The Mountaintop Insights, Inspiration and Perspective for Enlightened Marketers

May 24, 2010

Tearing Down the Brand Walls with Social Media

I recently wrote an article over at www.B2Bbloggers.com, The Relationship (r)Evolution – How Social Media is Driving Change in the Human Condition which captured the essence of some of my earlier human behavior articles. But while I was writing that piece I came up with, what I believe, is an interesting metaphor for how social media is working with big brands from the customer’s perspective. It is based on the image burned in every GenX soul when the Berlin Wall came down on November 9, 1989. An epic and evolutionary moment in human civilization and culture to be sure.

So what got me thinking was how big brands seem to have built similar “Berlin walls” up around themselves. This is what decades of one way communication and totalitarian control of the brand have accomplished. But how long did we think customers would tolerate this kind of relationship? I mean really, if we think about, we have been in it for ourselves since the beginning.

Watching the walls come down with each swing of the Social Media hammer

So is Social Media the proverbial sledge hammer in the hands of the customer? It just might be. It is certainly allowing them to come together and affect change on the biggest companies in the world; sometimes that change is forced. I mean just look at how Nestle turned it around after getting pummeled on FaceBook.

Think about it. One of the core attractions of Social Media for an individual is the ability to find people who share the same interest, both friends and strangers. Many times, those interests revolve around experiences and many times those experiences are based on relationships with brands – good, bad and indifferent. Social Media unites people and enables them to focus their collective voice to affect change. That is true power for the consumer.

So, with every 140 character comment on your brand, their is a swing of the hammer against your brand wall because even positive comments are going to affect change. Just look at how Starbucks is using the power of their social presence and customer voice to improve their brand, their products and their services.

Change your brand wall into a brand road

So can we actually leverage this to our advantage as companies? Absolutely. But it is going to take a shift in thinking,  in strategy and in our approach to our customers. I think a better metaphor for how forward thinking, customer-centric companies can leverage social media is a brand road. A road implies many things; progress, two-ways, going the distance, and most importantly no barriers.

Every time a brick is removed from your brand wall use it to build a road with your customers and remember the lessons learned from November 9, 1989.

Let me know what you think of this post and feel free to disagree or take the idea and run with it in your own way.

Cheers!

Jeff – Sensei

April 18, 2010

The Struggle for Existence in Social Media Environments

The more I read Darwin’s Origin of the Species, the more I am amazed at how his work opens the mind to so many different perspectives on human nature, human society, human evolution and the environments we use to develop relationships. This is a man who had and still has a singularly unique perspective on the design of nature.

One of the more fascinating pieces of his work was how he viewed what he deems the struggle for existence, including “the dependence of one being on another, and including not only the life of the individual, but the success in leaving progeny”.

But how is this even remotely related to Social Media or farther still Large Enterprise in Social Media?

Well, try this out and see if you agree…

First, think of Social Media Environments like a living, breathing, ever changing ecosystem where millions of beings (of all shapes, sizes, and dispositions) co-exist and contribute to the ecosystem by consuming and creating food. Add to this another layer I’ll refer to as the food layer which is made of of ideas and conversations.

Second, let’s say that all beings within social media environments are dependent on one another; why else would we need followers? And that their progeny is their ideas and/or their brand; thus the need to attract followers who take on your idea and brand – metaphorically they become your offspring.

Here is where I’m going to throw a bit more Darwin at you.

“We behold the face of nature (read Social Media) bright with gladness, we often see superabundance of food (read ideas and opportunities); we do not see, or we forget, that the birds which are idly singing round us mostly live on insects or seeds and are constantly destroying life; or we forget how largely these songsters, or their eggs, or their nestlings, are destroyed by birds and beasts of prey; we do not always bear in mind, that though food may be now superabundant, it is not so at all seasons of each recurring year.”        – Charles Darwin

If we step out of our deeply rooted perspective of ourselves, our business, and our customers we can begin to see how his observations, even natural laws, begin to become relevant to a virtual ecosystem like Twitter or FaceBook.

To illustrate this, let’s look at a couple ways the struggle for existence manifests itself within social media environments.

The struggle of ideas.

Do ideas destroy other ideas? Most certainly.  An idea flourishes depending on its strength, relevancy, value and on the beings that promote them. The stronger or more plentiful the beings, the greater chance for the idea to flourish and to create difficulty for competing ideas to flourish. So how many ideas can an ecosystem maintain? Hard to say, but certainly as one idea becomes dominant, another struggles for existence.

The struggle of companies and brands.

Do companies actually compete against other companies within social media environments or do they struggle to exist against the environment? Much like plants at the edge of a desert struggle for moisture; never competing against other plants, insects or animals, but simply for existence. I would imagine much of this is because brands (and the businesses behind them) are so new to the concept of such an environment. From Darwin’s perspective, they may just be the weakest beings within social media environments – possessing few traits that actually contribute to social survival, let alone social dominance.

The struggle of beings.

While all beings within social ecosystems are dependent on others, the struggle between them is relentless. Gurus, both real and fake, compete by churning out ideas, conversations and opinions that vie for relevancy with followers. Followers compete for attention from those they follow and for relevancy and standing within their social circles. Progeny are created and destroyed as they take up ideas or replace them with new, better ones that are more attractive to them personally or attractive to their social circle, thus improving their own standing and dominance.

The struggle of virtual ecosystems.

Looking at social ecosystems from the 30,000 foot level, we can see how even ecosystems struggle for existence. An ecosystem’s survival depends on creating an attractive environment for beings to flourish, with the ability to produce plentiful, high quality food.  The more that ecosystem can evolve its attractive qualities, the more likely the chance it will flourish and dominate other virtual ecosystems. We see this in the struggle between the great social platforms of You Tube, Buzz, Twitter, FaceBook, and FourSquare even as we see the decay of MySpace.They can’t all dominate and the weaker ones will surely decay and cease to exist.

Does the struggle ever get easier?

Most certainly it does and in the same breath most certainly it does not. As both beings and brands evolve stronger, more socially dominant traits, they will have an easier time attracting followers and keeping them within these social media environments. Several things are clear though, the struggle for existence ensures balance by creating strong, adaptable beings (people, brands, and platforms) and winnows out the weaker versions of the same.

Agree? Disagree? Think I’m a lunatic? Let me know! I love the comments and debate.

Cheers!

Jeff – Sensei

April 14, 2010

Demand Generation and Social Media for B2B Enterprise

I had an interesting conversation with one of my clients last night and it is one, not just myself, but every consultant and marketing executive has been thinking about since Social Media has become the craze. How do we get the leads?

And by leads, we are talking qualified expressions of interest in doing business with you leads.

What is the Role of Social Media in a Demand Generation Program?

The first part of the challenge is that we are looking at Social Media to deliver leads, and while this can happen, it is more likely that social media is an integrated part of an ongoing demand generation program working at the beginning of the cycle and supporting throughout.

The pivotal role of Social Media for Demand Generation is to attract and engage influencers, not decision-makers. To do this, you need to:

  • Research your target markets and understand their current needs and issues
  • Create an editorial schedule that accomplishes two things:
    • Discusses the issues/needs
    • Discusses the solutions to those issues and needs
  • Do it without shamelessly promoting yourself. It’s not about you.
  • The rest of the best practices around Social Media engagement apply

.

How do we Integrate Social Media into Demand Generation?

Integration requires an understanding of the Demand Generation process and the decision-making process of the influencer community you are targeting. Some critical things to remember:

  1. Align the Demand Generation process with the decision-making process
  2. Ensure your content is available in many forms (pod casts, pdfs, videos, webinars, presentations, etc.) to appeal to many personal preferences for acquiring knowledge
  3. Create a “Swiss cheese” type model of engagement allowing them to pop in and out of the process or different media options anytime, anywhere while staying within an overall demand generation framework.
  4. This is a marathon not a sprint. Think long term, but plan by quarter. A huge mistake is to think that these people are ready to buy based on your quarterly financial schedule. The Social Media component allows continual engagement so that when they are ready (6, 9, or 18 months down the road) you are still engaged and top of mind.

The Social Media Take-away for Influencers

The net result of the social media component within demand generation should be to build rapport, confidence and comfort in your audience. Comfort that allows them to begin to take further steps within the Demand Generation process. This will often lead them to commitment for additional steps such as attending events or webinars, signing up for newsletters, or booking  1on1 calls or meetings with your experts or Account Executives.

Emotional Stages of Commitment

Finally, your Demand Generation program should be walking them through 4 key areas of emotional commitment, each stage built by a combination of marketing tactics and personal interactions with your people.

  • Rapport – Your ability to quickly engage in a meaningful way that meets their immediate needs
  • Confidence – Increasing credibility through timely, relevant, valuable content and dialogue. Prove you know what you are talking about.
  • Comfort – Increasing seriousness in commitment to not just the process, but the relationship
  • Trust – You become a confidante and information, insights, and perspective become freely shared

Done right, Social Media becomes a lynch pin in not just ongoing intellectual engagement but also to gauge audience receptivity to your brand and their emotional attachment to your people.

This is where the rubber meets the road on developing long term, meaningful relationships that turn into customers.

Agree? Disagree? Think I’m a lunatic?

Let me know. I love the discussions and look forward to the journey of discovery with you!

Cheers!

Jeff – Sensei

April 5, 2010

Nice Guys Finish First – Natural Selection in Social Media

Oh the irony.

For centuries, the bad business guy has perceivably won every encounter. He has manipulated and lied and under delivered and gotten away with it every time because we were all kept in the dark. With marketing on their side, we were lured into the spider’s web only to be caught in contracts, given poor service and saddled with products that didnt meet expectations. This was the natural way of things. We were prey, they were predators.

The good guy suffered, sometimes achieved great things, sometimes not. He suffered, not by his own hand, but because we had no trust anymore – a shared fate resulting from the bad guy’s destruction of consumer faith. And really, don’t all companies look and sound the same? Not anymore. Social Media has finally given the nice guys a way to prove themselves; a way to show through listening and action that they are indeed different and worthy like my beloved Starbucks.

I look at it as karmic revenge. Social Media has given nice guys the ultimate tool to win the hearts and minds of customers. It is an evolutionary cycle in the making between companies that only take and companies that give and take equally.

How would Darwin have seen it?

I think that the best example I could find was how Darwin looked at the selection of favourable traits over injurious traits. In new environments such as Social Media, old corporate traits like greed and not listening would be considered injurious; a factor that leads invariably to extinction. Whereas a trait such as listening and reacting (in a reasonable amount of time) is a favourable trait in Social Media; a factor that contributes to dominance in nature and the expansion of the species, or the brand as the case may be.

Is it possible to evolve or take on these favourable traits? Of course, but not many companies today can do it easily, if at all. To those nice guy companies though, Social Media has ushered in the dawning of a new era in business – an era where nice guys finish first.

How big does the apple have to be?

Now all we have to do as customers is wake up and get over our own self-limiting behaviour of being in abusive relationships to realize that there are nice guys out there who want to earn our business and not take advantage of us at every step. A company that will love us and hold us figuratively close.

What is the business equivalent of spooning anyway?

Ferociously,

Jeff – Sensei

March 20, 2010

Risk Mitigation for Large Enterprise in Social Media Environments

Filed under: General,Human Behavior,Social Media — Jeff @ 12:58 pm

By now, everyone is talking about how Nestle screwed up on Facebook. I am not going to bore you with the same tripe that everyone else is spewing out about the situation. Yes they screwed up, now move on about it. Instead in true Mountain Top fashion, I am going to look at it from two different perspectives; one Pro Nestle (tied back to Risk Mitigation) and one Pro Consumer (tied back to understanding online human behaviour).

This post will deal with the Pro Nestle perspective and tie it directly to Risk Mitigation within Social Media environments.

The Risk for Large Enterprise in Social Media Environments

As I watched the Nestle situation unfold, I immediately thought about risk to their brand and the impact that a lack of risk management was having on them. The kerfuffle started over Green Peace UK attacking Nestle online for buying Palm Oil from a company that was destroying orangutan habitat in Indonesia. The catalyst or spark that ignited the wild fire was the use of the KitKat logo (to the right). A clever and effective tool to get a rise out of Nestle and it worked. Very well.

Understanding that situation requires us to look at how risk is different in Social Media environments which requires a different kind of risk planning.

  • Large Enterprise is exceptionally vulnerable in public Social Media environments but they typically think the opposite. You are a target now susceptible to attacks from every individual and organization that doesn’t like you. The difference here is every action around a volatile situation is on display for the world to see, and they are watching. How Large Enterprise perceives itself is critical to reducing vulnerability.
  • Exposure = Risk. Depending on where you go, your level of exposure to risk changes, thus the level of risk changes. Open public forums like FaceBook have the most exposure thus have the highest risk. Twitter has less exposure, You Tube less than that, and blogs least of all. Managing exposure is another key ingredient to understanding and managing risk.
  • Predators are everywhere. As a large enterprise you have enemies of all shapes and sizes. They are all online. This is unique to online environments like Social Media where two way conversations are expected. Your natural enemies know this and will take advantage of it every chance they can get. Know who your enemies are and understand what they are capable of.
  • It only takes a spark to start a wildfire. Within 10 hours, the situation with Nestle spiraled out of control, hit the news media, was picked up by blogs and their fan membership on Facebook raced to 91K all for the wrongs reasons. One spark, the way the Nestle rep handled the public on FaceBook, ignited a wildfire they could no longer control. In Social Media environments, risk to your brand is immediate and far reaching.

.

What is Risk Mitigation for Social Media Environments

Ideally, it is an integral part of a well thought out strategy and approach to going social with your customers and the public.  The risk planning portion should have the following components.

  1. Understanding of who you are in the big picture. Without question, Large Enterprise believe they are the big fish in the pond wherever they go and whatever they do. Not in Social Media. Understanding is the self-analysis leadership needs to do to recognize who they are and their place in Social Media environments. You are prey, not predators. This mean designing a completely different approach and experience than you are used to delivering.
  2. Risk Planning Scenarios. Once you have identified all of your potential vulnerabilities and predators. You need to scenario plan around them. It doesn’t need to be extravagant or complex because the implementation of risk planning relies on the capabilities of your front line people. Develop general cases for evaluating and managing risk that can be applied to multiple types of situations.
  3. Design a Vigilance Process. This is all about teaching your people to recognize the early warning signs of risk and giving them guidelines to manage it and public engagement rules for dealing with it immediately. This gives you time to properly apply resources and escalate your response to control the situation. Don’t go nuts, simple elegant, powerful processes are always the best for everyone involved.
  4. Get the Right People. Having the right people in Social Media is critical to your success. Their aptitude should be open, approachable, friendly, understanding and patient. In hostile situations, it should add helpful. Being armed with questions or techniques to disarm predators or delay the risk in a situation is key. No knee jerk reactions, no retaliation, no low blows. Lastly, asking good, probing questions to define the situation and understand their point of view becomes an important factor in risk management and escalation.

The Value of Risk Mitigation for Large Enterprise Social Media

Before we talk about the value, let’s look at the cost of not having a risk mitigation plan in place. Nestle was hit hard not just from a “Brand perception” point of view but also in the stock market. That’s real. That’s bottom line impact and measurable. If anything, my hope is that this hard fought experience for Nestle will help them realize how potent Social Media can be.

The value if Risk Mitigation can deliver the opposite effect. If it can impact stock prices negatively, it can impact them positively. Imagine if they had rolled out a well managed plan that turned that situation positive and made Green Peace look impotent? Could that have driven investor confidence? Sure it can.

More importantly, the sustainable impact to brand perception can only be improved by applying a risk mitigated approach to dealing with the public. The unique factor is that you have to do this within a two way forum on the open world stage. You have the chance to convert customers into evangelists and enemies into friends, or at the very least make enemies impotent. A win either way.

In the end, risk mitigation makes you a tough target. No predator, human or animal, likes tough targets so the natural inclination will be to move on. Predators look for weakness and when they find it, the exploit it ferociously. Adopt risk mitigation in your approach and make yourself a tough target. There is no downside.

« Newer PostsOlder Posts »

Powered by WordPress