I was at the Click Asia Summit earlier this year, and shared thoughts on Social Media Planning, and challenges thereof.

A video recording of the same is shared here below:

Would love to read your views on these thoughts. Do share!

This post is the second part of a two part series on the challenges faced by the marketing world today.

In the previous post, I shared some thoughts around the changing marketing model, the need to relook the marketing budget allocations, and the changing role in an organization for marketing.

This second post is largely inspired by Umair Haque’s message that “Marketing Can Do Better“, again from the Harvard Business Review. And my question to that is, “can it?”.

Yes, theoretically, it can do better, but the challenges as highlighted by Umair, are so huge that it will take a marketer significant will and conviction, and then effort, to make the change, and then ‘do better’.

Umair starts with a strong paragraph, that should make any marketer squirm.. :

Why are so many marketing campaigns brand-destroyers and money-losers? Why is “branding” becoming a devalued asset, whose returns are dwindling (witness Google building the world’s mightiest brand with barely a penny of orthodox marketing expenditure)? Why do people and communities exact steeper and steeper discounts, price-cuts, and margin-crushing concessions from the beleaguered, besieged companies once known as the masters of the universe?

The half-life of companies is shrinking and the weary practice known as “marketing,” adding little to no real value, seems powerless to help.

The challenge is well and truly thrown at the marketers!

Are marketers really that helpless?

I completely agree on his points of steep discounts, promotions and margin-crushing concessions. I mean, take for example, brand managers rushing to the GroupOns and the LivingSocials and the SnapDeals to sell (nay, ‘give away’) their products at deep-deep discounts. I liken this move to a marketer throwing up his hands and saying, “Ok, I give up, I cannot sell, and so I will just distribute my products for free!”.

Okay, I do not mean selling anything on GroupOn is wrong. Perishable inventory surplus and things of that kind are fine. But selling branded products for next to nothing, is beyond my comprehension.

Umair also brings in this concept of how marketing has not adapted / changed in all these years, and how its just about “talking down” to the customer:

Marketing is still a militaristic, adversarial school of thought that’s largely about cramming “product” down the already overstuffed gullets of “consumers” by “targeting” “messages” jam-packed with illusory, imaginary benefits at them, in grand “campaigns” that make overblown promises (“See this beer? It’s going to land you the girl of your dreams!!”). I’d argue that marketing as we know it is, still, largely about talking down.

I see this all so often in the marketer’s obsession to “control” things, “control” what comes in the media, “control” communication. Because in that manner, he can decide what exactly the customer should hear, see and read. And he wants to tell the customer what is right for him (the customer). Yes, the whole idea of “talking down“.

Not realizing that the customer does not want it, is not taking it, and that the so-called “control” is a myth in today’s times anyway!

Umair goes on to introduce the concept of “listening up“, then. But in his inimitable style, he first warns what marketers should not conveniently consider to be a ‘listening up’ effort! Yes, marketers may be prone to apparently grab new concepts, if in its garb, they are able to run their favorite old agendas, still.

So here is what Umair warns, is NOT listening up:

Listening up doesn’t mean surveilling your customers, and then discovering slightly cleverer ways to trick them (yet again). Listening up doesn’t mean holding five thousand focus groups a year, and thenprice discriminating the daylights out of hapless customers. Listening up doesn’t mean delving into mines studded with billions of seams of “data” about “consumers.” Listening up definitely doesn’t mean techno-stalking people in creepy, weird, and slightly sinister ways.

I am sure marketers must be seeing a creepy sense of familiarity in the above words. The obsession with traditional means and old forms or marketing keep taking us back to the old ways and the old tricks!! So what DOES Umair refer to, as he talks of “listening up“??

Marketing is going through a churn, perhaps akin to none other in its history. The fundamental rules of the game that one could swear by, seem to be challenged. And things could never remain the same again!

This is a two post series examining some of the changes and the challenges for marketing today.

There was an interesting cover story that the Harvard Business Review did in December, around the impact of Social Media. As a part of that feature, there was a particularly fascinating piece on “Branding in the Digital Age” by David Edelman.

Picking some thoughts from there, I have put together some thoughts in the presentation below:

Some of the key pointers in this presentation include:

1. The fact that the traditional model of a consumer purchase decision is not quite valid anymore. Earlier a consumer would put together an exhaustive list of options, then based on various inputs, figure his way down to a final choice. The typical funnel effect. But that was then. What a consumer is now doing, is best described in an elliptical curve.

Gathers names of a few brands that he recalls. On account of whatever inputs – be it advertising that he connected with, or referrals or whatever. That is the consideration point. From there begins the consumer’s evaluation journey. Read up blogs, see online content, talk to friends, etc. It is at this juncture that his choices may increase or decrease. He may drop some from his earlier list, he may add others. However all these changes are based on the inputs he is getting, usually from trusted sources.

From here comes the buy point. It is observed that today, a customer may walk into a store, still with an open mind, and final decision is taken at the point of sale.

The story does not end here, though. From this point onwards, begins the loyalty loop. The customer today wants to share his experience of using a product. Good or bad. And here is where he creates the impact for the next prospect.

So the shift from a funnel to an ellipse is the one major shift in marketing.

2. The crucial impact that the above change has, is in context of marketing budget allocations. When the customer was going though a funnel based decision process, the marketer had to ensure that his brand makes it to the awareness point of the buyer (the widest mouth of that funnel) and then, as the customer winds down the path of his decision making process, the brand is able to persuade the buyer to choose it. This may well happen by means of providing best push closer to the point of purchase. Maybe as discounts.

What that meant was the traditional marketing budgets went big time, into the awareness cycle – mass media advertising in a sense – and then into the purchase influence last leg. In terms of spends then, it was a large creative effort for creating the advertising, and then a variable media purchase budget. And planning or budgeting usually meant, only about playing with the media choices, and how much to leave for the sales offers.

Once we get into a different consumer purchase cycle, there may still be a need to be present at the awareness point and the buy point (and hence the spends there), but there needs to be adequate budgets kept for the two most critical touch points, where customer is most likely to be impacted by influence. This is while he is evaluating and when he in the loyalty loop. Usually, traditional marketers have not planned for these and have no budgets to allocate.

3. So what are these evaluate and loyalty loop stages? What is the media there? Unlike traditional marketing where you’d think TV or print or whatever, out here, we are looking at the various forms or owned and earned media for a brand. And how can a brand stay on top of that? Well, by monitoring what is going on there, providing inputs where necessary, and creating their own content as well, to put into those spaces.

The crucial impact where budgets are concerned is that, this is completely new space. Where brands were otherwise looking at creative costs and media purchase costs, this is non-productive expense, in that sense. Expense to monitor and manage the platforms where owned and earned media resides. Putting resources or getting outsourced help for the same. A brand has to start planning and budgeting for these.

4. There is also an evolution of the marketer’s role beyond the traditional work. Today, the brand produces tons of content for itself, far more than the 4-page brochure or the 10-page website that used to be the norm. With blogs, Facebook pages, presentations that are shared, tweets, YouTube videos, white papers, etc., the content produced is large. Add to that, product manuals, FAQs, registration forms, etc. and a brand becomes a serious content producer. If this content is allowed to happen in any which way, there is a risk that it will cause lot of negative response, which will spill over into Social Media space. And do harm to the brand. The marketer then, needs to assume control over such communications, and ensure that it is consistent with the brand’s positioning.

All these are the changes facing marketers and marketing teams, in this changing world.

It is a threat usually, but can also be an opportunity for many. An opportunity for those who can figure this change and adapt themselves, to a more significant role in the organization.

I will continue dwelling on the challenges for marketers in a a follow up post.

Meanwhile, very keen to seek your views on these thoughts. Please do share comments.

Wikileaks in the world and RadiaGate in India have suddenly exposed the world to a new set of possibilities. And a new set of vulnerabilities.

Conversations, be it on phone or in other electronic formats, and which one assumed to have been private and secure, can actually become very public and embarrassing for the people involved! While the legality of the public appearance of Wikileaks and RadiaGate conversations may be open to judgement, another form of conversations that are clearly legal and yet equally potentially damaging are the kind that are happening in various spaces of Social Media. For a brand or an individual, there is as much damage to fear in Wikileaks or RadiaGate mentions, as it is in damaging Social Media conversations!

Considering a certain parallel between these situations then, I would like to share some learnings from a RadiaGate situation, which can in turn be useful, in tackling Online Reputation Management challenges, for brands, via Social Media.

The bigger story of Nira Radia’s taped conversations, the 2G telecom scam, the role played by corporates and politicians, and many more of those issues, will take a long time to become clear. This post is not about RadiaGate or its fall out, per se.

What this post strives to attempt, is to relate the early response from Ratan Tata, in RadiaGate and map it to a possible ORM challenge for a brand, and see what learnings we can take from the same.

So here is what happened, in this context:

Several telephonic conversations involving lobbyist Nira Radia were tapped, and many of these conversations made their way to the public space, via links posted on the Outlook magazine website.

Nira Radia happened to be officially appointed by the Tatas, as their PR representative, and would have been looking after many corporate matters related to the Tatas. As a part of such management, the Chairman of Tatas. Mr. Ratan Tata, would also have need to talk to Nira Radia, sometimes. Now since the phones of Nira Radia were tapped, and those tapped conversations went public, what also went public, were some of her conversations with her client, Ratan Tata.

Considering the stature of Ratan Tata, this was extremely embarrassing, to say the least. Similar small bits of conversations that Mukesh Ambani (another client of Nira Radia) had with Nira, also went public, likewise.

Well, Ratan Tata was angry. As anyone in his place would. But unlike many others, Ratan Tata chose to go public with his feelings, condemning the leaks. It took everyone by surprise, as first of all, Ratan Tata is not one to go to the media ever so often, and secondly, on account of his direct involvement in some of the leaked conversations! Both, the extent and the manner of his response, surprised everyone.

Whether he should have gone public in this manner, with his thoughts or not, could there have been other, better options are all a matter of conjecture.

But visualize the same kind of dirt flying on the Social Media space, instead of publicly accessible tapes. Then, from an ORM point of view, would this have been a right thing to do? What could have been the best means to handle a crisis of this kind?

Recognize first, that there was indeed a crisis. The goodwill of the Tata name had got shaken. It was made to appear that Tatas, like any other group, also use lobbying, to get favors for themselves. And because you hold a person and a group in such high esteem, therefore, it hurts even more. For the hero to have fallen, and seem like an ordinary mortal after all.

It was in the backdrop of such feelings that the public harboured, did Ratan Tata’s protests came. Here then, are some views on this, from and ORM perspective:

1. If as a company or a large brand, you are attacked by far smaller entities – the bloggerati and all – the last thing you want to start doing, is to show how powerful you are. If you come out like an elephant willing to trample them all away, it can only backfire. As the first reactions to Ratan Tata’s strong response showed. In spite of the great respect that the country has for Ratan Tata and the Tata name, when Ratan Tata himself chose to come out and show anger, it appeared as if reality had stung him. That his group had also tried to manipulate (in their own way) for spectrum etc. appeared to question the lofty standards of the Tata group.

Besides everything else, when Ratan Tata takes the fight to the open, it indeed becomes an open fight! And people like MP Rajeev Chandrashekar chose to also take him on, in public, and suddenly it appeared to a lot of dirty linen out for everyone to see!

2. So if one does not come out strongly, does that mean that one takes negative press (and negative social media) lying down? Surely not. There IS a need to act. And act fast too.

In the recently concluded Click Asia Summit, after my talk, I was asked this question. Whether in the totally unpredictable world of Social Media, a company can at all plan its footsteps?! Could the Tata group have “planned” for a situation like RadiaGate?

No, you cannot PLAN for an exact situation. In this very open world of electronic information, Wikileaks and RadiaGate WILL happen. You just don’t know what the next one will be like. And what damage it will cause. So while you cannot plan the exact nature of response, you CAN prepare a protocol and be ready. And not have to be randomly impulsive, and potentially put your foot into your mouth!

Companies need to have a plan, and genuine training to the team, to deal with these new media related challenges that can come any day! A key starting point is to have a Media Monitoring plan in place, especially a Social Media Monitoring one!

3. As a part of the plan, empower the frontline team to respond! I remember the live coverage of 26/11 and the various authorities in whose face, media was prepared to stick a mike. And how they had no clue what to really say. There was no coordinated response, neither was there a preparation at most places, about the ways to deal with situations of this kind. Where 26/11 was television, worst is the case with social media, where any kind of negative news can come, for your brand, and can potentially snowball. Before a Ratan Tata intervened, there would have been lots of questions posed to the frontline folks in Tata Communications. Were they equipped to give any kind of response at all?

4. Play in the same field. So, if someone has put a strong message against you in an online forum, and you choose to go and call a press conference in response. That does not work. No can do. The biggest conversations – at least in open forums – about Ratan Tata and Barkha Dutt and Nira Radia were all happening on Social Media. Ratan Tata, writing a letter in mainline press, or doing a press conference, was fine. But he let the tongues continue to wag on Social Media.

It was important to respond in this space also. Whether it was by posting a YouTube video and then have a team responding back to other queries, or whatever.

5. Strengthen your team with external forces! Yes, you can shout yourself hoarse with your side of the story, and there will always be people who will doubt it. And the more you say, the more questions will be raised, and the more risk of being perceived as guilty! However, can you get force multipliers in terms of external support? Consolidate third party opinions that agree with yours, and give your point of view, that much more credence. Instead of just Ratan Tata fighting the lone battle on behalf of the Tata group, including taking on Rajeev Chandrashekar and the Congress government, could there have been other credible sources who could have been brought in, to strengthen the Tata story? And give it better credibility?

Same approach works in Social Media as well!

6. This is the time when all your earlier good work comes to help. Yes, all those testimonials and your credentials that you have been building up. This is the time to go out and leverage those. Used in a subtle way, the testimonials and credentials now need to give additional credibility to your view point, and make people question the allegations against your brand. Tata might have done it in some measure and could have done a lot more. And you can do it too, in the possible face of any negative mentions against you, on Social Media.

In summary, I would emphasize that there will be more Wikileaks and more RadiaGates. There will also be more of the Dominos cases or the Nestle Greenpeace attacks. This is the new world, the world of new media as well.

It is not about hoping (praying??) that it does not happen to you. But about being aware of the possibility first, and then about having preparation for such eventualities.

Yes, we can learn from what Ratan Tata did right, and also from what he did not do so right.

Executive Summary: Is Social Media Monitoring just an academic exercise, or can it lead to concrete benefits to the Brand? We conducted a Monitoring exercise to find out. The chosen domain was iPod and iPhone speakers and docks. To know more about what we found, read on. (Hint: It was the latter)

The method used for conducting this Social Media Monitoring exercise was essentially similar to the previous exercises carried out by us (Online Travel Sector in India and Hybrid Cars – Whats the Social Media Buzz). The study differed however, in that we completely focused on deriving points of action from it. We specifically chose this particular market  (iPhone and iPod docks) to conduct the exercise, because it was very close to another market/domain (iPods and iPhones themselves) which have a very high level of noise. We would have to ensure, therefore, that the search was very well defined, so that the number of irrelevant results retrieved would be kept in check. The entire exercise involved:

1. Identifying the appropriate search terms to enter into the Social Media Monitoring tool, so as to reduce the number of irrelevant results retrieved. (We restricted the searches to retrieve four days worth of data, June 12th to June 15th)
2. Running the searches, and allowing the Software to perform a first level classification of the results.
3. Our Social Media Executives cleaning up the results, to remove all the irrelevant ones.
4. Higher level, intelligent classification, categorization by our Executives.
5. Analyzing these results to extract points of action, and identifying influencers.

Our learning:

If I was a company about to launch an iPod Dock/Speaker system, what would be the features I would ensure that my product had? Apart from the obvious feature, viz. Good Audio output, our monitoring exercise revealed two features which were highly appreciated:

1. Compatibility with different generations of iPhones/iPods: What may seem to be an obvious enough feature, was not present in some models (eg. Bose SoundDock Portable). Conversely, whenever a mention was made of a dock which had this feature, it was highly praised (eg. GenevaSound Medium).
2. Ability to charge your device while music is being played: This feature, as well, wherever present was highly praised (eg. Harmon Kardon Go + Play). Yet, not all systems seem to have this feature.

On Social Media, Issues resurface, constant vigilance is required. The Bose SoundDock Portable, mentioned above, had a problem. Days after the 3G iPhone was released on 11th July 2008, people started talking about issues with the SoundDock Portable. While charging the iPhone 3G, the dock made a popping/clucking sound, every 5 minutes. This was reported on a particular thread on the Apple Support forums. We saw users helping each other, recounting  their interactions with Bose’s support  (which incidentally, did not reply in the thread). The problem was solvable, requiring the users to send the dock to Bose, who would modify it and send it back. As it happens, three new posts was posted on the the same thread, on 15th June 2009 (which is why the tool picked it up).  These people had the same issue, one year later, and still had to help each other solve it.

Action Required:

We identified results, which merited response as ‘Action Required’ results. They were further classified into ‘Action Required: First Level Response’ and ‘Action Required: Escalate to Customer Service’. Within these four days, we found three results on which we determined action would be required, in terms of escalating those three results to Customer Service. They were all related to the Bose SoundDock and problems associated with the same. The first Action Required result was about Bose SoundDock not being able to charge a users iPod Touch. The second and third results were from the apple support forums, with users talking about the popping/clucking sounds being made by the SoundDock Portable.

Influencer Identification:

From among the various sources where iPod docks were spoken about, Social Media Monitoring also helps us identify the influencers, viz. sources with the widest reach. While the largest number of reviews of various iPod docking systems were on the blog Smart Reviews Online, the popularity rating for this particular blog was 2 (out of a maximum possible rating of 10). On the other hand, the blog Geek.com, which did not always talk about iPod docks, had a popularity rating of 10 (highest rating possible). The only talk about iPod docks on geek.com in this time frame was about the passPORT home dock enables the Soundock to charge iPods while playing them. Another big influencer, with a popularity rating of 10 (source with highest reach or popularity) was, unsurprisingly Apple’s support forums, which had a single thread active, with only three posts during this time frame. It became clear, that frequency of posting (which may lead to a particular blog/channel being seen as influential) may not really be the most popular source.

The above study is an illustration of how monitoring Social Media can very clearly be used to derive well defined and specific action steps. It also helps in identifying which are the most influential sources of information about your product or brand.

The categorization done by our analysts, opens up opportunities for some interesting insights. First let us look at what is the ratio of relevant to irrelevant results from the one’s extracted by the tool:

How do users percieve your brand? What are the thoughts, words they associate with your company? We can analyze the themes being touched upon on Social Media, when people are talking about your brand. In this example, we did this themes analysis on the entire set of relevant results, viz. across brands.

In the tag cloud shown above, larger the size of the word/tag, more closely it is associated with the brand (in this case across brands). The above cloud, for example reveals that the word ‘System’ is very closely associated with speakers/docks, something which should be considered while thinking of a branding strategy for your next product. The word ‘dock’ is individually bigger than ‘speaker’, however, the word ‘speakers’ also figures prominently in the tag cloud.

Now that we know the themes being touched, we want to see which domains have the maximum volume of conversations about iPod Docks and Speakers (a reminder, we are doing this study for the four day period from 12th June to 15th June. It can easily be conducted for longer durations, and on an ongoing basis). The most popular domains, which spoke about iPod speakers, were as per the following image:

If we look at the above graph carefully, we see that there are two posts on Craigslist. Which means there is probably a resales market for iPod docks. We classified these posts concerning resale, and now we can see, which brand has the most resale related posts  for the given duration:

These resale related posts were not restricted to Craigslist alone. Done on an ongoing basis, this can help identify the size of the resale market for a particular brand, or even a particular product.

In previous Social Media Monitoring exercises, we have seen some basic data analysis, including Ratio of Tone within brand, Tone analysis related to product etc. As we can see in this post, much more complex and insightful analysis is possible.

Your questions/comments are invited. What other insights would you like to be able to draw from Social Media?

If you wish to download the White Paper for this study (PDF), you can visit the Resources Page on our website.

Executive Summary:

People ARE talking about your Brand on Social Media. This much you know. Should you be tracking the conversations and interactions? Can actionable insights be delivered to you by monitoring Social Media for your brand (and that of your competitors)? In order to answer these, and other questions, about tracking the activity of your brand on this new media, we conducted a monitoring exercise for Hybrid/Electric cars. What follows is a detailed report of the same.

Contents:

• The Idea
• The Methodology
• Our Findings
  • Relevant/Irrelevant Ratio
  • Competitor Comparison related insights
  • Ratio of Tone, within brand
  • Product Related, by Tone
  • Price Related, by Tone
  • Buying Stage/Lead Generation
• Conclusions drawn/Learning
• Notes/Appendices

The Idea:

(Back To Top)

We have previously performed Social Media Monitoring exercises on the Indian Elections 2009 as well as on the Online Travel Sector in India. We now shifted our focus to the worldwide Hybrid Car market. Our aim was to see if it is possible to get insights about a market, by monitoring the Social Media buzz around the same.

The Methodology:

(Back To Top)

1. We used the industry leading Social Media Monitoring tool SM2 by the people over at Techrigy for the first stage of the process, viz. Capturing the data from across Social Media.

2. Since the study was to be about Hybrid/Electric Cars (as against elections), we decided to query the vast space using some well known brand names in the Hybrid/Electric cars market.
3. We used the SM2 to retrieve results over a 4 day period (12^th June ’09 to 15^th June 09). This period gave us a total of 2822 results. SM2 did a great job of first level Categorization of the results.
4. Then, our team of Social Media Analysts swung into action. Using SM2, we first created a set of categories, which we believed would deliver insights into the monitoring effort.
5. We then analyzed each result, individually, categorizing it as appropriate. Humans, understanding Humans, as we like to say. We then sliced and diced the results, to get some interesting insights.
6. What did we find? Over to the next section.

Our Findings:

Relevant/Irrelevant ratio: (Back To Top)

Even with a very specific query, a large number of results, which had no bearing on the subject were recovered. During the human cleanup phase, these were categorized as irrelevant (What was classified as irrelevant?). These irrelevant results, are not considered while drawing further insights.

Of the total volume of 2822 results, the number of irrelevant results is 1837, the remaining being relevant. In terms of percentage, 65% were irrelevant, whereas 35%, relevant.

Types on insights available:

Competitor Comparison Related: (Back To Top)

If two or more brands of Hybrid/Electric cars have been compared, we marked the result as ‘Competitor Comparison Related’, while also tagging the result according to the tone it uses for each of the companies being compared. 37 relevant results were marked as ‘Competitor Comparison Related’.

Example: Is the Prius too mighty to take down?: (this was marked as being Neutral for both Honda and Toyota, as well as Price Related).

Summary: Among the results tagged as ‘Competitor Comparison’, the recurring comparison was the one between the Toyota Prius (entering its 3rd generation) and the first generation Honda Insight. While the sales of the Insight are said to below expectations and the Prius sales have also fallen, among the two, the 3rd generation Prius emerges ahead of the Insight. Examples: (1, 2).

Ratio of tone, within brand: (Back To Top) 

A brand has some chatter about it. But within this chatter, how much is positive/negative/neutral? How does the percentage of positive/negative/neutral results for a brand stack up against the same percentage for another brand?

Tone For GM: 78% Neutral Mentions, 13% Positive Mentions, 8%Negative Mentions

Summary: The Negative results for GM followed the announcement that GM canceled most of its Hybrid lineup, including the Malibu Hybrid 2010. Largely, the positive results were those which spoke the upcoming Buick having a Hybrid Powertrain.

Tone For Toyota: 78% Neutral Mentions, 19% Positive Mentions, 2%Negative Mentions

Summary: Negative results for Toyota came in the form of Tesla motors CEO saying that the Prius is not a true hybrid. Other negative results were about the Prius not being able to cross the 50 MPG average of fuel efficiency. Positive results for Toyota came from talk around the Prius, which people seem to be happy about, as well as reviews of the Toyota Civic hybrid.

Tone For Ford: 72% Neutral Mentions, 26% Positive Mentions, <1%Negative Mentions

Summary: The one negative result about Ford concerns how Toyota is beating Ford and GM, by employing lean business practices, allowing them to come up with innovate faster and cheaper as in the     case of the Prius. The largest number of positive results for Ford were around Senator McCain planning to buy a Ford Fusion Hybrid.

Product Related, by tone: (Back To Top)

When someone is talking about the features of your product (in this case, a Hybrid car), what tone does she use?

Take Toyota, for example. If a brand manager at Toyota wanted to find out, if someone has spoken on Social Media about the brand using a negative tone, this can be done. We can see all results with a negative tone, about its product (viz. The car itself, as against price, availability etc.). The following result matches the criteria:

Why is the Toyota Prius such a bore:

This result is ideal for posting a response to, and could have been escalated to the relevant department.

Summary: By far, the largest number of results for all brands are Product related. The Product related category is where correct Categorization can yield great results, as seen in the above example. The topics being discussed are by and large:

• People discussing news and events related to the brands (1, 2)
• Features of existing Products (1, 2)
• Upcoming releases (1, 2)

Price Related, by tone: (Back To Top)

39 results have been Categorized as ‘Price related’. Example: Honda Insight a Flop?

(This has been categorized into Honda: Tone Negative, Price Related)

Summary: Most price related results were about the Toyota Prius and the Honda Insight. The Honda Insight is priced at $2000 less than the Prius, and in response, Toyota has slashed the price of its car by $1000. Despite the lower cost, the Honda Insight is likely to miss its sales target.

Buying Stage/Lead Generation: (Back To Top)

As we saw in the case of travel websites, listening to Social Media can be used as a method of lead generation as well.

An example of a result Categorized as ‘Buying: Early Stage’:

Summary: In the Buying Stage: Early category, people spoke about cars which they were considering as possible purchases. In the Buying Stage: Late category, most of the noise was around Senator McCain’s decision to buy a Ford Fusion.

Conclusions Drawn/Learning:

(Back To Top)

About the Hybrid Cars Market, and related chatter on Social Media:

1. In terms of Social Media Volume the largest brands are Toyota, GM, Ford and Honda
2. The most discussed cars are Prius, Insight, Fusion and Civic
3. Smaller brands are also being spoken about on Social Media, with much lower volume.
4. The most discussed topics surrounding these brands and cars are the products themselves (features etc.), upcoming releases, price related issues, comparisons and news related to the brands/cars. There was also discussion related to the fact that despite the 24 hour production schedule of Toyota, there still exists a waiting period for the Prius.

About the Social Media Monitoring Exercise:

1. For any Brand/Company interested in knowing about the Social Media chatter surrounding them, this kind of a Social Media Monitoring exercise can deliver great value as well as actionable insights.

2. Such an exercise entails

• A Social Media monitoring tool, which can extract relevant data from across Social Media properties, based on the query that is set up.
• Setting up a Query, in such a manner that all possible relevant results are captured, while at the same time minimizing the incidence of irrelevant results being caught.
• Setting up of appropriate categories which will allow for better analysis of the data gathered. Both the above (query and category set up) are iterative in nature, with ongoing tweaking required.
• Beyond this, a layer of human intervention is absolutely necessary. The results retrieved by the tool need to be cleaned, by humans.
• To these cleaned results, appropriate rigorous categorization of the results must be done.These Categorized-by-Humans results can then be sliced and diced to derive actionable insights.

Your questions/comments are invited, of course.

—————————————————————————-

Notes and Appendices:

(Back To Top)

NOTE: The above report is an analysis of the Social Media buzz around the subject of Hybrid Vehicles. None of the above statements represent any personal views of ours, on the subject.

NOTE: The numbers mentioned above, say for GM, are only of those results in which the brand name ‘GM’ (or ‘General Motors’ and its variations thereof) was mentioned. The same is the case with the other results as well.

What was classified as irrelevant? (Back To Top)

Two kinds of results were classified as irrelevant:

1. Results which were not related to Hybrid/Electric Cars: Many results talk about the different brands mentioned in the query and use the words ‘Hybrid’ and ‘Electric’ in a context other than the one relevant to the search. Example.

2. Results related to Hybrid/Electric Cars, which are irrelevant to people interested in monitoring the brand: Some results like link farms (blogs with only links pointing to other pages), many wiki talk pages (where the brand/product reference is not edited). Example.

[Edits: Tweaked the Title and the above notes]

[Edits 2: Changed graph style, formatting, added menu]

If you wish to download the White Paper for this study (PDF), you can visit the Resources Page on our website.