Friday, 10 June 2011

Social Commerce


Social commerce is definitely one of the buzzwords of 2011. Several fully functioning Facebook Stores and storefronts that link to an external site have been founded this year, and even predictions of Facebook surpassing Google in terms of advertising revenue have surfaced. With all this hype and new terms like f-commerce, m-commerce and the good old e-commerce popping up, one might think that social commerce is something completely new and revolutionizing.

The fact is however, that even though the technology and software are new, the social aspect of shopping isn’t. What is emerging as the new trend in online retailing has already been done for over 50 years. Only the medium of the social aspect is changing.

Facebook and social commerce
As an example where this is most evident, lets examine Facebook. Using it as medium for engaging, creating relationships with customers and building a better brand image, has become self-evident for most companies. So it makes only sense that the gradual adaptation of shopping online should be taken to the next level, by adding the social aspect.

In his article about the viability of Facebook as a commerce channel, Stefan Schmidt raises some valid points about the payment system, limitations in having a separated silo platform and moral questions about accessing consumer’s information. While I agree that these issues need to be addressed, I still see them as only temporary hiccups that are overcome by a growing consumer demand.

Social shopping
The reason why I believe this is because it simply makes commercial sense for a retailer to sell, where customers spend their time. Despite requiring time, effort and money to function properly, social media platforms offer a cost-effective way for any B2C retailer to reach a large audience. The added benefit to this is that it enables something called “thin-slicing” (Source 1). This concept from social psychology argues that people tend to ignore most “traditional ”information available when making a purchase decision and instead base their decision on “salient information cues” (Source 2). In layman’s terms this translates into behavior based on person’s social peers, which has been used in marketing for decades.

Just one example of this is the concept of “liking”. People tend to follow people they like and when applied commercially, it means that people are more likely to buy something if an influential person endorses it. Yesterday’s Tupperware parties are today’s “Like-button”.  Even though this is already done outside of Facebook, it can be taken further and have a greater impact if the purchase is made possible within Facebook. Allowing influential and liked people to influence purchase decisions can take different forms in social networks. News feeds of your friends’ latest purchases and group purchases are just some applications of how this could be done.

What are the company’s goals?
Different ways companies can approach Facebook will depend on their goals. The store can only consist of a fan store that is meant to drive advocacy instead of actually making commercially vital sales. Another way to go, is to set up a full equivalent of the company’s website to drive sales, much like ASOS and French Connection did earlier this year. The third way to approach the Facebook store is to set up a similar site like Starbucks and O2 have done.

These Facebook stores allow customers to top-up on the Facebook page and even though they generate sales for the companies, their main purpose is to improve customer service by providing a loyalty platform. This kind of approach might prove most successful for companies, especially if they decide to gradually rollout more features and items over time. It allows the customers to get used to the idea of shopping in Facebook while increasing their lifetime value. 

Fear not the change
Even though entering the social commerce era will present new challenges for retailers, the same time-tested concepts from past decades still apply. Separating commercial activities into different trendy silos will not be commercially viable for long. A more unified commercial approach will be the way to go, whatever tools and channels retailers decide to use. And like it or not, as a social media platform, Facebook is the trendsetter for practicing social commerce. As another generation of digital natives graduates this summer and moves out to the real world, this trend is only going to get stronger.

Saturday, 4 June 2011

Voice of the customer (my ecommerce analysis continues)


Continuing on my analysis a few weeks ago where I analysed the multichannel experience with Argos, I've now set my sights on M&S's customer service. This time I examined the ease and effectiveness of their review mechanism and the customer service via different channels. 

M&S lets their customers’ voices be heard by making the writing of reviews for products easy and by filtering out offensive and discriminative reviews. By doing so, M&S is able to maintain a high level of quality within their reviews, provide actually useful reviews for customers in order to maximize sales and finally improve their SEO with extended product description pages.

M&S’s customer service is a mixed bag of traditional, mediocre customer service, and ninja-level interaction through social media. The overall quality of service is up to a level, which will increase M&S’s brand image, increase the lifetime value of their customers and improve their long-term profitability.

Review mechanism
The ease of using the M&S review function is made slightly inconvenient with a compulsory registration to the site. However, the process is compensated with cookie tracking, which takes the customer automatically back to the product page after the registration is complete.

Leaving reviews on the M&S site is made relatively simple with their 5-star overall rating and with four, more detailed, 5-dash ratings. The more detailed ratings change according to the type of product being reviewed, providing relevant review criteria.

The level of liquidity in the M&S review system is high. Most of the products have been reviewed, some over 20 times. There also doesn’t seem to be many products with only very old reviews, but all have recent reviews as well.
Quick calculation shows that the 1/9/90-rule applies to M&S reviews and this has not gone unnoticed by the company The most active contributors get a “Top 25 Contributor” statement under their username, which is a way of rewarding the contributors and at the same time giving others something to strive for.

Getting a review on to the site can take up to 48 hours, while it is being checked by M&S, but as far as can be told, they are not censoring out bad reviews. Maintaining a certain level of quality and keeping spamming away from the reviews increases their reliability, which means better customer satisfaction. Also, the high number of reviews improves their SEO, as users provide more keywords with their reviews and make the product pages’ details sections longer.

Customer service 
The M&S main website is missing a “contact us” section, which makes sending them an email or filling out a contact form difficult. Reason for this could be because M&S is well prepared for customer questions with their extensive Help section and virtual assistant Hannah, and try to drive traffic towards these services, instead of burdening call centers.

The Contact Us page on the M&S Money-page is well divided between different topics. This lowers the length of call times and the number of personnel required to re-direct calls, resulting into greater customer satisfaction and lowered costs.

Customer service to my question was a mixed result of good and bad. Calling the call center took less than 5 minutes thanks to a direct phone number provided in an email, which was sent to me immediately after sending the question via contact form. The customer service representative was able to provide me with a very detailed answer. It took M&S 4 days to finally answer my question via email but on day 2 they did sent an email, notifying me of a delay in response time. The final response was adequate but lacked in personal touch and detail.

Using Facebook and Twitter to contact M&S proved to be the best way to get their attention and a response. Within 12-hours after posting the question to the M&S Facebook page’s discussion forum, I had a complete answer and a phone number for more information. M&S also replied to my tweet, referring me to their answer on Facebook. This level of service was exceptionally good and seems to be the standard that M&S wants to maintain. Good service via email or on the phone should not be forgotten, but questions asked in “public” spaces like Facebook and Twitter will leave behind a digital footprint for everyone to see. The benefit of answering a single person in Facebook or Twitter isn’t limited down to just that one person, but it can spread beyond them and benefit the company much more.

Summa summarum
M&S review mechanism is well executed and this shows on their website. The number of reviewed products, the number of reviews per product and the activity of customers, are a testament to a mechanism, which really helps customers and is bound increase sales. The positive ripple effect created by the excellent service in Twitter and Facebook is and will be a competitive advantage for M&S. 

Monday, 30 May 2011

How news and information are accessed through digital channels?


Being able to be connected to everything you’re interested in, anytime you want has definitely changed the way we consume media and information. Because we’re not bound to wait for the morning paper or the hourly news update from TV, but have the option to access information anytime that suits us, has resulted in new ways of accessing information.

Apps, Search, RSS readers, social media, news aggregator sites and of course traditional news sites, all provide us with different ways to access and consume information. Let’s go over the four main ways.

1. Going directly to the news site of my choice
This is the classical model of consuming news and the philosophy behind any newspaper. I choose the media site I trust, click my way to the front page and study the content the editors have chosen for me.

This model depends on my trust in the brand and old media habits. But it also limits how many sources I can follow. In the past you had no choice. You subscribed to one or two newspapers and watched a couple of television channels. Editors may be dreaming that I am happy only with their site for all my needs, but it just isn’t so.

2. Aggregation of news from many sources
The web has given us practically unlimited number of choices. But there is no way I can visit every site I might be interested in every day. So I use aggregation sites, which automatically pick up news from numerous different sources, either selected by me or by the aggregator.

Aggregation offers users the choice to follow many more news sources than before, scanning through their headlines and quickly deciding whether they want to go to the actual source. This is a major benefit if you are following news from a particular niche. Yet the amount of stories quickly becomes too much. The biggest challenge is what to do with the stories you did not have the time to scan through.

3. Search
Search has become so convenient and normal these days that we don’t even think about it as “search”. Search is very good when you look for specific information – but does not work as well when you just want to follow the latest news. There are some great opportunities with tailored search alerts, for instance if you are following the news about one particular company.

4. Peer-edited news stream
Social communities like Twitter and Facebook as well as bookmark sites like Digg, Reddit and Delicious let users recommend news content to their peers. Instead of depending on the sources of the news, the users leave their trust with who is recommending the content. Basically this means that your peers take the role as editors.

Personally I have found myself increasingly depended on the people I follow on Twitter and Facebook. I have chosen these people either because I know them or because they have a professional position, which is interesting to me. These people provide an increasing number of the news stories I have the time to consume during the day, especially in the niche areas of my interest.

And guess what? They are so much quicker than the professional journalists! Breaking stories happens so much faster in Facebook and Twitter because the distribution is crowdsourced to the users and because people spend most of their time using them anyway. It only makes sense that they should be the main medium of accessing and consuming information in the upcoming years.

Media consumption diet


My media consumption diet 
Posting this just to make a little reference for future, to see how my media consumption will change.

Media that I Buy
  • Music via iTunes downloads
  • Random magazines for airline travel (Men’s Health, National Geographic, The Economist)

Media that I Consume
  • Radio/Music- YouTube
  • Newspapers (Helsingin Sanomat, Huffington Post, Google News, Google Reader
  • Television shows
  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • Blogs
  • RSS feeds (Indianapolis Colts, Carolina Panthers, DePauw University News, BusinessWeek)

Media Consumption Categorization:
B2C: Specialist and Generalist
  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • Magazines
  • Movies
  • Music

B2B
  • RSS
  • Mashable
  • TechCrunch
  • Engadget
  • Digital Buzz blog
  • Social Media Today

C2C
  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • Blogs

Saturday, 28 May 2011

Even "boring" companies can do great things with social media!

When you hear the words social media, what companies come to mind? Coca cola? Skittles? Ben & Jerry's? If so, it's not a surprise. These companies have been well publicized for their use of Facebook and Twitter to create innovative campaigns. But other companies are using social medias too. Even "boring" companies! 

The following best practice analysis is of Intuit inc. (an American software company) that develops financial and tax preparation software and related services for small businesses, accountants and individuals. The company is a great example of how any company (not just the obvious, fun ones, like Skittles or Ben & Jerry’s) can utilize social medias and communities in their business models.  

The online presence of the company is quite impressive, especially considering the field of work Intuit’s in. Their online activities cover everything form blogging, crowdsourcing, YouTube channels, social networks to aTaxAlmanac, which is a free tax research resource modeled after Wikipedia.


Intuit’s online presence covers the following:

Blogging
- TurboTax team blog (General topics about to taxation and accounting)
- Bob Meighan’s blog (Vice President of Intuit, company and industry topics)

Crowdsourcing
            - Intuit Labs (Site for product testing and customer feedback)

Twitter
            - @Intuitinc
            - @intuitcommunity
            - @IntuitUK
            - @IntuitPayroll
            - @turbotax
            - @IntuitHealth
            - @TeamTurboTax
            - @IntuitCareers
            - @IntuitAR
            - @Intuit
            - @Intuitlabs
            - @Quickbooks
            - @IntuitDeals
            - @IntuitTownHall
            - Numerous employee accounts to answer product questions
           
YouTube
            - Intuit QuickBooks – channel (Guides about the product)
            - TurboTax – channel (General news and help for individuals)

Ratings and Reviews
            - TurboTax reviews (reviews of their personal and business software’s)

Social Networks
            - Facebook
            - LinkedIn
            - TurboTax Support Community (targeted for individuals)
            - QuickBooks Community (targeted for businesses)
            - JumpUp Community (targeted for small businesses and start-ups)

Wiki
            - TaxAlmanac (“Wikipedia” of taxation and accounting)


SWOT analysis of Intuit’s use of social medias

Strengths
Intuit’s greatest strength is in its massive number of communities. Just one of their communities has more to offer than many other companies’ entire online presence.

Besides the official company blog (TurboTax team blog), which covers topics from industry specific topics to topics relevant to individuals, and the blog written by the Vice President Bob Meighan’s blog, each community has a blog of their own. Each community also has an expert locator map, calendar of upcoming Intuit and other relevant events, forums, podcasts, videocasts, webinars, whitepapers and user generated content. The communities are built around the different Intuit products, which have their own specific user segments. Having all this information and content made available for each product makes sense, since there is little risk of cannibalizing their own communities.

Example of just one of Intuit’s communities is JumpUp, which is a free social networking and resource site for small businesses and start-ups. The site offers numerous free tools and services, like an interactive business planner, different cost and profit calculators, free templates and sample business plans.

Intuit is also involving their customers into the development of new software and applications. On Intuit Labs.com Intuit’s development teams share their ideas and products with users to have them tested and to get feedback from them. All this is freely available for customers and the featured applications cover everything from small businesses apps, to apps related to personal finance and various mobile devices.

Finally, as a testament to their commitment to providing people with all the possible information they might need related to finance and taxation, in 2005 intuit launched the TaxAlmanac. The site is modeled after Wikipedia and is written by US tax professionals and combines legislative information with practical examples and case studies.

Weaknesses and threats
Intuit’s massive online presence can also be seen as a weakness. The massive amount of personnel and operating costs required to maintain this kind of system can easily cripple a company if circumstances were to change. Because Intuit has established itself as the number one software company for personal finance, accounting and tax return software in the US and has created these huge communities around each of its products, consumers will expect the same for every new product they will launch. Every product will have to have its own site, with its own designated experts and content, which means ever-higher operating expenses.

Even if Intuit eventually does discontinue old products, people will still be using them and will not take it lightly if Intuit will also close the communities of these products. So the choice is between saving operating costs or pissing of and possibly alienating their customers.

Intuit’s inability to expand to other geographical markets is also a weakness. In most of Europe and around the world, taxation is far more simple and automated than in the US. Average citizens in these countries don’t need the type of software Intuit offers and that means that the market the company is competing in is limited mostly to the US. Spending in online marketing is the highest in the US market and if Intuit wishes to stay as the market leader in their field, they need to invest significantly time, resources and money to marketing and research.

Opportunities
Even though the company is somewhat limited to the US market for now, they could still expand to other geographical markets with their small business and start-up software’s. Providing European markets for example with information on the international legislation related to finance and taxation, with software optimized for the European and UK accounting standards could be a way to enter the market.


Conclusion
Intuit’s online presence is a combination of high-level professionalism, mixed with a dash of fun and lightheartedness, which can be seen on their Facebook page and on their TurboTax – channel. Intuit has invested heavily on building communities around each of their products. Each of these niche communities has a very active level of engagement by the company’s specialists and the users. The company has understood that just by providing people and companies with software to help with their taxation and accounting problems isn’t enough, the support by Intuit has to be top quality and can’t be limited to just product support but has to encompass the entire process of accounting and taxation. By making all this information and content free, re-enforces the company’s image as a reliable source of information, and the customer engagement through the several communities, social networks and crowdsourcing guarantees high-level 

Monday, 23 May 2011

A bloggers guide to digital publishing pricing models


There are almost as many variations of the different pricing models as there are companies on the web. Everyone is trying to figure out what’s the best model out there in order to maximize either conversion, traffic or whatever they’re trying to do. In my previous post “To charge or not to charge, that is the question” I explained my take on pricing of online content and what I see as almost a paradigm shift in how consumer will consume information and entertainment. Since we haven’t yet entered through the golden gates to Shangri La, where content is freely available to everyone, I will now cover different pricing models suited for modern publishers and content producers.

To begin with what I won’t be covering here is the infamous pay wall model. My personal view is that, even though it might work for highly specialized publishers with their own niche audiences, it won’t work for 99% of the companies out there. Not at least as a single source of revenue. If the pay wall payment can be bundled together with for example my cell phone and cable bill or if I have the option to specifically choose what I want to pay for, then there is a change it could work. What the Finnish newspaper Helsingin Sanomat does very well is that they’ve enabled the customers to choose exactly what they want to pay for. In addition to receiving the traditional paper newspaper, customers can choose to add the iPad and mobile versions of the magazine to the order. They can also choose on which days they wish to receive all this. So for instance for a busy future business man like me, the iPad and mobile versions of the magazine might be enough from Monday to Thursday but I could still have the paper magazine on Friday, Saturday and Sunday when I have time to read.

During a time when publishers are becoming service providers and service providers are more and more becoming publishers, the differentiation into black and white is difficult and so is finding the best possible pricing model. Different ways publishers can approach this problem is by experimenting. If revenue from advertising isn’t enough, they shouldn’t isolate themselves from the web behind a pay wall, but they should develop new sources of revenue. Adding different services that meet the needs of different niche markets into an existing business model is one way to go. Examples of this can be found from the Daily Mirror’s MirrorFootball.co.uk, which provides highly detailed information about football in the UK and around the world. The page takes the sport’s section on the Daily Mirror site further by offering users more content and a change to bet on games. Until the industry standards and clearer game rules are established, the best bet for successful pricing should be a mix of little bit of everything. 

Sunday, 22 May 2011

To charge or not to charge, that is the question.


Okey, so we’ve all seen the struggle the newspaper industry has been facing over the last decade and a half, which is how to make money in the digital world. Compared to traditional paper magazines, the pricing of digital content isn’t as clear cut as deducting the cost of printing added with the salaries of the journalists and operating cost of the magazine, divided over the number of magazines sold. Of course even the old model isn’t as simple as this, but the different components affecting the price you pay at the newsstand for your morning paper are more evident and more easily discoverable.

When it comes to digital content the old approach doesn’t really make much sense in a modern world. There’s not much incentive for me to pay for news on one site if I can get the exact same news for free on another site. Faced with this problem the publishing industry decided to go with either of two different ways, free access to content supported with advertising revenue or pay walls around the content. Arguments for and against both business models have their supporters and so far no clear victor has risen. Where pay walls might make sense for some publishers, for example highly specialized financial magazines, they don’t make much sense as a standalone payment option for general newspapers. It’s not that I can’t spare the few pounds a week it would cost to get access to the news behind a pay wall, but it’s more on the lines being fallaciously wrong. At this day and age, at the time of free information, it’s just simply put wrong.

I’m not saying that publishers shouldn’t get paid and be able to make profit, but the way they do it should be revised. Holding on the old believes of what and how people should be charged for content has changed. In an interview by ORGZine, author Neil Gaiman talks about the beneficial effects he discovered piratism of his books had on their sales. Initially irritated with the unlawful publishing of his books for free online, he later discovered that it actually worked for him, especially in markets where he was still unknown. Sales of his books took of after they were illegally translated and distributed online. This discovery encouraged him to offer his latest book, a book that was still selling well, free for one month on his web page. After the experiment ended they discovered a 300% increase in sales of his books in total. It was then that he realized that he wasn’t loosing money because of piracy, but that people were actually sharing the books amongst their friends who were then buying his other books and recommending them to their friends. When asking audiences of how they discovered their favorite author, a rough 90% of them said by lending a book from their friend. In his opinion he isn’t loosing sales, he is advertising. He’s reaching more people and raising awareness. “Nobody who would’ve bought your book is not buying it because they can find it for free. “

So here is one example where embracing the freely distributed content model works. Will it work for you or a large publisher like the New York Times, that I don’t know. Nobody knows. There is no one clear solution out there. What might work for one company could be out of the question for another. The problems that the newspaper and music industry are facing now, might be a problem that the movie industry will be facing soon. Of course piracy is already an issue for them but the direction things are headed towards might force them to search for new ways of making money. The same way as the newspaper industry is seen as going either really cheap or really expensive, might be happening in the movie industry by the end of the decade. Just like the news industry and journalism aren’t going anywhere, neither is the desire for entertainment. Only the medium of distributing and pricing it is.