It is good. No wait, thats an understatement. It is very, very, very good. I would go so far as to state that it is awesome.

One of the issues that has arisen recently, is how to reach out to more people, i.e. get more followers.

Earlier today I had a brief discussion about how to go about this, and the consensus seemed to be that the only way to do it was to post interesting tweets, and to follow others.

And while I partially agree on this, I do not believe that this is the only way to go about it.

First and foremost, I believe that Twitter requires (dare I say demands) that users participate actively, and not just by “shouting”, but also (more importantly) have dialogues with their followers.

Secondly, consider the type of account one wants. It is purely for business or pleasure? Is it a mix of both (consider if this really is a good idea)?

Thirdly, consider using one of the many online tools that allow you to gain followers easily. There are several (no, this isn’t a shameless pug of one specific tool), and all have one thing in common: They help users gain followers.

However, a lot of these tools are on the razors edge in regards to “legality” concerning the means the followers are gotten. Many bots frequent these tools, thus basically boosting your followers purely from a qualitative point of view.

A few of the tools, on the other hand, require users to actively add themselves as followers thus earning the user credits that can be used to “purchase” more followers. The good ones allow/require you to add topics of interest. And this is where I find these tools very interesting. The ability to gain followers who are interested in the topics you write about, is great! Filter these users so you only allow users that don’t just follow and then unfollow, and you have a powerful tool for connecting with others.

Now, is this “cheating”? Is this on the line in regards to fair use?

I do not believe so. Twitter are quite clear on their terms, allowing users to follow and unfollow as long as they do not abuse this. So it is essentially up to one self, and ones ethics to decide if one wants to abuse the system.

Personally, I have found it a great tool. I have found quite a few very interesting tweeps whom I follow. And I have found more followers, whom I believe are truly interested in what I tweet about.

All in all, I see these types of tools as being quite powerful, if used properly. And I believe that this does not ruin integrity in any way or form, since the users easily can unfollow you, should your content/tweets not be of a satisfactory level.

What say you? Good tool, great tool, horrible tool?

This is not just something that is purely for the marketing budget. Do you know what your users do on your site? Are you aware of conversion rates of the products you sell? Without web analytics, your best bet is a gut feel, and thats possibly not the best way of handling your business intelligence.

What surprises me is the fact that more than just a few companies hardly even dabble with web analytics. It is as if it is still considered voodoo… Or at the very best a fad.

Upper management need to be convinced. Pure and simple. And yes, there are many reasons why companies do not use analytics:

1. Web analytics is too expensive
   I respectfully disagree. At the very least install Google Analytics. It’s free
2. Web analytics is difficult
   Well… Yes. Deep analytics isn’t the easiest to carry out, but even the basic metrics and data are understandable quite easily. Once again, Google Analytics is a good start
3. We don’t have the time to spend on analytics
   As mentioned above, the basic metrics are easy to understand, and provide valuable data. Let me counter that with a question: Can you afford to not spend the time on analytics?

So bottom line: It’s not that difficult to start up with analytics. Basic metrics give valuable data, and does not require oceans of time.

Why not? There’s not a lot to loose by using analytics. On the contrary, there’s the world to win.

The general consensus seems to be that Social Media is the most effective method of generating traffic, and I tend to agree. However, it really does depend on what one is aiming for: quantity or quality.

I think it is safe to say that Social Media has proven its worth in regards to generating massive amounts of traffic to a site in no time. Anyone that has witnessed a tweet go viral, will have experienced this: Traffic in the hundreds of thousands appears out of nowhere.

So this should just be a matter of generating the correct tweets, making them go viral, right?

Well, it depends. Social Media does have an advantage, in that it is an excellent way of “getting your stuff out there”, however, the traffic generated tends to be purely quantitative.

If one is aiming at boosting the qualitative traffic, then it is essential to look into SEO. This simply due to the fact that SEO targets a different segment compared to Social Media.

The Social Media segment:

• Wants to be entertained
• Is curious, but not in the purchasing mode
• Is quick to leave once lack of interest is apparent

The SEO segment:

• Desires the product or content available
• Will be closer to taking action (i.e. purchasing a product)
• Will stick around longer since the interest is already there

It can be boiled down to the simple fact that with Social Media the message is pushed at any and all users, whereas with SEO, the user is “pulled” to the site (has to proactively search for content of interest).

So should one concentrate solely on SEO instead of Social Media then?

In my opinion, no. If one looks at the AIDA model, then both methods absolutely have their place. Social Media is excellent for creating attention and interest about a product, whereas SEO takes the cup when it comes to the desire and action points. Social Media and SEO should co-exist in any only strategy.

However, bear in mind that diving into Social Media without having a sound long-term strategy can be risky at best. More on this in a later subject.
Your thoughts?