Let’s Do [a Social Media] Breakfast


Chicken = Involved, Pig = Committed.

Hey, it’s great to be connected online and even better to connect in person.  I’ll be participating in two Social Media Breakfasts in the upcoming weeks and we can socialize about social media if you’re around.

– In Austin, Tuesday October 7th at 7:30 am, Rudy’s "Country Store" & Bar-B-Q.  We’ll try to answer the question, "Does Social Media Marketing Matter?"  Organized by Bryan Person and Amie Paxton.  Breakfast taco, anyone?

– In Boston, Thursday October 16th at 8 am, Ryles Jazz Club.  The topic is "Starting Social Media and Community-Building Programs with a Reluctant Executive."  With Jamie Pappas from EMC and Sam Lawrence from Jive.  Organized by Bob Collins.  Watch out if I don’t get enough coffee before we get mic’d up.

You can register by clicking through on the city links, above.  It would be great to connect on Twitter before (and after), it’s conversation you know.

Panopticons and social behavior


"Work Makes You Free."  Taken at Dachau, Germany by Pete Kim.

In the 18th century, English architect Jeremy Bentham designed the panopticon, a prison structure that allowed guards to watch prisoners without knowing when they were being observed – so that prisoners felt that they might be under watch at all times.

Two centuries later, French philosopher Foucault applied the idea to discipline in the organization, particularly in the industrial age.  Managers and foreman stood in offices high above the shop floor to observe activity below.

In modern offices, the panopticon persists in today’s cube farms – where open work spaces may foster collaboration, but also facilitate observation by managers and peers.

In the 21st century, the panopticon has moved online.  Today’s IT departments install keystroke loggers and web proxies that monitor employees’ computing activities.

Employees usually react to panoptic observation by falling in line and acceding to discipline – or leaving the company (only to fall into the same situation, different brand on the door).

But social computing fosters 100% anti-panoptic behavior.  People become exceedingly transparent and open.  Observation loses its power as workers share the information anyway.

Today’s enterprise appears to be headed for a panoptic-social conflict.  Management desires control.  Employees walk out the door every night and want to return with the technologies they find useful in their personal lives.  You may block Facebook and Twitter today – but how long will it be until the Enterprise wakes up and realizes that community participation is the key to success?

 


 

What is community?

Credit: Gapingvoid
I posted some thoughts over on the MarketingProfs Daily Fix blog about community – and a response has me thinking about community.

Lewis Green commented, "Question: Don’t mean to spark controversy (yes I do) but I am troubled by women (or men) only groups. I think exclusion hurts everyone,
including members of the exclusive group."

Is this true?

What is community?

Communities are groups of people defined and separated by common interest.  A community’s core looks like yin and yang, relying on supporters and detractors to define inclusion and exclusion.  In the UK, Conservatives wouldn’t be Conservatives unless the Labour and Liberals existed.  Red Sox Nation needs its Evil Empire.  The survivors of Oceanic 815 need The Others.

Communities need barriers to entry – whether natural or artificial.  Does being human make you part of a community?  Ask your dog or cat.  Green marketers would have us think so.  Hollywood, too.  I know Lew alludes to issues of gender, race, and religion…but I’m going to steer clear of those here and focus on community in a business sense.

We all know that "the conversation" exists.  By definition, community exists as well.  That’s why companies run into problems when they use social media for marketing communications.  It’s good to listen to the conversation and to acknowledge the speakers.  But the speakers expect a response, because the company is a participant.  That’s why many individuals are afraid to participate – companies can’t blog/tweet/podcast – only people can.  And people often don’t know if they’re allowed to speak for the company.  While the people who can (e.g. PR, Corp Comm) stick to traditional one-way channels.

The core of community lies within the corporation.  Companies are already social – we have business units and divisions, functional departments, and softball leagues and charity outreach groups.  Your corporate community connects all the time – company meetings, hallway conversations, and via email or phone.  However, when it comes to external communication and connections, companies operate like a jail, preventing contact with the outside world and releasing inmates every evening into the community, returning to lock-up the next morning.

So what’s so tough about enabling connections in corporate communities with social technology?  I.e. allowing the company to connect with the outside world during the day instead of only every night during work release?

Well, most companies don’t resemble the "porous membrane" as pictured above by Hugh McLeod and operate instead like a castle with moat.  Moreover, many brands secretly fear that connecting with the community will lead to dilution and destruction.

It’s notable that castles today aren’t seats of power, but are maintained as reminders of a distant past.  Lew is spot on, that "exclusion hurts everyone, including members of the exclusive group" – especially when it comes to your corporation and its community.

 


 

Ego Trap: Industry Awards

I’ve been thinking about how ego traps operate in social media – which could also be called hero marketing (credit Seth Godin for suggesting the term).  Essentially, social media focuses on individuals and ego traps help promote individuals, not necessarily at the expense of helping/promoting others.

I don’t think ego traps are inherently "bad."  However, I believe that individuals should be fully aware of the implications when participating in a hero marketing scheme – particularly what they’re trying to accomplish and why.  Honesty with one’s own ego is the key.  (Or is it the id that’s really the problem?)

Jeremiah has started a list of social media marketing awards.  Self-submitted industry award competitions are ego traps in action.  Why?

  • Agencies seek credit for their work, so they can win more clients.
  • Clients seek recognition for success, so they can ask for bigger budgets and salaries.
  • Judges seek credit as subject matter experts, so they can get more business.
  • Award hosts seek credibility as industry authorities, so they can get more business.

Award competitions work well when executed properly (i.e. focused topic, large sample of competition, critical judgment process), because they can be a quintuple-win situation for the participants: clients, agencies, judges, hosts, and observers.  Let’s just be aware of and honest about what everyone seeks in the process.

My Day With The C200

C200
I wanted to share a pretty cool experience from this week with you.  On Friday, I had the honor of participating in Committee of 200’s (C200) Annual Conference.  Have you ever heard of C200?  They are a fairly low-key and extremely high-powered group.  Membership is invitation only for women who either own businesses over $15 million or manage a corporate division over $250 million…making this a very tight-knit and exclusive group.

The conference started in a way that said, "Texas."  Senator Kay Bailey Hutchison rode into a ballroom at the Four Seasons Las Colinas on a horse.  (!)  I can just imagine the discussion between the event planners and the Four Seasons staff to make that idea turn into reality…

I was part of a panel moderated by Gay Gaddis of T3 with Nick Bomersbach from JCPenney, discussing the "digital ecosystem and advertising today."  I’ve done a lot of public speaking and I don’t think I’ve ever shared a discussion a room full of CEOs before!  They had great questions, as you’d expect.

At lunch, three awards were presented to:
– Marsha Serlin, Founder and CEO of United Scrap Metal, for entrepreneurship.  I never knew that scrap metal could make for such a compelling story of determination and perseverance.
– Susan Arnold, President of Global Business Units at P&G, for corporate innovation.  A woman who directs $83 billion of brands that the world uses daily.  Who enjoys being barefoot around the office.
– Jacqueline Novogratz, Founder and CEO of The Acument Fund, for philanthropy.  Her experiences with making water accessible in India and fighting malaria in Africa were mesmerizing.

Although geography and gender were highlighted at various points throughout the day, I can tell you that the inspiration and energy present were awesome, especially for a guy from Boston who by definition can never be a part of the C200.  But I hope that someday my other family members may be!

A List of Social Media Marketing Examples

Hello – if you’re here’s for social media examples, you’ve come to the right place.

Here are some related resources you might find helpful:

Background on why I originally did this:

I’ve been thinking about how social media works.  For example, applying game mechanics to understand participation, thinking about users vs. customers, and deconstructing ego traps in PR campaigns.  This analysis makes me wonder if social media marketing matters and if so, does it scale.

I thought you might benefit from some of my background research on these topics.  And I’d appreciate your help in curating this list by providing more details and submitting additional cases.

 

Wiki analysis

 

>> Last update: 23 November 2008
>> Total brands: 324

Examples of companies using and being used by social media marketing:

[Notice anything missing?  Leave a link and description in the comments below.  I’ll add to the main list on a periodic basis.]

—
1 Jeremiah Owyang’s A Chronology of Brands that Got Punk’d by Social Media
2 Mashable’s 35+ Examples of Corporate Social Media in Action
3 Forrester’s Groundswell Awards, 2007 and 2008
4 Mack Collier’s Company Blog Checkup Series
5 Social Brand Index – Twitter
6 Credit: Gavin Heaton
7 Credit: Philippe Deltenre
8 Credit:  zeroinfluencer, David Bausola
9 Credit: Bruce Eric Anderson
10 Credit: Nick Ayres
11 Credit: Jeff Glasson
12 Credit: Luke
13 Credit: Mike
14 Credit: Robin Seidner
15 Credit: Tom Shea
16 Credit: Ed Nicholson
17 Credit:  Stefan Halley
18 Credit: Tom Hoehn
19 Credit: Debbie Weil and her list of 67+ Big Brand Corporate Blogs
20 Credit: Marta Kagan
21 Credit: Paull Young
22 Credit: Kevin
23 Credit: Paul Fabretti
24 Credit: Nick Huhn
25 Credit: dominic
26 Credit: Michael Pranikoff
27 Credit: Kyle Flaherty
28 Credit: Ed Terpenning
29 Credit: Chi-chi Ekweozor
30 Credit: Lisa
31 Credit: David Bressler
32 Credit: C.B. Whittemore
33 Credit: Torley
34 Credit: David Jones
35 Credit: Keith De La Rue
36 Credit: Sean Lew
37 Credit: Tom Cummings
38 Credit: Donna Tocci
39 Credit: Adam Singer
40 Credit: Yianni Garcia
41 Credit: Matt Cronin
42 Credit: Stephen Manning
43 Credit: Jim Dietzel
44 Credit: Clayton
45 Credit: Mike
46 Credit: Kira Wampler
47 Credit: Woody Meachum
48 Credit: Lee Aase
49 Credit: Toby Bloomberg
50 Credit: Adam Denison
51 Credit: Colleen Gatlin
52 Credit: Davezilla
53 Credit: Gina
54 Credit: Marcos Fargas
55 Credit: Marianne Richmond
56 Credit: Kevin Barenblat
57 Credit: Dan Entin
58 Credit: Bruce Ertmann
59 Credit: Sean Moffitt
60 Credit: Elana Bowman
61 Credit: Dan
62 Credit: Andrew
63 Credit: James O’Connor
64 Credit: Herve Kabla
65 Credit: Sachin Agarwal
66 Credit: Lou Cuming
67 Credit: Danny Urguia
68 Credit: Kathrin Lohmann
69 Credit: Rafa
70 Credit: John Galpin
71 Credit: Ken Kaplan
72 Credit: Kathy Mandelstein
73 Credit: BJ Cook
74 Credit: John Welsh and list of UK SMM examples
75 Credit: Nils Koenig
76 Credit: James Finnen
77 Credit: Miko
78 Credit: Yvonne DiVita
79 Credit: Juny Lee
80 Credit: Massimo Cavazzini
81 Credit: Gunther Lie
82 Credit: Alan Edgett
83 Credit: Kelly
84 Credit: Søren Storm Hansen
85 Credit: dlafont
86 Credit: Greg Weinger
87 Credit: Katie Mingo
88 Credit: Patricia Romeo
89 Credit: Kate Elzer-Peters
90 Credit: Jason
91 Credit: Penny Schouten
92 Credit: Gillian
93 Credit: Valorie Luther
94 Credit: Shannon Swenson
95 Credit: Rachel Happe’s Social Media Examples via @MadLid
96 Credit: vidarbrekke
97 Credit: Kylie Lewis
98 Credit: Guy Kawasaki
99 Credit: Mikael Lindecrantz
100 Credit: Alex
101 Credit: Steve Radick
102 Credit: NewTarget Web
103 Credit: Jason Dojc
104 Credit: Chrissie Hsu
105 Credit: Aki Spicer
106 Credit: Liza Hausman
107 Credit: Eric Hoffman
108 Credit: Kami W Huyse
109 Credit: Sean Hudson
110 Credit: Eric
111 Credit: Matt
112 Credit: Larry Gee
113 Credit: Urs
114 Credit:  Harry Gold

Social media marketing’s scalability problem

I’d like your thoughts on what I see as one of the biggest problems I see for using social media in marketing:  scalability.

In theory, using social media for marketing should scale elegantly.  Most advisors and evangelists tell a story that plays out something like this:  once a marketer gets up enough courage to push over the first domino and launch a social media effort, that person tells a friend, who tells another three friends, who tell yet another three friends, and so on with almost infinite reach at almost zero incremental cost.  Examples like Subservient Chicken, Dove Evolution, and Elf Yourself are often cited here.

In practice, real life starts to get in the way.  You can’t create "viral."  (In fact, "viral" is even the wrong metaphor.)  Philippe reminds us of Watts’s "big seed" concept, which starts to look like mass media. One-ninth of the WORLD’s population watched the 2006 FIFA World Cup final.  Social media vs. Television for marketing purposes just doesn’t match up.

People don’t scale, either.  Frank at Comcast does a great job, but he’s only one person.  Dell has 17+ people on Twitter, like Amie Paxton.  Scott Monty is a new kind of leader, but he’s only one person.  How much harm did Exxon Janet inflict?  (Answer: none.)

[Let me pause here and say that I have and will always believe that the purpose of marketing is to sell stuff, whether direct response or 30-year sales cycle.  Marketers who don’t believe that their job is to ultimately sell something should become receptionists instead, if all you want to do is talk.]

I do believe social media can help sell.  Social content has started integrating into traditional tactics like banners and emails.  I have a better opinion of Comcast after Frank helped me with my cable modem and will resist Verizon FIOS for a while longer.  From my last post asking if social media matters, the commenting consensus seems to agree, with its impact in awareness, consideration, and preference.

But if social media marketing matters, then does it scale?

I don’t think so.  I think the technologies scale.  But the programs – especially those with a labor-intensive component – don’t.

[Social technologies are better applied inside the enterprise – to improve existing systems, grow culture, improve productivity, and scale to a finite point…]

Your thoughts appreciated.

How to set an ego trap


I’ve been thinking lately about what I call the social media ego trap.  In a nutshell, social technologies use game mechanics to get users hooked on participation.  People often get addicted to ego-stroking system feedback, until they can temper their usage (addiction?) in terms of utility vs. serendipity.

But what if you’ve got something to sell?  What if you want to set an “ego trap” yourself?

Let me show you a few traps that have already been sprung, maybe we can learn something from them.

Andy Sernovitz is a word-of-mouth marketing genius.  He also set a perfect ego trap to promote a marketing workshop for his company, Gaspedal.  Andy recruited a network of bloggers to promote his event.  For free.  Who fell into the trap?  Stowe Boyd.  Susan Bratton.  Tara Hunt.  Steve Hall.  And 28 others.  If you look at the related posts, all of these bloggers are promoting Andy’s “special event” that’s “limited to 50 people” and “not usually offered to individuals” and “this low of a price.”  (If this seems silly, you need to click through the links and read the offer in context.)  Damn, I wish I’d thought of this idea.

So why did it work?  The offer was simple.  It was personalized.  Andy is credible; he’s one of the founders of WOMMA.  It was positioned as a scarce resource that bloggers could offer their readers, with a discount.  By the way, I’ve heard Andy speak – his seminar is well worth the price.  (Be sure to use a discount though!)

Dave Balter happens to be a word-of-mouth guru as well.  Coincidentally, he and Andy don’t get along very well – maybe it’s an ego issue?  (I digress.)  Dave set a great ego trap recently to promote his new book, The Word of Mouth Manual: Volume II.  Dave recruited a network of bloggers to promote his book.  For free.  Who fell into the trap?  Rohit Bhargava.  Tom Peters.  John Moore.  John Jantsch. And 15 others. (Yes, there were 20 bloggers total.)  If you look at the related posts, almost all of these bloggers are promoting Dave’s book talking about how they’re in a select group of 20 people.  Those posts aren’t about you – they’re about how important the bloggers themselves are.  “Look, I’m in a hand-selected group of 20 bloggers who are going to promote this book for free on Dave Balter’s behalf.  I am special.”  (If this seems silly, you need to click through the links and read the posts in context.

So why did it work?  The offer was limited.  It was relevant to the bloggers and their readers.  I haven’t read the book and probably won’t, because I prefer to read hard/soft covers, not PDFs.  But don’t let me stop you from downloading the book for free and gaining some knowledge.  You can even join the special 20 (now 28) by creating a unique URL to promote the book on your own site.

One last example:  The Power 150.  Originally a hand coded list by marketer Todd Andrlik, it was purchased by Ad Age.  Todd set an unwitting ego trap by ranking “the top marketing blogs in America.”  Who fell into the trap?  Many, many bloggers – including Todd himself.  At one point, he appealed to his own readers to help boost his ranking on the list.  Today the list ranks 826 blogs.  Presumably, the other 676 just aren’t as powerful.

Why did it work?  Game mechanics – competition and a somewhat objective comparison scale (except for “Todd Points.”  I may lose some of my 12 after this post.)

OK, let’s review.  Here’s how to set an effective “ego trap” with your own offer:

  • Keep it simple.
  • Make it scarce.
  • Personalize it.
  • Use numbers.
  • Appeal to the head…and the heart.

Steve Rubel sums it up:  “I actually like the thrill of the chase and serendipity. I want to be first. This is something that has fueled the egos of reporters for years – partly because it sells. Heck, count me in.”

The old saying tells us, “the way to a man’s heart is through his stomach.”  Let’s update that for today’s world and recognize that the way to a blogger’s keyboard is through their ego.

The known, knowable, and the unknown

When I was in business school, my strategy professor Jeanne Liedtka introduced a framework for strategic thinking that I use quite often, based on Fitch’s paradox of knowability:  any issue can be broken into three distinct parts:  the known, knowable, and unknown.

This may seem like a simple framework, so let’s apply it to something you understand pretty well, like your company.

There are things that are known.  But knowledge can be difficult to distribute.  In theory, markets are transparent; in practice, today it’s nearly impossible to tap into the collective intellect of an organization’s ecosystem (i.e. employees, suppliers, customers).  It takes good tools to capitalize on the known.

There are things that are knowable.  Research can help convert these into the known.  Building bridges and opening communication conduits can help unclog knowledge arteries and spur information flow as well.  It takes the right process and culture to be successful.

And there are things that are unknowable.  Time is often the only solution here.  But as Pasteur said, "chance favors the prepared mind."  Having the right strategy and structure in place will ensure your company is ready to embrace and act on whatever outcomes emerge from the passage of time and introduction of new market data.

So maybe not so simple after all.  You can apply this to social technology adoption, evaluating a job opportunity, or trading for Manny Ramirez.  Decisions are rarely black and white, but using a good filter will help you eliminate as much grey as possible.

Applying game mechanics to social media

In my last post, I talked about falling into the ego trap.  So what happened?  I got caught up in watching the numbers, becoming a full participant in the game mechanics underlying social media.

Everyone likes games – your preference might be for the simple, like Solitare, or complex, like World of Warcraft.  If you think games are frivolous, think again – they help us accomplish the simple, like getting an infant to eat, and the complex, like warming up surgeons or disaster response.  But as in all things, moderation is key and some people have died when taking games too far.

People fall into the ego trap when they take social media gaming too far, focusing on the aspects of the game instead of the content and purpose of their activities.

Here’s how game mechanics work.  My friend Max Kalehoff blogged about five keys of successful game design as communicated by expert Amy Jo Kim (no relation to me).  I’ll apply her framework here:

  1. Collecting things. Humans have a primal instinct to collect and display.  Offline, think about boy scout badges or Olympic pins. My old housemate used to collect commemorative Coca-Cola bottles.  Online, we have our Twitter widgets, Facebook fan pages, and Flickr photo albums.
  2. Earning points. These define achievement and translate into social standing.  Offline, it’s how NASCAR champions are crowned and how you earn a free airplane flight.  Online, it’s the number of fans, friends, followers, or subscribers to your content.  World-leading PR firms advise their clients to pay attention to individuals with "influence" and "authority" based on points.  We reinforce the credibility of points by watching lists of top blogs, top tweeters, even top egos.
  3. System feedback. Offline, it’s the experience of shopping at an Apple store or your car accelerating when you press the gas.  Online, it’s not comments, replies, or trackbacks (those feed into points & exchanges), but response from the system itself.  How complete is your LinkedIn profile?  How much Plurk karma do you have?  Do you have Facebook for Blackberry installed yet?
  4. Value exchanges.  Successful interactions.  Offline, it’s us inviting each other’s kids to their birthday parties, or paying it forward to strangers.  Online, it’s the process of interactions:  Posting wall-to-wall. Sending a mini-ninja or martini glass.  People "liking" your FriendFeed items. Twitter’s @ messages.
  5. Customization and personalization.  User-created barriers to exit.  Offline, it’s the color you chose to paint your house, the case for your iPhone, the stickers on your laptop.  Online, it’s the extensive profile information you entered, the photos you uploaded, or the background picture that says something about your interests.

The ego trap lies in wait around the points issue.  When a user is blindly amassing points, their collections become spammy.  Feedback overwhelms.  Exchanges aren’t worth participation. 

From a business, i.e. the application owner’s, perspective – these are all good.  They pave the way to monetization – display ads, sponsorships, brand participation, and more.

From a participant’s perspective, these are only good up to a certain point after which there are only diminishing returns.  The numbers are all relative.  For example, I’m comfortable right now with about 500 in my Facebook network.  Jeremiah seems ok with almost 2,500. 

Focus is the key to steering clear of the ego trap.  Play the game with an end goal in mind.  Social media games never end, because they’re part of life.  Ultimately, winning and losing become states of being instead of static points in time.


Being: Peter Kim