iThnk.com – Your Freestyle Social Media Resource

Don’t uthnk becoming a fan is a big step to take.? Well I do. I struggled to become a fan of anything on Facebook for a long time. I thought “yea I’m into that, but FAN is a big call. I’m hardly fanatical about it.” So I took a seat on the fence and decided to commit to not committing to anything fan related.

The main reason I didn’t pop my fan cherry was out of fear of adding to the amount of Facebook fannies. We’ve all seen the trail of update Diarrhea - “Jenny became a fan of eating toast”. Wow Jenny your life sux. Or “Barry became a fan of morning sex”. Yuk Barry, we don’t want to know! Etc.

Maybe Fb needs to introduce some more low key pages. “Become somewhat interested in. ….” or “Andy indicated he thought … wasn’t bad”. That would be pretty weak though. Probably best to stick with the status quo this time.

Eventually I got over my Fanphobia and got fanned up to a few Fb pages. I now believe being a fan is a good way to attach whatever it may be to my personality. Usually to provoke a reaction like this: “Oh I see Andy is a fan of the internet. He looks like he would be into that kinda stuff”. But more important to me is the ability becoming a fan has to give those who are doing something ithnk is cool some recognition (or mad props).

I’m not suggesting we all be like Jenny or Barry and fan everything you can, these people give us legit fans a bad name. I’m just saying don’t be afraid to let others know what you’re into – especially if it helps get interesting stuff out there. Or don’t, it’s up to you; but you should definitely become a fan of iThnk on Fb right now!

There is quite a lot of chat going on about the amount of self-proclaimed Social Media experts popping up on Twitter right now. I wasn’t horribly surprised when I read that the number of (for the sake of this post I’m going to call them Social Media Pros or SMPS) had exploded from 4,487 to nearly 16,000 in just seven months – check out B.L. Ochman’s blog.

If you are a SMP (or if at least that is how you want to make a name for yourself), of course you will be doing it on Twitter. Go to a conference about the adverse affects of smoking and I’d expect you would find more than a few health professionals. From time to time I experience a sensation others tell me is known as “common sense”. Right now it’s telling me not all the SMPs on Twitter are actually legit; but it is fair to expect an over-representation on one of the most popular SM platforms.

The thing that really jumped out at me about the new spate of SMPs was the names that some of these aficionados give themselves…The first is the SM Guru. Fair to say the Gurus already get the flack they probably deserve online. Watch the video below to see what I’m talking about. (sorry about the language).

I do like the term “Social Media Ninja” though. If you are going to give yourself a ridiculous title you might as well make it hilarious. I feel as if not all 79 of these Ninjas are just having fun with it. I’d say some do actually think their social media savvy is Ninja-esque . The question is would you seriously employ someone that claimed to be a Ninja to work on you SM  strategy? I wouldn’t.

On a more constructive note the stats did get me to thinking about what it means to be a social media expert, and what allows someone to call themselves that? Obviously having a formal qualification would be a start. Funnily enough a quick Google search told me Birmingham City University is now offering a masters course in the field. Master of social media, is that cooler than being a Ninja? Na. I do enjoy the Q and A section of the Birmingham site: “Become a social media consultant (and understand what that means)”. If you can’t work that one out perhaps you should rethink enrolment in a post-graduate program?

So in the future there WILL be qualified social media “experts”. But how do the current mix earn their stripes? Experience? Trial and error? Who knows really. I’m betting the majority are far less proficient than they claim to be. As I’ve mentioned in other posts I believe SM is just one element of the marketing mix. Just as there has been advertising experts in marketing for decades, now you get SM experts too. Over time the actual “gurus” will emerge and the pretenders will hopefully find some other fad bandwagon to jump on, or off.

Has the plethora of new marketing tools available with Web 2.0 helped create a more even playing field for business? The short answer is; potentially…the more accurate answer to this somewhat loaded question contains a lot more ifs, buts and maybes.

The Dilemma

Web 2.0 certainly has the ability to reduce the gap between small and big business. See  Micro-brewing Social Media for a great example of how. But as the gap potentially narrows; the reality is that it also widens in the majority of cases.

Sounds deep I know, and it is. Deeply troubling if you’re an old school small business content to watch the world pass by. But equally as disturbing at the other end of the spectrum if you’re reliant upon traditional media to push your message to increasingly selective consumers. In either case opting not to join “the conversation” will put distance between those who do and those who don’t.

Small Business

If you’re a SME ticking along nicely it may be hard to see how an activity like joining a social network could help improve your customer relationships. It probably seems like too much hassle for most. For those who consider online communication just as a necessary box to tick and not a powerful marketing platform; investing time in Web 2.0 not going to appeal. It will always be difficult to make inroads when the true value is not fully understood.There are heaps of SMEs embracing web 2.0 with great results – check out this success story. However, I don’t think I’m wrong when I claim is the exception rather than the rule (at least for the time being).

The Big Fish

A lot of the big companies that have historically spent loads of cash through print, TV, and radio advertising are in the same boat as the hesitant small companies. The “lets see what happens with this second web thingee”, soon to sink boat. Being purely a spectator to online developments will certainly allow competitors to catch up, or more likely, go further ahead.

What I’ve eluded to above is that it’s not the business size, rather the business attitude that dictates what impact Web 2.0 can have on growth. So to answer the opening question; no it doesn’t create an even playing field. I personally believe the new net has actually pushed big business even further ahead. Why? I’m glad you asked…

Reality Bites

Bigger companies are in a better position to capitalise on new developments, quicker. It comes down to resources. Lets say you’re trying to build a kick ass corporate blog…First you need good content. That content comes form interesting people, genuine company insight, and well written posts . Putting all these together is hard work, time consuming and almost impossible if the right people aren’t involved. Big business have the resources to put all the ingredients in place. If one of the important ingredients [e.g. video production] doesn’t exist in house, they have the means to outsource it. Importantly they can do it quickly, spread the load between employees to ensure good content is always coming through, and even throw some money into search engine advertising to promote it if need be. Not very “even” if you ask me.

Small business does has the advantage of agility. Less organisational red tape coupled with a more intimate company culture can help SMEs rip into new web domination. I believe the rise of Web 2.0 has given small business a realistic opportunity to compete with the big boys head on. Communicating through blogs and social networking is much more cost effective (than traditional media), and  the barriers to entry are few. The well resourced companies will make it happen quicker, that’s for sure; but there’s no reason why the underdog can’t catch up.

Several weeks ago I posted Advertising Conversations – An AdWords Experiment. Now the budget has been exhausted and the results are in. Our initial strategy proved costly. We used a lot of quite broad keywords, had a high average cost-per-click (CPC) bid (relative to our budget), opted to use both managed and automated ad placements, and had a high daily budget allocation. The fact  that we were using free money (thanks Google!) probably didn’t help motivate us to formulate a more economical strategy from the outset. However, we always had the intention to make mistakes so others wouldn’t have to. You can thank us later…

Most of our impressions (and about 40% of clicks) came from the automatic placement network. The managed content placements we used had next to no traction at all. There is a lot of material going round stating the risk of allocating much of your budget to the automatic content network, check out this Internet Marketing Blog. Like many others I would advise to err on the side of caution (at least initially) when it comes to the auto content network. Focus on optimising your keywords first.

Content placements drastically reduce your click-through-rate (CTR), which in turn adversely affects your quality score. This means your ads are less likely to appear at the top when your keywords are searched for. Bummer. Unless you have a lot of money to allocate to AdWords campaigns (enabling you to frequently outbid the competition), I would suggest giving the auto network the flick. Sure you can get a lot of impressions and possibly clicks, but are these people really interested in what you do? The majority probably wont find what their looking for. Hello high bounce rate, bye bye budget!

Give us the stats already!

Ok for our $95 we got 134 clicks, 286,874 impressions, and had a click through rate (CTR) of 0.05%. Our most successful keyword was “Co-creation” with 23 clicks (CTR of 0.91%), followed by “marketing tips” with 20 (CTR of 0.59%). Interestingly the term “join the conversation” had the highest CTR of 2.59%. We burned through most of the budget in less than a week on when our daily limit was $20! In an attempt to gather more information with what money remained we adjusted our campaign settings. This enabled the ads to continue running for about one month all up. What it also did was make us consider the most efficient and effective way to manage our ads.

That is about the best advice I can offer. Keep tinkering with your keywords. Add more, remove non-performing ones and keep a close eye on those that are generating rubbish traffic. Consider using negative keywords where you think people may be inadvertently clicking on your ads. We noticed a pattern of searchers looking for Facebook login info so we added negative keywords that were associated with this search.

Overall the AdWords experiment wasn’t hugely successful in terms of getting people to “join the conversation”. More people visited the site for sure, but as for getting the community to contribute, well I guess that is still a work in progress… What it did teach us was that the saying “build it and they will come” doesn’t apply to AdWords. Build it (your ads), they will come, leave quickly, and you’re left out of pocket in a hurry. Build it well on the other hand, adapt you keywords and ad text to what the searchers are looking for; and you will increasingly improve your R.O.I

If you have any AdWords advice, stories or questions please comment below or contact us at @iThnk.

Short-sighted corporate type #1: “Hey Bruce, you heard of that Twatter thing?”

Short-slighted corporate type #2: “Oh yea some of the new grads have been talking about it, I think it’s called Twitter.”

#1: “Whatever. Apparently some companies are using it to advertise.”

#2: “Really, how much does it cost?”

#1: “It doesn’t cost anything, that’s the best part.”

#2: “So we can use the Twitter to advertise for free?”

#1: “Yea sounds bloody great doesn’t it?”

#2: “Sounds fantastic, how do we use it?”

#1: “Well everyone is using the internet for everything these days so we just run one of our usual boring sales that we normally advertise on T.V, but now we can tell everyone about it on Twitter. They’ll love it because we are such a big important company…We’ll save thousands!”

#2: “Bruce this could be huge…. We can just constantly interrupt people now. Our ads will be everywhere, sales will go through the roof!”

#1 & #2: Pat each other on the back. “We will get a raise out of this”

Hopefully this type of conversation doesn’t take place around the marketing executive water cooler, but it is fathomable when you see how some companies use social media. I’m referring to the select few that see Twitter (and other online platforms) as a cheap way to cling to their current advertising model.

Over the next couple of weeks I will be attempting to start conversations with New Zealand businesses that have entered the Twittersphere. The purpose is to find who is engaging with their followers, who is taking steps in the right direction, and who has missed the point completely. Watch this space for the results of the first annual iThnk.com“Fail Whale Awards”…

Adding social media to the Marketing Mix doesn’t mean re-inventing the business wheel. What it should do for firms interested in entering the social space is provide an opportunity to perform an organisational wheel alignment. This means taking a good look at the overall marketing strategy to ensure social media compliments the direction of the firm, not complicates it. Basically ensuring the new is aligned with the current, and everything is moving forward in the right direction.

The culture of an organisation is fundamental to a successful Social Media Strategy. This is no secret. Jeremiah Owyang discusses the importance of having the right platform to launch a new media strategy in a piece about Social Media Adoption. A sound foundation to base a social media marketing strategy upon is the essence of this post. Where does this foundation come from? In my humble opinion it stems from The Marketing Concept.

Understanding what your customers want and then tailoring your offerings accordingly is not achieved by launching a social media campaign, it is something that needs to be inherent to the firm’s business philosophy. If your organisation is product-centric and unwilling to listen to the voice of your customers, any social media initiatives will likely end in disaster.  Why start a conversation if all your going to do is ignore or yell profanity at anyone that responds? If you have never listened to your customer before then how is social media going to help? It will only alienate your prehistoric organisation further.

On the flip-side firms that are in tune with customers can utilise social platforms to improve their offerings extremely effectively. Is there a more efficient form or market research than engaging in a conversation directly with consumers? And not just any consumers, those who are loyal enough to follow your online activities. Tapping into the Collective Intelligence of you community is now possible in an instant with the myriad of new media tools available to the savvy marketing strategist.

So before embarking on a social media experiment that could further distance your organisation from your potential customer base, it is important to consider your firm’s current market orientation. Look at it this way… If they tell you something you don’t want to hear, will do you anything about? Or are you even really willing to listen at all?