Digital Influence Mapping Project

Closing Communities: Is There a Better Way?

I was drawn in by Ben McConnell's post about the closing of Disney's Virtual Magic Kingdom (VMK). The virtual community fueled by Sulake closed one week ago. Lots of coverage from CNN to WSJ. Fans have gone the Jehrico route and set up protest sites. But it's not fair to compare the closing of a community that had been live and active for a couple of years with a passive TV show. Community mmbers feel abaonded, let down or down-right disrespected. Disney claims that the community was part of a limited time celebration of their 50th anniversary and the current message on the url is fairly ubrupt.

John Frost over at the Disney Blog (unofficial) had a terrific post last month about the closing. He considers many angles of the business drivers inside Disney from the decentralized buisness unit structure to the rigorous margin goals shared across the enterprise. Ben takes teh claim that the community was intended for a short term campaign. We wrestle with campaign-mentality in marcom all the time. Only difference is that our campaigns are often a few monmths long whereas this community was up for more than two years. Ben goes on in his post to set up the business rationale for a community to begin with:

"Campaign thinking is a byproduct of the last 25 years of business school education. The formula has been to create a short-term project using established metrics, execute, then start over with a new idea. Move the needle quickly.

The formula for evangelism thinking is: Create a project where the community of users become part of the process and most importantly, are considered a tangible asset. The needle may not move as fast because the investment is for the long term, but it's less likely to have wild, up-and-down swings."

Both authors have hit on something important: communities can serve the business goals of a company and their value and the actual value of the community members should be weighed with a business eye. 

Sometimes you have to close

If you valuate the community, you may find it is not a sustainable enterprise. As business people (and community enthusiasts) we cannot say that a business must keep a community going or make any other business decision not in line with their fiscal responsibilities.  I completely respect the investment of the VMK community members.

But it's how you do it that shows what you are made of

As usual, I think the real missed opportuntiy is how they did it. Communities are co-created experiences no matter who licensed the software or created the bitmaps. Inviting members of the community in to discuss what could happen next - where could the community be directed to to reform, how could they stay connected or how they could participate in the next Disney creation - all of these discussions might have helped the community transition. It would certianly telegraph that Disney respects its community members. Still people would be angry. But some would understand. Just look at John Frost's business-like assessment.

So sites like Savevmk crop up and gather petitions. they also collect comments - almost 5000 comments that show the emtional connection as well as the disappointment:

"Flower_KId
What cruel heartless person would want to close vmk. If anyone ever trys to close vmk i will hurt to a point were they can't even breath! If you close vmk then you shut off the love I have for Disney. I will never watch Disney channel again if vmk closes. vmk staff wise up and keep vmk for all the children to enjoy. VMK, VMK, WHAT'S THE NAME IT'S VMK, HOORAY!! "

Would it be a huge risk for someone from Disney to participate in that comment string?

Will EA Do It Better? 

Now SIMS Online from EA is closing. From the sounds of it, they do not have the vibrant community that VMK had. Still, it looks like they may also be tumbling forward in a less than ideal way. They changed the name of the community to EAOnline and then immediately announced it's closure. Someone asked if they did that just so they wouldn't have to say that one of their most prized assets didn't hit a home run. Undoubtedly, they are closing for business reasons - for one reason or another it doesn't make business sense for them to keep going with it. I only hope they are reaching out to their community - what little there may be - and having them contribute to next steps for that community.

If more companies went the extra mile to demonstrate their respect for and their value of their community members (read: customers, evangelists, potential customers), they could make business decisions like closing a community and maintain many of their strong positive relationships with community members.  

Are Social Media-based Programs Scalable?

There is a general perception that advertising is thoroughly scalable and that public relations is not. But how about social media-based word of mouth programs?

You can develop a $5m, $10m and $100m ad program. You will get increasing "returns" for your investment. Reach and frequency can both go up. There are limits but they are pretty out there. It is predictive and incremental. The media relations side of PR can only be dialed up so much before traditional media shuts down on additional coverage for the same brand & message. Now, there is a lot more to public relations that just media relations. The value of public relations goes beyond (yet includes) short term marketing goals to include enduring brand reputation. It seems that PR's role in supporting short term sales such as a new product launch is more limited than the scalable "burst" of awareness available via paid advertising. PR's impact on reputation is almost infinitely scalable. But we are now talking about word of mouth and social media-based word of mouth.

Scalable: Reach

At WOM University, we held a roundtable discussion on the scalability of WOM programs. Keep in mind, my position that most social media-based programs are ultimately WOM programs. The table's focus fell on both online and offline programs. Walter Carl of Northeastern University and Chat Threads presided over the table. He introduce the group to his measurement model which, while complicated, suggests a method for understanding overall performance and then being able to dial it up or down accordingly. Walter modeled out his generational pass-along effect which I will call the 'multiplier effect.' A recent Fast Company article on NING rechristened this a "viral loop." I am not sure that new definition adds anything to our understanding. The multiplier effect tells us how many people we will reach and convert into "relayers" once we give Gen '0' something to talk about. Walter can match back G0 and G1, for instance, to verify that G0 actually passed along their story to 6, 8, or 12 people. It is the same logic he used to support BzzAgent's impact and make it meaningful to the media planners of the world (who rely on scalable "channels").

It's great stuff but a little complex. It speaks to the "reach" capacity of a WOM program. I need to simplify the issue to make it useful in my daily life. If there were predictive models for the multiplier effect, that might help.

Scalable: Frequency vs. Multiple Voices

Walter's model is a great way to understand the reach of a WOM program. The problem is that it remains very complex and requires a self-reporting procedure itself needing an incentive to motivate participants ("Tell us who you talked to and you might win an iPhone or we'll give $5 to charity or...").

The best value of a social media-based WOM program is scaling through time combined with the slower growth of more relevant reach. "More relevant reach" is a loaded phrase. I am suggesting that one's 'social graph', is a more powerful channel than the audience of a particular media property (TV channel, show, magazine, newspaper, etc...). I also assume that when I hear something from a colleague, friend, or "stranger with expertise," it sinks in without the same need of message frequency that we expect with advertising (i.e. need to hear something 3-5 times for it to be memorable, never mind actionable). My client, Gerry, recommended a reasonably high-end coffee maker a few weeks back. I Will eventually buy that coffee maker without any other input save for some model-browsing on the Web.

There are plenty of purchases or decisions that I need to make where the number of 'promoters' matter. On most book purchases, I will scan the reviewers to make sure there are more positive reviews than negative. I scan the negative comments quickly to see if the complaints resonate. But I don't let a few negative comments dissuade me from purchase. There is a name for this behavior which I don't remember. I'll call it a simple 'disaster-check.'

It takes fewer positive voices to drive me to purchase consideration and even purchase than the number of ad impressions it takes to persuade me. In fact, beyond direct-response offers, no advertising really gets me to the same deep level of consideration. This begins to speak to WOMs place in the "funnel" - the deeper end of the purchase/advocacy decision.

If I spend $100K more on my WOMM program, what do I get?

Classic marketer question. Will you get more reach? Will you get more brand/product advocates? Will you get a deeper bond with a select group of enthusiast influencers? And the kicker: will it sell more product?

The answer to all questions is yes, yes, yes and yes. The problem is that I need 30 minutes of your time to explain how. If you intuitively believe in the strengths of WOM and the sales impact of a great Net Promoter Score, you will give me that 30 minutes. If all you care about is a proxy metric like site traffic (i.e. cpg brand marketers online), than you will glaze over right after I tell you this is a different measure than traditional advertising.

You can use Walter's model to answer the $100K question. But I have to ask is that model practical and itself, scalable?

We need simplicity based upon reasonable and shared assumptions. How do you show that WOM is scalable?

Relevant Links:

• Walter Carl's Post on "Communication Value"
• WOMMAs Measurement Books
• Jeremiah's Measurement Tag (for good measurement resources)
• Rachel Happe's Long list of Metrics

The Learning, Teaching, Doing Continuum

In marketing, communications and the integration of social media in each, there are practitioners and there are pundits. There are practitioners who are in a constant state of growth from learning and teaching. There are also analysts who fall somewhere in between. They are also in the learning-teaching practice as they try to make useful sense of what is happening in the market.

I was reminded of this recently by a simple post from Seth Godin on How to Read a Business Book. I aspire to read lots of books - business, marketing, fiction and the occaisional left-field of my interests. I cannot read or consume them all as swiftly as I would like and have a considerable backlog. (Reading "Leading for Growth" by Ray Davis/Umpqua Bank now.) But Seth's post reminds me that me drive to "consume" them may not be the best use of the time. How will I pass along what I learn from the reading? How will I find the useful, actionable gems available in almost every book (or any life experience)?

He suggests that I dive into the next book in a different way:

"1. Decide, before you start, that you’re going to change three things about what you do all day at work. Then, as you’re reading, find the three things and do it. The goal of the reading, then, isn’t to persuade you to change, it’s to help you choose what to change.

2. If you’re going to invest a valuable asset (like time), go ahead and make it productive. Use a postit or two, or some index cards or a highlighter. Not to write down stuff so you can forget it later, but to create marching orders....

3. It’s not about you, it’s about the next person. The single best use of a business book is to help someone else. Sharing what you read, handing the book to a person who needs it... pushing those around you to get in sync and to take action..."

Read with the intent to get something out of it - something you can pass along to be of service to your peers. There is a discipline in living in a constant state of growth and learning. I have found that teaching is part of that discipline, as is actually "doing." Even our team - 360° Digital Influence, the social media, word of mouth team - has adopted a constant learn/teach/do discipline to be as sharp as possible about what we do for clients. We have developed a curriculum for new recruits and clients that pass along the best practices that we have learned from actually planning and implementing word of mouth marketing. The process of actually building that curriculum which everybody on the team has participated in helps us all learn as we are forced to communicate information and experience.

We don't pretend to know everything.We do believe that living in a culture of learn/teach/do makes us more valuable to our clients (and to each other). Seth's approach to book reading captures that spirit beautifully.

The Insiders Guide to Using Community for Marketing

We were at the Community2.0 conference in Las Vegas. Many of us are brands or marketers. We want to engage with or build community to meet some marketing goal - itself designed around a business goal. We may want more loyal customers, a way to activate brand advocates, build brand reputation and value, and even sell products and services.

For marketers at a community conference, we needed to talk about real-world practices where we have engaged with communities to get business done. We need to go beyond community 101. We accepted the folllowing:

• we need to serve the authentic needs of community members
• our solution is not simply shoe-horning display advertising into community spaces
• activating and stewarding community takes a new expertise

I had four experts on our panel and another 50 in the room  Each understands a marketer’s perspective.

Amy Dalton, Senior Director of Marketing, Topix, LLC.
Peter Friedman, Chairman and CEO, LiveWorld, Inc.
Aaron Strout, Vice President, New Media, Mzinga
Dave Carter, Founder, and CTO, Awareness, Inc.

Our session the Insider’s Guide for Marketers using “Community”  - we wanted to hear what each has learned from developing or running communities with marketers. And we got great experiences for the community of experts throughout the room (there remains a great Tweme here)

Insider’s Guide for Marketers using “Community”

1. Avoid registration as it becomes a barrier to entry that slows down or can choke the community.
2. Make the right choice about partnering vs. creating features for that community. Topix tried to create classifieds for their community when it turned out to be more efficient to partner.
3. Don't try too hard to organize the chaos. Rather use it to your advantage. The message here is don't try to over control the community.
4. It's a myth that communities don't like advertisers or advertising. If it's done right  they not only tolerate it but they actually like it.
5. Seek and embrace criticism don't simply allow it.
6. Invite them to co-create as they become "owners" and ambassadors
7. Use Twitter (there was a solid core of us at the conference "covering" our experience there via #c20 Tweme)
8. Embrace as many points of enthusiasm as possible. Wherever people are expressing themselves - the core community, Facebook groups, Twitter memes - then embrace that activity somehow.
9. Create community around brand-relevant topics that you find are already relevant to people (vs. communities directly around a product brand)
10. Know who you are inviting to dinner and actively seek them out. If you want a thoughtful PBS-like crowd then design for them and go find them.
11. Don't get lost in developing features. Spend your time getting people to express themselves and becoming engaged in dialogue.
12. Know which KPIs matter. Start by deciding which metrics from the community will indicate success and progress - there are no relevant standards.
13. Build your own ROI model. Use Charlene Li's ROI of Blogging for reference.
14. Use studies that demonstrate the business value of community members (e.g. - better customers, more likely to advocate, lifetime value, etc...)

It was a lively discussion. These points are not a complete guide by any means. They are the practical insights of a few, great experts teased out in a great collaborative session at Community 2.0.

Useful Links:

B2B Marketers Fail The Community Marketing Test
Forrester Report: Online Community Best Practices

Web Community Forum

Stories at the Personality Project

One of my favorite "features" of Rohit's new book, Personality Not Included, is a related Web site he created, The Personality Project. I, along with lots of more luminous luminaries are featured there talking about the importance of personality in marketing. each does it with perosnal stories and examples from their business or their lives. The great thing in most is that there is not a huge division between their POVs as business leaders and their own personaloutlooks on life.

My story is very personal and includes Air Canada. You will find many other stories from the likes of Tony Hsieh, CEO of Zappos.com. I had the chance to see Tony speak at Community 2.0 this past week. He told the story behind Zappos. At times, it sounded like he aspired to be Amazon (the epitome of customer service, selling everything not just shoes), but he revealed that personality is a big part of their story. You can read his Personality Project post here. I love that his staff will check three competeing web sites to find something for a customer if they, themselves, do not have it and then will drive that customer to a competitor.

Tony, a serial entrepeneur at a disgustingly young age, is serious about the Zappos culture. 'Culture' is the whole point of my post. Culture is real and organic. It is a value system that lets people be themselves (yes, they must share some of teh values to fit in, but unlike our families, we "choose" our job, and can move to one that aligns with enough of our values). Culture promotes someone at Zappos to go the extra 10 miles for a customer not just because it feelsl good but because customer retention is key to profits and to outbound word of mouth.

So, I love The Personality Project because of all of the original stories from a collection of not-the-usual personalities. And I also love it as a great example of what I will now call "transmedia" - a term that first noticed last week in an article (where was that article?) about the new generation of Hollywood science fiction geeks - the creators of Lost, Heroes, Battlestar Gallactica. These followers of Joss Whedon are super sharp about extending the experience of their stories and characters into different mediums without resorting to indiscriminate license deals. No lunchboxes. They only do what will extend the story. That is what Rohit has done with the Personality Project. It complements the book but takes it further in a new direction (not to mention that it's a great way to invite people in to whitewash the fence with you a la Tom Sawyer).

There are a hundred slots. Let's see who shows up next. 

Marketing: War Metaphors Should Surrender to Community Development Metaphors

Many of us complain about the use of war metaphors in marketing: target audiences, campaigns, strategy & tactics, KPIs (not sure this is really a war thing it just sounds like KIAs). We really attack our problems. We report out campaign success with McNamara-like data devoid of much humanity. Try as I might, I always come back to calling people like myself "target audiences." I do it so the different marketing teams that I work with will know what I am talking about. The war college vocabulary is that ingrained.

We need a new model that we can teach at B-school and start using in the marketplace. I don't have the ultimate right answer but I think it has something to do with community development.

I don't mean community online. I mean like urban, suburban and rural community development. I remember designing a town in 5th grade complete with streets, buildings for government and businesses. You know - ice cream cone shaped ice cream stores, schools that looked more like amusement parks (I remember one boy designed a strip joint into his town that looked like a pair of breasts - 5th grade!). Anyhow, the ideas behind designing communities are very positive and appealing on some level.

The Ol' In-and-Out vs. a Committed Effort
Campaigns come and go. We dial them up and then close them out. We always "win" in marketing campaigns as we cannot admit defeat. Community development is a long term play. When we think about how to design and support a community, we spend time observing what's important to the people in that community - what are they talking about, where do they spend their time, what are their shared values.

We design to bring value to their lives, sometimes to make their lives easier. We try things that may serve the people. What if we add a community center with a gym since the schools sports programs are underfunded? If we insert a road here will it spark more commerce between neighborhood A and B?

What is the language of community development? I am no expert despite my fascination. I would guess we talk about "the public," community groups and citizens. We talk about community enhancements, projects and initiatives.

If the ultimate goal is selling ("We sell or else!"), does selling have to be such a conquest? Can it be not just a transaction but part of a relationship, a long term commitment to build up communities?

Links of use:

• What are KPIs
• Eric Petersen's Great Book on KPIs
• The Dashboard Spy
• Peace Magazine - History of Military Metaphors

(Photo CC from AtomicShed)

Learning of Chengdu Earthquake via Twitter

I learned of the 7.8 earthquake in south eastern China today via Michael Darragh's Twitter stream - our Digital Influence team member in Shanghai. Horribly, as many as 900 students may be buried, the BBC Reports. While I don't want to turn such a terrible event into a communications object lesson, I see one of the true benefits of Twitter in the early twits out of China. It reminded me of following the blog of the tech guy during the Katrina crisis.

See Michael's stream here.

See Casper's stream here.

Social Media at Verge Toronto

I spoke about Word of Mouth Marketing at this year's Verge Toronto - Ogilvy's digital confab for clients (thanks to Guy!). Paul Beck, Digital Strategist at Ogilvy and all around smart evangelist, delivered a great snapshot of innovative digital programs - many of them anchored in social media - in the B2B and B2C space. He has been a tremendous ally within Ogilvy from the advertising side and is pushing some terrific "social" programs with clients like American Express.

I shared about choosing a new coffee making solution (thanks Gerry!).

Paul shared about his "Cell Phone Experience." Paul dropped his phone in a puddle. He went online to research the right replacement. He started at Google (only customer acquisition links there), to Technorati, to YouTube. He bought the LG Envy based upon cgm videos and positive mentions from "strangers with experience." He wanted to do what many of us want to do now - hear what others have to say about their exeprience with the product. 

This category - "Strangers with Experience" - has grown as a source for product referral more than any other source from 1997-2007. This starts to speak to the idea of who we find influential amongst people we do not directly know.

Paul has a very clear and strong POV about transforming the marketing process. He describes this as "Flipping the Long Tail." It's simple really. Find and connect with your advocates and fans, engage with them, amplify what they say or do and then market around that to ultimately reach a mass audience.  This is the true promise behind word of mouth programs.

Paul's 3 point program
1. Listening as a disciplined marketing practice: Don't listen once. Don't just do focus groups. Make listening a fundamental and ongoing practice.

2. Advocacy as a deliberate marketing channel: Don't just tack on a WOMM program. Make it core and make the discipline of making it work central to your team.

3. Unlock and unleash the content: Once you have engaged consumers to create cgm - work it, merchandise it, get it into search engines

Cardmembersvoice.com
He shared a great program he leads with American Express which just launched. Cardmembersvoice.com asks members for their input and feedback. Using our 'Voice of the Customer' platform, they solicit ideas and report back to customers what they may do with that good thinking. I know this was a journey of internal evangelism and education to get to this point. It's a great program and reflective of what experts like Paul - real practitioners, not pundits - can do to transform marketing.

My favorite Paul quotes from his session:
"Open source problem solving - don't ask broad questions - invite them to help solve a specific problem."

"Community is not a place. It is a shared set of values"

He also left the audience with four related imperatives:

• try it
• experiment now
• it does not have to be pristine
• learning will lead the way

Singapore Will Build It's Own Virtual World?

The Media Development Authority in Singapore is soliciting bids from hungry software development shops to build their own version of Second Life. MDA department chief executive Michael Yap calls it "Google Earth meets Second Life." Can't you just hear the concept meeting now?

The development seems to be tied to the launch of the 2010 Youth Olympics. The budget is not clear. The MDA will fund 50% of the development costs which suggests that they are also seeding a business.

I have to admit that when I first read about this in the newspaper upon touching down, I had immediate visions of Walmart's The Hub. Remember that ill-fated MySpace clone for committed Walmart shoppers? I think it lasted about three months in the light of day before they pulled the plug with a quiet little "Oops" squeaked out of Bentonville. Creating a social network - virtual or otherwise - is not a trivial task that can be overcome by a deep purse and business "will". The fact that a government authority is behind this new effort only added my sense of hubris-fueled doom.

I think I am wrong. On quite a few levels, actually.

I had the chance to meet with Krishnasamy Bhavani from the Ministry of Information, Communications and the Arts where the MDA resides (MICA). I met with bloggers and PR pros. I met with friends who had grown up in Singapore. Others who have since gladly made it their home or at least their homebase. And while there are some mixed feelings about the controlling nature of the government, one thing seemed to come to the surface: they could actually pull off creating the Singapore Virtual World.

There are three things that support this idea:

1. When Singapore won the bid for the Youth Olympics, there was a wave of pride across the island city-state. I wasn't there when that happened, but the sense I get is that it was widespread and unifying. That pride may drive traffic and residency in a virtual social network that promises to reproduce the physical Singapore with some innovative mix of 3D and live-camera feeds.

2. MICA and DMA are the groups responsible for the world-reknowned feat of pervasive wireless connectivity across Singapore. They do what they say they are going to do. I walked in with a western POV. My government could never pull this stuff off but that wouldn't stop them from wasting taxpayer's dollars on ill-fated projects. Most people I talked with acknowledge the efficiency of the Singapore government and it's overall capability in what some call "social engineering."  They have the will, the resources and the capability of accomplishing significant tasks. They know what they are doing and they have a proven track record.

3. Singapore will become a significant hub of technological - specifically Internet marketing - innovation over the next 5 years. Warning: this obeservation is firmly rooted in gut, not independent research. This comes more from my own experience with our 360° Digital Influence team throughout Asia Pacific (major hubs in Singapore, China and Australia), a gut feeling about the efforts of the government to seed tech business (some failed attempts which is the source of learning not dead-ends), some emerging social media education, and the idea that the current government leaders will be succeeded by a next-generation leadership who see the benefits of loosening the reins a bit to juice growth.

Welcome to Virtual Singapore
I love Singapore. I first visited 20 years ago. The city-state has become a significant nexus of wealth perhaps, eclipsed by dramatic, nearby Dubai but quietly stable and growing. There are almost all the right seeds to make Singapore a digital marketing hub, if not a digital innovation center. Who knows, they may have a a virtual Singapore we can all join by the start of the Youth Olympics. If anyone can pull it off, it will be Singapore. And I will join if they will have me.