Blame Social Media - then think again

Social media has been blamed for the riots across the UK last August and since then there have been numerous several cries from politicians and other senior people to shut social networks down to stop them being used for organising disorder.

As you may have read in a post I did on this several weeks ago, I thought the whole idea of blaming social media itself pretty ludicrous. http://press20.blogspot.com/2011/08/dont-blame-social-media-for-unrest.html

But politicians and leaders carried on this chain of thought, all the way up to the front doors of the social network providers. But there it seems to have stopped thankfully, as now senior UK politicians have backed down in their rhetoric to shut down or restrict networks such as BlackBerry Messenger, Facebook or Twitter.

After apparent 'positive' discussions a Home Office spokesman said that the “The Government did not seek any additional powers to close down social media networks.”

Hurrah.... we don't yet live in a dictatorship.

How Google Plus can gain ubiquity

Following on from my earlier posting on Google’s introduction of Google Plus, I was taking along a further understanding of its potential thanks to the comments by my old friend Boudewijn.

His comment below really struck a chord with me:

If they'd make something that has the wow-factor of wave, would focus on cellphone users, and that would enable commerce without pushing it in the face of the casual user... then we'd have a winner.

And he's right (in my opinion). If Google were to develop their new Google Plus social networking platform to be ubiquitous to the ever-growing mobile internet population and to incorporate payment functionality... such as their Google Shopping Cart product, then they may be able to take on the might of Facebook as the default social platform for posting, sharing and interacting with friends and other contacts.

Without that ubiquity, Google Plus could just be another social media also-ran.

The battle for the web continues

My post last month declared that the battle for the web has begun, with the rivalry between Google and Facebook escalating to the point where a Global PR agency was hired by Facebook to tarnish the reputation of one of Google's products.

And now the battle over the eyeballs & attention, browsing behaviour and therefore the wallets of the majority of Internet users has taken another step forward with Google's announcement of Google Plus ... its own social networking site that lets users post photographs and videos as well as comments and messages. In addition it claims to allow users have "real world interactions" and "real life sharing" (whatever that is, but my guess its somewhere between a Facebook status update and a Twitter post).

This latest dive into the social space by the mighty G has already built up a healthy cynicism for the digital elite, who claim that Google's previous attempts at social networking have been less-than ideal and I also have my already-documented reservations about their ability to understand and develop social functionality.

However, let's not forget that Google already has a working and popular social networking platform... http://www.orkut.com/ . Now it may not be that popular in Europe or the United States, but Orkut has over 100 million global active users... with a high proportion of them in Brazil and India.

So before we all dismiss Google Plus as a venture as flawed as Buzz and Wave (which I still think will make a magical and evolved appearance when the world is ready for it), consider that Orkut is in the top 100 of all sites according to Alexa. And furthermore, ask yourself what would happen if it decided to merge this community with its newly-created Plus service?

The battle continues....

H2H - the real social networks

By now you all should know what Social Media is.

“Why Hayden, it’s Facebook and Twitter of course, right?”.... Wrong!

Social Media is the use of technology (and specifically the Internet) to connect people with people. This creates new and exciting ways for them to meet, interact and engage with each other.
Note: Yes, this does include revolutions!

Specific social networks facilitate this connectivity

• Facebook : personal
• Linkedin: business
• Twitter: short (& trivial)

These networks no longer make it about the technology; they make it about the people, their relationships and their behaviour.

That's why the advertising revenue of Facebook is growing so quickly, is because that's where people are these day.. hanging out, chatting with friends, throwing sheep (BTW: does anyone still do that?), etc. And one reason Facebook is valued so highly (currently $50 billion) is because of that ad revenue.

So next time someone claims that social networks are worth so much is because they have so much great functionality or because brands are there... my suggestion is to tell them its because that's where the humans are. And humans engaging with other humans is what social networks are really about.

Social Networks World Map

Vincenzo Cosenza from Italy has put together an updated version of his Global Map of Social Networks, 6 months on from producing his first one in June.

This map collated with data from Alexa & Google Trends shows the ongoing domination of Facebook as the main Social Network in 100 out of 127 countries.

Do friends really influence purchases?

The answer: It depends

Earlier this year the Harvard Business Review published a working paper entitled "Do Friends Influence Purchases in a Social Network?" They set out to examine the questions of :
1. do friends influence purchases of users in an online social network
2. which users are more influenced by this social pressure
3. and can we quantify this social influence in terms of increase in sales and revenue

The findings were that there was a range of revenue increases between three distinct groups of people categorised by status and interaction with others. The lower and middle groups had zero and 5% rise in purchases due to this social influence, but the revenue of the higher group actually declines by almost 14% .This has been explained as follows:

This finding is similar to work on characteristics of opinion leaders or the elite in the fashion industry, who tend to abandon one type of fashion and adopt the next in order to differentiate themselves from the masses

(in other words they seek to make themselves different from others by chosing / buying different things.. perhaps because they can afford to).

However, I'm not convinced. Maybe its because the sample size was quite small (Number of users = 208; Number of observations =2080) or because the figures used were from a Korean Social network (Cyworld), but I personally would like to see some further research done on this subject.

blogs have more impact than social networks

A report of a survey done by Buzz Logic & Jupiter Research back in the Autumn of this year shows that over half of all US blog reader (sorry, it doesn't seem to have a global reach) find blogs useful for purchase information. (Full press release here)

And suprisingly, blogs have more impact on purchasing decisions than social networks because blogs are more trusted!

Its even better news for niche blogs, as of those who found blog content useful for product decisions, over half of them (56%) said niche focus blogs and "topical expertise" sources were key. Unsuprisingly this information was most useful for technology-related purchases:

So had blogging actually come-of-age now?

Well it seems that for a certain segment of the population that answer is "yes", as blogs now rival search as a means of navigating to information that influences their decisions.

IBM corporate newsletter goes social

IBM are making a big thing recently about their Enterprise 2.0 or Enterprise Social Network credentials. Its therefore only fitting that they highlight how this has been of benefit internally for them.

The document below shows how they are leveraging social networks to improve the communications between their staff, current and past, creating an Alumni site which as of July 2008 had 45,000 members.

However, as well as highlighting how IBM is using modern social technology... I can't help but think that they are also using it to cut down on the fragmentation of communication caused by various employees (past and present) setting up networks on: Facebook, Xing, LinkedIn, Orkut or other publically available social networks.

Social media IBM study - Upload a Document to Scribd

You can also read this document on Scribd: Social media IBM study

Interview with Tim Young, CEO of Socialcast

Last month I received an invite to interview the CEO of Socialcast, a company that provides enterprise-wide on-demand social networking. Having only a small exposure to them previously, I was interested in understand more about their product and its features.

Background
Social Cast was started by Tim Young in June 2005 and provides a SAAS (software-as-a-service) offering to enable companies to have their own private social networks. Their early customers came from the music industry (Universal, Sony, etc.) and in Jan 2007 they won a piece of work for Guitar Centre (the US's largest instrument retailer) to build a Social Network between their headquarters & stores.

HS: So what's the key thing that companies need to establish a social network?
TY: Company culture makes a big difference and to get best use from these social networking tools companies need to work towards establish a culture where there is transparency between staff & management.

HS: What's the best method of getting buy-in for an Enterprise Social Network?
TY: You need both CIO & HR stakeholders; clients get the most success when they approach the solution from both perspectives. HR provides the case for building morale and the CIO looks to build and retain knowledge. Just one of these means the approach can be skewed to just one particular direction.

HS: What helps to build adoption of an Enterprise Social Network?
Taking the work we did for Guitar Centre, this project was helped considerably by having total connectivity between the branches and the centre. This then encouraged viral growth of the service which proved beneficial in its roll-out.

HS: What's a typical roll-out plan?
TY: How its rolled-out is very important. We initially test the application in the first 2-4 weeks with a few users. This can then be increased to 20 or so users to set the tone and get key people comfortable. To then encourage usage further we've found it is beneficial to create some exclusivity, perhaps by making it invitation-only so people see the value. This assists adoption by encouraging scarcity, which actually increases the initial networking effect.

HS: So what's the right size of organisation to have an Enterprise Social Network? Is there an optimum number?
TY: We don't usually look at clients with less than 500 employees & as you don't have enough conversations happening. However it can work with as little as 10 people – the more you make it conversational, the better it works. The level of interaction is definitely dependant upon the internal culture and how employees are valued, its a shift in thinking that makes the difference.

HS: Have you had companies measure the ROI of Enterprise Social Media?
TY: Yes, investing in this technology should be benefit-led. You can obviously measure the basic metrics such as whether people are using the software, but once they are engaged you potentially have a career changing tool. Take for example in retail where you have a high turnover of staff, this affects the amount of training and other support you provide. In the case of one client we have implemented Socialcast for; having this sort of tool has helped to drive down turnover to79% following four successive quarters of 100% turnover. This has a direct affect on the cost of the business. In addition, providing a tool to retain organisational information and can capture the knowledge of older retiring employees.

HS: Does this have more an effect for different generations of users?
TY: Yes, defiantly. The hiring & training of millenials is very different. But this can be overcome by integrating them within the company and finding them mentors to pair with. Millenials are different, even their communication structure is different, its immediate. But they do adopt this sort of technology much easier.

HS: So what's new for SocialCast?
TY: We have a new version of our product coming out in September. This is a dramatic shift in what we're providing and is based upon the feedback we've received from customers & end users.

HS: Can you tell me more?
TY: We're obviously keeping things under-wraps until the launch of Socialcast version 3.0, but I can say that we're launching more Twitter-like functionality for users to share ideas. We've found that brevity works and people find small posts far more approachable. This is compared to blogs, which can take more effort to produce. You need to encourage the conversation and not make people feel guilty about not posting frequently.

HS: So have you been looking at how users communicate in a company to deliver a better product?
TY: Yes, we've looked a lot at why people are connected in an organisation and found that its usually around a set of shared objects. These Enterprise social objects can be anything from photos or videos, through to specific documents. The power of knowledge comes from lots of individuals communicating together. The aim is therefore to get the conversations out of email, which has become an abused silo of information.

HS: How did you decide on the correct functionality for your new version?
TY: We prioritise the functionality from an user-centric view when deciding what to develop. We had small forums where we did some behavioural monitoring, its not just important to capture what users say, but what they do. The software must be used to be useful. It was also important to us to build something that is loved. Consumer software is better to use compared to most corporate software, which can be comparatively dry. Its not just about a functional checklists, its about understanding the needs of your users, the challenges they face and giving them tools they like.

HS: Do you have any plans for the expansion of Socialcast?
TY: Yes, we had a successful implementation in Australia earlier in 2008 and we're ramping up our efforts internationally. We've also signed our first UK client for a trial period, so we should have more news about that soon.

The Dutch are first... again

The Netherlands has the largest number of social network users globally (relative to its size) according to this article. Apparently Hyves, LinkedIn and MSN Spaces are the most popular and in that order.

I have to admit, I'm not suprised by this. The Dutch are a very social nation and the only ones I know with just one word to encapsulate "a general feeling of well-being".... "gezellig"!
(Correct spelling thanks to my Dutch friend Boudewijn)

Facebook for the UK Enterprise?

There is a recent Forrester report entitled 'Facebook for the Enterprise: Catchy Phrase or a Strategy for Collaboration?'. This document highlights several case studies where social networking features have successfully been implemented within large companies.

I should also qualify that what it does not recommend is that companies set up a replica of Mark Zuckerburg's Harvard project to 'poke' their colleagues all day. But it does suggest that companies could use some social networking features to leverage the work of Information & KM professionals to solve business problems. (It also strikes me that if you have an younger workforce who are used to 'personal' social networking sites, that they will find the move to Enterprise Social Networks that much easier). According to Debra Aho Williamson , author of the recent report: B2B Marketing on Social Networks:Engaging the Business Audience

"...marketers will spend far more over the next few years to create and manage their own social networks for business customers, partners, suppliers and vendors"

Note: I'm currently writing up an interview I did for a magaine with Tim Young CEO of Socialcast, who are an on-demand provider of corporate social networks. He also provides several interesting examples (which I'll publish here soon hopefully).

However, all the examples I've seen of companies who have done this are based in the USA. So why have no UK organisations seemingly not stepped into this arena yet? Well UK companies may be willing to consider it following a recent survey that gave 88 percent of delegates (surveyed at the Enterprise 2.0 Conference in Boston and the Web 2.0 Strategies event in London) as eager to start using social networking for the business. In fact, 94% of the UK businessese surveyed believe social networking would be beneficial to use at work. This compared to 82% of US organisations.

So who did this research? That will be http://www.trampolinesystems.com/ , the UK's own provider of Enterprise Social Network products.

Social Networking Wars...

Why companies are not using Social Networking

By now, most companies are aware of Social Networking and have decided to do one of three things:

1. Do nothing, wait and watch (or ignore)
2. Carry out a limited trial
3. Fully embrace social networking

From assumption and experience, I gather that some large companies & organisations have still done nothing because :

• There is no reason for them to use social networking
  (e.g. they are too small, specialised or have no products/services to speak of)
• They are ignoring it, hoping it will go away
• Social Networking sites for brands/products have already been set up already by fans (and can therefore be monitoried and/or influenced in a cost effective way)
• They believe it is too difficult or technically complex to set up
• They have exisiting methods of communicating that do not suit digital technologies
  (I struggle to think who this would be.... but I'm sure they all have their reasons).
• They have been scared off by the transparency and humility required
• There is not a definitive Return on Investment model (ROI).
  Note:
  I was recently told this by a senior marketing type, who had for years used tradional hit & miss TV & Radio campaigns to keep his company just about treading water in its own market space. I had to quote the old Lord Lever phrase at him)

Now some companies, including clients of my company Ideal Interface, have decided to trial social networking sites or set one up in a specially sectioned-off area on their own company website. By creating these destinations they have created useful but still risk-limited efforts where they have started to understand customer interactivity. Some have even adopted a different voice/tone or a slightly different subject from their core offering in an attempt to measure and analyse the public voice.

What's your company's excuse for not engaging?

I'm officially defined as a creator

I've just taken the 'Groundswell Social Technographics Profile'.

Here are my results:



I must say, I agree with this assessment. Here's my take on the results:

Joiner:
I'm always networking and looking for ways to communicate with people

Critic:
I'm not a harsh critic, preferring to comment (and hopefully mostly positively)

Collector:
I use photo storing sites and have a del.icio.us set of bookmarks, but its not my life

Spectator:
Its nice to watch, but its usually better to participate

Inactive:
Yes, that figures.

Social Networks ARE the news

I've recently been asked by a potential client where the newly-created 'Social Media Manager' role should sit. Like this role and other emerging jobs like it, it will depend somewhat upon the company's existing structure and process (and significantly upon the individuals that work within them).

So.....

1. advertising has news
(banners now have feeds with product updates, branding sites that want to create repeat visits provide regularly-updated content and don't get me started on 'Advertorial')

2. news has adverts
Although news sites on the web find it quite hard to monetise their content (and the newspapers find their business models dying off), many are still supported by paid-for-advertising. On some sites the news and adverts are becoming hard to tell the difference between and even some news feeds come with integrated adverts now.

3. social media has news
News about what your friends: are doing (status), find interesting (notes), are buying (Beacon) or any number of other things they find interesting enough to tell you about.

4. adverts have social media
Even the Doritos advert in the middle of this year's Superbowl was a UGC-sourced production

..... With the lines between news, adverts & social media are so blurred, its become difficult to tell them apart any more. This blended mix of journalism, marketing and networking changes the relationships between companies and consumers/individuals.

It therefore changes the inner working of companies who are getting their heads around this. It consequently makes the question about where the Social Media Manager sits in the organisation that much more difficult!

"We gotta have our own Social Network"..

... don't we?

The Economist has recently produced a great article on the current state (and potential future) of social networks:
http://www.economist.com/business/displaystory.cfm?story_id=10880936

It initially comments on the revenue and partnerships these new environments (e.g. Facebook) have:

So it is entirely conceivable that social networking, like web-mail, will never
make oodles of money

However it brings us back to reality (removes some of the hype) and argues that with email still the ubiquitous communication medium and with open standards for portability of your social graph:

Social networking may end up being everywhere, and yet nowhere

I personally think that in the future there will be a tangible social space but that these areas will be focused far less around building freinds/contacts in each environment and more around the features & functionality that each environement provides (made possible by Open Social?).

The big issue (and one I have not full got my head around yet) is potentially having to decide which of my friends/business contacts/associates fits into each particular environment (and having to tell some that "well I like you, I just don't want to know you in that online space").

What is potentially going to be even harder... is finding the path amongst the blurred lines between individual and the company communication. An organisation, potentially made up of many individuals, will have its own social graph. However, if it decides to have two different conversations in two different functional area/places..... how will it maintain the consistency of approach and still retain the human and transaparent qualities required in modern extended corporate communications?

Barriers to UGC adoption

I've been speak ing with a company about a potential UGC site and accompanying marketing campaign. One of the concerns is the potential lack of popularity of the service. They are well aware of the motto from the film Field of Dreams

"if you build it, they will come"

... and that this doesn't work for the web unless you have some mystic force supporting you.

Brian Oberkirch's post on 'Really, We Don’t Want to Join Your Social Network' puts forward the case (and well made it is is) for not building your own Social Network, especially when there's so many of them going up all the time.
With the bar to build a compelling community site rising all the time, its becomming very difficult now to stand-out from the crowd and its all looking a bit 'Me Too' isn't it?.

So has the door shut on this opportunity now?

Creating a company 'Group' in a Social Network

So why should a company get involved in Social Networking? These are sites where people build relationships with other people and create groups of peers who share interests. So should a company or organisation at least consider the possibility of entering into these sites?

If your target audience is already using Social Networking sites (Bebo, MySpace, Facebook, etc.) then its a good bet that they are already discussing, commenting on and interacting with your products and brand. They are doing this in their own way, without your company's control/influence. They are probably also asking questions about your products that are not getting answered, or making statements about your brand that are incorrect (either purposefully or not).

If your employees are also on such sites, they are possibly mentioning your products or services and some may well be answering questions on behalf of you. There is therefore a likely demand for the 'official' line, the answers to simple questions (easily provided by links to content such as: FAQ's, branch locators, etc.)

There's also an affinity created by users who share a liking for a product or brand. They will want to 'bond' with your company and would be likely to consider information from your company within these spaces.

So who does this well?

Drambui:
Following their sponsorship of 'The Drambui Pursuit' (an annual race, involving extreme sports, that takes place in Scotland), the Drambui 'Clan' have created their own Group in Facebook:
http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=585084206

This fulfills two major roles:

1. To increase awareness of the actual event amongst likely participants and other inactive but highly aspirational potential customers (e.g. training tips, event questions, etc.)

2. To provide a social area where other Drambui-supported events can be shown. The most recent being a set of Scottish-themed 'Den Parties' around the UK, paid for by Drambui.

So does this work?

Well....

a) The Group has 694 member so far (up from just over 500 a month or so back) and we should expect more to join as coverage of the event grows towards Spring 2008.
b) Hopeful teams are uploading their 'audition' videos to the site and members are commenting on them
c) One other company has already started offering Group members discounts on its outdoor clothing range: http://www.chilledturtle.com/

Food for thought?