The Full Monty

Say you work for a brand. Customers have more access to you than ever - and you've got a wealth of choices as far as channels go: traditional marketing, online & interactive, gaming, mobile, social media, etc.

But for your customers that are interested in interacting online, what do you think they want from you? And what should you do when you connect with them? Look no further! eMarketer Daily has very helpfully published a piece on Lightspeed Research's "Global Web Index."

What do customer want from the brands they love? Information, mostly (well, after a good discount, anyway). Ultimately, they want value. They're not there to be "friends," or to get your time-wasting app - they want something that's relevant to them that helps push the relationship forward.

Something to think about when thinking about your online strategy.

Chart courtesy of eMarketer.

I originally wrote this over a year ago, but I think it deserves another go around, as there seem to be even more social media "experts" out there. Please add your suggestion to the comments section or on Twitter with the hashtag #smbulb and let's see how many responses we can get.

Stop me if you've heard this.

Yesterday, I asked a question on Twitter - one that Joseph Jaffe rhetorically asked on his blog - I posed it as a joke and asked for responses.

The question was: How many social media experts does it take to change a lightbulb? My original answer on Joe's blog was: "309. One to come up with the idea, three to turn it into a strategy, five to execute it, and 300 to influence someone else to do it."

Naturally, responses to my question were far better than my lame punchline. Here are some examples of what I received:

@mncahill: 14,465 to twitter about the need for "LightBulbCamp" and one to hire a developer to change it.

@scottaparks: None, it never gets changed. They are too busy looking for a better bulb!

@cohnjoyne: before I tell you how many soc media experts it takes to screw in a light bulb, full disclosure, GE is a client of mine

@adam_rosenberg: at least 10. that way you have 1 to change it and at least 9 to tweet about it.

@scottstead: A: 500, Chris Brogan to ask the question, 495 to respond, 3 to organize #changealightbulbweek08, 1 to change the lightbulb

@ScottWitsToo: 3. One to change bulb. Two to discuss how we could change light bulbs better if only we could talk ad nauseum about the process

@LewisG: At least two, so an argument over the ethics of monetization can occur.

@jtobin: A team of 6 will happily consult, but nobody actually wants to execute the light bulb change for you. :-)

And this one from @jeffglasson: 4, Mitch Joel to give 6 steps to open the package, Brogan to write a 100 blog post series on the process, L. Feldman to score the puppet adaptation, and CC Chapman to actually screw the lightbulb in and get the job done!

My favorite was from @dmscott: What's your budget?

Got a retort humorous? Let me know by leaving a comment, or share the joke with some friends.

Photo credit: zetson (Flickr)

It's all about usability. 

Common sense dictates that the easier something is to accomplish, the more readily it will be passed along. What information do you ask your customers to submit? And of that, which is really necessary? Less is more.

Courtesy of Stuff That Happens.

I'm perfectly capable of wasting it myself.

According to a recent poll by Ruder Finn, 100% of the people on the Internet go online to pass the time. But what other activities do they say they primarily use it for?

For those of you interested in the social space, 92% want to connect with others, 76% wish to discuss, 72% aspire to be part of a community, and 56% desire to influence others, and 52% hope to activate support. Those are pretty strong numbers.

Especially when you compare them to the percentage of people who wish to manage finances, comparison shop or join a cause (all 30% or less). Hmm. I wonder if that means we'll have a generation of people who are too busy yapping with each other to pay attention to how they spend their money?

Unless they connect and discuss personal finances with others in an influential community. :-)

Chart source: eMarketer

Also cross-posted at: http://www.scottmonty.com/2009/10/recent-facebook-demographics.html

If you get a chance, check out the latest statistics from InsideFacebook.com. Please keep in mind that these are only number for the United States. But there are some things that stand out:

Looking at percentages, the highest growth rate is coming from the over-45 demographic:

While the absolute number of members is smaller in that group, the growth rate is fascinating to watch. I would imagine this will eventually slow, as we've seen with the younger demographic, until it normalizes. In anecdotal conversations, I'm finding that many people from this demographic are using Facebook to connect with high school and college friends (especially as we move into reunion time), stay in touch with children and grandchildren, and even begin to use it for some business networking purposes.

Another worthwhile graph from the post breaks down current U.S. users by age:

If you bundle up the groups, you'll find that the 35 and older crowd makes up 38% of Facebook's population here in the U.S. Pretty cool when you consider that Facebook started about five years ago as a college-based tool.

And finally, looking at gender, we find that - in every single segment - there are more female users than male users of Facebook:

While we know that overall women use social networks more than men, I wonder how many of us are using that knowledge to effectively feed our marketing and communications programs? Seems like there's a good opportunity there.

Do any of these data strike you differently? Can you draw any conclusions or make inferences that I've missed? Let me know.

Chart credit: InsideFacebook.com

One of the great features of the South by Southwest Interactive conference (that's SXSWi to you) is the plethora of panels and speakers there are to hear from. In many cases, you have to make hard choices because of an embarrassment of riches, so to speak.

If you've never gone to SXSW, I strongly recommend it, whether you're learning about social media or you're a representative for your company in the field. You'll meet plenty of other talented and like-minded individuals, you'll see new technology debuted (it's where Twitter first made a big splash), and you'll be able to hear some industry thought leaders. Not to mention you'll have a chance to keep Austin weird. If you can only attend one social media conference a year, make it this one. 

Each year, the organizers of SXSW open it up to us plebs to select which panels we'd most like to see. Never one to say no, I've been asked by five different individuals to be part of their panels. Here they are. Feel free to vote for (or against) as many as you like.

1. #youFAIL: Respond or Die in Social Media - featuring Planet Hollywood and Miramax Films, moderated by Kirk Skodis
2. Social Networking for Dealers: Cultivate Relationships First - moderated by Mary Butler from Razorfish
3. Virtual Experience vs. Advertising to Change Brand Perception - with ABC and Qik, moderated by Tom Martin
4. Building Social Strategies at Fortune 100 Companies - a who's-who of brands, from SAP to Microsoft, Nationwide Insurance to IBM and Dell and moderated by Jim Storer
5. Can You Tame the Twitter Beast? These Brands Think So - Jesse Engle, CEO of CoTweet moderates this panel that inclues Whole Foods, Sports Illustrated and Starbucks.

But be kind. I'd like a chance to see some panels as well. ;-) And while you're at it, take a look around the Interactive Panel Picker and select some others. There are plenty to choose from.

Photo credit: The Laughing Squid (Flickr)

Not quite, it would seem.

While we in business are seeing some advances from companies that are learning how to become more transparent, it's clear that the scientific community is stuck in the relative Dark Ages. Case in point: check out this guide on How To Publish a Scientific Comment in 1 2 3 Easy Steps (embedded below).

It would be funny if it weren't tragic.

I suppose it's a chance for those of us who understand and operate in the realm of online communications and social media to be thankful that we embrace instantaneous commenting and direct access to authors. That we co-create instead of hoard. That we can request assistance and get dozens of replies from people willing to collaborate for the sake of solving a problem or helping a colleague. That's precisely how open source software has allowed us to advance farther faster. iPhone app, anyone?

What if the scientific community were more collaborative (and I'm speaking about the publications here, not institutions themselves)? Or at the very least, collegial? What if journals and scientific publications held their authors to such high standards that they required more open disclosure of data, processes, and errors? Wouldn't that be something that we could all benefit from? The process below stands to illustrate the old thinking of self-promotion, fiefdoms, and jealously guarded secrets.

There must be a better way.

How to Publish a Scientific Comment in 1 2 3 Easy Steps

Last month, we gave a driving experience to a blogger who had been skeptical of the U.S. auto industry, and pretty vocal about her position. Today, all that has changed.

Please read this post from CityMama and share it with anyone you think should see it. It shows how blogger relations, done properly, can change long-held perceptions about your company.

If you don't read Seth Godin's blog, you should. Here's a great interview with Seth by Josh Bernoff on Ad Age.

Very interesting and in-depth report on how the auto, financial and pharma industries - among others - are using social media. http://www.goingsocialnow.com/2009/07/launching-fluent-the-social-in.html