There have been several instances of companies using social media to apologize for their mistakes, whether for a policy, or product, or a situation that they were responsible for, either directly or indirectly.  Whether it’s the CEO of Jet Blue apologizing for leaving their customers stranded on the runway, or Google saying sorry for an email outage, companies recognize that by saying sorry, they can head off a potential reputation management nightmare, and engage their customers at the same time.

Today, I came across an example of a city using social media for the same thing.  Napoli, in Italy, has a soccer team that’s currently enjoying what looks like their best season for ~ 15 years.  One of their star players is a Slovakian gentleman named Marek Hamsik, who has been linked with a big money move to teams across Europe. 

Last Thursday, Mr. Hamsik was out for a stroll when he was robbed at gunpoint of 800 Euros, and his Rolex watch.  Fearful that this would hasten his departure, and perhaps doom their season;  fans of the Napoli team jumped onto Facebook and created a group with the sole purpose of saying “Sorry.”  Four days later, this group has over 4400  members all wanting to apologize, and let him know that the regular people of Napoli don’t condone what happened.

Marek Hamsik has responded by saying that he’s just looking to put the incident behind him.  And, when told of the Facebook groups that have sprung up about this situation he said “Don’t worry, I am not leaving.” 

It’s doubtful that the one incident would have forced him to relocate, after all … there are robbers with guns in most major cities around the world.  But, when one of the major European clubs comes in with an offer for his services, he may now stop and think about the support he received from the Napoli fans as they came together on Social Media sites.  And maybe, just maybe, that’ll be enough to keep him in the blue of Napoli, at least until the end of the season.

One of the more famous examples of a company using a game as a marketing technique was Burger King. They built three games for the Xbox and Xbox360 and sold them for $4 a pop.

Of the reviews I’ve read, most do not speak highly of these games. But, at the same time, very few speak ultra-negatively either. One review at gamespot.com summed up Sneak King with - “Sneak King isn’t a good game, but it’s so crazy and so cheap that it still manages to be weirdly compelling.”

Match that with the fact that during the 5 week promotional period, they sold more than 2.4 million units.  And as of June 2007 (the latest numbers I have), it was tied with the third best selling Xbox title of all time. 

Its estimated media impression was equivalent to thirteen Super Bowls and helped drive record traffic and sales.  Hence, not surprisingly, Burger King considered this a success. (Numbers and success analysis courtesy Coloribus.com)

We can learn from this…that reaching the upper echelons of perfection is not so much the goal as producing something of interest to your customers. The low cost of entry (particularly compared with the normal cost of a game $30-$50) and the novelty of stuffing hamburgers into the mouths of unsuspecting citizens (the premise of Sneak King) added to the luster and success of the games.

I surprisingly had a hard time finding failures. You might think this bodes well for video games as a marketing technique, but I wonder if most of the failures have been so small that the media took no notice of them.

One failure I found was Viagra’s “Viva Cruiser” Game.  But, this seemed more due to a lack of explaining the side-effects of the drug rather than a problem with the game.

So, what can we learn from this? Video games can be a very lucrative tool for customer engagement.  And, they are a largely untapped market as I could find very few examples to include here. But, even if you do everything right, somethings such as legal worries or other unforeseen problems can sink the ship. Tread carefully.

Wait, think about it first, don’t just do it.

…but all of the cool companies are doing it… and there isn’t a dedicated social network for our prime audience - steeplejacks. If we act fast enough, and leap in with both feet (not something recommended in the steeplejack world), we can become the go-to destination for steeplejack enthusiasts around the world.

Picture by Sponselli

So, have you checked out the demand for such a site? It could be that the reason there isn’t a steeplejack social network is that steeplejacks are too busy climbing chimneys to go on the Web. It could be that the audience isn’t of sufficient size to make a dedicated social network viable. It could be that they’re all already engaged on a similar social network such as one dedicated to dangerous occupations. If you haven’t done the research, you have no idea whether the potential exists for the site to attract enough active members to be a success.

If the potential for the site exists, your next question should be - What will it offer to attract and retain a user base? If you build it, they most likely won’t just come. You have to ask yourself various questions, with the primary ones being: What will the users get out of it? What resources will you offer them that they can’t get elsewhere? Is it just the opportunity to talk about their job / hobby with others? Will you aggregate data from other sources in one place - maps and images of the tallest chimneys, videos of them being climbed, instructional demonstrations, etc - or will you offer new information not found elsewhere?

Of course, part of the discussion on the actual offering should be what you intend to actually use the site for. Do you intend to make ad revenue off it? Sell your products to members? Offer tours & events? Mine the users for their experience and recommendations on your products? Obviously, whatever you intend to do with the site will give direction to the overall look and feel of the site, as you’ll want to ensure that you’re attracting the right people for your purposes.

So, now that you believe there’s an audience, and you have a plan for how you’re going to use it, and a user base building and retention strategy; it’s time to think about the cost to your business. What’s it going to take to get this social network off the ground, and what resources are you going to have to dedicate to it on an ongoing basis? Do you need moderators? How many? How often does your company create new content for the users? How much handholding do the users need? Are there superusers that you can trust with certain responsibilities?

Picture by ThomasHawk

Finally, you have to watch the evolution of the social network to see whether it still allows you to achieve your goals. If it begins to deviate from your purpose, you have to make a choice as to whether you’re going to allow it to float off course, and see where it ends up.  Or, whether you’re going to ‘right the ship’ and make minor course corrections along the way. The problem with the former is obvious, while the problem with the latter is that too harsh a correction can potentially alienate some of your user base, so you need to be careful and preemptive where possible.

What if, after all this, you decide that it’s just too much work to start and maintain your own social network? Depending on your goals, you may just want to go ahead and partner with, or sponsor an existing network. In our example, maybe our firm looking to engage Steeplejacks could negotiate to manage the channel on Steeplejacks on the Dangerous Jobs site - or at the very least, become such an expert in the eyes of the users that they come over to your product page to buy your goods…because ‘he knows what he’s talking about, so his stuff must be good’.’

It doesn’t even have to cost much to sponsor a network. One group I belong to is a meetup group for local soccer players. The cost to the organizer of the meetup group is $45 every 3 months. The cost of this group was previously shared out among the members. A couple of weeks ago, we took an offer to have the group sponsored by The Soccer Resort, a soccer tournament organizing company out of Hoboken, NJ. I don’t know the full details of the arrangement, but I’m going to assume that for at a minimum of the $15 per month cost of the group, The Soccer Resort has just placed their name in front of almost 200 avid soccer players in the DC market. Not a bad price at all.

In my last post, I referenced a magazine ad from an older issue of Business 2.0 (October 24, 2000) describing how interesting it is to time travel BACK in time to get a ‘gut-check’ of the present and maybe, even look into the future.

Perhaps, more interesting than that ad, in my journey back in time, was the large absence of Google on the business radar back then.

Not only was Google absent from the ‘Internet at a Glance’ page, but there was not even a mention of Google in the article about ‘buying ads online’ called ‘Open for Bid-ness, Round Two.’

The article opened citing a recent report that showed many online media buys took place by old school means: “faxes, phone calls, business lunches.”

The article described the abundant need for business/technology that worked for both ad buyers and ad sellers; a solution that addressed the concerns; and concerns about introducing new technology to automate the process.  Or, on the flip-side, it described the problems with having to beef up a sales staff, concerns about excess inventory, and big concerns with conflict of interest between publishers, sellers, buyers, and agencies.

Hindsight is so clearly 20/20.   Nice job, Google!  You saw the opportunity, the challenge.  And, you solved the problem.

So, perhaps a good resolution for me (and you) for next year (wow, is it that time already?) is to read these articles with a bit more sense of foresight - to try to figure out how the current big problems could be the next big solution.

Well, maybe not a day, maybe 8 years.

When I was home for Thanksgiving this past week, I had a chance to enjoy one of my guilty pleasures.

Be Warned: The next few lines may contain the nerdiest thing you have read in a long while.

I’ve saved most all of my old issues of Fast Company and Business 2.0 and when I have spare time, I like to peruse the old issues. I know, I know, N-E-R-D-Y.

But, in my defense…marketing, like much of business, tends to be cyclical. So, I think it is interesting to look at the business trends and emerging business trends from the past, sort of a print version of the Wayback Machine. And, it’s not only the articles and ideas that I find interesting, but also the advertising.

In fact, here’s one of the best ads that I came across was in the October 24, 2000 issue of Business 2.0.

How great is this ad?
“Do you think a hunch about data relationships will improve browser-to-buyer conversion?”

But, here is the best part:
“Your disjointed and incomplete eMarketing data has had you playing the guessing game for too long.”

Back in 2000, way before the great analytics growth explosion, when (WebTrends) Executive
Summaries consisted of nothing more than a few (some meaningless) metrics…

…Coremetrics had the guts to call attention to the fact that eMarketing is trackable and that marketing decisions should not be made based on hunches or worse, bad data.

The fact is that analytics have improved by leaps and bounds in the past 8 years. But, the sad fact is that despite that, many marketers are still making important spending decisions based on their gut-feelings and bad data.

And maybe, some of that is caused by the overwhelming amount of analytic data that is available now. There is a big difference between data and information. Because data whether meaningful or meaningless, without context is really no help. But in this economy, in this recession, very few companies have the luxury of experimental marketing or, in words of Coremetrics, a ‘VP of Guesstimation.”

The other day, I received, amongst the usual spam, an email from Fox Broadcasting inviting me to join their brand-new social network for fans of FOX shows. I wasn’t quite sure how I qualified since I don’t recall the last time I actually watched a FOX show.

But still, I’d been specially selected, and they promised me lots of special features once I signed up for their private social network. Heck, maybe I’d find something redeemable on their schedule to watch, or maybe get them to bring back one of their older shows that they canceled ahead of its time…

Project FOX

Excitedly I clicked on the link, I would be a voice of influence on their network. That sounded good. It took me to a page with one question on it. The question regarded my occupation. I know I could have lied.  But, that’s not me…I answered truthfully.  After all, I’d been selected to join this community. They probably just wanted this information for demographic purposes. Then, the next screen came up.

Fox Broadcasting says Thanks but No Thanks

But… but… I was specially selected… I was going to influence your programming… you asked me to join. Now, I’ll go back to not caring about the former home of Firefly and Futurama.

Lessons to be learned from this:

1. If you’re going to have pre-qualification criteria, it’s probably a good idea to mention it somewhere - rather than promise the moon and then snatch it back. I’ve no idea where they got my email address from, but I can say that I had a slightly better opinion of FOX when I was blissfully unaware of this network than now.
2. More and more companies are creating branded private social networks to use as their own internal ‘captive’ focus groups. By rewarding participants with special features for their participation, they’re not only getting the benefit of instant feedback, but they’re also creating and fostering a dedicated group of ambassadors.
3. Companies such as FOX Broadcasting are using tools such as email to seed their social network. They’re not just taking the ‘build it and they will come’ attitude, they’re using the other marketing tools at their disposal.

I’m gonna be honest and I’m not gonna pull any punches.

We’re just not sure if this relationship is working anymore.

I mean, I know we’re witty and we’re great with analytics and marketing.  But, you’re just not reading us anymore. Sure, you scan us for a provocative headline here and there.  But, I’m just not sure you’re getting much out of this relationship.

I know I promised you three more parts on Video Games last time, and I’m gonna come through, I swear.  But, we never talk anymore. You rarely comment and we just feel like we’re talking to the wall (who, by the way, does not happen to be a particularly responsive piece of stucco.)

This is no Dear John letter.  The last thing we want is you checking out that hot little technology blog from across the Internet. No, we want to get back to that place where you’re thrilled to read our content. Where you get that twinkle in your eye after you finish a story.

But, how do we get back there? How do we catch your interest and keep it? We don’t want to just slip into a hot new site design (which will be coming to better match our redesigned corporate site) and hope you’ll stick around for the long haul.

We want to catch your eye and your heart with stories, content, and perhaps videos that interest you, inform you, and make your day. We want to talk with you again, really talk, and listen, and try to bring the passion and fire back to your RSS reader.

We’re in the process of a full-rethinking of this blog, and we’d like your–scratch that–we yearn for your input like a meat-eater trapped in Vegan country longs for steak. What do you want to see in this blog? Is there something we used to do really well, but don’t anymore? Is there something we do particularly poorly that you never want to see again? How can we help you better? How can we provide better content?

You, our readers, are our most important resource and we want to make sure that your voice is always heard. So, leave us a comment or send me, John, an email directly at jrhea (at) serengeticom (dot) com.

Let me thank you in advance for joining the conversation and helping us be the best blog we can be. A warm thank you to all of our long-time readers (I’m looking at you Nate’s Mom), and I hope we can serve you even better in the future.

In case you were wondering, here’s our blog strategy so far. Let us know what you think

Can searches on Google for flu-related keywords predict increases and decreases in the number of flu cases?  That is a question the folks over at Google wanted to find out. 

After compiling the search-related data, they worked with the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) to compare the data to actual flu outbreaks around the country.  What they found was that there was a very close correlation between the two.

Google decided to use this data to try and help individuals across the country find out the level of flu activity in their area.  They have created a Flu Trends tool through Google.org that displays the data in a chart that can be drilled into - to show individual states. 

One really nice aspect of the tool is that the data is current where as the data that comes from the CDC lags by a couple weeks.  Because of this, you can better anticipate oncoming flu activity before the CDC releases its data and have already begun to take preventive measure to help avoid catching the flu. 

To get a better visual understanding of how the tool works, I pulled a few screenshots from the tool.  The first one shows the overall flu activity throughout the country. 

As you can see, the level of flu activity has been low so far this year.  But, based on previous years, it is likely about to begin to increase.  You can see that in certain states such as Mississippi, Arkansas, and Kentucky, the flu activity has already risen to the moderate level.  

That got me thinking of what it looks like around my area.

Filtering the data for the DC area shows that flu activity has begun to increase, but is still at the low level.

This would seem to indicate that there isn’t much risk of the flu at this point.  But, that it is beginning to have an upwards trend.  So, I should start being a bit more careful in my attempts to avoid contracting the flu this season. 

I’ll probably continue to revisit Google Flu Trends to see if what I see living in the DC area matches with what the tool is telling me.  And, who knows, maybe it can be one way that I can try to avoid the flu this year.      

“Twitter isn’t something that we plan to use right now.”

“We don’t have the resources to invest in a site like Digg or Mixx.”

“Plurk? Never heard of it, not something that we want to bother with until it reaches some kind of critical mass.”

Do any of these sound familiar? These aren’t a problem.  Not every company is ready for each social network, and not every social network is ready for your company. It may be that your company and social networks (some or all) never meet, because they’re just not a real fit.  So, what’s my point with this post?

Even if your company decides not to use a social network, you should make sure to secure your brand on each through user names. Because, if you don’t, the chance is that someone else will.  And, the potential is that that someone may be a detractor, someone who dislikes your brand, and uses that profile to spread messages contrary to your corporate message.

True, when you notice that someone is doing that you can, depending on the strength of our brand and the policies of the social network in question, have them turn that ID over to you  But, damage to your reputation may already be done.

So, you need to go out to social networks and secure your brand name(s). …and you might want to point this post out to a certain former President…

Yesterday morning, when I was thinking about this blog, it was actually shaping up to be quite a different post. But then, the events of yesterday changed things.

Originally, I was going to write about ways to encourage your customers to participate in your brand. I thought about some brands that I happily participate in. For example, having long been a Seth Godin fan, not just reading all his books and his blog daily, but occasionally posting a quote from him on our blog or recommending a book.  I’ve joined his ‘fan club’ and received his book ‘Tribes’ before it was officially released.

There are many examples in that one brand alone of great ways to encourage participation with your brand in a positive way.

But then, yesterday. Sure, it was election day. And, I was thrilled with the outcome (yay!!!). But then, it was also the day that I had quite possibly my worst ever experience as a customer (well, as a potential customer)…

Being relatively new to the area, I took the lazy, convenient way of finding a place to board my dogs (the Petsmart across the street). I won’t bore you with the exhaustive details but it started with three phone calls to their veterinary department, Banfield, to schedule a shot. (One that they are current on for every other kennel I have talked to since, but that is another story.) They ‘lost’ my information (apparently twice because I had to fill out a form that reiterated what I had told two other employees). 

I was forced (before any vet would see them) to watch their sales video (Sure, I get advertising to a captive audience [stuck in the exam room].  But please, this was more torturous than a time share experience).  I was told that my dogs (who, did I mention are current on all of their vaccines) needed hundreds of dollars of shots that Banfield recommends, ugh. I declined the ‘recommended vaccines.’  But, it got worse (didn’t think it could, but it did). So, I left.

I can’t think of any experience that I’ve EVER had as a customer that was worse. Apparently, Banfield has a system to generate the most revenue based on annoying sales tactics (the video), deceptive tactics (pulling up a list of vaccines that are not necessary), and trying other ways to charge for services that are unneccesary. So, I will participate in their brand. I will tell every pet owner who I talk to about my experience and never, ever even shop in Petsmart, as they must see this practice as not a problem.

My point is that there are two ways that customers who will participate in your brand can participate - and there are not that many customers who will. So, you can choose.  Choose by the way you treat your customers (or mistreat them).