My sense of this position has stayed pretty true since I first considered it: This person will be the critical bridge between the FM network of sites and the marketers who wish to join the conversation those sites engender. A more traditional title would be "VP Sales," but that implies that all this position does is sell, and that...undersells the value of this position. Perhaps the role is "VP Business Development," but really, in the end, it's all about being in charge of a critical element of FM's value proposition, the marketers. So for now I'll call it VP, Market, and we can figure out the exact title as we go along.
As I wrote in my original post on this job:
This is someone who lives and breathes the value of the network FMP will create, and who works in a consultative, client driven way. The ideal person has worked in the Web 2.0 world of sales and is familiar with how major agencies, ad serving networks, paid search networks, and new, innovative marketing solutions work.
But as I have spoken to many more potential partners at agencies, as well as possible candidates for the role, a more sophisticated spec has emerged. FM Publishing will employ a pretty simple three-pronged technology platform consisting of a console/dashboard for bloggers, another for marketers, and a database of inventory and rules which ties the two together (we'll also have an ad serving platform, of course). The VP, Market position will own the marketer's console, making sure it serves his or her clients to the fullest. But the secret sauce is in the relationships - in the human portion that FM will layer over that console. I've studied ad networks and how they scale (or don't), and I'm convinced that for high-quality advertising online, all roads lead to relationships. So this person will have to be extremely good at creating and maintaining high quality relationships built on trust and execution. And he or she will also have an unshakeable respect for authorship - the fundamental building block of all value at FMP, and the ability to spread that respect to others, in particular other marketers.
I've been on the phone with a number of senior executives at major online agencies in the past few weeks, and all have agreed with this premise: great commercial publications are robust conversations between three parties: the publisher/author, the audience, and the marketer. Great publications attract marketing that not only respects that conversation, but also adds to it (within the accepted boundaries of what constitutes advertising, of course). That means that in an ideal world, marketers seek out good publications, just as publishers seek out advertisers who understand and honor the conversation a publication creates. This is why Boing Boing, for example, only accepts advertising it thinks is "wonderful." We don't say no to that many advertisers, but we do say no, sometimes to perfectly good advertisers who simply are not a fit - they'd be out of tune with the conversation. What that really means is that advertisers on Boing Boing have an implicit endorsement when they appear on the site: we believe that these are good companies worthy of our audience's attention.
This may not seem like a radical shift in advertising to you, but let me tell you, coming from the brutal world of print, it most certainly is. And when a good sample of major advertising executives conclude that endemic advertising is not only acceptable, but even preferred, well, that's pretty cool. Several even told me that they would consider changing their creative to better converse in the blogging environment, as long as that creative was honest to the brand they were marketing (of course, it'd have to be, or the bloggers would call them out on it...).
So, does this sound like something you'd like to lead? Or perhaps you want to work for the person who we hire? Email me!