Comments on: Who Needs Enterprise SRM? http://scalableintimacy.com/who-needs-enterprise-srm/ Branding in the age of social media. Sat, 17 Mar 2012 18:04:07 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.2.1 By: In the end, it’s about activation. http://scalableintimacy.com/who-needs-enterprise-srm/comment-page-1/#comment-6845 In the end, it’s about activation. Sat, 06 Aug 2011 22:45:36 +0000 http://scalableintimacy.com/?p=321#comment-6845 [...] by Michael Troiano on February 23, 2009 I posted a while back on the important distinctions among Monitoring, Participation, and Activation. Short version: Monitoring social networks is where most brands start. Most will eventually move to Participate – to actually engage in the conversation – through some combination of consolidation under a “Community Manager” type, and coordination of the distributed activity among it’s employees (more on those here). [...] [...] by Michael Troiano on February 23, 2009 I posted a while back on the important distinctions among Monitoring, Participation, and Activation. Short version: Monitoring social networks is where most brands start. Most will eventually move to Participate – to actually engage in the conversation – through some combination of consolidation under a “Community Manager” type, and coordination of the distributed activity among it’s employees (more on those here). [...]

]]> By: Tom Cunniff http://scalableintimacy.com/who-needs-enterprise-srm/comment-page-1/#comment-321 Tom Cunniff Tue, 03 Feb 2009 14:03:30 +0000 http://scalableintimacy.com/?p=321#comment-321 Mike: a challenging POV, and one I need to think about. Much of the real progress in marketing in the past 100 years has come from learning to differentiate a blip of data from a meaningful trend. A fairly big blip like "Motrin Moms" was deafening inside the social media echo chamber. "ZOMG, there are armies of Mommy Bloggers attacking Motrin HQ. Surely the National Guard will need to bring tanks there to stop them!" But, I'll bet a month's pay it didn't make a peep in the weekly Wal-Mart sales data. How can we tell which Tweets are the start of an important Groundswell? And which ones are the dyspeptic grumblings of a couple of self-righteous basement bloggers who believe having 1,000 readers makes them world leaders? Perhaps more practically, which feedback should be managed by customer relations? Which ones need to be looked at by marketing? Which need to be kicked over to manufacturing, or R&D? What's the appropriate response level? Some of this will likely always require human judgment. But maybe some chunk of this is rules-based stuff that can be baked into Enterprise SRM software. P.S. At my company, I believe our two best sources of customer insight are search (what are people looking for, and why?) and phone calls to our consumer relations department. I look at search data regularly to look for trends, and on my brands we sit with our director of consumer relations once or twice a quarter to hear what real consumers are asking about. We learn a LOT this way. Mike: a challenging POV, and one I need to think about. Much of the real progress in marketing in the past 100 years has come from learning to differentiate a blip of data from a meaningful trend.

A fairly big blip like "Motrin Moms" was deafening inside the social media echo chamber. "ZOMG, there are armies of Mommy Bloggers attacking Motrin HQ. Surely the National Guard will need to bring tanks there to stop them!"

But, I'll bet a month's pay it didn't make a peep in the weekly Wal-Mart sales data.

How can we tell which Tweets are the start of an important Groundswell? And which ones are the dyspeptic grumblings of a couple of self-righteous basement bloggers who believe having 1,000 readers makes them world leaders?

Perhaps more practically, which feedback should be managed by customer relations? Which ones need to be looked at by marketing? Which need to be kicked over to manufacturing, or R&D? What's the appropriate response level?

Some of this will likely always require human judgment. But maybe some chunk of this is rules-based stuff that can be baked into Enterprise SRM software.

P.S. At my company, I believe our two best sources of customer insight are search (what are people looking for, and why?) and phone calls to our consumer relations department. I look at search data regularly to look for trends, and on my brands we sit with our director of consumer relations once or twice a quarter to hear what real consumers are asking about. We learn a LOT this way.

]]> By: Tom Cunniff http://scalableintimacy.com/who-needs-enterprise-srm/comment-page-1/#comment-6495 Tom Cunniff Tue, 03 Feb 2009 14:03:00 +0000 http://scalableintimacy.com/?p=321#comment-6495 Mike: a challenging POV, and one I need to think about. Much of the real progress in marketing in the past 100 years has come from learning to differentiate a blip of data from a meaningful trend. A fairly big blip like "Motrin Moms" was deafening inside the social media echo chamber. "ZOMG, there are armies of Mommy Bloggers attacking Motrin HQ. Surely the National Guard will need to bring tanks there to stop them!" But, I'll bet a month's pay it didn't make a peep in the weekly Wal-Mart sales data. How can we tell which Tweets are the start of an important Groundswell? And which ones are the dyspeptic grumblings of a couple of self-righteous basement bloggers who believe having 1,000 readers makes them world leaders? Perhaps more practically, which feedback should be managed by customer relations? Which ones need to be looked at by marketing? Which need to be kicked over to manufacturing, or R&D? What's the appropriate response level? Some of this will likely always require human judgment. But maybe some chunk of this is rules-based stuff that can be baked into Enterprise SRM software. P.S. At my company, I believe our two best sources of customer insight are search (what are people looking for, and why?) and phone calls to our consumer relations department. I look at search data regularly to look for trends, and on my brands we sit with our director of consumer relations once or twice a quarter to hear what real consumers are asking about. We learn a LOT this way. Mike: a challenging POV, and one I need to think about. Much of the real progress in marketing in the past 100 years has come from learning to differentiate a blip of data from a meaningful trend.

A fairly big blip like "Motrin Moms" was deafening inside the social media echo chamber. "ZOMG, there are armies of Mommy Bloggers attacking Motrin HQ. Surely the National Guard will need to bring tanks there to stop them!"

But, I'll bet a month's pay it didn't make a peep in the weekly Wal-Mart sales data.

How can we tell which Tweets are the start of an important Groundswell? And which ones are the dyspeptic grumblings of a couple of self-righteous basement bloggers who believe having 1,000 readers makes them world leaders?

Perhaps more practically, which feedback should be managed by customer relations? Which ones need to be looked at by marketing? Which need to be kicked over to manufacturing, or R&D? What's the appropriate response level?

Some of this will likely always require human judgment. But maybe some chunk of this is rules-based stuff that can be baked into Enterprise SRM software.

P.S. At my company, I believe our two best sources of customer insight are search (what are people looking for, and why?) and phone calls to our consumer relations department. I look at search data regularly to look for trends, and on my brands we sit with our director of consumer relations once or twice a quarter to hear what real consumers are asking about. We learn a LOT this way.

]]>