ImpactWatch Blog

MarketingProfs, an online resource for marketers, released some rather interesting results from a case study they recently did.  The survey was conducted in June 2009 across several marketing and social media outlets, and it included a total of 338 completed responses.  It shows that more companies understand the relevance of using social media to grow business.

Interesting findings:

• Lack of resources was the most cited reason (30%) for lack of social media engagement.
• Almost 80% of the respondents plan to increase social media involvement in the upcoming six months.
• 87% said that social media was either “important” or “somewhat important” to their companies.

MarketingProfs has also released a study called “Social Media ROI Success Stories: How 11 companies – like OfficeMax, Nissan, BMC and Microsoft – are listening, engaging and measuring.”

“While social media marketing remains hugely popular, it’s clear from these results that few have confidence in their ability to track and measure it from an ROI perspective,” said Ann Handley, Chief Content Officer for MarketingProfs. “Until marketers figure out the measurement game, brands may resist increasing their social media investments.”

It’s interesting that lack of resources is the number one reason that companies claim lack of social media work within their business.  I would have assumed lack of tools, but perhaps there is an over-abundance of those while companies simply don’t know what to do with them.  In the coming months, there will probably be more and more listings for dedicated social media positions/jobs at major corporations.

Lately all brands are trying to get into the social media game, but which ones are doing to the best job?  A new study by Charlene Li of Altimeter Group and Wetpaint ranks the top brands by social media engagement.  Below are the top social media mongers:

1. Starbucks (127)
2. Dell (123)
3. eBay (115)
4. Google (105)
5. Microsoft (103)
6. Thomson Reuters (101)
7. Nike (100)
8. Amazon (88)
9. SAP (86)
10. Tie – Yahoo!/Intel (85)

The brands are categorized from “mavens” (those with the best social media engagement) to “wallflowers” (those with the least).  The study claims that there is a correlation between a high ranking and revenue growth.  Erick Schonfeld disagrees, stating that the brands with the most revenue are likely to be the most socially engaged anyway.  Decide for yourself which way the circular logic turns by reading the full report.

Twitter has completely changed the ease by which viewers can quickly review a movie.  It only takes 140 characters to type “This movie was awesome!” or “This movie was an abomination of film!”  Many Twitter users even talk about the film while they are watching it, curtly ignoring the friendly reminders to turn off their cell phones before the film begins.

I decided to do a quick analysis of tweets from this weekend concerning the new Star Trek flick.  I haven’t seen the film yet, but the positive reviews and hype surrounding it have definitely peaked my interest.  After taking a gander at the tweets, I’m nearly raving to go see it.

I took a look at 500 tweets from Saturday, May 9, a day after the movie had premiered in theaters.  Below is a pie chart with the breakdown.

180 of the tweets were people telling the world that they were going to see the movie, in the middle of seeing the movie, or just leaving from seeing the movie.  155 tweets described the movie in some positive manner, with one-word compliments ranging from ‘wicked’ to ‘brilliant’.  15 tweets cited negative things about the film, from complaints about canon changes to bad acting.  If a tweet said something about seeing the film but included a positive or negative review, the tweet was classified as ‘positive’ or ‘negative’ and not in the ‘going’ category.

Of the remaining tweets, 35 of them were links to reviews or news articles about high box office sales.  10 talked about how the film was not for “just fans” of the series.  The remaining 55 out of 500 didn’t fall into any of these categories.

In addition to the above categorical analysis, 50 of the 500 tweets contained @replies to someone, showing the conversation emerging.  Only one included the hash tag #startrek, while another one contained the hilarious #whyidonthaveagirlfriend.  Also, seven mentioned the Burger King collectable glasses sold in conjunction with the film’s release.

There were far more than 500 tweets on Saturday about the movie, and if this sample is any indication, the Twitter world highly recommends the film.  While I certainly don’t approve of people using their cell phones in the theater, it’s pretty amazing to think that you can immediately know your friends’ impressions of a movie before seeing it yourself.

Perhaps films should use Twitter to help promote their movies?  Specifically assigned Twittering employees of the production could answer question about the film as well as promote it online.  Several TV shows like Eureka are already going similar things so it’d definitely be worth looking into.

John D. Sutter of CNN seems to think Twitter is going to cause a riot.  In this article he explains how new media is helping create a “hotbed of unnecessary hype and misinformation about the outbreak.”  Others like Sean M. Wood of Communi-K believe that mainstream media is more likely to spread panic in an attempt to scrap up new readers in their dying industry.

Interestingly, a lot of Internet attention has shifted from factual information about the epidemic to stories about how news of the epidemic is being spread.  I have a working theory that Ashton Kutcher created Swine Flu.  After all, how else would you explain his recent battle (again, coincidentally with CNN) for top Twitter-god?

Thanks to celebrities like him, Twitter has finally surpassed being only for those ‘in the know’ to being ‘for anyone with a pulse and computer’.  People who once ignored the social media tool are now taking notice thanks to the Ashton-CNN-gate and the Swine Flu controversy.  And let’s not forgot the supposed ‘Oprah Effect’ that some speculate to have increased user numbers by over one million.

So with all these new users, is there cause for worry that social media will begat panic (as this comic so hilariously illustrates)?  Below is a recently made graph showing the number of tweets concerning the topic:

The tweets are mostly offhand comments about the disease.  Some contain links to recent news while lots re-ask the common questions about eating pork.  While many are discussing it, no one is saying anything new.  The tweets don’t seem to be causing panic any more than in-person chat would do.  If anything, I notice a lot of informative replies and Direct Messages to some of the sillier questions.  This could actually ease panic by calming the masses.  Isn’t that the point of social media (and heck, the Internet) in the first place?  To be as informed as possible.

UPDATE: Luckily, thousands of tweets are pouring in this morning about Adam Lambert’s bottom two appearances on American Idol, nearly just as many as about swine flu.  Twitterers are getting back to normal.

CrossFit is an excellent example of using smart Web 2.0 tactics to gain popularity among the online world.  The ideology began in the 1980s with creator Greg Glassman (who sounds suspiciously like he dated Jan Brady).  The first CrossFit gym opened in the mid-90s, but the topic of this post–the website–began in 2001.  The exercise giant has been heralded for its virtual community that bolsters its visibility and supposedly encourages others to stick with the program.

 The beauty behind the program is that it succeeds by infiltrating every ‘big boy’ of Web 2.0.  The program has made an effort to incorporate new Web 2.0 technologies as they became available.  Now the program’s so wide-spread that users start the process on behalf of CrossFit.  Pretty impressive.

Blogs

The blog/site of CrossFit has a simple idea.  It posts the next WOD (Workout of the Day) around 11PM each night, thus making it available for review by all participants for the coming day.  The forums are utilized to post variations on the workouts and exercises s well as elicit discussions among the posters.  Most blog entries contain the following: the WOD, a picture of successful CrossFit people, links to similar previous blog posts, and any additional information about the day.  Users are encouraged to post to the forums and blog comment sections on their times/weights/successes of the day.

Each day is additionally dummy-proofed thanks to a HUGE library of videos of the exercises listed in the workouts. 

Photo-sharing Sites

People love to post pictures of their progress and routines when they enter an exercise routine, and CrossFit is no exception.  A simple keyword search on Flickr for “crossfit” resulted in 72,416 related photos, while an astonishing 64,434 photos were tagged with “crossfit”.  Basically all of the photos were positive, showing progress, CrossFit gyms, or before/after results.

Video-sharing Sites

The concept of CrossFit on video sites is practically the same as photo sites.  Users upload clips of them performing exercises and showing progressive results.  These same users friends and subscribe to other CrossFit participants to keep motivated by seeing likewise progress.  13,100 videos results from a keyword search for “crossfit” on YouTube.

Twitter

The micro-blogging platform is incredibly easy to use for CrossFit, almost as if they’d planned it that way back in 2001.  The website contains explanations and definitions of numerous acronyms, many of which are used in tweets.   Twitterers tend to use the platform to remind others of their impending workouts and post their results.  Some examples follow below.

A search for tweets containing “crossfit” in the 140 characters for just April 22^nd resulted in 448 tweets.  The hashtag #crossfit resulted in 229 tweets.  Of course, some affiliates of CrossFit have official usernames as well.

CrossFit has revolutionized exercising for the Internet age.  The gigantic network of users provides an excellent way to hold exercisers and would-be exercisers accountable to the program, which grows the concept every day.  Personal trainers agree that working out with a friend helps keep people motivated.  CrossFit’s Web 2.0 presence lets you work out with thousands.

In his latest blog entry, Chris Brogan gave great advice passed along to him via Conn Fishburn (Yahoo):  bring wine to the picnic.

Specially, Brogan is referencing the ‘social media picnic’ most of us attend on a daily basis.  Fishburn wants us to bring something of value to our online peers instead of only self-marketing.  It’s a simple principal, but definitely one that bears repeating.  Many Twitter, Facebook, and other platform users neglect this important aspect of the Internet game.

As a personal example, I have an aspiring DJ friend that wants nothing more than to have his musical creations reach a wide audience.  Any time I have the chance to mention him, I try to provide a little linkage to his music, as I just did.  It’s a small act that can mean a lot to the friend, when done appropriately.    Below, I’ve reprinted Brogan’s 10 Ways to Build Relationships Before You Ask for Anything from his post.  I can confidently say that I agree with all of these.

• Comment on and reply to other people’s observations, posts, and ideas. (Sometimes, just retweeting someone’s status message in Twitter is a gesture that matters to people.)
• Share good information freely, such as pointing to great blog posts or articles.
• Make virtual introductions when you see obvious like-minded people who could do to know each other.
• Create useful media like blog posts or ebooks or videos that help people.
• Find mutual interest points and talk about them. (Bonus points to you if they’re off-topic from your business needs, like talking about the Red Sox or Barbecue.)
• Remember things about the other person, such as whether they have a big meeting on Thursday, and ask them about it on Friday.
• Help when someone is promoting their thing. Spread information for other people liberally.
• Find causes and nonprofit experiences to help out. Showing that you’re not just a capitalist pig goes a long way.
• Reply to people and build conversations.
• Thank people when they’re helpful.

Interestingly, most of these suggestions are things that would be equally helpful for ‘real life’ friendships.  I wouldn’t mind if more of my convos in real life contained valuable information.

I thought that my love for Wikipedia couldn’t get any stronger, but my romance with it has taken a drastic new turn with the introduction of WikiRank.  This new app allows users to search for Wikipedia articles and then view a 30, 60, or 90 day line graph of their popularity.  The line represents the number of views for a particular article in a day’s time.

On the front page of WikiRank, the creators have chosen what they believe is a particularly interesting comparison.  From that page, users can do their own comparisons easily.  Once the topics are selected, users can view a sample from the Wikipedia article on the topic as well as see links to various outlets such as Google, The New York Times, and Twitter.  This is a great way to figure out why articles have peaks in viewership on certain days.

The creators want users to be well aware that the numbers are for “entertainment and enlightenment” purposes only.  The log program counts all single page loads, including those from Web spiders.  The creators claim that the overall shape of the increasing and decreasing line graph is more important than the exact calculations.

The user-created charts can be embedded into anything that accepts widgets, and the charts themselves are bright and colorful.  For something that only took the creators six weeks to make, I’m happy that the first version of this seems very complete.

There are two glaring issues with the application: there’s no API (yet) and the auto-completing search functionality sometimes caused me to choose the wrong article, ending in inaccurate comparisons.  The API issue is being worked on, and maybe I’m the only one having the problem with my searches.  Check it out and let me know if you have any tips or tricks for it.

New applications and iterations of Twitter arrive daily, but I think I’ve finally found one that I want to champion:  Present.ly.  Despite my hatred of Web 2.0-y names for products, I feel like there are a lot of positive things to be said about it.

In the company’s own words: “Present.ly gives your employees the ability to instantly communicate their current status, ask and answer questions, share media, and more with the revolutionary communications method pioneered by Twitter.”

Pros

• Text attachments give users the ability to forgo the 140 character limit and attach longer accessible text
• The company offers an Enterprise Edition that provides more behind-the-firewall security than their open cloud-hosted version
• Plenty of interfaces are compatible, including smart phones like iPhones
• The website offers user feedback options as well as video tours
• Users can send video, images, audio, and more through attachments within the tweets
• Group creation helps users to only see the messages that are relevant to them

Present.ly had been around for less than a year, but in that time they’ve made some great progress.  I’m interested to see what else they have in store.

My only query concerns the types of businesses that need this sort of communication.  Assuming most of today’s companies use email for their interoffice communication, I can’t see there being a huge market for Present.ly.  For giant companies it seems like a lot of ‘noise’ would be present on such a platform, and small boutiques could just as easily email or chat with their five-person team.  Twitter is becoming more widespread, however, and this application is an example of just how big the idea has grown.

Can Twitter apps like this one help businesses flourish?  We’ll have to wait and see.

Since its creation in 2003, Facebook has since become a household name, a verb, and a social medium by which millions are people are connected.  With unique visitors of upwards of 70M, it shows no signs of slowing down anytime soon.  In those years, several updates have been made: some good, some great, some…questionable.  Below is my opinion on what succeeded and what should have been avoided.

August 2006 – Notes (Never really that popular to begin with)

One of the first major additions was Facebook’s attempt to mirror blogging.  Using Notes, users could write their inner-most thoughts and feelings that a standard user profile couldn’t hold.  However, Notes have one major flaw: they mirror blogging, the most popular and widely competitive Web 2.0 nonsense.  Most users just stick to their own blogs and share the links in their profile.

September 2006 – News Feed (rose in popularity)

Ah, yes!  The controversial News Feed!  This baby started a riot when it was first introduced over two years ago.  People couldn’t stand that select private information from their profile was plastered for all to see.  The cries didn’t go unnoticed, and customizable privacy features were added.  Today the News Feed stands as a portal to the rest of Facebook; it’s the best page to look at when you’re just bored.

February 2007 – Gifts (Nosedived in popularity)

These cute little buggers above are called Facebook ‘gifts’ and when originally introduced, purchases of them automatically donated a portion to Susan G. Komen for the Cure.  Initially, these proved very popular, but in time the donation aspect ended and Facebook Platform (which I’ll cover in a bit) dominated virtual gift-giving with free options.  Most gifts rest stagnant in profiles as remnants of the once popular gimmick.

May 2007 – Platform and Applications (Declined slowly in popularity)

One of the biggest changes to Facebook was its attempt to give more creativity to the users.  With the new Platform system, any user could create an application for near-immediate use.  (For more on applications, feel free to check out my study on them located here)

These haven’t lost as much popularity as gifts, but they have certainly declined in interest.  What was once fascinating to users soon became irritating as invitations to new ‘snow ball fights’ bombarded inboxes.  Jesse Farmer of 20Bits writes about the decline of the Platform and how the developing forums are falling into disuse.

May 2007 – Marketplace (Stagnant)

There’s not much to say about the Marketplace other than it was overwhelmed by the same-month introduction of the Platform.  It’s simply Craigslist with one major difference: only users in your networks can see the listings.  Whether that’s an advantage or a disadvantage is up to you.

July 2007 – Attachments on Wall (Smart move, high popularity)

Facebook got it right this time!  Allowing users to add video, links, and more to friends’ walls was a brilliant and timely move.  I have no complaints about this, and I’ve discovered some great videos thanks to it.

April 2008 – Chat Features (Low popularity)

It was an interesting move for Facebook to add SMS-ish features to the system, which are now implementable in popular freeware programs like Pidgin.  Did Facebook users really need the ability to chat while they were checking in?  Not really, but Facebook hadn’t made a big update in a while, and nothing’s ever stopped this social network giant from updating just for the sake of updating in the past.

July 2008 – ‘New’ Facebook (Mixed popularity)

Eric wrote an extensive review of the new Facebook format when it was new.  It pretty much sums up what everyone thinks: meh.  It’s got a lot of good, but some bad.  Overall, users have adjusted to the new format well, and I personally like the less cluttered look.

December 2008 – New Signup Process (New!)

Facebook is currently testing a simpler signup process.  They’re hoping to close the gap between Facebook and MySpace by making it even easier to get a profile.  After the riot that resulted from the new terms of service agreement, it’s a wise move to offer something new/good.

As you can see in the graph below, Facebook is definitely closing the gap.

A few days ago 2009 – News Feed Facelift (Too soon to tell)

It’s a pretty controversial move to change the News Feed’s layout, especially since (as I stated above) it was one of most disliked changes when it first debuted.  The new feed layout is similar, except way more “Twittery” with real time updates and changes.  Also, in order to cram more information onto the feed, updates that used to say “Noah wrote on Anne’s wall” now simply say “Noah -> Anne”.

It’s also much easier to update your status with an obvious content box fitted snuggly at the top of the feed.  Yep: it’s Twitter-tastic.

I don’t care for the hyper-abbreviated notices for things like wall posts, but I do like the new organization of the fan pages, events, and birthdays.  Also, now all the thumbnails have rounded edges.  Now that’s just safer!

You may have noticed something new.  Today we’re launching the redesign of the ImpactWatch website. 

Over the past several months, we have brainstormed, designed and written content for what we hope will be a milestone in IW’s life.

The idea for the site redesign came from the need for a new logo.  Last year, we attended the PDF conference in NY and used a temporary logo for all the swag that was handed out to potential clients.  We weren’t particularly happy with the temporary logo; it was hurriedly done, and it didn’t symbolize IW in our eyes.  Upon returning to the office, Eric and I set to work on a memo detailing all of our ideas for a new logo.  Our initial idea was to have an animal mascot, an owl to be specific, and you can see that vision in some of the rejected logos at the bottom of the post.

Eventually, the owl died (flew the coop?) and after some weeks of redesign, marketing meetings and discussion, we finally came to a consensus.

 The process of selecting a new symbol helped the team see that it was time for a complete marketing website remix.  The original site had been created years ago and we wanted to match our fancy new logo with a fancy new site.  And so began a whole new process of meetings, marketing strategy sessions and designer debates.

The old site was mostly narrative, with long paragraphs describing the features and benefits of IW.  People in the blogging age simply don’t read that way anymore, so the first order of business was to streamline the paragraphs into new bulleted lists and tabbed sections.  The end result is a complete overhaul of the information presented to you on every page.  It’s easier to read, easier to edit and just plain better.

Another tweak to the site was the addition of the Twitter feed on the homepage and secondary pages.  We started tweeting for our brand a couple of months ago, and love the response we’ve been getting.  I saw a great feed app on a favorite webcomic’s page , so I pitched the idea and we made it our own.  Look for that to evolve and grow over time, with the addition of some more Web 2.0 goodies.

With phase one of the site re-launch complete, we are already hard at work thinking of great ideas for phase two.  Feel free to post any comments or suggestions, but try to keep them free of owls…it’s still too soon for me.

As a bonus, browse some of the logos from the decision-making process that didn’t make the cut.  During the decision-making period, these were designed by graphics guru Teddy Taylor.  As you can see, we went through a LOT of different ideas before finally deciding on the one you see above.