Your SlideShare is downloading. ×
0
European communication monitor 2012   social media
European communication monitor 2012   social media
European communication monitor 2012   social media
European communication monitor 2012   social media
European communication monitor 2012   social media
European communication monitor 2012   social media
European communication monitor 2012   social media
European communication monitor 2012   social media
European communication monitor 2012   social media
European communication monitor 2012   social media
European communication monitor 2012   social media
European communication monitor 2012   social media
European communication monitor 2012   social media
European communication monitor 2012   social media
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in...5
×

Thanks for flagging this SlideShare!

Oops! An error has occurred.

×
Saving this for later? Get the SlideShare app to save on your phone or tablet. Read anywhere, anytime – even offline.
Text the download link to your phone
Standard text messaging rates apply

European communication monitor 2012 social media

656

Published on

Parte del "European Communication Monitor 2012" referida al social media

Parte del "European Communication Monitor 2012" referida al social media

0 Comments
0 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Views
Total Views
656
On Slideshare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
1
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
2
Comments
0
Likes
0
Embeds 0
No embeds

Report content
Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

Cancel
No notes for slide

Transcript

  1. Social media: Importance, implementation and skills
  2. Chapter overviewThe survey reveals a large gap between the perceived importance of social media tools for communication and the actual rate ofimplementation in European organisations. Most obviously, mobile applications have entered the top three ranks of important social mediaplatforms, but at the same time the backlog of implementation is higher than in any other field. European communication professionals consider online communities or social networks as by far the most important social media toolavailable. With more than 75% support by respondents, it is leading the list of important social media tools. Online communities are followedby online videos ranking second in importance (67%), mobile applications like apps and mobile webs ranking third (65%), micro blogs(e.g. Twitter) ranking fourth (56%) and weblogs ranking fifth (45%). However, less than 56% of the communication departments actually useonline communities in their communication, a gap of more than 20% compared to the importance this tool is given by the practitioners. Thebiggest difference between importance (65%) and implementation (31%) is found for mobile applications, a gap of almost 35%. A cross-matrixanalysis shows that mobile applications, weblogs and photo sharing are considered the most important opportunities in social mediacommunication. The results show differences in social media use by communication professionals in Europe and in the United States as well as differencesin support for the use of certain tools between European regions. Surprisingly communication practitioners have overestimated the growthof social media use by their organisations. In 2011 they predicted a bigger increase in importance than was actually recorded this year. All communication managers report rather moderate skills for using digital technologies for internal and external communication,regardless of their gender. Quite logically, digital skills increase when the age of the professionals questioned decreases. Youngerprofessionals report higher personal skills in using online and similar technology than their older colleagues. Reported digital skills alsodiffer according to the area professionals are working in. Professionals working in overall communication, international and public affairs,media relations and marketing communications score lower than professionals working in strategy, internal communication and of courseonline communication. Despite the unsatisfactory level of digital skills, only every second respondent thinks that training is useful. Informal approaches toenhance those skills are clearly favoured. Eight out of ten European professionals think that the best way to learn about online tools isto use them as part of the regular work as well as privately. These two ways of learning are by far the most popular among communicationpractitioners. 63
  3. Social media tools in communication management: Importance and implementation in European organisations 75.8% Online communities (social networks) 55.7% 66.6% Online video 47.2% 65.4% Mobile applications (Apps, Mobile Webs) 30.7% 55.8% Microblogs (e.g. Twitter) 41.8% 44.9% Weblogs 27.5% 42.3% Photo sharing 34.7% 34.5% Slide sharing 23.5% 33.4% Location-based services 17.5% 27.2% Online audio (e.g. podcasts) 16.5% 26.0% Social bookmarks 14.1% Important social media tools for 23.6% communication management Wikis 12.1% 13.1% Mash-ups 4.5% Implemented social media tools 12.2% in organisations Virtual worlds 6.7%www.communicationmonitor.eu / Zerfass et al. 2012 / n min = 1,900 PR professionals. Q 10: Can you indicate the level of importance today for communicationmanagement (in general) of the following tools? / Q 11: To what extent has your organisation implemented these instruments in its daily communication 64activities? Scale 1 (not important / not used at all) − 5 (very important / used significantly). Considered scale points 4-5.
  4. Communication management has to catch up in the field of mobile applications Gap between importance and current implementation of social media tools in communications Mobile applications (Apps, Mobile Webs) -34.7% Online communities (social networks) -20.1% Online video -19.4% Weblogs -17.5% Location-based services -15.9% Microblogs (e.g. Twitter) -14.0% Social bookmarks -11.8% Wikis -11.5% Slide sharing -11.1% Online audio (e.g. podcasts) -10.8% Mash-ups -8.6% Photo sharing -7.6% Virtual worlds -5.6%www.communicationmonitor.eu / Zerfass et al. 2012 / n = 1,925 PR professionals. Q 10 / Q 11. Implementation is always smaller than perceived importance. 65
  5. Opportunities and needs for enhancing social media communication Very important 5 Online communities (3.54 | 4.08) Mobile applications Online video (2.68 | 3.77) (3.32 | 3.82) Weblogs Microblogs (2.62 | 3.29) (3.02 | 3.55) IMPORTANCE FOR Photo sharing (2.84 | 3.18) COMMUNICATION 3 Location-based services MANAGEMENT Slide sharing (2.24 | 2.93) (2.49 | 2.99) Social bookmarks (2.13 | 2.73) Wikis Online audio (2.06 | 2.67) (2.16 | 2.73) Mash-ups (1.69 | 2.35) Virtual worlds (1.59 | 2.06) Not important 1 1 3 5 Not used at all IMPLEMENTATION Used significantly IN ORGANISATIONSwww.communicationmonitor.eu / Zerfass et al. 2012 / n = 1,925 PR professionals. Q 10 / Q 11. 66
  6. Usage of social media communication tools in European and US organisations 50.4% Online communities (social networks) 67.7% 39.5% Microblogs (e.g. Twitter) 59.2% 22.7% Weblogs 37.0% 17.5% Location-based services 19.7% 16.5% Online audio (e.g. podcasts) 25.0% 11.9% Wikis 9.7% 3.8% Mash-ups 4.2% 6.4% Virtual worlds 3.0% Significant usage in European organisations Significant usage in US organisationswww.communicationmonitor.eu / Zerfass et al. 2012 / n min = 1.485 European PR professionals working in communication departments / Swerling et al. 2012 /n = 569 US PR professionals working in communication departments / Q 11: To what extent has your organisation implemented these instruments in its daily 67communication activities? Scale 1 (not used at all) − 5 (used significantly). Considered scale points 4-5. US study: Scale 1-7. Considered scale points 5-7.
  7. Importance of social media tools is steadily growing; but only online communities and videos are supported by a majority of communication professionals Online communities (social networks) 80% Online video Weblogs 70% Online audio (e.g. podcasts) 60% Wikis 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012www.communicationmonitor.eu / Zerfass et al. 2012 / n = 1,925 PR professionals, Q 10. Zerfass et al. 2011 / n = 2,146 /Q 11; Zerfass et al. 2010 / 68n = 1,914 / Q 6; Zerfass et al. 2009 / n = 1,863 / Q 5. Zerfass et al. 2008 / n = 1,524; Q 3
  8. Perception of importance differs significantly in various European regions Importance of social media tools (mean values) Online communities** Online video** Mobile applications* Microblogs** Weblogs Photo sharing** Slide sharing** Location-based services** Online audio** Social bookmarks** Wikis** Mash-ups** Virtual worlds** not important (3) very important Western Europe Northern Europe Southern Europe Eastern Europewww.communicationmonitor.eu / Zerfass et al. 2012 / n = 1,925 PR professionals. Q 10. * Significant differences (chi-square test, p ≤ 0.05). 69** Highly significant differences (chi-square test, p ≤ 0.01).
  9. Communication professionals overestimate the growth of importance in social media 75.8% Online communities (social networks) 82.2% 66.6% Online video 76.5% 55.8% Microblogs (e.g. Twitter) 62.0% 44.9% Weblogs 55.4% 42.3% Photo sharing 47.4% 34.5% Slide sharing 42.8% 33.4% Location-based services 42.3% 27.2% Online audio (e.g. podcasts) 35.6% 23.6% Wikis 44.3% 12.2% Virtual worlds 26.6% Importance rated in 2012 Importance 2012 predicted last year (ECM 2011 survey)www.communicationmonitor.eu / Zerfass et al. 2012 / n = 1,925 PR professionals / Q 10. Zerfass et al. 2011 / n = 1,572 / Q 15. 70
  10. Skills for using digital technologies are rather moderate Personal skills in using digital technologies for internal and external communications Female communication 3.39 professionals Male communication 3.54 professionals 1 3 5 Very low Moderate Very highwww.communicationmonitor.eu / Zerfass et al. 2012 / n = 2,185 PR professionals. Q 12: How do you rate your personal skills in using digital technologies for 71internal and external communications? Scale 1 (very low) − 5 (very high). Mean values. Highly significant differences between genders (T-test, p ≤ 0.01).
  11. Younger professionals are more competent in the digital world Personal skills in using digital technologies for internal and external communications 29 or younger 3.82 30 - 39 3.59 40 - 49 3.36 50 - 59 3.21 60 or older 3.30 1 3 5 Very low Moderate Very highwww.communicationmonitor.eu / Zerfass et al. 2012 / n = 2,185 PR professionals. Q 12: How do you rate your personal skills in using digital technologiesfor internal and external communications? Scale 1 (very low) − 5 (very high). Mean values. highly significant differences (Kendall‘s rank correlation, 72p ≤ 0.01; τ = -0.164).
  12. Minor differences between digital skill levels in various fields of practice; even online experts are cautious about their abilities Personal skills in using digital technologies for internal and external communications Communication professionals working in … Online communication, social media 4.06 Internal communication, change 3.55 Strategy and coordination of the 3.48 communication function Consultancy, advising, coaching, key account 3.48 Marketing, brand, consumer communication 3.43 Media relations, press spokesperson 3.42 Governmental relations, public affairs, 3.42 lobbying International communication 3.39 Overall communication 3.32 1 3 5 Very low Moderate Very highwww.communicationmonitor.eu / Zerfass et al. 2012 / n = 2,185 PR professionals. Q 12: How do you rate your personal skills in using digital technologies 73for internal and external communications? Scale 1 (very low) − 5 (very high). Mean values.
  13. Digital skills are on different levels throughout Europe Personal skills in using digital technologies for internal and external communications Netherlands (3.54) 5 Spain (3.65) Germany (3.48) 4 Serbia (3.64) Belgium (3.49) 3 2 Italy (3.48) France (3.19) 1 Norway (3.61) Switzerland (3.21) Finland (3.38) United Kingdom (3.36) Sweden (3.53)www.communicationmonitor.eu / Zerfass et al. 2012 / n = 2,185 PR professionals. Q 12: How do you rate your personal skills in using digital technologies 74for internal and external communications? Scale 1 (very low) − 5 (very high). Mean values. Significant differences (ANOVA, p ≤ 0.01; F = 2.910).
  14. Informal approaches to enhance digital skills are clearly favoured by professionals; only every second respondent thinks that training is useful Suitable ways to learn digital skills for communication practitioners Required use of digital technologies / online tools as part of 81.4% the regular work Private use of digital technologies / online tools 80.8% Self-development (without support or requirements by the 58.9% organisation) Attending company-specific training programs 56.2% Attending training programs externally 53.3% University or college education (part of BA/MA programs) 24.7%www.communicationmonitor.eu / Zerfass et al. 2012 / n = 2,185 PR professionals. Q 13: In your opinion, what is the best way that communication practitionerslearn how to use such technologies? Scale 1 (not useful) − 5 (very useful). Considered scale points 4-5. 75

×