September 13, 2010

Innocuous But Very Powerful. Facebook's Like Button

On the surface, it looks harmless. A small button that should you click on it, tells your friends on Facebook that you "Like" something. Your friends, especially the really nosey ones, should they see your wall update, can click through to see exactly what it is you like. They in turn may choose to click the like button and in turn update all their Facebook friends. So, you can see the potential for good content to go viral.

Facebook decided on this approach for a number of reasons. The act of liking something with a single click requires minimum effort (especially if you're already logged into Facebook) and people's association with the term "Like" is a very positive one. The pass-on value that your friends like something does encourage others to check it out to see whether or not they agree.

But it offers so much more than this. If you are a company/brand, adding a like button to the various areas of your site, will help gain exposure in the way explained above. If it is added to your site in the right way, you can also gain exposure to potentially untapped areas of Facebook too. The "Like" button is part of Facebook Open Graph, and the various buttons on your site can be associated with pre-defined Open Graph Objects. The full Open Graph Object list is not that extensive currently, but it is expected to grow. For example, if your website "About Us" section had a description of the senior management team, it is possible to add a "Like" button to each profile and associate this with the "Director" or "Public Figure" object. Not that exciting, but if your business has key people, deemed influential in their field, making sure their profile has good content and include information that some may wish to share and be associated with, why not add a "Like" button? By adding this to the "Director" object will mean the profile will gain exposure in Facebook in areas where Director is being discussed. An example of this is below:

Appearing in the "Director" interest page, will gain exposure to those people who have already liked this page. It may help if this person is a musician too, as "Musician" has a much higher level of exposure of currently 38,000+. This of course does mean the objects can be played about with and it isn't surprising that some likes are associated to the wrong categories on purpose. Short term thinking behind this is to gain higher levels of exposure, however, the audience who like something and are presented with something irrelevant to their likes, will not be impressed and this could tarnish reputation etc.

But, potentially more important than this, and probably the main driver for Facebook, is the re-indexing of the web for search purposes. Imagine a place in the not too distant future, where content is presented to you after a search which is sorted by the number of likes. Relevant content to your search term, which is ordered by the most likes i.e. I want to search for an article on "power of Facebook like". This article would feature nowhere!! (please "Like" it) But should someone with a much bigger following eg. Mashable write a post on this, there is a very strong chance they will be at the top. We could argue, very badly, that this content is just as valuable, but they get the "votes" from many more people and quite rightly will rank much higher.

So, if your site has great content and you offer products, services, information, whatever really, get the "Like" button up there. It has a very strong relevance for the future.

December 24, 2009

2010- The Year Brands will Seduce Consumers via the Social Web

As 2009 draws to a close, it is a good time to reflect the speed and vigour with which many consumer brands adopted the social web as part of their customer engagement strategy throughout the year. Some really understood it and did a fantastic job; some got it so badly wrong they may take years to repair the damage caused; however, the majority were somewhere in the middle. Expectations were high - "We're on Twitter, we'll get thousands of followers!" - in most cases this just didn't happen. Those brands that did dip their toe in the water will have learned many things and be better positioned to see some real success in 2010.

2010, will see a change from the usual "discount tweets" and "become a fan" (Why?!) and we'll start to see the emergence of an "art of seduction" across the social web. How many of you have already received a comment on a blog or a retweet or an @mention which was phrased something like "Great post" or "Totally agree"? Most probably they come from friends and colleagues, but expect to see more of these from brand representatives. If it is done well and genuinely meant, then this is great, but it is a thin line to tread if it isn't.

There is a tried and tested "chat-up" formula used by many successful seducers (allegedly) which is an acronym of CIQ. This stands for Compliment, Introduction and Question. Here's an example: A man walks up to an attractive lady in a bar and says "Wow! You look fantastic." Lady responds by being very flattered and says something positive in return. "My names, Paul, by the way." "Hello Paul, I'm Tracy." (Don't ask me where those names came from, I have no idea!) Paul then asks "May I buy you a drink?". Apparently, the answer is usually a positive one, as long as you've brushed your teeth.

Now apply this same formula to the social web and brand consumer dialogue, Clearly define profiles and id's will negate the introduction if the brand is well known. Here's what might happen:

Consumer Tweet: "Just been for a great run around the park. Had The Who blasting out of my iPod"
Brand Tweet: "@consumer It's good to run, great choice of music. The Who are always on my playlist."
Consumer Tweet: "@brand Thanks. They seem to make me run a little faster."
Brand Tweet: "@consumer Definitely, I (that's me from Brand X) also like a little bit of Motorhead, not everyone's cup of tea."
Consumer Tweet: "@brand You're right. Ace of Spades is the only one I know."
Brand Tweet: "@consumer There are many more. By the way, what's the park like to run on?"
Consumer Tweet: "@brand A bit bumpy and slippy in places. Why?"
Brand Tweet: "@consumer Sounds like the park I run round. But I tried a pair of these bit.ly*** and they knocked 3 mins of my time."
Consumer Tweet: "@brand Thanks I'll take a look"

Sound elaborate? Don't believe it. Brand X is a running shoe reseller and had set up searches looking at terms such as "run" "running" "terrain" "personal best" etc. and could see the associated tweets.

This is how it is going to be. Your tweets, updates, comments will be heard across the globe by those who want to. Such brands, with the right tools, can then make a judgement whether to engage you; if you're "attractive" be prepared to be seduced. It'll get personal and could be a real benefit to you if brands get it right. It could also be a real pain. There will be many a time in 2010 when you'll be engaged via the social web by a brand. "Get your coat, you've pulled."

December 21, 2009

Punk's Not Dead! Very much alive due to the Social Web. #RATM

People were fed up of having the heavily manufactured and overly publicised X Factor/Psycho TV "music" rammed down their throats. So they used the social web to speak out and rebel. In fact, one guy Jon Morter stared the whole thing by setting up a Facebook group and using other social web channels (namely Twitter) to spread the word and gain coverage on national radio, press and TV. He chose a very relevant track and band (Rage Against the Machine & Killing in the Name), which was only available by download (Have you seen the "Share on Twitter" (and Facebook) function on iTunes?)...a track released in 1992 (17 years ago). Whereas, the X Factor, Joe McElderry track was download, CD and probably the most advertised single ever...with millions pumped into it. All this, and yet it was beaten to the number 1 slot. Why?

Well obviously, a lot of people downloaded it, because of their "anti" feeling...not necessarily because they liked the track. It's a statement being made, which has resulted in a clear manifestation. If there is a strong enough feeling amongst the general public about something, they now have the ability to enforce an outcome in their favour. This has truly demonstrated the power of the social web; without it, it would not have happened. How else could a massive crowd of like minded people be brought together in such a short time frame?

Also, another key factor, is the availability to download any genre of music from any era. If downloads were not available, again this could not have happened. In my day (Karl Havard writing this), it was availability of vinyl and cassette tape. Time passing, would mean the ability to get your hands on any form of track would become more and more difficult. Various movements would come and go with the years - Mods, Rockers, Punks, New Romantics etc. as would fashion. However, today every type of music is available and it is clear to see a healthy revival and variance of all these movements again. Two days ago I saw a young girl of around 19 years, in a coffee shop with Buddy Holly tattooed on her arm.

The social web has acted as a catalyst to all of this, and who knows what may happen in the very near future. Will we see various groundswells of people having their say about politics, law, brands, customer service and forcing several outcomes in their favour? Has anarchy been provided with a new and significant weapon for its armoury? 2010 may become a really interesting year.

December 10, 2009

We're like the Susan Boyle of the econsultancy Innovation Awards 2009

Pleasantly surprised...we were. Somatica Digital was founded at the beginning of April 2009...we're still in our nappies (or diapers). However, Somatica was founded off the back of a couple of years of fairly significant research around online consumer brand trust; i.e. What are the key dynamics at play which encourage trust to be built between the various parties? Out of this research came our Online Brand Trust Profiling, which analyses all aspects of consumer brand engagement of awareness, consideration, conversion and advocacy. Our ultimate aim is to help consumer brands achieve maximum levels of advocacy amongst their customers. If we can help encourage people to say great things to each other about a brand; make it easy for them to do so and do it in the most influential places online, then we believe we've done our job. Our brand trust methodology enables us to do this with significant degrees of accuracy.

Of course, as we are focused on consumer conversation online, the social web or social media plays a huge part in what we do. We don't claim to be social media guru's (Who in their right mind would?) But we do know a thing or two about online interaction and engagement; this included consumer and brand and consumer to consumer. So, only eight months old, we are really, really pleased to have been "Highly Commended" in the 2009 econsultancy Innovation Awards, specifically the Customer Insight and Market Research category. We take the "Highly Commended" position as second (hence the Susan Boyle reference regarding Britain's Got Talent). Many congratulations to Insites Consulting UK, who won the category.

Oh..."we dreamed a dream...la la la la..."

August 14, 2009

It's official! 99% of digital agencies don't have a clue about the social web

It must also be said that 65.6% (that's nearly two thirds) of statistics are made up on the spot. However, when it comes to businesses (even the very large brands) looking for help and guidance on how best they should integrate social media into their customer contact/engagement strategy; they typically turn to their existing agencies. Which is the most natural thing to do.

Such agencies then feel they should be in an authoritative position on the subject. They don't wish to lose any credibility by actually admitting this isn't their core expertise, they'd feel exposed and a bit silly (honesty doesn't seem to matter) and of course they can hear the "kerching" of the extra revenue which may come their way.

So what happens is, agencies "play the game" and begin to regurgitate sound bytes from the numerous and various articles spread over the web (most of which have been plagiarised from a very limited source of genuine innovative thinking). Then, after a while, they start to believe their own bulls**t and believe they sound credible. Because of the perceived recency of social web (when actually it has been around for several years) the ability to sound convincing, especially to a client who is looking for advice and has limited knowledge, is fairly easy. We have seen this happen in meetings, at seminars and networking events many times and have felt the need to cut into the conversation to prevent bad decisions being made. Observing this and having conversations with some of the largest agencies who, in some of their more candid moments will actually admit "off the record" that they really don't have a clue. We could name names...but that may land us in some hot water...three letter acronyms...oops! This whole situation just isn't right.

It is appreciated that organisations, especially in the current economic climate, want to minimise risk and therefore turn to well established digital agencies who are financially stable and safe. However, some common sense should prevail when you understand the core skills and experience of these agencies. Typically they do a very good job at media buying and advertising; design work, may dabble in paid search, venture out into search engine optimisation (quality is debatable) and now have probably set up a new Social Media Department so as not to miss the bandwagon.

And then....they start talking about Social Media Marketing...selling your products via the social web. If that is the direction you have been steered down and your twitter updates are all about discounted products; your facebook fan page is talking about up and coming sales you should stop right now, as this won't work. In fact, it will tarnish your brand.

Think about your customers and what they want. Look at their motivation; understand their behaviour; work with them and help them. Give them advice, support, customer service, make them laugh, chat to them on a one to one...just try to avoid the constant sales pitch. You don't like it when it is aimed at you and they don't like it either.

So when your incumbent agency, who were originally selected by your organisation for something totally different, starts to come to you with "social media marketing" ideas, look at them long and hard, and ask some challenging questions, such as:-

Why would this appeal to my customers?
Who would it appeal to?
What exactly is the objective here?
How does this integrate into our overall customer contact strategy?
Is this in sync with our brand values, the things we stand for?
What are the performance measures?
How are we going to measure this?
Who makes this happen?

That should keep them busy. Points are deducted for pauses, repetition, stuttering and any farmyard aromas.

July 15, 2009

All Twittered Out!

Twitter this, Twitter that, tweet, re-tweet...is anyone starting to get a little fed up with all this malarky? If your brand has decided to have a Twitter channel, then you'll know it is a full time job to monitor the conversations; make sure what you say is on brand and that you don't feature in the latest "How not to..." section of some marketing industry website. It won't be long before we see full-time social media "engager" jobs being advertised.

Anyway, wasn't it refreshing to hear how the "younger generation" is not that interested in all this social media hype. Facebook is the preferred choice (and we thought it was Bebo!) and Twitter is "boring" full of celebrities and old people trying to be cool . Simplicity of communication, cool viral with involvement and free stuff is what they like.

It would appear us "new media types" and marketers are getting too hung up on all this stuff. Can anyone remember when email was a novelty? It didn't matter who the email was from, it was cool to get one and then reply to it...how quickly that changed. Are we witnessing the same thing in Twitter? Spammers following you with promises of making thousands of dollars (yes, they are typically US centric...not seen a "pounds" or "Euros" one as yet) and offering sexual favours from bored women (Or is that just us?). Anyone invented a Twitter Spam Filter yet?

The other interesting concept is how to get loads more followers. Why? Why would you want to be followed by thousands of people and follow thousands of people, creating yourself a bigger reading and filtering nightmare? The answers probably go back to being unpopular as a child. If, as a brand, the perception is more followers means more sales, then we'd actually disagree (especially looking at the way the majority of brand Twitter accounts are being currently managed). More followers means a brand needs to be more careful and the chances of creating a brand reputation issue can be enhanced. One wrong word or interaction and you could be in trouble. As the Bishop said to the Actress, it's all about quality and not quantity.

Our belief is to ensure we follow and are followed by people who are a bit like us...we have something in common. We don't want to scan through thousands of pointless tweets and we wouldn't expect others to do the same. Our rule of thumb is to engage online with the same types of people and brands we would engage with offline. The main thing social media allows us to do is to do it with a lot more people across the globe...that's all.

June 15, 2009

What unites a "Brand Community"?

Firstly, what is a Brand Community? Well it is fairly self explanatory and basically it is a bunch of people who are fans of a brand, very similar dynamics to those of a band. The web and specifically social media has allowed these communities to be global and communicate with each other around any brand related subject, ranging from new products, customer service, personnel etc. There are many such brand communities and the web is a key central component to help these communities, in the true sense of the word, exist and thrive. Maybe you're a member of one or two?

But...how do these communities manifest themselves? What brings them together to become a united group? Specifically in the online environment. There has been a lot of research about crowds and tribes in a more generic manner and some really interesting research on "Consumer Tribes" by Cova, Kozinets and Shankar. However, there is limited research specifically about online communities.

Interestingly, many, many organisations are looking at the social web and scratching their heads about how they can create such online communities around their own brand. Surely, with all the available platforms attracting millions of people who are already actively interacting with each other, there must be a way to create something which will attract interest?

Well, we at Somatica Digital think that it is very difficult for a brand to achieve any success in the social web if it is treated as a separate channel. In fact, the key elements of building up a brand community outside of the Internet, still apply...the web then becomes the main way for the brand community to communicate..not the other way round.

So what are the key ingredients for building a brand community?

- Common Interest. A common element that everyone in the community is passionate about. Passionate enough to spend time talking about it and listening to others talk about it. Your brand may not have reached such dizzy heights and have the required attraction. Does this mean your brand cannot be the common element of a community? No brand community for you?! Well, not strictly true. Your brand will be/can become part of a wider community. You will be operating in a market or area where there is passion around something; maybe a specific technology; eco friendly product; specific fashion type or genre etc. There will be something your brand can be associated.

- Common Enemy. Something that directly opposes the beliefs and values of the community (for whatever reason) can build a stronger cohesive community. A common interest is one thing, but when it is "fighting" against something passion increases. Local opposing football teams is a strong example of tribalism, with a softer one being Apple and Microsoft..extreme passion is demonstrated in both examples.

- Status & Recognition. As well as being part of a community, there is always a pecking order in such groups. The communities need organising and leading so that they can stay focused on a common cause and be updated with the latest news and developments. Community members are motivated by being recognised for contribution (Maslow stuff) made and are energised by seeing their contribution recognised by others. If their contribution isn't recognised it won't be long until individuals become disenchanted. It is important to ensure community leaders are continually aware of this. Back to the first point; if your brand is part of a community, then good contribution will help you improve your pecking order and become noticed.

Without these three things it is very difficult to see how a community can be created or exist. Geography plays a big part in "real-life" communities of course, but this pull diminishes online. (Although we (Somatica Digital) do see this changing in the future.)

So when you, as a brand, create a Facebook Group, a twitter Channel, a blog etc. and they aren't as popular as you'd like, please consider the three points listed above. Maybe a re-think is required...remembering the basics could help you onto the right track.

May 19, 2009

Twitter: The web pages you won't have seen!

Anyone fed up with Maggie yet? Everytime you go to the Twitter home page, there she is with her superior smile and school teacher ways...we know her type! Anyway, Maggie is always on view, but have you ever taken the time to look at the other pages about why and how? Have you ever watched the video? We'd bet a very small amount of money that you haven't. It's a bit like the "I'm feeling lucky" button in Google...no one clicks it.

Anyway, we recommend you take a look at the "why", "how" and the video; it's very apparent that they explain what twitter was supposed to be about when it was first introduced. Answering the question "What are you doing?" and sharing this between family and friends is certainly different to amassing thousands and thousands of followers. Anyway, here are some screen shots with our observations...

So Twitter puts you in control does it?! And a modern "antidote" to information overload!! In the early days maybe, but it has, in our humble opinion, achieved the exact opposite. Anyone else lost a couple of hours a day to Twitter, Tweetdeck etc?

Here's another one

Eating Soup!! (Don't you drink it?)...we'll give them the other two, but for us tweets which are updates along the lines of "eating soup" "scratching my nose" and "me me me" add intensity to the noise factor. Especially as it is no longer about friends and family. And then there is Carla.

Not sure why she is wearing an England shirt from the 80's or why she has a shaven head; maybe it's an interpretation of "plain English"? Anyway, she blows that by uncovering her love of Van Halen later in the video.

We'd recommend taking a look, we found it quite amusing. The guys a Twitter when making this stuff at the outset, could never have envisaged the scale Twitter would grow to in their wildest of wild dreams. hats off to them. Our interpretation is below.

April 27, 2009

Pros and Cons of Contextual Paid Search Ads

You may...may not be aware of the ability to place your Google Paid Search (PPC) ads contextually i.e. in places where there is a relationship between the website content where the ad will feature and the content of the ad itself. This service has come on leaps and bounds just recently and advertisers are now able to also select certain social networks where the ad can be considered for placement, such as LinkedIn.

All this sounds quite clever, and on the surface it is, but there are a number of things to consider before you dive in. This applies to both advertisers and site owners allowing for contextual ads (a bit like this blog). We've listed, what we feel, are some key points for advertisers and site owners to be aware of and we hope you find them of interest.

Advertisers:

You will gain coverage in specific areas of the web relevant to the content of your ad.
You'll potentially appear in front a more targeted audience.
Ensure the content of the ad is as specific as possible and not ambiguous. Your quality score due to bounce rate could otherwise suffer.
You're under the complete control of Google. If they think you're relevant they'll place you.
If your competitors have "opted in" to display ads you may very well start appearing on their site.
Being displayed in social networks and social media in an advertising manner may very well work against you if your ad is poorly written. (Better to join in the conversation adding value; rather than gatecrashing and broadcasting yourself.)
Think about related topics where you could help the audience; you may achieve clearer visibility and be seen to be unique and increase the level of attraction.

Website Owners:

You are providing more relevant content (assuming Google do their job properly) for your site visitors.
If you are a business website; blog; your own social network; you are opening a window for your "competitors" to appear on your site.
You may make some money from click-throughs, however, consider the longer term value. Have you just provided you competitor with one of your potential customers?
Think extra specially hard about the content on your site (text, imagery, video etc.) and how it is all labelled and tagged. You may have some obscure references which could attract unwanted types of advertising. This can be interesting if you have a blog accepting uncensored comments, which may contain expletives.
180 degree/antonym relevancy. A good example of this is a wildlife preservation website who had a feature on alligators and crocodiles to find they had adverts selling shoes and handbags suddenly appear next to the article. This can be avoided.
Think about the potential distraction and degradation of your site visitors' experience. If the risk is too high don't do it.

Of course, the main attraction for having ads on your site is to make some money from click throughs...which is why the web contains a number of "dodgy" affiliates and "misleading" review sites. They write content in such a way to specifically attract certain ads, but that is another story and Google is now much better at spotting these. However, if the monetary gain from having ads on your site is far out weighed by the potential of having a competitor take up valuable real estate on you page and pinching customers, then we'd advise against it.

As an experiment, we vehemently oppose the term "Social Media Marketing". It doesn't make sense and is born out of ignorance. See the "Art of Conversation" presentation for details. But as we have now added the term in this post and tagged it up accordingly, please take a look at the ads on this site...are there any numpties paying to advertise their "Social Media Marketing" skills? Or even worse, are there any that are talking about using social media for lead generation? Don't be misled.

April 21, 2009

"Double Dynamic" forcing UK Retailers to reconsider their business model

The UK Retail industry is in the middle of a situation never experienced before. Firstly, we are in the midst of the worst economic crisis or over seventy years. This is bad (Although I did overhear someone in a chip shop saying the "green shoots" are here!), but recessions have happened before and managing costs; sticking to the knitting has seen most retail businesses ride the previous recessions ok. However, when mixed up with the second factor, this tried and tested approach will no longer work. The second major dynamic is how the Internet has evolved (specifically the social web, social media and online conversation) allowing consumers to hold a much higher level of influence and power than ever before. Consumers online, especially in groups are beginning to call the shots and are no longer receptive to "push" marketing approaches, such as advertising.

So retailers, from the very largest to the smallest, need to reconsider their business models in order to sustain and accelerate growth for when the recession starts to ease. Should they automatically re-open another store? Should they continue with the same distribution channels? or should they look at more innovative and forward thinking measures online? I'd promote exploring the latter.

Formulating and implementing a brand engagement strategy online, targeted at helping your specific group of consumers needs to be considered. Rather than just focussing on the sale; place a much higher emphasis on providing good and helpful information and truly reflecting your own and employee's personalities, as well as that of your brand. This will become viral, much more personable and you will be in a much better position to create advocates...even if they have never purchased from you.

This combined dynamic of economic downturn and Internet evolution also means the smaller and medium sized retailers can challenge the bigger players for market share. Smaller retailers can be more agile; reflect their personality easily; and achieve the same level of visibility online as held by the major retailers, or an even higher profile if done well. Change can be executed at a much faster pace as long as the desire is there to do so. This has to come from the very top of the business accompanied by the willingness to take a few calculated risks and "get involved."

An example of such an organisation is Wallace Sacks and their CEO Stephen Sacks. Stephen presented and took part in the Institute of Leadership & Management's "Delivering in the Downturn" event on 21st April 2009, exclusively for ILM members. Stephen outlined the "nagging feeling" he had had for sometime and came to the realisation that he needed to change the engagement and business model for the benefit of his customers, and for his business. In fact, to put in place a strategy that would allow Wallace Sacks to deal direct and extend their consumer reach. The social web plays a major role in this approach.

To draw an analogy, the UK retail sector could be seen as a massive, never ending, boat race where everything from cruise ships to inflatable dinghies are taking part. All having the aim of not only staying afloat, but to stay ahead of the competition and take on board more paying passengers as they progress. The combination of the afore mentioned dynamics means the race has reached a tricky part of the course where there are a number of sharp turns to navigate through; in stormy seas, all with ports where paying passengers need to be picked up. The smaller boats, captained well, will find these passengers faster and learn to cater for their needs; the larger ships will find it challenging as it will take longer to "turn" the ship. The vast majority will take it very slowly coming out of it ok, but losing out on the extra passengers. Some will sink.

Which ship/boat are you on?