better ideas lead to higher share ratio, regardless of size
Seth Godin had a great post about how a focus on good ideas will always have more value than a focus on getting more fans or followers. Reconciling size versus engagement is something that I know a lot of brands and individuals struggle with online. We all want to be important. We all want to have a million followers. I struggle with this as well. Would I rather have 10 passionate people who digest everything and spread the word than a thousand people who are passive observers? From a long term strategy, yes, but it sure would feel good (at least for a moment) to have a follower / fan count of several thousand.
Without trying to reiterate what Seth says, I’d really like to call your attention to the graph that I grabbed from his post and also direct you there to read his theory (with a little data to back it up) on followers vs. ideas. It’s one of the better posts he’s drafted recently and I think everyone should take a look. Read Seth’s post by clicking here…
There was a really interesting and insightful video from Gary V. about how the explosion of social media has changed customer expectations. He talks about how brands & celebrities are embracing the same social networks that we are, and that there is also now an expectation of interaction buy the consumer. If I think a product sucks and I talk about it, I could rightly expect that someone at that company is at least listening - and may respond.
The same is getting to be true celebrities, CEOs, and the like - John Mayer, Ashton Kutcher, Bill Gates and other top business peeps are on Twitter and (in theory) accessible. No gatekeepers for them in this medium. But can it last? And because of the openness we’re seeing now, will customers grow to have expectations that can’t be sustained?
Andrew Warner over at Mixergy had an interesting post arguing that it can’t. And I tend to agree, but don’t think it will be true for absolutely everyone. We’re in what I think of as an attention gold rush - where the tools are still new enough that barriers and gatekeepers aren’t a huge issue yet. As this builds (and it will) the competition for attention and competition for that conversation will start to exist, just like in every other medium. Gary is a good example of someone who works really hard to engage 1:1 and say ‘what’s up’ to a good chunk of his audience, but with every appearance on GMA, every new tasting with Jimmy Fallon, the audience grows and I’m sure it gets much harder to scale those interactions 1:1.
But, I think it all comes down to how bad someone wants a passionate online community. I get really excited any time someone like Gary (or Andrew, or Chris) responds to a question of mine or a blog I posted. Because it takes real time to respond directly, those discussions make people feel like they are a valued part of the community. Maybe down the road there will have to be another mechanism that can scale better, but at a basic level, I think nothing creates a brand evangelist or a fan like a conversation. Businesses and people will have to learn to better manage those interactions and scale them up, or customers and fans may become disenchanted if these new tools become the 21st century equivelant of fan mail.
Your thoughts? Is there a good way to scale your social interactions if you’re a major brand or celebrity that hasn’t been talked about? Will interactions and expectations consistently increase or will they bell curve? Hit me in the comments…
Here’s my quick take on Mention Map. I think it’s a really interesting way of showing how we’re all connected on Twitter as well as how people are having most of their conversations with.
We’re all part of multiple social media networks now. Maybe it’s Twitter and Facebook, with a little Ping.fm thrown in with FriendFeed and LinkedIn on the flipside. Don’t even get me started on public Google Waves.
And as we’re all getting on more and more networks, our paths are bound to cross at more and more points. Which is why I think it’s more important than ever to know your network and know your audience.
I’ll only post certain types of content on LinkedIN. Twitter gets a bit more loose, and Facebook is more of personal likes and funny stuff. Not a lot of business content there. But that’s because most of my ‘friends’ on Facebook aren’t following me on Twitter or aren’t connected to me on LinkedIN (emphasis on the MOST in that sentence). As we’re migrating, more people are starting to use Twitter or LinkedIN (using those big 3 as an example because it’s where I spend most of my time) and are getting my favorite links, blog post notifications and recommendations on multiple platforms.
From a marketing perspective this is kick-ass… right? More people consuming messages (even duplicate ones) on multiple social media channels from a trusted source is a good thing, if I’m digging your website or movie, or blog, or whatever.
But flip the coin over and I think there’s a point where pushing the same content through duplicate channels now becomes an interruption as opposed to a conversation. If you’re following me on Twitter, as well as being friends on Facebook and colleagues on LinkedIN - there are times where I’m sure you’ve seen the same piece of content across all of your media streams from me…… sorry. Maybe this post is one of them.
The problem is that I want to be able to tell my whole network about something I think is cool, and since we’re not all consolidated onto one channel, some people are getting double doses. At the root of this is the notion that I think we all want to be influencers. We all want to be the person that found that next cool thing, and so hitting everyone in our own network seems like an easy way to share content.
But I think that this will start to come at a price. I’ve already un-friended people from different networks because I haven’t found their content useful or that it’s been too repetitive or spammy. While I hope the same thing hasn’t happened to me, there’s no guarantee that it hasn’t. I also recently was intrigued by my friend Rob Bluey’s post on how he’s going to be treating his Facebook network in 2010. If 2009 was a planting year for social networks, 2010 may be a year of pruning or at least shaping.
What’s the point? I think its that we need to tailor your content to fit the network and be conscious of the people who may be receiving multiple forms of the same message. Trust that if you’re putting out good stuff that people will use a different tool in order to receive that content. You won’t need to force feed them. Chris Brogan does a fantastic job of this. His FB posts are different (not always, but enough) from his Blog posts. Most importantly though, if you want some really useful content, he’ll only offer that through his newsletter. He knows that his content has value and that if people want that premium content, well, they’ll just have to deal with subscribing.
I helped a friend out the other night who was using Verizon DSL and had recently magically became unable to send outgoing mail. This actually isn’t the first time I’ve heard of this problem in the area so I had a hunch that they were simply blocking port 25. I’m not going to get too technical here, but let’s just say we were able to determine this was the problem. After nearly an hour on the phone trying to explain this to a technician at Verizon, they continued to insist that it wasn’t their issue and that could no longer help us. Long story short we switched to cable internet that night and that resolved the issue.
A couple of nights later I had an issue with my Windows 7 license and though the Microsoft technician didn’t solve what I wanted, they were much better at customer service than Verizon. But I noticed what may be a new ‘buzzphrase’ and trend in corporate customer support (besides outsourcing it to India ((no offense, India)) )…
That new ‘buzzphrase’ was this: “So, before we proceed any further I want to set the expectations for this call.” Really? Set the expectations? If I’m calling Customer Service. It’s my expectation that you will FIX THE PROBLEM I’M CALLING ABOUT.
Immediately after hearing that phrase my brain started telling me that I just heard a cop out. It told me that they were going to go through the things that were in the manual, like asking me if I have my router plugged in or if I’ve rebooted the computer before. It also told me that this was the end of the line.
Contrast that with what folks like Frank at ComcastCares are doing. If I’m a Comcast user (which I’m not), I may still think Comcast sucks at the end of the day, but having someone who’s not reading from a script, but talking to me like I’m a human being will go a looooong way toward making me think that they suck less. I promise.
One final example. Last month I had issues with my hosting provider (Netfirms). After getting a not-so-fast response from their helpdesk line (phone), I sent out a Tweet regarding my problem. Almost immediately I got a response back from Netfirms’ rep on Twitter with an acknowledgement of my problem, the promise of a follow up (with ticket), and a speedy resolution. That, my friends was a kick-ass and unexpected surprise. They turned an angry customer into one that would still recommend their service to others.
If your business starts off a call with letting the customer know that they’re going to set expectations before they even start working on the problem, it’s probably not going to be a fun experience for your customer. But if you engage like a human being, give a crap and know that it’s the customer who is setting the expectation - you’ll fare much better (or at least make people dislike you a lot less).
Now more than ever it’s customer service that is going to make and break brands just by the nature of how conversation scales online.
I got a chance to check out a service called TinyChat this past week. It’s a very cool platform that lets you build disposable chat rooms for events or meetings but also integrates up to 6 live video streams via webcam where you can have your presenter essentially streaming out the content while the audience can participate via chat (similar to Ustream - which also is a damn great service). And I got to log in with my Twitter credentials.
Then came news that LinkedIn was linking up with Twitter (or was Twitter linking up with LinkedIn?) and it got me thinking…. While we’re still seeing an explosion in social platforms and tools that people use to connect, we’re also seeing consolidation.
More and more platforms are using the robust APIs from Twitter and Facebook to let users log into and use services with their Facebook or Twitter IDs. I know Google is doing this to a lesser extent as well but mostly with companies they’ve bought or services they’re starting.
The point is… I think that FB and Twitter are positioning themselves for the long term not just in their own platforms, but by using their accounts as a sort of ‘passport’ that’s accepted throughout the different social media sphere. They’re becoming the big daddies of social data (read: my information) in much the same way Google has become the big name in search data. And I think that platforms which make it easier on their users to connect (without having to create yet ANOTHER username / password / secret question / demographic form) are the ones that are going to have a leg up because it’s a lower barrier of entry for me to participate.
What do you guys think? Are you more likely to use 3rd party services that let you connect with existing credentials or doesn’t it matter? On the flip side, does the centralization of your social data bother you? Leave a comment and let’s chat.
