Paneldebattar om Digital Marknadsföring på Internet Expo i Malmö onsdag 5 oktober 2011

På onsdag blir det tredje gången gillt för mig att paneldebatta med IDG om Digital Marknadsföring. Först Göteborg för ett knappt år sedan, sedan Stockholm i januari och nu på hemmaplan. Det ska bli kul att avsluta på hemmaplan.

Det har mest varit reklambyråer och jag i panelen som Magnus Höij (Internetworld’s chefredaktör) leder. Jag har nog varit tänkt som den udda fågeln i diskussionen och det är en positionering jag gärna tagit.

Tidigare diskussioner har givit goda tillfällen att poängtera att alltför många företag och organisationer använt digital marknadsföring och sociala medier bara som ytterligare en kanal att basunera ut sina pressreleaser och andra meddelanden på. Skräckexemplet var Exportrådet när jag kollade runt förra hösten.

En annan käpphäst har varit att jag inte instämt i de facto-definitionen av marknadsföring som visat sig genom hur frågor ställts t.ex. Marknadsföring är så mycket mer än bara reklamen. Den är den synliga delen, men för lyckad marknadsföring krävs så mycket analys och strategi före som verkar glömmas bort. Och där har de sociala medierna ohyggligt mycket att erbjuda. Alla tweetar, inlägg och kommentarer bör man ju se som “gratis marknadsundersökning” och ta tillvara på kritik och uppslag. Dessutom hittar man lätt entusiaster och ambassadörer som man gör bäst i att vårda och ta hand om.

Tredje käpphästen är de medarbetarna som sociala ambassadörer. Hur företagen gör bäst för att ta tillvara all den kraft, det engagemang och den kontaktyta som personalen har i de sociala medierna. Hur viktigt det är att företagen tydligt kommunicerar sina värderingar och strategier så att socialt engagerad personal förhoppningsvis väl representerar varumärket och inte behöver tveka på deras förhållningsramar i förhållande till arbetsgivaren går.

Några bra exempel:

Video från paneldebatten (35 min)

Advertisements

Which social aggregator will be first to include Google+ ?

Many of us social addicts have come to rely on aggregators to help us post across social platforms and to view and manage our scanning of the buzz in one application. The ones I have come across are Tweetdeck, Echofon, Seesmic and Yoono. I’m sure there are more. Please feel welcome to add a comment if I have left out your favourite.

They all have their advantages and disadvantages. I have come to use Tweetdeck and Yoono more and more. Tweetdeck because of the neat control of the panels where I can follow a subset of twitterflows and Facebook. For quick posting, Yoono integrated into Firefox gives a continuous flow of updates, including a nice, but sometimes distracting notifier in the bottom right hand corner of the screen. You can turn it off if you want to, forever of for a limited time. But the best thing about Yoono is the coverage of services: Facebook, several Twitter accounts, LinkedIn, FriendFinder, MySpace, Flickr, Foursquare, AIM, Yammer, Yahoo Messenger Google Buzz and Google Talk as well as YouTube. They just had to give up on Microsoft Live Messenger but who cares really?

Now when Google have released Google+ to the public, I wait in suspense to see which of these aggregators (or others) will be the first to integrate with it. Whichever it is it will get a big + in my book since that is currently a prime hurdle to my use of Google+.

It’s unlikely to be Tweetdeck (since they were recently acquired by Twitter)

I hope it is Yoono.

I actually think it will be Yoono.

—- UPDATE —-

13 October 2011

The correct answer is: None of the above.

I have just sent my first cross-network update using iStatus+, an iPhone app by Nadan Gergeo. Read more here

Too many companies miss the “social” in “Social Media”

Let’s try out these new social media, they say. Then they use them to distribute a flow of press releases, linking to their own website. What the **** is social about that? And then they get disappointed about the results.

  • Social means two-way communication
  • Social means engaging people
  • Social means people engaging with people
  • Social means listening
  • Social means responding

When discussing with companies who are contemplating starting to use social media, my advice is usually the same and pretty simple:

  1. Start scanning Twitter and other platforms where it is possible for your company and brand names – why not for your competitor’s too? – for your products and services and other topics of interest.
  2. Establish processes to channel the “spontaneous feedback” to those concerned in the company
  3. Start interacting with people who make interesting posts. Respond to complaints and comments. Engage with potential ambassadors.
  4. Then, but not before, start interspersing with your own marketing messages. Since, by this time, you are likely to have built sufficient credibility with the public and strong relations with the ambassadors so they pass your messages on through their networks.

Say after me please: Social Media is not just another megaphone

So what’s so great about social intranets?

If there is one thing almost all intranets have in common, it is that people complain about them. The appreciation of traditional intranets generally is somewhere on a scale between neutral and abysmal.

If you ask employees who have access to social intranets, they would rather be somewhere on the scale between neutral and extatic (at least on occasions).

Communalities of most traditional intranets are:

  • Information is spread down- or outwards in the organization
  • Content is created by a cadre of communication professionals
  • The editors constantly debate structure and editor access
  • Users have difficulties to find their way in the structure
  • And just as much difficultyto find stuff when searching
  • Much of the content is out of date
  • An ever-present question for the company is “How do we make people use the intranet?”. (The response usually is to make it the default start page for all browser installations)

So what about social intranets?

  • Content is spread in all directions by the people who know the topics, not by the people who know how to write about them
  • The creators of collaborative content don’t care too much about the big structure. Only about the substance. And everybody have access to create content (but not everywhere, though)
  • Structure is secondary, since content is found through searching, and by association with similar content and with people you trust
  • Search works much better since it is based not only on search engine “mechanics” but is boosted by peer recommendations and social bookmarks
  • Social intranets apply “Content Darwinism”. Almost all presentation is based on “recency of updating”. Hot topics and communities therefore float to the surface while inactive communities and stuff people aren’t interested in slowly sinks to the bottom. (It can still be found through searching for it though)
  • As the intranet is seen as valuable and relevant, people will want to use it. There is no more need to make them go there.

Of course, it cannot be ALL social. The most powerful tool is blending the traditional with social. The communications folks may give some screen real estate away, but increased exposure of what remains is likely to compensate with a healthy margin for the lost real estate.

But, won’t the staff waste valuable time socializing via the intranet? No way! I’m constantly amazed by how the same kind of features result in such different uses on each side of the firewall. Or would you consider it a waste if:

  • people find experts to help them solve problems fast and with proven solutions
  • instead of re-inventing the wheel for the umpteenth time, people find documents from others that they can adapt to their current needs
  • employees band together in communities to share and build common knowledge on topics of professional and corporate value
  • knowledge is unlocked from employees hard drives, brains and desk drawers, shared and made available for the common good of the company… and for the future – an aspect to take into account in these days of retiring babyboomers and shortening average tenure
  • and – much needed in many a company – the ability of employees to network and communicate in all directions bridge geographic and organizational boundaries helping to overcome the frequent suboptimization stemming from organizational protectionism.
  • the criss-crossing of networks and communication generates chance meetings of people with other people or with unexpected information, a well known, proven and sought for environment for creativity and invention.

For me, it is very simple: the ability of implementing social intranets is the possibility for companies and organizations to show that “Our Employees are our Most Valuable Resource” weren’t just empty words.

Network value = People x Relations

Whatever value you look for in your network, socializing, improving your knowledge, finding job opportunities or finding a spouse, the headline formula stays valid: the value of your network depends on who (and how many) are in your network and what kind of relationship you have with them.

Just having 168 friends on Facebook doesn’t bring you closer to any target whatsoever if you don’t nurture your relationship with them.

So how do you nurture relations online? There are some simple basics:

  • Standard: Help them to know who you are through your status updates
  • Stronger: Respond and comment on what they share (Simply, we appreciate more to get feedback on our stuff to reading just one more status update by someone else)
  • Share generously (I don’t mean all of your party pictures! Of your personality, knowledge and helping hands)

Regarding the “People” component of the formula, only you can know who are the best people to have in your network. But I do have a view on “how many”: The more, the merrier. Why? Three simple words: “You never know….” as in:

  • Who might have the answer to your question
  • Who will know someone you need to get hold of
  • Who may inspire you to make good choices
  • Who may put a smile on your face