Facebook: Digital Customer Service

Lots of studies have been done about how consumers interact with Facebook. The results can be read one of two ways, marketers gain customers and increase customer interaction on Facebook or marketers strengthen their ties with existing customers on Facebook. The reality is more like the second view. It’s easy to see why a lot of marketers read the situation more like the first scenario though, take for example a study looking at ”How Consumers Interact With Brands on Facebook” http://on.mash.to/o17dJb.

It touches on both sides, and it explains why marketers look at Facebook so positively and are satisfied with any type of interaction they can get on Facebook. Constant Contact and research firm Chadwick Martin Bailey report on ‘encouraging stats for business owners’ including that 56% who become fans are more likely to recommend a brand to a friend, 51% are more likely to buy a product after becoming a fan and 78% of consumers who ‘like’ brands like less than 10 brands. 76% have never unliked a brand. Here are my thoughts. The phrase ‘more likely’ tells me nothing exact about how often consumers actually act on these tendencies. Most likely, consumers like more than 10 brands and only feel compelled to list ones they like most. It also doesn’t guarantee that customers are any more particular or any more loyal to a brand. 76% have never unliked a brand. Well, that’s good except some still have so it’s still a possible outcome. I have no doubt that Facebook has potential, I just think that people are quick to jump to conclusions and read more into its progress than there is. A few points here echo ones from ”Why Do People Follow Brands on Facebook?” http://on.mash.to/jDNWiX.

CRM  specialists Get Satisfaction found many consumers are just in it for the perks or because they’re already customers. The study goes on to showcase these statistics through a series of graphs. One attempts to measure how often people consider the brand when shopping, buy the brand and recommend the brand to others. On a scale of Never, Sometimes, Usually and Always, the majority response for all is ‘usually’, but usually doesn’t tell us exactly how often. All of these are indirect forms of measurement that provide few concrete numbers. Without concrete numbers, any opinion of the results of brand marketing on Facebook is purely speculation. There is still much to come in developing Facebook measurement methods to determine true ROI. “How Consumers Interact With Brands on Facebook” even points out that Facebook interaction is fairly passive, with 77% reading posts and updates from brands, 17% sharing experiences and news stories about the brand and 13% posting updates about the brands they like. None of the interactions they measure are about purchasing the product and only 30% share experiences and news stories or post updates about brands they like. That doesn’t say much for Facebook’s brand interaction so far. What it does say though, is that Facebook is an excellent tool for customer communication.

I think Justin Kistner of Webtrends put it best in “How Brands Should Think About Facebook: A Loyalty Program” http://bit.ly/qyHhYP. In response to the fact that most fans are existing customers, Kistner states it makes Facebook “…more like a customer relationship management program than a customer acquisition tool.” He goes on to say “Search is a customer acquisition tool. Facebook really isn’t….(Facebook) is really about staying in touch with the people we know” and “more about preaching to the converted than getting new converts.” All of these statements point to what Facebook really is in this moment, a form of digital customer service. Until there are concrete facts and the connection between Facebook fan and product purchase becomes more of a direct and predictable correlation, that’s what a brands’ focus should be for Facebook. It’s the safest bet, and one whose results and dividends are much more measurable.

The Rise of Hyperlocal

With the growing popularity of geolocation services like Gowalla and Foursquare, increasingly, a parallel can be drawn. There’s an increasing fascination with the concept of hyperlocal. Hyperlocal is on the rise and it’s pushed connectivity to a whole new level. But is there a saturation point? If so, are we about to or have we reached that saturation point? Have things become more relevant? Or too personal? To the first, my response is most likely, to the second not yet, to the third I’d say in some ways, and to the 4th at times yes. Here’s where hyperlocal gets it right, and where hyperlocal gets it wrong. First, how it gets it wrong.

1) When companies or brands get too personal. In July, WhitePages introduced its “Neighbors” feature, which allows users to see who their neighbors are and set up block parties with those neighbors http://bit.ly/qUw9WB. WhitePages needs to be careful with this feature. I would find it weird if one of my neighbors showed up with smartphone in hand, introducing themselves and stating they found me on WhitePages “Neighbors” feature. They really should allow people to opt out of being included in this. 

2) When companies or brands  go hypercasual. You’ve seen it, all the “lol” lexicon that came from instant messaging. Well, that and other too casual approaches are what make up hypercasual. Bobbie Johnson notes that there are strategic ways to be friendly and playful, like Flickr, and then there are others http://bit.ly/nJtwwS. If it’s unique, strategic, and appropriate to the company and to the brand, then its a smart move. When you relax your voice for social media and just say whatever comes to mind, share videos, etc. and customers leave? That is an example of being too friendly, and not being tapped into what your customers want from their relationship with you. Basically, think about what you say before you say it. 

Now where hyperlocal gets it right.

1) When companies or brands get competitive. WhitePages, in addition to its creepy “Neighbors” feature, also released a free mobile app called ”Localicious” http://bit.ly/qUw9WB. “Localicious” integrates tips, trends and reviews of places in over 80,000 neighborhoods across the country and offers a pre-checkin check-in setup. Basically, WhitePages is adding a social dimension to its one-dimensional outlook and purpose as a print directory. In that regard, I applaud them. This makes them multi-purpose and puts them on a competitive level with geolocation apps, a smart move.

2) When companies or brands expand upon their bottom line, becoming more multi-dimensional. Yes, they already have a revamped Google Places, a daily deals component, and have added a more social dimension to search. Now Google is going local with their recent purchase of Zagat, a high-end restaurant and shopping reviews publisher http://bit.ly/qFRpWk. This addition, combined with search, offers more access to local resources and more ad space. For Google, hyperlocal is the logical next piece of the puzzle in transforming themselves into a multi-dimensional company. Also, unlike WhitePages’ “Neighbors” feature, they are playing it smart.

To sum it up, hyperlocal can be good when it adds another dimension to your offerings and makes you more competitive. Where it goes wrong is when it gets too personal or hypercasual. There’s a fine line, some know how to walk it and some go too far. The ones that walk the line will have an edge, and the ones that go too far are potentially flirting with disaster. These examples serve as case studies for how to use hyperlocal to your advantage and avoid its pitfalls. Case studies can only do so much though, it’s what you do with them that matters and how you use them that directs your future.

Targeting the College Demographic

The 18-24 demographic may be one of the most powerful demographics out there, but marketers struggle to effectively reach this demographic. It’s one that is always talked about in numbers, but what it really should be called is the ‘college demographic’. Not everyone in this demographic is necessarily in college, but regardless of that this time is a pivotal one because a new independence is born. During this time, children split from parents and become their own consumer. Sure they may have a few brands they cling to out of nostalgia, but the most exciting thing for them and marketers is that their parents aren’t doing the choosing for them anymore. They are on their own. It’s what makes this the best time to reach out to them, because they are establishing their own identity apart from the family dynamic. More and more students are spending time online, whether through PC, mobile or tablet, as an eMarketer survey finds that 28.4 million Internet users in this age bracket access the Internet in some way at least one time a month http://bit.ly/iBZvyd. This makes it the best place to get their attention, but not enough people are taking advantage of that. Namely, colleges. Mashable’s Dan Klamm points out Four Ways Colleges Can Take Their Social Media Presence to the Next Level. His first point is coordinating strategy across campus. Personal acknowledgement across social media channels and referral back to university departments, in response to what’s happening with students and alumni, puts a positive and inviting spin on them while driving more resources back to their bottom line (student recruitment, student retention and financial resources). His second point, investing more time in education and training, refers to offering classes or webinars about services such as LinkedIn, having recruiters connect alumni as well as connecting alumni with students, etc. Lastly, his final two points offer up other ways for giving the university more of an appealing voice: using students and the university president as social media ambassadors.

Not enough companies reach out to students either, and that is where the brand partnership program of textbook rental company Chegg comes in to the picture. Chegg’s brand partnership program is really a daily deals program http://bit.ly/j553Wj. Think about it, college students, most in a new town or city with little knowledge of their surroundings. Daily deals programs are a great way to let them know about your business and turn them into customers. Plus it’s an underserved piece of the daily deals market. College students are important to brands, because that is where their relationship with brands tends to start. On the flip side of those that are struggling are those who have been successful. Notably, Facebook, Victoria’s Secret, Apple, American Eagle, Red Bull, Zipcar and Hewlett-Packard according to Angela Bright http://bit.ly/oilUL6. Facebook started out as a student directory to connect fellow students, now it’s a social media backbone and connects people of all ages as well as connecting businesses to customers. Victoria’s Secret is another example, parlaying it’s success with women’s clothing into a line of loungewear for female students tied to their universities. Apple, in changing the way we consume and share music, has changed the college experience. Music is important to college students, and Apple has come up with a variety of ways for them to customize, arrange, share, and play their music. American Eagle has combined on-campus ambassadors with coupons and free flip-flops on move-in days as a way to target students from day one on campus. Red Bull, Zipcar and Hewlett-Packard use a combination of social media, mobile marketing, student representatives and samples to entice students. All of these companies have found a way to reach the college demographic. The college demographic is not to be overlooked when developing your target audience, as it is one of the most crucial to your brand’s success. How will you target the college demographic? That is up to you.

Marketing Makeover: Contests and Giveaways

Remember when contests, giveaways, sweepstakes (whatever you may call them) were postcards that were sent in the mail? Usually you tossed them aside as junk and paid no further attention to them. That form of contests and giveaways has largely died, and been reborn in a new context. A marketing makeover of sorts. As consumers have increasingly moved online, so has everything else. Social communities brought people together and gave marketers a collective audience. That collective audience is now experiencing a new version of contests and giveaways, socialized through QR codes, Microsoft Tags and Social SnapTags. Most marketing plans do not focus enough on this area. Mashable’s Ben Pickering discusses 4 Reasons Why Contests Should Be Part of Your Marketing Strategy. His four reasons, in my own words, are contests build fan bases, contests engage your audience in a different way, contests are a great way to learn about your customers (collect data) and contests put more word of mouth marketers to work for your brand. All great reasons to include and focus more on contests and giveaways as part of a marketing strategy. Contests build fan bases by increasing likes on Facebook, and are especially good at getting people involved when there’s a low barrier of entry. Now, increasing likes isn’t everything, as my Engagement Matters Most blog entry shows you. Facebook likes are the tip of the iceberg so to speak. They show that there’s interest, but it’s where you take it from there that increases your stature as a brand. Contests engage audiences in a different way is the next point, which is shown by Allure magazine’s recent success with their August giveaway issue http://bit.ly/os83FD. Using Microsoft Tag codes, and the lure of free swag, they gained over 444,000 bar code activations. By far one of the most successful examples to date.

Not only did it get their readers involved and increase subscriptions, it built up brands by rewarding those that won with samples (a huge part of what drives the beauty industry) and opened up another channel of communication with their readers. One that Allure magazine plans to revisit later by sending or texting those users content such as ’Beauty Tip of the Day’. It’s simple really, open up more channels of communication with consumers and you will build a deeper connection that leads to more involvement with your brand (and in this case advertised brands too). The next reason for including contests and giveaways is collecting data. This would be an example of targeted marketing. The more you know about your consumers, without overstepping their comfort zone as far as privacy is concerned, the better you can reach them and engage them. His last reason, more word of mouth marketers for your brand, is a direct result of these engagement efforts through contests and giveaways. All of these aspects offer a win-win relationship. Marketers and brands see increased engagement, and consumers gain more from brands with exclusive deals and communication channels that reward them as well as strengthen their relationship and involvement with your brand. A very interesting take on what some might deem an extinct marketing tool. The only limitations are the lack of measurement and lack of contest communication. Lack of measurement would be, in the case of Allure magazine, only looking at the subscription benefits and not the overall engagement with the magazine and the brands involved in the giveaway. Only by looking at the overall picture do you get a sense of the impact, or lack thereof, with your brand. As I said before, Facebook likes are only part of it, you have to look beyond that. The other limitation, lack of contest communication, stems from this being a new type of communication that not everyone is familiar with yet. You really have to spell out the benefits for consumers and make it easy for them to get involved in order to see results. These are things to be careful of when making use of this reinvented marketing concept. However, when used correctly, marketers and brands have a lot to gain from adding contests and giveaways to their marketing mix. Socializing contests and giveaways, a marketing makeover? Perhaps in more ways than one.

Can Social SnapTags Save Print?

Before I jump into this post I’d like to update my readers on why I haven’t posted in a while. Since the last post I got married, went on a honeymoon and moved all within the last two weeks. As of today I am back online and will resume my weekly posting. Thanks for your patience, please enjoy the following blog post.

SpyderLynk, a marketing technology company, has created a similar component to the QR code called the Social SnapTag. According to a press release by Nikki DeFilippo and Melodye Demastus, a Social SnapTag features a Facebook or Twitter icon that any mobile user, with or without a QR code, can activate to trigger incentives from marketers upon ‘liking’ that brand http://bit.ly/pfpqrl. Incentives can include sweepstakes entries, exclusive content, free samples and discounts. Some of the major differences between QR codes and Social SnapTags are that Social SnapTags do more than just send a user to that brand’s website. They use Twitter and Facebook to provide interactive content, features, and rewards that extend beyond the brand’s website, making it more attractive to consumers. Also, a user does not need to have a QR code scanner to process the Social SnapTag. Users without a QR code scanner can take a picture of the Social SnapTag and send it to the designated short code. It’s these types of differences that make the Social SnapTag the next step up from the QR code. Perhaps the most notable example of where Social SnapTags are making their debut are magazines, and Glamour’s September issue is no exception http://bit.ly/n9EG22. It’s front cover, as well as several advertisers throughout, display the Social SnapTag icon – Facebook’s logo surrounded by two circles. The Social SnapTag may be the most successful version of a QR code yet, but how effective is it? A recent report by GfK MRI Starch Advertising Research shows that 4% of users who noticed ads with 2D bar codes (this includes QR codes) snapped a picture at least once http://bit.ly/nLvt57. The fact that Social SnapTags are more interactive and more accessible, combined with this research, shows promise. However, it does not disclose the social media metrics.

There is no way to tell how many users they are talking about, how many times on average a 2D bar code was snapped (taking into account all the places 2D bar codes have appeared), how many actually accessed the content, how long they lingered, and what their next steps were after that (sharing, redeeming, etc.). Additionally, there are many who say this technology has arrived before its time and consumers are not ready for it yet. Part of that is that Social SnapTags and QR codes are not easily identifiable yet. Not everyone knows what a QR code or Social SnapTag is, let alone how to use it and how it can benefit them. Unfortunately, this fact may hurt its success. The flip side of it is that QR codes and Social SnapTags are becoming increasingly popular, as GfK MRI Starch found that 6% of the 18-34 demographic who noticed took a picture of a 2D bar code compared to 3% of those who noticed in the 35 and up demographic. Obviously, the fact that Social SnapTags are an advanced version of a QR code acts in its favor. Common knowledge shows that the more convenient and easily accessible something is, the more likely it is to be used. The benefits of Social SnapTags far outweigh those of the typical QR code direct to website experience too. Is it enough to save print though? Out of all the mediums displaying 2D bar codes, ComScore found that users were most likely to scan codes on product packaging and print. Despite any negative aspects of this new technology, it appears promising and the research confirms that as well as its growing popularity. Whether it is a trend, or here to stay is still a question. In the meantime, it seems 2D bar codes like Social SnapTags at least have the power to draw more attention to print. As print is still suffering from ad drawbacks, increased readership and readership interaction would lead to more money for all involved, which would lead to more ad pages, more magazine pages, and a revitalized outlook for print in general. As I see it, this technology can only get better from here and may be just what print has been missing.