2. Our next 4 days
• Goal:
– Overview of the basics and latest new stuff
– Understand new & relevant consumer trends
– Integration of social media in marketing mix
3. Day 1: Setting the scene
• Conversation Management
– Trends in consumer behavior
– Conversation management philosophy
– Brand identification
– Activation
– Manage the Conversation
• Case introduction: Conv. Mgm. Plan for Vlerick
4. Day 2: Get the basics right
• Direct marketing
– Erik Van Vooren
• Stories from a successful start-up: the insiders
– Bjorn Cassiers
• The best website in the world
– Bart De Waele (@Netlash)
5. Day 3: Interactive brand activation
• Best online advertising in the world
– Erwin Jansen (@ErwinJansen)
• Stories from the first Conv Mgr in Belgium
– Dirk De Wulf, Rabobank (@__XIII__)
• From conversation to conversion
– Clo Willaerts (@bnox)
6. Day 4: the future
• What’s the story about mobile?
– Dado Van Peteghem (@Dadovanpeteghem)
• Superstar companies
– Steven (@Steven_InSites)
• Showtime
– Starring? You!
7. The Conversation Manager
by Steven Van Belleghem
#CM48
@Steven_InSites
“This is the new conventional
wisdom. Use it or lose!”
Seth Godin
author Purple cow
27. We believe today’s consumers ...
are post-modern nomads
Consumers switch between online and offline,
blend work and private life,
and are part of a global social web.
That’s why they are more difficult to grasp.
33. We believe today’s consumers ...
are revealing more emotions
Decisions have always been
strongly guided by emotions,
now tapping into them has
become easier.
123. N = 1.503
Filter: none
64%
24%
12%
74%
23%
2%
No exposure
Direct exposure
Only indirect exposure
124. Buzz activation can reach different levels of engagement with often unexpected outcomes
35%
81%
37%
81%
0% 0%
125. Originality of the spot
Spot was beautiful made
Message of the film
Brand
126. 9 on 10 conversations
were about the
campaign message
127. In a regular post test, we would have missed their opinion.
Just because they are no part of our target group.
Fathers & people with
no daughters
128. Although, in WOM cases. They
often function as connectors
What else did we miss?
129. Direct
exposure 23%
Indirect
exposure 3%
Spread the
word 29%
Originality of the spot
Spot was beautiful made
Message of the film
Brand
The message was the key driver for
connectors to spread the word.
What else did we miss?
166. 18/03/2022 166
“Ik heb het even nagekeken en ook bij mij is dit het geval.
Ik veronderstel dat er dus door een fout in de afrekening geen rekening werd gehouden met
de vrijstellingsdrempel.
Wij onderzoeken het en zetten het probleem zo snel mogelijk recht.”
171. The critical incident
Observe: What was the impact?
Facilitate/Join: What did Danone do?
Facilitate/Join: What did we learn?
172. On May 22nd 2010, Foodwatch and Kassa
awarded Actimel het Gouden Windei, for
misleading Dutch consumers.
173. @Steven_InSites #cm48
On May 22nd 2010, Actimel got
awarded het Gouden Windei, for
misleading Dutch consumers.
The largest news website in The
Netherlands, nu.nl and a plethora of
blogs and tweets mentioned this.
179. We used InSites´ Conversation Mapping
Research tool to map, filter and analyse
the conversation on het Gouden Windei,
Actimel and Danone.
This is what we found.
*Conversation Mapping Research is survey based
181. @Steven_InSites #cm48
H W
84%
8%
6% 1%
Face-to-face conversation
Telephone conversation
E-mail
Posts on a blog, social network or other website
Chat or instant messaging
Online? Yes. But most of the conversation
takes place offline.
182. @Steven_InSites #cm48
WH
No surprise: Most conversations are with
strong ties.
Friends
&Family
Me
Me
Well known
Stranger
Don’t really know
70%
21%
Friends & Family
5%
4%
183. Credibility of the claim
is the top conversation topic (>75% of conversations)
184. @Steven_InSites #cm48
of the people mention that
conversations are a reason to
stop drinking or eating
functional dairy products.
20%
185. Back to the most important question:
What was the
impact?
186. Heavy Actimel users have a more negative
perception of Actimel
They account for 80% of all Actimel sales
188. @Steven_InSites #cm48
Was influenced by viral spreading.
8%
Was influenced via newspaper.
21%
Was influenced via KASSA.
61%
Did active information retrieval via Foodwatch.
5%
200. The critical incident
Observe: What was the impact?
Facilitate/Join: What did Danone do?
Facilitate/Join: What did we learn?
201. @Steven_InSites #cm48
We did a mainstream press release
We made an appearance at the KASSA
television show
We contacted “Family Danone”, our
own core consumer group
We created a standard reply to
consumer reactions
Classical response
202. @Steven_InSites #cm48
This case made us realize our
relationship with consumers is really
really important to us. It accelerated
our efforts to open up to consumers
and start a dialogue. For us, it
translated into two main learnings
(and related actions):
But we did more
204. Learning 1)
We were in broadcasting mode, not in
dialogue mode. Broadcasting makes brands
vulnerable.
Action:
• We invited Foodwatch to visit us in Paris (more journalists and
consumers are planned)
• Although we’re still learning, we’re more and more joining the
conversation online
205. Learning 2)
We were focussing too much on functional
benefits. And almost forgot how important
a relationship with our customers is.
Action:
• We embrace the fact that the functional benefits are always
part of the conversation
• We appointed a new director Health affairs and public affairs
to totally commit to health and public affairs concerns
• We started a rebranding campaign to add emotional benefits
and to tell our real brand story
209. Online CM
We are
right
Hybrid
What Danone should have done
Don’t deny the discussion: facilitate the
discussion on functional benefits online
(credibility is the top conversation
topic).
Facilitate the believers (still 40%).
Use mainstream media as a spotlight
on the conversation on functional
benefits (remember KASSA vs viral).
223. “People are very open for new things,
as long as they are exactly like the old ones”
Charles Kettering
224. “Everyone thinks about changing the world,
but no one thinks of changing himself”
Leo Tolstoy
225.
226.
227. Thank you!
Available as interactive App for iPad, the first in the world
Download it from the App STore
Good luck!
Questions, feedback, remarks:
Steven@InSites.eu
Follow me: @Steven_InSites
Join me on LinkedIn
www.theconversationmanager.com
#CM48
@Steven_InSites
228. Project: Conv mgm Vlerick Masters
• Introduction by Ilse
• Goal:
– Create an impactful strategy & implementation
plan for the Vlerick Masters using the philosophy
of today
– Make sure this plan can be used
229. Deliverable
• Presentation of 15 minutes
• Conversation Management plan:
– PPT format
– More background than presentation (you can use
notes if you want)
Editor's Notes
“A lot of times, people don’t know what they want until you show it to them…” (Steve Jobs)
Recent literature on WOM has largely emphasized these so called influencers. However, others have challenged this idea poning that “word-of-mouth from celebrities, mavens, connectors, alphas, hubs, transmitters, trendsetters, [...] is always good. But it’s no more powerful or influential than word-of-mouth from that guy [...] sitting next to you on the train” (Balter & Butman, 2005). It is therefore our belief that the first step towards a better measurement of WOMO is not looking at “who is doing something”, but at “what everybody is doing.” Therefore, action rather than persons and their characteristics are situated at the heart of our model.When evaluating a viral campaign it is important to map all different communication that consumers have started. The model distinguishes different levels of online actions in relation to the level of engagement they imply (see figure 1) (Womma, 2005).A first type of actions are receiver actions. These happen whenever people receive and absorb the content of a message about brands, products and services. Online surfers can come in contact with information about brands via two types of channels. They can use selective channels like e-mail where they receive information that is personally addressed. However, they can also find information on public sharing platforms like YouTube, online forums,... A second type of actions are sender actions. This encompasses all actions where people share the information about brands with other people. While forwarding as such is indicative for extended reach of an ad (by definition a key performance indicator) it can crystallize in different actions. “Selective forward” actions happen whenever consumers forward the communication to a focussed and/or limited set of people. In turn there are three formats of this kind of forwarding. In “plain forwarding” no comments or much thinking or acting is added from the part of the sender. “Commented forwarding ” means that the forwarder adds negative, positive, reinforcing or other comments. Finally, forwarders can specifically “target” certain people in their peer group (e.g. only send it to brand lovers or acquaintances they know are in a buying process). A second type of sender action are “sharing forward” actions. These consumers like or dislike the ad so much they post it on a open sharing platform such that anyone else interested can be exposed to the ad. The sender is not interested in reaching close acquaintances but reach as many people as possibleA final type of actions are creator actions. These actions basically imply people contributing content to the add (e.g. filling out there or others’ details to personalize the ad), participate in a contest or play an interactive game or even create a new add.In this research, we want to measure to what extent consumers undertake the different types and subtypes of actions: We believe that some WoMo actions will occur more frequently than others. Because receiver actions are passive actions that do not ask a lot of effort from the consumer, we expect this type of action will be the biggest group. Similarly we hypothesize that although sender actions demand more consumer involvement than receiver actions, they will still occur more frequently than creator actions that require a truly active and passionate consumer. Next, we expect that there will be a difference between selective (e-mail) and sharing online communication channels (online forums, blogs, websites specialized in online movies). We hypothesize that consumers will still have a preference for e-mail communication above other types of communication because they are more familiar with the channel (www.E-scape-reports.com)
Recent literature on WOM has largely emphasized these so called influencers. However, others have challenged this idea poning that “word-of-mouth from celebrities, mavens, connectors, alphas, hubs, transmitters, trendsetters, [...] is always good. But it’s no more powerful or influential than word-of-mouth from that guy [...] sitting next to you on the train” (Balter & Butman, 2005). It is therefore our belief that the first step towards a better measurement of WOMO is not looking at “who is doing something”, but at “what everybody is doing.” Therefore, action rather than persons and their characteristics are situated at the heart of our model.When evaluating a viral campaign it is important to map all different communication that consumers have started. The model distinguishes different levels of online actions in relation to the level of engagement they imply (see figure 1) (Womma, 2005).A first type of actions are receiver actions. These happen whenever people receive and absorb the content of a message about brands, products and services. Online surfers can come in contact with information about brands via two types of channels. They can use selective channels like e-mail where they receive information that is personally addressed. However, they can also find information on public sharing platforms like YouTube, online forums,... A second type of actions are sender actions. This encompasses all actions where people share the information about brands with other people. While forwarding as such is indicative for extended reach of an ad (by definition a key performance indicator) it can crystallize in different actions. “Selective forward” actions happen whenever consumers forward the communication to a focussed and/or limited set of people. In turn there are three formats of this kind of forwarding. In “plain forwarding” no comments or much thinking or acting is added from the part of the sender. “Commented forwarding ” means that the forwarder adds negative, positive, reinforcing or other comments. Finally, forwarders can specifically “target” certain people in their peer group (e.g. only send it to brand lovers or acquaintances they know are in a buying process). A second type of sender action are “sharing forward” actions. These consumers like or dislike the ad so much they post it on a open sharing platform such that anyone else interested can be exposed to the ad. The sender is not interested in reaching close acquaintances but reach as many people as possibleA final type of actions are creator actions. These actions basically imply people contributing content to the add (e.g. filling out there or others’ details to personalize the ad), participate in a contest or play an interactive game or even create a new add.In this research, we want to measure to what extent consumers undertake the different types and subtypes of actions: We believe that some WoMo actions will occur more frequently than others. Because receiver actions are passive actions that do not ask a lot of effort from the consumer, we expect this type of action will be the biggest group. Similarly we hypothesize that although sender actions demand more consumer involvement than receiver actions, they will still occur more frequently than creator actions that require a truly active and passionate consumer. Next, we expect that there will be a difference between selective (e-mail) and sharing online communication channels (online forums, blogs, websites specialized in online movies). We hypothesize that consumers will still have a preference for e-mail communication above other types of communication because they are more familiar with the channel (www.E-scape-reports.com)
Recent literature on WOM has largely emphasized these so called influencers. However, others have challenged this idea poning that “word-of-mouth from celebrities, mavens, connectors, alphas, hubs, transmitters, trendsetters, [...] is always good. But it’s no more powerful or influential than word-of-mouth from that guy [...] sitting next to you on the train” (Balter & Butman, 2005). It is therefore our belief that the first step towards a better measurement of WOMO is not looking at “who is doing something”, but at “what everybody is doing.” Therefore, action rather than persons and their characteristics are situated at the heart of our model.When evaluating a viral campaign it is important to map all different communication that consumers have started. The model distinguishes different levels of online actions in relation to the level of engagement they imply (see figure 1) (Womma, 2005).A first type of actions are receiver actions. These happen whenever people receive and absorb the content of a message about brands, products and services. Online surfers can come in contact with information about brands via two types of channels. They can use selective channels like e-mail where they receive information that is personally addressed. However, they can also find information on public sharing platforms like YouTube, online forums,... A second type of actions are sender actions. This encompasses all actions where people share the information about brands with other people. While forwarding as such is indicative for extended reach of an ad (by definition a key performance indicator) it can crystallize in different actions. “Selective forward” actions happen whenever consumers forward the communication to a focussed and/or limited set of people. In turn there are three formats of this kind of forwarding. In “plain forwarding” no comments or much thinking or acting is added from the part of the sender. “Commented forwarding ” means that the forwarder adds negative, positive, reinforcing or other comments. Finally, forwarders can specifically “target” certain people in their peer group (e.g. only send it to brand lovers or acquaintances they know are in a buying process). A second type of sender action are “sharing forward” actions. These consumers like or dislike the ad so much they post it on a open sharing platform such that anyone else interested can be exposed to the ad. The sender is not interested in reaching close acquaintances but reach as many people as possibleA final type of actions are creator actions. These actions basically imply people contributing content to the add (e.g. filling out there or others’ details to personalize the ad), participate in a contest or play an interactive game or even create a new add.In this research, we want to measure to what extent consumers undertake the different types and subtypes of actions: We believe that some WoMo actions will occur more frequently than others. Because receiver actions are passive actions that do not ask a lot of effort from the consumer, we expect this type of action will be the biggest group. Similarly we hypothesize that although sender actions demand more consumer involvement than receiver actions, they will still occur more frequently than creator actions that require a truly active and passionate consumer. Next, we expect that there will be a difference between selective (e-mail) and sharing online communication channels (online forums, blogs, websites specialized in online movies). We hypothesize that consumers will still have a preference for e-mail communication above other types of communication because they are more familiar with the channel (www.E-scape-reports.com)
Recent literature on WOM has largely emphasized these so called influencers. However, others have challenged this idea poning that “word-of-mouth from celebrities, mavens, connectors, alphas, hubs, transmitters, trendsetters, [...] is always good. But it’s no more powerful or influential than word-of-mouth from that guy [...] sitting next to you on the train” (Balter & Butman, 2005). It is therefore our belief that the first step towards a better measurement of WOMO is not looking at “who is doing something”, but at “what everybody is doing.” Therefore, action rather than persons and their characteristics are situated at the heart of our model.When evaluating a viral campaign it is important to map all different communication that consumers have started. The model distinguishes different levels of online actions in relation to the level of engagement they imply (see figure 1) (Womma, 2005).A first type of actions are receiver actions. These happen whenever people receive and absorb the content of a message about brands, products and services. Online surfers can come in contact with information about brands via two types of channels. They can use selective channels like e-mail where they receive information that is personally addressed. However, they can also find information on public sharing platforms like YouTube, online forums,... A second type of actions are sender actions. This encompasses all actions where people share the information about brands with other people. While forwarding as such is indicative for extended reach of an ad (by definition a key performance indicator) it can crystallize in different actions. “Selective forward” actions happen whenever consumers forward the communication to a focussed and/or limited set of people. In turn there are three formats of this kind of forwarding. In “plain forwarding” no comments or much thinking or acting is added from the part of the sender. “Commented forwarding ” means that the forwarder adds negative, positive, reinforcing or other comments. Finally, forwarders can specifically “target” certain people in their peer group (e.g. only send it to brand lovers or acquaintances they know are in a buying process). A second type of sender action are “sharing forward” actions. These consumers like or dislike the ad so much they post it on a open sharing platform such that anyone else interested can be exposed to the ad. The sender is not interested in reaching close acquaintances but reach as many people as possibleA final type of actions are creator actions. These actions basically imply people contributing content to the add (e.g. filling out there or others’ details to personalize the ad), participate in a contest or play an interactive game or even create a new add.In this research, we want to measure to what extent consumers undertake the different types and subtypes of actions: We believe that some WoMo actions will occur more frequently than others. Because receiver actions are passive actions that do not ask a lot of effort from the consumer, we expect this type of action will be the biggest group. Similarly we hypothesize that although sender actions demand more consumer involvement than receiver actions, they will still occur more frequently than creator actions that require a truly active and passionate consumer. Next, we expect that there will be a difference between selective (e-mail) and sharing online communication channels (online forums, blogs, websites specialized in online movies). We hypothesize that consumers will still have a preference for e-mail communication above other types of communication because they are more familiar with the channel (www.E-scape-reports.com)
Leading Chinese e-tailerDangDang.com gives back toits customers—and encourages their vigilant attention tothe site—by randomly assigning one hour a day as“Lucky Time” in which all purchases made within thathour are free of charge. (Tip of the hat to PSFK.com.)