May 21st, 2008

Last week I had the privilege of joining a series of professionals at the Word of Mouth Marketing Association’s (WOMMA) education & insight conference, WOMM-U in Miami. It was a highly edifying experience in a variety of ways.

I was one of the few Brits there and before I went, I expected the US to be ahead of us in the word of marketing game, but once I got there I didn’t really find any gap to speak of. All the same issues we are working on are the same ones confronted by our colleagues across the Atlantic. It was also good seeing a variety of people, from Web 2.0 evangelists to traditional agencies to clients, all talking the same language and sharing a common understanding the landscape was changing.

The first major theme was moving digital and word-of-mouth from the margins into the middle. Jeffrey Graham of the New York Times couldn’t have been more explicit (or cheeky) with his lecture entitled “Word of Mouth - the butt-crack of marketing“. The metaphor refers to the tiny sliver the typical budget word of mouth will occupy in the much larger pie chart devoted to total marketing spend, despite it being the most effective form of message. Jeffrey went onto explain why many companies are unwilling to put more into word of mouth, mainly because of the following four “myths” that pervade marketing thinking:

  1. You can’t influence Word of Mouth
  2. You can’t buy it in scale
  3. You can’t integrate it
  4. You can’t measure it

From our own experience, all four of these myths are indeed false, although I wouldn’t use the word “buy” in relation to word of mouth - I prefer “earn” as a more accurate illustration as it is often an investment of time instead of mere cash (though of course, time is money…) to create and sustain relationships with consumers.

An example of bringing word of mouth into the lynchpin of your strategy was given by Carla Hendra, co-CEO of Ogilvy North America. A self-confessed member of old-school marketing, she talked about the incredibly successful Campaign for Real Beauty campaign Ogilvy have been operating for Dove. Setting up a community on the site, allowing women to blog and share content, and followed up by the hugely successful “Evolution” viral and the foundation of the Dove Self-Esteem Fund, the resulting total value is a phenomenal $1.2bn in brand value across all the associated campaigns during the past, making Dove third behind Google and YouTube in most transformed brands of 2007.

Carla emphasised honesty and clarity: consumers want facts and direct information without spin (and was one of many to mention the imminent change in UK advertising law); incidentally, her talk coincided with the allegation that Dove had retouched some of their photos for their campaigns, which she and the people from Unilever present were able to swiftly deny (you can see the official rebuttal here - a case in point of being directly and honestly engaging). Above all else, Carla emphasised that a brand must have a good storyline: “Storytelling is the heart of any successful WOM program, it should also be the heart of a brand. What’s the story of the brand? No amount of technology or production cost will save a lousy story, however good stories will always last.”

So far these may both sound a little wishy-washy, but both talks came from people working at the coalface of the business, and both know the reality that digital, while important, is not the be-all and end-all of word of mouth and that in reality people still receive messages offline as well as on; Jeffrey talked about the integration of word of mouth into media planning across all media, while Carla tacitly acknowledged the importance of involving other media - the Dove Evolution ad debuted during the US Superbowl and not online. Word of mouth is important, but an integrated approach is essential to make it a success.

Yet still it can be difficult to prove word of mouth’s effectiveness - something of increasing importance now we’re facing an economic downturn. Which is where the next theme of the conference - measurement - comes in. For effective planning and placement you need accurate metrics, but working in digital marketing & PR is both a blessing and a curse - you have access to far more detailed statistics and metrics for what you do than any of the traditional media ever could dream of accessing, far more cheaply, yet you end up with a spoil of riches that mean which metrics are actually reflecting your effectiveness are a mystery. What can be measured? How much value do you put on a conversation? Which metrics should we be using? Perhaps more controversially, should we be using metrics at all?

These are all good questions, and I’ll talk about these in my second WOMMU post tomorrow. In the meantime, you can catch some further insights into WOMMU over at the blogs of Virginia Miracle and Simon Heseltine, both of whom I met and enjoyed interesting conversations with.


posted by Chris at 09:19  

2 Responses to “Outside Line at WOMM-U”

May 21st, 2008

Chris,

Excellent post. It seems the key words to draw from your post in relation to WOM marketing are honesty, engagement and integration, all tied together with a strong storyline. I like the idea of earning word of mouth versus buying it, but I wonder if in reality there’s a little of both of these in any campaign..?

Look forward to the next instalment about measurement. This is clearly one of the biggest challenges facing all marketers / PROs and no doubt many would benefit from some ideas around measuring online WOM campaigns.

Cheers,
Andy



 
May 21st, 2008

I notice you don’t really give any examples of influencing word of mouth. Bit more clarity on ‘your’ experience would have been helpful.

In terms of earning word of mouth in any meaningful way I just don’t think it’s sustainable. The web is so disparate that you would need 10’s if not 100’s of people constantly monitoring communities to make even an indent into influencing people’s views on a large scale.

In my experience and I’ve seen this mentioned in forums around web it takes at least 1,000 posts in a particular forum to be perceived as trusted.

Who can justify the time and/or money to build up this level of trust in not just 1 but 10’s or 100’s of online communities?

Of course the change in the law makes a lot of this now impossible anyway and I bet there are community members around the globe now cheering at the reduction of blatant spam they all to often had to put up with.

Attempts to influence word of mouth will now have to be totally above board and almost always explicitly branded whether it be blogs or message boards or ‘thoughts’ or whatever other spin you want to put on it.

This surely misses the point? Word of Mouth was/is always about credibility. So whilst branded blogs or whatever might create some form of buzz or brand awareness it is hardly right to call it influencing word of mouth in the correct sense of the word. To me it seems marketers have just shifted the playing field because actually truly influencing word of mouth has proved to be very difficult if not impossible.

It appears to me anyway that producing strong creative output is still the best way of getting the job done.

I encourage all to read this - http://www.fastcompany.com/magazine/122/is-the-tipping-point-toast.html


By jack

Post a Comment