Stuff I Don’t Do: Follow Friday (#FF)

(NOTE: This is a series of occasional posts clarifying the things I don’t do, business-wise, marketing-wise, or social-media-wise.  Same format each time.)

What: Follow Friday or #FF on Twitter (or other microblogging platform).  Essentially, someone tweets a list of Twitter handles/names (I’m @tracydiziere for example) as a blanket recommendation of people to follow. 

Why I Don’t Do It: Recommending people to follow, while a nice gesture, makes the assumption that all of your followers will value the tweets (consisting of news, opinions, personal updates, etc.) of these people.  It’s just too generic.  There’s no way in marketing I would recommend every product or every service to everyone.  There are market segments, ideal clients, target markets, etc.  I apply the same logic to microblogging.  Unless I can ensure that I’m delivering a meaningful message to a specific, interested group, it’s not worth it.  However, if I could segment my updates and/or customize recommendations for following based on an industry or interest, FF would be appealing to me.  Without this ability, I’m not providing value to followers with respect to their specific variety of shared interests with me—from jewelry/retail sales, to marketing/PR, food/wine, small business, instigating (you know who you are), and all things Arizona.  I never want to treat these  followers (or clients!) as an indistinct mass of an audience.  For tweeps with a lot of influence, however, I realize it makes sense.  It’s like they are referring people they trust, which is cool.  I just prefer to do that on a smaller more personal scale. 

What I Do Instead:

(1) Re-Tweet. When someone I follow has a tweet that is relevant (Relevance is key!) or that I believe will be interesting to a segment of followers, I will re-tweet (RT) it.  I don’t limit the number of RTs from any one person—it’s a matter of relevance and those who are more relevant are RT’ed more.  I typically don’t RT quotes (nor do I tweet quotes from famous people often).  This is because I do value information that is specifically directed at and appropriate to my followers. 

(2) Reply. Another way I indicate someone is worth following (and why they are—the component missing from the generic list and hashtag) is by Replying to them, or starting a conversation.  Replying using @ lets me tell that person (and my followers) that I’m interested in what they have to say with respect to a certain topic or communication instance.  Followers who see that we’re communicating about wine, for example, and like wine themselves (or sell it, make it, write about it, teach others about it, etc.) can follow that person.  It’s a slower process, but for me, it’s more genuine and thoughtful than the  “This-is-who-I-think-is-important-for-everyone-to-listen-to-regardless-of-who-you-are” message I get from #FF.  Maybe that works if you’re already a social media guru with thousands of followers.  That’s not who I am or  aspire to be.  I also will reply using a bunch of people if I think they have something in common.  That way I’m recommending (or referring) people within a certain context, subject, or niche.  And I’ve pre-selected that group to ensure they have interests in common. 

 

Additional Comments: I noticed recently #FF isn’t as big as deal as it used to be (thankfully!).  Is this your sense as well?  Is this because others feel as I do or something else?   I’d like to think Twitter users on the whole are getting smarter and more considerate of audiences/markets and really wanting to tailor communications (e.g., tweets) to them.  Also, if you think I’m really missing out by not participating or want to share your reasons for doing it, chime in!  If you’d like to connect, follow me: @tracydiziere.

Who Are You on Facebook? A Short List of Users

In thinking about who uses Facebook (and why), I’ve developed this short list of the likely and usual suspects.

1. Gamers. They rarely post updates and news about themselves or reply to others’ wall posts. Instead, they play Farmville, Sorority Life, etc. and answer quizzes. They may join groups, but really Facebook is just another platform for games, albeit perhaps a bit more social. Although they may be any age, both my nephew and niece (a teen and pre-teen) fall into this category, so I wonder if there are any trends/data? Do you and/or your family members fall into this category of Facebook users?

2. Networkers. They have tons of friends and will usually friend-request you after just meeting you, seeing you post to one of their friends’ pages, or even just finding you online. For them, it’s mainly a numbers game, although they can be open and frequent posters. Networkers do seek to engage their Facebook-friends, with links and thought-provoking questions, however.

3. Activists. They primarily post about causes they feel strongly about or policies and politics they object to. They may join or start such groups, as well as send you invites to do so. Activists can be great sources of news and perspectives about our culture by providing such links, especially when they are interesting, multi-faceted people to begin with. Some, however, are single-issue advocates, and their multiple posts about the same thing over and over can create a major tune-out effect, which is exactly the opposite of what they are trying to achieve.

4. Promoters. Internal company marketing, sales, or PR people fall into this category as do independent marketers, PR professionals, and social media companies. Their Facebook use is goal-oriented, primarily to create and maintain a fan page, whereby they promote the company’s products and services, provide important updates, interact with the public, generate special offers, drive traffic to their main website, encourage referrals, create leads, get the word out about events, and the list goes on. In best case scenarios, they are tracking the results of their efforts and are seeing some traction and conversions with respect to key metrics. I’ve mostly seen one-way communications from this group, so don’t expect them to post on your wall or visit your website. They want the love and support of the general public, and their job is to work for it. Facebook is just another means to market something. In cases where Promoters do not have a Fan page, their wall posts may often be related to their company’s successes or newsworthy tidbits. The best of them will reply to you if you write on their wall. As this group grows, it will be interesting to see how the other users react.

5. Shooting Stars. They figure it’s better to be there than not, so they’ll show up from time to time, albeit briefly. They rarely post updates on their wall but may have a ton of friends, like Networkers. They may not log in often nor read everyone’s updates, mainly because they are just too busy to fuss with another application. (Wasn’t LinkedIn enough?) Usually a Shooting Star’s contacts are strictly professional. No games, no groups, no photos, and (for heaven’s sake!) don’t tag them without their approval. Facebook is serious business. If you are a true friend, they’re more likely to email you (through Facebook or not) or call you directly. And they have a good point . . . Facebook doesn’t replace face-time (or voice-time, if distance is an issue).

5. Connectors. These folks joined Facebook primarily to keep in touch with the people they care about (or just used to know!). They keep their Facebook-friend group small, typically, and won’t accept just any invitation (such as from Networkers and Promoters). They may also be reluctant to become a fan of companies and brands unless they know them and/or are passionate about them. Connectors may also dislike Networkers and tune out Gamers, since these types don’t really fit with their goals. They are happy to tell you what they (and their kids) are up to and look forward to reading and commenting on your posts and photos. Connectors may even ask for advice in a post or encourage a discussion. They may take quizzes or participate in activities that are interactive in nature (pokes, birthday gifts, etc.) as a way of connecting/reconnecting with friends. (This happens to varying degrees; I’m a prime example of one who doesn’t do any of that stuff). Facebook is also like an extra email account for Connectors, especially since the Inbox supports an email-type exchange among a group of friends. If they are having a party, they might just use Facebook instead of evite.

6. Newbies. They may have just joined, at someone’s urging perhaps. Usually mid-40s and up. They aren’t sure how they will use Facebook or which type of user they’d like to be. (Maybe this list will help!)

Final Note: Not everyone falls into a single category, of course. Some may be a combination of two or more types. ( I am a Connector/Promoter, for example, which is an odd mix and somewhat conflicting at times.) Feel free to weigh in here about what type(s) you are and/or what you’re seeing within your Facebook circles. Did I miss any types? Did I misunderstand or misrepresent the type that you most identify with? Any reactions to this post are welcomed.

What Peter Says

Here at iabc phoenix copper quills after peter shankman's keynote so forgive the lowercase etc. It was hard to hear but what I took from the talk was:
1. It's a conversation. Freakin listen. It's not just spouting off . . . And talking About irrelevant stuff.
2. The average person has an attention span of 2.7 seconds. Ouch!
3. We don't even talk to people in our network on a personal level (guilty). Seriously, reach out!
4. Social media=the chance to screw up on a larger scale
That's all I got now. Was it longer than 2.7 seconds?

A Thought on Twitter, The New Blog

Twitter may be the new frontier, but after it's been leveled, tilled, and farmed, you still have to sort the wheat from the shaff.

Nevertheless, I am there, sowing some seeds: http://twitter.com/tracydiziere

(Oops, the link on my comment didn't work; for a good intro to twitter, check out david pogue's article from the NYT: http://pogue.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/01/15/twittering-tips-for-beginners/)

No website? No profile? No business!

Just a quick anecdotal post to convey the impact of not being found online. I am looking for an independent market research partner and keyword searches point primarily to LinkedIn profiles. "Great," I think, "I'll be able to see potential professionals' skills and contact them all in one shot!" Well, I found 3 perfect people--none of whom had links to a website with their contact information (read: they don't have websites!). I searched for them BY NAME using Google and still nothing! If they have no website (or no SEO in place) and no accessible profiles/directory listings online (with LinkedIn, Naymz, Xing, Guru, elance, facebook, myspace, etc.), how are clients finding them?

Social networking profile development and directory listings at least are no-cost ways to market so I can't fathom why everyone wouldn't create something! Further, why would someone restrict their full profile on LinkedIn or not be open to Introductions or InMail--unless they are so wealthy they don't need any business or so hermetic they don't even want to pass along business to people they know. (Incidentally, if you are ever looking for anyone to do anything, I am always happy to refer friends, collegaues, family, etc. I figure matching two people who can benefit from each other's knowledge or services is a good thing!)

Is there some downside to having a website (at least one page with your contact info) and/or profile that I missing?

P.S. If you know how to contact independent market researchers Patricia Cartier, Susan Katz, or Sheila Woods, tell them I'm looking for them.

I'm Coining a Term Today: Frienomenon

Admittedly, I'm not much a social anything (just ask my mother, she will tell you). But I've been lurking in social media long enough to know one thing: Bloggers, bigwigs of subscription-based e-blasts, myspacers, virtual community leaders, message board/chat room moderators, citizen journalists and the like often put themselves--or their personas, who can say?--"out there," create a sense of familiarity with their audience, and are then surprised that people respond to them as colleagues or friends due to a sense of commonality, respect, or connectedness. I call this phenomemon appropriately enough "frienomenon." It's the inability to recognize the inviting and illiciting (soliciting?) of feedback, dialogue, and relationships with strangers via technology and to be accountable for or responsive to those exchanges. To make matters worse, we all have our own rules and expectations and oftentimes the "social contracts" are vague--or worse, unstated. This is a real shame because there's plenty of room on the web to publish your manifesto. "Why should this matter to me," you ask? Here's how "frienomenon" affects you as a small business owner interested in social/online marketing, word of mouth advertising, social networking, etc.: If you are engaging in this activity using technology and/or if other folks are on your behalf (or not), all that's available publicly is an extension of your brand and therefore needs attention. In this wired world, we all have a voice. So if upholding a brand image of I'm-an-industry-god-you're-a-nobody works for you, by all means act that way consistently online--and tell people what rights they'll be relinquishing upfront and how you'll make them pay if they break your rules. In other words, make it a point to act like a jerk publicly and thrill your readers with Schadenfreude. I can think of a design teacher who does this right now, and I applaud his efforts, although he scares me and I wouldn't necessarily advise that path outside the ivory tower. But at least there are no surprises with him! But if you project ponies and rainbows and pots of gold, be prepared to get and respond to requests for magic. Bottom line: truth and consistency in marketing across media and communications should always be the goal.

Building a Customer-Friendly Website with 2.0

Trying to decide which new features to include in your site? Not even sure of your options? Look to your customer demographics to guide you. While all users will require an easy-to-navigate site, here are the key features valued most by demographic based on a recent analyst survey:

• Baby Boomers. Easy does it: Limited content and functionality.
• Boomers on the edge. Keeping up with the Joneses: User ratings, reviews, and price comparisons.
• Gen X. Talk about the passion: Discussion boards and profile creation.
• Gen Y. I like that: Games, quizzes and questions, profile creation, personalizing the site, and uploading content.

Overall, the preferences of Gen Y’ers (18-27) were the least requested functionalities within the study. So while you can’t please all the people all the time, your dollars are best spent incorporating the more mainstream technologies, plus the occasional special offer, if your market consists of multiple demographics and/or if you are unsure.

For best results, implement tools to collect primary market data, if you haven’t already, as this information will be a boon in driving all of your marketing decisions.

In additon to ease of use, consider applicability as a general guideline. Since most Internet users are seeking content—not e-commerce—regardless of your industry you would be wise to include educational/informative materials, even if this is not your primary product. If you are selling services, the production of content that positions you as an expert, including links to online articles you author, would be a good use of your time—and a no-cost marketing strategy to boot.