Archive for June, 2009

Social Media Overload–How to make sense of it all

Friday, June 19th, 2009


By Barbara Bix -
Blogs and Linked In and Twitter, oh my! So much information, so little time… It’s all a bit overwhelming.

Imagine my relief when Peter Buechler, publisher of the Marketing Guy 2.0, told me that help was on the way. Full of hope and expectations I set off to attend this morning’s breakfast meeting: Social Media Overload—How to Make Sense of It All.

Kudos to the organizers

It was a fabulous morning with fantastic presentations packed with worthwhile information. That said I realized that I misinterpreted the title. Rather than addressing the problem of information overload, the conference offered ideas for reducing the time and effort it takes to process data. Thanks to Bob Collins and Diane Hession of Communispace for hosting a useful and informative event!

Start with aggregation

First up was Joe Cascio from People Browsr. When he asked, “How many social networks can you go to?” I knew I had met a kindred soul.

Joe then showed us a product he’s developed that will enable you to filter and view posts from multiple social media feeds (Twitter, Facebook, etc.) on a single dashboard. His perspective: “You shouldn’t have to go to multiple sites every time you want to communicate. After all, I don’t have 50 telephones”.

The “overload” is real

Before the audience became too complacent, Michael Durwin of Gathr Me upset the applecart with his company’s pitch video. This video presented statistic after statistic showing how many people add content to the Internet every day. For example, “Did you know that 184 million people publish a blog?”.

Tuning out is not an option

Tongue in cheek, Marta Kagan offered another solution for managing information overload—just stop listening. I have to admit that I’ve executed on that strategy more than once—because I didn’t have time to process all the information I so diligently gather.

She then warned the audience that shutting down is not an option. Instead, companies need to be diligent about “listening” to what’s being said about them—and more important to who is pretending to be them and speaking for them–or they’d end up like Exxon

Know what matters and don’t lose focus

Actually neither Michael nor Marta left the audience hanging. Michael advised defining clear objectives and Marta reminded the audience to concentrate their attention on the areas that mattered most to them.

To do so, they recommended basic tools such as RSS Feeds, Google and other readers, content aggregators, Google alerts and Twitter searches. One of Michael’s suggestions, that made me uncomfortable from a privacy perspective, was that we aggregate all our information using a single tool such as Gmail.

Extracting meaning is the holy grail

The last speaker, Michael Troiano sits on the board of Crimson Hexagon. Michael offered another great quote: “Data is abundant. Information is free. Meaning is what matters most.”

Crimson Hexagon has software that mathematically analyzes social conversations with the goal of extracting meaning. Michael told us about a recent project where the goal was to find out about how people feel about men’s grooming products.

The analysis showed that people care about effectiveness and price and that more people care about effectiveness than price—conclusions that the company’s marketers anticipated. The big surprise, however, was that men also want the product to feel good when they’re using it.

Michael then pointed out that this is just the beginning. When paired with a tools that tracks which content was produced by the most authoritative sources, marketers can also determine what or who drives interest in a particular product characteristic (such as effectiveness, price, or scent).

As someone who does a lot of marketing research, I was impressed with the potential power of this tool to help segment markets, develop buyer personas, and reduce research costs. As a marketing strategist, however, the real value will come from really pinpointing where companies should invest to wield the most influence over purchasers in each market segment they address.

Back to metrics

During the question and answer period, a number of people discussed metrics including Dell’s recent claim that Twitter had generated more than $3 million in revenue in 2008. The speakers were united in insisting that the only metric that matters is sales.

One distinguished between three activities: monitoring, engagement and activity. He said that social media can help with engagement but engagement does not translate directly to sales.

What engagement does do is build social equity. It brings people to the table and they may refer others to the table. But there are no sales until someone executes an activity. In the case of Dell, a message and an offer delivered via Twitter caused people to execute the activity of going to a landing page and making a purchase.

In short, the sales were produced by conventional direct marketing. Or, as one speaker noted, the strategies remain the same, social media only changes the tactics.

How do you manage the torrent of information?

If you’re reading this post, you’re probably a consumer of social information. Are you overwhelmed by the sheer amount of fascinating information out there? If so, what’s your strategy for staying on top of it—given there are still only 24 hours in a day?

Add to Del.cio.us RSS Feed Add to Technorati Favorites Stumble It! Digg It!
    www.sajithmr.com

Post to Twitter Tweet This Post

I’ll Link In To That!

Thursday, June 11th, 2009


By Barbara Bix -

Last night, I presented “Personal Branding: The Social Media Way” at a local job seekers’ group. Here are my answers to questions posed in a follow up email from one of the participants.

Why didn’t I discuss the one-to-one connections one can make on Linked In?

The talk focused on branding–which is generally accomplished using one-to-many (broadcast) communications. Nevertheless, as the questioner correctly points out everything you say or do affects your brand. Therefore, one-to-one communications are also fair game.

What’s the best use of this feature?

The short answer is that the best use of this feature is to build a network that will meet your objectives. That said everyone’s goals differ.

Another answer is to use it in a way that fosters, rather than hinders, relationships. This is especially important when communicating with people with whom you don’t already have a strong relationship.

For example, when you invite someone to join your network, consider writing a short note–rather than sending the default invitation. In it, describe the existing connection between you and why you hope the two of you will connect. In addition to being more thoughtful and courteous, a warm note will also increase your chance of acceptance.

When you decide not to connect with someone, consider just not accepting their invitation. That way, it’s less likely to feel like a rejection. Also, try to avoid checking the box that says you don’t know the other person—especially if there’s any chance that he or she thinks the two of you do know each other.

Loose links sink ships

The third question asked about how I use this feature. In general, I try to connect only to people with whom I have—or want to have—a relationship. As for the rest, we can link up and discuss mutual interests using the Group function of Linked In. My reasons follow.

One of the primary ways that people use Linked In is to contact third parties through others in their network. I want to make sure that I’d feel comfortable contacting everyone in my network to ask that favor of them.

Familiarity becomes even more important when someone in my network wants me to connect them with someone in my network. That’s because I’m only comfortable connecting two people when I feel it is likely that both will derive value from the connection.

Another reason that I limit my connections is that I sometimes send messages to everyone in my network. Examples include requests for information or news about my business. In either case, my goal is to send messages only to those who will be receptive—and I suspect those who don’t know me well may not be receptive. We all get too much mail.

Some would argue that anyone who requests or accepts a connection is tacitly indicating that they want to help out others in your network and are receptive to your messages. All I can say is that I’m not sure that’s true. But then, that’s why there are many perspectives on this issue.

This leads to two follow up questions. The questions and answers follow.

Do I do as I say?

I haven’t always adhered to my own policies. First of all, in the beginning I had a different policy. I wanted to protect the privacy of my connections. Therefore, I only accepted invitations from others—I didn’t extend any invitations—and accepted invitations from anyone who invited me.

Now, I only extend invitations to people with whom I want to have a relationship. By the same token, I accept invitations from those with whom I would like to have a relationship.

That leaves the small number of people who I would not have invited to join my network. Of these, I accept about half the invitations I receive.

The primary reason for this incongruity is that I don’t like to reject people. So, I add those I know and have a positive feeling about. Nevertheless, I view the relationship differently and hope they will understand if I’m not comfortable connecting with them someone they’d like to meet.

Avoiding invitations you’d rather not accept

I don’t respond to the remaining invitations—rather than rejecting them outright. The primary reason that I don’t accept these invitations is that I want to avoid the discomfort that may arise later if and when they ask for an introduction.

These are my policies. I believe they may also pertain to job seekers–since not everyone in your network is looking for a job. Those that are not, may not be as receptive to connections and too frequent updates.

Do you agree or disagree?

Everyone networks differently–and for different reasons. How do you use Linked In and what’s your rationale?

Add to Del.cio.us RSS Feed Add to Technorati Favorites Stumble It! Digg It!
    www.sajithmr.com

Post to Twitter Tweet This Post

Social Media: So What?

Thursday, June 4th, 2009


By Barbara Bix -

One way or another, that’s what a lot of people that I know are asking. Here are snippets from five conversations I’ve had in the last week—followed by my own observations.

So what’s the big deal?

Tuesday morning, I gave a presentation on Social Media 101 to the Boston Chapter of the Wharton Alumni club. There was a lot of interest and a lot of questions about how members could use social media to increase their revenues.

Nevertheless, at least one person wondered whether it was just a fad—and a tremendous waste of time. His experience was that most posters’ communications seemed to focus on the details of the publisher’s life—things that would probably be of little use or interest to anyone outside the poster’s closest associates.

So what am I missing?

Wednesday afternoon, a prospective client called to discuss the first draft of her social media marketing plan. She had clearly outlined her business objectives and developed a detailed tactical plan. Specifics included target social media platforms, desired frequency of communications, examples of tools/content needed to foster (internal and external) participant engagement, and resource requirements. Her question was: “So what am I missing?”

So what’s the best use of our time?

Last Friday, I met with the Marketing Director of a sizable division of a large firm. His greatest concern was the amount of time it takes to produce—and even keep abreast—of relevant social media. And, I thought that was mostly a problem for smaller companies.

His greatest need: metrics on the ROI of various social media marketing strategies and tactics. As he said, without that information, it’s difficult to decide where to invest constrained staff time—and impossible to justify decisions to company executives.

So what is working?

While there aren’t as many metrics on the ROI of social media – yet – as there are for more conventional marketing strategies, there are some. Yesterday morning, I attended a meeting of the Business Lawyers’ Network organized by Roger Glovsky where Erik J. Heels spoke about one of his successes. Upon realizing that the ROI he was getting from direct mail – which in the past had returned in excess of 400%–was approaching zero, Erik ramped up his social media marketing efforts.

About six months ago, building on what he had learned from his direct marketing experience, Erik launched a Twitter campaign with a compelling offer–free trademarks for start ups. Since then, other social media publishers have spread the word by retweeting it and commenting on it in their blogs (just as I’ve done here).

The result? Erik broke even in 30 days and has added one new client per week since launching the campaign six months ago. Each client, on average, files four trademarks, so he counts on the follow-on business to pay for the first free filing. The offer keeps on giving since his Twitter bio features the website link: http://FreeTrademarksForStartups.com.

So what can we learn?

Social media marketing, when backed by strong strategic thinking, is very powerful. Witness Erik’s success. That said, having a social media marketing strategy is key. Else, as the Wharton alum noted social media marketing can be a tremendous waste of time—both for creators and for consumers.

For that reason, my advice to the prospect, who yesterday asked me what she’s missing from her plan, was to suggest that she approach social media marketing as she does conventional marketing. That is start by identifying who she needs to reach—and what events need to occur—before she can achieve her business objectives.

Then, it’s a matter of figuring out how to engage these individuals by finding out:

  • where do they turn for information,
  • what sources do they trust most, and
  • what format works best for them.

Only then, will she know whether to invest in testing social media platforms and tactics, which ones to choose, and how to make the most of her company’s time and money…

Finally, I advised her to review her metrics. Her plan had been to generate a large number of visitors, page views, and followers. But, the plan didn’t indicate how she knew that any of these metrics would actually translate to

  • greater performance of the actions she hoped to motivate,
  • faster performance of the desired actions,
  • or achievement of her ultimate objectives.

    I suggested, therefore, that she test these assumptions before making major investments. One way to do so would be to collect initial data and then look backwards.

    Was there any correlation between execution of the desired actions and passive or active use of social media tools? And, if so, where was the correlation greatest—and did it differ by type of target audience? In short, I recommended that she gather exactly the information that the Marketing Director was seeking to determine where, and if, to invest in social media.

    In conclusion

    The questions that I heard this past week are pretty similar to the questions I hear every week about social media marketing. Different people are using social media for different things—and some have more experience than others—so it’s not surprising to hear a broad range of questions and/or conclusions.

    I believe it’s foolish to dismiss social media just because a lot of people aren’t using it effectively. What matters most is not how others are using it—but what’s in it for you both as a content consumer and a content creator. Much like other marketing initiatives, it’s all about data-driven choices.

    So what is on your mind about social media marketing?

    Are you thinking about it at all? If not, why not? What’s worked for you and what hasn’t? If so, what questions do you have?

    Add to Del.cio.us RSS Feed Add to Technorati Favorites Stumble It! Digg It!
        www.sajithmr.com

    Post to Twitter Tweet This Post