Here’s a question many social media and online CRM advocates hope never gets asked: what do customers actually want to get out of their social engagements?
[eventPDF]
Interacting with customers in a live, public, convenient forum seems so obviously beneficial that attention is not paid to the fact that customers may not see social media as a preferred pathway for two-way brand communication, let alone customer service. To social advocates, the bottleneck is always the corporation—weak investment, weak resources, weak commitment to the medium and weak organizational connectivity.
New findings, however, suggest the one thing skeptics have long contended and the one thing advocates do not want to hear—customers are not necessarily clamoring for intense social CRM, and they do not necessarily equate a "like" with a demand for the "engagement" we tell our customer service and marketing teams we need to offer. Doubt, in fact, exists as to whether customers even truly, passionately care about the brands with which they connect on Facebook and Twitter.
Remember in high school when the kid whose parents let him throw parties, whose parents let him use their yacht and whose parents paid for an expensive, big screen TV was "popular?" Sure, that person had plenty of friends in philosophy—he could always cull together a group for a social gathering. But were those people actually his friends—would they be there in times of sickness? Would they take a bullet for him?
Probably not.
If the new Nielsen study is to be believed, many brands greatly resemble that kid. Like a high schooler who uses wealth to establish superficial friendships, these brands are using superficialities to blur the lines between honest and incentive-based fandom, and they consequently mistake social media support as indicative of a true interest in "engagement."
According to Nielsen, 45% of those North Americans who "like" brands do so primarily to receive discounts and special offers. This figure trumps all other motivations, including "I just want to support the brand" (33%), "to be among the first to get news" on the brand (9%), "I saw an advertisement and was curious" (5%), recommendation/signal from a friend who likes the brand (4%) and "other" (3%).
And the actual percentage of customers who visit social media websites to receive coupons and discounts is even higher—60% do so, and 23% do so weekly. From all indications, the key to engaging customers with social media is not heavily predicated on customer service and other forms of two-way communication. Instead, it is simply to make their "like" materially-worthwhile.
During case study presentations on social media, it is not uncommon for speakers to share some positive examples of "social CRM" interactions on Facebook and Twitter. Often, however, the ones that are portrayed as most successful involve some sort of coupon, incentive or make-good. Somehow, the customer service and marketing managers convince themselves that it was the interaction medium—not the offer—that generated the positive response and subsequent customer "loyalty." They try to believe responses on Twitter are so powerful that even if they said, "Sorry, you will absolutely not get a refund on that product and we will never give you a discount just for following us," customers would still react favorably.
According to the Nielsen data, that is largely untrue. Customers adopt a "what’s in it for me" mindset when truly engaging with brands; or, perhaps worse, they primarily seem interested in only passive forms of brand allegiance. In 33% of cases, it seems customers are giving "likes" simply because they, frankly, LIKE the brand and want their friends to know it. Cool? Yes. An unprecedented step in customer advocacy? Sure. But a sign that they want to develop an intensely-engaging relationship with the brand that includes ongoing purchasing, feedback and requests for customer service? Hardly.
Customers use their social media profiles as a source of identity--as a window into their likes, dislikes and habits. That naturally means they will want to "like" brands, but far too often, the desire to connect on social media goes no further--letting people know what shoes they where or what TV shows they watch is not the same as wanting to forge undying, heavily-communicative relationships with the brands.
The Nielsen revelations are not necessarily a bad thing—there is nothing astounding or troubling about the fact that customer engagement on social media is motivated by the ability to acquire discounts. This is marketing and human nature 101, and something that was every bit a reality in the world of "traditional" media marketing. Weekly circulars, clearance racks and coupons exist to create the same type of engagement—use promotional rates to forge relationships with customers.
But they do question whether customer demand for social engagement matches the hype provided by marketing minds. As multi-channel communication becomes increasingly-accepted by customers, of course brands should initiate strategies for fielding inquiries on social media (and many brands, in fact, are hurting their images by not sufficiently responding to customer concerns) but in the short term, it appears brands are best served by understanding the superficial nature of social fandom.
Actual success seems most directly tied to giving customers a compelling reason for issuing a like. For now, that is about offering monetary incentives or, simply, representing a "cool" brand. If there is indeed value in a "like," it will be these strategies—not high-level, frequent "engagement"—that drives such value.