Global Neighbourhoods: GNTV: How BuzzLogic Calculates Influence
Shel Israel, discussing how BuzzLogic Calculates Influence, says:
What I liked was that this was a simple, straightforward measurement designed to see a monetary return on a hard dollar investment.
But, much of social media’s goals is less tangible.
(emphasis mine)
What he’s referring to at the start of the quote is Kami Huyse’s wonderful work calculating the ROI of the Sea World San Antonio campaign that launched their new roller coaster. It was a great case study by a fast-rising star of social PR.
But I’m struck by that last sentence of Shel’s quote (and not only by the grammatical gaffe.) When I heard Shel Holtz discussing Kami’s work on For Immediate Release, as soon as he mentioned measurement of ROI, and before he got into the meat of the segment, I remember thinking “Who measures the ROI of having a desk or wearing decent clothes?”
Yes, when you launch a social media campaign, you ought to think about how you’ll define and measure success. But if you’re still on the fence about using social media at all, I believe it’s time you started thinking about having a presence (on Twitter and a blog at minimum) in much the same way you think about basic office equipment and your business wardrobe. No, a social media presence isn’t a minimum requirement of doing business, not just yet, but that corner will be turned so soon, so suddenly, and so quietly, that you’re safest–by far–turning the corner yourself as soon as you can.
May 1st, 2008 at 2:32 pm
What a great perspective. I think that you are right - and not about the fast-rising star bit;-)
I am totally committed to showing my clients hard dollar value where possible, but one of the coolest things about the campaign is the relationships that we built with the coaster community. It probably certainly has a bottom line impact, but there is no way to determine what it is. However, it has an immediate impact in the input we receive, maybe averting a public opinion disaster, maybe getting great feedback for improvement that increases guest satisfaction - whatever it does it isn’t measurable but yet has intrinsic value.
May 1st, 2008 at 3:41 pm
Thanks for the very thoughtful post. I agree with Kami’s comment above. My issue with you is over grammar. I actually paused on the is/are issue. You assume “goals is the subject, but it cannot be, because it’s the object of a preposition.The subject is “much,” a word usually used as an adjective. I maintain “Much is,” is the appropriate subject verb.
May 1st, 2008 at 9:03 pm
Oh, my God. Shel Israel’s a grammar geek!
I think you’re absolutely right, Max, that organizations need their people to participate actively in the various communities and conversations taking place that pertain to them. There’s a case to be made for such participation. But even with that as the goal, results-focused executives will look for proof that an adequate presence has been established and that it is producing results more positive than negative. I haven’t met a CEO yet who would accept, “I can’t prove it’s working, but my gut tells me it is.”
Measurement can also tell you if you’re using the right tools in the right places with the right people, which is the step that comes after deciding that a presence is necessary.
May 2nd, 2008 at 10:53 am
Two Shels! My beach bucket runneth over!
Shel Israel: I guess I’m kinda red in the face.
When I was pastor of the Friends Church, I learned to practice a certain kind of restraint which isn’t first nature with me: For 4 years I made it a rule not to correct anyone’s English.
There were exceptions. The exceptions were when non-native speakers had explicitly invited me to correct them because they wanted to improve, plus the one time someone very insistently corrected me, and he was wrong, and telling him so was the easiest way of ending that conversational sidetrack and getting us back to theology.
Since leaving the pastorate, I’ve mostly decided to stick to the same resolve. Yet I stupidly pointed out what I thought was a “grammatical gaffe” in your post, and I feel dumb about it.
It was just a case of my feeling the need to let everyone know that I know about this stuff. It was unnecessary.
But, Shel, if you tell me you actually welcome correction, I’ll tell you why I still think you got it wrong.
xo,
Max
May 2nd, 2008 at 11:07 am
Shel Holtz: No disagreement here. Even if there’s no campaign in the works, a company needs to have a clue whether its employees’ participation in social media is positive, negative, or neutral. In the same way a professional can do plenty of spending on wardrobe but still have bad taste, a blogger can reflect badly on his/her firm, not by actively dissing the firm, but just by doing non-brand-safe blogging.
I’m sure we both agree, also, that when it’s no longer a matter of baseline participation, but there’s a planned campaign involved, measurement needs to be kicked up a notch. It was this that Kami did so well.