Relevant Engagement

Anatomy of Involvement

New technology enables new kinds of consumer behavior.  It's wonderful for consumers, it is a nightmare for marketers for three reasons.

1. mass engagement exists - only now, marketers have to work for the levels of mass they once believed they could receive through a TV buy *
2. success measures exist - only now, marketers have to work at identifying business goals, be open to change and experimentation, be agile, and be vigilant - this is new territory for many - transparency and work aren't real high up on the list of things to do in most corporations. 
3. consumer engagement exits - you just have to be able to stand back and dissect the anatomy of the involvement between your brand, your message and your customer

Later I'll run through some steps that you can use to dissect and diagram involvement interactions with your customers.

* for those that know me - I'm an ex-Media Director who had to take a different path.  In the advertising arena one of the greatest scams of all times is the amount of influence over marketing spend Nielsen has on organizations.  If you want precise details I'm more than happy to go offline and discuss.  Just drop me a note. 

The Speed of Information

This topic is certainly a new world trend.

One of the most contentious conversations I have had in the past two years was with a GM of a local TV station in top 20 DMA.  The heart of the issue was driving people to his news cast.  His approach was over simplistic.  I offered up my advice but he would have none of it that day.  Of course TV stations have to protect their revenue streams; however, his oblique view of the impact of technological changes, dynamic pricing strategies, consumer behavior and preference in the news and entertainment industry was simultaneously humorous and horrifying.  I was eating lunch with a dinosaur. 

That got me to thinking.  I'm kicking around a new classification - something along the lines of the information "have" and "have nots".  It is not my intention for my classifications to be a pejorative. 

Enlightened and Benighted.  A visual representation may be a simple bell-curve.

Two things about the Benighted.

1. I am not optimistic that they will ever get it - the changes occurring around us are so obvious and are having such a profound daily impact on our world, jobs, and personal lives I just don't understand why they don't get it.
2. I don't think they care to "get it" - this is the scary one because their are a host of issues attached to this one.  Corporations must grow or die.  Culturally, you must foster an environment of learning, exploration and change.  Same old same old won't get it done.  I see clashes between Enlightened's and Benighted Don't Cares and it creates an unhealthy environment. 

What sparked this whole thought stream was a note on The New Speed of Information article I just read. 

Reshaping Our Understanding

I've been consulting on strategic approaches for new world trends by utilizing simple steps/strategies and the importance of framing up your brand from the perspective of the customer.  The idea of reshaping our understanding has been a consistent thread throughout my years of consulting.

For this topic (in particular) I've found it best to describe these complex issues in simple ways to get broad acceptance.  As I discussed the changing tide of events with a friend of mine, she shared a great simile that worked well in my mind.

Reshaping our profession is like wanting to make a square ice cube round.  You don't hack away at the corners of the ice cube - you melt the ice cube and pour the water into a new mold.

THAT IS RESHAPING!  Take all of what we know (cause there is good stuff in our experiences) and use new techniques to solve challenges based on the world we live in today. I was very pleased to see a presentation by Clay Shirky that just nailed home some very salient issues facing marketers:

• For years we've been operating on a "lousy understandings of human behavior."
  
• TV is still a popular pastime, but the rise of social media shows people also want to produce and interact with content.
• Previous media channels did not let us engage with the medium - people couldn't interact, produce or share at the depth and speed they can today.
  
• Most instances content creators have intrinsic motivations that aren't, for example, about money.
• "We are living in the middle of the largest expansion of expressive capability in the history of media."

Go here to read more: Social Web Reshaping How Media Works

Ownership - the Great Myth

I could be missing something but a recent statistic leaves me wondering if CMO's actually understand what is going on in the marketplace today.

A recent study by SpencerStuart with over 200 chief marketing officers found that only 33% believed their success to be tied to having a customer orientation; moreover, 92% of the CMOs said they must "own" the brand to be successful, compared with 41% who indicated they must "own" the customer relationship.

Maybe it's the verb "own" that I'm hung up on.  They may "own" trademarks and intellectual property but the customer ultimately dictates what the brand means to them.

New Pricing Model for Social Media

I read an interesting article this morning: CPSA: The New Pricing Model For Social Media?

David Berkowitz, the author, highlights a list of measures that clearly were not built for Social Media and gives great rationale as to why they shouldn't be used.  He also points out, and he's right, basically we're dealing with yet another measure we have to learn, work with publishers, educate clients, etc.  I think the sad truth is that is the way it is going to be moving forward. 

I responded to his article - below is my response.

David, I agree we need another TLA (three letter acronym) like we need a hole in the head.  That said - I like the fact that you're keeping this dialogue alive. 

I like CPSA because (as you said) it gives us something we can share with our client so that they feel like they're paying for something social and relationship-oriented.

On the other side of the pancake.

I don't like CPSA because (to your point) it is vague.  The tactics recommended within a Social Media plan are as varied and unique as a fingerprint.  To compound this issue CPSA basically seems to me to be a new higher level model that uses key performance indicators that could be applied to Social Media plans right now but are more independent and isolated:
- Repeat Rate
- Time Spent Rate
- Take Rate or Download Rate
- Send to A Friend Rates
- Comment Rates
- Linking Rate

Maybe we should consider looking at the tools available to us that listen to the social ecosystem (BuzzMetrics, Spiral16, Radian6, etc.) and the results our efforts produce.  In the social space, what has our current spend created in terms of conversation/relationship sentiment (positive, level, or negative).  A possible measure could be around the impact our efforts have on that sentiment score and our ability to sustain a positive level.