Showing posts with label Social Behavior. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Social Behavior. Show all posts

Tuesday, February 5, 2008

Twitter Google SuperTuesday Mashup Is Cool

I know it's a weak title for this post, but the Twitter / Google mashup map is cool, and I wanted to talk about it briefly as I am engaged with it. (map courtesy of TechCrunch)

As I sit on my couch watching coverage of the primaries on CNN, I'm also following the map on my laptop. People from all over the world are commenting -- from California to Maine, to Brazil and Spain.

I love the instant connection of commenting and talking to others on my twitter feed. But to actually see people's locations pop up every couple of seconds on the map makes the circle that I follow feel even more personal. It not just an avatar I can relate to, but a place, and that place no longer feels so distant or removed.

--

On a more business-y note, an article on Techcrunch talks about Google collaborating with Twitter on this mashup, despite purchasing a Twitter rival, Jaiku, last fall. I like that Google values the Twitter audience, and recognizes something special about us (our numbers? our locations? our influencer status? our early adopter behaviors?).

Does this mean Twitter will become more mainstream (if it isn't already)? I love the connections I make on Twitter -- the authors of the blog feeds I follow, and the people I talk to on Gooruze are on Twitter. I value their opinions, and like that I can find them all in one place. For professional development, its a huge influencer and guide.

Sunday, January 27, 2008

Kia's Making an Effort, Social Media Made it Happen

I wanted to write this before I forget. My Kia issues have been resolved. After just 2 weeks of venting my Kia frustrations via social media outlets, they finally contacted me to help us move toward a resolution.

Suffice it to say, my happiness can be bought. Essentially, I'm a cheap date, and I'm a sucker for some nice words and a little effort. I'd rather be in a positive relationship than a negative one, so I'll keep up my end of the bargain if they will. Are you tired of the cliche's yet? I'll move on.

Anyway, the Kia customer service representative who I'm working with said something interesting during our talks. Though Kia received my complaint letter via snail mail back in August 2007, it wasn't until they saw one of my numerous social media posts that they acted. Apparently, there are some sites Kia monitors, and one of my rants came to their attention.

He alluded to the fact that Kia, and other companies he was familiar with, are still trying to wrap their heads around these types of conversations being posted on the web, and how to go about mediating them. Given my interest and research into the topic of companies using social media, I'm not surprised.

I'm only disappointed that it had to go this far. That I had to invest the time and effort to post my grievances online -- all the while getting more angry -- to finally get their attention.

But I was a little surprised (and very pleased) that the customer service representative didn't ask me to remove or update any of my posts. I've decided to update them voluntarily, because I feel it's the responsible thing to do.

Wednesday, November 28, 2007

Get Your Company To Know Your Customer

Before starting graduate school, I worked for an organization* that had an internal communication vehicle called the Buzz, which published several times a week on the company's intranet. The Buzz reported on company projects, new associates, new procedures, etc. Its purpose was to keep associates in the loop on the goings on of the company, and hopefully help them feel more engaged with its growing infrastructure.

Often, buzz stories centered on new client work - the unique demands of the project, the innovative services we were applying, and so on. But as I think about it, we never really got to know the customer. Sure, we would be briefed on the client company, but did we really know the actual people we were working for?

Often, when a consumer interacts with a faceless company, there is an emotional detachment that can lead to behaviors that would be regarded as unacceptable in a face to face encounter. Think about a time you wrote a scathing communication to an underperforming company (I'm guilty of it...this past summer Kia got an 'earful' from me in a very long, very detailed letter). And in a state of absolute frustration, consider how simple it is to harshly criticize a product feature on an organization’s community forum or feedback page.

This concept unfortunately also works in reverse. Have you ever noticed how much easier it is to let a deadline slip by (but it was just a day or so, you tell yourself) when the only interaction you've had with a client is over email? Or, when in a meeting with your coworkers you spoke in a careless or rude manner about a challenging client? After all, the client doesn’t really know what they want, do they? Before you know it, the impact of those detached behaviors could cost you a client relationship.

I think there is a great opportunity with corporate intranets to introduce associates to actual customers, the people they are working for one on one. Through a simple interview, an organization can provide a face to a project or customer - for example, a profile on Mark Smith, his role within his organization, reasons why he chose to work with your company or buy your product. Companies would better position their associates to provide an exceptional experience, namely because they would feel a greater degree of accountability when relating to a person rather than a corporation.

*I used to work for WD Partners, a firm specializing in delivering an exceptional prototype and rollout experience for national retail and restaurant clients.

Wednesday, October 24, 2007

Is Radiohead's Pricing Experiment a Sign of Things To Come?

By now, the Radiohead set-your-own-price-for-their-CD event is old news in the blogging world. 1.2 downloads in the first week at roughly $8 a pop. I'm not even a Radiohead fan, but I am intrigued by their unorthodox pricing experiment, and what it means to the future of transaction pricing.

Presumably, Radiohead wanted to tap into the emerging social networking phenomena. Their fans are likely an Internet savvy, texting-obsessed, MySpace lovin' group. It just so happens that this demographic is comfortable "sharing" digital versions of music with each other, or would maybe pay only for a song or two. Radiohead (and their label*) likely hopes to find extra album sales from these folks who would otherwise not have shelled out for the entire compilation. Their willingness to enter into this type of transaction is a proclamation that they respect and trust their fan base. As a financial consideration, it is evidence they are confident in their brand equity and reputation.

This pricing strategy is especially uncommon because it has to do with intellectual property. Simple economics dictates that if an owner of intellectual property is not compensated for their contributions, there is lack of incentive for future innovation (aside from artists, think pharmaceuticals).

However, as an adoption strategy, the logic behind this type of pricing isn't new. For example, weight management (and social networking) website thedailyplate.com (TDP) is a community of over 100,000 people using TDP's free on-line food tracking software to track their caloric intake. Users have the option of paying a fee for some lite-weight bonus features. And devoted TDP users do, despite the fact that the bonus features are little more than the addition of some cute graphics and priority for service requests. But their is no requirement, no hassling, no annoying emails, no pressure whatsoever to contribute. Those that contribute have determined there is value in TDP, and want to see it succeed.

Many websites offer free services, and (like thedailyplate.com) get much of their revenues from advertising. But with online ads having questionable relevance and low click-thru rates, they may have to modify their business model to stay profitable. Has Radiohead shown us that if there is trust and respect between business and consumer, the goodwill will work both ways?

This is a level of participation and collaboration that is relatively rare. Web 2.0 principles are ushering in new behaviors between business and consumer. Beyond marketing and communication, traditional pricing for products and services may be challenged by this participation-driven phenomena. As an afterthought, I'm struck by the similarity between Radiohead's fans determining their album's value, and tipping a waiter or waitress for their service. Could the the future of payment be determined on value after the fact?

--

*Ammendement: According to The Week (11/9/2007) Radiohead released their album online with this pricing experiment without any help or guidance from their label. In fact, Radiohead frontman, Thom Yorke, says "...you have to ask yourself why anyone needs [a record label] anymore." The music industry's decaying business model is leading artists to explore new ways to distribute their work.