coUNDco & Lithium present: DACH-Studie "Social Business Solutions"

3,081 views

Published on

Der vernetzte Konsument verändert den Markt. Er fordert Transparenz, ist informiert und hält sein Umfeld auf dem Laufenden - und das immer mobiler und immer mehr in Echtzeit. Viel wird den Unternehmen geraten und die Dringlichkeit propagiert, «social» aktiv werden zu müssen. Wir wollten in Zusammenarbeit mit der Universität Zürich, Lithium und Wirtschaftspartnern aus Deutschland, Österreich und der Schweiz, die konkreten Herausforderungen mit dieser «Dringlichkeit» in Unternehmen besser verstehen und in Erfahrung bringen: Sind es kulturelle oder organisatorische? Sind es personelle oder geht es um fehlendes Fachwissen?

Published in: Social Media, Business, Technology
0 Comments
1 Like
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

No Downloads
Views
Total views
3,081
On SlideShare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
1,982
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
8
Comments
0
Likes
1
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

coUNDco & Lithium present: DACH-Studie "Social Business Solutions"

  1. 1. Kontakt: Florian Wieser, 
 Partner, Chef-Stratege coUNDco AG wieser@coUNDco.ch |@floto Foto:glückimwinkl/Quelle:PHOTOCASE Studie: Social Business Solutions
  2. 2. coUNDco - Digital First. 2 coUNDco hand book: Journeys More journeys you can find in our hand book. Download or order: www.coUNDco.ch/journeys • Proven Campaign Mechanisms • Conversion focused • Adaptable
  3. 3. Challenges and Opportunities of Social Media Prof. Dr. René Algesheimer University of Zurich April 3rd, 2014 URPP Social Networks
  4. 4. Welcome! 2
  5. 5. „In order to underpin its excellent position among the world’s leading research institutions, the University of Zurich has established its University Research Priority Programs (URPP). Rooted in the University’s official policy to strengthen scholarship, the URPP create and promote academic networks in selected areas of research. The interdisciplinary programs build on research expertise already present at the University and are instrumental in promoting the academic career of junior scholars. By establishing the URPP, the University of Zurich actively contributes to the advancement of knowledge in areas of research that benefit society.“ Source: h p://www.uzh.ch/research/priorityprograms/university_en.html 3
  6. 6. Network analysis Network growth Community detection Diffusion Social influence Influencers Seeding Fraud Grid computing Predictive social analytics Social CRM Customer lifetime values Churn, cross-churn Demand modeling Sentiment mining Mining of meaning Gamification Business experiments... 4
  7. 7. Prof. Dr. René Algesheimer Dipl.-Kffr. Margot Löwenberg Christian Busin José Parra Moyano Kristina Stöppelmann, MA 5
  8. 8. 6 @Ralgesheimer #UZH_SocialMedia !
  9. 9. AGENDA! INTRO! 01 02 03 04 Setup Study Results - The bright side Results - The dark side Opportunities Challenges •  Objectives •  Strategy •  Activities •  KPIs •  Wrap-up •  Objectives •  Strategy •  Activities •  KPIs •  Wrap-up •  Motivation •  Definition •  Questions •  Design •  Sample 7 •  Wrap-up •  Outlook
  10. 10. AGENDA! INTRO! 01 02 03 04 Setup Study Results - The bright side Results - The dark side Opportunities Challenges 8 •  Motivation •  Definition •  Questions •  Design •  Sample
  11. 11. Firm‘s view : not customer view
  12. 12. Depth : rather than width
  13. 13. Listening in : not validating
  14. 14. Social is quite old : hangout, recommend, shop
  15. 15. Different are the access, : hangout, recommend, shop
  16. 16. the process and the content : hangout, recommend, shop
  17. 17. Social is...
  18. 18. A group of internet-based apps : to create and exchange content
  19. 19. ? 1. What are the objectives firms follow with social media? 2. Do they have a social media strategy? Which? 3. How do they implement the strategy into activities? 4. How do they measure social media success? 17
  20. 20. ! 1. Literature review, expert interviews 2. Primary data collection, descriptive, internet-based 3. Expert interviews, pre-tests 4. Primary data collection, evaluative, survey-based February – April 2013! May – August 2013! July – September 2013! October 2013 – February 2014! 18
  21. 21. Dax30, SMI20, ATX20, TOP 30 German brands BrandFinance Branddirectory, TOP 50 Swiss brands Interbrand 2012, TOP 10 Austrian brands Eurobrand 2012. 19SAMPLE
  22. 22. B2C B2C & B2B B2B 20
  23. 23. DE CH AT 21
  24. 24. AGENDA! INTRO! 01 02 03 04 Setup Study Results - The bright side Results - The dark side Opportunities Challenges 22 •  Objectives •  Strategy •  Activities •  KPIs •  Wrap-up
  25. 25. WRAP-UP! Objec3ves! !  On average, social media is important for firms. !  It is more important for firms in B2C than in B2B. !  Customers are the most important social media target group. !  Firms are very heterogeneous when it comes to precise definition of social media objectives. !  The most important objectives across firms are: !  To increase brand awareness for the organization and for the brand(s) !  To inform customers about products and services !  To increase customer loyalty and retention. 23
  26. 26. OBJECTIVES! Importance! 4.09 4.86 4.46 4.00 1.00 2.00 3.00 4.00 5.00 6.00 manufacturing retail service others Importance of social media within industry categories !  On average, firms rate the importance of social media 4.3 on a six-point scale. !  Above average: Firms in !  fashion (6.0), !  consumer packaged goods (6.0), !  so ware (5.33), !  healthcare (5.0), and !  sport (5.0) !  Below average: Firms in !  real estate (2.0), !  electric appliances (3.0), !  energy and supply (3.0) and !  manufacturing industry (3.17) !  On average, B2C firms value social media slightly higher than B2B. 24
  27. 27. OBJECTIVES! Target! 1.93 2.22 3.29 3.59 3.66 4.12 4.14 4.86 5.01 1.00 2.00 3.00 4.00 5.00 6.00 Suppliers Investors Partners Traditional media (journalists) Employees New media (bloggers, podcasters) Potential employees Potential customers Customers Importance of social media for different target groups: average among respondents 25 unimportant important
  28. 28. OBJECTIVES! Defined! 0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30% 35% 1 2 3 4 5 6 26 Our organization has clearly defined social media objectives. ! disagree agree
  29. 29. OBJECTIVES! Open!ques3on! No objectives, just doing it because it's trendy Increase brand desirability Strengthen customer loyalty Inform customers about the latest products No objectives at the moment, but we’ll discuss Sales: lead generation HR finds a ractive candidates Customer experience and satisfaction Promote commercial activities Build customer relationships Create experiences Customer engagement Customer service & care Sales Communicate & engage Identify influencers Community building … News and information Awareness Maintain and increase brand value Dialogue between users and brand Generate customer insights Customer proximity Demand generation Employer branding Recruiting Further distribution channel Appropriate tools of collaboration NA Promote commercial activities Open dialogue Evolution towards enterprise 2.0 Empowering the brand Increase customer satisfaction … 27
  30. 30. OBJECTIVES! Closed!ques3on! 2.25 2.73 2.97 3.01 3.11 3.59 4.11 4.34 4.34 4.49 4.68 4.70 5.16 1.00 2.00 3.00 4.00 5.00 6.00 Cost savings (e.g. reduce call center costs) Deliver (price) promotions Communicate with the press/media Gather ideas from the customer (e.g. crowdsourcing through online communities) Conduct market research with customers Increase sales Improve customer service and support Increase traffic to the website Give customers an opportunity to deliver feedback Ability to monitor what is being said about our organization Increase loyalty and retention of our customers Inform customers about products or services Increase awareness of our organization and brand(s) Importance of different social media objectives: average among respondents 28 unimportant important
  31. 31. WRAP-UP! Strategies! !  The majority of firms state to have a clearly defined social media strategy. !  Strategies are predominantly formulated by the marketing or corporate communications department. Senior management is sometimes involved. !  The majority of firms who state that they have a clearly defined social media strategy perceive themselves as intensively active on social media channels. !  Those indicating to have a clearly defined strategy tend to be intensively focused on a few channels. 29
  32. 32. WRAP-UP! Strategies! !  Social media budgets are currently on average 0-5% of overall marketing budgets. !  Within five years: Social media budgets will increase towards 11-15% (average) of overall marketing budgets. !  Social media budgets tend to come from reduced spending on traditional marketing programs. !  Firms new to social media (starting point 2012 or later) assume to have the highest budgets. !  Firms who started their social media activities before 2010 also expect a social media budget above average. 30
  33. 33. STRATEGIES! Existence! 0%! 5%! 10%! 15%! 20%! 25%! 30%! 35%! 1! 2! 3! 4! 5! 6! 31 Our organization has a clearly defined social media strategy. ! disagree agree
  34. 34. STRATEGIES! Intensity!vs!breadth! !  Highly defined strategy (Not highly defined strategy) 73% ! 15% ! 10% ! 2% ! Intensity Breadth A few - Intensively Many - Intensively A few - Not intensively Many - Not intensively (31%) (13%) (43%) (13%) !  88% of the firms who state that they have a clearly defined social media strategy perceive themselves as intensively active on social media channels. !  Those indicating to have a clearly defined strategy tend to be intensively focused on a few channels (73%). !  Of the firms with no highly defined strategy, 44% consider themselves intensively involved in social media channels, whereof 13% state to be active on many channels. 32
  35. 35. STRATEGIES! Budget! 59% 16% 1% 3% 21% 12% 29% 10% 16% 8% 3% 1% 21% 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 0-5% 6-10% 11-15% 16-20% 21-25% 26-30% 31-35% I don't know. %offirms Social media budgets in % of overall marketing budgets Current and future social media budget as % of overall marketing budget Current budget Expected budget in 5 years !  Currently: social media budgets on average 0-5% of overall marketing budgets. !  Within five years: social media budgets 11-15% (average) respectively 6-10% (median) of overall marketing budgets. !  Current and future budgets positively related to importance of social media and year in which firm started to use social media. !  Social media budgets tend to come from reduced spending on traditional marketing programs. 33
  36. 36. WRAP-UP! Ac3vi3es! !  A significant portion of firms has started their social media activities in 2009/10. !  Firms are on average active on 6 social media channels. !  Firms tend to be most active on those platforms most users reach. Facebook is most important. !  LinkedIn and Xing are important for recruiting reasons. !  Channel breadth increases with firm size, consumer orientation and private ownership. !  The majority of firms claim that they are active on “one- or two way communication” pages. !  Social marketing and social support are perceived as most important activities. 34
  37. 37. Ac3vi3es! Timeline! 35 1%! 1%! 1%! 1%! 3%! 4%! 14%! 32%! 30%! 8%! 4%! 0%! 10%! 20%! 30%! 40%! 2000! 2001! 2002! 2003! 2004! 2005! 2006! 2007! 2008! 2009! 2010! 2011! 2012! 2013! Year in which organizations started to use social media !
  38. 38. Ac3vi3es! Channels! 36 184 175 170 170 165 112 76 70 50 34 92% 87% 85% 85% 82% 56% 38% 35% 25% 17% 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 Type of social media channels used by firms !
  39. 39. Ac3vi3es! Typology! 37 7%! 34%! 38%! 11%! 10%! 0%! 10%! 20%! 30%! 40%! We passively 'listen' to what our customers say We actively offer 'one-way communication' pages We actively offer 'two-way interaction' pages We actively offer 'two-way interaction' platforms Consumers can fully, socially engage themselves Statement that best describes firm’s social media activities
  40. 40. Ac3vi3es! Typology! 38 3.07 3.18 3.40 4.12 4.67 1.00 2.00 3.00 4.00 5.00 6.00 Social Commerce: to promote and inform the actual purchase process, particularly online. Social Innovation: to gain insights and ideas from customers that may lead to new or improved products / services. Social Recruiting: to provide information about career opportunities and to recruit new employees. Social Support: to enable customers to find answers and help online from peers or directly from the company. Social Marketing: to be er inform customers and prospects as they identify, consider, evaluate, and select products and services for purchase. Importance of different social media applications: average among respondents unimportant important
  41. 41. WRAP-UP! KPIs! !  Most firms measure and report their social media activities. !  Only a few firms use specific social media KPIs and embed them in overall company metrics. !  Reach, interaction, and traffic on homepage are perceived as most important KPIs to measure social media success. !  A tendency to move from mere reach metrics towards engagement and qualitative KPIs is perceived by firms. 39
  42. 42. KPIs! Open!ques3on! No specific Likes Usage statistics Impressions Fan growth Traffic Activity rate Tracked sales #answered customer questions # of shares Comments Sentiments Costs per lead Costs per sale Click through rates to links Re-tweets Traffic vs engagement Engagement rate … PTAT interaction in Facebook # friends # followers Activity rate Buzz Page visits Feedback Reach # leads Sales Not measuring Not implemented yet Online statistics Post/likes Resolution time (service) Share of voice Conversion Social media cockpit … 40
  43. 43. KPIs! Closed!ques3on! 41 2.25 2.63 2.81 3.18 3.77 3.82 4.00 4.71 4.73 4.81 1.00 2.00 3.00 4.00 5.00 6.00 Call deflection Net Promoter Score (NPS) Text analysis ratings (others than sentiment) Buzz indicators (web mentions) Conversion rates Sentiment (overall image on social media platforms) Search engine optimization (SEO) Traffic on own homepage (hits, visits, page views) Interaction (No. of comments / retweets /@replies) Reach (No. of fans / followers / subscribers / video or photo view) Importance of different social media metrics: average among respondents unimportant important
  44. 44. KPIs! Change! 42 8% 24% 27% 41% 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% Inclusion of financial metrics (costs, sales) No comparison possible since social media / KPIs only recently introduced More focus on engagement, qualitative aspects, targeted reach No change Change of social media KPIs in the last 5y
  45. 45. WRAP-UP! The!bright!side! !  Firms have finally recognized the importance of social media. !  Social media objectives are highly heterogeneous across firms. !  Mostly customers and potential future employees are the core target groups of their social media activities. !  Firms do not feel extensive external pressure to implement social media. !  Most firms have formulated a social media strategy. !  Social media KPIs are important metrics to measure social media success. Their usage is highly heterogeneous across firms. !  Budget mostly comes from traditional marketing programs. 43
  46. 46. AGENDA! INTRO! 01 02 03 04 Setup Study Results - The bright side Results - The dark side Opportunities Challenges 44 •  Objectives •  Strategy •  Activities •  KPIs •  Wrap-up
  47. 47. WRAP-UP! Objec3ves! !  Many firms state that they do not have clearly defined social media objectives. !  Firms who have clearly defined objectives either a) don’t measure them, b) don’t measure those who are important to them, c) or seem to measure them in a wrong way. !  Neither cost savings nor market research are considered to be important social media objectives. 45
  48. 48. OBJECTIVES! Defined! 0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30% 35% 1 2 3 4 5 6 46 disagree agree Our organization has clearly defined social media objectives. !
  49. 49. OBJECTIVES! Closed!ques3on! 2.25 2.73 2.97 3.01 3.11 3.59 4.11 4.34 4.34 4.49 4.68 4.70 5.16 1.00 2.00 3.00 4.00 5.00 6.00 Cost savings (e.g. reduce call center costs) Deliver (price) promotions Communicate with the press/media Gather ideas from the customer (e.g. crowdsourcing through online communities) Conduct market research with customers Increase sales Improve customer service and support Increase traffic to the website Give customers an opportunity to deliver feedback Ability to monitor what is being said about our organization Increase loyalty and retention of our customers Inform customers about products or services Increase awareness of our organization and brand(s) Importance of different social media objectives: average among respondents 47 unimportant important
  50. 50. WRAP-UP! Strategies! !  Strategy is not integrated deeply into core business processes in most organizations. !  Surprisingly, of the firms with no highly defined strategy, about half considers themselves intensively involved in social media channels. !  Firms a ributing the highest importance to social media predict lowest future social media budget. 48
  51. 51. STRATEGIES! Integra3on! 49 0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30% 35% 1 2 3 4 5 6 disagree agree Our social media strategy is deeply integrated into our core business processes. !
  52. 52. STRATEGIES! Intensity!vs!breadth! !  Survey (Internet study) !  79% of firms state that they use a few social media channels, whereas according to the Internet study only 46% of the firms actually use a few social media channels. !  70% of the firms state that they use social media channels intensively. However, according to the Internet study, only 48% of the firms are doing so. 50 56% ! 14% ! 23% ! 7% ! Intensity Breadth A few - Intensively Many - Intensively A few - Not intensively Many - Not intensively (14%) (34%) (32%) (20%)
  53. 53. WRAP-UP! Ac3vi3es! !  Across activities there seems to be almost no alignment. !  Activities seem to o en work as separated from each other, rather than connected and linked to an overall strategy. !  Forums and communities, which are – contrary to other social media channels highly customizable - are only provided by a few firms. !  A „social firm“ does not seem to exist, i.e., many parts of the value chain could be thought of to be more socialized and connected with stakeholders in order to reach firm‘s objectives. !  Missing opportunities for customers to participate in value generating activities like customer support or product development. 51
  54. 54. WRAP-UP! KPIs! !  Monetary benefits of social media activities only seen by 10% of respondents. !  Social media metrics almost not embedded in overall company metrics. !  Success of social media seems to be subjectively valued without ability to express benefits in financial terms. !  Many firms fail to measure metrics they consider important. !  Many firms lack systematic monitoring of social media applications they consider important. 52
  55. 55. KPIs! Integra3on! 53 5% 10% 21% 32% 33% 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% Social media metrics embedded in overall company metrics. We have specific social media KPIs and see monetary benefits of social media activities. We have metrics for specific social media activities and know key fans and influencers. We measure fans and/or followers a ributable to brand or products. We track company and press mentions, customer sentiment, share of voice. How sophisticated is the measurement of social media activities?
  56. 56. KPIs! Financial!metrics! 54 8% 24% 27% 41% 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% Inclusion of financial metrics (costs, sales) No comparison possible since social media / KPIs only recently introduced More focus on engagement, qualitative aspects, targeted reach No change Change of social media KPIs in the last 5y !
  57. 57. WRAP-UP! The!dark!side! !  Many firms state that they do not have clearly defined social media objectives. !  Firms o en engage in many different social media channels, without connecting all activities to their strategy and without specifying their contributions to reaching social media objectives. !  Social media is not deeply integrated into core business processes. !  Many firms fail to clearly formulate relevant KPIs linked to performance. !  Firms who have clearly defined objectives either a) don’t measure them, b) don’t measure those who are important to them, c) or measure them in a wrong way. !  Neither cost savings nor market research are considered to be important social media objectives. !  Many firms lack continuous and systematic monitoring of social media activities. 55
  58. 58. AGENDA! INTRO! 01 02 03 04 Setup Study Results - The bright side Results - The dark side Opportunities Challenges 56 •  Wrap-up •  Outlook
  59. 59. Product management : 1760-1830
  60. 60. Channel management : 1840-1870
  61. 61. Brand management : 1931-
  62. 62. TQM : 1951-
  63. 63. CRM : 1970-
  64. 64. Lean management : 1988-
  65. 65. Social management : 2003-
  66. 66. 65 What do all these developments have in common?
  67. 67. 66 To be successful, departments in a firm have to be incorporated. ALL
  68. 68. 67 What is the challenge?
  69. 69. 69 Time between developments shrink s
  70. 70. 70 What has been the consequence?
  71. 71. 71 In the racefor productivity, quality, customer orientation, speed...
  72. 72. 72 Management tools have replaced strategy
  73. 73. 73 “Positioning – once the heart of strategy – is rejected as too static for today‘s dynamic markets…” Michael Porter!
  74. 74. 74 What do firms do instead?
  75. 75. 75 Operational effectiveness-driven Activity-driven
  76. 76. 76 Why?
  77. 77. 77 Simple, concrete, actionable No need for difficult trade-offs No choice is preferred over risk-taking Pressures to grow lead to •  product line extensions •  new features •  imitation •  mergers & acquisitions!
  78. 78. Strategy : not operational effectiveness
  79. 79. 79 No onecan win this race
  80. 80. 80 Combining ALL activities Operational effectiveness: Excellence in certain activities Strategy:
  81. 81. 81 The liquid and linked firm Coca-Cola 2020 Strategic Initiative!
  82. 82. Summary
  83. 83. SUMMARY! INTRO! 01 02 03 04 Setup Study Results - The bright side Results - The dark side Opportunities Challenges 83 •  Objectives •  Strategy •  Activities •  KPIs •  Wrap-up •  Objectives •  Strategy •  Activities •  KPIs •  Wrap-up •  Motivation •  Definition •  Questions •  Design •  Sample •  Wrap-up •  Outlook
  84. 84. 84 „growthimperative is hazardous to strategy“ Michael Porter!
  85. 85. 86 Question for the panel: How to?
  86. 86. Andreas Nicklas (Lithium) Sandra Teuber (Lithium) Florian Wieser (coUNDco) Margot Löwenberg (UZH) Susanna Flühmann (UZH) Wolfgang Kotowski (UZH) 45SPECIAL!THANKS!TO!
  87. 87. 88AND! you!
  88. 88. René Algesheimer rene.algesheimer@business.uzh.ch socialnetworks.uzh.ch h ps://twi er.com/Ralgesheimer h p://ch.linkedin.com/pub/rené-algesheimer/ h p://www.xing.com/profile/Rene_Algesheimer h p://www.pinterest.com/renealgesheimer/ @ www!
  89. 89. 90References! 1. Porter, Michael (1996): What is Strategy?, Harvard Business Review, Nov.-Dec., Reprint: 96‘608. 2. Porter, Michael (2001): Strategy and the Internet, Harvard Business Review, Mar., 62-78. 3. Coca-Cola Content 2020 Initiative Strategy, h p://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G1P3r2EsAos, 28032014. 4. Kaplan. Andreas M., Haenlein, Michael (2010): Users of the World, Unite! The Challenges and Opportunities of Social Media, Business Horizons, 53, 59-68.
  90. 90. 1. Slide 9: Shu erstock.com, drive(#64023790).jpg. 2. Slide 10: Shu erstock.com, illusion(#7544227).jpg. 3. Slide 11: Shu erstock.com, iStock_000011973935Large.jpg. 4. Slide 12: h p://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Bahnhofstrasse_Zürich_1920.jpg, 24032014. 5. Slides 13/14: h p://www.bahnhofstrasse-zuerich.ch/medien/bilder/pic13_bahnhofstrasse_zuerich.jpg, 24032014. 6. Slides 15/16: h p://www.blog-spot.ch/wp-content/uploads/2014/03/social-media-prism.jpg, 24032014. 7. Slide 57: iStockphoto.com, iStock_000018951814XLarge.jpg. 8. Slide 58: Shu erstock.com, locomotive-60539. 9. Slide 59: iStockphoto.com, iStock_000023621531XLarge.jpg. 10 Slide 60: h p://www.innovationinpractice.com/Neil%20McElroy%20Memo%201931.pdf, collected by Drew Boyd. 11. Slide 61: iStockphoto.com, iStock_000006823591Large.jpg. 12. Slide 62: Shu erstock.com, shu erstock_66955933.jpg. 13. Slide 63: iStockphoto.com, iStock_000023418475Large.jpg. 14. Slide 64: Shu erstock.com, network_connections(#58591414).jpg. 15. Slide 68: Shu erstock.com, time_is_running(#64904317).jpg. 16. Slide 73: iStock_000016761568Large.jpg. 17. Slides 78/85: M.C. Escher, Ascending and Descending, 1960. 18. Slide 82: iStockphoto.com, iStock_000000718899Medium.jpg. 91Credits!

×