When I checked out this weeks readings I was a little disappointed to see the Starbucks case was all taken up. Nonetheless the Fortune 500 case was pretty interesting. I liked how it changed my idea that the biggest, most successful, and sometimes the oldest companies were actually using social media so well. It goes to show social media is the real deal. Aside from changing my view point of the Fortune 500, I was surprised to see how many companies use Twitter, and I also liked the idea of "absorption" by companies.
Both of these ideas go hand in hand. Twitter allows for quick and concise communication, and absorption of this information by a company really determines how successful a social media campaign is. I imagine if a company really wants to engage customers, they also want to do so a simply as possible. Twitter confines comments, questions, and outbursts to 140 characters. By keeping all of this information short a company can easily analyze it and act upon is rapidly. Whether an online response, total company apology, or physical change is called for a company can do so immediately.
From the three cases, I found Coca-Cola using social media the best. They had several official outlets run by the company, but also had customer run communities set up with specific guidelines to keep usage in line. Coke also has a blog run by the company historian, which aside from being cool, is essential to their brand. Coca-Cola is one of the oldest and the most recognizable brand in the world. By having a historical based blog they really enhance their brand and stick to their heritage and roots.
In all the reading had a lot of older things we have discussed, but some great ideas inside. I would give it a 7/10
I'd like to know: Is absorption and responsiveness the most important trait for successful social media? And what other cool social media developments have you seen similar to Coke's historical blog?
Charlie,
ReplyDeleteI was also really impressed with how well Coca-Cola used social media. I was surprised to see that they had so many different facebook and twitter pages. My question was who would be in charge of monitoring and policing each of the pages. At the same time, though, I wondered why Coca-Cola only had one blog, even though a histocial based blog is a great way to make known their values and background. I too liked the idea of absorption because if companies arent monitoring the sites and aren't learning from what their customers have to offer, then what's the point of having them at all. I think responsiveness is an indicator of this absorptive capacity because the company is recognizing the contributions that individuals are making. Since this is the first time i've ever really looked into anything like this, i haven't seen many other cool developments but I am interested to hear about what they may be--there is so much that can be done with social media!
I think absorption and responsiveness are hugely important to a successful social media strategy. If an organization sets up outlets for consumers to interact with the organization, but it doesn't respond, it won't go unnoticed by those online collaborators. Consumers want to feel that they are being heard, that's why these forums have been so successful. Another successful strategy that I've seen, especially on twitter, is when organizations use their twitter feed as a window into the company. I've seen this implemented successfully by @bravotv and @zappos. Both of these feeds quote their employees, post jokes and even pictures of employees having fun. While these posts have nothing to do with the product per se, it makes the consumer feel like they're in on an inside joke. It ultimately promotes positive feelings toward the organization.
ReplyDeleteI response to your question Charlie, I would definitely agree with Amanda, responsiveness and absorption are very important in providing for the success of a company's social media strategy. However, I think Communispace last week taught us an important lesson, absorption and responsiveness are important, but so is the art of listening. To effectively run a successful social media platform it is essential not only to provide capable and accommodating tool, however there is an essential need to listen and digest what is being said and THEN acting on response.
ReplyDeleteI totally agree with what Hadley said....
ReplyDeleteResponsiveness and absorption are very important, but at the same time the art of listening is essential. You have to listen to what customers are thinking and what they want from you, and then have to response to that. If you are not listening to them, i don't think there is no point of using social media platform b/c social media platform is for consumers and company to interact with each other in easier and more effective way.
I think you hit the nail on the head with "quick and concise" -- some companies have tried to overcomplicate things, and Twitter and many other social media tools force them to keep it simple. To quote Jack Welch, "If you're not simple, you can't be fast, and if you're not fast, you're dead." Although he wasn't talking about social media specifically, I think it is a relevant point. It is much easier to stay engaged with a company that you can follow on Twitter, FB, etc... you feel that it is a two way conversation vs. getting spam type e-mails or letters in the mail.
ReplyDelete