Stefano Maggi's Blog

Interest graphs: connecting people by their passions [trend]

noreply@blogger.com (Stefano Maggi) — Fri, 30 Dec 2011 10:31:00 +0000

Social media are excellent at connecting people. The form of connection that has developed most is, so far, based on direct knowledge: Facebook uses the concept of "friendship" to establish a bond between people.

From a "social" point of view, there's another element that's even more at the core of how we establish relationships with each other: the concept of "interest". Finding like-minded people and connecting them based on their passions is a practice that's been rarely explored so far and that is showing huge potential right now.

An interest graph is a mapping of relationships between people based on their passions.

In the past
Capitalizing on what people "like" is nothing new. Facebook tried quite hard to leverage on this concept a few months ago, when it launched Community Pages. They have never become a "hit" because they were intended as a part of an already existing system that already worked with priorities other than interests: the main element that connects people on Facebook is "friendship" or anyway "personal bonds" and not to topics.

An example of Facebook Community Page

As Facebook defines them "Community Pages are a new type of Facebook Page dedicated to a topic or experience that is owned collectively by the community connected to it. Just like official Pages for businesses, organizations and public figures, Community Pages let you connect with others who share similar interests and experiences". As you can see, the objective was to start from an interest to end up with direct connections between people, such as friendships.

A new attitude
The attitude towards interest graphs is changing: social networks and companies are starting to understand this need and providing people solutions to connect based on this.

Interest graphs
Yesterday	Today
Scope Starting point to establish a connection between people	Scope A long lasting element of connection: expect entire social networks to be based exclusively on interests
Support for action (recommendations by friends) We get purchase suggestions based on behavior and suggestions from our friends, ignoring people who are more qualified for a specific interest, just because they're not directly connected to us.	Support for action (recommendations by experts) Suggestions and functional solutions (such as "what could I buy to meet my need?") will be provided through interest graphs. Not just because someone is our friend, it means he can advise us better than anyone else.
Listening and understanding Brands listened to conversations to understand people's needs. Very often, these needs were biased and influenced by relationships between people, rather than by interests.	Listening and understanding The presence of places dedicated to a single interest will allow brands to understand people's needs without bias derived from social connections, thus adopting a cleaner approach to their suggestions.

A matter of priorities
The "social graph" as we've always intended it is not going away and it's still going to be a main player in our relationships. Still, it's extremely important to understand the rise of dedicated social instances (or areas in social networks) where people can connect to each other simply based on their interests.

The huge opportunity
Interest graphs are going mainstream: people are learning to think about connections that come from conversations and interests, rather than only from friendship.

Twitter is relying strongly on "interests": think about the way it uses hashtags to connect people who don't know each other into a conversation. Some brands (like Starbucks, as Brian Solis notes) are starting to think about Twitter as a huge source of insight, starting from interest graphs.

Interest networks
Pinterest is a fast-growing social network based on interest graphs: people connect to content pointed out by like-minded people or by people who are good at communicating their interest. Pinterest is a virtual pinboard with the goal "to connect everyone in the world through the 'things' they find interesting". (Pinterest is in beta. If you want an invite, ask me on Twitter).

Pinterest is a social network based on interest graph

Another interesting application is Social TV: people connect everyday through social channels to follow their favorite shows, to chat about them and to interact with them. They also want to connect with like-minded people during the show, even if they're not friends. Here's why Twitter, with its hashtag logic works so well for commenting live events.

TV productions are starting to integrate social elements (and interest graphs) in their experience

What should brands do?
There are a few steps for brands that want to take advantage of interest graphs:

Listen to people: identify their passions and topics of interest on existing social networks;
Provide content: content is an excellent way to sparkle a conversations about an interest;
Start integrating interest graphs in functional activities: such as social commerce, relying on what other like minded people did, rather only on what friends and peers did;
Join the conversation, by adding value to a specific interest. Brands need to be believable in order to gain people's trust. Choose an interest that's close to the brand values;
Pick multiple platforms: start considering possibile actions on more than one platform. Start from your "embassies" on current social networks and try to extend to places where your "target" is, including social TV platforms and shared content fruition platforms in general.

People look for brands on social media [infographic]

noreply@blogger.com (Stefano Maggi) — Fri, 16 Dec 2011 06:15:00 +0000

Brands must be on social media. At least that's what people say: they want their favorite brands, the ones they care about, the ones that tell a compelling story, to be part of their lives.

This participation, anyway, is never seen as an "interruption", but it's rather a conversation, "embedded" in people's lifestyle.

AYTM did an interesting research, even though not on a huge panel and put it in a nice infographic. You'll see that:

People use social media as part of their daily way of communication;
Many want to talk about brands (they just need a story to tell)
People are more likely to share positive sentiment;
"Positive" is a much more widespread attitude towards brand than "neutral" or "negative";
People see the commercial element of brands as part of a conversation;

The new old question: Facebook or Twitter?

noreply@blogger.com (Stefano Maggi) — Tue, 13 Dec 2011 06:25:00 +0000

As you might have noticed, in the last few months, two of the world's most widespread social networks have changed.

Facebook introduced real time updates, mentions, lists and the possibility to subscribe to people: characteristics that are very near to Twitter the way it always worked.

Twitter introduced brand pages, content preview directly in people's streams, an interface easier to understand for newbies and a high attention on suggestions.

Following last week's introduction of brand pages by Twitter, I read a lot of people wondering what would be the best choice, since Facebook and Twitter suddenly got similar.

In fact, they haven't.

Twitter has:

A public approach (the default rule is "everyone sees my tweets");
A focus on conversations derived from micro-interactions;

Facebook has:

A more private approach (the default rule is "my friends see my updates")
A focus on conversations derived from content;

Even though, inevitably, many changes are bringing Facebook and Twitter a little closer in terms of functionalities, it doesn't mean that they're headed the same direction. Actually, it's quite the opposite.

What's the rule for deciding: Facebook or Twitter? It's very simple: look at people. And answer two questions:

Where are they?
How do they use those channels?

And also consider that, since you should use a conversational approach, you can be on both channels effectively if you can differentiate your message and the conversation you're starting with people.

The path of least resistance

noreply@blogger.com (Stefano Maggi) — Thu, 24 Nov 2011 20:31:00 +0000

According to physics, every object in a system moves following a path of least resistance: the easiest way to change status.

People follow the same law, too, when they get in touch with something new and unexpected. It's a way to protect their scarce resources: time and attention.

This is why most Social Ads on Facebook fail: brands often use them as banners. No specific targeting, no idea of who's interacting, bold picture and an unclear copy. This is not anyone's path of least resistance.

There is another way of thinking about Social Ads on Facebook. Considering them "conversational media". Facebook Social Ads are a way for brands to reach people interested in a conversation that's happening somewhere else, which they would otherwise ignore. Social Ads on Facebook succeed when they integrate with people's life. Good Facebook Social Ads brings to people's attention content targeted on a specific topic, at the right time in their life and it's just a sparkle for a conversation.

Think about it. Otherwise it's almost impossible for brands to integrate in this scenario, portrayed in this Infographic by Jess3.

How to burst filter bubbles through social media

noreply@blogger.com (Stefano Maggi) — Sat, 05 Nov 2011 07:26:00 +0000

Right now, if you search something, you get a totally different result than I would for the same search. This is because the software we use to access information gives us a personalized answer. This is brilliant. Except when it's not.

What if the software fails to show you that piece of information you didn't know you needed? Eli Pariser calls this a "filter bubble": a situation in which you are "locked out" from the information that could be useful for you, because of an algorithm.

Watch Eli's TED Talk to see this point clearly.

Mark Zuckerberg once said

A squirrel dying in front of your house may be more relevant to your interests right now than people dying in Africa.

He intended to highlight the importance of content curation made by a software: the Facebook news feed.

When we search something in Google, we get a totally personalized result, even if we're not logged in, says Eli. There are 57 variables considered by Google, that include the kind of computer we search from, the browser we use or where we are).

In this context it's clear that we need to integrate a strong human component with the algorithm that provides us information and conversation. It's fundamental to have a human approach with people we want to reach with our information and to remember that the "human feed", cooperating with content curation via software, will be the only way for us to get relevant conversations.

Brands should be aware of this and understand how "optimizing for SEO" has little sense, if it's not matched with an "optimization for people" of everything they communicate online.

Optimize for people.

People who talk, buy. [Study]

noreply@blogger.com (Stefano Maggi) — Thu, 27 Oct 2011 18:45:00 +0000

Not always, but often.

Many studies have demonstrated it. The latest one, a research by Bain & Company, highlighted that people who have a conversation with a brand over social media spend 20% to 40% more money the brand than other customers.

What's really surprising is that someone is still surprised about it. People buy something because they like it, remember it and recall it. They talk about it for the same reasons. When brands have a remarkable relationship with people, even when it's not about a product, they generate a bond, an emotional relationship that goes beyond communication.

It's no surprise that such a relationship stimulates people to get in touch with products and to purchase. But that's not all. The most amazing thing is that when brands set up an effective conversation and a remarkable storytelling, people are willing to talk about it with their friends and to involve them directly. Purchase becomes just an intermediate step towards a much more interesting development: advocacy.

Think about it next time you set your strategic objectives.

Loyalty vs advocacy

noreply@blogger.com (Stefano Maggi) — Thu, 20 Oct 2011 18:26:00 +0000

The concept of loyalty has always been an important pillar of marketing, being probably older than marketing itself: it looks like the first form of loyalty program was implemented by a US merchant who gave to his customers copper tokens that could be exchanged for goods in his store.

Encouraging loyal buying behavior is a great strategy and it usually costs a lot less than acquiring new customers, so companies have learned that investing in rewarding people for repeated purchases often works very well.But there's something that's even more valuable than repeated purchase: people's willingness to share the love for a brand or a product with their own peers.

Advocacy is one of the most valuable asset a company can develop.Today is easier than it's ever been to spread an idea: technology is so advanced that anyone with a great idea can virtually reach millions of people. This would make it easier for advocates to spread their feelings about a brand.Yet, there are very few brands that reward advocacy: brands that recognize people's passion and involvement and that give them the level of visibility they deserve.

Social media represent a great way to encourage, reward and highlight advocacy: consider conversation as a multiplier of people's power to share.

Are you considering advocacy as one of your marketing priorities? Are you extending your loyalty program into an advocacy program? Are people being properly rewarded for being fans of your brand and for sharing their passion with friends and peers?

What happens when people involve brands?

noreply@blogger.com (Stefano Maggi) — Sat, 08 Oct 2011 07:10:00 +0000

It's very interesting to see brands that have the strength, passion and appeal to actively involve people in a relationship. They do it through outreach activities and by stimulating people's interest.

It fascinates even more to follow brands that are able to draw attention and engagement to a level that people are spontaneously willing to be involved. In these cases, people find strategies and implement real tactics to be noticed and involved by brands.

Take a look at this interesting post by Juli Ziv about how bloggers can get in touch with brands to get access to an exclusive experience such as the fashion week.

What do fashion brands have in common? How can they sparkle this level of involvement? How can this apply to your brand?

A fundamental step is differentiating a "flat", non-creative approach that can activate a generic conversation (let's call it "buzz") and a deep, personalized, creative and direct approach that can generate a real commitment in a brand's community. Only one of these generates real, long term, unconditioned involvement.

Picasso and social media

noreply@blogger.com (Stefano Maggi) — Tue, 27 Sep 2011 20:47:00 +0000

Picasso once said "Unfinished, a picture remains alive, dangerous. A finished work is a dead work, killed.".

I love how this also applies to marketing and communication, too. Given that much of what we see around us is very far from being "art", the same rule is true for the way brands communicate.

On one and we have advertising that can be brilliant (but more often it's not) and that is static, closed, finished. It doesn't allow an exchange. It just can be seen.

On the other hand, we have conversation, that can extend from advertising and that, by definition, is never finished. It's a continuous dialogue, made by thousands microinteractions.

Social media has the great advantage of leaving you "work" open, alive.

How does conversation turn your art into something that's "alive"?

Why social media rocks at marketing

noreply@blogger.com (Stefano Maggi) — Mon, 19 Sep 2011 17:54:00 +0000

There are many types of marketing, different approaches, different ways companies decide to interact with their target. The borders between these ways of thinking are so blurred that it's impossible to categorize them.

Of course, there are two extreme poles for all these types of marketing: two elements between all the others stand. One, as Seth Godin would say, is marketing as art, while the other is marketing as numbers.

The latter is focused on equations: invest as much in media and creativity, interrupt people, sell more, buy more media and so on. The former is about transferring emotions. It's not easy, of course, because it involves a deep understanding of people and their motivation, but it's a multiplier. If you consider marketing as art, as a way to activate a relationship and a conversation, suddenly the media you purchase has a better ROI, the creativity you apply doesn't become only a TV ad, but a conversation, your events extend into a million of micro interaction and you start building a community.

This is why social media rocks at marketing. It's the best way to activate a conversation, moving between the two poles of marketing. It's the best set of tools that can match strategies to bring an approach from characterized by "numbers" to one characterized by "art".

Then you think about marketing, are you evolving your numbers into art?

Note about the photo: it's about the Palace of Fine Arts, taken during my trip to San Francisco a few months ago. It represents the birth of art. Of course, in a classical meaning, but it can be applied to any kind of art.

The border between communities

noreply@blogger.com (Stefano Maggi) — Sat, 03 Sep 2011 13:26:00 +0000

Facebook recently released an update of its user interface, that has many new characteristics, but one of the most important is the ability to choose more easily people related to any status update.

This means that selecting people who "are with you" or who you want to tag in a post is immediate and can be done from a prominent icon on the left. This also means that you can easily select what groups can see your status updates, by clicking the button on the right, where you can select the community you want to show your message to. It was possibile before the new release, but now it's easier.

Do you notice any similarities? That's right: Facebook is following a trend that Google+ has perfectly highlighted. People need to select the right community to share with, for every single piece of conversation. What's the next challenge social networks will face? Dealing with the "border" between communities, lists, circles. It's quite hard for people to trace a line between groups: who is a coworker, a friend, an acquaintance? What's the real difference? The categorization is not discreet and it can become hard to "define" peers.

Here's why it will be important for social networks to start offering solutions to share that are an evolution of current Google+'s Circles: something that is more liquid and that defines groups based on hard and soft bonds between people. In the meantime it's very important to learn from current situation, also from a marketing point of view: when a brand interacts with someone, the context is crucial and the relationship a person has with her friends must be taken in consideration.

Brands that will learn to build a relationship involving people's friends at different levels, by building communities of interest will be the most successful in the next months. What do you think about these new features by Google+ and Facebook? Is it hart do build lists and circles because you need a more liquid approach to sharing? Let me know in the comments.

Community management: the fundamental link between brands and people

noreply@blogger.com (Stefano Maggi) — Sat, 03 Sep 2011 12:33:00 +0000

A few days ago, I prepared a visual to highlight why community management is so important for companies and people. It really acts as a bridge between brands and potentially everyone in their community. I published a post about it on We Are Social blog, both in English and Italian. You're very welcome to join the conversation.

Google+ Invites, social technology and language

noreply@blogger.com (Stefano Maggi) — Sun, 07 Aug 2011 08:48:00 +0000

Google+ just released a new invite mode: people don't need to type their friends email one by one anymore, but it's enough they share a link.

So here are my 150 invites available right now. If you want one, just enjoy ;)

Google+ is an excellent social technology that has the objective to enable cooperation. Just like... language, for all mankind. To see this parallel better, take a look at this brilliant TED video, by Mark Pagel: How language transformed humanity.

What do you think about language, social technology and Google+?

Facebook search: prepare for a superficial approach

noreply@blogger.com (Stefano Maggi) — Wed, 27 Jul 2011 03:54:00 +0000

Facebook is one of the two main online destinations worldwide. Its search is in a prominent space of the page and used very much to find people and brands to interact with. It allows to find people, pages, groups, apps, events, web results (in partnership with Bing) and posts in Facebook.

It works very well for quick searches and interactions:

Type a word
See a short list of results (usually 7)
Select one

This search it can also be more superficial, reducing results to one, if we use a very common behavior in search: typing a word and pressing "return". In this case, the results are reduced down to one. The best one according to Facebook.

Type a word
Press return
See content associated with first result

The only way to see the whole set of results available is by clicking "See more results for...".

Facebook gives privilege to results that have something to do with your social graph. In some cases, the first result when looking for a brand can be a status update about what you searched, by one of your friends, even if you were looking for the brand page itself.

From a user point of view, this means you have to be very careful when you're looking something up for the first time: finding the right person, page, app, content or group isn't so easy.

From a brand point of view, this means it's fundamental to activate a conversation with people: this increases chances of being found, simply by being relevant for a user's social graph.

Facebook search has a superficial approach: it can be a good thing for quick interactions with people and brands in your network. It can be tougher when you're looking for something new. It's very important to be aware and prepared for it.

What do you think about Facebook search? How do you interact with it? What do you think about its "first result" approach?

Google+, data and sociographics

noreply@blogger.com (Stefano Maggi) — Wed, 13 Jul 2011 06:04:00 +0000

Google, through its new Google+ product, is building an unbelievable database of information and adding it to its already existing search engine data. Not only is the world's most used search engine keeping track of what we see, what we click, but now, even more, Google is gathering information from observation. Behavioral information, like:

What you usually share
What you read the most
Which friends influence you the most
Which kinds of content are the most effective for you

All of these data could be aggregated and mined, not an easy job considering how huge they are, but - most importantly - could help understand people better from a sociographic point of view.

These data also allow to identify - from a quantitative point of view - which influencers are more interesting for specific people and for target niches. After a preliminary indication, there will be a fundamental part of human work, in understanding social dynamics and building insights upon what has been researched.

So, Google+ offers a wonderful basis for marketers to understand the target. So does Facebook, with a similar approach to data and influence. Now we'll have to see which social network opens its data (in an aggregate and privacy respectful way) to everyone. Google did this in the past with Google Analytics. And access to information will become an huge asset to build conversations that are relevant for people.

What do you think? Will Google open up data, like it did with Analytics, in an aggregated way and without invading people's privacy?

A little more conversation, a little less actions

noreply@blogger.com (Stefano Maggi) — Sat, 25 Jun 2011 06:20:00 +0000

If you follow this blog, you probably like to be up to date with marketing actions by brands, to understand how local and global brands engage with people, in particular through social media. And if you follow social media marketing, you probably see a lot of initiatives by brands that leverage on your social graph: they may use social media to share your interaction (tell a friend) or to take data from your "social graph" and put it into an experience (think about all the video experiences that show your photos in it).

It's very good to see that "digital" is turning to social media technology in almost every interaction. The limit today is that, in many cases, brands think about initiatives in a "digital" way: beautiful boxes with funny mechanisms, but with little or no human relationship.

It's very important for company to understand that "actions" make sense only when they're part of a conversation: elements of a continuous exchange between people and the brand. When actions are isolated, they make little impact on people, at least in terms of time: as soon as the action ends, so does the engagement.

There are also brands that are doing it very well and understand that actions are just part of a continuous project. Where is your brand positioning?

Do you know brands who are focused on actions and other brands that are uilding relationships? Feel free to name names in comments.

Photo credit Ali

Blogging in a world where no company cares about you

noreply@blogger.com (Stefano Maggi) — Sun, 29 May 2011 14:47:00 +0000

Many brands decide to start blogging for several reasons, but mainly because it:

Can help brands acquiring thought leadership about a specific argument;
Is a way to build a relationship with an ingreasingly big audience (more than 50% of internet users will read blogs this year);

Is a great way to start an ecosystem that can be integrated with other channels: social networks, microblogging solutions, geolocation services;
Can help connecting: business with people and people with each other;

What is the best way to make blogging work well for a brand? There are four steps:

Being trustworthy: it's very important that people think you're a reliable source of information, so that thay can open up and have an exchange with you;
Being interesting: it's fundamental to post content that creates value. This can happen because content is unique, because it's original or also because, even if it comes from someone else, it's curated very well by the brand and selected carefully because it's remarkable;
Being useful: speaking to everybody is useless: find a small niche (or a set of niches) and provide small bits of content that they need in a precise moment;
Being human: people who follow blogs don't want to interact with a "company" or a "brand". They like to see there are other people there. Thay love that brands and companis are made by people, not machines. Make them feel your human touch, put people in the game;

I really like the way Seth Godin thinks about "Caring". If a company wants to be successful at blogging (which means reaching objectives set for it) it must make people count. Seth says:

No organization cares about you. Organizations aren't capable of this. [...] If you want to build a caring organization, you need to fill it with caring people and then get out of their way. When your organization punishes people for caring, don't be surprised when people stop caring.

What are your best tips for blogging?

Content, community, experience: a new framework

noreply@blogger.com (Stefano Maggi) — Sun, 22 May 2011 11:44:00 +0000

A new way to enjoy content is gradually becoming mainstream. Last year, Flipboard introduced a way of reading and interacting with content that takes in consideration people's social graphs: what your friends see, what content they create, what they highlight in their own social channels, such as Facebook and Twitter.

Flipboard model is very interesting because it adds a layer of entertainment and experience to social media content, applying it to a device with great interaction possibilities: the iPad.

This model is at the core of a new application, called Plizy, currently in beta. Plizy (for iPad, too) allows users to enjoy content from their community, highlighted in people's social streams (e.g. Twitter and Facebook). It's very interesting and it gives you the sensation of a video experience with an agenda set by your community.

Another similar application leverages on the concept of viewing videos in a Flipboard looking way, starting from friends' networks: Showyou. What really works in this models is that it's changing the way people interact with their content, without receiving it passively, but finding it through the suggestion of their own communities, and sharing relevant bits of content with their friends and followers.

As soon as applications like these become mainstream, brands can successfully decide to be a part of it, by creating content and experiences that are easily shared to these platforms or by activating partnerships, like the ones Flipboard is already making available (see this one with Oprah, MC Hammer and Sports Illustrated). Brands can successfully curate content about specific topics and present it to their communities and niches, interested to specific topics.

This new framework, based on content, community and experience is an important trend to watch. This has the potential to radically change the way content is presented to people. It's not about broadcasting anymore, it's about creating a conversation about content and making it available through an engaging experience.

What do you think about these kind of solutions? Are you already using them? Do you already see brands that effectively leverage on them?

Random acts of kindness: it looks like we're getting better

noreply@blogger.com (Stefano Maggi) — Sat, 14 May 2011 07:54:00 +0000

The social web is changing the way we live. The internet, thanks to social media, brings people together and it looks that - from a sociological point of view - the evolution is towards positive interactions between networks of people. From a specific marketing point of view, this trend is the basis for Random Acts of Kindness. Here's how Trendstream defines RAK:

RANDOM ACTS OF KINDNESS | For consumers long used to (and annoyed by) distant, inflexible and self-serving corporations, any acts of kindness by brands will be gratefully received. For brands, increasingly open communications both with and between consumers (especially online), means that it's never been easier to surprise and delight audiences with R.A.K.: whether sending gifts, responding to publicly expressed moods or just showing that they care*.

I suggest you take a look at the article by Trendstream, which has a lot of RAK examples, including We Are Social's Interflora campaign. [Disclosure: I'm Managing Partner at We Are Social Italy].

To better understand Random Acts of Kindness, I suggest you to watch this brilliant video, that analyzes how the social web is making us better, from a sociological point of view. It's a TED talk by Jonathan Zittrain, social theorist. Enjoy!

Find the value: Facebook pays you to watch spots.

noreply@blogger.com (Stefano Maggi) — Sat, 07 May 2011 19:09:00 +0000

Facebook recently launched a new solution for advertisers: while Facebook users are playing a game, they can choose to see a branded video and earn Facebook credits for this action.

Apparently, a situation, where eveyone wins:

People earn credits;
Facebook sells ads that are actually seen by people;
Brands earn impressions for their content;

Except no one really wins:

People watch videos because they have to, if they want to get credits without paying, they aren't motivated to do it and it's unlikely they'll have a mindset that is available to follow any calls to action;
Facebook sells an ad format that generates impressions, but that hardly translates into leads;
Brands get seen, build awareness, but they interrupt people, without building any conversation;

This solution has many elements in common with TV advertising: experience interruption, type of content, "push" approach.

What do you think about this solution by Facebook? Is it a step forward or would you look for something that's nearer to the concept of "conversation"?

The social media game

noreply@blogger.com (Stefano Maggi) — Sat, 30 Apr 2011 14:07:00 +0000

It's very interesting and useful to follow how the social gaming landscape is gaining speed and evolving lately. With the increase of attention on Empire Avenue, it's possible to define a model and identify the main kinds of "social media games" that are available today. This exercise allows to understand the opportunities for both people and brands, in building a conversation that takes the gaming aspect in consideration.

There are currently three types of social gaming:

Self-focused: the result of this kind of gaming is often limited to the game itself. Participating builds up rewards and improves the experience people can have inside it. Brands take part to this type of games, mainly as sponsors. The community element has the role of extending the game itself. An example for this kind of gaming is Farmville;
Community-focused: this kind of social gaming has a continuous connection with the community. The challenging element is important. The results of this gaming interaction are limited to the game and to its community. Brands take part to this type of gaming by participating by rules similar to people's rules. An example if Empire Avenue;
Reality-focused: this type of gaming has outcomes that impact the "real world". Its long- and short- term rewards impact both the game (e.g. "badges") and the real world. Brands take part to this kind of games by participating to the conversation. The result can build value not only for the user, the game or his community, but for the whole world. An example for this type of game is Foursquare;

How would you categorize the favorite social games you're using? What opportunities do you see for brands?

When advertising can become a conversation

noreply@blogger.com (Stefano Maggi) — Tue, 26 Apr 2011 07:23:00 +0000

File this under "huge potential". It's just about a technology, that could be a first evolutional step towards a deep transformation in the way we think about advertising.

Let's start from the technology. A few days ago, Pepsi MAX aired a spot that could be "tagged": which means "recognized" on a mobile device. People could use an application, called "IntoNow": by allowing the device to "listen" to the spot, it would understand if it was showing the Pepsi MAX spot, and tag it. The consequence? A coupon to buy the product.

This is a first step, but that's where the opportunity comes in. What if, instead of giving a coupon, a spot could be the starter for a conversation?

Every commercial could potentially be linked to its brand and to relevant conversations for people who are watching it. The most interesting point? No one is forcing people to continue the relationship: if you're interested in what the brand says and want to have a conversation with it, go on, tag, and make it a relationship starter.

Instead of coupons, brands could offer:

The opportunity to meet other people;
The opportunity to have a conversation with the brand and its community;
The possibility to comment on content;
The chance to unlock rewards;
The unique starter for a conversation;

Can you see the potential? Right now it's just an experimental technology, used for a very tactical objective, but - given the strong developing convergence between TV and Social Media, it has the opportunity to become a game changer. What do you think about it?
Note: Yahoo! saw the opportunity and just bought IntoNow.

Can't buy you love: 5 strategic alternatives

noreply@blogger.com (Stefano Maggi) — Sun, 10 Apr 2011 07:32:00 +0000

on social media. That's right, love from your community is not for sale.

As Wendy Clark recently said "Brands can't buy their way to greatness any more". This has a huge impact if you consider Wendy is in charge of integrated marketing and communication for Coca Cola. And she also added that the right approach is being "Liquid and Linked". Liquid because the social media landscape changes everyday, Linked because no channels can be kept isolated from an overall strategy.

Money is not enough anymore, particularly on social media. The old logic was: build an average product, invest lots in advertising, make your brand appear everywhere, sell. Today, your message cannot be average anymore: targets are not average (have they ever been so?), but made of a thousand niches. You need to speak to all of them and to stimulate all of them. Focusing on money is not enough, here are five things you can do instead, with some of the money you can save:

Study your target to find out where people interact and what interests they have;
On the inside, understand processes so well that you are sure you're already providing the best experience your company can provide. If not, find a way to improve (maybe with a little help from your community);
On the outside, listen carefully to reactions and adapt everything you're doing in real time;
Build a strategy, think about it as "liquid and linked" if you want: define it not just for social media, but for your whole brand, giving social media the right weight;
Invest in adapting your service and product to conversation: it could be just about adapting communication, but it could move on in making what you offer something more conversational, remarkable and worth sharing;

Brands can't buy their way to greatness anymore. What else could they do with part of that money? What's your take? How would you build a dialogue?

Never been so human: two stories

noreply@blogger.com (Stefano Maggi) — Sat, 02 Apr 2011 12:29:00 +0000

Companies are made by people. Brands are made by people. Like it or not, the human component in every business is fundamental. In marketing and communication, when a brand didn't want to show its people, it was easy to hide them behind a shiny logo and a catchy payoff. But then came social media.

People are now more important than ever, also because they cannot be hidden, because their nature directly influences the way their brand interacts with its community. What you, your colleagues and your partners are has never had such a big impact on how you're perceived by people you want to reach.

The reason for all this? We love to interact with people, not with logos. We love conversations, not websites that are built as beautiful shiny mechanisms, with no trace of humanity in them.

Let me tell you about two stories that got my attention this week.

The elephant and the CEO.
One week ago a video circulated on social media. It was not the usual "wannabe viral" video, but a reportage of Bob Parsons killing an elephant in Zimbabwe. Bob Parsons is CEO at GoDaddy.com, one of the most famous domain and hosting service in the world. How did I found out about that? An email from their competitors telling me to switch to a company that doesn't kill elephants, while offering a special discount and a contribution for SaveTheElephants.com. Beside this reaction, story brought a lot of negative attention to GoDaddy.com. Bob Parsons tried to explain his reasons a few days later, claiming he was in fact helping a village against the elephant, but the GoDaddy.com reputation has been strongly hit by this. The boundary between the "company" and the people is so thin that it's hard to detach them.

The entrepreneur and her passion
The second story is from a TEDx talk, by Tara Hunt. It's about how her personal passion impacts everything she does and the way she can help her startup to keep pushing. It takes a lot of faith and perseverance, but entrepreneurship, seen as a mission, adds value to every company or every brand. If you read Delivering Happines by Tony Hsieh, you know what this means: building a great culture and favoring people's passion is the best way to build an effective brand. Watch Tara's talk and you'll see for yourself: how much strength can this kind of passion bring into a business, a brand, a conversation, a relationship?

It's so much important today to understand that business has never been so human. Finding the right partners to establish a relationship is not only a good idea: it's the only way to be successful and create value with people. The fact that you will also sell them a service or product will come as a consequence.

Can you feel it? Is your business becoming more human everyday? Is it demanding that you communicate to people as people? Feel the change.

How to be remarkable. One act at a time.

noreply@blogger.com (Stefano Maggi) — Sat, 26 Mar 2011 09:11:00 +0000

Not everyday dives us the chance to save somebody's life, but everyday gives you the opportunity to make a difference for someone.

Volunteer firefighter Mark Bezos tells a very short and interesting story: what makes an impression, what is remarkable for people is not just the "big heroic" action. Being remarkable is a result of many small acts of kindness.

Remember that when you interact with your community: on the Facebook Page of your brand, on Twitter, on your blog. It's not important to create a huge experience in one interaction, try to give people a lot of small, significant experiences that will change their life. One tweet / update / post at a time.

And, enjoy this story. A life ( /marketing /communication /pr) lesson from a firefighter: