pr-media-blog.co.uk

Return on investment from social media?

Step forward, please, the social media alchemist who has struck gold…

The leading voices in social media practice and debate are certainly giving it their best shot: Brian Solis’ recent guest post on Mashable paints a daunting picture of senior executives’ views on ROI from social media, including the bar chart below lifted from a study by Bazaarvoice and the CMO Club.

In short, the marketing decision makers remain unconvinced; so, if selling social media is the way you’re aiming to pay for dinner tonight, be prepared for a light salad rather than roast beef.

Solis suggests that measuring social media ROI in 2010 will hinge on real business metrics, such as revenue, rather than the nebulous numbers offered by volumes of followers on Twitter.

Though it’s been around for a while, Oliver Blanchard’s take on the ROI question (presentation below) still hits the spot, although the influence of other elements in the marketing mix make it difficult to evaluate the effect of social media in isolation.

Olivier Blanchard Basics Of Social Media Roi

View more presentations from Olivier Blanchard.

In our experience as a business using social media for our own purposes, as well as advising clients on theirs, there is a significant investment of time in order to make it work. Equally, the definition of a “return” has not been limited to pounds and pence, though that is the ultimate objective.

So what has been our return from social media? In its purest, measurable form of generating income, we have developed an ongoing relationship with a blue chip company that began with an exchange of views on this blog. But there have been other returns too, that oil the wheels towards our destination.

This has included using social networks to develop new contacts in a range of fields whose knowledge we have been able to call upon when pitching for new business. Through listening to networks such as LinkedIn, we’ve been asked to quote for work, opened doors with decision makers where they otherwise may have remained shut and we’ve fostered true partnerships with our suppliers by providing recommendations and referring them to opportunities spotted online. Monitoring Twitter has helped us to protect and enhance client reputation, especially when influential people on the network have a grievance.

Granted, none of this is a guarantee of instant, financial success. But would we rather have it or not have it? In tough times (and, let’s face it, one measly tenth of a percentage point growth doesn’t make for a recovery) every tool in the new business box has to be sharpened, and social media is now one of them.

To borrow from Solis again, “Defining the “R” in ROI is where we need to focus, as it relates to our business goals and performance indicators specifically”.

In business, the “R” is beefing up the bottom line. But there’s more than one way of getting there and building a presence within social media can mean you leveraging a little help from your friends.

What is the way to a woman’s heart or, of rather more concern to politicians, her vote?

Tory leader, David Cameron, has hired all-woman PR company, Pretty Little Head, to help him and his party crack this enigma - much to the disgust of Daily Mail readers, who have been less than enamoured with the idea.

The idea of tapping into a PR company, which claims to have expertise in helping marketers deliver “what women really want”, has Mail readers incandescent with rage:

“Well, he’s just lost my vote,” says Ann of Wimbledon, adding “I can’t stand people who think women need special treatment”. Ex-pat, Sue, booms: “We are not stupid, we don’t need to be wooed…”

So, has Cameron badly misjudged the female voter? An informal (and far from scientific, but bear with me) survey of more than 40 of my female colleagues revealed that 47% found Cameron more appealing than Brown as the next Prime Minister, with 57% admitting the Tory leader had become “more appealing” in the past 12 months. So far, so good for the Tories and their PR campaign. But a crushing 92% said that politicians showing a feminine side was irrelevant in winning their vote. 

Apart from other Mail readers’ comments along the lines of “why can’t politicians think for themselves?”, is there a fundamental problem about style over substance? As Oliver Blanchard’s Brand Builder blog states: “No matter how you look at it, successful branding always starts with a product”. He goes on, “No matter how cool your packaging is…if your fragrance isn’t appealing you aren’t going to get many repeat customers.”

Does Cameron believe that looking good and showing empathy with the female population is more important than talking about actual policies - his party’s core “product”?

Last word to another ex-pat Mail reader, Karen, who says: “You silly man, most women are intelligent and don’t need pandering to.”

Probably a good tip for most men.