ComBlu specializes in community marketing and influencer programs. Our Lumenatti blog sparks conversation about the best and brightest community ideas.

Home → Blogs → Lumenatti
  • 03.08.2010

    What if IBM ran the healthcare debate?

     

    One of the first things that Sam Palmisano did after becoming CEO of IBM was to do a values gut check. Palmisano felt strongly that a refreshed values system would provide a roadmap for operating differently in a rapidly changing market environment and ultimately complete the transformation process.

    The biggest challenge? Despite the fact that IBM was emerging from a long, painful decline and was newly prosperous, people were cautious and suspicious of a new vision. The company needed a way to galvanize people around hope and aspiration as opposed to fear of failure. The company also has a massive, global employee base with widely divergent views.

    The answer was a highly innovative process that IBM called Jam Sessions. In a nut shell, the first one started with senior management creating a set of values that were vetted and refined through focus groups and surveys. Then, the entire employee population was invited to weigh in on the list. IBM used social media tools to gather input and analyze trends across the input. Each “value” was the topic of a single forum that was moderated by a member of the senior management team, including the CEO. Employees comments reflected the “good, the bad and the ugly.” Instead of running from the bad and the ugly, Palmisano viewed negative input as a mandate for change. Tags helped sort input, which informed the creation of a new mission and values statement. The company eventually held adjunct Jam Sessions to identify operational roadblocks to adoption of the new IBM way.

    If President Obama and the United States Congress could outsource the healthcare debate, IBM would be the perfect partner. Imagine if we “jammed’ the healthcare bill. Each major tenet could be debated over a 2-3 week period and include anyone in the country who wanted to learn and participate. For example, one week, the focus could be “cost reduction”. This umbrella topic could be broken down into several sub topics such as “tort reform”, buying insurance over state lines”, “public option” , “pools”, etc. Before jumping into the jam session, the participant could view content that provides context for each topic. A few experts could debate the pros and cons of each topic and then citizens could jump into the session and comment. Following the “open jam” period, comments could be analyzed and used to create a “mission” for each topic. This mission then would be sent back out and people could give a thumbs up or down for each sub topic. Sort of a mash-up between Yelp, Ideastorm and IBM’s jam sessions.

    Congress could augment this online debate with town hall meetings held simultaneously around the country in movie theaters. This approach was used by Buisness Week several years ago for its annual two day business conference. Live speakers were at various venues and teleconferenced to audiences in movie theaters around the country. Interactive devices facilitated audience participation and captured feedback instantly. This opens discussion and participation to audiences with no access to or comfort with online social tools.

    The integration of on-and off-line engagement is  a best practices often missed by marketers. In this case, it also provides a very important choice for how to engage citizens.

    Congress would then use this feedback to write a bill that reflects the will of the people. This of course has been one of the big criticisms of the current process: the will of the people has gotten lost in the shuffle. Another drawback of the recent debate has been the sheer size of both the House and Senate bills. A Healthcare Jam would break it down and give people an opportunity to learn in smaller bites, participate and “vote”. What a concept. It’s a little bit like “democracy in action”.

    Let’s Jam!

  • 11.30.2009

    I’m tired and my head hurts……

     

    But not from the usual Vegas reasons: staying up late, losing money and drinking too much. I did none of those during the three day WOMMA 2009 Summit in sin city. My excuse is too much information and so many great conversations with little down time to process. So now, I’m in the air heading home with a little time to reflect.

    Summit 2009 content was heavily focused on case studies, social marketing techniques and measurement. In fact, WOMMA debuted it’s newly published “Measurement and Metrics Guidebook”, a collaboration of some of the best thinkers in social metrics. Check out ComBlu’s chapter by Jennifer Voisard on cost deflection. I moderated a session on “Community: An Important Driver of WOM” with panelists Dawn Lacallade , chief community strategist at Solar Winds and Bill Johnston chief community officer at Forum One.

    And, Steve Hershberger helped lead the live “Socializing Media” podcast which featured a conversation with some of the best thinkers in word-of-mouth. In between hallway chat and keeping up with crucial projects, I attended a half dozen sessions. Here’s some of my favorite take aways.

    Measurment Keynote. WOMMA’s chair of the Measurement Council, Walter Carl, PhD, presented highlights of the above cited tome of best practices in measurement. One interesting factoid was the impact of word of mouth marketing (WOM) on revenue vs. traditional marketing communications channels. Turns out the latter does a much better job of generating short term customer acquisition and revenue generation, while WOM yields higher customer lifetime value through longer, deeper customer relationships and a significantly higher referral rate for new customers. (1.7 per traditional channels vs. 3.8 for WOM).

    Anatomy of Buzz Revisted. Author Emanual Rosen gave an address on what not-for-profits can teach commercial enterprises about generating buzz. Core to his examples is the concept that human beings want to share what they create. If you give them an opportunity to co-create with you and other stakeholders, they will spread their interpretation of the activity. I think this basic tenet of self-expression as an engagement model has been forgotten in the gold rush of social media and the bright shiny object syndrome.

    The View, only with academics. Keller Fay principal, Brad Fay deftly led a panel of academics who all study various aspects of engagement, influencer identification, measurement, etc. You’re thinking this was deadly, right? They were great. Here’s the line-up.

    Socializing Customer Service. Sue Sunday, Microsoft, Ed Billmaier, The Scotts Company and Marie Shubin The Gallo Winery, talked customer support. These were from wildly different industries: software, wine and fertilizer yet offered a common thread: the use of customer service professionals to become the voice of the company in social platforms. The rationale: many companies that start listening programs or solicit comments through online forums and communities often get quickly overwhelmed by the sheer volume of conversations. The solutions: repurpose customer service representatives from call centers or email support. Not only will they be able to handle a larger volume of customer support episodes through the online platform, but they typically can offer marketing three magic things: human resources who already have deep product knowledge and are steeped in the legal, privacy and compliance imperatives of their organizations.

    Cognitive Science. Another potentially deadly topic that turned out to be the absolutely best presentation I heard. This one was lead by Steve Knox of P&G’s Tremor Group. He laid out how human’s think and a process for disrupting normal perceptions that serves to get people’s attention. Using this disruption model or combining two unrelated schemas can lead to the magic that we all seek: cutting through the clutter and getting consumers to notice, buy and tell others. This is highly over simplified, and definitely worth digging deeper. Who knew 45 minutes about schemas could mesmerize!

    I’ll provide more learning about some of these sessions in upcoming posts. ComBlu also previewed our research report, “The State of Online Branded Communities” which we’ll also dive into in the weeks ahead. Now that I’ve gotten these ideas out of my head, the seat is going back and I’m snoozing the rest of the way home.

  • 10.05.2009

    Community: More social science than computer science

     

    We’re about to release findings from some research ComBlu conducted to gather insights about the state of online community marketing. Without getting too far ahead of ourselves, let me share one observation after diving deeply into over 125 communities that were built by 45 different brands. Many companies are still taking a computer science approach to community building vs. a social science orientation.

    Here’s the big insight: only a slight fraction of the brands we reviewed show any evidence of a cohesive strategy. Many seemed to still have a “build it and they will come” mentality and left the community to its own devices. This epitomizes the computer science orientation: get a platform, throw a community out there, and hope for the best. This flies in the face of using communities as a core engagement strategy.

    Those communities that were high performers typically exhibited lots of best practices. This is a very important point given that the best practices are almost all some flavor of an engagement tool. And, that’s where the social science comes in. Brands build communities because they want to engage with customers and other key stakeholders. The whole point of having a branded community is to have purpose driven conversations about topics that are of genuine interest to both the company and its customers. This requires the brand to really think through how to provide multiple, meaningful paths to engagement. The brand needs to be an active participant in the community and interact in ways that resonate with members or visitors.

    Conversations are two-way activities; it’s essential that the community sponsor exhibit signs of life. It’s imperative to have a strategy for what to do with feedback, ideas, and insights. One of the worst practices we saw was a community that solicited input and then used an automated response that told the person to contact customer service. Ouch. The community IS customer service! That’s what is at the heart of engagement: knowing customers and using that information to serve their needs.

    Another aspect of engagement is modeling behaviors and organizing activities that make each person feel affinity with the brand. In essence, taking a social science approach to community building provides the gestalt of engagement. The community sponsor needs to unite elements in such a way that the ultimate experience can not be derived from a simple summation of its parts. It is a symbiotic bond that spawns new experiences and deepens engagement from the collective life force of the community. In the process, all parties learn and grow.

    So, it’s no real surprise that those communities that offer multiple ways to engage scored high in our research. What is shocking is the number of brands that go to all the trouble of building a community and then neglect it. Instead of building a significant asset, these brands are simply using a social platform in a very tactical way. At best, this represents a huge missed opportunity; at worst, It just doesn’t do the intended job.

  • 06.18.2009

    Somebody get Bill Ford to read this

    Ford Motor company’s biggest competitive marketing weapon is a doddering 100 year old.  Actually it is about 100,000 doddering 100 year olds.

    The other day I went to a meeting and the person I met drove up in his Model T.  Well, it isn’t every day you see a Model T, so it attracted a bit of attention. 

    So when a throng of people gathered around, my friend was more than happy to answer every last question and show it off.  It isn’t pretty, but surely a piece of living history.

    DSC01624

    I learned that there are about 100,000 of them driving across our U.S. roads every day and driven they are.  Heck, there are about a hundred in my neck of the woods.  Their owners drive them a lot.

    Unlike another friend of mine who owns a different type Ford (a GT 500 that turns more heads than the Model T), which seldom makes its way out of his well appointed garage, the Model T’s are driven a lot and pretty much all the owners are like my friend.  They love to talk about the car, the history of Ford Motors, etc.  Their knowledgeable, have great stories (like the pictures that Karl carries in the car of his grandfather in his horse and buggy on his way to buy this very car) and are generally likeable people.

    Apparently, the Model T is bomb-proof.  As a lot, they were well designed, well engineered and well built.  He changes the oil, using the original glass container and changes tires using the original jack and tools, which while ancient are as functional as the day they were made. 

    DSC01625

    My friend’s has had no major work since it was bought in 1927; still it runs and runs as reliably as his other car, a Volvo.

    Hmm.  A direct comparison between a new Volvo sedan and a Ford Model T, and he is serious about the correlation.  He talks about Ford value and engineering and he gives examples….on occasion, using the car.  Heck, we even got to see what real floor boards look like! 

    DSC01626

    I learned a lot in talking to Karl about Ford, some things were factual like the use of vanadium that was came from the wreckage of a race car.  Nobody in the U.S. knew how to make this metal (which was much lighter and three times stronger that traditional steel of the day).  So, Henry Ford financed and set up a steel plant to figure it out and then make vast supplies of it.  I learned that 30 types of black paint were used.  Why?  Because the car was built on an assembly line (the only one at the time) different mixtures dried at different speeds, and that, along with the parts the paint went on impacted potential choke points in the assembly line.  Don’t think in it’s day that wasn’t wicked-smart innovation.  Other things were anecdotal.   Both were interesting and informative the way no tv commercial or YouTube video ever could be.

    Let me tell you that the people who were asking Karl questions very much pay attention to what he says and he answers them and advocates in a very genuine way.  To the person, they leave the conversation with Karl with a very different perspective and a very positive impression of the Ford brand. 

    So Ford has 100 Ford Fiesta running as part of a social media campaign designed to drive interest in the European version of the car, which will debut here as the 2011 model.  Ford, like all of its, solvent and bankrupt competitors spends hundred millions of dollars on marketing.

    I would content that while all of this is fine, spending the equivalent to one television advertisement to support an ambassador program of Model T drivers to spread the word about Ford Quality and value (remember, value is the new black), as well as, fuel a grass roots movement to the return of value.  Ford style.

    It’s my guess that that such an approach would exceed the results of traditional mar/com tactics in terms of engagement metrics…by a lot.  A big bang for the buck. 

    So Bill, if you read this and I hope you do, you need to focus on tapping into the passion of your customer base and utilize what drove Ford to prominence in the first place:  Innovation and quality.  It’s all found there in that 100 year old car and its loyal, passionate, visible and quite large owner base.  I bet if you asked nicely, they’d help.

    Traditional approach to marketing a brand?  No.  Innovative and effective?  Yes.

  • 05.20.2009

    Community 2.0: Getting on the same page

    I recently attended the Community 2.0 conference in San Francisco.  I am going to try and distill my experience down into a couple of key thoughts about what I learned.

    1.  Brands have begun to understand the importance that their operation (i.e. the other elements of the business that deliver against the promise they tee up).  Granted, I think they knew these other areas were important, it is just that for the first time, operational aspects of the business can participate in brand building…using community and also social media tools.

    Community infrastructure allows for dialogue and learning to occur between the parties involved.  It’s two way.  Everybody gives and takes.  Community.

    Social media tools allows for a broader reach of a brand message at a lower cost than traditional mar-com tools.  Oh, if done right, they are also more measurable.

    Marketers seem excited…and a bit concerned with the challenge of ‘operationalizing’ of social media and community efforts.  Why?  Their job just got more complex and more important all at the same time.

    2.  Agencies still want to cram everything into the shiny penny they are selling.  Forget whether it belongs or not.

    Plus, based on the tweets I saw during the presentation on risk planning that Drew Bartkiewicz gave, most agency attendees feared they would start bleeding from their ears due to the ‘blandness’ of his topic.  Another attendee from the brand side commented, half joking, he may as well been presenting the value proposition of patent law….those that ‘got it’ understood its importance and paid attention but this importance was lost on a big section of the participants-mostly because it wasn’t sexy.  In my opinion, it was their loss; the people who paid attention were smarter for it.

    In the end, there were a number of terrific presenters and marketers attending that are asking smart questions.  Some great lessons learned but we still are not addressing the big issues.  Such as:

    • What’s the overarching strategy for either social media or community…or both?
    • How do these efforts deliver business value across the organization specifically?  What is the ‘ratio’ of activities which get applied to categories such as Advocacy, Feedback and Support and what’s the value we attribute to each of these categories, as well as, the ratio?
    • How does the organization (beyond the marketing department) play a role on an ongoing basis?  How is this defined and managed?
    • What are the real and hard metrics which prove value and sustainability?  How are these metrics aggregated across the organization, absorbed and acted upon?

     

    Interestingly, and not by my design, these questions and topics marketers were focusing their questions mapped to the slides I included in my last blog post, ‘Community by the Numbers’.  I shared the draft of that blog posting to a number of people and was urged to publish the first installment during Community 2.0, which I did.

    Granted, these are hard topics to tackle.  However, nothing worthwhile is easy.

  • 05.08.2009

    Do you know your customers as well as they know you?

    I had a conversation recently that brought up this interesting question. Since I can’t stop thinking about it, here we go.

    Brands continue to take the plunge into the ocean of transparency and consumer advocacy. Turning over the keys and employing user or consumer generated content into a marketing strategy is risky, but, if done correctly, the ROI is huge. This is not news. We already know this, and the reason is simple. Your customers know you. In fact, they know you better than you know yourself. Remember, perception is reality.

    Not only do your customers know you, the ones that know you inside and out, have the most influence. Advocate influence directly affects your bottom line–for better or for worse. Advocates make up a critical, but very small segment of your customer base. Size doesn’t matter, because it is their personal experiences with your brand that counts.

    Do you have the right set of tools to find your advocates? Ask yourself a couple of questions. Do you know how to identify the right advocate behaviors and traits in the first place? Can you put together a profile that goes beyond database marketing?

    Or, are you so focused on the importance of the right demographic and transactional data, that 20-somethings and moms with active lifestyles fit your ideal? Can you apply a loyalty multiplier to understand the dollar value beyond the purchase?

    Advocate identification is both an art and a science. Implement a strong methodology behind your customer profiling. Tap into the smallest percentage of your customer base that has the largest reach. Advocates are hard-wired to talk about you. Take a step further and engage with them. Those conversations will be positive and effective.

    Empowering your advocates that know you best and letting them speak for you is a smart strategy, but you have to know who they are first.

    Do you?