Heavy Social Media Users: Weak ROI



Forbes, leading source for business news and financial information, published an interesting article on the value of High Social Media Users. And the result of their research might not show what most of us want to see...

First, let's take a look at their definition of social media usage and what they consider social media:

Usage:
1. Heavy Users: People who spend 26% of their online time using social media.
2. Medium : People who spend 4.1% of their online time using social media.
3. Light : People who spend 0.42% of their online time using social media.

Social media:
Foursquare, Facebook, Twitter, blogs, etc.

Let's admit it: sounds very fair. But hey, what would you expect?

Forbes related the social media usage to the online spent in number of online buyers as well as in purchase value:

Some bloggers, even at SocialMediaToday, seem to need an explanation for this. But it wouldn't bring us any further than a hypothesis. Point is that light social media users seem to be more interesting for your online commerce.

Meaning that today's marketer has again a new dilemma: heavy social media users are easy to reach but have a lower ROI. Light social media users (in this case People who spend 0.42% of their online time using social media) are more difficult to reach but have a higher online spent.

Damn. Social media aren't the magic solution either...
;-)

Modern traveling according to Google Maps

During the summer period, lighthearted posts can occur on this blog...
Just go from 'Taiwan' to 'China' and read line 23.

User value versus company value...

No further comment needed...

Click here to read the original article.

The Brand Bull

I've had an interesting experience yesterday. I was invited for an interview on big companies' customer centricity (or rather the lack of it) by Radio1, the national quali radio station in Belgium. They had created a charter and companies were invited to the studio to sign it. You can imagine that all major companies from the energy and telecom markets were present to show their good will.
As I was at the end of the program, I was waiting outside the studio and was privileged to follow the official on air version as well as the 'backstage' comments.
One of the major energy providers had sent their spokeswoman. A very confident and mediatrained apparition that was sent out on her mission to reassure the world that the company she represented was already customer aware today and will be even more customer centric in the future. As a proud protector of her employer she declared that the average waiting time before their call center picked up the phone was 28 seconds. Which was a great average, but it directly reminded me of the story of the man who drowned in the river with an average water level of 20cm. While she was pronouncing her words in front of the microphone her (I suppose) assistant made a small victory dance outside the studio. Suddenly it became clear to me that for them the whole show wasn't about customers but about free publicity on national radio. It had nothing to do with an intention to change their attitude towards the customer. The host of the program immediately interpellated the spokeswomen on the impossible to understand invoices. The selfconfident spokeswoman had no clear answer. End of the interview.
Coming out of the studio, the assistant was clearly in a victorious flush. "You did great! And on the 28 seconds they had no reply! She (the host) immediately started about the invoices. That was low", she almost shouted.
In front of me were 2 brand bulls. Responsible for the official company declarations that their bosses didn't want to pronounce or didn't want to spend time on. The initiative of Radio1 was just anioher competition for them against the other providers. Their point of view had nothing to do with customers or customer centricity. It was once again an attack on 'the others' like a dumb bull running towards the red rag And at the same time a missed opportunity to get fundamental input and insights on their customers. Another missed opportunity to show interaction with the customer. Another missed opportunity to tell their story or to start conversating with their customer. I'll suggest to Peeters and Pical, the hosts of the show, to hang the red rag outside their studio so next time the brand bulls will stay out of the studio...

Dear customer, we still have a very long way to go...

Frankly, Forget Customer Centricity

I’m getting tired of ‘Customer Centricity’. Since markete(e)rs have panicked over the empowered consumer, Customer Centricity is ‘it’. One of the basic ways to start being customer centric, is interacting with your customer. We’re all transforming into conversationalists and storytellers, or at least we should be. However, the thing is that any good conversation starts over a cup of coffee or tea. Meaning that you create a ‘moment’, you make and take time for it and you focus on each other. But when is the last time you did that as a markete(e)r before engaging the conversation with your customer? Right. Because now we’re telling stories everything will be OK?

Last week I received a message from my fellow-author Steven Van Belleghem (The Conversation Manager) asking how companies can start a conversation if they know so little about their customers. A question I also asked through Twitter some time ago. Yep, the conversation sure is a great thing, but we forget to create our coffee-break with our customers. Sorry, no time, no can do?!


8(0)-delivery-gap

Research has shown and confirmed recently (Bain & company) that 80% percent of companies (400 researched worldwide) are convinced that they deliver a superior customer experience. But only 8% of the customers agree with that. Meaning that 92% of the customers are passive loyalists; they stick to your offer because they just got used to it. Because they don’t ask questions (anymore). because they know or presume that elsewhere they’ll get the same (non-)experience. Nothing to worry, unless you’re in a market where the customer feels he gets a pretty lousy deal. And then brands like Virgin pick in. Or O2. Or Zappos. Because Zappos ‘lives’ its customer. And the company lives it values. How many companies that you know have ‘fun and weird’ as one of their major values? How many companies do you know where the financial department keeps an internal parade EVERY FRIDAY, celebrating one of their fellow colleagues?


WHY, tell me WHY!

What seems to be the problem? Why can’t we deliver customer experience? What makes it so hard? Because it is an intangible asset. Because it is difficult and complex to measure.

But consumers don’t ‘measure’ or analyze customer experience. They just live it. No discussion, no argumentation, no thick report to explain and understand. According to Bain’s report most companies don’t grasp it. Do they think that they can still decide for the customer what is a good experience and what is not? They probably still think it isn’t up to the customer himself to decide.


Forget the customer?

Certainly not unless you are suicidal and want to forget your business. But customer centricity just seems to be too high. We, market(e)rs, just can’t grasp it. We can’t work with it. And yes, we try. We try really hard. So what now?

Very simple: make it tangible. Make customer centricity tangible for the market(e)r. Don’t tell stories. We have to create a book of fairy tales or a book full of adventures. With images and heroes. And market(e)rs will start telling stories. But they need that book. Because books and iPads are tangible, stories not. Give markete(e)rs a cozy corner with a coffee machine and some choices of sweet tea. And they’ll sit down, take time and enjoy the moment. Then they’ll engage in a conversation. They’ll even start listening. And chatting. And telling things you never knew but always wanted to know.


So, what is that book in marketish?

You could call it product-service. A service that is created around a product. An example: think about your car. What makes your relationship with that brand? Whatever brand it is. “The product” would be the first answer. But since decades there are no bad cars anymore. They’re all great and drive just fine. And they’re all customer-centric in more or less the same way. As well as they’re not customer-centric in the same way. The customer focus doesn’t come from the product. It comes from the services that are created around it. The product-services. Those services that are created around a product in order to support it.

Successful product-services are very tangible AND they are customer-centric by definition. They support your products and brands, create loyalty if they’re well designed and can be all-present. If they’re not customer centric, they won’t be used. This means that you can instantly track and measure your customer focus. Product-services are customer focus made tangible.

So, forget customer centricity and customer focus. You won’t make it through that path. Embrace those services that support your product. It doesn’t matter whether they are online or offline, digital or IRL.

What matters is that they bridge your 8(0)-delivery-gap.

Deal with the Devil? GAP & Facebook ctd.

GAP has a special relation with Facebook. After handling reactions very poorly with the online community, they had to retract their new logo.

Since yesterday, Google has launched a couple of new features such as single sign-on (yeahaa), location APIs to enhance Facebook Places for theird-party apps and the possibility to offer local deals with that same Facebook Places. These local deals mean that you can check in on Facebook, go to the places app and find out what the local deals are near you.

GAP is one of the first brands to start using this: the first 10.000 customers to check in, get a free jeans. Meaning that the brand is making things up with the online community through 'free'. And those who are too late still get 40% off. Is GAP buying back its customers' sympathy this way?

Unhappy Facefans are already posting their frustration again: you do need an iPhone or an Android. Too bad for the Blackberries... (Me Android ;-) But most Facefans are very enthusiastic.

I wonder wether the jeans have the old or the new logo ;-)

The renewed marketing jive: "customer"

"You got to be kidding" was my first idea this morning. Belgacom, Belgium's biggest telecom provider (the ex-monopolist) is said to 'bow for the customer'. A big leap, I would say, as they leapfrog from 'customer disinterest' to 'customer curtsy' (Belgacom IS a lady), skipping the phase of customer centricity.

However, big disappointment, as Belgacom in their press contacts -or the media in their sensation craving- have created a headline that has nothing to do with customer thinking whatsoever: the big idea is to 'improve' the quality of complaint management. Meaning that the telephonic helpdesk will be 'open' till 10 PM 7/7 and if the technician needs to come by, you don't need to take the day off, as they will be working during the evenings also.

Big misunderstanding.

This is an example of what I call 'termabuse'. Using 'customer oriented' as descriptor for these changes is the same as laughing your customers into the face. Customers that are customer centric DO NOT have massive complaints. Managing complaints is one thing, but putting it under the umbrella of customer thinking is several bridges too far. To be clear: there is always something ready to go wrong in your product, service, delivery or use. Nothing's perfect. And that is OK. But customer centric brands get credits from their customer when things go wrong. Because they can go wrong and they have noticed that when they do go wrong, the brand is helpfull and stays customer centric. Non-customer-centric brands or companies are not helpfull. Not before and not after the moment things go wrong. 

Customer centricity is adapting your system to reduce complaints, not changing your system to cope with the increasing amount of complaints.

Big stress.

That will be the result. Big stress. For the 'agents' manning the Belgacom call center. They will have to work longer, work harder and work more days. Complaints will be more fierce and more frequent; Belgacom just gave the customers the permission to be unhappy and to complain. They've just admitted that things are going wrong and that the only thing they will do about it is foresee more resources to handle the complaints.

1 minute.

The same day that Belgacom announced their 'fundamental' changes, my colleague received a letter from another 'ex-'monopolist Electrabel. The letter stated that Electrabel wants to be more customer centric. Therefore they have improved their ... yes: call-center. All calls will be handled within 1 minute. Poor call center agents. Because call centers are evaluated on the time they need to handle your problem,  not  necessarily on the quality of the solution they provide. 

But finally, what are you interested in? To have a good product and service to start with. To have a brand that offers relevance and gives you recognition as a customer. And if things would happen to go wrong, you 'just' want a decent solution. Not more people to handle the complaint but more people to create relevance in the first place.

That would be a good start for customer centricity...