The Social Echo Survey - Measures That Matter

8/3/2019 The Social Echo Survey - Measures That Matter

1/20

The Social EchoSurvey: Measures

That Matter

report

ENGAGE OPPORTUNITY EVERYWHERE

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.


2/20

2Cpyright 2011 PR Nwswir Assciatin LLC. All Rights Rsrvd.

Executive Summary: A Growing Gap

As social media becomes a more important and more integrated part o marketing

and public relations, the communications proessionals using currently available social

listening tools perceive a gap between the importance o their goals and the tools ability

to get them there.

In The Social Echo Survey: Measures That Matter, felded in November and December 2011,respondents consistently rated their organizations eectiveness at achieving social media

goals about two points lowerthan the importance o the goals themselves. And as Figure

1 shows, on average, the gap between the importance o a goal and the relevant social

listening tools was even greater typically about three points.

Follow-up interviews with survey respondents revealed a clear sense o rustration about this gap.

We all know we need to be monitoring all o our touch points, and that we need to

respond in real time. But no one is eeling confdent that they can achieve that through the

tools that are available to them or that they even know all the tools that are available to

them, says Robin Shea, Senior Manager o Consumer Engagement or Funjet Vacations,the agship brand o The Mark Travel Corporation.

Adds Tony Fisch, President o Tony Fisch Consulting: The lack o eective social media

listening tools not only makes it considerably more difcult to achieve a desired goal, but

it jacks up the number o work hours it takes to get results that meet client expectations.

Truly excellent social media tools would probably reduce the operating expenses or social

media by about 40%, Fisch says.

The Social Echo Survey:Measures That Matter

RePoR

Research shows that as social medias value grows,communicators are nding a gap between the importance oftheir social media goals and their ability to achieve those goals

using available listening tools


.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.


3/20


Some respondents pointed out that despite high expectations o social media

measurement, they cant connect the dots all the way to sales which makes it hard to

demonstrate ROI. This suggests the potential or a stall in social media PR and marketing

growth i the right listening tools dont become available soon, and at the right price.

In addition to the gap between what communications proessionals want rom their toolsand what the tools can deliver, survey results and interviews urther ound that:

Determining the topics/issues that target audiences care about is, on average,respondents number one goal 49% o respondents rated it a 10 on a 1-to-10scale (Figure 2)

Respondents rated the importance o media editors care abouts in a virtual tiewith those o bloggers, tweeters and commentators, though more people gave 10son the editors side (47% vs. 40%) (Figure 4)

Respondents rated Establish brand thought leadership their most important useo insights resulting rom social listening tools, ollowed closely by Optimizationo brand messaging and Increase web trafc (Figure 11)

Facebook and Twitter were rated the frst- and second-most important socialmedia venues by a wide margin over LinkedIn (third) and video-based services(ourth) (Figure 12)

O note, our analysis o the ranking o 15 dierent uses o the insights that can be derived rom

social media monitoring (Figure 11) leads to a striking insight o its own. The analysis shows

strong support or a surprisingly diverse number o the 15 dierent uses we suggested.


.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

RePoR The Social Echo Survey

>

>

>

>

8.75

The Goals

What Our AudienceReally Cares About

What Matters to theMedia Editors

Inuential Bloggers onBrand-Related Topics

Identify the Level ofInuence of Audience

Identify Our OwnInuence

Where Our Audienceis Hanging Out

Product-Related

Behavior

8.62

8.58

7.98

7.91

7.68

7.46

6.34

6.69

6.25

6.16

5.84

5.88

5.61

5.65

5.24

5.47

5.25

5.30

5.22

4.81

IMPORTACE ORGAIzATIOS ACHIEEMET TOOL EECTIEESS

IGRE 1


4/20


O course, those o us who have been studying social media or several years get that

it is a long-term, multidimensional, and proound, change. The results seen in Figure 11,

however, present clear evidence or one o the key reasons why this is so: the sheer number

o diverse goals that social media can help communicators achieve.

rustration With Existing Listening Tools

Respondents gripes about the social media monitoring tools they use or are evaluating

come down to these:

None provide 100% coverage

Too many alse positives

The tools cant assess composition as opposed to reach and dont provide a way

or manual weighting o high-composition sitesThe tools are too easily conused by vernacular and colloquialisms

The tools cant reallytell the dierence between positive and negative sentiment

And theyre too expensive

The tools are not up to our needs, or sure, says Charlene

Blohm, President o C. Blohm & Associates Inc., which works

primarily with education companies. We have yet to fnd

a social media tool that will help us do good analysis in our

sector. No matter how much we fnesse it, we still get alse

positives, notes Blohm.In addition, ater trying several tools, Blohm reports, The

ones Ive seen dont understand the dierence between a

hit in the New York Times and in Teachermagazine. I work

or companies that are household brands inside o a school

building but that moms and dads have never heard o. In my

world, the relevancy o something in Teachermagazine is so

much more important. But none o the tools let you weight

the media outlets.

Mark B. Nolan, Account Coordinator at 360 Public Relations,

explains, When we try to gauge sentiment, the system cant

process vernacular and colloquialisms. I someone said our

product was totally kick-ass! that comment would get a

negative sentiment rating because the automated algorithm

thinks thats negative.

In aggregate, the respondents descriptions suggest a

monitoring tool industry that is still immature. Tools are able


.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

>

>

>

>

>

>


METHOOLOG

In late November we invited PRproessionals via email to completeThe Social Echo Survey: MeasuresThat Matter; approximately 100

participated. The survey asked eachrespondent to rate various aspectso seven dierent social medialistening goals on a 1-to-10 scale,where 1 is not at all important and10 is extremely important. We alsoasked the importance o 15 dierentuses o the insights they gained romsocial media listening, and about 8dierent social media venues, all onthe same 1-to-10 scale. In addition,we asked about their listening toolsin the context o each goal, on thesame scale but with 1 equal toextremely eective and 10 equalto extremely rustrating. Finally,we asked to interview respondentsand ended up conducting in-depthinterviews with nearly a dozen.


5/20


to discern dierences among broad concepts and high-volume venues, but have trouble

with niches in either case. Such tools may be highly eective or major brands, particularly

in the consumer space. But the limitations present challenges or B2B and niche brands.

And respondents complained that that is how the tools are priced: as i all their customers

were giant brand houses.

O note, many respondents say tools limitations mean theres just no

substitute or reading all the relevant posts.

You defnitely have to drill into the comments, says Fisch, whose clients

range rom WaveJet, which makes powered sur boards, to Myricom, a

maker o high-perormance computer networking products. Fisch says

evaluating and responding to comments to test various hypotheses has

led to valuable insights or both clients.

At some point you have to slog through all the comments, agrees Blohm.

And i I still have to have a human being going through and reading each

and every post, then Ive gained nothing.

FunJets Shea explains why this is necessary: Marketing is getting to the

point where the critical dierence or a company is going to be their ability

to deliver as perect an experience as they possible can. Any imperection

can be amplifed through the Social Echo. Youre not just getting letters

any more that you can just fle. You have to act on every piece o eedback

that you get.

Sheas point raises a coverage issue that concerned many respondents. I want one

monitoring source that gets 100% o the messages, but that doesnt exist, explains Shea.

Were evaluating our tools right now, monitoring the same keywords every day. Theres

overlap, o course, but theres also some unique content captured in each one, she reports.

Given the state o currently available tools, says Shea, I dont think anybody eels like they

are really nailing it. People are doing their best but its very difcult.

Goal: Identify the topics/issues our audience really cares about

Above all, survey respondents want to know what topics their audiences really care about. Thisgoal garnered the surveys top average rating o 8.75 out o 10 points, and 49% o respondents

rated this goal a 10 on our 1-to-10 scale. Thats more than any other goal in the survey

although it beat out what media editors care about by only a small margin, as that goal scored

47% 10s and the surveys second-best average rating o 8.62 points (see Figure 4).

Although the eectiveness o the tools used to meet this goal achieved the best rating

or tools in the survey, that best was still a dismal 5.65 out o 10 and the 3.1-point gap


.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.


At some point youhave to slog throughall the comments,and if I still have tohave a human beinggoing through andreading each andevery post, then Ivegained nothing.

Charlene Blohm

Prsidnt, C. Blhm &Assciats Inc.


6/20


between goal importance and tool eectiveness was the surveys second-largest, due to

the high level o importance respondents ascribed to this goal. Still, respondents had a

slightly elevated sense o their own eectiveness at achieving this goal, rating themselves

a 6.34 out o 10 second-best in the survey to the 6.69 point rating or fguring out what

media editors care about.

As Figure 3 shows, in general, respondents use the tools primarily to track posts related

to keywords, and then they manually read and analyze the content o the posts. None

o the approaches scored very many 10s not even sentiment analysis. Based on our

interviews, thats not because respondents think sentiment analysis is unimportant they

think its very important. They just dont trust the tools to do it with anything close to

needed accuracy.

In the end, thereore, achieving this goal is labor-intensive. But respondents make the

labor-intensive approach work.

For WaveJet, we were able to rapidly fgure out that audiences were taking away

an unintended message rom our frst brand ambassador. He was a renowned elder

statesmen o the surfng world but the takeaway was that the product was or old guys,

explains Fisch. We adjusted rapidly when we saw that.

Shea articulated many respondents sense o the current state-o-the-art o listening tools

or this goal: In general, the right way to do this is to read and respond to every bit o


.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.


6% 6% 3% 12% 22% 49%2%

12% 15% 17% 12% 11% 8%1.5 17%1.5 5%

14% 23% 11% 8% 8% 4%4% 19%1% 8%

Goal: What Our Audience Cares AboutIdentiy the Topics/Issues Our Audience Really Cares About

IMPORTACE

ORGAIzATIOS ACHIEEMET

TOOL EECTIEESS

1 5 6 7 8 9 10

1 5 6 7 8 9 102 3 4

1 5 6 7 8 9 102 3 4

8.75 average \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\

6.34 average \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\

5.65 average \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\

IGRE 2


7/20


eedback you receive and provide the appropriate response. You try to fnd

tools that make it as easy as possible to fnd all that and put it in one place

to act on. And thats where companies are coming up short at this time.

We know what to do; we just havent fgured out how to do it efciently,

and consistently, Shea says.

She adds: I wouldnt say there are no tools but theres no cost eective

tools that are providing the ability to do this very quickly.

Shea suggests that its most important to assess what your audiences

want to hear romyou. You have to understand where your brand fts

into their construct. We have a clear idea o how to use social media or

customer service, but when it comes to more proactive conversation

development there is some question about how customers want brands

to interact with them, outside o the purchase process.

Goal: Identify what topics really matter to the media editors thatwe care about

Not surprisingly, fguring out media editors hot-button issues and interests is another

abiding concern expressed by respondents. Forty-seven percent rated this goal a 10 and

its average rating was 8.62 and both those scores were close seconds to what target

audiences really care about.


.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

ou try to nd toolsthat make it as easy

as possible to nd allthat [feedback] andput it in one placeto act on. And thatswhere companies arecoming up short atthis time.

Robin SheaSnir Managr f Cnsumr

engagmnt , Funjt Vacatins


Approaches to etermine IssuesAudiences Care About

Track topical keywords occurrence in relevant social venues

Analysis of positive/negative/neutral sentiments about trending topics

ind out and follow who they follow

Analysis of speed of change in sentiment

11% 9% 14% 17% 23% 19%2%4 5 6 7 8 9 10

7.52 average \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\

3%

1

2%

3

2%

2

8% 15% 20% 12% 19% 12%2%4 5 6 7 8 9 10

6.97 average \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\

2%

1

9%

3

2%

2

8% 9% 14% 19% 19% 11%6%4 5 6 7 8 9 10

6.77 average \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\

3%

1

11%

3

2%

2

8% 9% 15% 9% 28% 3%6%4 5 6 7 8 9 10

6.35 average \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\

6%

1

14%

3

2%

2

IMPORTACE

IGRE 3


8/20


Tools proved relatively ineective in this endeavor, earning a 5.24 average rating third

rom the bottom. However, because this goal ocuses on the traditional media they know

best, PR proessionals are most confdent in their own eectiveness compared to other

goals surveyed. They rated themselves 6.69, the highest average rating in the survey or

eectiveness at achieving a goal.

Figure 5 shows why: theyre doing it the old-ashioned way. They manually ollow individual

editors and determine their inuence on relevant topics. But ar and away, their primary

approach to this goal is to engage editors directly on relevant topics and our respondent

interviews reveal that that engagement happens via email and phone calls as much as it

does through Twitter or Facebook.

Ill send emails, but I still get on the phone and call. Thats becoming a lost art, says Fisch.

But when I pick up the phone and call an editor, I fnd out exactly what hes working on

or not working on I know there is a hit list, I know what he needs, so I know how to be

successul with him.

Carey Osmundson, Account Supervisor at PR agency Stratacomm in Detroit, explains that,

Through Facebook Im riends with reporters. They post articles theyve written and Ill

comment on them to keep that relationship alive, so that when they see an email rom me

they will be more likely to open it.


.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.


3%3% 17% 16% 12% 47%2%

7% 9% 22% 17% 7% 12%7% 16%3%

16% 24% 14% 9% 3%3%10% 10%3% 7%

Goal: What Matters to Media EditorsIdentiy What Topics Really Matter to the Media Editors That We Care About

IMPORTACE


TOOL EECTIEESS

3 5 6 7 8 9 10

5 6 7 8 9 102 3 4

1 5 6 7 8 9 102 3 4

8.62 average \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\

6.69 average \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\

5.24 average \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\

IGRE 4


9/20

9

That this issue scored so high didnt really surprise anyone. But interviewees pointed out

that in reality, its very dependent on the situation. For Wavjet, or example, I really want

to know what the consumers interests are much more than the media, be they traditional

editors or bloggers, says Fisch.

In general, however, respondents want to determine both media and audiences care

abouts and then test various approaches rapidly through social media. Says Fisch, Im

fnding in this vertical [surfng], editors love video, or example; we test it by putting

videos with some o our content and not with others, and then analyzing the dierence in

response in terms o both volume and quality, or depth.

Goal: Identify inuential bloggers, tweeters and commentators relative tothe topics that are most important to our brand

The newer categories o inuencers are nearly as important to fnd as traditional media.

Forty percent rate this goal a 10, and at 8.58 its average rating is just our hundredths o

Cpyright 2011 PR Nwswir Assciatin LLC. All Rights Rsrvd.


.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.


Approaches to etermine WhatReally Matters to Media Editors

Engage directly with editors of inuence on a relevant topic

ollow individual editors and analye their content for topical keywords in relvant social venues

etermine their inuence on relevant topics

Analysis of editors positive/negative/neutral sentiments about trending topics

5% 3% 10% 19% 21% 38%3%4 5 6 7 8 9 10

8.50 average \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\

7% 12% 7% 19% 22% 26%5%4 5 6 7 8 9 10

7.91 average \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\

2%

2

5% 9% 14% 26% 19% 19%5%4 5 6 7 8 9 10

7.69 average \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\

3%2

9% 10% 16% 24% 17% 16%5%4 5 6 7 8 9 10

7.47 average \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\

2%2%

32

etermine their inuence among their followers

Analye their lists/followers/friends

9% 14% 17% 16% 21% 16%5%4 5 6 7 8 9 10

7.40 average \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\

3%

2

10% 14% 19% 9% 19% 10%14%4 5 6 7 8 9 10

6.78 average \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\

3%2%

32

IMPORTACE

IGRE 5


10/20


a point less than media editors a statistical tie. Here the tools perorm a hair better or

communicators, with an average ranking o 5.47 (second in the survey), perhaps because

these inuencers are digital natives.

That said, survey respondents dont eel they are as eective with these inuencers as they

are with traditional media editors. For eectiveness, they rate themselves, on average, at

6.25 points out o 10 compared with 6.69 or media editors (Figure 3).

Respondents comments reected both the importance o these new social media

inuencers and communicators rustration with them.

In general, we treat them [editors and bloggers] relatively equally in terms o the

attention and ocus we put on the dierent types, says Shea. We would still preer to

have relationships and mentions with the highest impression sites, o course; though

the perect scenario is high impression and absolutely aligned something that istravel-ocused with a large audience. Typically, bloggers have a smaller audience but are

much better aligned, and thats why its a wash. It turns out to be a classic reach versus

composition issue.

She adds: Ultimately what wed all like to be doing is reach and requency as well as

content alignment. The right people, and a lot o them.


.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.


7% 5% 4% 21% 21% 40%2%

11% 14% 12% 7% 18% 9%9% 14%7%

11% 33% 5% 11% 5% 4%11% 16%2%

4%

Goal: Inuential Bloggers on Brand-Related TopicsIdentiy Infuential Bloggers, Tweeters and Commentators Relativeto the Topics that are Most Important to Our Brand

IMPORTACE


TOOL EECTIEESS

3 5 6 7 8 9 10

5 6 7 8 9 102 3 4

1 5 6 7 8 9 102 3 4

8.58 average \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\

6.25 average \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\

5.47 average \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\

IGRE 6


11/20


Fischs comments exemplifed many respondents rustration: Blogs are a

lesser quality that you have to be engaged in i you dont tend to them,

they will eat you alive.

Many respondents shared Fischs rustration with blogs generally lower

level o journalistic skill and proessionalism, yet noted that this is also

extremely dierent on a case-by-case basis. Stratacomms Osmundson, or

example, notes that blogs in the electric vehicle community oten exhibit

very high expertise, quality, passion and proessionalism. Stratacomm has

automotive industry clients in that space, she says.

At least one respondent wants a special place in Hell reserved or message

boards. Message boards are the biggest challenge to come along with

digital media sites, says Fisch. With Facebook or Twitter, you sort o know

where you stand right away. But message boards, sheesh there are a lot o idiots outthere. You have to get alerts all day long. Real time is important, because a lot can happen

i you dont head it o.

Goal: Identify the level of inuence (among our target audience) ofdifferent inuencers, conversations & venues


.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.


Blogs are a lesser

quality that you haveto be engaged in if you dont tend tothem, they will eatyou alive.

Tony FischPrsidnt, ny Fisch Cnsulting

11% 7% 11% 23% 21% 25%2%

11% 23% 14% 18% 11% 4%7% 11%4%

18% 35% 5% 9% 4%4%11% 11%5%

Goal: Identify the Level of Inuence of AudienceIdentiy the Level o Infuence (Among Our Target Audience) o Dierent

Infuencers, Conversations & Venues

IMPORTACE


TOOL EECTIEESS

4 5 6 7 8 9 10

5 6 7 8 9 102 3 4

5 6 7 8 9 102 3 4

7.98 average \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\

6.16 average \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\

5.25 average \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\

2%

3

IGRE 7


12/20


Among our survey respondents, the goal o determining the level o inuence o dierent

inuencers scored ar lower than identiying the topics that people are talking about or

identiying where inuence exists, regardless o level. The goal o diving deeper into the

details o inuence garnered only a 7.98 average rating, with only 25% rating this goal a

10. Those are big gaps rom the three top-scoring goals (Figures 2, 4 and 6).

The tools were not judged altogether helpul, with a 5.25 average rating. And survey

respondents rated their own eectiveness in this category at only 6.16.

Its not that knowing the level o inuence o dierent inuencers is unimportant, says Fisch.

The real problem is that the tools barely make a dent in this, not the least because its a moving

target level o inuence can change in real time, in an instant. The ew top inuencers are airly

consistent, o course but you dont need ancy tools to know who they are.

Osmundson points out that this, too, varies rom market to market. She says, or example,

in the electric vehicle community, bloggers tend to be more inuential than any other

source. The spectrum o the automotive industry is so broad, and the EV community is so

ocused on that one issue, and so very passionate. They are getting down to the nitty-gritty

inormation that the EV community wants. As a result, theyre the ones the people are

reading, and they are inuencing the trade publications, Osmundson explains.

Goal: Identify our organiations own inuence


.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.


12% 4% 9% 14% 12% 40%5%

7% 19% 11% 11% 7% 7%9%

21%7%

9% 40% 7% 11% 5% 4%9% 5%2% 9%

Goal: Identify Our Own InuenceIdentiy Our Organizations Own Infuence

IMPORTACE


TOOL EECTIEESS

3 5 6 7 8 9 10

5 6 7 8 9 102 3 4

1 5 6 7 8 9 102 3 4

7.91 average \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\

5.84 average \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\

5.30 average \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\

2%

1

2%

2

2%

1

IGRE 8


13/20


Elsewhere in this survey, respondents ranked Establishing thought leadership as the

number one use o their social media monitoring analyses (Figure 11). That said, however,

they rated this goal o measuring their own inuence in the bottom hal o the seven goals

oered in the survey despite the obvious connection between the two.

Interestingly, the goal scored a relatively high number o 10s 40% o respondents but

the scoring dropped o ast ater that, yielding a middling 7.91 average rating. Tools are

not deemed very useul, with a 5.30 average rating. Survey respondents rated their own

eectiveness only at 5.84 out o 10.

This is a curious result that bears deeper investigation; were planning to look into it in a

uture article. In our interviews or this report, respondents rustration with the available

tools took precedence; thus, this issue was not explored in the interviews.

Goal: etermine in what venues our targeted customers/prospects(audience) are hanging out in social media

Locating their audiences is an extremely important goal to 25% o respondents but ranked 7.68

on average second-to-last. Sixty-three percent o respondents gave existing tools or this goal

a grade o 5 or lower, or an overall average rating o 5.22. This rustration with available tools

is also reected in respondents rating o their own audience-fnding skills 5.88 out o 10.


.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

13% 6% 16% 18% 16% 25%2%

10% 21% 10% 18% 6% 6%10% 13%3%

7% 32% 6% 9% 6% 4%12% 10%2% 12%

Goal: Where Our Audience is Hanging OutDetermine in What Venues Our Targeted Customers/Prospects

(Audiences) are Hanging Out in Social Media

IMPORTACE


TOOL EECTIEESS

4 5 6 7 8 9 10

5 6 7 8 9 102 3 4

1 5 6 7 8 9 102 3 4

7.68 average \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\

5.88 average \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\

5.22 average \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\

2%

1

3%

3

3%

1


IGRE 9


14/20


In other research, weve ound that fnding where your audience congregates in social

media is important when considering paid media approaches that complement owned

and earned media. However, these results suggest that when listening and reacting,

content trumps location or many PR proessionals.

The gathering place becomes less important than whats being said, says Shea. In

practice, i someone is out there saying something negative about my brand, I dont care i

theyre on Facebook or Twitter or some specifc topic-ocused blog. I dont care where they

are, I just want to solve that issue.

Goal: Identify audiences product preferences, use cases, and otherproduct-related behavior

Not my department? Perhaps; but whatever the reason, only 26% o survey respondents

rated this goal as extremely important, and its average rating is the surveys lowest or a

top goal: 7.46. Tools also register the surveys worst grade, 4.81. And survey respondents

own eectiveness in achieving this goal came in last place as well, with an average 5.61

rating. This goal appears not to be critical to the majority o PR proessionals.


.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

4%4% 12% 23% 16% 26%2%

7% 16% 18% 18% 7%9% 14%5%

12% 32% 9% 4% 7%11% 11%5% 11%

Goal: Product-Related BehaviorIdentiy Audiences Product Preerences, Use Cases, and OtherProduct-Related Behavior

IMPORTACE


TOOL EECTIEESS

4 5 6 7 8 9 10

5 6 7 8 92 3 4

1 5 6 7 8 92 3 4

7.46 average \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\

5.61 average \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\

4.81 average \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\

2%

1

5%

3

7%

1

7%

2


IGRE 10


15/20


However, its important in certain cases. It became an important goal

or Stratacomm when a client that makes an atermarket sunroo had

a product recall. Because their products are atermarket, they dont

have the luxury o knowing who all o their customers are, Osmundson

explains. She describes how Stratacomm used listening tools to hone in

on certain keywords they expected to fnd in posts related to the problem

that led to the recall. They would then engage commenters who may have

been aected by the problem.

When they fnd an aected customer and inorm them that they are

eligible or compensation due to the recall, the customers are oten

surprised at the proactive nature o the companys response. Customers

are surprised that a company is doing the right thing. The eedback has

been very positive, Osmundson says.

How important to your organiation are the following uses of theinsights you obtain via social media listening?

Whats most interesting about this ranking o 15 uses o the insights obtained rom social

media monitoring is the extreme diversity that we ound when we dug beneath the surace.

For example, the top-ranked use, Establish brand thought leadership, scored 10s rom

only 24% o respondents but achieved its No. 1 rank because 18% rated it a 9 and 26%

awarded it an 8. The most 10s 29% were awarded to Crisis management, but that

use managed to rank only seventh because o a steep drop o ater all those 10s. O note,

we ound several instances where a use scored a high concentration o 10s yet ranked

relatively low: Customer service had 26% 10s yet ranked sixth; Measure success o

marketing campaigns also had 26% 10s yet ranked fth; Make the case or social media

to executive management had 24% 10s yet ranked tenth.

These results paint a picture o many dierent uses that are extremely important to dierent

subsets o respondents. When a crisis occurs, or example, all else melts away until it is mitigated.

More than any other result, this one speaks prooundly about the growing importance

and inuence o social media and, particularly, social media monitoring analysis. It shows

that there is a strong oundation o many dierent, equally important, uses underlying the

hype and the sound bites about social media. And it attests to the role o social media

monitoring in achieving the insights necessary to enable those uses.


.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.


Customers are

surprised that acompany is doingthe right thing. Thefeedback has beenvery positive.

Carrey OsmundsonAccunt Suprvisr, Stratacmm


16/20

16


.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

Importance of Social Echo Insight ses

Establish brand thought leadership

Optimiation of brand messaging

Increase web trafc

Measure impact of marketing/product announcements

6% 11% 13% 26% 18% 23%2%

4 5 6 7 8 9 10

7.95 average \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\

5% 15% 15% 20% 20% 20%5%4 5 6 7 8 9 10

7.78 average \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\

7% 11% 15% 13% 27% 20%5%4 5 6 7 8 9 10

7.76 average \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\

2%

2

7% 9% 20% 15% 15% 24%5%4 5 6 7 8 9 10

7.47 average \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\

2%2%

32

Measure success of marketing campaigns

9% 7% 16% 13% 15% 26%7%4 5 6 7 8 9 10

7.36 average \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\

IMPORTACE

1

2%

1

2%

2%4%

321

2%

Competitive analysis

Optimie product-related demand generation campaigns

Risk management

Test new ideas

11% 5% 15% 20% 15% 16%5%4 5 6 7 8 9 10

6.93 average \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\

18% 9% 11% 15% 15% 15%7%4 5 6 7 8 9 10

6.62 average \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\

18% 15% 9% 6% 15% 16%9%4 5 6 7 8 9 10

6.42 average \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\

13% 9% 18% 13% 11% 13%9%4 5 6 7 8 9 10

6.40 average \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\

5% 5%32

Product development

15% 11% 11% 11% 13% 2%15%4 5 6 7 8 9 10

5.36 average \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\

1

4%4%2

5%3

1

6% 4%2

2%

3

1

6% 2%

2

6%3

1

4%

1

9% 9%2

6%3


IGRE 11

Customer service

Crisis management

Customer acquisition

Customer research

7% 15% 7% 13% 15% 26%11%4 5 6 7 8 9 10

7.24 average \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\

15% 9% 13% 6% 15% 29%5%4 5 6 7 8 9 10

7.18 average \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\

2%

2

13% 20% 5% 18% 9% 22%5%4 5 6 7 8 9 10

7.07 average \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\

4%

2

7% 18% 13% 18% 24% 7%5%4 5 6 7 8 9 10

7.02 average \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\

4% 2%

32

Make the case for social media to executive management

16% 7% 15% 13% 11% 24%2%4 5 6 7 8 9 10

7.00 average \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\

5%

2

6%31

2%

1

5% 2%

3

4%

3

1

2%

1

2% 5%

3


17/20


Which of the following social media venues are most important toyour organiation?

There are no surprises in this ranking o important social media venues, with Facebook,Twitter and LinkedIn ranked one, two and three. The growing popularity o video-based

services such as YouTube is evidenced in a ourth-place rank. From there, there is a steep

all-o to Google+ and location-based services, which suggests their nascent nature.


.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.


Importance of ifferent Social Media enues

acebook

Twitter

LinkedIn

ideo-based services

13% 6% 7% 9% 17% 43%5 6 7 8 9 10

8.09 average \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\

15% 7% 13% 20% 33%4%4 5 7 8 9 10

7.74 average \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\

2%

2

6.91 average \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\

9% 11% 20% 13% 11% 7%6%4 5 6 7 8 9 10

5.85 average \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\

4%2%

32

Google+

19% 2% 17% 7% 4% 7%7%

4 5 6 7 8 9 10

4.76 average \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\

11%

2

IMPORTACE

2%

31

4%

1

4% 2%

3

1

17%

1

20% 6%3

17% 7% 15% 11% 17% 19%4%4 5 6 7 8 9 10

2%

21

6% 4%3

Location-based services

Photo-based services

Coupon services

11% 7% 15% 9% 4% 7%7%4 5 6 7 8 9 10

4.69 average \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\

19% 9% 17% 4% 6% 4%6%4 5 6 7 8 9 10

4.65 average \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\

9%2

13% 4% 6% 4%4%2%4 5 6 7 9 10

2.94 average \\\\\\\\\\

11%2

4%31

28%

120% 7%

3

6%3

7%2

52%1

IGRE 12


18/20


Conclusion: these hills willbe climbed

Reviewing the results o our survey and ollow-up interviews, its hard not to eel daunted

by the challenges they suggest. Respondents complaints about current social medialistening tools strike at the heart o truly hard technology challenges.

For example, addressing respondents concerns about alse positives, difculties with

vernacular and colloquialisms and sentiment analysis all require a machine to understand

the nuances o unstructured text. That technical challenge is several orders o magnitude

harder than the current state-o-the-art or listening tools. IBM made extraordinary and

very public progress with this challenge in February 2011 with its now-amous Watson

computers Jeopardy! triumph, but Watson-like capability is still years away rom becoming

a cloud service that small- and medium-sized businesses can aord.

Then there is the sheer volume o data required or Social Echo analysis. It is nocoincidence that the technology industrys so-called big data problem has erupted in

the last ew years right alongside social media. Social networks are a major new source o

exponentially growing mountains o data.

And yet it is also no coincidence that the technology industry is so rapidly reocusing its

resources on that big data problem! Reading down the list o Social Echo uses in Figure

11, you realize that the potential value to be created by social media monitoring is just as

extraordinary as the technology solutions required to achieve it. Capturing a portion o

that value as revenue is whats motivating so many technology companies to address the

large business intelligence/analytics problems, including social media monitoring tools.

And look at how much our respondents have achieved with the tools they have. Our

respondents described countless high-value insights rom their monitoring o social

media, even though those insights required more eort and, thereore, greater cost than

the respondents wished. WaveJets ability to adjust and optimize its messaging so rapidly,

or Stratacomms fnding people with aulty sunroos wherever they are in America, would

be unthinkable without social media monitoring. And these two examples only begin to

scratch the surace o an infnite number o social media monitoring possibilities.

In short, the overriding sense to emerge rom our survey and interviews is that social

media monitoring has the potential to generate so much valuable insight or organizations

across so many organizational disciplines, that it is only a matter o time beore itschallenges are conquered.


.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.



19/20


About PR ewswire

PR Newswire (www.prnewswire.com) is the premier global provider o multimedia platorms

and solutions that enable marketers, corporate communicators, sustainability ocers,public aairs and investor relations ocers to leverage content to engage with all their key

audiences.

Having pioneered the commercial news distribution industry 56 years ago, PR Newswire

today provides end-to-end solutions to produce, optimize and target content rom rich

media to online video to multimedia and then distribute content and measure results

across traditional, digital, social, search and mobile channels.

Combining the worlds largest multi-channel, multi-cultural content distribution and

optimization network with comprehensive workfow tools and platorms, PR Newswire

enables the worlds enterprises to engage opportunity everywhere it exists.Among its suite o audience engagement and workfow solutions, PR Newswire includes the

ARC engagement platorm, which enables marketers to distribute and optimize multimedia

across all digital channels, and Social Media Monitoring, which enables the measurement o

brands Social Echo, including sentiment.

PR Newswire serves tens o thousands o clients rom oces in the Americas, Europe, Middle

East, Arica and the Asia-Pacic region, and is a UBM plc company.


.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.



20/20


.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

(888) 776-0942

www.prnewswire.com

Cpyright 2011 PR Nwswir Assciatin LLC. All Rights Rsrvd.

The Social Echo Survey - Measures That Matter

Documents