I had the pleasure of attending the Mumbai leg of Exchange4Media’s Conclave where Nitin Paranjpe, CEO and MD of Hindustan Unilever Ltd. was the keynote speaker.

Starting the day’s proceedings with a heavyweight speaker of this kind, set the tone for the day. His talk was thought provoking and virtually posed a challenge, for all of the attendees present, to think if they were preparing adequately for the changing times, and the future that could be!

I was particularly pleased when in the first 5 minutes of his talk – which were in a way, also the first 5 minutes of the conclave – he started talking about how digital has started to grow, and how it can only get bigger now!

Digital and social media figured extensively in the keynote address, and which certainly pleased me, no end!

Paranjpe made it clear at the outset that he was going to throw some thoughts, potentially with an idea to provoke, to challenge, to make people think and consider. Some of his observations were speculative, and he emphasized the same, but the idea as per him was, to wonder how things would be, if those speculations came true. He also emphasized that he did not necessarily have answers, just questions. And that everyone would need to figure out their own answers really!

With this background, I am pleased to share some of his thoughts, with my comments interspersed, as per below:

1. One of the bold thoughts that Paranjpe threw was about how big digital could potentially get, in India? He mentioned that in the US, TV was still a lot bigger, but in the UK, digital had become bigger than TV, in media spend. Could such a scenario occur in India as well, he wondered?

* My thoughts: wow! Even to consider the possibility is mind boggling. Today digital is almost an afterthought for planners and marketers. And it is a small percentage of the spend, with bulk still going to TV. While we consider digital going to a double digit share – and that looks far away – considering an idea that it could possibly be bigger than TV, is certainly HUGE. If anyone else had said it, we’d have dismissed it summarily, but when Nitin Paranjpe speculates this, we have to stand up and think about the possibility!!

2. Paranjpe talked about possibilities that we had not envisaged and how things have got impacted on basis of the same. Be it mobile phones and their population in India, on the one hand, or the use of Digital Video Recorders. As CEO of one of India’s largest advertisers, it was candid of him to admit that most of the television that he himself sees, is on DVRs. And that he certainly fast-forwards the advertising there, except on account of his professional interest! Paranjpe was essentially referring to potential inflexion points. He wondered, if like mobile phones’ usage costs had come down dramatically, what if cost of DVRs came down from around INR 4,000/- to INR 400/-? How will life change then?

* My thoughts: indeed a staggering thought. If more and more television in India gets viewed via DVRs, what does that do to the big budgets allocated for TVCs?? Would there be a strong rethink then?

3. Nitin Paranjpe shared this amazing infographic, about what happens on the Internet in 60 seconds:

A fabulous graphic, this shows the totally dynamic and ever-changing world on the Internet.

* My thought: how many marketers are really prepared for this ever-changing world? If there was an eye opener, this graphic it is!

4. Like in case of DVRs, Paranjpe feared another possible inflexion point. Like the cost of mobile usage, he speculated, what would happen if broadband costs came down rapidly? Say, these became INR 200/- or even free? How will life change due to that?

* My thought: will anyone watch any TV at all? Would you get all the entertainment and news and everything else that you need, on broadband? When you want it? From allocation of media spend, to budgets for content creation, things will never be the same again!

5. Nitin Paranjpe emphasized the three new skills people need to learn and have: Engage, Engage, Engage.

* My thoughts: If this does not spell Social Media, what does?

(In fact, Paranjpe waxed eloquent about Social Media!)

6. An important point Paranjpe made was that consumers see a lot, but remember litte. On one of his visits to small town India, he asked a few people to remember some of their favorite ads of recent days. And they could not recall much at all. That in spite of the fact that television reaches everywhere. On further prodding, they mentioned that they remember the old Sridevi ad, for Lux!!

This is what he meant when he said that while consumers see a lot, there are few things they remember. And which is where the challenge for the marketer lies.

7. Another story that Paranjpe related, again from a village in India, was seeing a young woman there, use fabric softener. On asking, he was surprised to find that the girl completely understood the concept of softener, and it was not accidental use. That prompted Paranjpe to share a masterful insight – that thanks to television “aspirations have become homogenous, even though the means may be heterogenous”!!

Few other thoughts that Paranjpe shared included sharing how Cornetto had used crowdsourcing and social media. The fact that even their agency partners were also still getting an understanding of the new space, and they were learning together.

Paranjpe shared a very interesting personal challenge that he has taken up for himself. That this year, he intends to get familiar with the new media, and he is doing it the hard way. He has a 25-year old “mentor” who is taking him through the paces, including giving him homework and projects! Isn’t this fantastic??!

No wonder, Anurag Batra of Exchange4Media conveyed at the end of the talk that Paranjpe’s speech was better than many that he heard at Cannes recently!!

It was fun time again this year, at the Global Youth Marketing Forum, organized by Dr. R. L. Bhatia.

I was invited to speak on the subject of how brands are using Social Media to reach youth markets. As our company has many brands that target youth markets using Social Media, I was able to share my experience. A detailed case study that I shared was about one of our clients, Channel V, and a recent, successful campaign that we ran on Social Media, called ‘Sabse Liked College’.

My presentation deck, from the forum is as under:

Nothing ventured, nothing gained!

The statement is valid in all walks of life, and at this time, it seems relevant in the space of Social Media as well.

Okay, need to rewind and start at the beginning.

In our business of being a Social Media agency, we meet a lot of clients. Many of them are large brands with significant marketing budgets and advertising spends. Several of them initiate the discussion on Social Media from their end, while few discussions are initiated from our end as well.

At this point in time, most brands are convinced about looking at Social Media. Few are still hesitant, and few have made good inroads to be confident to place large bets. But most of them are in the middle of the road. They are approaching Social Media very gingerly.

Let us look at some typical scenarios:

1.    Brand is going for a new campaign, in mainline media: an expensive TVC, supported by print, perhaps OOH too. When we hear of these developments, we propose significant strategies around the campaign. Possibly including doing a teaser on social media, then taking the longer versions of the TVC on to social media (why be constrained with 15-30 seconds, when you are not paying by the second on YouTube – build a larger story board!), putting some behind-the-scenes clips (especially where celebrity brand ambassadors are involved), etc. We could even ask users on Social Media, to carry the storyboard further, maybe even propose a sequel for the advertisement.

Few brands have been venturing out with some of these strategies. Many just go ahead and create a Facebook page around the campaign (which is also abandoned, once the campaign is off-air), and many do nothing at all, on Social Media.

2.    Brand wants to get onto social media independent of any other campaign: convinced that this is a place not to be ignored, a brand wants to get there. Where smart ideas of potential high impact are shared, may of them like those, but want to get started with ‘just a facebook presence first’.

3.    And there are some brands who are set to go to Social Media, but are still hesitant, whether to go ‘as the brand’ or do some surrogate work. Since they fear that as soon as they step into the space, on their own name, they will be inundated with large number of complaints.

All of these are examples of brands playing it safe. Lets look at each of the cases.

If the brand has a new campaign out, in mainline media, it’s a great opportunity to leverage this with a decent Social Media extension. Crores are being spent on the TVC – on its creation, and then on the media itself. At a fraction of that cost, the brand can get users on Social Media, engaged with the brand, by smart placement of the campaign story.

Why then, does the brand hesitate? It is inherently a fear of the unknown. The brand is not sure what they are getting into. Will the users rip apart the campaign? What if it creates negative response? What if questions are asked that we cannot easily respond to?

The fact is that these questions are asked anyway. Advertising is one of the biggest discussed topics on Social Media. If a brand is confident about the campaign, then there should not be hesitation in facing the consumer in a direct interaction over it. And in doing so, give yourself the opportunity of creating good mileage on account of the same.

Coming to the case of creating a social media presence, why opt for the safe and boring ‘only facebook page’ presence? The creation of the Old Spice man, with the large number of videos and the interaction, was clearly a brave act. What if it was rejected? But it was not. And went on to become a stupendous success. Would Old Spice have achieved even a fraction of that visibility if it had stayed with a ‘safe and simple’ Facebook page?? As I said at the outset, ‘nothing ventured, nothing gained’.

And the brands that hesitate still, in putting their name out in the front, for fear of getting user flak, well, they are also losing an opportunity here.

If the service is demanding flak, the flak is coming, no matter if they are present on social media or not. Their presence, a confirmation of their ‘listening’ to the customer, their responses back to the customers, will generate a positive feel about the brand. Not being present is to let the users have a free hand, to allow the odd complaint to potentially snowball as users keep adding fuel to the fire, with no one giving the brand’s point of view.

I reckon we have reached the point where Social Media is now accepted by most brands as being real, but most of them still have a sense of apprehension about going all out, into that space.

And what distinguishes the few who have taken the bigger calls, and have been successful in so doing, is a sense of dare.

Be it P&G internationally or a Just Dial or Star Plus in India, it is indeed that bravado that differentiates these winners, from the many also-rans.

So dear brand owner, in social media, there is nothing to fear but fear itself! And as Seth Godin put it, “If you waiting for a case study in your business vertical, it is already too late to jump in”.

Go for it! Social Media is indeed, here and now!!

Almost a year ago, I had blogged about the challenges that Advertising Agencies face, while approaching Social Media. And one of the points that I shared at that time was the “campaign” oriented approach that agencies had, whereas Social Media demanded more of an ongoing management approach, rather than a burst of a campaign.

While a lot has changed in a year, including the level of understanding that Advertising Agencies have, about Social Media, the one thing that has perhaps only gone worse, is the increasing campaign-style approach, while making Social Media a part of the marketing mix, for brands.

I interacted with one such agency recently. It was heartening to hear that they had close to 20-25 Social Media activations for brands. Considering the type of brands, and assuming that these are all active at the time, I presumed that they had a large team managing Social Media, at their end. Or that they were outsourcing the execution to someone else.

First of all, they proudly mentioned that they did not outsource anything. Which was fine. But then they conveyed that their Social Media team was all of 6 persons. Which came as a surprise to me.

I did some digging around after the meeting, and I found that almost all of the brands that they had mentioned had had some good bursts when they went online for Social Media, but they were nearly inactive at this time. Except for the 4-5 which were currently active.

It so appeared that the brands did not care (or they did not realize what damage they were doing to their brands by creating a community and ignoring it later) and neither did the agency.

Many a significant FMCG brand in recent times, have gone on to television and in print, with their specific campaign oriented Facebook pages. Given that this visibility to Social Media is heartening, but if the page is left to die, when the campaign goes off air, it will be sad. And we have seen more cases of such abandonment for me to fear the same fate here as well!

And as against these approaches, consider the approaches of brands like Fastrack, Ching’s Secret, Just Dial or Pantaloons, for example, and you will see that these brands have kept their Social Media activations central to the brand, and not to a campaign, and they have nurtured their communities, with good, ongoing engagements, not just when an offline campaign was running. And these are the more long lasting approaches, after all.

So what made that agency I was referring to earlier, to take a campaign approach? The reasons as I can see can be one or more of the following:

1. The agency does not understand better. With a legacy of a campaign oriented approach, they continue to recommend the same thing, even in Social Media.
2. The agency understands the difference for sure, but going the ‘ongoing social media management’ way would demand them to grow their team size, by leaps and bounds, for every new client that goes on to Social Media (like our company, Social Wavelength has done, in fact). And adding heads into the agency is not so easy for them. Sometimes they need to justify every new head to add to the rolls, all the way to Singapore or New York or Chicago or Paris. It is an elaborate process, and someone in the system needs to stick his head out, and take responsibility to bring in revenues to justify the addition. All these are easier said than done. It is easier then, to recommend campaigns to clients, and get done. And manage with the team size that the agency carries.
3. The agency could of course, outsource to specialist social media outfits (like Social Wavelength or many others in the space now) and manage long term social media activities. However here again, there is a demand for effort and energy from the agency’s end. The few agencies that have created some excellent ongoing working relationships with us have put in serious efforts from their end. Like having a few people dedicated to work with us and with the client, and ensure that the agency adds value in the chain. When they take a certain responsibility of delivery on behalf of the brand, they have to be involved. In real-time, when the outsourced social media outfit puts out updates on behalf of the client brand, the agency is still carrying the responsibility of there being no goof-ups. This does not happen without effort from the agency’s end. Few agencies have the attitude or the commitment to social media, to invest that kind of time and effort on this. And so they do not outsource, they manage in-house, and with their small teams then, they end up doing only “short term social media campaigns” then!
4. Many times, the constraint is from client’s end. They are not willing to take long calls on Social Media, and want to experiment at a campaign level. And agencies agree to these suggestions (as they do, to a lot of client demands – after all, the client is signing the cheques!). And which is why we see the short bursts of campaign oriented social media. Unfortunately for the client too, this will not serve as good examples. When you think you are experimenting in social media, with such bursts, you are not really experimenting in social media, but rather you are using social media as one more media platform, to run your traditional marketing campaign. And these are NOT the same thing! What you learn – good or bad – about Social Media, from such an experiment, is not the right research for an ultimately, long term ongoing Social Media presence.
5. The final reason is that of budgets. An ongoing Social Media presence demands commitments to resources say, for the next one year. A campaign may on the other hand, ask only for commitments for 1-2 months. The latter is an easier decision for the brand to take, and for an agency to sell. But it is happening at the cost of not utilizing Social Media, for what it really stands for. And it can often cause more harm to the brand, when social media platforms are abandoned. I have seen many in recent days, where fan updates on a Facebook page include marketing messages of Viagra like pharma offers, competitor offers, or other home business promotions. And no one from the brand or the agency has felt it necessary to go and clean up the page!!

Recently we have also got an assignment from an agency, for a brand that wants to do a campaign oriented social media presence. We advised against. We shared the pitfalls of the approach. The client was not convinced. We are doing the Social Media activity, only for the campaign, much against what we stand for. However, we disowned our responsibility on the ultimate benefit for the brand. And we reckoned that while executing this “campaign”, we will make the case for an ongoing presence. So let’s see how that part pans out.

But for us, this is a rare one. But it is also indicative of the way many brands and agencies continue to take the quick fix approach. It is important to understand that this Is not how a good Social Media presence should be established. We continue to put our efforts to educate clients and agencies that we work with.

What are your views on this? Do you face similar challenges with brands / agencies? Do you even agree to the campaign vs ongoing management approach for Social Media? I a keen to read your views on the subject!

A lot of brands have high consumer touch points. Footfalls, if you please. Literal footfalls, like in stores. Or airlines. Or cinema houses. Coffee shops. Etc, etc.
Or virtual footfalls, like in a popular web site.
Or remote footfalls like in television channels, with high viewer base.

When such brands go on to Social Media, as they embrace the new platforms like Facebook or Twitter, they do start from zero. Usually, the approach remains restricted to the Social Media space, and fan base is attempted to be built organically, or through other means, but by staying in the Social Media space, and creating interesting strategies, or spending money there itself.

Why not integrate the physical touch points, and convert them to be your fans?? Would that not accelerate the growth of fans on Facebook? How about converting those Footfalls to become your Fans?!

Here is a presentation that I made to the Social Media Club in Mumbai, India, about this proposition:

The interesting element to note is the second part of the story, viz. getting those Facebook fans, back into the stores. That is often forgotten or left to chance. However very little business is actually done on those Facebook pages. The money to be earned is in the stores, and not on Facebook.

The key element is to get the fan from Facebook, back into the stores, spending money. And which is all about converting the Fans back to being Footfalls!

What do you think about this? Do you see a closer integration of messaging in the offline space, and the Social Media space, for a brand? I’d love to read your views. Please share them as comments here!

Time was when companies would accumulate large email lists so they could write to these people, updating them about their offerings and promotions. In fact, we still come across a lot of companies who think in terms of creating an “email database”.

So for long since the Internet was recognized as a means to reach your prospects, email has lived and thrived. That one great way to have your brand message delivered directly to your prospect, in her email box, which she was certainly going to see. At such a low cost. And which is how, companies and brands started using email a lot.

Till the point of time that email was also discovered by few others: those that wanted to sell you Viagra, those who promised to get you rich quickly, and others that offered to deliver free porn to your desktop! With junk and spam coming into the email system, users got wary, stopped accepting many emails and suddenly, email became a dirty word, for sending out brand messages.

As we meet and talk to clients and prospects, there are many who want to drive traffic to their website and the website alone, even while using our services to generate Social Media engagement. They feel that the website is “theirs” with their brand name etc., and which is where the traffic should be ultimately driven. And where they can then pick up the email addresses of these visitors!

Well, I think they need to understand a few new realities:

1. People get just way too much email, and most users filter email and block spam. And there is every chance that your email may not really reach the customer.
2. People are very concerned about leaving behind their email ids at sites now. So the genuine customers and prospects may not even be in your email list.
3. This also means that when you drive traffic only to your website, it may be that one-off visit, but you lose the customer thereafter, as she did not leave behind any of her contact details.
4. It is the new world of convergence, and of using multiple devices to access the Internet. In scenarios like these, what is really important? To have your brand message reach your prospect and get read. Does it matter how that happens?
5. The other comfort that a mailing list used to give earlier was the possible reuse of that list, to reach the customer again, after a while. Well, on email in fact, people are less tolerant now. I will get into my email box, only that information which I really want to see. Anyone else sending email to me, and that too repeatedly, is taking up my time and attention, and is therefore not welcome!

So what options do brands have now, to deliver their message to their prospects and customers? If not email, then what?

Consider the option of a Facebook Fan page.

You create one for your brand. You populate it with good content. You also put out images and videos there. You are subtle in your marketing messages. You genuinely show the human face of your brand. You actually converse with your customers. And in doing all these, you pick up “fans”. Those folks on Facebook who tell you that ‘they like what you are putting up out there, and will not mind your occasional updates coming on to their Facebook walls’.

Permission marketing, anyone?

Why is this working at this time?

Clearly, the nature of the medium teaches brands, and they comply as well, to keep their messages small, simple, friendly and subtle. As against that weapon of the HTML email that marketers had got in their hands, with Flash and what not, and which was blatantly pushy. And which consumers wanted nothing of.

So the simplicity of the Facebook update works well.

Then again, the brand is not expected to push too many updates, too often. As soon as a brand tries to overdo this, for the user who has her Facebook wall full of one brand’s updates, it takes only a click to withdraw her fan-dom for the brand. Email also offered the “unsubscribe” option in such cases, but too often it did not work, and it was also in the hands of the sender of the email, to stop sending those emails to you. In case of Facebook, the control is in the hands of the user herself. And if any brand still finds a way to abuse the system (say, by pushing “messages”), then big brother Facebook is quick to the rescue of the user.

So getting occasional updates and not too many, is also a good thing.

Facebook fans may become fans of many things. At this time, not many are un-fanning themselves that often. In other words, for a brand, if they acquire say, 10,000 fans, that is nearly as good, or perhaps better than acquiring 10,000 email addresses. With those 10,000 fans, even if you do not know much about them, you are able to reach them with your updates when you have something useful to tell them. They are usually around and don’t leave you. Unlike the email addresses which change every once in a while, a user’s Facebook account is normally not changing that frequently. And the other advantage is the viral aspect. Today, we have gone past the early stage of email usage, where we would forward good emails to long mailing lists of our friends. So an email is perhaps going to reach only that one individual to whom it is sent. On the other hand, a good Facebook update like a video is easily “shared”, and suddenly you get a possible viral surge on your fans list.

I have told many of our clients that they should not be obsessed with driving traffic to their website. Their Facebook page is as much “theirs” as their website. If they drive traffic to the website, but the user does not leave behind an email address, there will still be an effort to reach him the next time. On the other hand, if you drive traffic to a good Facebook page and manage to get the user to click a simple button and become your fan, you have reach to him for a long time.

So as long as Facebook rules ensure that companies remain disciplined on this front, till then, Facebook’s your new email! That one way to get to your prospects and customers, in a permission marketing mode.

And what about Twitter then? Is having Twitter followers also the same thing? I guess not. To penetrate a user’s mindshare on Twitter, amidst tons of tweets flowing past him continuously, takes more than getting the person to just follow you. With filtering concepts like groups and lists emerging, the user will have to pick your account and put it in a list that he “wants to see” for sure, and then only, does it become the equivalent of the Facebook case.

What do you think? Do you agree that Facebook’s your new email? Any other experiences that you have had? Please share in comments below.

Social Wavelength is a full service Social Media Agency. Our solutions range from creation of long term strategy, custom application development, SMM, Presence Management, Community building and management and actual execution of Social Media initiatives. Currently, we serve clients from a large variety of industries including healthcare, electronics, media and many more. These clients are a mix of Indian and International entities, from one-person companies to large multinationals. I believe this mix of clients we are servicing gives us a unique perspective, when it comes to how different brands and companies can utilize Social Media. It helps us identify the variables which go into making Social Media initiatives successful, as well as the constants.

We thought it’d be great to share some of our observations here. Learning from the trenches, as it were.

Fundamentals are fundamentally important

Was that a profound statement or what?! But seriously, this is the real world. Results have to be real as well. Not an inventory of things you did, but a checklist of things you achieved.

Listening is way more important that it is made out to be

Whether by using basic Twitter search, Google Blogsearch, Oneriot etc. or with Radian 6, Techrigy SM2 (Full Disclosure: Social Wavelength is a Techrigy SM2 Reseller), listening is the most important activity you can invest your time in, at all stages of your initiatives.

Buy In

Going with today’s theme of making profound statements I’d like to say, that Client buy in is very important. Buy in into your agency, you, your portfolio. The more of this there is, the easier it is for you to suggest and implement innovative strategies.

Integrate

If you think about it (not even too hard) its obvious that an integrated approach is the only thing which makes sense. Why is it, then, that we see so many social media activities oblivious of their counterparts in the so called ‘mainstream’ media? A non integrated campaign is merely an experiment, a dabbling. When Social Media initiatives are integrated with the overall marketing strategy, you achieve, well, Resonance.

There is huge room for innovation, loads of untapped potential

How many ‘Remarkable’ Social Media campaigns do you recall? Things which made you say, “I love the way they’ve used Social Media” or “Damn! That’s audacious”. Not nearly enough!

So there you have it. Just some things we picked up on the job over the last few months. There is lots more, of course, but we’d like to hear from you. What are your thoughts? What is your learning from the trenches?