Digital Influence Mapping Project

Zombies Bite Off Half of Digital Advocacy

 It’s a great idea. Unleash well-produced zombies as mailmen, first-responders, shoppers on the streets of city, capture the ‘freak-outs’ of passerby’s and then cap with the meaningful, action-inducing message.

“Put Zombies Back on TV” is the flag we are waving. AMC Networks is the one doing the waving. We have seen these disputes before between content publishers/networks and the distributors. Usually it is about money. Who gets what slice of the pie. It is usually pretty complex and impossible to decipher who is “in the right.” Essentially, it is two big corporations battling to protect their business needs. The consumer’s interest doesn’t enter into it unless you count the enjoyment we get from watching their programming (which we pay for one way or another). And this is where this corporate advocacy program falls apart. The best that they can do is to try and trigger AMC show fans (e.g. Walking Dead, Mad men, Breaking Bad) to scream bloody murder.

The Zombies are great. Of course, I am exactly who they are trying to reach….almost. I love Walking Dead and all of the combined zombie canon. Problem is, I am not a DISH Network customer. Best that I can do for them is share the video or share the message of the campaign. The DISH network customer, on the other hand, they want them to literally switch to another provider who does carry the AMC shows.

 

Three problems

The issue is too complex and I really don’t know who to support in the battle.  AMC hasn’t done enough to simplfy the issue, if that is even possible. Here’s how they explain the issue on their microsite:

“DISH’s decision to drop AMC, WEtv, IFC and Sundance Channel had nothing to do with our fees, or our shows. In fact, unlike almost every other dispute you see between providers and programmers, and despite DISH’s misleading claims to the contrary, this is not about fees.

The simple truth is that DISH is using their consumers as pawns to attempt to gain leverage in a lawsuit involving an old and unrelated business venture that has nothing to do with AMC, nothing to do with our shows or fees, and certainly nothing to do with DISH subscribers, who just want to watch the shows they love and are paying DISH for. You will not see any AMC Networks’ shows on DISH any time soon.

In other words, since DISH’s reason for depriving you of AMC programming is based on a lawsuit that won’t be resolved for a long time, this problem won’t be solved shortly, unlike other disputes between programmers and providers, which typically are resolved in a matter of days (weeks at most).” 

 

Huh? What “old and unrelated business venture?” Without simplicity and transparency I cannot possibly form a view as to which profit-making enterprise is worth supporting. AMC’s claims that the only way I see my beloved show is by voicing my discontent or outright switching (to one of the cable providers who are not likely to be bastions of customer goodwill, themselves)

If you are a glutton for detail (it won’t help sort it) then here is how Chip Lebovitz at CNN Money summarized it:

“The two companies have waged a legal war for over four years. In 2008, AMC Networks and its then-parent company, Cablevision, sued Dish (DISH) for $2.5 billion for breaching its 2005 carriage contract with Voom HD, a suite of channels created by a Cablevision (CVC) subsidiary. The dispute centers on whether Dish violated the contract when it dropped Voom because, Dish claims, Voom didn't spend enough money on programming. A trial is set for September 18th in the New York Supreme Court.

The timing of Dish's decision to drop AMC seems retaliatory. Dish first threatened to drop AMC in May, a week after it lost an appeal in the Voom lawsuit…

This is a litigation strategy. By not renewing [AMC Networks], Dish gained leverage in the underlying lawsuit," says Thomas Claps, an analyst at Susquehanna Group. "It highlights the fact that Dish faces significant headwinds in the [Voom] trial."…

According to Nielsen, in the last six months The Walking Dead had the highest rating in the key 18-49 demographic among Dish's basic cable subscribers. The network also has popular shows like Mad Men and Breaking Bad.

Any Dish blackout of AMC, regardless of its motivations, hurts AMC significantly more than it does Dish. Without access to Dish's 14 million subscribers, AMC ratings and ad revenue will drop, weakening a company already struggling with net debt of over $2 billion.”

 

I feel like a zombie on the wrong end of one of Darryl’s arrows from the show The Walking Dead. My head hurts.

 The second problem I have is a simple social design and messaging one. They need my advocacy even if I am just a fan and not a customer. The video has a proper ‘throw’ to the “putzombiesback.com” site. Okay, I’ll bite (so-to-speak). But once there, my actions are not as clear and simple as they could be.  If I am a customer, they want me to switch. If not, I can either go to the @AMC_Assist  Twitter handle (>750 followers) or click on one of the ubiquitous social network share buttons at the bottom of the page (only 15K Likes on Facebook and only 5 Tweets?).

I want to share content not pages. Crafting a fan-oriented message that links to the video yet still carries a message of the campaign is what we need. Instead, the auto-fill on the tweet-share says something flat and not action-oriented. 

“DISH Customers have lost AMC, WE TV, IFC and SUNDANCE Channel.”

Why not, 

“If you luv Walking Dead, don’t let DISH Network keep it from 14 million fans. Join the Zombie swarm (link).” 

This lets me be a part, keeps the focus on the show I have an affinity for, and  drives me to deeper content as a collective action. 

The thrid problem is hardly that simply because I dont know what they have done to market this effort to the right people. But I hope that are using Facebook's Connections Analysis Tool (CAT) and other targeting efforts to deliver stories with clear calls-to-action to people who are fams of the shows, live in Dish customer regions, have affinity for similar programming, are big TV lovers and so forth. They could run this more as an advocacy program and less like a corporate issue deserving of a newspaper ad and, in this case, a cool video wth a mcirosite support.

Half a job done, I think. 

But wait, then there is the response from Dish Network Chairman Charlie Ergen, not much a fan of AMC programs. he essentially recommends that we just watch our video programs through iTunes. Not sure what kind of advice that is from someone who runs a satellite network:

"He was also dismissive of AMC which has acclaimed series includingMad Men and Breaking Bad. “They’re critically acclaimed but not viewed as much by our audience”, he says. “And our customers can go to iTunes and get Mad Menthe same time it’s on. We could pay the entire iTunes bill and it would be cheaper”

Brands: Stop Publishing Content on Facebook!

No, this isn't another 'Facebook as a disappointment' story. It's about how we best use Facebook or, more broadly, our content marketing. 

With over 3.5 Billion pieces of content shared each week on Facebook, brands first impulse is to jump in and add another few thousand pieces of clutter to the fray. Many start by thinking about social networks as another platform to publish out news the brand feels is of interest.

Some get more sophisticated and actually start thinking about what types of content their customers and advocates would find most interesting and actionable. Some wrestle with brand character issues such as what the “voice” is of the publisher and how a page looks and works.

Many evolve to creating complex content calendars that aim to sort through all the potential content that could be published and dole it out in a sensible manner.  We look at the data and figure out what drives the most “People Talking About” metrics (engagement).

 

Start Publishing Stories

Few think about stories. Each content nugget is just that, an isolated nugget. It likely points to content elsewhere on an owned site. But for the most part each content unit is judged in it’s own. That’s where you see brands discovering some of the simple rules of social media like pictures drive more involvement than simple text blurbs, especially ones with no clear call-to-action.

If we are trying to drive behavior, we had best use the most persuasive means to do so.  That means story. And likely today in the social age, it means stories that people can get involved in. One of my key takeaways from talking with Thomas Gensemer from Blue State Digital following their successful work on the first “Obama for America” campaign was the idea of “story arcs” in their messaging or content strategy. Actually, they called them “email arcs.” I abstracted it up one level since many of us are now communicating with customers and constituents via many platforms beyond email. Story arcs are simply a series of content postings tied together in a story that drive people to some action or series of actions.

Let’s say that your brand is staging a kids DIY event like Carhartt did. Rather than simply inviting people to the store for the event, you might start by soliciting dream DIY projects from the fan base (parents), or what projects did they create when they were kids – the sort of thing that drives comments and even shares.  The “story” might all be around those parents giving their kids the gift of self-discovery and creativity. Then, of course, they celebrate what they made at the story by posting online. Carhartt owners (I own one) are ‘makers.’ Lets build stories for makers. Carhartt actually does do that. 

The emotional value of stories is stronger that orphaned content. If we are trying to drive behavior and even belief. We ought to be anchoring our content strategies in stories. The neurosciencemarketing blog has a great pov in general and this in particular, 

"Researchers Philip Mazzocco and Melanie Green draw a contrast between rhetorical persuasion, in essence arguing with facts and logic, and the use of narratives to influence decisions. They conclude that stories are more effective at changing emotional beliefs that logical arguments have difficulty reaching."

 

And as you think about what makes for great stories ,tons have been written on this bit I like this little summary from Phil Johnson in Forbes :

"Whether you’re working on a brand story, an advertising campaign, or standing up to talk at a conference, here are three suggestions:

• If your story does not reveal something personal and unknown about the person or brand, it’s going to be boring.
• If your story does not tap into a specific emotion – whether it be fear, desire, anger, or happiness – it will not move people to action.
• If your story does not take people on a journey where there is a transformation between the beginning, middle, and the end, it’s not a story.

The best stories represent a simplicity of purpose and tap into the audience’s imagination so that they willingly go along for the journey. And the shortest ones can sometimes be the best. Ernest Hemingway famously wrote the six-word story: “For sale: baby shoes, never worn.”

 

More great story reference:

• The Power of Story - John Kotter
• The Science of Storytelling - Steve Denning 
• The Art of Business Storytelling - Kelsey Ruger 

Social Media Success Needs Evidence-based Testing

Behavioral economics plays out everyday in social media. We see clear expressions of the lessons that drive human behavior made popular by Cialdini, the Heaths and Dan Ariely in the use of social networks by major marketers like Ford, Unilever, Nestlé and others.

We have taken learnings like how reciprocity, authority and scarcity can drive persuasion and action (Cialdini concepts) and how “finding the bright spots,” “shrinking the change,” and “pointing to the destination” (Heath Bros. concepts) and built them into a sensible way to plan predictably great social programs.

And we learn more each time we deploy a program. We see many brands gaining experience in using social media well. But as marketers get more and more focused on driving behaviors versus hard-to-appreciate attitudes and intentions, there’s just not enough testing and reporting of what works best. We all think we are internalizing these lessons through shared case studies, the sharing that happens in the few great communities of interest inside companies (think social/digital “center for excellence”), and the “test and learn” habits of individual experts. It’s still not enough.

Richard Thaler told the story of collaborating with the British Behavioral Insights Team led by David Halpern in the New York Times. Richard Thaler is a professor of economics and behavioral science at the Booth School of Business at the University of Chicago. The Behavioral Insights Team is all about trying to drive behaviors by applying behavioral economics to public policy issues.

 He simplifies the most important tenants of their work into 2 things:

1. If you want to encourage some activity, make it easy
2. You can’t make evidence-based policy decisions without evidence  

We get the “make it easy” part although even that is a lesson routinely overlooked by many an ambitious marketer. As for evidence-based policy decisions, well, we are trying to do that every day in marketing. We are just not as aggressive about formally testing our theories and accruing formal lessons.

The Difference Between 

Whose got tougher demands for accountability – a public policy leader or a CMO? Having worked with both, I think these two groups have so much to learn from each other but have suffered from ‘terminal uniqueness’ that keeps them believing each has special circumstance the other cannot possibly appreciate. But their worlds are coming together. Just look at the recent “red paper” from Ogilvy’s behavioral econ team, From Cause to Change. The main hypothesis of this team’s work states that the rigor of behavior change as practiced in “Social Marketing” (do not confuse with social media marketing) is highly relevant to business not simply governments.

There are differences. Crafting health behavior change is usually led by scientists accountable to public servants. This makes them insanely tied to science and unequivocal proof. Most CMOs want short term evidence that will ultimately be revealed as effective in sales or stock price.

More Evidence

The British Behavioral Insights Team has published a white paper, Test, Learn, Adapt: Developing Public Policy with Randomised Controlled Trials. Okay, it’s a bit intense for consumer marketing. It lays out a discipline of constant testing and learning. That’s the lesson.

Many brands are increasingly active in social media. There’s some high quality work that wins out in the WOMMY Awards and the Effies and Cannes Lions. But how great are these organizations with formal test and learn exercises to more precisely understand what is working and what is not. And how good are they all, we all, at capturing and sharing best practices, lessons learned?

Facebook Building a Learning Culture

The media gave Facebook a hard time in the wake of their IPO. How could they justify the huge valuation? And weren’t the stumbles in the early stock price the inevitable calling out of the ‘emperor’s new clothes?’

Meanwhile, Facebook has been publishing case studies on Facebook Studio, a series of white papers that summarize lessons-learned and launching a training program to make marketers smarter about succeeding on Facebook. They continue to share their ‘try and learn’ culture which is more accepting of failure than any CMO I know can ever afford to be (Implicit in the ‘fail fast’ credo is that failing fast gets you to even bigger successes faster, too).

For all the complaining about Facebook, they are finding the evidence and sharing it out of benign self-interest. They have built a community of marketers in their Facebook marketing group and the Product Council that I sit on, committed to documenting the evidence of what works.

There is a terrifc article in Technology Review that talks about their Data Science Team and how they are trying to use the petabytes of data at Facebook to understand what drives behavior. 

As brands deepen their commitment to using social media, they ought to prioritize knowledge-sharing and real test-and-learn experiments meant to prove the efficacy of different strategies. We need to understand how we can nudge, inspire, and be a part of new consumer behaviors through digital and other expereinces. It's not enough to try and find some grand ad-equivalency in all this new digital and social media. 

(thanks to Peter Keusch, University of Regensburg for the great picture)

1 in 100 Slides from Cannes 2012 Tells a Bigger Story

There’s a ton of slideology at Cannes. We all heard some of the highlights whether there or, as I was, sidelined back at home – JR’s presentation of his tremendous giant faces peeking out from some of the most tense places; and Paul Adams for Facebook.

Jesse Desjardins pulled together his annual 100 best slides from that onslaught. That meta-presentation is at the bottom of the post. 

The one slide that really stuck out to me (beyond the JR piece which must be in the favella’s in Rio) was this one simple blender slide from the Kraft presentation. I didn’t see the rest of the presentation. I almost don’t want to. This slide by itself is likely more aspirational than real but still speaks worlds about a key innovation happening around us.

We need new models of working together to produce the most effective, the most digitally-enabled, the most organically social, the absolute best new creative. It’s not just team structure, its not just a fresh organizational chart, its more. It’s a different business model. It’s social that is horizontal (vs. hierarchical) and networked. It’s incubated and special. It’s tied to a different measure of profitability on the agency side that stretches beyond the timesheet, the mark-up, and the procurement-optimized rate card.

Here Kraft crosses out workshops and think tanks to get to what fascinates all of marketing-dom now – silicon valley models of incubators and start-ups. Marketers are entranced by the apparent agility of small tech start-ups. They do move faster generally unencumbered by the bureaucracy of big, established businesses. But is it realistic that Kraft can establish a start-up set of behaviors?

If they really set up a start-up it is. That means removing the burdens of a traditional brand marketing team whose job revolves around incremental sales targets and where “innovation” is defined by a new package design or 50% less sugar.

We need new ways of working. I am not sure the blender model is the roadmap more than an artifact of one company trying something different. I had the chance to work at a major FMCG last week. We used their process to bring multi-disciplinary groups together to work on marketing and solution problems. It was one of those models that downplay channel choices till much later, focuses on ideas and generally tries to get smart people to set aside their narrower commercial interests to get to the best ideas. 

It worked pretty well. Still, it was designed “pre-social” and put no specific emphasis on driving advocacy. Would that process look different if the most important measure beyond sales was growth of positive customer advocacy?  

 

100 Beautiful Slides From Cannes Lions '12

View more presentations from Jesse Desjardins - @jessedee

Lessons from the Cannes Lions 2012 Winners

I missed my chance to be at Cannes this year. Family matters kept me away and that was the right decision. Advertising awards used to be a bit of a closed loop with the same people congratulating themselves. At least that’s how I remember them. Not so anymore. 

The judging rigor is there (see Thomas Crampton’s video with Barney Loehnis). The digital pros now find themselves as judges. The discipline categories keep expanding. The quality of the entrants are strong.

Check out the winners here. It will be eye-opening. As I reviewed the winners three ideas and three cases stuck out.

 

Should Curators of Sweden have won the Cyber Lions?

The Twitter handle-relay where different Swedes earn the responsibility of publishing out via @Sweden twitter handle is owned by the Visit Sweden and Swedish Institute. (see case video here)  It’s a neat concept for meeting the people of Sweden. Here’s how they put it: 

“Every week, someone in Sweden is @Sweden: sole ruler of the world’s most democratic Twitter account. For seven days, he or she recommends things to do and places to see, sharing diverse opinions, and ideas along the way. After that, someone else does the same—but differently. Follow all nine million of us. Welcome to Sweden.”

They have grown to 66K followers (from 5K) and have a 500%+ rate of “conversation” (replies and retweets). What’s not to like?

They’re tweeting an awful lot and most is the banter between the host and others which has little to do with Sweden. The concept is cool. Righteous even. But I am not certain that the value of the Twitter stream is delivering beyond the “get to know some Swedish citizens.” 

Then, of course, came @sweden/Sonja who kept people guessing with her inflammatory and maybe a bit naïve comments about Jews, gays and so forth. But the real issue isn’t whether this expression of democracy leads to a few extremist/borderline-offensive hosts but whether it raises interest in visiting Sweden. 

Back-seat judging is no fun. Should it have won? It did. I think it is a compelling concept that likely is raising awareness for Sweden and in its own quirky way driving people to now consider a trip. It’s a great case, and I love that a purely earned/owned effort shared the Cyber Lion. It’s a creative idea brought to life in a very different way than the Cannes Lions are used to. Big ideas that don’t end up as luscious images or videos can win at Cannes. That’s great. 

There is another model for using Twitter for tourism and country branding that I find compelling. Wizard of Istanbul aims to answer tweets from visitors with questions immediately and to build a cadre of Istanbul enthusiasts to offer their suggestions for the best place for lunch up the coast or the most authentic whirling dervish ceremony. It’s a bit more spot-on for  the traveler and since it is run by regular folks supported by other Istanbul enthusiasts, it retains a personal nature.

 

Is Honda’s Connecting Lifelines the Wave of Future Winners?

Getting creative with data and technology is the next great wave. The Connecting Lifelines ‘experience’ does just that by mining traffic data from all of the Honda’s on the road in Japan during the earthquake and visualizing the status of roads.  Were they passable? How bad was traffic? Were new roads getting opened up post-crisis?

Beyond the social good role of the effort, it demonstrates how to be smart and creative with the web of connectivity and sensors around us. Digital is no longer a media choice but an infrastructure that is leading to very interesting innovations that can also serve a communications or marketing purpose.

We had a program for Dove that used technology in a great creative way. The Dove Ad Makeover continued the signature self-esteem territory by figuring out how to manipulate the Facebook ad-serving marketplace and let consumers replace shaming diet ads targeted to women with positive messages.

How are we, as agencies, going to stimulate this type of creativity? Have we done enough to change the perception of just what is creative in our own ranks?

 

How do you repeat/rinse/scale the greatest B2B campaign?

American Express’ program Small Business Saturday is more than a simple awareness program driving people to buy from local and small business on November 26th. (see the case video here) It’s a program that has tapped into the unique qualities of social networks to spread a cause while enabling the beneficiaries (small businesses) and the proponents (consumers) to do what they really want to do.

The case is great. Just the quotes from small business owners raving about 20% and greater increases in sales are worth their weight in gold. Will it win next year? Where can the Shop Small program go from here?

Well, American Express has been developing its role as partner to small business for years. They won’t stop here but rather expand what small businesses can do for themselves via resources supplied by Amex (check out their Facebook tab that collects a bunch of social assets for small business people including grants for Twitter advertising.)

They have created an annual ‘tent pole’ with the public and government support earned and now just need to expand with a diligent eye towards what actually delivers more and more value to their small business customers/merchants.  

Programs that build enduring bonds with customers are the true gems of the work we all do. I hope we see more programs like this honored in prestigious award events once reserved for he who hath the biggest….TV commercial.

 

(thanks to Creative Social Blog for pic)

Study: With Healthy Skepticism of Engagement, Sales Matter

The term “engagement” has easily become one of the most overused terms in marketing over the past few years. Even in it’s simplest, least frothy meaning it relies on the belief that more time spent and more interactions with a brand ultimately drives sales. Of all of the metrics available in Facebook, it’s the engagement metrics, principally the People Talking About This metrics, that brands care about most. Okay, truth be told, they care equally about all of the reach metrics but they go hand-in-glove. No one really wants a high fan count with no interaction. But if reach is actually a measure of the actual fans plus friends reached via specific content then that content must have been engaging to begin with to be passed along.

We care about engagement. We want more engaging brands. We want customers finding content important enough to pass along to their friends. 

A study from AdMap says that engagement is stupid.

Sure, I could have put that more diplomatically. But read the study. Essentially it calls out what many of us struggle with everyday – different understandings of what the term ‘engagement’ can actually mean, connecting any form of engaged behavior to sales-related outcomes, and the mad rush to celebrate or condemn Facebook depending on what day of the week it is.

What do low levels of engagement mean?

The study examined the top 200 brand pages in Facebook and concluded that given a rolling week, fans engaged for FMCG-type brands around .30% while car brands pulled in .98%. No brand crested 1% average engagement. And it was not much better for “passion brands” which hopped from an average of .51% to .64%. 

Without disputing their research, I have to question their conclusion that engagement doesn’t matter. It may be that engagement as a goal is faulty logic or a semantic slip. If brands are able to deliver valuable content and service through social platforms like Facebook they can actually build stronger bonds with customers that will translate into additional sales and valuable customer advocacy. Do customers interacting with valuable content constitute ‘engagement?’ Sure.

It is common knowledge that a minority of people lean forward enough to actually interact with brands in social media. It is that active minority that we work to engage everyday since we know they will spread the word via their social graph. Does that mean that a fan base of 1m people really only has 10,000 – 50,000 active fans? Probably. But that’s okay. The power of this minority is appreciable. I would also hypothesize that we are all learning new behaviors as consumers. That means that engagement levels may rise as brands do a better job of delivering value and we, as consumers, learn that we can expect more from brands. 

Does engagement matter as a metric?

The AdMap study would say no,

“Overall, the results demonstrating low levels of interaction with brands, knowledge of repertoire rather than loyal brand buying behaviour and the fundamental uncertainty about what engagement is, or achieves, suggest that brands need to proceed with caution. They should focus instead on measurement of the sales effects of exposure to advertising with social media, tempering the expectation of finding high engagement that leads to sales.”

But I think the answer is actually a resounding “yes.” We want a productive relationship with customers. Productive for them and for the brand. Productivity for the brand can be summed up as sales today, sales tomorrow and customer advocacy. Engagement with brand content in Facebook is not only indicative of more brain space for brands strengthening awareness, consideration and even intent to purchase, but it is also directly correlative to reach via the more trusted channel of our friends, family and social connections.

You want sales, here’s sales

Facebook has been quiet due to the ‘quiet period’ surrounding the IPO. That doesn’t mean they haven’t been diligently collecting effectiveness measures. They know that marketers want hardcore evidence of Facebook’s efficacy as a business platform.

So, while engagement metrics matter as useful, daily KPIs indicative of the stronger bonds we are building with customers and the social advocacy we are earning, there are tangible sales results as well:

• In the four weeks after seeing “coffee house brand” messages on Facebook, fans and their friends overall bought at “coffee house brand” 38% more frequently than the unexposed group of fans and friends of fans 
• In the four weeks after seeing “mass retailer” messages on Facebook, “mass retailer” fans and their friends overall bought at the store 21% more frequently

 

Both engagement and sales matter. And so, by the way, does social media.

Two Different Types of Mobile Businesses

Nothing appears more certain nor more elusive to marketers than how to fully leverage the biggest behavior change since the mass adoption of automobiles. Yes, I am talking mobile access to communications, data and our social graph.  

The explosion of mobile phone, smart phone and, now, tablet use has led to some interesting innovations. MPesa mobile currency, Flipboard content display, Instagram photography communities and personal GPS are just a few examples of how mobile changes how we do things. Just look at Mary Meekers Internet Trends 2012 presentation and many of the "reimagined" business examples include mobile as a key part.

Still, it seems as marketers we are still struggling to “go full mobile.” I would guess that some of that is due to the “Curse of the Channel Mindset” where, too often, we look at mobile as just another marcom channel to deliver messages through. I blame this ‘curse” on the advertising planning community and the powerful economic strength of media buying companies.

Meanwhile entrepreneurs unconstrained by that channel mentality and empowered with the innovators sideways manner of looking at things are making new interesting business or applications of mobile.

Two innovations should make us think differently. 

Mobile Grilled Cheese 

The Melt is a grilled cheese restaurant designed around mobile payment. Founded by Jonathan Kaplan who brought us the Flip Video Camera (now a collectors item), the Melt is getting ready to deliver a restaurant experience where users can order via device and use simple QR codes to jump through the fast lane and pick up their warm, melted goodness of a gourmand grilled cheese.

Instead of just adding mobile payments as a cash register alternate on top of cash, credit, debit, chip-card or whatever, they are designing the transaction experience around the mobile user. How you pick up a food is as much a part of the experience as the food, itself. Now, I don't know if their innovation will add up to a smash success. So far, they only have stores in the SF and Silicon Valley areas. But when you consider that service is the number one reason for return visits to restaurants and that service innovations that cut down on process (make things simpler) tend to be the drivers of loyalty, I give these guys a better than even chance of getting somewhere. (Thanks to Social Commerce Today for the heads up on The melt)

I love grilled cheese. I love great service. If it were in DC, I would buy.  

Mobile Close-Ties Network 

We practice “mobile first” design within our team (actually “SoMo First” – but that’s a different post). That means that we design a user experience first for the mobile display (often the smartphone and tablet, simultaneously). Once that is great, we design the desktop experience.

Path is a recent entrant into the social network space and is only available as a mobile experience. (see a good explanation from Satish Dharmaraj, managing director at Redpoint Ventures LLC (investors))The service is designed to connect each of us with only our closest ties.  Not thousands of friends. It tops out at 150 friends. Think you and your wife (or whomever), your closest friends and some family. 

Whether or not this dedicated channel of intimacy works for you, pay attention that it was designed as mobile –only. The founders felt that the close-ties relationships it is trying to support favors the intimate, always-connected utility of mobile.  More businesses will be doing this going into the future. They will consider how their business can serve new behaviors and needs developing out of our mobile and connected lives.

 Two very different examples how mobile is interpreted as a core part of the experience not an additional channel or touchpoint. Two good examples of disruptive design that could easily lead to big, long lasting innovations. 

Can Austerity Drive Social Media Growth in Business?

It’s easy to pay attention to the fast growth markets for social media – the Philippines, Indonesia, Turkey, Brazil, Mexico, China and a few more.  Its like being in that growth company that keeps opening stores. Let's just focus on the markets that are going great guns. Let's "open stores" where it is easiest. What about the established markets where people are already connected and where Facebook is 'old hat?' 

Coming back from Portugal and Brussels – both trudging along in their own ways under the weight of “austerity” – plenty of business people were asking whether social media has relevance in a time of stress and crisis. Often in times of crisis, business pulls back on marketing and relies generally on accepted practices.  You know, the stuff you were always told that works and won't get you fired.

4 reasons social matters in a tight economy like Europe

Here are four reasons why I think social media will grow in Europe even now when the region struggles to gain the financial stability it needs.

 

1. Some of the big social success stories were born out of crisis

Dell, Ford, and BP each committed to using social media at a time of crisis not when things were going great. Ford, specifically, faced a global financial crisis that suppressed car sales pretty much everywhere. In 2008/9.  Each of these brands could have pulled their head into the shell waiting for the smoke to clear. They didn’t. The got busy. They knew they needed a new way of doing things.  

 

2. Integrated social media is more efficient

Just look at the Integrated Social Media Sales Impact Study we did last year. Combining social media to the marcom mix can drive up consumption and sales for categories like quick service restaurants (QSRs).  If you are a C-suite leader for a company doing business in Europe, I would think you would be deeply concerned with getting more out of the budgets you do have as you work to drive sales back up.

 

3. People’s behavior is changing

About 70% of Portugal is connected to the internet. Of those north of 90% are active on social media. Mobile penetration exceeds 100%. Belgium is similar. Almost 82% of the populaion is online. Almost half the population is on Facebook.  People are changing how they form opinions and purchase decisions and it won't go back to the way it was before the financial crisis. If business wants to build enduring, profitable relationships with customers, they are going to have to shift to socially-enabled customer service, customer advocacy programs and building more value for customers through digital channels.  What Forrester calls the “always connected customer” has become the new reality and we must understand what that means not hide from it.

 

4. The competition is weightlifting during the crisis

Not everyone’s business is down. I spoke to one of the biggest food companies in Brussels, mobile service providers in both Brussels and Portugal, and several banks. Sales were up. Usage was growing. Innovation was introducing new competition. During any crisis – even a large financial one – not everyone is hurt the same way. Some businesses continue or flourish. The pressure of innovating in the face of competition never really recedes. The smart money is on those companies who know they are playing the long game and know they have to work just as hard now as in flush times to engage, satisfy and delight their customers.

Does Mary Meeker Consider LinkedIn a “Star?”

Mary Meeker, venture capitalist at Kleiner Perkins Caulfied Byers and former Wall Street analyst, delivered her 110-slide “Internet Trends 2012” presentation at the D10 Conference. I have already seen slides from the preso show up in business presentations from some of our largest partners.

Three immediate stand out points for me:

• The “re-imagination” of so many services that will ultimately disrupt many established business models 
• The inevitability of mobile as a viable and leading ad channel
• And that LinkedIn might win the “slow but steady” vote of confidence from investors and users alike

 

Re-imagine everything

A big chunk of her presentation profiles dozens of different services or behaviors that have been disrupted by technology and behavior change. From Photography (e.g. Instagram, Hipstamatic) to Magazines (e.g. Flipboard) to Calling a Cab (e.g. Uber) – they are all in the process of being challenged by new ways of satisfying core needs. The jury may still be out on many certainly in terms of which technology startup will actually earn the leadership role, but the cumulative effect of her list is powerful. It is a reminder that market-making changes are happening across many, many sectors. Just this morning The Washington Post featured an example of “re-imagining real estate” with the site Popularise which allows community members to vote for the retail tenant in local storefronts.  

 Mobile will pay off

The criticisms of Facebook for not monetizing their platform accessed by mobile devices were overwrought. Recent decisions from Facebook like this weeks’ unbundling of premium advertising (advertisers can now buy mobile separately) point to the inevitable future – that ad revenue per user on mobile will grow and likely eclipse ad review from the desktop. Ms. Meeker points to examples in the Japanese marketplace like the mobile game maker, CyberAgent, where that is already the case.

 

LinkedIn may be the slow but steady winner

While all of the other high-profile IPOs have led to lower values, LinkedIn has grown 137% to its recent $100 share price. I am sure there are all sorts of VC-insightful explanations that I am not qualified to offer. I do think there is strength to the LinkedIn platform in the B2B space that many brands are getting wise to. Just look at your LinkedIn home page now. It serves as a business-relevant hub as good as any business magazine or portal out there.

I find it interesting that LinkedIn is increasingly popular in Europe – a not-so-fast-growing-region for social networking (compared to fast-growth markets like Indonesia, Brazil or the Philippines). Turkey is the one exception as a fast-growth market and it sits between Europe and Asia. ComScore's Top 10 Need to Knows on Social Networking puts it this way, 

 “Similar to Facebook and Twitter, the majority of LinkedIn’s audience now resides outside the U.S. While LinkedIn continues to generate the most traffic from the U.S., it shows its highest market penetration in the Netherlands, where it reached more than a quarter (27 percent) of the Dutch online population in October 2011. Western European countries also comprise five of the top ten markets for LinkedIn, showing promise for further expansion for the professional social network in Europe.”

Eric Savitz at Forbes summarized key points that Jeff Weiner, CEO at LinkedIn made at the D10 conference last week:

“Weiner: They have 161 million members, growing 2 a second. Mission is to connect all the world’s knowledge workers; global workforce is 3.3 billion people. They have three themes on the product road map: Simplify, for staters, as they upgraded mobile product to 2.0 version from 1.0. Second theme, continue to grow membership, localize – 17 languages so far. Consider to invest in monetization. And lastly, invest in everyday value propositions. Like the company’s iPad application. LinkedIn Today is another example ...”

LinkedIn’s role in professional development extends beyond recruiting and career management. It is quickly becoming a professional content  network delivering value to the jobs we hold today and those we aspire to tomorrow.

Kind of makes you ask yourself, what’s my LinkedIn strategy?

KPCB Internet Trends 2012

The Planning Logic of Social Paths

We are rolling out our 2012 Social Strategy and Engagement Training across our global network. This is the expert-level training for our Social@Ogilvy teams around the world and is in its 7^th year. I have just come back from delivering this training in our Singapore and Hong Kong offices.  They are doing some awesome work and my favorite part of this responsibility is learning from our experts in-market.

This year, we have doubled-down on our discipline to create insights from social and other data. Insights strengthen any strategy and ultimately answer why people should care to engage in a program or with a brand via social and digital media. If you want more effective social programs – better short and long term results – then having genuine insight into the behavior of customers, the business and culture are key to knowing how to be relevant.

 

Insights drive effectiveness

We discover insights by combining 2 or more data points or observations to reveal something new and useful. A clinical but accurate description of what is often an inspiring discovery. We get insights from listening data, persona profiles of how users actually use social and digital media, ethnographies and more. One place we discover insights and practical knowledge that help us know how and where to engage people, are social paths. These are a type of customer journey that use research to understand all the relevant moments people interact with digital and social content along a decision-making journey like what shoulder bag to buy or which vaccines to get for their children. Social Paths help us understand where we can be of-use to people by delivering valuable content, tools or an experience along their way.

 

The Real Customer Journey

We have a model inside Ogilvy for understanding what will drive people’s behavior through the purchase cycle. Developed and championed by our planning leads – Ben Richards and Colin Mitchell – the Customer Journey is part of our integrated planning model called Fusion. 

I love this tool and framework. It really helps understand how we can be of-use to people and to drive actual behavior (vs. attitude). By articulating the desired response we hope to get from people at various moments in the cycle, we can map the barriers and the drivers to that response. 

That’s the customer journey writ large and can help drive any big programmatic strategy and idea in marketing. 

Why I Like Social Paths

In Google’s ZMOT research they find “The number of sources used by any shopper for any average shopping occasion has almost doubled, from 5.2 to 10.4 sources.” How we move from initial discovery through consideration, evaluation, purchase and on through the product experience and potential advocacy has certainty gotten more complex. Our examination clearly reveals a pattern of people reaching out through their social graph repeatedly through all phases of this cycle. Looking at just their social and digital touchpoints such as posting an image on Facebook for friend feedback, Googling to find customer reviews or following a brand on Facebook to receive valuable updates, is a somewhat artificial act. Ideally, we would look at a more holistic ‘customer path.’ Ok, we do that, but we also take a deep dive to look specifically at the social and digital moments. 

Each of these moments represents an opportunity for insight and for actual execution. We learn how people are starting to use mobile access to consumer reviews while standing in front of a display counter in-store. Readers take photos of book covers in Barnes and Noble to collect readable books they will buy later in batches on Amazon. Who wants to carry around a heavy book?   

Social Paths have a practical and tactical purpose, as well. Our Social Shopping colleague, Matt Gierhart sees that these moments can all be disrupted by the brand. Not in a bad way. We can learn where we can place content and what type will be most helpful or entertaining. We can see where the brand might make getting a task done a little (or a lot) easier. 

Just as listening to social conversations helps us understand what people are really thinking about brands and issues, Social Paths help us understand the process we all step through towards a goal. We find this a particularly helpful view on the customer journey.

(image of The Census Project, a large-scale public art project created by artist Anita Glesta for the United States General Services Administration’s Art in Architecture Program)