Sure, the #moonfruit promotion, in which anyone who tweeted #moonfruit got entered to win a Mac a day for 10 days, got plenty of play. And according to Marketing Vox, they claim their sales spiked. That’s fantastic, and I’m sure because of that, a lot of people will disagree with me. But, how many of the people who tweeted #moonfruit even know what it is? Much less anything specific about why it’s good, better, different? How much more might their sales have gone up in the short term or the long term if their promotion or content was actually…gasp…RELEVANT? What would the reported ROI look like if something had been shared regarding what the brand stands for, or at least what the product IS and some interesting feature of it? Something that I, the would-be consumer, would actually care to hear about?
Same goes for this new @MarriottHawaii “Tweet Yourself To Hawaii” promotion. You can enter to win a trip to Hawaii, or, if you send in a video, you might win a Hawaii tweetup for you and 11 friends. Yeah, yeah, I know we’re talking about it, so in their mind, or their agency’s mind, it’s probably a raging success right now. And general response to it from the Twitter community seems to be mostly positive. But in my opinion as a strategist, it’s a big “SO WHAT?” What do we know or feel about this brand that we didn’t know a few days ago? Absolutely nothing. Just that it exists.
Is it enough that people talk about you if all they are saying is that you EXIST? Really? Is “we exist…pass it on” a strategy? Mmm…NO. OK, it IS, but most of the time, I say we can do more. Isn’t there an intersection between branding and social media communication in which you can tell a story about your brand and still promote it – move the needle – at the same time? I believe there is.
Now, I’ve only been on Twitter for about nine months. But in that amount of time (during which I have been spending waaaay too much time on Twitter, mind you) I have encountered so little strategically relevant content that I am frankly a bit stunned. It seems awfully hard to brands to figure out what to do with this tool. The most notable exception is the Ford Fiesta Movement. I’m not saying that every strategic execution needs to be that elaborate, either. Just tell me something, anything, about what the heck you want me to take away about you.
Tom Martin proved in his experiment “How One Man, an iPhone and Twitter Changed Consumer Perception of Mardi Gras.” that twitter can be used to effectively reposition a brand. So I asked him to weigh in on this discussion. Tom, am I just a brand strategy geek that doesn’t get this, or what? Do you think this type of “tweet-to-win” promotion is a strategic, effective use of this tool? (I will post a link to Tom’s post here when he responds.)
How about the rest of you? What do you think? Is “we exist…pass it on” enough? Or is it time for brands do better? If you have seen other strategic exceptions, please share them; I actually hope to be proven wrong on this one. Maybe I am just missing all the good stuff.
Sue and I have had some dialogue on this via email so I’ve had some time to think about this prior to posting my response.
As a marketer and a consumer I believe this is a positive first step for Marriott.
Should brands be doing more than saying we exist – yes, absolutely. Could Marriott have made this promotion more relevant – most definitely.
Twitter, for many marketers and individuals is still a relatively new medium. Each day I interact with Twitter I learn a little bit more about this vehicle in large part to brilliant Twitterers like @suespaight, @augieray, @triveraguy and so many more. I’ve made many mistakes along the way and will continue to make mistakes as I tweet to learn, share and connect. You’ve got to be in the fray to learn. Learning involves taking that first step and making mistakes along the way.
While it may not be the perfect promotion I applaud and celebrate Marriott’s fortitude to jump into the fray of Twitter, learn and even make mistakes. Would imagine Marriott is gleaning great insights that will make their next Twitter promotion stretch beyond a we exist platform.
Sue, thank you for the opportunity to learn and grow as a marketer by continually sharing your knowledge and insights.
Linda Neff
Marketing strategy 101:
Awareness –> Comprehension –> Participation –> Loyalty –> Advocacy / Support
(1) Figure out where your market is on the continuum.
(2) Move them to the next step.
But you can’t do two at once. And you can’t skip a step.
The Squarespace promotion worked on me. I decided to check out what they were all about, realized they were awesome and eventually (when I later had a need) got their product.
Sue,
I’ll save you the trouble of linking- here is my 02 on the subject.
I think there is a place for “EXISTS” as a strategy. For instance, new products/services could benefit from such a strategy. But agree, I’m pretty sure most folks have heard of Marriot and Hawaii. My greater challenge with these promotions is the same challenge I have with all promotions that offer folks a chance to get something for free and that is: are you really acquiring good leads?
Does joining a sweepstakes equate to future intent to purchase? I think not. And even if the brand is smart enough to perform some kind of double opt-in to gain permission to remarket to these entrants, again you have to ask yourself, how likely are they to listen? Sure I’m interested in Marriot and Hawaii when they are willing to give me a free trip. But in terms of actually paying to go to Hawaii and staying at a Marriot??? Am I going to be looking out for or more likely to read an email message promoting something from either? A stretch at best.
I agree with you that unfortunately many marketers are simply viewing Social Platforms like Twitter as another channel. They are simply replicating what they used to do in other channels (direct and advertising) in this new social channel. But that isn’t too much of a surprise. Early radio was little more than audio only versions of plays. TV simply added back the visual but it was many years before the true power of “the drama” came in to its own as a television content strategy. Before advertisers figured out how to create 60 second stories that moved brand perception needles.
The Twitter experiment was an effort on my part to better understand “how” the channel “could” be used. We learned a lot and now apply that learning on behalf of our clients. But in the end, the reason it worked is because we used the medium in the manner it was designed to be used and then pushed just a tad toward the outside of the standard usage envelope by including photographs and an editorial thematic. This allowed the movement beyond EXISTS to KNOWS. It gave me a chance to educate followers about aspects of Mardi Gras they had never been exposed to before and thus, change brand perception. Or as I say, it allowed me to SHOW not TELL folks what to think about Mardi Gras. Best of all, many have told me they now plan to attend Mardi Gras at some point: case in point http://richmondeditor.com/2009/08/22/social-south-now-mardi-gras-later/ which is the ultimate reason any brand would want to engage in this kind of activity — trackable sales.
@TomMartin
Thanks, Tom. Great input, as always. I completely agree with your points about generating quality leads, not just quantity. And that’s what I’m talkin’ about – “show, don’t tell”, and “be it, don’t just say it”. Or, in the absence of that, at least tell me or say it
I would say that, if you are telling me a story, I am therefore more likely to become a quality lead. Because you’re ENGAGING me in more than just a one-off “Tweet this” task. It all comes back to engagement. This post from @valeriesimon on @davefleet’s blog very relevant here: http://bit.ly/18fKif
That’s great learning. Thanks for sharing it, Tim. Perhaps for technology companies, then, like squarespace and moonfruit, saying “we exist, check us out” on Twitter is not a horrible strategy, given that their core audience is hanging out on Twitter anyway. See, I am flexible, sometimes
I still think they COULD do more, though, and that a brand like Marriott Hawaii could do much, much more.
Tamsen,
At last, we truly disagree.
With all due respect to one of the most intelligent people I know, I would say that is more like Marketing Strategy 1.01. Marketing just isn’t this neatly linear anymore. See Forrester Research new marketing funnel. If I am telling a story through social channels, as in the Ford example, there is absolutely no reason that I can’t create awareness in the process of telling you why you should care. Marriott Hawaii, for example, not sure what their strategy is or what they want to differentiate on. Say, 100% hypothetically, that they want to stand for “Mahalo”, the gold standard of Hawaiian welcome. If they tell me stories about that, then I also get that they exist.
Linda,
Thanks so much for continuing our conversation, and for your flattering compliments. (And truly sorry I could not respond to your last E-mail – I’ll eventually explain what has been going on with me for the past week.) I’m in complete agreement with you that brands with the fortitude to take the plunge should be applauded.
But – having never, ever been accused of being overly optimistic – I think we also need to offer suggestions and encouragement. Actually, I should definitely note here that when you and I were tweeting about @marriotthawaii, they were totally on top of their game and responded to us with “let us know how we can improve our efforts.” I absolutely applaud – with standing ovation – that type of openness. That’s the spirit in which this post was intended. Hope it didn’t come off too curmudgeonly
Best,
Sue
Agree with Linda’s comment re: get into the game and try by doing and failing. But would suggest that Marriot and other brands learn and fail on a smaller scale first, then take that learning and apply it to large scale promotions like the Hawaii effort.
@TomMartin
PS> And Sue is quite brilliant, isn’t she
Great post and some exellent comments here, too. While I agree with the importance of having a strategy behind Twitter promotions (or any promotions, for that matter), we all know that there are many social media tactics being implemented with out any strategy. This doesn’t make it right, but I wonder if it is better to be engaging customers and prospective customers with social media rather than to simply be pushing out the news that is available through other channels.
As Linda mentions, maybe this is a first step for better engagement. Although, as a marketer, I don’t think this strategy-less approach is best, as a consumer, I think I would pay more attention to a company that has engaged me rather than one that has just pushed information at me.
I should also note I’m totally guilty of a pointless Twitter promotion myself. Just yesterday, actually. I partnered with another website, sent out a newsletter, they blogged about it, and we attempted to drive people to each others’ respective Facebook pages and Twitter accounts.
I didn’t have high expectations going in, just wanted to see what would happen. It was low cost and commitment.
It seemed to attract just a few new people, but the real and unexpected value was what was shared by some existing fans, some of whom I never interacted with before.
Here was just one exchange from a winner on Facebook (using just their first names):
—
Rosa: I WON, I WON, I WON, I WON!!! ((((happy dance)))))) ((((happy dance)))) high five! chest bump!
Walter: Well, this certainly caught my attention! Ah, … so, … I’m curious…what did you win?
Rosa: well, mr. social media, i won a t shirt from http://www.teecycle.org. it’s a t-shirt recycling company started by a cool cat i met through twitter. i’m sure it’s true for you, too, but some *wicked cool* tweeps have found me on twitter. yeah, yeah, yeah for twitter!!
—
So anyway, I’m not sure I’d do this again anytime soon, because this kind of promotion IS getting oversaturated. But this time I was very happy with the results, and it was fun to make others happy, too
Hmm. Good to be reminded that sometimes it’s OK to do something just because it’s fun.
There is a time and a place for “fun” – having a great brand personality – as a strategy.
Thanks for the link to “The New Marketing Funnel Post”! The Forrester one was a new graphic to me, but I was struck that the *other* funnel, the one that the authors seem to put forward is, in fact, exactly what I outlined in my original comment (where advocacy and support are the final goals, not just purchase or loyalty).
I have no disagreement that there is much more affecting consumers’ path through the funnel (which the Forrester model shows), but even in that model the desired move, however complicated, is from Eyeballs (awareness) to Buyers (participation / loyalty) and Contributors (advocacy). You can try to do two things at once, but what matters is where your customers are in the funnel.
This quote from that post struck me: “Building loyalty now means entering into a dialogue with them and letting customers participate in more meaningful ways than static customer feedback surveys or a constant barrage of emails announcing special promotions.” the moonfruit and Marriott Hawaii campaigns strike me as new versions of the special promotion email barrage. These aren’t *meaningful* forms of participation (in the traditional sense, that’s BUYING THE PRODUCT!!). Nor is it real advocacy–people weren’t retweeting out of an endorsement of the brand, they were trying to win something.
What needle did they move? What needle were they TRYING to move? That’s the real question. If moonfruit was trying to create awareness, they succeeded. I know they exist. If they wanted to sell whatever it is they sell, they failed–because the common comprehension of them is that they ran a cool Twitter campaign that gave away free computers, but how many people understand what they do? Without comprehension of their product, no one’s buying.
The Marriott Hawaii promotion suffers the same lack of direction. Were they creating awareness? Of what? That they have hotels in Hawaii? Were they creating comprehension? Of what? That they “do” social media? Were they trying to get people to stay at Marriotts? What about that campaign would make me want to pay for a night at a Marriott, when they’re giving it away for free?
There are undoubtedly all sorts of new forces at work, but the basic steps of the consumer progression are still the same. What’s changed, I think, is that there is a mirrored funnel of movement back from the organization OUT, to its customers. One that represents steps towards ITS engagement with its community.
Hmmm…now I’m curious as to what those phases would be!
Tamsen,
Common ground! Woot! The quote you point to is perfection; indeed, the brands in question are using Twitter as a new version of the e-mail barrage. This is why, when I have heard others say they think Marriott is using social media well, I staunchly disagree. It’s as one-way as ever, not more meaningful, not more engaged. Same approach, different technology. And yes, the steps in the process are still the same; they just might not ever happen in a linear progression. You might be more likely to see a product review, for example, that zips you right on through to a purchase. Or conversely to see a complaint that erects a barrier that didn’t exist before. All the more reason to develop a true social strategy that helps you navigate the new waters. (BTW, I was struggling for months with “what is the new marketing funnel?” and somehow missed the Forrester version. Beth Harte presented it in her strategic planning presentation at Social South and my jaw dropped. It resolved a major hole in my brain, so hat tip to Beth.) Thanks for sharing your brain with us.
Sue