Showing posts with label social media. Show all posts
Showing posts with label social media. Show all posts

Friday, May 27, 2011

Social Media vs. Social Technology

Does it matter what we call it?

Earlier this week I sat on a panel at a Utah AMA event.  One of the questions we fielded was: What's the next big thing in 'social media'?   Now, if any of us on the panel knew the answer, we probably wouldn't have been on the panel - we'd be busy launching it.

The point I made was to first throw out the word 'media' and replace it with 'technology'.   The reason was that media is often associated with business, marketing and advertising and that clouds our thinking about the art of the possible.   Two of the biggest platforms - Facebook and YouTube - started as technical solutions to the real and personal problems of the founders, not as business tools for delivering messages.  Based on the feedback, this line of thinking resonated well with the audience.

So, if there is something that frustrates you and your insights allow you to imagine a solution that leverages or facilitates human interaction then it might be the next big thing in social technology.   Whether it is media, is a chapter to be written later.

Wednesday, March 18, 2009

On the Competition for Social Media Help

How does a community behave commercially?

The "Social Media Club" launched its first question of the week:
How can we best support our social media community and our peers knowing full well we’re often competing for the same clients and client money?
I like to think that co-opetition means that it is in everybody's best interest to move a category forward even if a specific opportunity is competitive. While the term is usually thought of as a means of leveraging cost structures on complex deals, the application to social media at the moment appears to be more of a 'greater good' opportunity.

Three thoughts:
  • Part of the uniqueness of social media by its very nature is it also allows us to build out our network of like minds in order to learn. I can't think of another business-related vehicle that facilitates contact with outsiders as much. In other times and places the only time we could chat with competitors without the risk of being fired was at trade shows. During rapid category growth learning and experiences out-weigh the competitive threat. Only in a fixed or diminishing pie do competitive threats arise.
  • In time we will develop our own competencies, niches and unique solutions as this medium both matures and fragments. For instance I wouldn't attempt to build a private community, a social user group, or counsel CEOs on PR crises. I would (and do) leverage social media as it relates to branding, positioning, and lead generation in specific categories. The challenge will be in recognizing that leaving a nickle on the table is a commercially viable strategy and better for the client in the long run.
  • If we think about a career its really a series of hopefully cool projects; if the paycheck comes from the same source so much the better. So, if we are to pursue our individual passions and interests we need to know who else is doing neat things. The active use of social media in this regard leaves the other options in the dust.
Without interaction we're only as good as our individual thinking.


Some tags: #SMCQ1, #Coopetition

Tuesday, February 10, 2009

Tapping Passion

Why social media is different?

In the recent free book by Todd Defren (@TDefren) of Shift Communications there is a central theme about why people contribute to social media. It's their passion.

This is a game changer for marketers.

The book opens with the premise that 'marketing is participation'. I am reading this at 3:30 in the morning - so I may have missed the bit that explained why this is true. Here's my take. Since the sales department has the job of selling, marketing must be responsible for something else. What does participation give marketers that other activities do not? The answer: Insight.

Several examples in the book demonstrate the aha moment that only comes from observing and talking with people passionate about what they do. By no means do marketers and companies have a lock on all the good ideas out there. In fact, they probably have far fewer of them since innovation and new products come from people simply trying to do a simple job. (Like scanning our kids pictures for posting.)

Since marketing is responsible for aligning solutions with needs to everyone's satisfaction going to where the passion is just makes good sense.

Wednesday, December 17, 2008

Emulsifier Needed for Marketing

What's the right recipe for social networks and advertising?

Several articles this week on the lack of effectiveness of advertising in social networks; here's one on eMarketer. These articles raise the question: can advertising and social networks mix? It seems like they're oil and vinegar.

I'm a fan of vinaigrette and here's a simple recipe that I use that is a bit out of the ordinary since it is equal parts oil and vinegar rather than the traditional ratio of 3:1.

3 T Olive Oil
3 T Balsamic Vinegar
1 t Dijon-style mustard
1 t Kosher salt

Oil and vinegar don't normally mix, but the secret ingredient - mustard - does something to create a smooth and harmonious mixture that doesn't separate.

Why don't oil and vinegar blend?

The molecules involved aren't designed to attach to one another because one is charged (water) and one isn't (oil). As a result they each much prefer their own community and they band together. So, if their physical properties are incompatible with one another how do emulsifiers work? They broker a truce by fitting in within both communities - usually they are a wrapper around one of the ingredients to make the mixture more compatible. In a vinaigrette the charged water molecules (Balsamic vinegar) are wrapped by the mustard to eliminate the polarity. The result is a nice salad dressing.

So, if social networks and advertising are oil and vinegar, what's the emulsifier?

Advertising is charged. The worst offenders, or those with the highest charge, are likely the direct response ads goading you to do something now. Social network advertising should not entice to you leave the the community, what's the point of that?

Marketers have a message that they'd like to circulate easily among a social network, just like Balsamic vinegar in EVOO. They need to think like a mustard and wrap them in something that is much more compatible with the non-charged social network environment. Messages should be delivered as content with relevance and even amusement so that it stays within the community and adds to the overall experience.

If the acidic nature of advertising isn't smoothed over, it will end up in isolated pools off to the side being completely ignored.

Thursday, November 27, 2008

Impact of Social Media

Is it ROI or IOR?

Kyle Flaherty wrote a post about measuring Social Media the other day. I think its got the priorities straight - it's not only about the financial return of a(ny) tactic, but rather the impact on the business as a whole. For social media: Impact of Relationships.

It would be a bad for business to always pick the tactic or campaigns with the highest ROI. Why? Because measuring a purely financial outcome could result in disjointed, uncoordinated, and contradictory programs. We certainly don't let manufacturing pick their best ROI-project and sales theirs'. We might be making widgets and selling gadgets.

Key Question: As a business, why are we better off implementing this plan versus that plan?

Note: I thought ROI was invented by people trying to figure out where to invest scarce resources. I like Kyle's view better - promoting big-ROI projects got you a bonus and a better job.

Friday, September 05, 2008

Cowpaths Lead to Lemmings

What do bovine trails have to with marketing?

Chris Brogan has posted some videos on his current thinking - it opens with a story about why the roads in Boston are the way they are. Seems they were built on the wanderings of cows. I think the point is that we build on what we know - adjacent possibilities are easier to see (and implement) than starting afresh.

Social media is new(ish). The issue is that we often frame it in terms from the old world and have trouble adapting because the previous rules of the game don't necessarily apply. We blindly follow what has worked for us before.

As a result, people find fault with every new technology. For example, the Greek sages thought writing was going to make people to 'cease to exercise their memories and become forgetful' and that the printing press would 'weaken people's minds' and undermine authority. These predictions were in fact correct, but the unseen (and unimaginable) benefits of both writing and printing clearly out weighed the problems and democratized information. These points have been said before: the quotes above are from Nick Carr's "Is Google Making Us Stupid?"; Cathy Taylor's the problems with online video (social media) is another examples.

Applying metrics and rules from a previous generation of technology (brain to scribe, scribe to press, analog to digital, corporate to community) is risky business.