Last week, Facebook announced changes that expanded the sharing of consumer data with a select set of third-party partners, and it only took a matter of days for lawmakers to press Facebook for changes and government agencies for more oversight. The fact Washington took note of Facebook’s changes isn’t at all surprising; in fact, it was inevitable. But what happens next—and what this means to marketers—is not inevitable and depends a great deal on how proactive Facebook becomes on education, transparency and cooperation with lawmakers and privacy watchdogs.
In a recent blog post called "Drop The Pilot," Andrew McAfee argues that most "Enterprise 2.0" pilots are unintentionally set up to fail. This is in part because such enterprise communities depend upon broad employee acceptance in order to be effective. This doesn't mean that collaboration platforms are only effective in organizations with tens of thousands of employees, but it certainly helps. And the challenge with pilots is that they are frequently focused on a subset of the organization -- these pilots never really have the chance to fully realize their potential. Perhaps the best pilots are those that are not limited in scale but limited in time -- they determine adoption rates over time and use the pilot to figure out how to make the final rollout more successful.
In his blog post McAfee goes on to suggest six steps toward effective deployment which gel nicely with the key lessons learned from the United Business Media (UBM) case study published recently. McAfee suggests you should:
"Deploy tools that deliver a novel capability, like microblogging, social network formation, or prediction markets. Tools that deliver something novel -- that aren’t trying to displace an incumbent -- avoid the 9X effect.
Make sure the tools are frictionless, freeform, and emergent. This lowers barriers to participation and altruism.
We all know that Social Computing can have an important impact on the brand and on the brand experience. And that many people and departments around the enterprise have adopted social technologies. But therein lies the challenge -- how to best benefit from social when everyone is involved? And what role for the CMO?
I'll talk about my new research on how CMOs should orchestrate their company's social initiatives next week at our Paris Tweet-up. And I expect not to be the only one talking.
If you're in Paris the evening of May 4th - or would like to be ;-) - please join us. You can find details and registration here: http://twtvite.com/ParisTweetupMBK. I look forward to seeing you at Café Reflets - Centre Cerise @ 19 h.
I was included on a very interesting panel discussion a couple of weeks ago entitled, "Stories From The Frontline, Building A Social Media Business." The event was co-sponsored by TiE and the Social Media Club SFSV and included a terrific set of people who were experienced, smart and funny:
Rich Reader captured a quick clip of me sharing thoughts on the appropriateness of measuring ROI in Social Media. While the panel format doesn't furnish time for an appropriate deep dive into when and how ROI might be an appropriate metric, I believe in most cases ROI is the wrong question to ask (and if you start with the wrong question, you'll get the wrong answer.)
I will be working on a report about Social Media and Marketing ROI. Your thoughts and input are welcome and encouraged. Please check out the 76-second clip and then let me know what you think.
Going into Chirp, Twitter's first-ever developers conference, the natives were restless. A string of announcements--from the release of Twitter's own Blackberry app to the acquisition of development firm Atebits--had some developers wondering where Twitter was going and what it all meant to them. While Twitter's executive team didn't answer every question, they did outline a vision for future growth with a vigorous role for third-party developers. For me, the role Twitter sees for itself and for developers was most clearly outlined in its discussion of "place."
Twitter clearly recognizes that our location is extremely relevant data that can yield substantial value for others who use (either directly or indirectly) the Twitter information network. It's not just about where you are at every given moment, but what you're saying and doing while you're there.
Ryan Sarver offered a compelling example of the power of place in his discussion about the New York Times' coverage of the Fort Hood tragedy. A reporter turned to Twitter for real-time news and information but ran into a flood of retweets and expressions of sympathy and concern. Then he entered "near Killeen, TX" and was able to see relevant tweets from first responders, soldiers and citizen journalists in the immediate area. At Chirp, Twitter conveyed the importance of place and how geolocation will be a vital part of the Twitter experience.
Our little baby is all grown up. Just 30 months ago, Twitter was flying under the radar and people interested in microblogging might very well have joined Identica, Pounce, Plurk or other lookalike services. By early 2010, Twitter handled 50 million tweets per day and had become crucial to hundreds of brands and tens of millions of people, but it still had just one visible (and arguably modest) means of support—search engine deals with Microsoft and Yahoo. As of today, Twitter is getting a job and earning its keep with the rollout of an ad platform.
As it grew and became a more important communications channel, Twitter found its business model the focus of intense scrutiny; for example, when Ev Williams failed to announce an ad platform at SXSW, there was palpable disappointment among bloggers and other observers. This week, Twitter is addressing that disappointment with the rollout of its new Promoted Tweet program, which offers some benefits to brands. What are those benefits and what are the limitations for marketers?
This past weekend, I did something no man welcomes: The dreaded car-buying event. Sure, we men love to shop for cars, but buying one is another thing altogether. I abhor salespeople botching heavy-handed “closing techniques,” fake chumminess, the sexism of telling my wife about cup holders and showing me the engine, and one of my least-favorite lines in the human language, “I’m not sure that’s gonna fly—I’ll have to check with my manager.” Yes, this weekend was all that and more, but in the end we snagged our car and I got the chance to meet and learn from a Mass Maven (and now so can you).
A while back, I published a report and blog post that briefly introduced two types of Mass Influencers—Mass Connectors and Mass Mavens. Next week, Forrester will release a new report that defines Mass Influencers in more detail, but this weekend I had the opportunity to study a Mass Maven in the wild. So, grab your pith helmet and join me as we embark on a Mass Influencer safari.
My journey started with a decision to purchase a convertible. (Hey, we may have moved to Northern California, but it’s still California!) First stop was a dealership to look at the new VW Eos. Our salesperson was—how can I put this delicately?—uninformed. When asked what the difference was between the two versions of the vehicle, he answered, “One has more features” and left it at that.
Let me answer my own question immediately by saying: Yes, money belongs in social media. It costs money to host social networks, develop social applications, create content, moderate dialog in social channels, and launch community platforms. VCs want to see money returned, Facebook and Twitter want to earn money, marketers want to invest money wisely and brands want people to spend money.
But should money be everywhere in social media? That's the question that came to mind as I read about a new social ad program being launched by Domino's Pizza.
I just read a brilliant and inspirational blog post on the Harvard Business Review site entitled, "Are All Employees Knowledge Workers?" The authors, John Hagel III, John Seely Brown and Lang Davison, explore the "artificial distinction" that businesses create in their workforce between the haves (so-called "high potentials," creative talent, and knowledge workers) and the have nots (everyone else). The writers suggest we need "to redefine all jobs, especially those performed at the front line (or, in an image, that reveals our prevalent management mindset, the 'bottom' of the institutional pyramid), in ways that facilitate problem solving, experimentation, and tinkering."
Early in the Web 1.0 era, companies asked what the Web could do for them. It was the wrong question, because soon the Web was doing something to them--changing consumer expectations, forcing investments in technology, altering the way companies recruit, disrupting sales channels, changing company culture and breaking old models of the employee-employer dynamic. (Remember when communicating with a boss at a certain level used to mean asking his secretary for time on his calendar rather than a real-time dialog via email or IM? I do.)