Social media results -PR & comms


Published on

Richard Bagnall's workshop on social media monitoring and social media measurement delivered at the Social Media Results - PR & Comms Conference. London, November 30th 2011.

Published in: Business, Technology
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Total views
On SlideShare
From Embeds
Number of Embeds
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide
  • Guys, we have a problem. All of us in this room share it. Social media is exploding in importance We feel out of control, we feel like we’re missing opportunities. We’re terrified that potential problems could erupt anywhere. How do we organise? How do we scale? How do we optimise? If we engage, who should we engage with, where is the content that matters? How should we behave and interact? Within our businesses – whether we work at PR agencies or in house – how do we justify our budgets? How do we prove value? How do we know if we are being effective?
  • Ken Burbary – wiki on social media monitoring companies
  • Problems with relying on google alerts and other free tools
  • Total numbers differ by almost 100% On average 40% of coverage is irrelevant Overlap between any two aggregators is only around 20% On average 40% of coverage is irrelevant Company 1 had the highest number of duplicate posts Overlap between any two aggregators is around 20% No aggregator is fully comprehensive Aggregator volumes differ across channels So…there’s no point trying to “measure the universe” And you still need a human touch for qualitative insight Company 2 by far the fastest across all posts Sentiment – Company 1 was worse than random base line! Metrica’s in-house automated sentiment ran at 68% before human checking Poor relevance and sentiment accuracy demonstrates value of expert input, particularly at the search string creation and content checking stages However, speed of automated monitoring (especially Company 2) is perfectly suited for monitoring crises/ emerging conversations All companies involved in our survey have excellent monitoring portals for this purpose
  • January 2009: approx. 75 million Tweets per month August 2010: approx. 2.64 billion Tweets per month Latest figures celebrating Twitters 5 th birthday; It took 3 years, 2 months and 1 day to hit 1 billion Tweets. Now it only takes 1 week for Twitter to syndicate 1 billion Tweets Scaling problem here Universe is always expanding Absolute numbers lose meaning in this environment
  • Aggregator volumes differ across channels No aggregator is comprehensive Next: speed / timeliness
  • Only one company was finding most content in acceptable time frame. Two were taking about 24 hours to find some content – on average! Two of the companies suffered outages during our trial! Next tone
  • Social media automated tools don’t understand context, wit, sarcasm etc
  • Who agrees with this?
  • Now who agrees
  • A real example of confusing sentiment
  • Automated sentiment analysis was not very good One company performed worse than random base line! The others didn’t perform much better than 50:50. Recent project work : One years worth of data Aggregator supplied 94,910 After removing irrelevant pubs & dupes = 70,000 After our own Boolean searches = 40,000 After human analysis of all clips = 33,662 Next: summary of challenges
  • Lets move onto influence – another hot topic in measurement at the moment. Described as the new gold rush. If I can just reach the influencers – aren’t all my problems solved? Obama – surely pretty influential? Appinions Find and profile influencers relevant to topics defined by Boolean queries. Uses text analytics to understand statements by, and about, influencers and specific topics. ( api ,  faq ) Connect.Me  (beta) A reputation-scoring system based on individuals recommending each other. Tags link recommendations to specific topics. Connect.Me promises not to mine or sell user data, so it's not an option for developers looking for influence scores. Identified A career-oriented marketability score based on how well Facebook profiles match what employers search for on social network sites. ( how ) Klout A single-score influence metric based on social network activity. "The standard for influence," at least in the sense that it's the one everyone's arguing about. ( api , faq ,  how ) Kred  (beta) PeopleBrowsr 's single-metric scoring system based on online influence and outreach. ( api ,  how ,  intro ) PeekYou A search engine for people with a single-score influence metric based on online activity. ( api ,  faq ,  how ) PeerIndex Influence analysis with scores broken out by topic and activity, audience, and authority subscores. ( api ,  faq ,  how ) PROskore Business-oriented reputation and experience score based on social network activity, career profiles entered on the site, and on-site engagement. ( faq ,  how ) Spot Influence Contextual influencer identification and analysis based on reach, topicality, and impact. ( api ,  faq ,  how ) Traackr Influencer search and profiling based on reach, resonance, and relevance. Traackr can also monitor and measure online activity by influencers for campaign management. 
  • Big Ben Clock is apparently influential
  • Big Ben Clock is authorative on drugs! Even with me – it says that I am influential about some of the things you would expect, but also some that you wouldn’t – like magic, photography and health – none of which I ever discuss online – or off!
  • Philip: “You have been influenced when you think in a way that you otherwise would not have thought, or when you have done something you wouldn’t otherwise have done” Influence is subjective to define and practically impossible to measure. From a social content point of view and the likelihood to cause actions, it also depends on one key area that no tool can help you with – the quality of your content!
  • So, plenty for clients to be confused about. Plenty of work still needs to be done. AMEC, has come together with CIPR, PRCA, IPR, PRSA to work on standards Focussing on 5 areas Influence Engagement Sentiment Monitoring Terminology Consultation process is open and ongoing
  • In the meantime, what can you do? Focus on your objectives! When choosing a hammer or a screw driver, it’s useful to know whether you have a screw or a nail Must consider what your objectives are. This is the process that all organisations should follow. Next - Blending of media – means ideally we don’t want silos. Now there is a bigger picture that we need to consider
  • Monitor and measure effectively – To be aware of content in close to real time - To know about crises before their bosses or clients To bring intelligence, information & order to the fire-hose of content - Bringing order to chaos To understand the drivers and influencers of the conversations - From all these conversations, who and what really matter? To gauge how this impacts the reputation of their organisation To educate colleagues about the importance of monitoring & measuring online conversations – sometimes with limited budget To point to ROI and demonstrate value for the social media investment - Demonstrate success and prove their value
  • Heard a lot about Poems & Pesos Poems – Paid, owned, earned media Peso – Paid, earned, shared, owned media The consumer doesn’t care or notice which channel it is – therefore it’s important that the strategy is joined up. What's the knock on effect for measurement? Other departments that have a stake in social include: PR, Human Resources, Sales, Customer service, Marketing, Branding / promotion, Advertising, IT, Legal, When the same channels are used for all these, whose metrics do you use? How do you measure one environment for multiple objectives?
  • This takes us along the measurement road from the old school metrics – measuring outputs to looking at measuring outcomes The old model is perhaps not relevant any more Don Bartholomew, Exposure, Engagement, Influence and Action. More at his blog. But here’s the problem. We have the oppo to measure more easily the good stuff – the out-takes and the out-comes . But this involves tailoring the metrics to client’s objectives. The volumes of content have encouraged large software companies making social media monitoring platforms – they have to make a one size that fits all so they measure what’s easy and also rely on their own scoring systems too
  • This matrix puts those new communications processes against the 4 types of media
  • Thank you. Keep in touch. Richard Bagnall – twitter –
  • Social media results -PR & comms

    1. 1. Richard Bagnall Insights & Analytics Director, Gorkana Group Chair, AMEC social media measurement standards group
    2. 4. 226
    3. 5. 1,900,000 results
    4. 6. 12,800 results UK only Past week
    5. 7. 12,700 results UK only Past week Page 14
    6. 8. Just 198 results UK only Past week Page 20 The end of Google!
    7. 9. Volume & Relevance Co. A Co. B Co. C
    8. 11. Coverage by channel Co. A Co. B Co. C
    9. 12. Speed & Delay Co. A Co. B Co. C
    10. 13. “ I once shot an elephant in my pyjamas. How he got into them, I'll never know."
    11. 14. A woman without her man is nothing
    12. 15. A woman; without her, man is nothing
    13. 17. Sentiment Accuracy Co. A Co. B Co. C Metrica (without analysts) ‘ CHANCE’
    14. 23. Credit:
    15. 24. 4. Monitoring / content 5. Terminology 1. Influence 2. Engagement 3. Sentiment
    16. 25. G oals O bjectives S trategy T actics Metrics Metrics Business objectives & business KPIs PR objectives & PR KPIs
    17. 26. Think about our own PR objectives and needs To be aware of issues and opportunities in close to real time To know which content matters and which is irrelevant To identify the drivers and influencers To justify budgets To prove success of campaigns / agency work To fine tune results / know what works
    18. 27. POEMS & PESOs
    19. 28. Output Out-take Outcome
    20. 29.
    21. 31. [email_address] @richardbagnall Let’s keep talking: Copyright applies to this document –some rights reserved. This work is licensed under a Creative Commons. Attribution-non commercial-share alike 3.0 license.