Project Butterfly – Palmerston Group

April 18, 2012

What does it mean to be social?

This is precisely the question that @danielberkal and Seattle’s Cole + Weber United set out to answer in 2011.
Presented at social media week [#SMWTO], this study is deeply insightful and organized in thought – so much so that I am often sharing the story of Daniel’s presentation around the office and to clients.
What does it mean to be social?  To be interesting and interested.. in an age where social media plays such importance.   In my POV, brands are reaching a coming of age – that ‘doing social media’ is passé and that being social is what’s next.  But how to do this is wonderfully explained by his study.   And it is a presentation that is thought provoking to those who understand a lot about digital as well as for this who know nothing.  It transcends quite nicely.
Conducted in five cities across the US, Daniel & co. invited ten strangers to ‘speed friend’ to understand what makes people want to friend.  Next, he studied individuals with ‘social gravity’ (some would call them social butterflies, and yet, social butterflies do not like that label).  For his team to pursue the butterfly, they asked participants to think of the one individual among their friends or colleagues that people wanted to spend the most time with.  They then only studied individuals who, through multiple, unconnected sources, had been identified more than 3 times.  He goes into great depth into the characteristics and behaviours of people with social gravity – all the while annotating the work through film.   Finally, he takes this study into the online world to compare, contrast and offer valuable lessons for brands in social media.
It is well worth extra effort to see his whole presentation.  In Toronto, he is speaking at NXNE, June 11 – 17.

Pro-site: why build a website in this day & age?

February 13, 2011

That’s the question that I get these days – from all around me – clients, agency side, my more mobile digital friends (though they don’t frame it as a question but a statement).  This question is so prominent that I encounter folks that assume a website should not even be on the table for consideration.  This assumption needs checking.

[an unpublished blog post i found from pre-xmas]

Certainly, the rise of social networking sites combined with the stellar growth of mobile apps are definitely putting the decision of website (and more so microsite) (and more so expensive, elaborate microsites) development in question.  But the website still has a place – and important one – and the size of its role depends on your marketing objectives and situation of your brand.

But alas, allow me a word in defense for the website.  Websites are owned media where a brand can control the online experience.  Social networking sites are earned spaces and often, like the case with Facebook, a brand’s efforts are frustrated by the agile development of a software service that does not cater to corporate pages.

Certainly – it’s much easier to drive traffic to a new website than it is to build a social network presence and keep consumers engaged.  As earned media – it can take time to build to momentum.  Social networking sites follow an exponential growth curve – slow start, quick finish – like a hockey stick.  This is a growth pattern that does not fit well within last minute campaign timelines.  I am not suggesting an either or approach, just that a combination of media types is needed to serve a brand and extend reach – and that a website is still an important part of the mix for many brands.

Interestingly, I’ve begun to examine sector share of time spent online from either Comscore or Nielsen.  It’s hard to find recent Canadian statistics but from the US – we see that social networking sites have risen 43% along with significant increases in online gaming (about 10%) and online video sites (about 10%, and 1% for search).   Almost every other sector from entertainment sites, to consumer electronics, etc has gone down.   The long tail – which is what I call everything other than portals, search and social networking sites, typically the wash of forums, blogs and corporate websites, is also down in time spent online.  But it is still the big pie slice – amounting to 34% (highly fragmented among millions of sites of course) (isn’t the long tail always a big pie slice) (excluding consumer electronics and travel).

Mobile is definitely something not to ignore – in 2010, smartphones have reached 30% penetration in Canada with blackberries at 75% market share and iphones at 25%.  Iphone users, however, access the web 8 times more than the blackberry user (my stats are from IDC and e-marketer).   The use of mobile to access the web is starting to trump out the old PC.   Depending on your target market – some segments are pretty heavy into the smartphone and so mobile is a fantastic direction.  And with the multiple platforms out there (android, iphone, blackberries multiple phones), building a mobile app needs careful planning.  In fact, some brands just need a mobile ready website not an app.  (it can still be an ‘application’ – its just delivered over the web vs. a downloadable app from an app store).

So there you have it.  A strong word for the website


Zuckerberg – “morally challenged geek or misunderstood genius” – Peter Foster, Financial Post

January 7, 2011

There is a fantastic article, Mark Zuckerberg’s close-up,  by Peter Foster in today’s Financial Post – definitely recommended reading for anyone who has seen The Social Network movie and is fascinated by the portrayal of Mark Zuckerberg.

Peter reviews Mark vs. the Mark portrayed in The Social Network movie and in doing so gives a run down on the current financial situation facing Facebook.  Eloquently written, Peter reminds us that the ‘moral’ issue today is Facebook’s business model that proffers users information to buyers.   He writes:

A more fundamental “moral” issue, however, relates to the nature of Facebook’s business model, which is based on the exploitation of networks of alleged friendship to sell stuff. Read more: http://opinion.financialpost.com/2011/01/06/peter-foster-mark-zuckerbergs-close-up/#ixzz1AP8173l9

Note:  I haven’t figured out why the SEC would force an IPO on Facebook – is this because of Goldman Sachs?

I see Mark Zuckerberg as the misunderstood genius – what I can’t tell from the movie is just how much of an idea was shared from the Winklevoss twins.  If it was only a conversation in a fancy private club, as depicted in the movie, then the $65M for a conversation is a pretty good return given they didn’t execute.  If they paid MZ while he blew them off looking at the code he did not use, then arguably the issue is larger.

In MZ’s defense (and I can’t help likely a smart a** who would re-calculate 18K + 1K = $19K for a condescending lawyer), the right idea is important but development and refinement of the idea to create a business and its online execution or activation is extremely difficult to nail.  I guess that’s why Mark Z is person of the year.   Now take time to read Time’s article – it certainly depicts Mark in a completely different light and at the same time, explains just what an amazing accomplishment facebook really is.


How non-profits use social media for social good

December 16, 2010

If you are interested in using social media for non-profit fundraising, I trust you are aware that Facebook has a non-profit group whereby they share a lot of tips and techniques.

icon for FB washington - summary of non-profit use of facebook for social goodHere is a quick summary of some learnings from the Facebook DC (a page on FB) held a live interview with three very socially active non-profits with Clay Dunn from Share Our Strength, Sarah Koch from Causes and, part of a favorite page for me – Wendy Harman from the American Red Cross.

[ American Red Cross is a page with social media activities I greatly admire - see my post " The new home page of 2011 is the tab in Facebook".]

Although I caught only the second half of the presentation (stay tuned for replay link), there were some key messages delivered:

1. Showing the impact that the donations make is valuable today as audiences are exposed to a lot of donation asks.

2.  Don’t forget to engage with those people who are supporting the charity.  Allow them [I would say give them permission - figuratively] to submit photos related to the charity so that they feel they are part of a group that does something.

3. Consider how you use social media for “digital volunteerism” – a new term that I was not aware of.  How do you allow volunteers to contribute and support digitally?

4.  Allow for micro payments which have been easy asks but in volume contributes quite a bit.

5.  consider enabling people, either through communication or online tools, to form a donation wish and then solicit friends to help achieve that goal.  This is really the door-to-door solicitation taken online.  This may sound obvious but in the design of online experiences – this is a functionality to include.

For more tips on using social media for social good – consider reading a post on “The Science of Sharing

I’d also like to point out that Facebook itself does a good job of parsing its audiences into a number of facebook pages and then markets events and information across all groups.  I believe this is a good model for organizations that have non-profit groups as a secondary organization.


Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 2,571 other followers