With the economy officially in a recession since December of 2007 and the last two quarters characterized by marked declines in consumption, can we declare 2008 the Year the Consumer Died? Of course, the literal death of consumerism is not what we’re referring to here but rather a convenient, and catchy, way to re-introduce the “prosumer” as the 2009 Web2.0 (3.0?) version of the online consumer.

Prosumer is a term that has been covered extensively with various meanings. In this post, it is a marketing term that reflects the collaborative and interactive relationship between the consumer and the producer of goods and services he or she is interested in. This definition, as near as I can tell, has two “historical” nods:

- Alvin Toffler coined the term in The Third Wave to refer to consumers that play a direct part in the “mass customization” that would occur with “one-to-one” marketing made manifest by eliminating the middlemen (“disintermediation”). These “prosumers” would play a more direct hand in the creation of new products by communicating directly with producers, in this case throughout the blogosphere.

(Interestingly, there was no such thing as “consumer” until manufacturing and production were separated from consumption – think the U.S. Western frontier in the 1800’s)

- The Cluetrain Manifesto at the turn of the 21^st century highlighted “markets as conversations” with “prosumers” taking an active hand in discussing products and services, at speeds 20^th century corporations were not prepared to keep up with.

Two years ago, TechCrunch highlighted the rise of the prosumer (and thus made it ok to remove the “quotation marks”).

Now more than ever it’s important to be able to hear what your prosumers – both current and prospective customers – are saying about you, your competition, your products and services, or even whether and if messaging is taking hold. User-generated content (UGC) can take many forms and not all of it is related to being a prosumer. However, most of it can be heard and should increasingly be considered an alternative to traditional primary research. In fact, in Jim Tobin’s recent book, ‘Social Media is a Cocktail Party’, he and fellow author Lisa Braziel call social media “the largest, best, most accurate market segmentation tool ever invented” – how’s that for a wake-up call to traditional market research?

Assuming consumption really didn’t die in 2008 (although some long-term adjustment in terms of spending levels certainly took place), the continued rise of the prosumers and the brand- or product-specific content they generate will drive more informed marketing communications across all channels in 2009 and beyond.

Tags: Analyzing Consumer Generated Media, Consumer-Generated Media (CGM), Social Media Analytics, Social Media Metrics // Add Comment »

Two terms reside at the center of the ongoing quest for measurable metrics and estimating the return on marketing investment within the social media arena – reach and engagement. The former is a measurement relic of traditional advertising effectiveness such as TV or radio spots while the latter is the latest buzzword (pun intended) for discussing the efficacy of social media marketing efforts. At the heart of any discussion of reach and engagement is the ongoing challenge of informed media planning across channels. At the end of the day, planners seek understanding of the return they are getting across channels and, with the explosion of alternative online and mobile channels, this task has become exponentially difficult.

Offering up a high-level, opinionated, and non-technical discussion of these two concepts is the subject of this post. Are they two sides of the same theoretical coin or polar opposites? As with many things, the answer to this question lies somewhere in between.

Reach

Reach can be generally thought of as the number of people who are exposed to advertising or brand messaging. The pure reach numbers resulting from Dr. Pepper’s offer of a free can of soda if Guns n’ Roses were able to release their “Chinese Democracy” album in 2008 (as well as from the continuing press surrounding the announcement) are no doubt quite attractive.

However, reach is more often used to estimate the exposure of traditional (online and offline) marketing and advertising communications (as opposed to PR efforts).

Offline and online reach definitions are conceptually similar. Online reach is generally defined as the percentage of audience being touched by messaging (while frequency is the number of times that message has reached this audience). Gross rating points (GRP’s) – the product of reach and frequency – are the foundation of traditional advertising effectiveness and are increasingly held up as the focal point of online reach as well.

However, the explosion of marketing channels is one challenge facing any online estimation of audience reach. Another challenge associated with any discussion of reach is whether and if the right audience is being targeted with digital marketing communications. Thus, a growing emphasis on the engagement concept – what it is, what it means, and how it might be measured.

Engagement

Myriad online engagement definitions exist but usually center on the measurement of some form of interaction with a brand or product, either on a company site or within a social networking context. That is, engagement is often framed as the measurable component of marketing efforts in terms of generating behavior that indicates an affinity for a company or product that goes beyond click-through rates (CTR) on banner ads, for example.

New Facebook Engagement Ads are tapping into this concept by asking Facebook users to “interact” with the ad itself (by leaving comments, e.g., which can then be transmitted via updates to friends). While it remains to be seen whether Facebook can monetize the site (advertising faces active resistance from users with CTR estimated at well under 1%), redefining advertising to be more interactive requires different metrics to be considered. For example, the Web Strategist believes interaction rates and social spread will help increase engagement ad efficacy, but only if the brand

• understands the needs of the community
• relies on new interaction strategies that don’t pull the user offsite
• offers up a mix of digital engagement (“Engagement ads can’t go it alone” or a creative concept that can be shared)

Increasing usage of widgets (e.g., to promote brand-specific content) and “widgetads” such as Facebook’s new engagement ads, will support the drive toward engagement metrics that approach the elusive “reach” figure relevant within a social media / networking context.

Summary – what are your goals?

David Smith (former chairman of ARF commission of online reach and frequency) once pointed out that reach and frequency are neither the most nor least important tools in the media planning process, which fundamentally depend on the goals of your marketing endeavors. As always, beginning with the end enables marketers to focus on metrics that matter. This also holds true for deriving engagement metrics that matter.

Reach is associated with general awareness and, less directly, to online conversion behavior, all of which can be tracked with comprehensive offerings such as comScore’s Ad Metrix. Engagement as a metric appears to be in the same nascent state as reach/frequency was a few years back. Defining engagement doesn’t need to be a quixotic quest but rather a systematic attempt to gauge a marketer’s ability to move the audience to identify with a company, product, or brand. Central tenets of social media marketing communication are transparency, honesty, and promoting value, all of which suggest different engagement measurement metrics.

Put another way, reach is less important than engagement in a social media context. As Jim Meskauskas pointed out, if enthusiasm for your brand’s value proposition currently exists in MySpace or Facebook, brand emissaries should figure out how to enhance this budding enthusiasm without crashing the party. Embedding targeted widgets or “widgetads”, done properly, increases relevance, engagement, and provides a trackable framework for measuring engagement. As compared to old-school marketing, marketing 3.0 places much more emphasis on attention and engaging the customer directly.

A rose is still a rose, even if it is called by a different name - engaging your customers and prospects, by any other name, is still engagement.

Tags: Social Media Analytics, Social Media Insights, Social Media Metrics, Uncategorized // Add Comment »

Curtis has been around the social media and public relations worlds for longer than practically anyone else I know of (except perhaps Chris Brogan). He talks about twitter, word of mouth, and measurement as they relate to public relations. Thanks for the mention Curtis!

What do clients want more/less of, given the current economic conditions?

Clients want more data-driven PR. They are requesting campaigns with greater transparency and measurability. Understandably, companies are less likely to embrace innovation without understanding the tangible return. This is good news for social media, which is far more measurable than traditional PR.

Link to Article

Tags: Uncategorized // Add Comment »

Came across this post this morning from Jason Falls.  It’s a collaborative piece predicting what may go down in social media next year.  These are from some of the most active thought leaders in social media.  Interesting to see the different perspectives and general impression that social media still has a ways to go in terms of being fully integrated into the mainstream, especially w.r.t. dollars spent AND that there exists a major opportunity in the midst of the current economic climate.

Tags: Social Media Best Practice // Add Comment »

Two terms reside at the center of the ongoing quest for measurable metrics and estimating ROI within the social media arena – reach and engagement. “Reach” is a measurement relic of traditional advertising effectiveness such as TV or radio spots. “Engagement” is the latest buzzword (pun intended) for discussing the efficacy of social media marketing efforts. At the heart of any discussion of reach and engagement is the ongoing challenge of informed media planning across channels. At the end of the day, planners seek understanding of the return they are getting across channels. With the explosion alternative online and mobile channels, this task has become exponentially difficult.

Offering up a high-level, opinionated, and non-technical discussion of these two concepts is the subject of this post. Are they two sides of the same theoretical coin or polar opposites? As with many things, the answer to this question lies somewhere in between.

Part One will discuss Reach; Part Two will focus on Engagement.

Reach

Reach can be generally described as the number of people who are exposed to advertising or brand messaging. The pure reach numbers resulting from Dr. Pepper’s offer of a free can of soda if Guns n’ Roses was able to release their “Chinese Democracy” album in 2008 (as well as from the continuing press surrounding the announcement) are no doubt quite attractive.

However, reach is more often used to estimate the exposure of traditional (online and offline) marketing and advertising communications (as opposed to PR efforts).

Offline and online reach definitions are conceptually similar. Online reach is generally defined as the percentage of audience being touched by messaging (while frequency is the number of times that message has reached this audience). Gross rating points (GRP’s) – the product of reach and frequency – are the foundation of traditional advertising effectiveness and are increasingly held up as the focal point of online reach as well.

However, the explosion of marketing channels is one challenge facing any online estimation of audience reach. Another challenge associated with any discussion of reach is whether and if the right audience is being targeted with digital marketing communications. Thus, a growing emphasis on the engagement concept – what it is, what it means, and how it might be measured.

Tags: Social Media Analytics, Social Media Best Practice, Social Media Metrics // Add Comment »

I was invited to speak at the following event yesterday by JohnstonWells.  They’ve just moved into new offices in Denver so was a great way to show off the new digs.  The event was well run and well attended by a number of local companies so hats off to the folks at JohnstonWells.  The purpose of the seminar was to discuss how in a social media world brands are losing control of the message and what can or should be done about it.

There was a lot of discussion around authenticity and measuring results.  Times are particularly crazy for the traditional PR house since a lot of what they have done in the past is changing rapidly from an offline world with well known pundits and analysts to the online world of the masses where the pundits shift like sand in the wind.  Many companies are still afraid to allow their employees to publish blogs and the transparency that comes with it.  it’s going too far to say authenticity is foreign, but it is scary.  This is truly the point of the discussion.  Social media is about engaging your customers where they live, where they participate, with whom they discuss.  To enter into this community, this discussion, with the mantle of PR and legal loofa sponge cleaned copy is an invitation to alienation, or worse, flaming.  The communication must be authentic, in that it must come off as honest and concerned.  If the product has a flaw, admit to this, if there is a problem, fess up and tell people how you are going to fix it.

This is why we got into the discussion that customer service is the new marketing.  It is because this is where the conversation is occurring.  Scrub marketing down to the bare metal and where the discussion meets the consumer is the conversation around how well the product meets their needs.  This is customer service and where the battle for the hearts and minds of the consumers will be won in social media.  Someone (Efrem I believe) brought up the story about Timbuktu packs.  He had a clasp break off from a 5 year old pack.  Not completely gruntled, he contacted customer service.  They were able to get him a replacement clasp to fix his pack.  Even though it was at cost he was very pleased that they responded so quickly and solved his problem.  He wrote it up in his blog.  Marketing.

So how do companies manage their brand in this brave new online world?

• Monitor the conversation.  Where is it occurring?  Who are the key players?  Are they positive or negative?
• Provide prompt feedback to customers, offer solutions.
• Engage in the conversation.  Use this as an opportunity to gather customer feedback.  Listen and respond.  Be honest with people when you aren’t able to solve their problem.
• Be as transparent as you can.  And communicate with integrity.  Say what you mean.

Tags: Uncategorized // Add Comment »

RT:  Great post by Remarkablogger Michael Martine outlining the top twitter faux pas made by marketers, summed up in the following paragraph.  The advice may seem like common sense but is a great reminder of why the word social appears in the wikipedia entry for twitter.

“If I could distill these five points down to one main message it would
be this: act like a normal person as much as you possibly can.
Providing value to your followers instead of sales pitches is the best
marketing you can engage in on Twitter (or in any social media
environment).”

Tags: Advertising/Marketing, Consumer-Generated Media (CGM), Social Media Best Practice // Add Comment »

It’s Election Day, and some pundits are predicting a landslide win for Obama, while others say that McCain has a slim but very real path to victory. In other words, no one knows anything for sure.

We decided to apply the same methodology we previously used to predict individual primaries, to gauge social media’s feelings on the two candidates. I won’t call these results a prediction– because there are too many variables this time around– but it gives a clear picture of who’s winning in the blogosphere.

We first looked at CI’s home state of Colorado, for the 7 days leading up to Election Day (10/28-11/3). We measured and averaged the mentions of each candidate, along with the sentiment, within a sample set of 30 right-leaning and 30 left-leaning Colorado-based blogs. When we translated these numbers into percentages (see methodology), Obama emerged the clear winner– 55% to 45%.

We also performed a national pulse-check, where we used the same metrics (avg. sentiment multiplied by number of mentions) and timeframe, but did not take party affiliation or location into account. This produced almost exactly the same result– Obama with 55%, McCain with 45.

Both metrics have their weaknesses. The Colorado sample set is very small; and on a national scale, Obama has been dominant in the social media space for over a year now. But the fact that both produced a ~10% point advantage for Obama, using separate sample sets, is definitely interesting.

Will this translate to the polls? We’ll see tonight (hopefully).

Tags: Blog Analysis, Event Tracking, Politics, Social Media Metrics // 1 Comment »

The recent malaise brought about by this month’s collapse of the Dow Jones Industrial Average and worsening economic conditions have brought into sharp relief the budgeting challenges marketers face in 2009 and beyond. Despite the economic doom and gloom, understanding who your customers and potential customers are and what they are saying about your company, your brand, and your products is as important ever. How do market research groups continue their focus on brand analyses and customer insight?

Leveraging social media by listening to, monitoring, and most importantly understanding the content and themes emerging from unstructured text (conversational) data is a cost-effective alternative to more costly primary research initiatives such as surveys and focus groups. In the best of times, social media analyses can play a supporting and synthetic role by augmenting primary research findings with insights derived from consumers about products or brands. Weaving social media research into traditional market research creates a more holistic approach to understanding customer attitudes and opinions, based on semantic analyses of publicly available content. In times of budgetary constraints and cutbacks, social media analytics can actually play a more prominent role as an alternative to more resource-intensive market research techniques.

“The world’s greatest focus group” is “out there” constantly discussing your company, your products, and your brands. Monitoring conversations through budgetary lulls enables companies to keep fingertips on the pulse of consumer brand and product discussions. Well-conducted social media research will also suggest areas of interest for traditional approaches to research once budgets have been restored to pre-apocalyptic levels. Using social media to research consumer attitudes has several advantages over traditional approaches:

1. cost-effective

2. no selection bias

3. cost-effective

4. no experimenter bias (these conversations are unsolicited and unedited and unaltered by response-bias associated with the presence of a moderator)

5. cost-effective

6. open-ended (conversations are user-generated content (UGC) as compared to conjoint analyses or survey approaches that fundamentally involve constrained choices

7. cost-effective

Finally, providers like Ripple6 specialize in integrating social media based consumer research within dedicated online communities. Price points for more comprehensive and rigorous approaches to online market research may vary but the point is that more, not less, attention being paid to online consumer content and sentiment.

So, if budgetary cuts have been handed to you and you’d like to keep an ear to the ground and continue to listen to your consumers and prospects, consider the Internet and the conversations taking place every minute as a bountiful and alternative source of consumer or brand marketing insights and data mining.

Tags: Social Media Analytics, Social Media Monitoring, Uncategorized // Add Comment »

A colleague of mine, Victoria Petrock, recently introduced me to a site she currently writes for called marketingcharts.com. The site provides free downloads of useful marketing charts and spreadsheets, as well as links to relevant articles. Today, one article in particular stood out to me. A recent study shows that young adults (ages 18-34) are more receptive to email ads rather than ads that pop up on their social network sites, such as MySpace and Facebook. I found this surprising considering the intense growth and popularity of such networks among this age group.

Anyway, I find this site to be a good source for quick marketing insights.

Tags: Advertising/Marketing // Add Comment »