Location-aware applications like Foursquare have been a hot topic across the web, especially on this blog, and although Foursquare has passed over one million check-ins per day, location-aware apps are still considered early adopter technology. Now, with the introduction of Facebook Places, location-based check-ins stand on the brink of mainstream acceptance. With the world's largest social network, boasting over 500 million users worldwide, the most recent addition to the location arena, it stands to reason that a giant percentage of the social media population is about to be exposed to check-ins for the first time.
There are still limitations, though, that must be considered. First is the ever present paranoia (sorry for the brief outburst of personal bias) regarding security. Checkins = privacy concerns = security breaches, no matter how strong Facebook's privacy controls are. That will remove a large portion of the potential user base. Second, location-based check-ins must be executed through Facebook's mobile site, meaning only smartphone users can partake in the fun. Once again this cuts down the potential user base. Finally, only the iPhone's Facebook app currently supports Facebook places. All other smartphones will need to access places through Facebook's mobile site, not the native app. For most smartphone users, this will require a deviation from current behavior to access Facebook through their mobile browser rather than the app. This deviation may too shrink the number of potential users. However, out of the remaining set of users who do use the new service, what will the introduction of Facebook Places do to their relationship with other location-based applications like Foursquare? We imagine two strong possibilities.
Facebook & Foursquare Play Nice
The first outcome is that Facebook and Foursquare form a beautiful symbiotic relationship and fuel the growth of one another. This may sound like a pipe dream but it's actually possible. How? Facebook actually appears to be interested in this outcome. Facebook is opening its Places API (the background set of codes that allow check-ins) to third party developers so that a check-in on Foursquare would equally result in a check-in on Facebook. How this will actually play out though is still hypothetical as nothing has been released yet. There are three possible tiers: good, neutral and bad. The good outcome, for both Facebook and Foursquare, would be that the integration of the Facebook API to Foursquare's application increases the value of check-ins vs check-ins through Foursquare alone, resulting in either better deals and services for businesses, more rewards and badges, or a smoother, streamlined interface on the two apps. This would potentially encourage Facebook Places users to adopt Foursquare because of the inherent advantages. The neutral outcome is that nothing changes, for better or worse. Foursquare still works the same, Facebook Places works the same, but a check-in through Foursquare now results in a check-in on Facebook as well. This is still a win for both services, although not as enticing as the good outcome. The bad outcome is that the integration makes using either service tedious or cumbersome. This may mean the process has more steps, is slower, or results in excess spam or clutter on your wall. This seems like a less likely possibility because one would hope that neither service would rollout an update that would hinder the user experience; however, it wouldn't be the first time and so it remains a possibility nonetheless.
One caveat, regardless of which of the three tiers plays out, is that the Facebook Place API is an open API, meaning it's available for all location-based applications to use and integrate. Even if Foursquare creates a winning integration, Gowalla, Loopt, Whrrl or a dozen other apps could do the same thing. On the contrary, Foursquare may create a wining integration while competitors don't, or vice versa. The point is competition will still abound. The silver lining is that Facebook and other location-aware apps playing nice together has a high potential to promote an increase in overall check-ins and and location-aware app use.
Facebook & Foursquare Battle it Out
The second, and less favorable option, is that two brands decide to fly solo and attempt to win the location battle based on their own merits. Truthfully this will be a decision made entirely by Foursquare as Facebook has already committed to releasing its APIs. If Foursquare decides they don't need Facebook to succeed or that a partnership with the social networking powerhouse would not benefit their users, they may decide to put faith in having the superior product and trust that new users interested in location-based products will continue to seek them out on their own. This would be an extremely risky tactic, but one that would best preserve Foursquare's integrity as the leader in location-based check-ins. If Foursquare uses Facebook's API, it could be seen as relying on the industry giant to validate its own services, rather than as expanding its compatibilities to provide users with a more complete user experience. Not integrating Facebook's APIs, however, could look arrogant and would be extremely risky. Millions of users already use the Facebook mobile application everyday, meaning check-ins through the Facebook app would require minimal extra work. Expecting users to check-in through a separate app, something millions of users aslo already do, requires extra work that may result in check-in fatigue for a majority of users (a topic that you can look forward to in our follow up article).
As with the above caveat, the same situation applies here. Just because Foursquare decides not to implement the Facebook Places API doesn't mean that its competitors in the location-aware market won't. This fact alone makes flying solo extremely ill-advised for Foursquare.
Implications
Based on initial numbers released earlier this morning, it appears that the launch of Facebook Places has already lead to a surge in new Foursquare users. Whether or not these new signups will migrate to regular users is still unknown, but this is definitely a good step in that direction. Ultimately our prediction is that one of two things will occur as a result of this influx: either Facebook will win the location war and become the only dominant player in the field or Places and its open API will fuel the growth of all location-based apps, increasing what is already a sea of potential players. Either way, check-ins are here to stay and businesses need to be ready to act accordingly. Users are checking-in at their favorite locations and they are expecting to be rewarded for it. Business that jump on board now will become leaders in the industry and will be well rewarded for their efforts. But don't take our word for it, just ask Gap.
Showing posts with label Social Media. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Social Media. Show all posts
Friday, August 20, 2010
Tuesday, August 17, 2010
Taking Responsibility for Our Tweets
When we grow up, our parents teach us that we must take responsibility for our actions. That what we say and what we do have consequences, some of which can be quite severe. As our society evolves and social networks become a prominent form of communication, it would seem logical that these same guidelines would apply to the digital realm. Nothing we post online is completely private and we must be prepared to accept the ramifications of what we say and post. For many though, Facebook and Twitter are stilled viewed as personal networks where we can do and say as we please without global or legal ramifications. One celebrity in particular appears to be a member of this camp. I am referring to the legendary Twitter Trending Topic king himself, Justin Bieber.
Recently Bieber participated in what would normally be considered a school yard prank. Except, because of the pop star's fame and his method of delivery, the prank was broadcast to the world and could resort in serious legal action. Bieber tweeted a message asking fans to call him at an included phone number. The number actually belonged to an enemy of Bieber's (do Tweens have enemies?) and within minutes the boy's phone was blowing up with texts and voicemails. This is actually the second time Bieber has been the subject of a Twitter scandal. Last November, Bieber tweeted that he was headed to a CD signing at a mall, only to later cancel the event. His fans, after waiting hours only to be told to leave, became violent resulting in one serious injury. Apparently Bieber was supposed to tweet again that the signing was cancelled but never did it. According to reports, it was Bieber's manager who decided not to post that the signing was cancelled. Bieber's first tweet that he was on his way is what caused the crowd to become unruly and he feared that a tweet in the contrary would put the crowd in more danger. Bieber's manager was arrested under criminal charges for the event.
Implications
So what does this mean for your business? First and foremost, people are reading what you post. No matter how few followers you think you have or how local your audience is, the contents of your posts are constantly being searched and indexed by search engines like Google and by users for keywords. What you post is out there forever, being read by many, and you must be ready to deal with the effects of that. If you tweet a customer promise, be ready to deliver on it. If you post a comment about a customer, they will read it...and so will their friends. Treat every word you post on a social network as if you're saying it directly to the customer's face. Finally, this same effect works in the positive direction as well. Made a mistake? Closed unexpectedly due to a glitch? Delivered a negative customer experience? Apologize for it. Let your customers know you recognize the error and will improve upon your service in the future.
Don't let the potential downfalls of social media keep you from using a service that could greatly benefit your business. Just be prepared and be smart about it. What was the old adage your parents used to always tell you? Think before you speak!
Implications
So what does this mean for your business? First and foremost, people are reading what you post. No matter how few followers you think you have or how local your audience is, the contents of your posts are constantly being searched and indexed by search engines like Google and by users for keywords. What you post is out there forever, being read by many, and you must be ready to deal with the effects of that. If you tweet a customer promise, be ready to deliver on it. If you post a comment about a customer, they will read it...and so will their friends. Treat every word you post on a social network as if you're saying it directly to the customer's face. Finally, this same effect works in the positive direction as well. Made a mistake? Closed unexpectedly due to a glitch? Delivered a negative customer experience? Apologize for it. Let your customers know you recognize the error and will improve upon your service in the future.
Don't let the potential downfalls of social media keep you from using a service that could greatly benefit your business. Just be prepared and be smart about it. What was the old adage your parents used to always tell you? Think before you speak!
Tuesday, July 20, 2010
Valuing Your Customers: Case Study on Murphy USA
- an iPhone and Android application using GPS to deliver up to the minute gas prices at your nearest Murphy USA gas station as well as neighboring competitors
- exclusive coupons and discounts on gas, food and beverages via the application
- text updates before gas prices go up
- a check-in promotion through location-aware application Whrrl entering users in a contest to win $50 in free gas
From a branding perspective, Murphy USA's new tools and services increase the brand's engagement with customers in three powerful ways. First, it increases brand awareness. Murphy USA may not be a brand many consumers recognize by name, this author included, but as a social media maven and price-conscious consumer I'm more apt to pay attention to the brand now because of the new application's ease of use and superior discounts. Second, it positions the brand as an entity that values its customers and seeks to provide savings and discounts in an industry that often takes advantage of consumers' need for the product. Lastly, as a result of the above, it ultimately increases brand loyalty from consumers who have benefited and saved using these services.
So how does this translate to your business?
- Provide value to your customers where others in your industry do not, whether it be through discounts, time-saving tools, simplifying the shopping process, or an exclusive knowledge base
- Put the customer before your bottom line, an increase in awareness and loyalty means an increase in sales, which offsets the costs of discounts and promotions
- Utilize new technology and social media to listen to your audience, discover their needs and communicate your brand's value to them
Tuesday, July 13, 2010
Effective Social Media on YouTube & Twitter: Case Study Old Spice
YouTube is now the second largest search engine on the net and with Google, the number one search engine, now indexing YouTube and Twitter feeds, these services should be at the top of any Social Media or Search Engine Optimization strategy. Combine these efforts with a viral campaign that also engages and interacts directly with consumers and you have the brilliance that is Old Spice.
Old Spice has harnessed the power of their newest icon (the rugged man on a horse, Isaiah Mustafa) to produce what seems like an endless series of web videos, published on YouTube, responding to customer, celebrity and blogger questions tweeted to the brand on Twitter. There are so many things right about this scenario. First, by holding this promotion on Twitter, Old Spice is attracting new fans and followers to its social media profiles. Second, Old Spice is strengthening its relationship with its customers leading to long term brand loyalty. Isaiah is a huge sensation right now with both male and female viewers. Allowing users to interact with the man is a big win for the brand. Finally, and most importantly for my small business owner audience, this effort is extremely cheap! Not only is YouTube great for SEO, but it's also completely free. You can publish all of your commercial and promotional videos to the site at no cost and have them seen by millions thanks to Google's superior indexing. Thus Old Spice could produce a day's worth of :60 spots, most likely with a lower production cost since they are web only, and deliver them directly to fans in real-time.
To take a look at Old Spice's YouTube channel and get some ideas for your next campaign, click here.
Small Business Social Media Success Story
Check out the article and Tillamook's Facebook fan page below.
Tuesday, July 6, 2010
"Google Me" vs Facebook: Why It Will or Won't Work
If you're reading this, chances are you're either already a Facebook addict or are realizing that it's about time you checked it out. You may also be aware that there are dozens of other competitor/supplemental/replacement/alternative sites out there as well vying for your attention - most of which will never reach the same size and influence as Facebook. The newest anticipated player in the mix, however, may stand a chance at doing just that, if not surpassing it. That's because it's Google. The bug amongst the blogosphere is that Google is poised to launch it's own social network, independent from Google Buzz and Latitude, called Google Me. Although we don't have any firm knowledge about the service yet, or know if it is even definite, if the service sets out to clone Facebook, as speculated, it could have some huge advantages over the market leader.
Why Google Me Could Win
Google already owns my data: The phrase "Google me" (meaning the verb here, not the suspected website, no pun intended) exists for a reason. Google is first and foremost a search engine, and as such, has access already to every piece of information on the internet about me. It knows all my curent social profiles, the activities, movies, music and so on that I've listed on them, and where my name has been written about on other sites. Furthermore, it knows my search history, who I'm connected to on Gmail (Google Mail) and Google Talk, what I watch on YouTube, where I'm going to be on Google Calendar, what I blog about on Blogger, what topics I'm interested in reading about in Google Reader, and the list goes on. Because of my already deep attachement to the brand, Google could build a stronger profile of me than I ever could...which is kind of scary. This leads to the next reason.
Google Me could interface with all my existing services: The TechCrunch article linked to earlier warns against Google arbitrarily linking the new social network to it's previous products and services; however, if this is done wisely, it could be a huge selling point for highly integrated Google users, such as myself. First, Google can automatically begin to build my network from my contact list in Gmail and use Google Talk as the default chat client (which includes AIM built in as a bonus). In an earlier blog post I discussed how Facebook messaging was one of the killers of personal email. Although it is more convenient to message someone on Facebook, because you don't have to keep track of or obtain their email address, you do still have to log in to the site in order to view your messages. Google Me could integrate the site's messaging with Gmail so I could receive my messages in real time on my phone, reviving personal email. Facebook events are a great way of sharing invites with a large number of people, especially open invitations from businesses, but after I confirm my attendance Facebook doesn't sync the information to my actual calendar. Google Me could automatically populate my Google calendar with my RSVP status. No need to click on share buttons, Google Me would be able to auto post articles in Google News or Google Reader that I star or share. The blog you are reading is composed on Blogger. Since Google owns Blogger, it can automatically update my news feed every time a new article is published, eliminating the need for third party solutions. Google Me could also use Picasa to store photos, YouTube to host and share videos, Maps to integrate, well, maps, into event invites, Shopping to create storefronts and much, much more. The possibilites are actually a little overwhelming and baffling at the same time - why hasn't Google done this already??
Better and wider integrated SEO, ads and analytics: This reason is all about eliminating repetitive third party applications. As businesses, we already maximize our search engine optimizations for Google Search and we trust our online ads and web traffic to Google Ads and Analytics. Now with social media, we have to optimize for and track data with even more tools, like Facebook Ads and Insights. Google Me would have preexisting SEO, Ads, and Analytics built in from the start. No additional ad buys, no additional metrics to integrate in your ROIs.
Google is still the most visited website: Facebook may have more global users than Google's individual applications like mail and calendar, and users may spend more time on Facebook in one sitting, but Google is still the number one ranked site in the world for unique visitors. The implication here is that unlike every other Facebook competitor, Google will have immediate and significant exposure to its new product along with an implicit higher trust level than an unheard of service. This would mean faster growth and uptake and an increased opportunity to surpass the master.
Why Google Me Could Fail
Is it too late?: Facebook continues to grow its user base every day and current users' data becomes more and more dependent on the site with every use. All the connections, groups, fan pages, photos, birthdays, events, and contact information we store on Facebook keeps us forever attached to the service. In order to truly succeed, instead of playing second string like Twitter, it would need to fully replace Facebook in the user's eyes. Would people be willing to fully abandon their connection to the site or would this be another project early adopters eventually forsake because the majority of their networks won't convert? Could Google Me be simple enough that late adopters or Facebook jumpers would give it a shot?
Facebook Connect: Google, and several other sites, have enabled users to login to third party sites using their Google credentials via OpenID for quite some time. It's Facebook Connect, though, that has garnered all the attention, both positive and negative. On one hand, Facebook Connect allows users to easily login and share their information with additional sites without having to sign up or reregister. At the same time, this feature has been rebuked for privacy concerns - how much information is being shared and are users aware of it? The amount of press Connect has earned combined with the increased level of integration it is experiencing (often in addition to or replacing Google OpenID) may make web site developers and businesses owners less apt to switch back again.
Is Google too big? If Facebook receives criticism for its privacy concerns, Google is bound to experience the same feedback. Google's sheer size and aforementioned ability to scan the web and know nearly everything about you is bound to draw privacy concerns from even the most early of adopters. In addition, Google tends to be a more open service, either having info completely private or open to everyone. A new set of security standards would likely need to be considered in order to quell fears. Finally, Google has already experienced security scandals, even recently, including Google Buzz defaulting to public and Google Maps collecting Wifi data.
We'll hopefully know more in the near future, but I for one am definitely willing to give this service a shot. As more information becomes available, we will issue follow ups to strengthen or weaken the arguments made in this post.
Update: According to a TechCrunch report, Google is conducting surveys on users' social media habits including online and offline friend interactions. Check out some sample questions from the survey here.
Why Google Me Could Win
Google already owns my data: The phrase "Google me" (meaning the verb here, not the suspected website, no pun intended) exists for a reason. Google is first and foremost a search engine, and as such, has access already to every piece of information on the internet about me. It knows all my curent social profiles, the activities, movies, music and so on that I've listed on them, and where my name has been written about on other sites. Furthermore, it knows my search history, who I'm connected to on Gmail (Google Mail) and Google Talk, what I watch on YouTube, where I'm going to be on Google Calendar, what I blog about on Blogger, what topics I'm interested in reading about in Google Reader, and the list goes on. Because of my already deep attachement to the brand, Google could build a stronger profile of me than I ever could...which is kind of scary. This leads to the next reason.
Google Me could interface with all my existing services: The TechCrunch article linked to earlier warns against Google arbitrarily linking the new social network to it's previous products and services; however, if this is done wisely, it could be a huge selling point for highly integrated Google users, such as myself. First, Google can automatically begin to build my network from my contact list in Gmail and use Google Talk as the default chat client (which includes AIM built in as a bonus). In an earlier blog post I discussed how Facebook messaging was one of the killers of personal email. Although it is more convenient to message someone on Facebook, because you don't have to keep track of or obtain their email address, you do still have to log in to the site in order to view your messages. Google Me could integrate the site's messaging with Gmail so I could receive my messages in real time on my phone, reviving personal email. Facebook events are a great way of sharing invites with a large number of people, especially open invitations from businesses, but after I confirm my attendance Facebook doesn't sync the information to my actual calendar. Google Me could automatically populate my Google calendar with my RSVP status. No need to click on share buttons, Google Me would be able to auto post articles in Google News or Google Reader that I star or share. The blog you are reading is composed on Blogger. Since Google owns Blogger, it can automatically update my news feed every time a new article is published, eliminating the need for third party solutions. Google Me could also use Picasa to store photos, YouTube to host and share videos, Maps to integrate, well, maps, into event invites, Shopping to create storefronts and much, much more. The possibilites are actually a little overwhelming and baffling at the same time - why hasn't Google done this already??
Better and wider integrated SEO, ads and analytics: This reason is all about eliminating repetitive third party applications. As businesses, we already maximize our search engine optimizations for Google Search and we trust our online ads and web traffic to Google Ads and Analytics. Now with social media, we have to optimize for and track data with even more tools, like Facebook Ads and Insights. Google Me would have preexisting SEO, Ads, and Analytics built in from the start. No additional ad buys, no additional metrics to integrate in your ROIs.
Google is still the most visited website: Facebook may have more global users than Google's individual applications like mail and calendar, and users may spend more time on Facebook in one sitting, but Google is still the number one ranked site in the world for unique visitors. The implication here is that unlike every other Facebook competitor, Google will have immediate and significant exposure to its new product along with an implicit higher trust level than an unheard of service. This would mean faster growth and uptake and an increased opportunity to surpass the master.
Why Google Me Could Fail
Is it too late?: Facebook continues to grow its user base every day and current users' data becomes more and more dependent on the site with every use. All the connections, groups, fan pages, photos, birthdays, events, and contact information we store on Facebook keeps us forever attached to the service. In order to truly succeed, instead of playing second string like Twitter, it would need to fully replace Facebook in the user's eyes. Would people be willing to fully abandon their connection to the site or would this be another project early adopters eventually forsake because the majority of their networks won't convert? Could Google Me be simple enough that late adopters or Facebook jumpers would give it a shot?
Facebook Connect: Google, and several other sites, have enabled users to login to third party sites using their Google credentials via OpenID for quite some time. It's Facebook Connect, though, that has garnered all the attention, both positive and negative. On one hand, Facebook Connect allows users to easily login and share their information with additional sites without having to sign up or reregister. At the same time, this feature has been rebuked for privacy concerns - how much information is being shared and are users aware of it? The amount of press Connect has earned combined with the increased level of integration it is experiencing (often in addition to or replacing Google OpenID) may make web site developers and businesses owners less apt to switch back again.
Is Google too big? If Facebook receives criticism for its privacy concerns, Google is bound to experience the same feedback. Google's sheer size and aforementioned ability to scan the web and know nearly everything about you is bound to draw privacy concerns from even the most early of adopters. In addition, Google tends to be a more open service, either having info completely private or open to everyone. A new set of security standards would likely need to be considered in order to quell fears. Finally, Google has already experienced security scandals, even recently, including Google Buzz defaulting to public and Google Maps collecting Wifi data.
We'll hopefully know more in the near future, but I for one am definitely willing to give this service a shot. As more information becomes available, we will issue follow ups to strengthen or weaken the arguments made in this post.
Update: According to a TechCrunch report, Google is conducting surveys on users' social media habits including online and offline friend interactions. Check out some sample questions from the survey here.
Friday, June 25, 2010
Check-in Revisited
Apple and Loopt are upping the ante on location-aware technology. Thanks to a new feature in iOS4, the application Loopt is able to consistently monitor users' locations in the background. This could have huge implications for the social use of location-aware applications.
Previously we noted that companies like Loopt have received minimal social uptake, partly due to security issues and having to rebuild your network on a new application. There is also a third reason though - the inability to check-out of a location. When a user checks-in to a location, their status remains at that location until they check-in somewhere else, meaning that if a friend decided to stop by and visit them, there was a good chance they could have already left...days ago even. Now, with background location, Loopt can continuously monitor your location (for a duration of time you control) and actually check you out of a location if it notices you are no longer within a given radius of the venue.
Clearly this doesn't address the primary two social concerns of location-aware applications, but this new feature does complete the technology, guaranteeing interactions between friends. Will this be enough to entice early adopters to reconsider social implications?
Previously we noted that companies like Loopt have received minimal social uptake, partly due to security issues and having to rebuild your network on a new application. There is also a third reason though - the inability to check-out of a location. When a user checks-in to a location, their status remains at that location until they check-in somewhere else, meaning that if a friend decided to stop by and visit them, there was a good chance they could have already left...days ago even. Now, with background location, Loopt can continuously monitor your location (for a duration of time you control) and actually check you out of a location if it notices you are no longer within a given radius of the venue.
Clearly this doesn't address the primary two social concerns of location-aware applications, but this new feature does complete the technology, guaranteeing interactions between friends. Will this be enough to entice early adopters to reconsider social implications?
Tuesday, June 22, 2010
Girl Scouts Using Social Media - Modernizing a Brand
I grew up, as I'm sure most of us did, with the doorbell ringing and a little girl in uniform on the other side trying to sell me delicious overpriced cookies using her award winning smile. Buying Girl Scout cookies is so ubiquitous that it almost equates to a rite of passage for new home owners - one of those inevitable events you know anticipate is going to happen that, unlike some first time experiences (like a pipe breaking), you can actually look forward to. However, I haven't had a Girl Scout come to my door in years. It certainly can't be because I'm not friendly :-D. Is door-to-door selling just not bringing in the returns these future entrepreneurs are looking for?
According to an article from Mashable, more and more Girl Scouts are turning to social media in order to reach larger audiences and sell cookies faster - and with less work. This may sound like a good idea at first, a smart way to use modern technology to increase sales, but the article warns that this may actually be tarnishing the Girl Scout brand. For two years shy of a century, the Girl Scout brand has been aligned with cute girls coming directly to your door hawking baked goods. That personal connection of knowing your neighborhood children and shelling out $5 a box to support her is what made the interaction so powerful. You were more likely to buy from her in person because how could you say no to that innocent face price gouging you? If this scenario took place entirely online, not in real time, through plain text, would you be as convinced to buy as you would be in person? If done correctly, yes!
I'll admit that a status update from my neighbor saying "please buy girl scout cookies from my daughter," or, heaven forbid, actually setting up a Facebook store, would not entice me to purchase...unless she had some thin mints...mmm....err but um, no, that situation would not be so persuasive. Imagine this instead, a personalized wall post with a picture of the daughter in uniform standing in an open front doorway, holding up an order form, with a caption attached saying "Ding Dong. Hi Mr. Cox, would you like to buy some Girl Scout cookies?" Um yeah, that's going to work. Why? Because this scenario has modernized the classic Girl Scout interaction to play out in a digital realm. On Facebook, my wall is the equivalent of my front door and a photo takes the place of looking through my peep hole. In all effects, I feel as though I am still receiving the same level of personal service, but on a forum that I am more likely to respond to (I'm always available on Facebook, whereas it would be much harder to isolate a time when I'm regularly home).
This form of modernized service is the key to keeping historic brand interactions relevant today. Feel out of touch with your local grocer or bakery? What if they posted their fresh produce or what's being pulled hot out of the oven? Not at home to receive that package? UPS could post a delivery notice to your Facebook wall, so that you could stop and retrieve the package on your way home rather than having to go back out. Social media has upped the standards for customer service and it's no longer becoming a convenience, it's an expectation. How is your brand adapting to better serve the customer?
According to an article from Mashable, more and more Girl Scouts are turning to social media in order to reach larger audiences and sell cookies faster - and with less work. This may sound like a good idea at first, a smart way to use modern technology to increase sales, but the article warns that this may actually be tarnishing the Girl Scout brand. For two years shy of a century, the Girl Scout brand has been aligned with cute girls coming directly to your door hawking baked goods. That personal connection of knowing your neighborhood children and shelling out $5 a box to support her is what made the interaction so powerful. You were more likely to buy from her in person because how could you say no to that innocent face price gouging you? If this scenario took place entirely online, not in real time, through plain text, would you be as convinced to buy as you would be in person? If done correctly, yes!
I'll admit that a status update from my neighbor saying "please buy girl scout cookies from my daughter," or, heaven forbid, actually setting up a Facebook store, would not entice me to purchase...unless she had some thin mints...mmm....err but um, no, that situation would not be so persuasive. Imagine this instead, a personalized wall post with a picture of the daughter in uniform standing in an open front doorway, holding up an order form, with a caption attached saying "Ding Dong. Hi Mr. Cox, would you like to buy some Girl Scout cookies?" Um yeah, that's going to work. Why? Because this scenario has modernized the classic Girl Scout interaction to play out in a digital realm. On Facebook, my wall is the equivalent of my front door and a photo takes the place of looking through my peep hole. In all effects, I feel as though I am still receiving the same level of personal service, but on a forum that I am more likely to respond to (I'm always available on Facebook, whereas it would be much harder to isolate a time when I'm regularly home).
This form of modernized service is the key to keeping historic brand interactions relevant today. Feel out of touch with your local grocer or bakery? What if they posted their fresh produce or what's being pulled hot out of the oven? Not at home to receive that package? UPS could post a delivery notice to your Facebook wall, so that you could stop and retrieve the package on your way home rather than having to go back out. Social media has upped the standards for customer service and it's no longer becoming a convenience, it's an expectation. How is your brand adapting to better serve the customer?
Friday, June 4, 2010
Why You Should Check-In to Location-Aware Apps
Location-aware applications have been a hot trend this past year after the leaders in "Check-In," Foursquare and Gowalla, took SXSW by storm last spring. Surely these two companies were not the pioneers in the field (as this author had been using similar location-based social media app Loopt for several months prior), but their strong presence at the national event, backed by sleek interfaces and updated technology, brought the attention of location-aware apps to the forefront of social media. The response from users and industry analysts alike has been mixed at best with a few early adopters (yours truly included) singing their praises while a larger majority either dismissed the tools or frowned upon them for various reasons including privacy or redundancy. However, as new contenders continue to enter the space and marketers become a little more savvy, industry players are beginning to realize that there may be more use to these tools than they were previously given credit for. Here we will analyze the social versus business value of these services and discuss how new players are changing the nature of the game in the right direction.
Early services in the location-aware field, such as Loopt and Britekite, and even more recent players like Google Latitude, Gowalla and Whrrl, have focused their services primarily around the social aspect of checking-in. These services allow users to broadcast their location to their social circles by checking-in at a venue, often accompanied by a short comment or picture. The goal is that nearby friends will see your location and choose to join you. In theory this sounds fun, but many concerns and short-comings quickly arose - chief amongst them safety. But the real problem was that there were too many of these apps and none of them were offered by the major social players - Facebook and Twitter. Users had to rebuild their networks all over again, convince friends to use the new services and, frankly, remember or continue to use the services. An update to have these apps post your check-in directly to Facebook seemed like a possible solution, but it was nothing that posting to Facebook on your own or sending a text message couldn't already accomplish.
The real solution is that the services aren't being used for the correct purposes. Don't try and fight the market leaders. Facebook and Twitter already own our social networks. Anything we want to communicate directly to our groups of friends, colleagues and acquaintances will be done through these well established channels. Instead, focus on how checking-in to a location can benefit the user and the venue. This is where Foursquare and subsequent derivatives are beginning to do things right.
Location-aware services need to be entirely focused on direct marketing - knowing exactly who your customer is, where they are, how often they go, and providing them with the rewards and incentives they have earned for their loyalty and advocacy. Most people are aware of Foursquare's mayor status, but there are so many more reward tiers that Foursquare allows, such as loyalty programs, first time visitor promotions, and even one day only sales. Take a look at what Cynthia Rowley (Mashable) is doing - a one time promotion, for two hours, where anyone who checks in gets a $25 gift card and 15% off. Brilliant! Veteran Loopt introduced an additional service called Loopt Star which has a similar, but more refined, effect. Check in twice at Gap with Loopt Star and save 25% (Forbes). Not only does this provide a great incentive for users to visit and return to a restaurant or store, but it also costs nothing for the venue to market the promotion and it gets plastered all over Facebook and Twitter every time someone checks-in. That is where the value lies.
An additional benefit for the venue lies in reviews and referrals. Yelp is a prime example here as one of the largest online peer review sites. Users check in to a location and proceed to write reviews, post photos and share their experiences. In fact, most of the location-based apps allow for Twitter-esque 140 character shout-outs, which can be shared via Facebook. Give the customer something positive to shout about and reward them for doing it and you have a perfect platform for free marketing that is golden for large corporations and small businesses alike.
Of course, problems still exist, largely in that these types of promotional uses are still few and far between. Getting $1 off your coffee after battling to be the Foursquare mayor at your local Starbucks hardly seems like a strong enough reason for users to maintain another social media tool. There's also the fact that there are a lot of new apps being developed that are quickly flooding this space and its far too soon to pick a winner. Big names like Foursquare or Gowalla may have the recognition and high number of daily check-ins (Foursquare is estimating 1 million check-ins per day [Twitter]), but new services like Loopt Star and WeReward are rewriting the rules, creating apps that blatantly depict the value of checking-in. Finally, there is the problem of corporate buy-in. Most businesses, large or small, are still trying to figure out what it means to operate in the social media realm, maintaining a relationship with their fans, providing industry news and insights, and engaging the consumer directly on Facebook and Twitter with storefronts, promotions and contests. If most brands still don't see the complete value of social media, how can we expect them to by into another fledgling tech trend?
The solution is to directly engage the businesses that have the most to gain from localized, low cost advertising - small businesses and restaurants. Although every business is trying to increase sales right now, small businesses especially are suffering and can benefit greatly from this service in many ways. First is awareness. After establishing a partnership with Foursquare, the app informs users every time they are near a venue with a special offer. This will immediately help raise awareness of unknown venues and encourage first time visits. Second is rewarding loyalty. Everyone is familiar with loyalty cards that reward a visitor for their 10th purchase. Location-aware apps offer the same tool, but without the need for printed cards, special hole punchers and with the bonus of a network-wide shout out every time a hole is punched/check-in occurs. Finally, it helps to venue reach out to a new audience on their terms. Today's younger audiences aren't being exposed to direct mail, ads in the paper or even commercials on the radio. They're taking suggestions from friends and social media. By connecting with this audience on their terms, not only are small businesses able to tap new audiences, but the audience in question's immediate perception of the business will be tech savvy and modern, which they can relate to.
As social media marketers it is our job to promote these services to our clients and continue to help them grow. The more business partner with location-aware websites, the more users will join, and so on, forming a reciprocal cycle. (*Shameless Plug*) As my clients can attest, the benefit is there and the value is measurable, the hard part is just taking the first step and learning more.
Early services in the location-aware field, such as Loopt and Britekite, and even more recent players like Google Latitude, Gowalla and Whrrl, have focused their services primarily around the social aspect of checking-in. These services allow users to broadcast their location to their social circles by checking-in at a venue, often accompanied by a short comment or picture. The goal is that nearby friends will see your location and choose to join you. In theory this sounds fun, but many concerns and short-comings quickly arose - chief amongst them safety. But the real problem was that there were too many of these apps and none of them were offered by the major social players - Facebook and Twitter. Users had to rebuild their networks all over again, convince friends to use the new services and, frankly, remember or continue to use the services. An update to have these apps post your check-in directly to Facebook seemed like a possible solution, but it was nothing that posting to Facebook on your own or sending a text message couldn't already accomplish.
The real solution is that the services aren't being used for the correct purposes. Don't try and fight the market leaders. Facebook and Twitter already own our social networks. Anything we want to communicate directly to our groups of friends, colleagues and acquaintances will be done through these well established channels. Instead, focus on how checking-in to a location can benefit the user and the venue. This is where Foursquare and subsequent derivatives are beginning to do things right.
Location-aware services need to be entirely focused on direct marketing - knowing exactly who your customer is, where they are, how often they go, and providing them with the rewards and incentives they have earned for their loyalty and advocacy. Most people are aware of Foursquare's mayor status, but there are so many more reward tiers that Foursquare allows, such as loyalty programs, first time visitor promotions, and even one day only sales. Take a look at what Cynthia Rowley (Mashable) is doing - a one time promotion, for two hours, where anyone who checks in gets a $25 gift card and 15% off. Brilliant! Veteran Loopt introduced an additional service called Loopt Star which has a similar, but more refined, effect. Check in twice at Gap with Loopt Star and save 25% (Forbes). Not only does this provide a great incentive for users to visit and return to a restaurant or store, but it also costs nothing for the venue to market the promotion and it gets plastered all over Facebook and Twitter every time someone checks-in. That is where the value lies.
An additional benefit for the venue lies in reviews and referrals. Yelp is a prime example here as one of the largest online peer review sites. Users check in to a location and proceed to write reviews, post photos and share their experiences. In fact, most of the location-based apps allow for Twitter-esque 140 character shout-outs, which can be shared via Facebook. Give the customer something positive to shout about and reward them for doing it and you have a perfect platform for free marketing that is golden for large corporations and small businesses alike.
Of course, problems still exist, largely in that these types of promotional uses are still few and far between. Getting $1 off your coffee after battling to be the Foursquare mayor at your local Starbucks hardly seems like a strong enough reason for users to maintain another social media tool. There's also the fact that there are a lot of new apps being developed that are quickly flooding this space and its far too soon to pick a winner. Big names like Foursquare or Gowalla may have the recognition and high number of daily check-ins (Foursquare is estimating 1 million check-ins per day [Twitter]), but new services like Loopt Star and WeReward are rewriting the rules, creating apps that blatantly depict the value of checking-in. Finally, there is the problem of corporate buy-in. Most businesses, large or small, are still trying to figure out what it means to operate in the social media realm, maintaining a relationship with their fans, providing industry news and insights, and engaging the consumer directly on Facebook and Twitter with storefronts, promotions and contests. If most brands still don't see the complete value of social media, how can we expect them to by into another fledgling tech trend?
The solution is to directly engage the businesses that have the most to gain from localized, low cost advertising - small businesses and restaurants. Although every business is trying to increase sales right now, small businesses especially are suffering and can benefit greatly from this service in many ways. First is awareness. After establishing a partnership with Foursquare, the app informs users every time they are near a venue with a special offer. This will immediately help raise awareness of unknown venues and encourage first time visits. Second is rewarding loyalty. Everyone is familiar with loyalty cards that reward a visitor for their 10th purchase. Location-aware apps offer the same tool, but without the need for printed cards, special hole punchers and with the bonus of a network-wide shout out every time a hole is punched/check-in occurs. Finally, it helps to venue reach out to a new audience on their terms. Today's younger audiences aren't being exposed to direct mail, ads in the paper or even commercials on the radio. They're taking suggestions from friends and social media. By connecting with this audience on their terms, not only are small businesses able to tap new audiences, but the audience in question's immediate perception of the business will be tech savvy and modern, which they can relate to.
As social media marketers it is our job to promote these services to our clients and continue to help them grow. The more business partner with location-aware websites, the more users will join, and so on, forming a reciprocal cycle. (*Shameless Plug*) As my clients can attest, the benefit is there and the value is measurable, the hard part is just taking the first step and learning more.
Tuesday, May 25, 2010
Is Instant Messaging Dead? What About Email?
Think about the last dozen times you communicated with a friend in writing. Maybe you were inviting them to lunch or asking about a homework assignment. How many of those times did you do so using a standard instant messaging client, such as AIM, Yahoo! or MSN Messenger? What about the last month? The last year? Next to none? This author too. In fact, even though I have an account with each one of those services linked to Meebo on my phone, I still don't recall my last time using them.
Quite frankly I'm not surprised. As TechCrunch points out in their article 2010: The Year Instant Messaging Finally Died?, instant messaging has largely been replaced by SMS messages or texting and Facebook's built in chat application (which is also linked to my Meebo app and I happen to use it daily). Is this a result of brands losing their focusing in the marketplace and failing to connect with target audiences? Or is it a symptom of something much bigger and more common? This strategist feels it's safe to say it's not the former. IM clients have done nearly everything possible to remain relevant in a mobile world, including rebranding themselves, acquiring new technologies and building multiple smartphone chat applications. But all of this hasn't been enough to tackle the bigger issue at hand that once again our communication preferences and abilities are expanding as technology evolves.
IMing does not and cannot provide us with the simplicity, speed, and global availability that texting permits, nor does it allow for the longevity, mass blasting and pull consumption habits of mainstream social media sites like Facebook and Twitter. A text message allows the user to send a short message to multiple recipients at once, without the need for a computer or internet connection, and without having to launch a program. There is no need to wait until your friend is online or gather a series of handles across multiple clients. Facebook and Twitter mirror this effect with the addition of allowing you to post a message to be seen by your entire network at once, when it is convenient for them to read it. And if you still want that instant response (without the inconvenience of a voice conversation, perish the thought), Facebook Chat lives right on the site where you are presumably already spending most of your time, alleviating the need for superfluous programs or screen names.
It is not the individual IM client brands themselves that have become irrelevant here, it is the underlying technology behind them that is being phased out. They are no more responsible for this shift in preference than the Postal Service is for us not sending personal letters anymore (my guess is stamps would be relatively cheaper had we still been sending letters instead of emails). Which reminds me of another dying technology: email. Up until recently, my personal inbox was covered in e-dust and collecting virtual cobwebs. Why would I send a friend or family member an email when I could text them, post on their wall or send them an evite? But unlike instant messaging, which has been branded primarily as a personal or social tool, email still thrives as a business necessity. It has not yet become largely acceptable to send your client's CEO a text message or post on their wall. Partially this is because of confidentiality, paper trail and legal reasons, but primarily it is because these communication methods on a grand scale do not carry the same heir of respect and professionalism that more personal and private communication methods hold. My guess is that over time this too will fade, first internally amongst colleagues and teams, then much later for external communications, but as brands large and small continue to embrace their customers through social networking and allow their operations to become exceedingly transparent, simplicity and social preference will prevail.
On a personal note, please don't interpret this commentary as an opportunity to become an evangelist for your favorite IM client and try to single-handedly resurrect them. Let's simply remember the good times we shared and allow them to pass peacefully.
Quite frankly I'm not surprised. As TechCrunch points out in their article 2010: The Year Instant Messaging Finally Died?, instant messaging has largely been replaced by SMS messages or texting and Facebook's built in chat application (which is also linked to my Meebo app and I happen to use it daily). Is this a result of brands losing their focusing in the marketplace and failing to connect with target audiences? Or is it a symptom of something much bigger and more common? This strategist feels it's safe to say it's not the former. IM clients have done nearly everything possible to remain relevant in a mobile world, including rebranding themselves, acquiring new technologies and building multiple smartphone chat applications. But all of this hasn't been enough to tackle the bigger issue at hand that once again our communication preferences and abilities are expanding as technology evolves.
IMing does not and cannot provide us with the simplicity, speed, and global availability that texting permits, nor does it allow for the longevity, mass blasting and pull consumption habits of mainstream social media sites like Facebook and Twitter. A text message allows the user to send a short message to multiple recipients at once, without the need for a computer or internet connection, and without having to launch a program. There is no need to wait until your friend is online or gather a series of handles across multiple clients. Facebook and Twitter mirror this effect with the addition of allowing you to post a message to be seen by your entire network at once, when it is convenient for them to read it. And if you still want that instant response (without the inconvenience of a voice conversation, perish the thought), Facebook Chat lives right on the site where you are presumably already spending most of your time, alleviating the need for superfluous programs or screen names.
It is not the individual IM client brands themselves that have become irrelevant here, it is the underlying technology behind them that is being phased out. They are no more responsible for this shift in preference than the Postal Service is for us not sending personal letters anymore (my guess is stamps would be relatively cheaper had we still been sending letters instead of emails). Which reminds me of another dying technology: email. Up until recently, my personal inbox was covered in e-dust and collecting virtual cobwebs. Why would I send a friend or family member an email when I could text them, post on their wall or send them an evite? But unlike instant messaging, which has been branded primarily as a personal or social tool, email still thrives as a business necessity. It has not yet become largely acceptable to send your client's CEO a text message or post on their wall. Partially this is because of confidentiality, paper trail and legal reasons, but primarily it is because these communication methods on a grand scale do not carry the same heir of respect and professionalism that more personal and private communication methods hold. My guess is that over time this too will fade, first internally amongst colleagues and teams, then much later for external communications, but as brands large and small continue to embrace their customers through social networking and allow their operations to become exceedingly transparent, simplicity and social preference will prevail.
On a personal note, please don't interpret this commentary as an opportunity to become an evangelist for your favorite IM client and try to single-handedly resurrect them. Let's simply remember the good times we shared and allow them to pass peacefully.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)