Quantcast
Subscribe!

 

Enter your email address:

Delivered by FeedBurner

 

E-mail Steve
This form does not yet contain any fields.

    free counters

    Twitter Feed
    « Siren fatigue and the danger of being tuned out | Main | The Pace of Change »
    Wednesday
    Feb012012

    The Other One Percenters

    The entire '99% vs. the 1%' is now a well established concept (thanks to the 'Occupy' movement), or method of describing in very broad terms the income, (and some might say opportunity), disparity that exists in the US economy. When you hear these terms, you immediately understand the concepts, take your own position on the merits of each point of view, and sometimes self-identify with one group or the other.Let's hug it out

    But recently I read an interesting piece on the AdAge Digital site about a different kind of 1%, (that was an awkward transition, admittedly), specifically the 1% of a company or a brand's social media fans that seem to actively engage with said company or brand. The article, titled 'Study: Only 1% of Facebook 'Fans' Engage With Brands', recounts a recent piece of research conducted by the Ehrenberg-Bass Institute that claims to show that only about 1% of the self-identified 'fans' of a brand on Facebook, (certainly not the only social platform, but indeed the largest), actually 'engage' with the brand by commenting, tagging, sharing, etc. actively with the brand and the content.  The vast, vast majority, the other 99%, simply identify as fans, get exposed to some of the brands' content, and continue on with whatever else they were doing.

    While seemingly offering a really low return on investment to marketers, at least according to the study's authors it doesn't paint a totally bleak picture. From the AdAge piece:

    "I don't think it's a bad thing," said Karen Nelson-Field, senior research associate for Ehrenberg-Bass Institute who describes herself as a "Facebook advocate." "People need to understand what it can do for a brand and what it can't do. Facebook doesn't really differ from mass media. It's great to get decent reach, but to change the way people interact with a brand overnight is just unrealistic." 

    In this understanding of the marketing and media worlds, social is just another media channel useful for its reach rather than any notion of engagement.

    While this article and the study it refers to are in a strict sense focusing on consumer brand engagement, I think they offer some food for thought for the Human Resources and Recruiting professionals who are increasingly looking to social platforms like Facebook and Twitter to create interest, conversation, and dare I use the word again, engagement for their own purposes. The main point, that an engagement level of 1% might be the baseline is instructive as HR pros create their forecasts and plans. 

    But the second point the AdAge piece brings up is even more thought provoking -  namely whether or not social platforms like Facebook are truly brand engagement platforms, or just another marketing and messaging channel like newspaper ads, company web sites, or large job boards.  I know we like to think that with social all or at least many of the traditional rules no longer apply, but this study (and others), suggest that maybe the change is not happening so fast.

    What do you think? Does the 1% number hold up in your experience? And does it even matter?

    PrintView Printer Friendly Version

    EmailEmail Article to Friend

    References (2)

    References allow you to track sources for this article, as well as articles that were written in response to this article.

    Reader Comments (2)

    Great post. I agree engagement numbers are low. But, those who engage are usually 99% conversions. Quality vs quantity is a piece of the puzzle that needs to be included. And then there is the old style "staying in front of your customer" branding strategy. Lurking, noticing though not clicking and engaging still has value. Though be it old-style. But, like you mention Steve, it is like TV or billboard or print - you don't have active stats. So it just becomes another channel. The real game changer is that in one click those static channels become active conversations allowing you to reach your customer in a more meaningful way. Repeat business is the lifeblood. Wonder how that could be measured relative to engagement? I find it fascinating to watch marketing and technology continue to try to figure out how to measure social media. Pioneers in new territory.

    February 1, 2012 | Unregistered CommenterLyn Hoyt

    Thanks for your comments Lyn. I think you make some great points. I think it is still pretty early, especially for the internal or HR type functions, to see how these platforms and engagement approaches will eventually pay off. I bring it up because I think it makes for a good discussion, and hopefully others will chime in as well.

    February 1, 2012 | Registered CommenterSteve

    PostPost a New Comment

    Enter your information below to add a new comment.

    My response is on my own website »
    Author Email (optional):
    Author URL (optional):
    Post:
     
    Some HTML allowed: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <code> <em> <i> <strike> <strong>