http://scottgould.me/the-pitfall-of-the-overestimation-of-participation/ Thu, 08 Dec 2011 04:29:00 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1 http://scottgould.me/the-pitfall-of-the-overestimation-of-participation/#comment-1358 Scott Gould Tue, 19 Jan 2010 19:47:56 +0000 http://scottgould.me/?p=1188#comment-1358 MunyaGood point - yes the central misunderstanding is of the tool - but then you could say that rests on a fundemental misunderstanding of marketing or communications.I think it is useful to break down the problems and get a grasp at least on this aspect.S MunyaGood point – yes the central misunderstanding is of the tool – but then you could say that rests on a fundemental misunderstanding of marketing or communications.I think it is useful to break down the problems and get a grasp at least on this aspect.S

]]> http://scottgould.me/the-pitfall-of-the-overestimation-of-participation/#comment-1359 Scott Gould Tue, 19 Jan 2010 19:46:37 +0000 http://scottgould.me/?p=1188#comment-1359 Hey SamuelTotally - segmentation. My concern, as you say, is that too many people are just waving the wond of 'twitter' or 'blogging' over a campaign, only to have low participation.I also think discussing participation as a unique thing separate to engagement is useful. Engagement talks of a two way thing, which might not ever happen. There's plenty of people who consume my content, for instance, but don't engage with me.I actually didn't do a good job here of communicating 'Lifting Restrictions' - the idea is more fully formed here: <a href="http://scottgould.me/lift-the-restrictions/" rel="nofollow">http://scottgould.me/lift-the-restrictions/</a>Re: levels, I've looked at Groundswells - the idea of mine is a bit different - I should hurry up and at least get my initial thoughts down so we can collaborate together Hey SamuelTotally – segmentation. My concern, as you say, is that too many people are just waving the wond of 'twitter' or 'blogging' over a campaign, only to have low participation.I also think discussing participation as a unique thing separate to engagement is useful. Engagement talks of a two way thing, which might not ever happen. There's plenty of people who consume my content, for instance, but don't engage with me.I actually didn't do a good job here of communicating 'Lifting Restrictions' – the idea is more fully formed here: http://scottgould.me/lift-the-restrictions/Re: levels, I've looked at Groundswells – the idea of mine is a bit different – I should hurry up and at least get my initial thoughts down so we can collaborate together

]]> http://scottgould.me/the-pitfall-of-the-overestimation-of-participation/#comment-1357 munyaradzihoto Tue, 19 Jan 2010 17:13:02 +0000 http://scottgould.me/?p=1188#comment-1357 This is a great analysis. I must however disagree with where the analysis is born. I do not think the problem faced by organizations that fit into the above prescribed category is overestimation of participation, rather misunderstanding the tool completely. When the purpose of a tool (in this case social media) is unknown, abnormal use is inevitable. To assume that because there 300+ million users on facebook, therefore setting up a facebook group will increase the number of people that buy from you is misunderstanding the tool. I think social media face a huge challenge in that it is largely viewed as a magic wand that can solve all problems pertaining to customer interaction, and although there are case studies that profile such successes, upon further inspection, it id the understanding of the tool and then the proper use of it that achieves results. This is a great analysis. I must however disagree with where the analysis is born. I do not think the problem faced by organizations that fit into the above prescribed category is overestimation of participation, rather misunderstanding the tool completely. When the purpose of a tool (in this case social media) is unknown, abnormal use is inevitable. To assume that because there 300+ million users on facebook, therefore setting up a facebook group will increase the number of people that buy from you is misunderstanding the tool. I think social media face a huge challenge in that it is largely viewed as a magic wand that can solve all problems pertaining to customer interaction, and although there are case studies that profile such successes, upon further inspection, it id the understanding of the tool and then the proper use of it that achieves results.

]]> http://scottgould.me/the-pitfall-of-the-overestimation-of-participation/#comment-1356 samueljsmith Tue, 19 Jan 2010 13:23:34 +0000 http://scottgould.me/?p=1188#comment-1356 Hi Scott, I enjoyed your post and video! I think many people assume that you can implement a one-size-fits-all program for participation and Social Media. They don't realize that you should segment the audience based on their participation preferences and match the participation (or engagement) activities to the audience profile. This is especially important when you have multiple generations in your audience. (not all generations communicate/participate in the same way OR have the same comfort level with technology.)Also, I think your step #3 "lift restrictions" is important, too. Sometimes there are just too many barriers to participate. (Website registrations, logins, queues, etc.) The easier that you make it for people to participate the more people will do it. When VW created the Fun Theory videos - they took mundane activities like recycling bottles and walking up stairs and got people to participate and change their behavior. Participation was easy and fun.I look forward to seeing your participation framework - when you launch it. I will be interested in seeing how it compares to (and differs from) the Groundswell's Social Technographics ladder. Hi Scott, I enjoyed your post and video! I think many people assume that you can implement a one-size-fits-all program for participation and Social Media. They don't realize that you should segment the audience based on their participation preferences and match the participation (or engagement) activities to the audience profile. This is especially important when you have multiple generations in your audience. (not all generations communicate/participate in the same way OR have the same comfort level with technology.)Also, I think your step #3 “lift restrictions” is important, too. Sometimes there are just too many barriers to participate. (Website registrations, logins, queues, etc.) The easier that you make it for people to participate the more people will do it. When VW created the Fun Theory videos – they took mundane activities like recycling bottles and walking up stairs and got people to participate and change their behavior. Participation was easy and fun.I look forward to seeing your participation framework – when you launch it. I will be interested in seeing how it compares to (and differs from) the Groundswell's Social Technographics ladder.

]]>