ôîðåêñ áàíê âòá …

Paying for hard metrics and encouraging that practise will only result in pay per post and rev share for video view type activity. I know that isn’t what you mean – but that is what would happen.

In this industry and economy, agencies can’t run if they’re having spending more resource than they’re being paid for on making something go naturally viral. The idea of creating something which is naturally viral is oxymoronic anyway as if it happens naturally, then it can’t be forced.

As Brad always says… “Money in… money out” – and guaranteeing results through practices which can’t be guaranteed would bring agencies to their knees if they tried it. As a business owner – I wouldn’t want to be in that position at all.

Also if the business objective is 25k visits and nothing further, then clients would be better informed to spend their money on PPC which will do that much more cost effectively.

Think you’ll have to re-think this my friend.

-tobeconfirmed-

And there’s plenty of opinion on how to compare brand measures to share value and longterm revenue.

I think the stumbling point is measuring the effect on brand resulting from digital campaigns. Reach of a single advert (or blog or Fb page or campaign thought etc) is rarely high enough to use traditional methods to measure this.

Digital branding activity always provokes a trackable reaction. What hasn’t been solved is how to attribute value to each different type of interaction (views, chatter, sales, ect.). I think the answer lies in buzz monitoring because it’s the broadest spectrum here. And once digital spend is high enough then there will always be some sort of chatter as a response. The key is not the level of buzz but in the sentiment of the chatter. The analysis on this could be awesome. Plenty of work by Onalytica on attributing buzz uplift to sales.

Nice post. Big topic. Time to us to sort it.

Not necessarily social media but general digital activity – you create something for your consumers to interact/engage with – how do you know HOW MANY is success? (and OF COURSE that in many cases it’s the quality and depth of engagement rather than volume of traffic/interaction/fans/readers but still – if we want clients to shift more £££ to digital, we should be able to tell them what success look in the medium of permission etc.

I’m starting to believe that in that sense we should start working like traditional advertising. The client will set the targets – i.e “I want 25K people interacting with your work”. Our answer should be: fair enough – pay for media worth 25K visits – anything beyond that is a ‘viral bonus’ that is due to the strength of the creative and so the agency will be rewarded accordingly.

Anyone with me on this?

In my head, there is a sort of dial where reach and (average?) engagement are inversely proportional. They aren’t mutually exclusive, but I believe a campaign should focus on one and not both. Each campaign needs to decide where they want to be on that dial

One of the more successful strategies we’ve had is to align the softer social metrics with their existing ATL framework (e.g. COI = Artemis).

On a more direct note, Scoble made a great point on TWIT last week about twitter and site statistics (no. 181, about 1hour 29 mins in)

“There is a direct correlation, If they’re talking about you on tweetdeck your hits are Up, if not they are down”

clearest case for social that i’ve heard.

http://tinyurl.com/bb4k8m

People who make money online (say roughly, catalogue retailers, financial services providers, travel agents, paid-content suppliers, software developers, SaaS providers, and publishers) know pretty much the value of their interactions.

Real value for many clients is still measured in hard currency (or sales). For other clients (our healthcare clients, for example) it’s measured in behavioural transactions — things like “number of people being screened for disease x”.

Ultimately, I think we have to be able to tie things to the bottom line. That seems like a pretty good benchmark.

I think a Facebook page should be as much a customer service tool as a marketing one. Like a call centre. What is the KPI for a call centre? What is the measure of a happy customer? I think Orange have this cracked – their call centre people are lovely and very helpful. I asked one once why this was, and she said “Oh, I don’t know. They train us on the phones and that, but then they just kind of tell us to be ourselves”. Measure that…..

Also, digital suffers because everything works. Read revolution or new media age, look at the IAB website. It is literally impossible to fail at digital. I have never read about a strategy that didn’t work, and work brilliantly. I’ve worked on a few, but maybe I’m shit?

This probably isn’t helping, is it? I think the way to measure it is to try to put a value on the interaction, not on volume. This can be done through ugly but necessary tools like exit surveys, panels, telephone research etc. Define how you want the interaction to affect or influence behaviour, then measure for that. Then multiply that by your volumes. Our friends in DM should be all over this.

Great question.