Social: Session 5: The Science of Relationship
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in...5
×
 

Social: Session 5: The Science of Relationship

on

  • 1,751 views

Learn to use sociology techniques to derive a clear, precise and quantifiable definition for relationships, then apply the resulting concepts to brand-customer relationship. We will explore the ...

Learn to use sociology techniques to derive a clear, precise and quantifiable definition for relationships, then apply the resulting concepts to brand-customer relationship. We will explore the metrics and potential ways to measure and quantify relationship and address the question of whether we can beat the Dunbar Limit of 150 friends.
We will also revisit the Dunbar Limit and its implication for brands under the concept of attention economy. How can brands can leverage various components of a relationship to build stronger customer relationship to bring ROI through loyalty and influence?

Statistics

Views

Total Views
1,751
Slideshare-icon Views on SlideShare
1,743
Embed Views
8

Actions

Likes
2
Downloads
13
Comments
0

3 Embeds 8

http://us-w1.rockmelt.com 6
http://www.twylah.com 1
https://twitter.com 1

Accessibility

Categories

Upload Details

Uploaded via as Adobe PDF

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…
Post Comment
Edit your comment

    Social: Session 5: The Science of Relationship Social: Session 5: The Science of Relationship Presentation Transcript

    • Track: SocialThe Science of Relationship Michael Wu, PhD (mich8elwu) Principal Scientist of Analytics @ Lithium April 24th, 2012
    • agenda▪ Introduction: CRM data▪ Development and maintenance of relationship • Anthropology: complementarity between social network and community▪ Interpersonal relationship and the Dunbar limit • Sociology: the attention economy▪ Customers relationship (with brands) • Application: dealing with the Facebook irony▪ Future work twitter: mich8elwu #scon12 linkedin.com/in/MichaelWuPhD
    • what’s  the  “R”  in  social  CRM▪ What data do CRM system store? • Contact record • email, phone, address • twitter, facebook, linkedin? • Transaction record • purchase/sales history • order/fulfillment data • Support record • support case history • service delivery data▪ Where’s  the  “r”elationship data in CRM system? #scon12 twitter: mich8elwu linkedin.com/in/MichaelWuPhD 3
    • Today’s  CRM  system “R”  ≈  record ≠  relationship#scon12 twitter: mich8elwu linkedin.com/in/MichaelWuPhD 4
    • where do we find relationship data?▪ On social media • Facebook • Linkedin▪ It’s  a  huge   ecosystem of tools+services▪ There are too many places to look! #scon12 twitter: mich8elwu linkedin.com/in/MichaelWuPhD 5
    • where do we find relationship data?▪ On social media • Facebook • Linkedin▪ It’s  a  huge   ecosystem of tools+services▪ There are too many places to look! #scon12 twitter: mich8elwu linkedin.com/in/MichaelWuPhD 5
    • Social is not new! Human have been social since they were caveman#scon12 twitter: mich8elwu linkedin.com/in/MichaelWuPhD 6
    • Social anthropology perspective of social Tech  relationship 1. Social network 2. Community#scon12 twitter: mich8elwu linkedin.com/in/MichaelWuPhD 7
    • Social anthropology perspective of social Tech  relationship 1. Social network 2. Community#scon12 twitter: mich8elwu linkedin.com/in/MichaelWuPhD 7
    • how do social networks form?A  story  of  how  Bob’s  social   Emeryville network was built = community weak ties Bob strong ties old members new / casual members #scon12 twitter: mich8elwu linkedin.com/in/MichaelWuPhD 8
    • how do social networks form? Emeryvillecollege = community Social networks form naturally within communities as people establishes relationships Social network maintains relationships as people move work between communities #scon12 twitter: mich8elwu linkedin.com/in/MichaelWuPhD 9
    • what do real social network data look like?#scon12 twitter: mich8elwu linkedin.com/in/MichaelWuPhD 10
    • communities vs. social networks (on/offline)▪ Social Network ▪ Community • Held together by pre-existing • Held together by some common interpersonal relationships interests of a large group of between individuals people • You know everyone in your • Most people, especially new network (ego-network), people members, do not know majority of who are connected to you directly the members in the community • Each person has only one social • Any one person may be part of network, despite there are many many communities at any given social network platforms time • Structure: Network • Structure: Hierarchical, overlapping & nested #scon12 twitter: mich8elwu linkedin.com/in/MichaelWuPhD 11
    • communities vs. social networks (on/offline)▪ Social Networks ▪ Community #scon12 twitter: mich8elwu linkedin.com/in/MichaelWuPhD 12
    • lifecycle of relationships disconnected Easy! do 1. creating All it takes issomething a weak tie an  “hello” bad weak tie 2. building do tie strength nothing strong tie 3. maintaining relationship #scon12 twitter: mich8elwu linkedin.com/in/MichaelWuPhD 13
    • But what is relationship?#scon12 twitter: mich8elwu linkedin.com/in/MichaelWuPhD 14
    • the components of a relationship▪ Relationship: sociology perspective • A tie or a connection between two entities (e.g. people, companies, cities, or even nations) • Tie strength = strength of the relationship▪ Granovetter: components of tie strength • Time: amount of time spent together • Intensity: emotional intensity & sense of closeness • Trust: intimacy or mutual confiding (transparency) • Reciprocity: amount of reciprocal services▪ Strong relationships requires more time & attention #scon12 twitter: mich8elwu linkedin.com/in/MichaelWuPhD 15
    • the attention economy▪ We only have 24 hours a day▪ We only have fixed amount of attention▪ How many meaningful relationship can we have? via nielsen #scon12 twitter: mich8elwu linkedin.com/in/MichaelWuPhD 16
    • ~150: the Dunbar number (or Dunbar limit)▪ Prof. Robin Dunbar found a relationship between brain size of primate species and their group size 148▪ Extrapolate data from 38 primate species to human neocortex ratio  Dunbar number = 148 (~150)▪ Verified by surveying pre- we know the human neocortical ratio industrial villages/tribes #scon12 twitter: mich8elwu linkedin.com/in/MichaelWuPhD 17
    • does Dunbar limit still applies in modern society?▪ Order our relationship from wife children the strongest (immediate parents family) to the weakest (acquaintance) siblings tie strength▪ This creates a relationship close friends profiles for each person acquaintance▪ In pre-industrial villages & tribes, people only know ………… ~150 people on average 16 ~150 # of relationships #scon12 twitter: mich8elwu linkedin.com/in/MichaelWuPhD 18
    • does Dunbar limit still applies in modern society?▪ Dunbar’s  limit  may  not   wife children apply in modern society b/c parents • necessity for social cohesion is substantially lower • communication (an important part siblings tie strength of socializing) is much more close friends efficient acquaintance▪ But our brain  hasn’t   ………… changed for millennia… 16 ~150 # of relationships #scon12 twitter: mich8elwu linkedin.com/in/MichaelWuPhD 19
    • we can have more than 150 friends if have fewer strong tiestie strength attention shift from stronger ties to weaker ties strong ties ~150 weak ties # of relationships #scon12 twitter: mich8elwu linkedin.com/in/MichaelWuPhD 20
    • we can have more than 150 friends We can shift our time/attention around, but the total amount of time/attention remain roughly the same if have weaker strong ties area under the area under thetie strength yellow relationship profile = blue relationship profile attention shift from stronger ties to weaker ties strong ties ~150 weak ties # of relationships #scon12 twitter: mich8elwu linkedin.com/in/MichaelWuPhD 21
    • What about the relationship between customers & brands? customer relationship < personal relationship (with brands) (with people) always weaker#scon12 twitter: mich8elwu linkedin.com/in/MichaelWuPhD 22
    • the Facebook irony▪ Facebook contains a lot of our strong ties • By definition, these stronger ties will demand more attention, and will win more of your limited time/attention▪ Irony:  because  Facebook  is  “too good”  at  maintaining  our   strong ties, it created problems for itself: • In the presence of strong ties, weaker ties are harder to develop into strong ones but  it’s  too  fast  for  your  dog • If you already have strong relationship with your customers. Great! maintain them with Facebook is the way to go • Otherwise, the strong ties on Facebook will hinder the development of weak ties #scon12 twitter: mich8elwu linkedin.com/in/MichaelWuPhD 23
    • How can brands build stronger relationships with their customers?#scon12 twitter: mich8elwu linkedin.com/in/MichaelWuPhD 24
    • component #1: time▪ “time”  =  time  spent  together   desire = mutual ≠  duration  of  relationship▪ “time”  increases  tie  strength   trust if the desires to spend time together is mutual time LOVE reciprocity intensity #scon12 twitter: mich8elwu linkedin.com/in/MichaelWuPhD 25
    • component #1: time▪ “time”  =  time  spent  together   desire = non-mutual ≠  duration  of  relationship▪ “time”  increases  tie  strength   trust if the desires to spend time together is mutual time▪ Key: know when your reciprocity customers want to spend time with you, and be there intensity HATE for them #scon12 twitter: mich8elwu linkedin.com/in/MichaelWuPhD 26
    • component #2: intensity▪ Customers’  intensity  for   brands is much lower than their intensity for friends trust▪ It is genetic! We have no control over it time▪ Tactic: appeal to greater reciprocity causes that customers have strong emotions for intensity▪ Key:  don’t  try  too  hard  on   this component #scon12 twitter: mich8elwu linkedin.com/in/MichaelWuPhD 27
    • component #3: trust▪ Transparency creates an environment  that’s  more   conducive for building trust trust▪ 2 types of transparency • brand–customer time • blog, twitter, etc reciprocity • customer–customer • community discussion forum intensity #scon12 twitter: mich8elwu linkedin.com/in/MichaelWuPhD 28
    • component #3: trust▪ People trust themselves, so trust they tend to trust brands that co-create with them▪ 2 types of co-creation • passive: listening + collect customer input time • active: crowdsourced ideation + filtering reciprocity▪ Key: 1. Create transparent & authentic intensity communication channels to customers & among customers 2. Co-create with your customers #scon12 twitter: mich8elwu linkedin.com/in/MichaelWuPhD 29
    • component #4: reciprocity▪ Reciprocity = 2 way reciprocal services▪ Customer Brands trust • Make it easy for them to help other customers of yours • Reward them properly and serve time right reciprocity▪ Create a sustainable cycle of reciprocity by co-creation intensity▪ Key:  don’t  forget  to  let  your   customer help you #scon12 twitter: mich8elwu linkedin.com/in/MichaelWuPhD 30
    • building customer relationship▪ Customer community • Opt-in:  it’s  there  when  the   customers want it • May have a great cause trust • Transparent channel • Platform for co-creation time • Enables reciprocity reciprocity▪ Customer relationship are build the same way as intensity inter-personal relationships, in a community #scon12 twitter: mich8elwu linkedin.com/in/MichaelWuPhD 31
    • Now we know how relationships are built, can we measure it?#scon12 twitter: mich8elwu linkedin.com/in/MichaelWuPhD 32
    • not yet, but each pillar is ~quantifiable~ how transparent is your how deep are the at what rate arehow much time spent in engagements brand to your customers? reciprocal andyour brand community? with your brand? how responsive you are mutual serviceshow much time spent sentiment ratio, to your customers? being carriedengaging & participating emotions out? how many inter-customeron your fan page, discussion do you enable?youtube channel, etc.? hard to measure. But that’s  OK,  b/c  it’s  hard at what rate are content to influence too being co-created w/ your customers? #scon12 twitter: mich8elwu linkedin.com/in/MichaelWuPhD 33
    • future CRM Big challenges: Combining the metrics for the 4 pillars into a single metric that quantifies the strength of relationship. There are nonlinear dependencies between the 4 pillars of a relationship, so a simple linear model, such a weighted average,  won’t  be  sufficient. Hopefully, future CRM will not only have data  on  your  customers’  relationship  with   your brand, but also the strength of relationships among your customers.#scon12 twitter: mich8elwu linkedin.com/in/MichaelWuPhD 34
    • Thank you Q&A + discussion @mich8elwu#scon12 twitter: mich8elwu linkedin.com/in/MichaelWuPhD 35
    • #SCON124/24/2012 ©2012 SugarCRM Inc. All rights reserved. 36