Most Admired Telecom Service Brands- Online
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in...5
×
 

Like this? Share it with your network

Share

Most Admired Telecom Service Brands- Online

on

  • 4,111 views

 

Statistics

Views

Total Views
4,111
Views on SlideShare
4,095
Embed Views
16

Actions

Likes
1
Downloads
105
Comments
4

3 Embeds 16

http://www.slideshare.net 10
http://drizzlin.com 3
http://www.linkedin.com 3

Accessibility

Categories

Upload Details

Uploaded via as Microsoft PowerPoint

Usage Rights

© All Rights Reserved

Report content

Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

Cancel
  • Full Name Full Name Comment goes here.
    Are you sure you want to
    Your message goes here
    Processing…
  • Would differ in opinion Mainak...On a day to day basis, we come across multiple blogs which have been written years ago but still continue to receive comments from people, even today. No one consciously goes around looking for a date, unless of course it is specifically staring you in the face. Also in the context of adverts, they live for ever. The admiration and impact continues for years if a good ad is made.Customer Service also remains a constant factor. While tariffs and plans may change, comments could involve general statements such as 'XYZ's billing is always delayed' or 'XYZ''s coverage in Assam is bad'
    Also please note that an 'old dated' conversation doesnt mean that it is on the 10th page of the SERPs. It is also possible that certain brands havent been expressed as much as the other brands, ensuring that older conversations are visible, even today well within the first 10 pages...sometimes well within the first 3 pages as well.
    As far as the assumption of Google's first 10 page goes, there are enough research papers to prove that people dont generally search beyond the first 10 pages.
    While I agree that there are points of contention and issues arising out of differences in perspective, please also note our definition of admiration. While we did factor in Google's inherent algorithm of showing up relevant results ( based on its definition of relevancy) , our primary focus was sentiment, date exclusive. Most of the venues that we audited ensured that recency was ensured, while some (just by virtue of there not being enough conversations or being an advert ) did not.
    Are you sure you want to
    Your message goes here
    Processing…
  • Hi Robin,

    Yes I understand your logic.


    But in the last seven years industry in India and the telecom industry in particular have seen drastic changes / improvements in terms of TARIFF, PRODUCT/SERVICE, COVERAGE, USER PROFILE AND USAGE. Therefore, even if Google does not look at the date to find out the relevance of its search results, the reader will understand if a particular conversation is relevant today and then process/respond/react. [ in 2002-04 the call rates, coverage and competition in the market was incomparable to today’s scenario. !! And most of the mobile telephone users in India are first generation users.]


    If a conversation comes up in the first 10 pages of advanced Google search, that too for a specific domain, how does the study justify that as being likely to influence other conversations, because most users just ’googlit ’ instead of ’advancedgoogleit’.
    Further, how do you assume that the consumer will turn 9 web pages to arrive at the 10th page? Some might, some might not. And if some will not, then with what certainty can you say that a significant percentage of users will turn 9 web pages to see the search results. If the methodology tests this apparent assumption then you can most certainly take conversations form the later pages of advanced domain specific Google search.


    In almost all the websites used for this study, the most recent comments appear on top. Hence to find a 2004 conversation, for example, you might have to turn a any number of web pages. How would be certain, that a user will start involving with the latest comments and go back till the last [or at least till conversations dated 2002] ? If this assumption is full proof, again, then,the study is right in taking conversations from even 2002!


    Because, is coming in the top 10 pages of ’advanced domain specific Google search’ enough to be visible to a significant number of users, so that those conversations become relevant for the scope of this study?
    Are you sure you want to
    Your message goes here
    Processing…
  • Hi Mainak

    A relevant question. As you would see in the methodology itself, the very fact that a conversation appears in the top 10 pages of google makes it as likely to influence someone as the other 99 conversations. User behaviour generally looks at digesting content rather than associating dates. It is precisely why we have considered some 'old' conversations in the ambit of the study
    Are you sure you want to
    Your message goes here
    Processing…
  • Sandip I really admire your work on the telecom brands. This is also a good example of how with only the investment of time so much of consumer information can be gathered and analyzed.

    I have one thing to ask you though,

    1) How did you come to the conclusion that opinions presented 7 years back are 'as likely' to influence opinions as a conversation that’s happened today?
    Are you sure you want to
    Your message goes here
    Processing…
Post Comment
Edit your comment

Most Admired Telecom Service Brands- Online Presentation Transcript

  • 1.  
  • 2. Research Overview
    • Understanding of the most admired brands through online ‘conversations’ existing on the web
    • Insights on feedback being provided by consumers online around mobile service brands
    • Understanding and exploring the opportunities that each of the brands have in exploring social media
  • 3. Methodology
      • To identify the most admired mobile telecom brand in the Indian Online Space. Admiration was defined as having a negative or a positive sentiment towards different aspects of the brand including:
    • Product/services: This includes conversations related to the different packages and value added services that the brand provides
    • Tariff/billing: Includes conversations which talks about the calling/sms rates for various offers and billing statements.
    • Ads/promotions: Includes conversations around marketing campaigns and TVCs.
    • Customer Service: This includes conversations where customers and prospective customers interacted with the brand
    • Network Coverage: This deals with conversations regarding the coverage and network strength of the mobile service provider.
  • 4.
    • Brand Affinity: Conversations where the brand has been praised without reference to any particular product or service
    • The Telecom brands covered for the purpose of the survey are:
        • Airtel
        • Vodafone
        • Idea
        • Tata Indicom
        • Aircel
        • Reliance
        • BSNL Mobile
        • MTNL
        • Spice Mobile
        • Loop Mobile
    Methodology
  • 5. Methodology
    • 6 venue types were chosen for the purpose of the survey which is as follows:
      • Blogs
      • Micro blogs: Twitter
      • Social Networks: Facebook and Orkut
      • Forums
      • Video Sharing: YouTube
      • Consumer review sites: Mouthshut
      • Purely Complaint venues such as consumercomplaints.in and complaintsboard.com were ignored for the purpose of this survey, to avoid the negative skew in conversations
      • Search terms were assigned to identify primary conversations for each of the brands.
  • 6. Methodology: The Search Terms Brand Search Term Airtel Airtel Vodafone Vodafone India Idea Cellular Idea Cellular Tata Indicom Tata Indicom Aircel Aircel Reliance Mobile Reliance Mobile BSNL Mobile BSNL Mobile MTNL MTNL Spice Mobile Spice Mobile Loop Mobile Loop Mobile
  • 7. Methodology
    • For each of the venues, Google searches were conducted with advanced operators. For Orkut.com, however, site specific searches were conducted, owing to the private nature of the social network.
    • The Universe of conversations considered for the purpose of the survey was 51,902,650.
    • For each search term on each venue, the top 10 pages (with 10 results each) were audited to arrive at a total of 700 conversations per venue and a total of 7000 conversations.
    • Of the 7000 conversations, relevant conversations (defined as ones expressing a personal opinion and showing an affinity towards one or multiple aspects of the brand) were identified. A total of 1631 conversations were thus identified.
  • 8. Methodology
    • No brand initiated conversations and conversations pertaining to brand products were considered for the purpose of the survey.
    •  
    • The conversations identified fell in the following date range:Nov’2002 to Aug’2009.The reason for such a broad time period was the fact that online conversations are here to stay and opinions presented 7 years back are as likely to influence opinions as a conversation that’s happened today.
    • Each conversation audited was assigned a tonality score which was used to measure overall admiration for a brand. Negative tonality conversations were given a score of -1; Positive tonality conversations were given a score of +1.
      • For conversations having multiple messaging parameters and therefore, multiple tonalities, an aggregate score was calculated based on the above method.
  • 9. Methodology
    • For calculation of the overall admiration score, the sum of scores for each brand was computed. A weightage was also assigned to the brands, based on Expected Conversations v/s Actual Conversations found. This weightage multiplied by the score of each brand, gave the final admiration score for each brand.
    • The Overall score for the brand, determined the “Most Admired Mobile Telecom Brand Online”
    • Admiration scores were also calculated for each individual parameter across the 10 brands to identify the top brands. This score was calculated by assigning weights, based on conversations around the parameter, for each brand.
  • 10. The Top lines
    • Vodafone has been recognized as the most admired mobile service brand online in India. This feat has been achieved through its strong branding and advertising efforts both in the offline and online mediums.
    • The final rankings were determined as follows:
    Brand Score Vodafone 117.57 Tata Indicom 101.12 Aircel 59.76 BSNL Mobile 13.11 Airtel 9.71 Idea Cellular 3.73 MTNL 1.59 Spice Mobile -2.21 Loop Mobile -33.48 Reliance Mobile -47.9
  • 11. The Top Lines
    • BSNL Mobile has scored highest in admiration for products and services while Vodafone appeared at the bottom of the stack.
    • In the context of Tariffs and Billing, BSNL Mobile took the top honors while Airtel lagged at the bottom.
    • Vodafone scored the highest in terms of admiration for ads and promotional messaging. Here BSNL Mobile scored the lowest.
    • Tata Indicom scored the highest in network coverage while Loop Mobile was the laggard in this space.
    • MTNL scored the highest in customer service, while Vodafone was rated to have the worst customer service.
    • Tata Indicom scores the highest in brand affinity whereas Aircel scores the lowest.
  • 12. The Top Lines
    • While MTNL and BSNL Mobile scored high on individual parameters, people talking of ads and promotions around brands was far higher, propelling active advertising brands like Vodafone, Aircel and Airtel to the top.
    • Facebook, despite its phenomenal growth in the Indian online space, still does not see much activity by the telecom brands. Apart from Tata Indicom and Vodafone, all the other brands had negligible presence on the platform.
    • 83% of the conversations, in which the gender could be clearly deduced, were found to be by men, while only 6% of these conversations were by women.
    • The highest number of conversations was found to be around Ads and promotions, particularly on YouTube and Twitter.
  • 13. Pricing
    • Price of Report : Rs.1,25,000/- (exclusive of taxes)
    • 10% discount on all orders placed before Dec 15, 2009
    • Payment Terms : 50% advance, 50% after delivery of the report
    • Delivery Timeline : Second Week of December (by Dec 16, 2009)
    • Report Delivery Format : PDF and Hard Copy format