Obama's Social Media Strategy: Lessons Learned from the Campaign Trail

A new report has just been released from Agency Giant Edelman.

Says the report:

By examining the social media success of Obama’s campaign and understanding the ways that advocacy groups are incorporating these lessons into their own engagement programs, businesses can learn what is required to remain relevant in this new environment by retooling their communications efforts to successfully leverage social media.

Aside from a bit of a run on there, the report basically says that remaining relevant in this new environment requries a retooling of communications programs. Leveraging social media is a must -- even if your organization is just starting to figure it out.

Key to understanding the leverage points for Obama's campaign and his subsequent presidency is this guiding principle noted in the report (the bolding is my annotation):

Obama is already converting the President’s bully pulpit into a social pulpit, delivering a message that is designed to be taken up and spread by others, with the tools and techniques learned during his campaign. Instead of relying on the traditional one-way, top-down approach to communications, the incoming administration is harnessing the power of public engagement to influence the conversation across various spheres of cross-influence.

What is key here is that the entire communications platform is designed to be used by others. It's not managed, not controlled, but created with the expectation and hope that it will be used in a wide variety of other channels and by a wide variety of other people.

As you think through your own organization's communications programs, are you relying on top-down channels and mediums to deliver your important messages? Is your communications platform designed for public engagement or one-way only delivery?

What organizations do you see as doing a good job at this?

NOTE: I'll be interviewing Lois Kelly, author of Beyond Buzz, and blogger at Foghound, tomorrow (Wednesday, 1/28) at 9 a.m. PST on my weekly radio show Marketing News Radio. You can listen LIVE and even CALL IN with your questions. Go to http://www.wsradio.com. We'll be discussing social media from the perspective of not why you should be using it, but how.

-- David Kinard, PCM

Metric Monday: Measuring Awareness, Attitudes, and Usage

In a recent survey of non profit leaders and marketers by the American Marketing Association and Lipman Hearne, respondents of small, medium, and large organizations said that building awareness was their top priority. In today’s edition of Metric Monday I am going to suggest a few ways of measuring your organization’s activities toward achieving this goal.

Typically referred to as AAU (Awareness, Attitudes, and Usage), this metric is most useful when results are set against some form of comparator – that is data from a prior term (e.g. year-over-year), different markets (e.g. geographic or demographic), or with the competition. An AAU metric by itself is meaningless until you have a pivot point from which to demonstrate movement. In that light, several data sets are essential to identify valid trends and movement in AAU.

In a nutshell, AAU looks at:

Awareness: the percentage of your target audience (customers or potential customers) who recognize your organization or its brand, either aided or unaided. It also measures what knowledge the target audience has about your organization’s products and services. So, not only do you look to see if they know about you, you measure what about you they know.

Attitudes: this is a combination of what your target audience believes and how strongly they believe it. Measurements cover the target audiences’ perceptions of quality, effectiveness, and value as they relate to your organization, and also cover intention to purchase or become involved with your cause.

Usage: this is simply the target audiences’ self-reported behavior as it relates to your organization.

So, how do you get this type of information? Here are two ideas.
Caveat: make sure you specifically identify the target audience you’re wanting to measure. I can’t emphasize the need for specificity in this step. Saying you want to measure awareness amongst the general population will not give you actionable data as your organization likely doesn’t have the marketing budget of General Electric or Coke. Think specifically about the finite group you want to study.

1. Use surveys conducted by research organizations who know how to reach your target audience. These might be online, intercept, mail, or telephone surveys that ask a series of questions. USE THE SAME SET OF QUESTIONS over time so you have data points to measure against. Yes, you can administer a survey yourself if you’re measuring your internal constituents, but I’d still suggest you employ a true researcher to help with the set up, collection, and analysis. They’re the experts at this type of work – you’re likely not.


2. Scan discussion boards and social sites for first-hand comments and reviews. You can gather a wealth of knowledge by being a quiet participant in user forums and sites that are talking about you. Resist the urge to defend and comment. Just listen and regularly monitor the tone and information shared.

Here are a few scenarios of data streams you might get and what to do:

• High awareness, high attitude, low usage – I know about you but I do not think highly of you and will not engage with you. Things to do: these people may not know of ways to engage with your organization. Maybe you’re communications are unclear as to volunteer opportunities. Maybe your opportunities for engagement are not what this audience wants. Go to them and find out how they want to engage you and create those opportunities.


• High awareness, low attitude, low usage – I know about you but don’t think highly of you and will not engage with you. Things to do: these people should be left alone and you should focus your energies on higher yield opportunities.


• Low awareness, low attitude, low usage – basically I don’t know you exist and do not engage with you. Things to do: an awareness campaign might migrate members of this group into another category. You’ll need to evaluate the cost of what it takes to break through the noise in the market space as you compete for attention. Make sure you have a plan in place to engage or disengage these people once you do.

Bottom Line: For many non profits or cause-related organization marketers, the idea is that if more people are aware of our organization then there will be more supporters to our cause and more users of our services. They equate awareness with moving the organization forward and increased success. My friend Katya Andresen, author of Robin Hood Marketing, recently quoted her mentor Bill Novelli as saying, “If your goal in life is to raise awareness, you might as well be shoveling pamphlets out of airplanes. Be in the business of creating action, not awareness.” Ultimately, while AAU may be a sexy metric to follow, it is a poor substitute for measuring your ability to do good.

If your organization is measuring AAU, please share how and what you're learning. If you have other ways you've gathered data for this metric, what are they?

-- David Kinard, PCM

Flashmobs and Non Profits

How much fun is it to be a part of your cause or organization? This video is part of a public marketing effort by T-Mobile and from the faces in the crowd you can see they're having fun.

From what I can make out, there are plants in the crowd -- those who are part of the event, know the songs, know the choreography. But what is exciting to watch is how more and more people are added into the mix over time, and many who are not part of the marketing program.

This video reminds me of an old camp song that starts, "It only takes a spark to get a fire going." I wonder what could be done in today's cause-related organizations to add an element of fun, of excitement, of spontaneity that would engage all those around you. Here in Seattle, one of our famous companies Pike Place Fish knows how to do this as they are world-famous for their fish-throwing antics and customer engagement (yep, that's them in the FISH and FISH STICKS videos). Here are two for-profit examples of companies who learned to engage those around them. What are good non profit examples?

Whether you like T-Mobile or not, you can't deny the impact these flashmobs have had. Googling t mobile dancing video produces more than 22 million results. YouTube has more than 40 related videos on their site just from that same search and people are talking, buzzing, and sharing. Not to mention those who participated will share the story offline making individual and powerful connections.

Think past handing out fliers in the park. How can you add delight and amazement to your marketing and positively (leave behind the offensive sandwich boards and negative messaging) engage the public in your cause. Think of the smiles and joy you see in the faces of the people in this video -- how can you add that same quality to your own community engagement?

-- David Kinard, PCM

Does Your BHAG Measure Up to King's and Obama's?

Today -- Inauguration Day 2009 -- Whew!

Okay, so let's put politics aside for a moment and focus on the critical element of what has made Obama the "man" transform into Obama the "movement". It was a Big, Hairy, Audacious Goal. Or more like a whole set of them.

Obama's approach is something that has been talked about by business gurus around the globe for years -- if you want to inspire, engage, and activate a community around your cause, give them something big to believe in. And Obama did just that. With approval ratings at or above 75% he has inspired not just tens of millions of Americans, but the world. Yet Obama gave us not just anything to believe in -- he could have said he wanted to build a giant ladder to the moon and we would have discredited both the man and the goal. So, what made his goals so believable? I'd like to suggest the following:

1. Big Hairy Audacious Goals require time -- They likely will take 10 to 30 years to complete, but they have a specific end date.


2. Big Hairy Audacious Goals require more than what we have to offer right now. We must grow, change, and evolve into something better in order to achieve them. We must transform ourselves during the journey.


3. Big Hairy Audacious Goals are measurable and achieveable. You should be able to envision and describe what success looks like with extreme clarity, with definition, and with a clear sense of what it will take to arrive at that point.


4. Big Hairy Audacious Goals inspire, focus, and align. They give us something big to strive for, focus our attention on what's most important, and align our resources to achieving that end state.

As you think through your organization's vision and goals -- how well do they match up to these four critical ingredients?

What are your thoughts? Do you think these four are enough?

-- David Kinard, PCM

Validation

I ran across this video today and was immediately struck by how validation can serve in our internal organizational communications.
First, you have to watch the video (just click on the photo -- and yes, that's one of the guys from the TV series Bones). It's about 16 minutes long, but well worth your time -- at least it was worth mine. I loved it.

Now, without giving too much away, we've all gotten our parking vouchers validated so we can get free parking. Not only does this guy stamp your ticket, but he also validates you. He's not being silly, or even making backhanded compliments...he's just pointing out the best in each person he meets. And the end result is amazing.

It is a growing belief, backed by research, that investing in employee morale and culture results in higher profits. See the Employee-Customer Profit Chain article at HBSP for one such report. You can also listen to Rick Garlick of Martiz Research talk about this on my radio show. Even from the branding side there are many gurus out there today who are suggesting the strongest brands are generated, in part, by strong employee development.

What strikes me here is that in our organizational communications we can do a better job of not just highlighting the work of someone (e.g. "And special thanks to Joan for her work this month on getting volunteers for the community clean up.") but dive a bit deeper into the qualities that made Joan successful, (e.g. "Our community clean up this month was a result of Joan's strong organizational skills and her can-do attitude. She is really good at taking on big tasks and making them enjoyable for others to participate.") It's very different to have your work recognized versus having yourself validated. Not to mention, this type of validating recognition also identifies the behaviors that are important to an organization, and shoudl be modeled.

In external communications, I think our communities also want to hear these types of validating comments about staff or employees. Knowing the above validating statements about Joan makes me want to work with her when I call. It gives me an idea of the kind of experience I might have interacting with her. And that experience directly translates into positive brand associations.

As you plan out the next edition of your organization's newsletter or even awards section of your all-staff meeting, rather than just recognizing the people who did this or that, try validating them as individuals first. Let their actions speak for themselves.

-- David Kinard, PCM

Become Pertinent to Move Beyond Buzz

Those who know me also know that one of my favorite words is PERTINENCE. My cowboy grandfather taught it to me and I've never forgotten his lesson. To me, pertinence is possibly the most critical element in marketing as it drives the focus away from my-product-my-company to the customer, audience, and consumer. To be pertinent means to be both IMPORTANT and RELEVANT.

Here's a great way of thinking about it. Picture your target audience's perceptive view of the world like that of a submarine's radar screen. Yep, you got it, that green circle with a radial arm going around like a clock identifying the objects within the scanning field. In regular intervals the radar pings the environment for new objects.

Now relating this to RELEVANT and IMPORTANT...relevance determines if your message to that target audience even shows up on the radar screen. It has nothing to do with the amount of noise you make, or the frequency of your message, or even the creative you use. If what you're talking about has nothing to do with the target's circle of concern, then your message simply doesn't get noticed.

IMPORTANCE has to do with how close to the center your message hits. For a submarine, that radar view indicates that the sub is at the very center of the radar screen. Objects close to that center are important to the submarine and they pay more attention to those objects than the ones on the periphery. The closer your message gets to the center of an audience's circle of concern it receives an equal measure more of attention.

In her book Beyond Buzz, author Lois Kelly offers up a poignant message on the importance of straight talk in our communications. In fact, the opening chapter is titled, "Enough with the marketing blah blah blah -- let's talk about something interesting." I couldn't agree more. (If you want to hear more from Lois about her book, tune in to my radio show on Wednesday, January 21 at 9 a.m. PST. You can listen live at http://www.wsradio.com/ and even call in with your own questions. The show, Marketing News Radio, is produced by the American Marketing Association.)

In a recent discussion on Beth Kanter's blog we chatted about ways to measure the effectiveness of our social media efforts (e.g. blogs, facebook, etc). In that discussion I suggest that rather than only looking at ROI (return on investment) metrics such as page views, trackbacks, and comments, maybe we should also add in a new metric: ROR -- return on relevance. I should have said ROP -- return on pertinence.

I think the greatest challenge facing non profit marketers in 2009 is not going to be how to find new revenue sources, how to get more from their efforts, or even how to participate in the digital marketplace. I think those will flow from a deeper and clearer insights into their audiences, understanding what is pertinent -- relevant and important. By getting to this rich and deep level of understanding, the choice of marketing tactics becomes much clearer if not obvious and the focus of raising needed resources becomes more of asking for partnership than donations.

-- David Kinard, PCM

Brands Using Twitter

Former radio show guest Paul Dunay has compiled a list of various corporate brands that are using twitter to stay in touch with their communities. I especially like this this for two reasons:

1. Many corporate marketers today are decrying the inability of businesses to use and engage with social media tools like twitter to connect and nurture communities of followers. Well, this list puts that to rest. Big and small, they're on here and likely many more exist that just didn't make Paul's list (see the comments for proof).

2. This list makes it clear that non profits must use tools like twitter to tap into the communities that already exist around their cause. No excuses. If you're a member of the American Marketing Association, sign in to your Marketingpower.com account and listen to the member-only Webinar that I hosted back in December. We had three amazing marketers on the program (Toby Bloomberg, Julie Fleischer, and Greg Verdino) give very specific advice and perspective on social media and how it can be used in your own marketing. (And as a side note, all three of these people will be at Mplanet later this month.)

And for those who think that that using twitter may be a silver bullet, let me dissuade you from going down that path. Like any other social media tool, twitter is a mechanism that equips you to dialogue and communicate only. It won't create relevancy, it is a poor substitute for integrated communication plans, and it will never overcome an inauthentic voice.

-- David Kinard, PCM

Ford an Example for Non Profits

John Gerzema, author of The Brand Bubble, recently wrote in his blog about Ford working with an open platform and CEO Alan Mulally's focus on partnership and connectivity. While I won't try to make the leap between Detroit and non profits (even if there is an inherent pun in saying that) I do like the idea of Ford attempting to climb its way out of economic duldrums through this type of transparency and innovation.

It seems all to common for non profits and cause related organizations to try and go it alone; or at least I think that is a widely held perception. Little islands out there floating in a sea of need. Sure there is partnership, but that's usually in the form of accepting donated services or products to support the mission. But what if that same non profit began to create an open platform where infrastructures were shared between other groups?

When thinking through your partnership possibilities, consider first the recipient of your work. If the homeless are your beneficiaries, then think through what other organizations (for and non profit alike) benefit from solving the homelessness challenge. If you're an alternative school, think through who else benefits from having kids educated and how could others participate and make that education even better.

This kind of open platform -- where there are no secrets, no hidden agendas, and shared ownership -- is where collaboration thrives. It's the truest example of synergy in action where one and one equal three or more.

-- David Kinard, PCM

Rate Your Favorite Non Profit

I stumbled upon this site today and was really impressed with the idea behind it. GreatNonProfits.org is a site that mashes up a Zagat-style rating with user reviews of non profit organizations across the country. From churches to shelters to 4H clubs, I found dozens and dozens of entries just for my local area.

Says site founder and CEO Perla Ni,

"It struck me that there needed to be an online Zagat, if you will, for non profits that would collect stories and reviews of people -- people like me, the victims of Katrina, and hundreds of thousands of others -- who have seen the impact of nonprofits up close, and can speak personally and firsthand about it."

I think this is a brilliant site and has the potential to provide transparency and street credibility for today's overwhelming number of non profits and cause-related organizations. From a donor's point of view, perhaps this might be a culling feature to identify how to distribute funds. From a recipient's perspective, maybe this could become a new type of yellow pages for referral agencies who are looking for extended services for their own populations. The possibilities are endless.

I did a quick search for my city and found that not every organization was listed so it's probably a good idea to ensure yours is accounted for, and then have a few of your champions (board members, staffers, recipients) write a comment or two. While you're at it, be sure to write a note to Perla letting her know that this is a great tool.

-- David Kinard, PCM

Join the Conversation at Katya's

There's a great conversation going on right now at Katya's Non-Profit Marketing Blog on who non profits and cause related organizations should target. It all started with a post on Preaching to the Choir.

Join in....

-- David Kinard, PCM

Move Over 4 P's -- Time for the 4 R's

Last night I was teaching MBA students at Seattle University the foundations of marketing. In review, we hit upon the legendary and foundational Four P's of Marketing. Originally coined by Harvard professor E. Jerome McCarthy in the early 1960s, this simple model has dominated much of the way marketing has operated ever since.

There have been many modifications to the original 4, some have made them into five suggesting People be included, and even Seth Godin suggested a new one -- Purple cow.

But the best addition to the 4 P's I've ever seen is the four R's. RELATIONSHIPS, RETURNS, RELEVANCE, and RESPONSIVENESS.

Cause-related organizations shoudl consider regularly assessing their mission and value proposition to the external marketplace against the four R's. In doing so, I think some will find ways to update and improve their services, engagement, and excitement factor. Following is a quick definition of each element of the four R's.

RELATIONSHIPS -- this has to do with your organization's ability to create alliances and partnerships that improve your ability to fulfill your mission. This isn't just about getting donors to provide free stuff, but rather finding ways to attach your cause into the missions of these organizations so that it becomes their cause too. How expansive are your relationships and alliances into the for profit world? How deep are your connections to decision makers? How wide is your reach because of these relationships?

RETURNS -- this is a big one that many cause-related organizations fail to understand, but is so easy to accomplish. Donors and supporters do not only want to know what you did with the resources you've been given, they desperately want to know the permanent difference you're making in the world. Go beyond identifying how many meals you served, beds provided, acres of forest saved, and wells dug. Tell the world about what happened as a result of those things. Tell us what happened 3, 5, and 10 years later. What permanent mark did you leave on the world? What is your legacy of good?

RELEVANCE -- for anyone who doesn't get this concept, I have a bunch of 8-track tapes I want to sell you. Music hasn't changed much over the past 25 years, but the way we consume it has. People continue to shop and share product reviews with their friends just like they did in the 1980's. The way they do it has changed dramatically. Your cause may be just as relevant today as it was 40 years ago, but is your organization? Have you kept up with the times? Are you a dinosaur in a world of robots? Don't be fooled into thinking that technology is the driver here. It's not; people are. You need to ensure your cause-related organization is relevant in their eyes, meeting today's needs, not yesterdays.

RESPONSIVENESS -- I can get same-day shipping from Amazon. Text messages are instant. Netflix knew that receiving videos by mail was soon to be too slow so they created instant view from their site as well as on-demand viewing through providers like TiVo, Xbox, and others. Keep in mind that the world operates in Web time. Things can be and are instant. This isn't something to be afraid of or to work against. On the contrary, it is an opportunity. Web sites can be updated daily, tweets can go out to communities instantly creating buzz and action, and needs can be met in real time, not on 30-day mailing cycles.

-- David Kinard, PCM

Priorities May Need Adjusting

The American Marketing Association and Lipman Hearne joined forces to produce a report on The State of Nonprofit Marketing. The report, released in July 2008 identified top priorities, strategies that are working, marketing metrics, and a look ahead at the challenges nonprofits face. More than one thousand nonprofit marketers participated in the survey, with a wide representation of various types of nonprofit organizations. The respondents were fairly senior in their roles within the organization.

What strikes me with perennial disappointment is that these marketers self-reported their most effective strategies for achieving their top priorities, but…

“the highest rated metric – event attendance and revenue – scored only average as indicators of success. While considered a top strategy, public relations efforts were not being effectively measured. Print and interactive advertising, often considered essential in brand building, were also among the lowest in being examined for identifiable, measurable results. In many cases, nonprofits were not measuring results at all. More than a quarter of survey participants were not monitoring web activity or public relations responses.”

In fact, when asked to rate their effectiveness in measuring various tactics, only two items earned a score of 3 (with 1 being poor and 4 being very effective). The remaining list of 19 items had scores ranging from 2.8 to 2.1. What seems unconscionable is that these same organizations year-after-year spend scarce resources on the same tactics without any relevant data to suggest if those tactics even work. Then they write their donation letters asking for more money.

Recently on a LinkedIn discussion forum, I defended non profits as being staffed by well-educated leaders who possess a skill-set that easily compares to their for-profit counterparts. And indeed, their sense of accountability is profoundly felt though some may decry poor results. The amazing things these leaders are able to accomplish with limited resources makes them far better managers than many of their budget-rich corporate peers.

But now I wonder if I was right to make such a claim.

Tracking event registrations, overall revenue, and member recruitment are excellent metrics when trying to assess the organization at macro levels, but non profits and cause-related organizations must do a better job of getting into the details such as tracking the effectiveness and impact of their advertising and direct mail. And these organizations must fully embrace digital tools and track and measure their search engine optimization, earned media, Web traffic, and blogs and tweets.

Maybe for 2009, the first priority should be to ensure all marketing is accurately and usefully measured.

-- David Kinard, PCM