Facebook, you know the social network that started for college kids has headed back to it’s roots in a unique way….an MBA. The London School of Business and Finance is now offering their Global MBA courses on Facebook. What I find most compelling is not that it’s being offered on Facebook – I find it amazing that they are offering all the content for free.
Yesterday I had the opportunity to speak on a panel with my friends Chad Parizman and Lynsay Caylor to a class of very bright full-time MBA students at the University of Tennessee. Our topic was social media monetization, although we certainly talked more broadly then that in our time with the class. I enjoyed hearing their questions, and learning more about the challenges that Chad faces at Scripps and Lynsay at Pilot.
The most striking thing to me about the class were their answers to a few questions Chad asked about their social involvement.
How many of you have updated your Facebook status in the last week?80%
How many of you have updated Twitter in the last few hours?45%
How many of you only have a Twitter account to study it? 60%
I caught a piece on eMarketer by Clark Fredricksen today about the dilemma of customer engagement companies face when moving into social media. The basis of the post is found in the video embedded below. Tension ramps up between the desire to have a presence and the need to participate. To quote the post:
Most businesses have realized that when it comes to social networks like Twitter or Facebook, simply broadcasting content isn’t quite enough. Consumers want companies to engage with them on social networks — not because they want to have a relationship, per say, with a brand of soap or shampoo, but because they appreciate the opportunity to give feedback on products, receive meaningful information from brands, and catch the occasional bargain, among other things.
What he says is entirely true, launching a presence on a social channel (i.e.. facebook, twitter, yelp, flickr, blogging) is a great thing for many companies and their customers, allowing them to mutually share and receive information. The dilemma comes when a brand has to decide how, when, and who should engage. In my opinion, if a brand is opening an account they are already in the game so there is not the option to not participate so the question becomes how and who. This should adhere to some basic rules of responding to most mentions, answering questions, etc. and every company will have secondary rules they will need to explore that will work best for them. Two great examples of this choice on engagement are Best Buy’s @twelpforce or Comcast’s @ComcastCares – where they are defining their intent because while the CEO of Best Buy is on twitter – having the expectation that he’ll respond personally to every question/whim isn’t only crazy its incredibly of base. Along that path, deciding to do customer service is a common tactic for those companies who use twitter. This brings up the great point that Jeremiah Owyang of the Altimeter Group makes “As companies accelerate their social support efforts, responding to customers in public reinforces the behavior of complaining to everyone they know.” I’m certainly not saying that responding to customers on twitter is a bad idea, but it’s an interesting idea to consider.
Something else to consider is that with the growth of web technology the last few years, the barriers to entry have dropped to a level for where for all intents and purposes it’s 0. It requires very little technical skill to open an account on any of the pieces named above which presents the dichotomy that marketers face – the ease of use can quickly translate to accounts that amount to “hello world” but often get forgotten in the hustle and bustle of day to day work. Without a focus on any account, those customers (guests in Ruby Tuesday’s world) who were very excited at the entry of a company they cared about in a digital space – will quickly move from excitement to vocal anger as their tweets and comments go unanswered and seemingly uncared for.
Which means that brands must ask, and then quickly answer the question, “what type of social media engagement is right for our brand?”
I think he’s right on for 2 and 3. I’d add an additional prediction – that social networking sites and tools will begin to add offerings that appeal to business. I’m not talking about CoTweet ramping up it’s twitter tool, while it’s a good product. I’m talking about product design BY the sites themselves. Sites building out tools and frameworks that not only support businesses but invite them. Let me be clear, I’m not sharing insider information, I just know what I think would help us and other companies like us.
Most social sites are designed for the individual and rightfully so as relationships are what create and grow these sites. But now that organizations are starting to join the fray – their needs, our need are different. Take for example any national retail company in any vertical. Walmart, Best Buy, Ruby Tuesday, P.F. Chang’s, Moe’s, etc. the list goes on and on. The commonality with all these organizations is that they are national, if not international companies, but ultimately serve customers locally.
Each of those customers cared for locally visits a store, where there may be 10-10,000 locations and those local stores together create the global brand. The tension is that social sites know how to serve the local – they are even set up for that in most cases (i.e. requiring a geographic area) but they haven’t quite figured out the global range yet. Global brands need the ability to set parameters to maintain control while allowing for local flexibility.
I’d also add that this need “could” be filled by third party developers if the platform API’s allow deep enough access.
UPDATED: 10/14/09 with new information about groups.
I developed this comparison (download) of Ning and Facebook for an internal discussion, but figured I’d share it since there didn’t seem to be much on the Internet in terms of a direct breakdown.
As an overview, Ning is a site that easily allows the creation of free private social networks.