Det var en gång en kille som hette Robert. Han var omåttligt populär och inte helt olik Prins Daniel. Med sitt stela leende lockade han många människor att betala en slant varje månad för att få titta på massor av TV-kanaler. Hela han var faktiskt lite stel. Det får man lov att säga.
Hans chefer tyckte i alla fall att det var dags för Robert att börja Twittra. Sagt och gjort. Sociala medier är ju ett måste i dessa dagar, så Robert satte upp ett twitterkonto. Twittra = berätta vilka program som går på TV, tänkte Robert och skred till verket. Han missade helt poängen med andra ord. Men diskussioner med människor har man väl kundtjänst till?
En vacker dag ringde en förtvivlad kvinna till denna kundtjänst och berättade att hennes hus brunnit ned och att hon ville säga upp sitt avtal med Robert. Vilka tokiga människor det finns! Det finns ju regler för det och ett avtal är ett avtal. Nedbrunna hus eller inte. Om människan kan titta på sin nedsmälta TV eller inte är då rakt inte Roberts business. Glöm det, tanten!
Den förtvivlade kvinnan hade en vän som blev riktigt upprörd och bloggade och twittrade om händelsen, vilket snabbt spred sig som en löpeld över landet, eftersom folk inte alls höll med Robert. Hans stela leende blev allt stelare och en chef bestämde sig för att få tyst på eländet en gång för alla. Tyst nu, så drar vi av ett par månader på avtalet, var hans budskap till den förtvivlade och faktiskt hemlösa kvinnan.
Naturligtvis fick inte det tyst på twittrandet. Istället började folk säga upp sina avtal med Boxer och varumärket fick sig rejäla törnar från alla håll. Tror ni nu att cheferna vaknade upp ur sin gammelmediadvala och insåg att de nya medierna faktiskt innebär att man måste ta hand om sina kunder? Nä! Det gjorde de inte. De lät visserligen udda vara jämnt och lät den hemlösa, TV-lösa och förtvivlade kvinnan slippa ur sitt avtal, men det var bara för att få tyst på väninnan. Inget annat.
Vad hände med Robert då? Han blev så förstenad av sitt misslyckande, att han vittrade sönder totalt och sopades bort med skurvattnet. Samtidigt fick alla hans chefer sparken och ersattes av moderna kommunikativa chefer som insåg värdet av genuin kundvård. Robert ersattes i samma veva med en riktig människa av kött och blod som kunde engagera människor på riktigt. En som deltog i diskussionerna och brydde sig om.
Eller inte.
söndag 7 november 2010
lördag 6 november 2010
A seven year old knows best
On Friday morning, I was reading the newspaper about the US election and I promised myself to understand it. To really understand what it meant.
Yes, the Republicans made it in the house of representatives and strengthened their position in the senate. That's not very good for Obama. I can understand that. But how bad is it? According to my newspaper, it's worse than ever before after WW2. Worse than for Harry Truman in 1946 and worse than for Bill Clinton in 1994. But what does it mean. Really?
At this point of my reading, my seven year old son sat down beside me, watching the front of the newspaper. He then said: That's Obama, isn't it? I said: Yes! He sais: I know why he looks so sad at the picture. I said: You do?! He said: Yes, he will not be able to decide as many things as he could before. He lost a competition, you know.
He then ran away to play again. It took me a while to digest that he actually gave me the answer that easily. He had watched "Lilla Löpsedeln" on TV and they obviously knew how to tell a story that anyone could understand.
I think that's why we often fail in communication. We get lost in details and miss out the real point. Instead of telling a story about an operator, who can now read his newspaper and drink a cup of morning coffee while the machine does his job, we talk about how sharp the cutting edge of the new insert is, or how many cutting edges there are.
Next time I'm writing a text, I'll ask my son how to write it.
Yes, the Republicans made it in the house of representatives and strengthened their position in the senate. That's not very good for Obama. I can understand that. But how bad is it? According to my newspaper, it's worse than ever before after WW2. Worse than for Harry Truman in 1946 and worse than for Bill Clinton in 1994. But what does it mean. Really?
At this point of my reading, my seven year old son sat down beside me, watching the front of the newspaper. He then said: That's Obama, isn't it? I said: Yes! He sais: I know why he looks so sad at the picture. I said: You do?! He said: Yes, he will not be able to decide as many things as he could before. He lost a competition, you know.
He then ran away to play again. It took me a while to digest that he actually gave me the answer that easily. He had watched "Lilla Löpsedeln" on TV and they obviously knew how to tell a story that anyone could understand.
I think that's why we often fail in communication. We get lost in details and miss out the real point. Instead of telling a story about an operator, who can now read his newspaper and drink a cup of morning coffee while the machine does his job, we talk about how sharp the cutting edge of the new insert is, or how many cutting edges there are.
Next time I'm writing a text, I'll ask my son how to write it.
onsdag 13 januari 2010
What is one-way communication?
I participated in a work-shop today whith about thirty engineers, where communication came up as a success factor in this highly engineered project. As I was the representative from the marketing communication department, they all looked at me every time this success factor came up, and it actually took me a while to understand that they meant information. Not communication.
It’s a complicated area and one obvious success factor is to inform people properly so that they don’t misunderstand what they are supposed to do. Information rather than communication.
The difference isn't always clear. There is even a word for one-way communication. How do you communicate with someone that doesn't answear? That’s information and nothing else. I couldn’t help but twitterize this issue.
Is Twitter a forum for information or a forum for communication?
Most people with some Twitter experience would probably say that it is a forum for communication. It is a social media, which means that we're talking communication, rather than information. However, there are numerous twitter profiles, following not one single person, and just use the medium for informing about what they think and do, or even worse just use Twitter to promote their products.
If we for the sake of this blog post could agree that Twitter is a social media though, which would mean communication rather than information, I just have one other question: Why are the people we communicate with called followers? A follower in my mind is not someone you communicate with. Could possibly be someone that you'd inform.
Facebook "followers" are called friends. Linkedin "followers" are called connections. Both these are more communicative. Why not call them contacts? Or connections, but that's already taken.
Ideas someone?
It’s a complicated area and one obvious success factor is to inform people properly so that they don’t misunderstand what they are supposed to do. Information rather than communication.
The difference isn't always clear. There is even a word for one-way communication. How do you communicate with someone that doesn't answear? That’s information and nothing else. I couldn’t help but twitterize this issue.
Is Twitter a forum for information or a forum for communication?
Most people with some Twitter experience would probably say that it is a forum for communication. It is a social media, which means that we're talking communication, rather than information. However, there are numerous twitter profiles, following not one single person, and just use the medium for informing about what they think and do, or even worse just use Twitter to promote their products.
If we for the sake of this blog post could agree that Twitter is a social media though, which would mean communication rather than information, I just have one other question: Why are the people we communicate with called followers? A follower in my mind is not someone you communicate with. Could possibly be someone that you'd inform.
Facebook "followers" are called friends. Linkedin "followers" are called connections. Both these are more communicative. Why not call them contacts? Or connections, but that's already taken.
Ideas someone?
lördag 9 januari 2010
Avatar again... just curious
My last post was about the movie Avatar and its work with social media. This one will just discuss Twitter followers... and Avatar again.
In six months and less than 160 tweets, Avatar managed to get over 20.000 Twitter followers, just discussing a movie that would be shown at the cinemas anyway. It's not like the followers could influence the content. It's not even likely that they'll receive any free tickets or see it before anyone else. It's a movie for heaven's sake! When you've seen it, it's over!
I can understand that Barak Obama has three million followers as he's actually ruling an important country. I can also understand that Britney Spears attracts a lot of followers (even though it amazes me that she attracts one more million followers than Obama himself). But a movie? This will keep my brain busy until someone helps me out here!
In six months and less than 160 tweets, Avatar managed to get over 20.000 Twitter followers, just discussing a movie that would be shown at the cinemas anyway. It's not like the followers could influence the content. It's not even likely that they'll receive any free tickets or see it before anyone else. It's a movie for heaven's sake! When you've seen it, it's over!
I can understand that Barak Obama has three million followers as he's actually ruling an important country. I can also understand that Britney Spears attracts a lot of followers (even though it amazes me that she attracts one more million followers than Obama himself). But a movie? This will keep my brain busy until someone helps me out here!
Avatar takes social media to the next level
The movie Avatar passed the $1 billion mark last weekend as the fifth movie ever and might well pass Titanic as the movie most seen ever. I haven’t seen it yet and it’s probably a great movie with amazing special effects, but my angle is as usual not on the technical side, but on the wonders of marketing.
With a marketing budget of 150 million USD, you can make a lot of noice on the market place and we’ve been served the regular commercials, ads, the McDonald’s kit, and trailers. What is more interesting though is the use of social media.
The team behind Avatar has understood the necessity of communicating rather than informing. Finding early adopters that will spread the word. Avatar has its own community with news, discussions, blogs, it has a Facebook page with 733.000 fans… Quarter of a million fans on a Facebook page! Of course it also has a Myspace page and a Twitter acoount with more than 20.000 followers. What makes all these people so interested in a movie that does not yet exist?
Of course it’s about expectations. On July 23rd, the first tweet from the official Avatar Twitter profile, saying simply:
Just an announcement, followed by others. While the number of followers grew however, the discussions, retweets and replies became more regular than the announcements. Discussions around Avatar Day rather than information about it. Discussions around trailers and the game rather than informing.
For the rest of us, that don’t have 150 MUSD to play with, we still have a lot to learn from the Avatar way of marketing. Not only did they spend the budget on traditional marketing channels, but put a lot of effort into the mix of new and traditional media in a clever way. Avatar is one of the most expensive movies ever made, but on the bottom line, the revenue will be something out of the ordinary.
I might even see the movie...
With a marketing budget of 150 million USD, you can make a lot of noice on the market place and we’ve been served the regular commercials, ads, the McDonald’s kit, and trailers. What is more interesting though is the use of social media.
The team behind Avatar has understood the necessity of communicating rather than informing. Finding early adopters that will spread the word. Avatar has its own community with news, discussions, blogs, it has a Facebook page with 733.000 fans… Quarter of a million fans on a Facebook page! Of course it also has a Myspace page and a Twitter acoount with more than 20.000 followers. What makes all these people so interested in a movie that does not yet exist?
Of course it’s about expectations. On July 23rd, the first tweet from the official Avatar Twitter profile, saying simply:
Just an announcement, followed by others. While the number of followers grew however, the discussions, retweets and replies became more regular than the announcements. Discussions around Avatar Day rather than information about it. Discussions around trailers and the game rather than informing.
For the rest of us, that don’t have 150 MUSD to play with, we still have a lot to learn from the Avatar way of marketing. Not only did they spend the budget on traditional marketing channels, but put a lot of effort into the mix of new and traditional media in a clever way. Avatar is one of the most expensive movies ever made, but on the bottom line, the revenue will be something out of the ordinary.
I might even see the movie...
torsdag 7 januari 2010
Google turns marketing up side down
Apple really succeeded in creating massive expectations around around the launch of iPhone two years ago. A successful promotion all together, where users were convinced about the excellence of the phone months before they had even seen it. When Google now introduces the challenger Nexus One, my first thought is why they don’t reuse the exceptional marketing success of Apple.
As late as in November, Google denied that they were planning to make their own phone. One month before launch, it was tested by Google employees, but without any confirmations from Google that they were actually presenting a phone.On January 5th, Nexus One was introduced, based on the operating system Android. It will not be sold through any retailers – only through the Apple web store.
Lower price on a premium product
The price on an unlocked telephone is around 500 USD, which is lower than what you pay for an iPhone. Keeping the price down is probably one of the reasons for avoiding retailers, but once again I wonder what Google has in mind. To offer a premium product at a “low” price usually doesn’t provide any sence of quality.
The marketing is also modest – at least when it comes to traditional marketing. Commercials on TV, in magazines and radio will not be selling Nexus One.
Why complicate èveryting?
Why not just copy the success story of Apple – hausse the phone months before launch, give it a high price to make it even more attractive, make it easy to buy in your nearest telephone store and then use the whole marketing budget to make sure that no one will miss that it’s available?
I think that we can just lean back and wait for the next step. Google knows exactly what they’re doing. They are not really beginners in the marketing business! They know exactly how to create awareness around a product. Young people are discussing, asking questions, expecting replies, and want to feel close to the brand they decide to follow.
Thinking of the core business of Google, the web and social media will do the job. The Nexus One buzz actually started out with a single tweet on December 11th:
"Stuck in mass of traffic leaving work post last all hands of 2009. ZOMG we had fireworks and we all got the new Google phone. It’s beautiful"
By chance there is already an official Youtube channel with all imaginable information about how to use the phone, the discussions at Twitter are unflagging and there are numerous groups and pages entirely about Nexus One.
The spring will be exciting and Google will for sure contribute to the redesign of the marketing arena.
As late as in November, Google denied that they were planning to make their own phone. One month before launch, it was tested by Google employees, but without any confirmations from Google that they were actually presenting a phone.On January 5th, Nexus One was introduced, based on the operating system Android. It will not be sold through any retailers – only through the Apple web store.
Lower price on a premium product
The price on an unlocked telephone is around 500 USD, which is lower than what you pay for an iPhone. Keeping the price down is probably one of the reasons for avoiding retailers, but once again I wonder what Google has in mind. To offer a premium product at a “low” price usually doesn’t provide any sence of quality.
The marketing is also modest – at least when it comes to traditional marketing. Commercials on TV, in magazines and radio will not be selling Nexus One.
Why complicate èveryting?
Why not just copy the success story of Apple – hausse the phone months before launch, give it a high price to make it even more attractive, make it easy to buy in your nearest telephone store and then use the whole marketing budget to make sure that no one will miss that it’s available?
I think that we can just lean back and wait for the next step. Google knows exactly what they’re doing. They are not really beginners in the marketing business! They know exactly how to create awareness around a product. Young people are discussing, asking questions, expecting replies, and want to feel close to the brand they decide to follow.
Thinking of the core business of Google, the web and social media will do the job. The Nexus One buzz actually started out with a single tweet on December 11th:
"Stuck in mass of traffic leaving work post last all hands of 2009. ZOMG we had fireworks and we all got the new Google phone. It’s beautiful"
By chance there is already an official Youtube channel with all imaginable information about how to use the phone, the discussions at Twitter are unflagging and there are numerous groups and pages entirely about Nexus One.
The spring will be exciting and Google will for sure contribute to the redesign of the marketing arena.
söndag 27 december 2009
Saving the planet...
This morning, we left a cold northern Sweden and headed south by car, which took about five hours. As today is the last day of Christmas holidays for a lot of people, the roads were packed with cars going north and even more going south.
We started discussing the necessity of having a not so thirsty car... but concluded that saving the planet has very little to do with fuel-efficient cars. It's more about not using it. If we all could leave the car at home and take the train, we would contribute to the saving of the planet.
Just read the conclusions from EWEA about the European wind power development during 2009 and it's actually very promising reading. In times of economical turbulence, environmental and energy problems, it seems like Europe has found wind power being a smart rescue for all three.
Wind power can replace a large proportion of the polluting and finite fuels that we currently rely on. Moreover, it creates a lot of new jobs and most importantly - it decreases the CO2 emissions drastically. Three major problems - one solution - a Kinder egg!
Unfortunately, wind power can not save the planet by itself. Being a great contributor, it can only be one contribution. The fuel-efficient cars is another, leaving the car behind a third, recycling yet another. Saving the planet is all about these small contributions and everyone can do something.
Next time, I'll take the train!
We started discussing the necessity of having a not so thirsty car... but concluded that saving the planet has very little to do with fuel-efficient cars. It's more about not using it. If we all could leave the car at home and take the train, we would contribute to the saving of the planet.
Just read the conclusions from EWEA about the European wind power development during 2009 and it's actually very promising reading. In times of economical turbulence, environmental and energy problems, it seems like Europe has found wind power being a smart rescue for all three.
Wind power can replace a large proportion of the polluting and finite fuels that we currently rely on. Moreover, it creates a lot of new jobs and most importantly - it decreases the CO2 emissions drastically. Three major problems - one solution - a Kinder egg!
Unfortunately, wind power can not save the planet by itself. Being a great contributor, it can only be one contribution. The fuel-efficient cars is another, leaving the car behind a third, recycling yet another. Saving the planet is all about these small contributions and everyone can do something.
Next time, I'll take the train!
Prenumerera på:
Inlägg (Atom)