COURTLAND BROOKS INTERNET DATING AGENCY-CONSULTANCY

Match Introduces Human Matchmaking

 

WALL STREET JOURNAL - For $4.99 a week Match dating experts will go through a user's answers to four questions and pair them. A 50-member team, trained as dating coaches, will select two profiles for participating members each week, drawing from the same algorithm-generated pool Match provides. Questions include, what a person would change about their dating life, and what sort of person a user gravitates toward. "The company created the feature because, for some singles, the pandemic has added a degree of urgency to finding a long-term relationship," said Amarnath Thombre, CEO of Match Group Americas. "People have had enough time to reflect," "Traditional matchmaking services are costly, starting in the thousands of dollars for just a few months. But these services are worth it to customers who don't have the time to sort through candidates on apps," said Tammy Shaklee, founder/matchmaker of H4M, an LGBTQ matchmaking service.

by Ann-Marie Alcántara
See full article at Wall Street Journal

Mark Brooks (owner of matchmaker.com): Fascinating stuff, but I think calling this matchmaking is an offense to the matchmaking industry. $5 a week may well be a scalable price-point, but I don't think this service does justice to the humanity of the service matchmakers provide. The whole point of (quality) matchmaking is to get deep into the person, council and coach them, and provide custom advice to the individuals, with occasional appropriately sugar-coated but tough feedback. Match's service appears to be a commitment vehicle. I don't quite see how this service quite passes muster as matchmaking, even as a minimum effective dose. Let's see. Looks like the opposite end of the spectrum to the matchmaking service eHarmony introduced and experimented with years ago.

WALL STREET JOURNAL - For $4.99 a week Match dating experts will go through a user's answers to four questions and pair them. A 50-member team, trained as dating coaches, will select two profiles for participating members each week, drawing from the same algorithm-generated pool Match provides. Questions include, what a person would change about their dating life, and what sort of person a user gravitates toward. "The company created the feature because, for some singles, the pandemic has added a degree of urgency to finding a long-term relationship," said Amarnath Thombre, CEO of Match Group Americas. "People have had enough time to reflect," "Traditional matchmaking services are costly, starting in the thousands of dollars for just a few months. But these services are worth it to customers who don't have the time to sort through candidates on apps," said Tammy Shaklee, founder/matchmaker of H4M, an LGBTQ matchmaking service.

by Ann-Marie Alcántara
See full article at Wall Street Journal

Mark Brooks (owner of matchmaker.com): Fascinating stuff, but I think calling this matchmaking is an offense to the matchmaking industry. $5 a week may well be a scalable price-point, but I don't think this service does justice to the humanity of the service matchmakers provide. The whole point of (quality) matchmaking is to get deep into the person, council and coach them, and provide custom advice to the individuals, with occasional appropriately sugar-coated but tough feedback. Match's service appears to be a commitment vehicle. I don't quite see how this service quite passes muster as matchmaking, even as a minimum effective dose. Let's see. Looks like the opposite end of the spectrum to the matchmaking service eHarmony introduced and experimented with years ago.

Making the Business Case for Your Marketing Budget

COURTLAND BROOKS - "59% of marketing leaders reporting increased pressure from CEOs and 45% experiencing pressure from CFOs."

A Harvard Business Review article lays out some keen advice for CMOs to help lower stress. Here's their advice, in a nutshell...

Build your case based on business priorities
New member acquisition is almost always a priority for dating and social apps. But how about brand awareness and stature. How about your market leadership and ranking. Make sure you have metrics to help make your case.

Get closer to your CFO
"Only 35% of marketers report that they use 'an integrated marketing team in which marketing and finance experts work together.'" You'll be more successful if the CFO is informed, and aligned with your marketing efforts. Plus, can help inform your decision making and quantification efforts.

Crack the lock on your magical hypotheses
As a marketing leader, you have informed ideas, hypotheses. Share them, along with the logic behind them, with your CFO and team members. It will make life easier later on, if you get them on board with your logic at the outset.

Measure brand and customer metrics
"Only 3% of marketers reported measuring brand equity "consistently". This is something that should measured more consistently. I will help lift your marketing budget if you can show effect here. Great brands get great conversions.

Get closer to your C-suite peers
"Only 17% [of C-suite executives] said they collaborated with the CMO in the last 12 months." Take time to meet your CXOs one at a time to offer evidence and logic for your spending and address their questions. Marketing is an investment, not just a cost!

Run experiments
Use a control group that does not get marketing spending. The goal is to build a strong understanding of the counterfactual — what if marketing spending had not occurred? Design and run experiments right and it will really help inform your marketing strategy choices.

Managing AI Decision-Making Tools

COURTLAND BROOKS - In social and dating we generally use AI for reviewing profiles and comms for abuse, and for pairing people up. Here's an article on Harvard Business Review which defines key terms referring to key modes of AI which are useful to know. - Mark Brooks
__

Your use of AI is only going to increase. How to think about AI decisions and determine the optimal management model? These 4 management models vary based on the level and nature of the human intervention.

Human in the loop (HITL): A human is assisted by a machine. The human is doing the decision making and the machine is providing support. a.k.a. intelligence amplification (IA).

Human in the loop for exceptions (HITLFE): Most decisions are automated, and the human handles exceptions. For the exceptions, the system requires some judgment or input from the human before it can make the decision. Humans control the logic to determine which exceptions are flagged for review.

Human on the loop (HOTL): The machine is assisted by a human. The machine makes the micro-decisions, but the human reviews the decision outcomes and can adjust rules and parameters for future decisions.

Human Out of the Loop (HOOTL): The machine is monitored by the human. The machine makes every decision, and the human intervenes only by setting new constraints and objectives.
__

Mark Brooks: Seems like we use HITFLE for profile and comms review, and HOOTL for paring. What do you think?

COURTLAND BROOKS - In social and dating we generally use AI for reviewing profiles and comms for abuse, and for pairing people up. Here's an article on Harvard Business Review which defines key terms referring to key modes of AI which are useful to know. - Mark Brooks
__

Your use of AI is only going to increase. How to think about AI decisions and determine the optimal management model? These 4 management models vary based on the level and nature of the human intervention.

Human in the loop (HITL): A human is assisted by a machine. The human is doing the decision making and the machine is providing support. a.k.a. intelligence amplification (IA).

Human in the loop for exceptions (HITLFE): Most decisions are automated, and the human handles exceptions. For the exceptions, the system requires some judgment or input from the human before it can make the decision. Humans control the logic to determine which exceptions are flagged for review.

Human on the loop (HOTL): The machine is assisted by a human. The machine makes the micro-decisions, but the human reviews the decision outcomes and can adjust rules and parameters for future decisions.

Human Out of the Loop (HOOTL): The machine is monitored by the human. The machine makes every decision, and the human intervenes only by setting new constraints and objectives.
__

Mark Brooks: Seems like we use HITFLE for profile and comms review, and HOOTL for paring. What do you think?

Network-Based Platforms Must Be Regulated. But How?

HARVARD BUSINESS REVIEW - Much of the dominance of today's tech firms, from Amazon to Google to Facebook, arises from network effects. These platforms facilitate connections: they connect people to products, to friends, to apps...More connections, more value to each person.

The question of how much competition tech giants face is now at the center of worldwide policy debate. Traditional antitrust policy is ill-equipped to regulate network-based platforms. Some platforms are offered free to users, charging in data or attention.

Antitrust authorities err on the side of not intervening; Google and Facebook have gone on a shopping spree to acquire early-stage competitors that could have become a threat if left independent. But the tide may be turning.

A better understanding of these networks can help societies fully reap the benefits of digital innovation, while mitigating emerging harms.

by by Daniel Björkegren & Chiara Farronato
See full article at Harvard Business Review

Mark Brooks: Scale and complexity will continue to increase. The job of overseeing the scale and complexity of platforms at the Governmental level is not easy. Mistakes will be made. It is essential companies, leaders, take the macro-perspective more seriously, right now, or potentially face overzealous oversteps from Government interventions. Leaders should provide more transparency and education to users and Government stakeholders alike.ons. Leaders should provide more transparency and education to users and Government stakeholders alike.

HARVARD BUSINESS REVIEW - Much of the dominance of today's tech firms, from Amazon to Google to Facebook, arises from network effects. These platforms facilitate connections: they connect people to products, to friends, to apps...More connections, more value to each person.

The question of how much competition tech giants face is now at the center of worldwide policy debate. Traditional antitrust policy is ill-equipped to regulate network-based platforms. Some platforms are offered free to users, charging in data or attention.

Antitrust authorities err on the side of not intervening; Google and Facebook have gone on a shopping spree to acquire early-stage competitors that could have become a threat if left independent. But the tide may be turning.

A better understanding of these networks can help societies fully reap the benefits of digital innovation, while mitigating emerging harms.

by by Daniel Björkegren & Chiara Farronato
See full article at Harvard Business Review

Mark Brooks: Scale and complexity will continue to increase. The job of overseeing the scale and complexity of platforms at the Governmental level is not easy. Mistakes will be made. It is essential companies, leaders, take the macro-perspective more seriously, right now, or potentially face overzealous oversteps from Government interventions. Leaders should provide more transparency and education to users and Government stakeholders alike.ons. Leaders should provide more transparency and education to users and Government stakeholders alike.

Match Acquisition Strategy

COURTLAND BROOKS - This week, a startup CEO asked me what acquirers are looking for. I think Sam Yagan spells it out quite nicely in this video. Sam Yagan presided over Match at the time that they acquired Tinder.

What Business Are YOU Really in?

HARVARD BUSINESS REVIEW - Since Jack Dorsey reassumed the helm of Twitter in 2015, the company's performance has soared. Dorsey used the "jobs to be done" approach to rethinking Twitter's strategy - defining Twitter from the perspective of what really matters to Twitter customers. Dorsey focused on serving 3 jobs: news, discussion, conversation. DAU's grew to 200m+, from 126m in 2018. It is on pace for $4B revenue in 2021, up from $3B in 2018. In 2019 Dorsey said, "We got overly reactive to everything our peers were doing. We didn't have a clear sense of what our purpose was, and that really hurt us a lot."

Dorsey's effort to identify the jobs that people hired Twitter for involved three steps.

1. Understand the full set of jobs for which Twitter was already being "hired."
2. Prioritize the jobs Twitter wanted to focus on.
3. Communicate the results and use them to allocate resources.

by David S. Duncan & Brian Hindo
See full article at HBR

Mark Brooks: It's easy to fall into the trap of assuming you know the purpose of your company. However, it pays to analyze and really understand this. What do your customers really expect from you? I studied under the wonderful (late) Clayton Christensen at HBS in 2015 and the 'jobs to be done' approach was absolutely core to his innovation method. This is his best book on the topic.

MeetUp: an Alternative to Dating Apps?

AARP - Ed Baig is the former tech editor at USA Today and is now at AARP. He asked me for a non-conventional 'social' alternative to dating apps for seniors, and I suggested Meetup. Here's the excerpt from a list of 50 recommended apps.

Meetup lets you mingle with people who share your interests and can match you with 300k groups and 100k weekly events. You can find a nearby book club, hiking group or someone you want to spend more time with. "This is a great place to meet like minds outside the explicit context of dating," says CEO Mark Brooks of Courtland Brooks, who consults with dating services. "Then count on serendipity and put some effort into meeting new friends through the friends you just met by inviting them out to your own group events."

by Edward C. Baig
See full article at AARP

Calendaring Tools and Strategy

COURTLAND BROOKS - May 14 - A friend just asked me about calendaring tools. Here's my advice to him...

__

There's a few options. I've opted for ScheduleOnce.com. I set up three calendars and connected them up to domains that link into specific calendars. Saves me so much time.

1. Use Koltu.com for general appts. This calendar doesn't allow Monday or Friday meetings.
2. I use eTwitter.com for press appts. This calendar allows meetings 5 days a week, and goes later into the day.
3. I use Mivot.com for one hour paid consults.

Saves a couple hours a month of to and fro.

You could also use Calendly.com, which seems to be more common. But, I don't think you can set up a paid consulting session. Not sure. Also, there's x.ai which claims to use AI to go back and forth, but I find it a tad annoying to set up, and for users. So I'd recommend ScheduleOnce.com really.

The trick is to make sure you always keep your calendar up to date. Then you can just let people book on your calendar directly, and save some braincycles for other more important stuff, not to mention your admin. This is the one job my admin always hated doing, so I automated it entirely. Now everyone is happier.

Also, I use the "Magical" chrome plugin to speed up insertion of meeting maker text in emails.

Interview With Mark Brooks

DEAL ARCHITECT - Apr 8 - Burning Platform: Digital Nomads. Fascinating session with @markcbrooks. He defines work from anywhere. He has worked from Shanghai, Bali, Malta, now Dubai. Lots of takeaways for employers and politicians #futureofwork.

In this video, hear about...

• The crosswalk test
• My alternative schooling concept
• The need for a fallback position

See full article at Deal Architect

How Thinking Like a Behavioral Scientist Can Take Your Influencer Marketing to the Next Level

COURTLAND BROOKS - Mar 24 - I studied behavioral science because I wanted to understand why people did things in digital environments, not just what they did. We all do AB testing and multivariate testing, and we see interesting results and variations when we change contexts. We know we must always keep testing and optimizing and try not to make too many assumptions. But why do people do the things they do, and make the (sometimes fast and flawed) decisions they do?

Behavioral science helps digital marketers form a better understanding of decision making, biases and heuristics. These are key to understanding and predicting how people will behave. Behavioral science also lays out a nomenclature that we can use. A set of terms in the forms of biases and heuristics, that help describe behaviors.

How to improve your influencer marketing with some key behavioral science insights? Here's some thoughts from an article in The Drum

• Break down your audience into niche passions.
• Understand the specific human archetype in each influencer. i.e. observe their body language.
• Plot other key differentiators for each piece of influencer content to recognize patterns against effectiveness metrics, e.g. word count.

See article at The Drum

Beyond this, the Courtland Brooks team recommend...

1. Don't pitch on a product. Instead, identify genuine advocates first by asking influencers questions about what they like. i.e. have you used a dating app? did ya like it?
2. Don't bother with the top tier influencers. Recruit second tier up-and-coming influencers and use them consistently. As they grow, you'll grow, and you'll get a far better deal over the long haul.
3. Before you commit, do a deep review of the influencer's material, so there's no surprises, and you can really get mutually creative with their specific program.
4. If you're going with tertiary influencers, use a network. It's just too much to manage otherwise.