How Smart Brands Aren't Measuring Social Media Against Unreasonable Metrics
This excellent post on real-time content marketing by +Mark Traphagen
for +Marketing Land
highlights a very interesting point: Many of the most successful brands aren't using social media with the expectation that it drive sales. They are using it, wisely, as a means of establishing/further establishing brand dominance and/or brand relevance.
The post looks at how the Coca-Cola and Denny's brands, respectively, are using social media successfully.
This quote from Denny's director of advertising and merchandising caught my eye:
"To be successful in social media, it is critical to convince upper management that direct ROI doesn’t matter for social. You have to get the execs to focus on the value of engagement figures, and to understand that social is a brand-building campaign."
At most companies, regardless of size, that's a tough sell, which helps explain why so many brands struggle to make the commitment to social media. Too often, the C-Suite wants a hard-and-fast number associated with the spend. And they expect the numerator to be as large as possible.
What amazes me about this line of thinking is how these same suits do not apply the same logic to advertising spends.
Big brands don't spend billions each year so that they can sell more cars or sodas or watches. They spend billions each year to (a) retain top-of-mind relevance and (b) prevent a loss of ground to the competition.
Proctor & Gamble, which spends north of $3B each year in advertising, doesn't sell an additional $3B a year in toothpaste or cleaning supplies for the effort. No, that spend helps ensure shoppers think about Tide, Bounty, Pampers and the like when they enter the store.
It's all about brand relevance and brand dominance.
Why can't those same execs see social in a similar light? #brandingstrategy #socialmediastrategy