Mild rant forthcoming.
I see so many case studies for social media being presented – in their entirety – as:
- social discounts and coupons
- a video campaign
- a clever Facebook contest
But this drives me crazy insane. Here’s why.
Social media is not just direct marketing parked online.
Ultimate social media success by my definition is far more that whether you took advantage of the latest application craze to market the same stuff you always have.
Part of the trouble is that we rarely distinguish between Social Media, The Tools and Tubes and Social Media, The Business Philosophy. And they’re different.
Social Media as a Tool Set
Twitter. Facebook. YouTube. They’re all technologies and tools. The means, if you will.
Adding a social sharing component to your campaigns and content is a good thing. In technical terms, it means you’re “adding something social” to your communications to give them longer legs, more interactivity even. Adapting some of your existing brand focused efforts for increased social media awareness, sales, or customer loyalty is fine. It’s part of the deal, and it’s certainly something into which you need to evolve.
But it’s only part of it.
Social Media as a Business Philosophy
This where it gets sticky, and where the hairs on the back of my neck stand up when we applaud a company for being awesome at social media when they pull off something cool, innovative, or a contest specific to a social network.
If the proper intent doesn’t live behind the campaign effort and there aren’t more pieces being put in place to make the entire approach to business more socially-minded, it’s just a clever campaign.
Businesses that are supporting their outward facing social media efforts with a true underlying philosophy are the ones that will win in the long run. That means your campaigns need to be representative of broader goals to:
- Listen to the newly amplified and disseminated voices of your customers online, and the feedback they’re sharing
- Respond to that feedback, and take it into consideration when you make decisions related to how you operate
- Provide helpful, useful information to your customers that supports their entire relationship with you, not just their moment of purchase
- Empower every person in your business to be and do all of those things themselves, within agreed upon guidelines, but with the freedom to respond with speed and personality
- Adapt your people and processes to provide more open, fluid networks of communication. That means inside your business, between your business and community (past, present, and future customers), and among and within the community itself.
Campaigns can be fun. Entertainment is a viable goal in itself. So might a click through be to a discount coupon to drive more foot traffic to your store. But these are merely single parts of this revolution, and superficial ones at that. We’ve got to buttress the surface work with deeper re-engineering of how and why we do what we do.
Otherwise, It’s All Window Dressing.
If we continue to celebrate video campaigns alone as the pinnacle of social media success, we’re missing our own boat.
Yes, it’s something to get noticed and talked about. Yes, it’s important to earn more and broader footprints for your brand online. But it can’t stop there, or you’ve negated the rest of the cycle and the subtleties that are what make social media so powerful in the first place. The video campaign ought to be an indicator of a broader system of listening, response, participation, improvement, and back again.
You can be the listener. The observer. The helper, the educator, the business that’s invested and responsive. You can be more than a turbo-charged marketing vehicle, and you should be. Social media marketing is only part of the equation. As Jay Baer would say, it’s not enough just to do social, you have to learn how to be social.
The companies that will stand out as examples worth emulating will show evidence – or at least discussions of their exploration – of weaving all of those pieces together to form a more evolved, more symbiotic whole.
It may be new and we may just be getting our sea legs, but let’s not settle. There’s more to all of this than just a campaign. And if there isn’t, I’m in the wrong business and have made a grave, grave error of judgment because I’ve been believing in – and seeking to create – something much more evolutionary all along.
What say you?
I say- right on sister
You got it. Actually, one of the best social media responses from a company that I’ve encountered so far is from Hertz rent-a-car. They’ve got someone up on Twitter, listening and reacting to consumers — something I didn’t expect and something which allowed me to have a better experience with Hertz instead of through Enterprise. I wrote about it a few months ago.
I take your mild rant and I second it. As a social media researcher, I get requests for measuring campaigns and I regularly point out that it’s worth measuring the full cycle – not just a glimpse.
WOW, finally, I find someone who thinks like me on social media. Great blog and ‘Long Live the Rant’.
Doing and being is the fundamental difference I see between companies who experience transformational results (much bigger success over the long-term) and those who experience “numbers” success (likes, mentions, blah, blah, blah). Your rants rock!
I try and explain this to clients and often get the questions: ‘where do I start? Twitter? Should I set up a Facebook page? How do I create a viral video?’ and so on…you nailed it. I will steal, er, uh get inspired by your ideas…social media is more than a set of tools, it’s a way to get closer to your clients and potential clients and create a valid conversation. When I tell the clients that, they often stare at me and then it sort of dawns on them…slowly…
I tend to be the defender of campaigns, not because I think they’re end-all, be-all, but because I believe they get brands (and customers) excited about the potential for social media. Personally, I don’t think every conversation has to be a relationship, and every relationship doesn’t have to be a marriage.
Being consistent in social is important, but it’s also quite boring. Customers like spice and sexiness. They like seeing that companies are capable of more than just yelling “Thanks!” on Twitter and apologizing for customer service gone awry.
And then there are the numbers. Consistent community management is a fantastic long-term strategy, but there’s also nothing wrong with a short-term campaign that blasts your fan base up 100% or more in a month (which good campaigns can do without breaking a sweat). Or advertising, for that matter, which can work absolute miracles on Facebook.
So yes, social strategy is vital, but so are creativity and excitement. We do ourselves a disservice when we downplay either side of the coin in favor of the other.
Hi David –
Thanks for the thoughtful comment.
I don’t think I meant to downplay campaigns – I meant specifically to point
out that they can be great, and entertainment has its value – but that
they’re an ingredient, not the recipe. And for far too many businesses,
they’re treating them as the end all.
But the kind of results you specified – “blasting” your fan base up or
catching eyeballs from advertising – are useless in the long term if you
can’t keep them there. That’s nothing new from traditional media days but if
we talk about social as a transformational idea about how businesses can
better connect with customers, we’re doing ***that* a disservice if all we
talk about is being clever and exciting for a few moments because consistent
is boring.
If I get my fans up by 100%, that means nothing except that momentary number
if no one sticks around long enough to care about the “boring” moments in
between the sexy ones.
I see your points, and I doubt it was your intent to cast campaigns in a dismissive light, but you can imagine how frustrating it would be for you to read a post about “Community management is lame without great campaigns!” There’s room for everybody in the clubhouse, and I think it’s important we all respect the contributions each player makes.
Like the back and forth. Is it fair to say that Amber’s post (rightly) points out that “marketing campaigns” labeled as “social media strategy” are the problem? That campaigns are great for marketing, but that the social aspects are something else entirely, even if intertwined? That was my take, anyway. Thanks both of you for the article and comments. 🙂
Hi David –
Thanks for the thoughtful comment.
I don’t think I meant to downplay campaigns – I meant specifically to point out that they can be great, and entertainment has its value – but that they’re an ingredient, not the recipe. And for far too many businesses, they’re treating them as the end all.
But the kind of results you specified – “blasting” your fan base up or catching eyeballs from advertising – are useless in the long term if you can’t keep them there. That’s nothing new from traditional media days but if we talk about social as a transformational idea about how businesses can better connect with customers, we’re doing *that* a disservice if all we talk about is being clever and exciting for a few moments because consistent is boring.
If I get my fans up by 100%, that means nothing except that momentary number if no one sticks around long enough to care about the “boring” moments in between the sexy ones.
Loving this rant! Right on target, in my opinion!
Bravo! I saw a tweet about something similar yesterday that really resonated with me–Jason Falls said “to be clear … purchasing advertisements on social networking sites (media buys), not “marketing” through social media.” Whether it’s media buys on social networking sites or some other type of campaign like you mention above, it’s all meaningless if the whole point is for the company to be able to do a press release bragging that they have “embraced social” with their snazzy whatever-it-is. How about if your company is really social, customers and people in general will eventually learn about it through your employees who love it there or who go above and beyond to solve problems?
It is also more than a Facebook Fan page. I find many small businesses (and perhaps large as well) think there is something “magic” to social media – they are looking/hoping for a “silver bullet” solution to marketing/PR/communication challenges. The people and businesses I see being successful are the ones who have always been good at marketing, etc. They understand their customer and know how to build trusted relationships with them regardless of the tools or the environment. They get it. Great post Amber – thanks again for keeping us thinking.
Your rant addresses an issue that I have struggled with for awhile. In our rush to “legitimize” social media as a business model, we’ve been tripping over ourselves in our race to demonstrate quicker ROI, come up with more ways to measure and develop an ever increasing bag of tricks to get more fans and followers.
I agree that it is important to integrate the “business philosophy” of social media into the company’s culture. Coming up with a plan and deciding which tools to use is easy because managers understand numbers – #’s of followers, #’s of clicks, #’s of friends.
It’s when I bring up the WHY question that their eyes glaze over and they look at me like a 70’s new age refuge. They perceive the “being social” part as soft and fuzzy and messy to measure.
Opening the company’s internal culture to enable more open communications and decision making scares them because that’s not how the company was structured, They hadn’t hired stakeholders. They hired placeholders.
More focus on how to help companies integrate this philosophy into their corporate structure would be most welcome.
Very stimulating post as usual.
I think I see what you are saying here Amber. Do we need to foster a connectedness between our relationships on our blog, and our relationships using social media like Twitter and Facebook? Can I say there is a certain personality or vibe that needs to permeate all these different mediums?
Am I on the right track or did I misunderstand your post?
That’s a very interesting thought.
I too agree that social media is something far deeper than the occasional spike of success in a particular medium of a particular campaign.
While this kind of success is encouraging and partially counters who still sees social media as wasted human resources (and many still do, we all know it), there’s more behind it, and it’s not all always flashy and fun.
On the other side, the same spikes of success have the disadvantage of making companies believe social media efforts can be short termed, which is far from the truth.
Good points. I believe much of your rant is derived from Mr. Old Spice. I think that campaign would have been big regardless of Social Media. Social Media only made it bigger because SM bloggers claimed it as a SM success. I’m sure things will increasingly be social, but this is an evolution of communication not a revolution as most people claim. Evolutions take time.
The social DNA definitely needs to come from the inside of a firm; being sicial starts with talking to employees. That process naturally gives birth to those amazing campaigns that sometimes go viral. Until then, there us no fake it till you make it.
AMEN!!
You nailed it. One thing is “understanding” social media (and so few people do so), another thing is so clearly being able to distinguish between the tools and the (business) philosophy of social media. Yet another to make companies (people) understand that it’s so much more about listening and responding to customers (people) than dictating to them or trying to wow to them via a campaign or two….
Great article that really got me thinking about how we view social media. I believe that one way to tell whether you see social media as a toolset or as a business philosophy is whether you talk about it as a channel or a community. If channel, its just another “media campaign.” If community, its all about the people and what is really happening in the community.
This is bang on, very good advice and I would say not just for businesses. It’s for all and it goes both ways. I think same can be said for bloggers and also for non profits. It’s a 3D approach or a whole life approach. It is my challenge as well. I can be social on line easily. It’s the real life component that challenges me, but this is a great reminder. I am retweeting right now.
This is bang on, very good advice and I would say not just for businesses. It’s for all and it goes both ways. I think same can be said for bloggers and also for non profits. It’s a 3D approach or a whole life approach. It is my challenge as well. I can be social on line easily. It’s the real life component that challenges me, but this is a great reminder. I am retweeting right now.
This is bang on, very good advice and I would say not just for businesses. It’s for all and it goes both ways. I think same can be said for bloggers and also for non profits. It’s a 3D approach or a whole life approach. It is my challenge as well. I can be social on line easily. It’s the real life component that challenges me, but this is a great reminder. I am retweeting right now.
Great Rant! Rant on!
I’m thinking that the big difference (nod to Brains on Fire) is whether one wants to run a campaign, facilitate a community or start and foster a movement.
I disagree with BOF in that campaigns are just fine. Everybody remembers the first four phases of a team/project: form, storm, norm, perform; but they almost always forget the fifth: adjourn. It’s okay to end something. Really. But that’s why a campaign is not a community…
I also think that a low-energy but connected community is fine also. This is probably the best steady-state for a community. No revolution. No emergencies. Just a joy in being in community. Evolutionary progress. Over time. Keeping everyone together.
Then there are movements. The good is that there is a great energy to harness; the bad is that people get left behind. The good is that new people will join a movement. The bad is that there is a decidedly Darwinian evolution to the community when it undertakes a movement. And Darwinian evolution is great, um, except when its ME that gets selected out. I think the hope is that people can be held onto until they can catch up. That their reservations get heard and responded to and the connunity can move forward.
I’m thinking that SM *techniques* fit all three, but for a campaign, it’s not really social; to your point, its really just internet-enabled direct marketing. OK to use, I suppose. Just not very meaningful or sustainable. In two and three, it’s social, connecting and the impact is exponential. It’s where we go from simply numerous to complexly tribal. Where it is our care for each other in a community that is the amplifier effect for the communication. Where our relationships with each other outlast a particular movement, campaign or event.
Great article! How many times have we seen a brand on Facebook or Twitter only to spend no time maintaining their presence?
Hit the nail on the head here- it is a bout being engaged and engaging, not just sticking on some social links and hoping it will happen by itself.
I like this post, and I also think it’s short-sighted. Some companies are so conservative, that a foray into social starts with the baby-step Facebook campaign.
Certainly sounds like what social media has always been to me. A vehicle to genuinely connect with the target audience, engage their imaginations, and make them dream big with you; the main goals of social media.
This is the problem I have with so many “case study” posts. All too often, a case study = a cool campaign that generated some buzz. But, without knowing the before, during and after, we’re only seeing part of the picture. Before the campaign was implemented, what was the strategy? What were the goals? Budget? How is the company allocating resources to “be” more social (as you put it)? During the campaign, how did a company leverage the “buzz” to build their community, create long-term connections, use feedback to make on-the-spot adjustments to strengthen the campaign, etc? And, after the buzz wears off, what’s being done to keep those people engaged? Or to build on those initial connections to drive sales (or other business goals)?
This was actually one of my qualms with case studies shown at BlogWorld. In some sessions, we heard a lot about cool campaigns, but only on the surface level. A cool campaign doesn’t really matter if it just “window dressing” (to borrow your phrase).
Good food for thought, Amber!
Heather
@prTini
Great thoughts here, Amber. And the section headings capture the gist of your points very succinctly. Truly it is a matter of business philosophy needing to provide the underpinnings of the social media engagement, or it does amount to window dressing.
As a marketer, my view on social media is that it is driving the need for the enterprise to pay attention to the basics of marketing 101 or risk eroding shareholder value. So for commoditized businesses, value creation amounts to the operating margin on each transaction. For businesses with differentiated products, value creation is operating margin plus brand equity. And brand equity can quickly erode when there’s weak alignment between marketing & sales and operations and the customers suffer and then tell they the entire world about it.
In this brave new world, the need to be authentic, transparent and true to your company values has never been greater. Business philosophy indeed!
Very good blog, I agree.
The line “it’s not enough just to do social, you have to learn how to be social.” sums it all up for me. Many brands and organisations just don’t understand that it isn’t enough just to put an update on Facebook or to tweet about it. What I try to ask people I work with is “what is social about this communicaton?” The problem is at inception of campaigns and ideas, the idea of being social should be there, right at the start. What is going to get people involved in this campaign/communication? What is going to get them to tell their friends? How can we do that? Instead it is still an afterthought.
Nice blog, Rss-ed! 🙂
Love the post, but I’m even going to take it one level higher. I generally agree with the bullet points you mentioned, but I think the first thing to figure out is what your values are as a company. This is very much drinking the Zappos kool-aid, but I feel like once you know your true values, you build all work (marketing, engineering, HR, etc) around those values. If one of your values truly is to be the most secretive company in the world, then social media is wrong for you. If, instead, one of your values is to grow a loyal audience of business professionals, then you can start to think about a LinkedIn campaign. We have to avoid getting ahead of ourselves. We need to know where we stand before we even think about strategies, let alone tools.