Topic “Social Trends”

Brands that bridge

Submitted by Steve Smith on Fri, 26/10/2012 - 15:45

Earlier on in the development of our point of view around communities, I talked about how brands need to behave like people when wanting to facilitate and leverage communities. However, what kind of person should a brand seek to be? That depends largely on what it wants to achieve.

One type of person a brand should be is a connector. I’ll give you an example. Last night I went to a dinner party sponsored by Rovi. Our host was a gentleman who is a connector. People enjoy being round him because he is an engaging person with interesting and insightful opinions and information that people find useful, he knows a lot of people, and he is able to bring those people together.

Engagement is of course vital for brands, and we want to create deep, meaningful, and uplifting engagements with people for our brands. But there is something else we want to do that our host also did last night. By bringing people together, he facilitated the creation of engagements between people, that are likely to continue. The opportunity for brands is to create engagements that are then a springboard for people to create engagements among themselves whose value can be traced back to the brand. Our Community Igniter tool helps brands to achieve this.

For example, the following chart shows that cooking is a topic of conversation for mums across online social networking. An opportunity for a brand would be to facilitate those conversations.

Source: Community Igniter

Read more posts about;

Add new comment

What do people's claims about using the internet tell us about brand?

Submitted by Steve Smith on Mon, 22/10/2012 - 09:51

Data just released from Forrester shows that for the second year in succession, people in the US claim to be using the internet less than they did three years ago. That's right. Less.

Of course, people are in fact using the internet much more.

Why the difference between actual and claimed behaviour? It's to do with routine. A characteristic of a routine behaviour is that we tend not be very aware of it.

And a measure of just how much the internet is increasingly part of our every day routines is that we are not aware of just how much we use it. From maps and mobile apps through to Facebook and watching YouTube, people simply do not always register that they are using the internet.

This concept of routine is related to brand. A goal of many brand owners (especially FMCG brands) is for people to make their brands essential parts of their every day routines or even for them to form an everyday routine. Think of tea and biscuits.

However, as the example of the internet shows, this can be dangerous for a brand. A brand owner will want people to know, remember and value their tea or biscuit brand and at the same time have those people make that brand a part of their everyday routines.

The development of this 'exceptional routine' is challenging, but vital.

Read more posts about;

Add new comment

On department stores, churches and brands

Submitted by Steve Smith on Tue, 16/10/2012 - 15:06

I’m really enjoying The Paradise, a drama series about a department store set in the north east during the late nineteenth century.

Last week’s storyline revolved around a baby that someone had left at the door of The Paradise, leading the owner to remark that once upon a time, people left unwanted babies outside the parish church; now they leave them at department stores.

This comparison between church and department store (or shopping mall) has been made in sociology since the early twentieth century. Both are places in which people from varied backgrounds regularly come together in one place at particular times to perform common sets of practices, rituals and identities. Such behaviours mark out the church and department store as different from elsewhere. In anthropological terms, each falls within the sphere of the sacred – the ‘extraordinary’, whilst other spaces outside fall within the sphere of the mundane – the ‘ordinary’.

In church and department store, the extraordinary is embodied within objects. Sacred objects in churches include icons, crosses and wine. Yet original intentions were not that they should be revered in themselves. They were not seen as intrinsically sacred, but important because of what they represented: Christ and his blood. Yet over time, people have given them intrinsic meanings, to the degree that they become sacred in themselves (or fetishes as anthropologists would call them).

We can translate this to some of the objects we buy. Think of a particular brand’s smartphone. To some people, it may merely represent communication, speed, connectivity and entertainment. That is, it points to something else. Yet processes of branding a smartphone (and other objects) should involve much more than mere representation. It should also involve giving the smartphone inherent qualities, which people in turn should ascribe to it. Some of this may lay in the apparent capacity of the smartphone to do particular activities (connect, communicate etc), but its value to people should exceed the value of being able to do these things. A measure of the success in achieving this ‘excess’ value is that people express desire for the particular smartphone, celebrate it, revere it, set it apart, display it, extol it, and eulogise it (think of the religious overtone of ‘brand ambassadors’). Further, just as icons can elicit emotions, so should the particular brand’s smartphone.

Groups and communities are essential to how religions operate (e.g. the church or synagogue). In turn, people also give brands and branded products central roles in communities. Most obviously we see this is ‘brand communities’ such as around Apple and Harley Davidson motorcycles. More interesting though is how people give roles to brands within their own communities, as our Community Igniter research shows.

Read more posts about;

Add new comment

Commoditisation and Community

Submitted by Steve Smith on Thu, 04/10/2012 - 10:03

I have a good friend who is incredibly good at wine tasting, so good in fact that he is one of only around three hundred people worldwide who are a Master of Wine. Give David a wine to taste and he will tell you the grape, the year, the country, the kind of soil and even the wine grower. It’s all very entertaining (and he’s very polite about anything I serve up at a meal).

There are a lot of people who are experts in a particular field. For many of them, their field is all they know about. Ask them about their interest and they will tell you everything about it. Discuss anything else, and they have little to say.

David is not like that. He is one of those (occasionally annoying) people who know a lot about everything. (He’s very good to have on your side at Trivial Pursuit.) Because David’s knowledge is so broad, people go to him for a variety of things. Want to know how to rewire your house, take a great photograph, paint, or get a suggestion about a new car or good town to visit on your next visit to Tanzania? David is your man.

David is also your kind of man if you are a brand. As our Community Igniter research shows, people like David have larger than average personal communities, people go to them for advice, and they are more likely than average try out new products and brands. Reach out to people like David and they are likely to talk about you or your service or product, and people will take notice of them.

But turn this on its head. Some brands have depth when it comes to a particular type of product (say a bank or insurance company), whilst others have breadth (like Tesco – from insurance through to clothes through to mobile phones). Which of these types of brands are people more likely to call upon when they need something? The one that has breadth because it is already likely to have relevance to you.

But what does this mean for a brand that has depth and little breadth? It needs to reach out. It needs to find out what kinds of things are important to its target audience. It may be a brand that only makes chocolate biscuits, but what are the kinds of conversations of its target customers that can show it what is important to them? By understanding target customers’ needs (outside of the need for chocolate biscuits!) and facilitating those needs, such a brand can make itself relevant so that the next time they are in the supermarket they pick up its chocolate biscuits rather than its competitor's.

This approach is especially important for a brand whose products are heavily commoditised. By making itself relevant to people by meeting some of their needs outside of its core product– by making itself unique - it can create differentiation from other brands who produce very similar things.The cafe sector in the UK is a great example of how a few brands have turned what could be a very commoditised product - coffee - into something more. For example, Pret a Manger has created itself as a place for mums to go for relaxation and a chat with each other after the school drop off. Often with quite large spaces, they provide room for pushchairs, as well as magazines, newspapers, Wi-Fi, a reliably good customer service, nutritional information and advice on its foods for mums to be.

Read more posts about;

Add new comment

On the Connected Consumer

Submitted by Steve Smith on Wed, 26/09/2012 - 15:42

On Monday I participated in a panel at the MediaTel Connected Consumer conference, debating finding, distributing and sharing content.

The first theme we discussed was about emerging behaviour around new devices. I wanted to be man prepared, so I took along some notes to prompt me.

The first thing I had written in front of me, is that people’s connections to other people, brands and content used to be largely restricted to a particular space – the home. This changed over time, with the uptake of the compact camera and the Sony Walkman.

Especially through the smart phone, we are now in a time in which people make connections to brands, people and content wherever and whenever they are, however they want and for whatever reason. Much of this has been said before, but it’s worth repeating. People make more choices and exert more control over their connections, according to their desires, expectations, goals and objectives which change throughout their day and from day to day. Of course, people do this in front of the television, but not to the same degree (although this is changing). People’s connections are much more about pulling off and accessing content rather than viewing and listening to content pushed to them.

An implication of this is that people largely see their connections as their own private connections. This should not be underestimated. This means brands need to earn the right to be involved in people’s connections, and they need to make themselves relevant. They need to make sure that amid the choices available to people, they offer something that people want and prefer over competing voices, and they need to be available on people’s own terms, and not on those of brands.

Brands importantly need to create experiences that enhance people's connections to other people - their personal communities. Our research shows that people are most likely to share online experiences that stimulate four things: the senses, thinking, behaviour, and especially emotions. We are also beginning work that benchmarks how brands perform more generally on these four experiences (senses, emotions, thinking and behaviour), which will help us and brand owners to design experiences depending on what they want to achieve.

Read more posts about;

Add new comment

What Amazon’s new delivery service ‘Collect+’ tells us about community

Submitted by Steve Smith on Mon, 20/08/2012 - 10:53

Amazon is set to offer delivery of customers’ parcels to nearly 5,000 corner shops and newsagents around the UK. The new service, ‘Collect+’, will also offer customers the opportunity to return unwanted items.

As you would expect, this is good news for small local grocers because the service is likely to increase footfall at a time when large retailers such as supermarkets are accused of poaching customers from them.

But it is also indicative of how some of the characteristics of community have changed over the last thirty to forty years. As our research project ‘Community Igniter’ shows, many of us are now much less likely to know our neighbours than people once used to – neighbours whom we would have once felt able to ask to take delivery of our parcels and packages if we were not in to do so.

This change is related to a decline in trust. If many of us don’t know our neighbours, then we are significantly less likely to trust them with our new purchases. Less trust means a further eroding in the cohesion of many local neighbourhoods (especially in large towns and cities), with trust now being more likely to be spread across distance, such as among work colleagues and friends from across town and beyond. But interestingly, Connect+ may help to reintroduce some of the local community and trust for which local retailers and other establishments were once a bedrock.

Read more posts about;

Add new comment

Facebook tests wider reaching newsfeed ads

Submitted by Oliver Newton on Fri, 17/08/2012 - 11:16

With the announcement on Wednesday that Facebook is opening up users’ newsfeeds to advertisers that aren’t connected to them, either directly or via a friend, it leaves the industry asking, what does this mean for users, advertisers and Facebook themselves?

The Advertiser

Our experience has shown that newsfeed placements can significantly out-perform ads on the right hand side (RHS) of the page. The story-led formats display content that is relevant to users and while perceived by some as intrusive, “content seeking” users may welcome the additional stories. Getting into users’ newsfeeds is extremely attractive to advertisers, not only because it opens up access to Facebook’s vast mobile audience, but because the organic feel of sponsored newsfeed posts can increase response and combats the banner blindness that has come with the RHS formats.

The User

The worry is that with more content being pushed into users’ newsfeeds, Facebook risk a backlash, with users upset a platform that used to be so personal to them is now including more advertising. However, there is an argument that Trending Articles have got users accustomed to the fact newsfeeds aren’t entirely theirs anymore and that any user backlash would have happened by now. Without doubt, there is some onus on advertisers to make their content more appealing to users (which has always been the case). Focusing on fans initially and testing appeal of content themes, before taking it out to a wider audience is a sensible approach, so that reaction can be gauged before it is exposed to those unconnected to the brand.

Facebook

Regardless, it’s almost inevitable that many advertisers will not have content that users are actively going to want to interact with, but in their rush to be present on a platform that so much time is now spent on (almost 7 hours a month on average, per user), the perception of Facebook spamming users with irrelevant ads will increase. One of Facebook’s big, unique pitches is that they offer ads with social recommendations from friends, so allowing ads to go out to users without this is certainly a change of direction. However, it is not a surprise, as they look to utilise their massive reach to increase ad revenues in the wake of their IPO and big reduction in share price since going public.

Final Word

What is certain is that Facebook will continue to test and develop formats that offer the best possible experience to users, but that can be effectively monetised to answer to the pressures of their increasingly demanding shareholders.

By Jon Harris.

Read more posts about;

Social Trends

1 comment

Audi isn’t about cars

Submitted by Steve Smith on Tue, 17/07/2012 - 10:26

Marketing Week has an article published today about how Audi is planning on opening 20 city-based digital showrooms globally by 2015. Each will use screens to showcase Audi’s entire range of cars, including all colour and vehicle options. Customers will be able to make a selection from thousands of possibilities using Kinnect, and then see a life-sized version of the vehicle in a 1:1 scale on the screens.

Interesting in itself, but what really got my attention is how Audi plans on using these new showrooms as brand spaces to go “beyond retail”, by hosting events including readings, round-table discussions and exhibitions on issues such as urban development and mobility or art, culture and design.

These events are not about Audi cars. Rather, they are examples of how brand owners can use their brands to move beyond a type of product for which that brand is well known. This is because a brand is not a material product. The late French sociologist Jean Baudrillard wrote back in 1974 that consumption and production are not about objects but about signs. One of the marks of a successful brand is this: when a person buys an object a product belonging to that brand, that person is buying into what that brand signifies. Audi isn’t about cars. It is about intelligent, sophisticated, elegant, German innovation. This means Audi can extend Audi products beyond cars to include clothes, ties, cufflinks, watches, rucksacks and umbrellas. (Another German brand, Porsche, also brands espresso makers, toasters, kettles and even whole kitchens.)

Audi designed watch

Porsche designed kitchen

More recently, the issue of brand is taken up by the sociologist, Celia Lury. She argues that a brand is an interface between people and objects, with its effects seen on and in products, packaging, screens, retail outlets, advertising, brand events and other brand experiences. Brands give these things meaning. Taking this further, I would say that a brand needs to be designed in such a way that it is a template or blueprint for how people should design brand objects and human experiences. A question then is how clearly and simply does your brand provide product and experience designers with a schematic for what they do?

Read more posts about;

Social Trends

1 comment

What 'Bring Your Own Device' tells us about IT chiefs and employees

Submitted by Steve Smith on Tue, 10/07/2012 - 14:22

Silicom.com recently asked IT chiefs if they were planning to offer the iPhone as part of their range of corporate mobile phones. Admittedly, the sample was low, but ten of the twelve CIOs dismissed the iPhone for reasons ranging from expense and poor battery life, to security and even a fear of appearing profligate.

This is just one side of the story, and it doesn't mean employees won't use them for work. CISCO released details from a more comprehensive study earlier this year of 1,500 IT managers and executives. It showed that 48% said their company would never authorize employees to bring their own devices to work, yet 57% agreed that some employees use personal devices without consent. In the US, using personal devices without consent was highest, at 64%.

At the heart of this are employees' expectations and experiences around work. Many employees don't make the firm distinctions between work and the rest of their lives that CIOs seem to think they do. A clue to this is just how much people access work information whilst at home or on the commute via permissible devices. How people use their own mobile phones, tablets and laptops during 'work' time and for work illustrates how people bring 'work' and 'non-work' together, want to work flexibly, and self-manage. The opportunity for IT chiefs is to facilitate this change rather than try to stifle it.

Read more posts about;

Social Trends

Add new comment

What Intel and Apple revenues tell us

Submitted by Steve Smith on Fri, 06/07/2012 - 07:41

I came across two charts yesterday. The first one gives revenues from 1995 to 2010 for Apple, Intel, Microsoft and Google. Apple and Google have all seen huge rises, Microsoft less so, but still respectable.

But look at Intel. No rise since 2000. Why? As we know, mature markets (which include the US, W. Europe, Japan and Canada) have largely moved into a post- PC world – a world in which Intel has yet to make its mark. Consider this. Around three quarters of Apple revenues in 2011 came from post-PC devices (iPads, iPhones, iPods).

The post-PC world is a concern for Intel, despite a rise in revenues in 2011 (at $54bn). With the smartphone and tablet chip markets dominated by ARM, NVIDIA, TI and Qualcomm, Intel will find creating success in this market difficult. It was only as recent as May this year that Intel announced the first smartphone to be powered by one of its processors in Europe. Tablet wise, some Windows 8 devices will run on Intel chips, but how much people will prefer these over the iPad is unknown.

The second chart makes clear the problems Intel faces. Laptop and desktop shipments in mature markets fell 7% in 2011 over 2010, and IDC forecasts only modest annual rises of around 5% per year to 2015.

Source: IDC

But what about emerging markets? With rises of between 12 and 15% per annum, this is good news for the chip maker. Yet even though many of these PCs will ship with Intel chips, many are likely to be lower spec chips and therefore at the cheaper end, which of course will generate less revenue for the company.

Source: IDC

Read more posts about;

Add new comment

Supermarket UK

Topics