Much Ado About Nothing and Face Palms

Marketing Magazine’s latest issue (Nov 30) just arrived and it is all about Social Media.

Make them stop!!!

Filled with pronouncements, prognostications and punditry, the issue shines a shaft of gold upon the field of Social Media.  Among the self congratulatory, hipster-filled, and jargon-riddled pages (B.J. Mendleson's rant against social networks excepted), two articles stood out. 

 A short column by Bryan Pearson, President of Air Miles (one of the more engaging and entertaining speakers I have ever seen) presents an executive summary of an Air Mile’s Social Media study. In a nutshell (from what I got from the column and case study) between February 2009 and May 2011, researchers watched member activity in three Air Miles promotions (an earlier article by one of the study’s authors said there were four contests).  The study group was made up of members who had previously signed up to the Air Miles Community page and were invited to take part in these contests via email: 

• The “Cruise Contest—members answer a weekly question for six weeks for a chance to win a luxury travel package 

• The Block Party Contest—members write about what Air Miles means to them for a chance to win 2,500 reward miles

• The Winter Event—members earn 10 bonus reward miles by posting an answer to the question what they want to redeem for that winter

Research showed that those participants in these contests increased their purchases at Air Miles partners from between 15% and 30% compared to non-participants during the 10-week study period. 

While the study sounds promising, I believe it overstates the obvious and is way, way too overconfident with the more speculative aspects.  By this, I mean that there may be an initial bias within the study because its participants had shown a willingness to interact with the company and other members when they signed up to the company’s Community page well beforehand—ergo, they were prime candidates to enter the three contests that involve writing about their Air Miles experiences and desires. 

The study had (I assume) 25,326 participants, which is one-quarter of one percent of all Air Miles members (is this a large enough sample?), and the participants were divided into two segments: high users (50+ reward miles earned two weeks before the start of the contests) and Medium/Low users (49 reward miles or less).  It is unknown whether this breakdown resembles the entire Air Miles user spectrum (as with any brand, there will likely be very few high users, slightly more medium users, and about 80% low/infrequent users) but that is understandable as it is proprietary information. 

It is also not known if the study group was over-weighted with hardcore high users, those keeners who know how to “play the game” and leverage every opportunity and contest to obtain the maximum number of reward miles; the “Extreme Couponers” of loyalty.  Plus, without a breakdown of the Medium and Low users, it is difficult to measure the effectiveness of the initiative. 

To understand the success of this Social Media effort and put its results in perspective with other communications tactics, here are just a few of the things I’d like to know:

• How many emails were sent and how many were opened?

• How many recipients acted on the click-prompt to go to the Community page in the email—of this group how many actually contributed to that page and what was transaction activity compared to before the contests began?

• Was only one email sent out for each contest participant or were there subsequent ones?  If so, what was their content?

• Were there any incentives or special bonus air miles events (e.g. 20x Bonus Air Miles) promoted during the contest periods?

• The study used a two-week period before the contests start to establish a baseline for transaction activity.  Is two weeks long enough?  What would the results be if one month was used?  Two months?

Social Media Data Massaging Techniques

 

Without more information, this study looks like it resembles one of the quirks of quantum theory that states that the very act of observing phenomenon changes the observed reality (behavior) of that phenomenon (suck on that, philosophy majors!).  Now, if its Social Media campaign had shown a statistically significant lift and penetration with the light/low users, the group that holds the most potential in growing Air Miles sales and profitability, that would be news. 

Then there was jewel in the crown, the face-palming, head-slapping stupidity from some of Social Media industry’s spokesidiots.  It’s a piece on how social media has moved marketers from impressions to feelings.  Feelings, wo-o-o feelings...  

The Father of Social Media Sentiment Analysis

Here’s Renny Monaghan, “Today your brand isn’t about the number of impressions anymore—it’s the sum of the conversations about your brand.”  Rennie, old chap, you’re an idiot.  A plain and simple idiot. 

Then there’s David Bradfield of SapientNitro who says that, for example a funeral home could position itself more favourably by understanding the language people planning funeral arrangements use.  “If people have negative sentiments about the words like ‘death’ and ‘dead’ this gives the funeral home the reality check needed to align with how customers are talking and make the necessary changes… If consumers are using the ‘d’ word, neither should the funeral home.”  Fuck, I almost died when I read that utter and complete bullshit.  David, I assume you’re a descent person, even though your moustache reminds me of a ‘70s disco group, but you haven’t a clue.  Not. One. Fucking. Clue.

To show how important “social sentiment” is, the article provides two examples of how this brainstrust dug into peoples’ feeling to save the day.  Dave “In the Navy” Bradfield cites a Canadian food product that cratered after launch.  With their superhero Feelings Capes on, Bradfield and his team used their magic social sentiment analysis to “identify how people who bought the products talked about them, the language they used, the experience they conveyed, which recipes they were talking about and which associations were materializing so the agency could use them to reshape the position of the brand” because it sucked at the time.

First off, I’d like to know who the asshat CMO was that created the original market feasability report that said the product was a good idea and then developed initial positioning strategy in the first place.  Second, does he or she still have a job? Third, was that person forced to eat his or her own weight in the product—if no, why not?

In the end, SapientNitro discovered that, after listening to customers, no one liked the product.  And its brilliant solution?  Call it a niche product and shove it in a tiny category  What the hell was this product anyway, almond encrusted cat turds? If that’s the case, it's a niche market snack for dogs in the "This Tastes Like Ass" category.

The other case study comes from Scot Wheeler (I thought there were two Ts in Scott—unless he's trying not to be confused with Irish Wheeler)  of Critical Mass.  Scot used sentiment analysis on behalf of a US medical imaging company that markets radiological dye and injection systems. The company wanted to know what emotions people experienced in radiological treatments.  (Hmm... I wonder how people feel when they start cancer treatment... ) The emotions chosen by Wheeler ranged from “anxiety to dread to appreciation and resolution.”

Surprisingly, among the groups Wheeler looked at, he found that nurses were worried about safety and being stuck by tainted needles.  And administrators were, shockingly, worried about costs and if other cost effective alternatives were coming so they wouldn’t have to lock-in to long-term service contracts.  The solution? Answer their concerns.  Whaaa?

Just wondering, Mr. U.S. maker of radiological treatment stuff, why you thought the opinions/emotions/fears of these nurses and administrators using your product would differ from nurses and administrators using other similar products in radiological/cancer treatments and therapies that involve bodily fluids?

It staggers me that the manufacturer didn’t consider these “feelings” or hear about them from their field reps before wanting to know what conversations their end users were having.  This is where I see Scot as being the smartest one in the article.  After all, he found a company—or better yet, it found him—that didn’t listen to its sales staff and field reps and paid him a lot of money to learn about their customers’ feelings.  Nice score, Scot old bean.  Git it while you can ‘cuz it ain’t gonna last.