thefunnel

Normally I try generate unique content, and not reiterate what others are doing, but today I participated in a MarketingProfs seminar regarding the “State of Social Media”, and this is well worth a brief comment. This research is an in depth view and benchmark into more 3000 companies (both B-2-B and B-2-C), and how they use social media, how they measure it and what their success so far has been. There’s a few surprising findings / recommendations.

1) There’s hardly any difference at all between the usage in B-2-B and B-2-C. Same tools are used trying to achieve the same things. You would think B-2-C would be much further ahead, but no. They are exactly in the same place with approximately success rate for what they’re trying to do. Except of course that their participating audiences are larger.

2) The objectives around Social Media are pretty fundamental – driving traffic to the web site, generate awareness and look for negative PR comments. Again you would think B-2-C would have more creative goals.

3) Although Twitter, Facebook and YouTube are the big ones, there’s a large number of smaller “industry specific” applications, so practitioners really need to know what their customers are using on a micro level. Twitter might not be it, although everyone is talking about it . You need to find out what the “work persona” is using.

4) Of the people that are using Social Media, only an average of 35% say that the efforts are successful meeting expectations. Pretty bad, compared to more traditional e-marketing activities like email marketing, or maybe the expectations are too low for email.

5) The average number of Twitter followers for companies are greatly skewed due to a few high hitters. The norm is about 150. So if your company have 150 followers you’re doing OK.

6) Only 12% of companies have strict and clearly articulated Social Media policies, and > 60% of marketers practicing Social Media do it “on their own time” (not being paid for it or part of their objectives)

Seems like Yes is always the answer, and for pure play on-line companies it’s the obviously true, but is this really the case for B-2-B technology companies? After all, companies don’t exist to have a Web presence, and if the Web is only used as a marketing or sales tool to communicate value (even if it includes e-commerce) then by definition it falls into the category tactical marketing. The various decisions in the Web space or outbound marketing space may strategic in nature, and the Web is probably the best productivity enhancement tool ever, but to the overall business it’s still only a tactic to achieve the revenue, customer service and satisfaction targets, and a tactic is always considered a cost rather than a value builder. So, is there a point for a B-2-B technology business when the Web moves from being tactical and strategic?

Internet / Web governance – Who’s in command?

One of the topics frequently debated in marketing (but probably in other functions as well) is that of the role of the Internet to a business, and how the Web and decisions related to the Web should be prioritized and governed, in addition to what the most effective organizational structures are to fully utilize the Web.

Read more….. Internet Web Governance