Social Organization Weekly Digest Vol.20 (2012) Содержание Gamification: The Crowd Sourcing Innovation to Engage Customers .......................................................... 1 Does Social Media Marketing Really Work? [INFOGRAPHIC] ....................................................................... 1 Crowdsourcing vs. collaboration: Which yields superior results? ................................................................ 3 Is Social Media Destroying Real-World Relationships? [INFOGRAPHIC] ....................................................... 4 Crowdsourcing and Crowdfunding Explained ............................................................................................... 5
Social Organization Gamification: The Crowd Sourcing Innovation to Engage Customers АВТОР: Jodie Sangster ДАТА ПУБЛИКАЦИИ: 21.10.2011 ИСТОЧНИК: http://www.powermarketer.net/digital-mobile/gamification-the-crowd-sourcinginnovation-to-engage-customers/ АННОТАЦИЯ: в статье автором анализируется возрастающая роль геймификации в маркетинге крупных компаний, описывается пример компании Nike и приложения Foursquare. Gamification is the newest type of loyalty marketing. It combines elements of gaming with mundane tasks and in turn creates an engaging consumer experience! We hear a lot these days about the new buzz term “gamification” but do we really know what it means and is anyone really doing it anyway? Well the answer seems to be ‘yes’ and if analysts at Gartner are to be believed it’s time for us to sit up and take notice. According to Gartner, by 2015 a gamified service for consumer goods marketing and customer retention will become as important to companies’ marketing departments as Facebook and Twitter. Gartner further predicts that in less than three years more than 70 percent of Global 2000 organizations will have at least one gamified application. The term “gamification” was coined by Tim Chang, principal at social game backer Norwest Venture Partners. It describes the broad trend of employing game mechanics to non-game environments. The idea is to add gaming elements in to tasks and processes that are ordinarily tedious, boring or uninspiring and thereby make them fun, compelling and engaging. By using gaming techniques you encourage a consumer to come back again and again. In many respects it can be seen as another form of loyalty marketing – the goals of gamification being to engage with consumers, stimulate interaction and change behaviours. With a traditional loyalty program participants are rewarded value-based benefits’ – points, discounts and special offers. In gamification reward is often not a monetary reward but based on gaining status, access and power within the game or interaction. The most well known examples of gamification can be seen in Foursquare and Nike+ although the application has now extended way beyond the big brands and is being adopted in a variety of forms. Foursquare took the US by storm using a location-based social network, through a free mobile app, to encourage people to report in wherever they are – shops, cafes and entertainment venues. People are incentivized to do so by being rewarded ‘virtual badges’ and the person that checks into a location the most becomes that spot’s “Mayor.” To encourage traffic to their venue businesses now award those who check in with discounts and promotions. For example: the Gap retail chain held a one-day “BlackMagic Event” which gave Foursquare users a 25% discount off all clothes. Nike + “gamified” exercise by selling a pedometer that can be placed in a pair of training shoes that monitors distance, pace and calories burned and then transmitting that information to the user’s iPod. The iPod software then “rewards” users if they reach a milestone using congratulatory messages from sporting icons such as Lance Armstrong, to date over 1.4 million individuals have purchased the Nike + unit. The opportunities for businesses are great – from having more engaged customers to crowd sourcing innovation. It’s certainly an area that we as marketers cannot afford to ignore.
Does Social Media Marketing Really Work? [INFOGRAPHIC] АВТОР: Sam Laird ДАТА ПУБЛИКАЦИИ: May 23, 2012 ИСТОЧНИК: http://mashable.com/2012/05/23/social-marketing-infographic/ АННОТАЦИЯ: интересная инфографика, наглядно показывающая отношение крупных компаний к социальным сетям и роль социальных медиа в продвижении продукции.
Social Organization
From Twitter to Facebook, to Google+, to YouTube, to Foursquare and more, social media use is the hottest thing in marketing. But does it really work? Brands and businesses are certainly making a stronger push than ever on social media, which makes sense — that’s where the people are. Figuring out just how much social media marketing returns on investments of time and money, however, is harder to do.
Social Organization Facebook marketing company Pagemodo recently pulled research from sources around the web to produce the infographic below, looking at just how much faith marketers have in social media. The aggregated data shows a sense of conservative optimism. Sixty-four percent of business owners say social media marketing is a promising tactic and they believe it provides returns — but they aren’t willing to go all in with it just yet and favor a more cautious approach. Another 20% are more bullish on its potential, according to the same study, while just 6% are hardcore skeptics. How do marketers and entrepreneurs measure whether social media marketing pays off? Most do so by measuring the accumulation of friends, likes, followers and other online connections. Thirty-nine percent look at shares of brand content, while 35% measure actual leads from social media. Just 18% measure success by overall brand awareness and favorability as gauged by consumer surveys. Check out the infographic below for more on how much faith businesses put in social media as a marketing tool, and for tips on additional ways to maximize results and measure influence. Then let us know in the comments — do you think social media marketing provides real results?
Crowdsourcing vs. collaboration: Which yields superior results?
АВТОР: Rebecca Fernandez ДАТА ПУБЛИКАЦИИ: 17 Jun 2010 ИСТОЧНИК: http://opensource.com/business/10/6/crowdsourcing-vs-collaboration-which-yieldssuperior-results АННОТАЦИЯ: автором статьи рассматриваются преимущества методов «краудсорсинга» и «коллаборации» и основные различия в их использовании. Lately I feel like I'm trapped in an endless loop of a certain Steve Ballmer moment, except the refrain is “crowdsourcing, crowdsourcing” on one hand, and “collaboration, collaboration” on the other. It seems everyone has jumped aboard either the crowdsourcing or the collaboration train. Call me a fence-rider, but I'm staying firmly on the platform. Sure, I believe there is wisdom in crowds. But there is also power in collaboration. Why crowdsourcing works... but not that well Statistician and wearer-of-many-hats Sir Frances Galton made a fascinating discovery at a livestock fair in 1906 (so the story goes). When he saw a weight-guessing contest open to the general public, he requested permission analyze the 787 guesses. Galton found that the mean of the guesses was off by merely a pound—in other words, the “average” of all guesses was remarkably close to the actual weight. Like most popular tales, there's a bit of embellishment here. Galton actually published information about the median, not the mean, because he felt the median was a better indicator. It was nine pounds heavier, but still within 1% of the actual weight and thus highly accurate. But let's not bother ourselves too much with the details. There's wisdom in crowdsourcing, and Galton proved it. Or did he? Perhaps there is something fundamentally different about “sourcing” ideas and innovation from a crowd... and averaging their numerical guesses for a specific mathematical problem. It seems to me that most crowdsourcing more commonly asks a large number of people to be “lone innovators,” and expects that from that group a few excellent ideas will rise (amidst lots of static). Still, having a number of bright individuals submitting ideas must be better than the common practice of relying on just one or two internal people to do the heavy-lifting. Despite his invaluable contributions to science (like standard deviation and “nature vs. nurture”), Galton serves as a reminder of the limitations of the lone innovator. The publication of his Hereditary Genius sparked the modern eugenics movement, leading to forced sterilization programs and various and sundry horrors. So crowdsourcing has some obvious benefits: It's often accurate at predicting mathematical solutions. It brings more innovators into an organization to present solutions to complex problems.
Social Organization But crowdsourcing nearly always excludes one powerful force: collaboration. Why collaboration isn't much better There's a difference between effective collaboration and ordinary brainstorming. Ideas produced entirely by a team tend to be worse—both on average and when comparing the best ones—than those produced when team members go off on their own and return to share. In a 57-page paper titled “Idea Generation and the Quality of the Best Idea" (PDF), researchers Girotra, Terwiesch, and Ulrich cite some big problems with a purely team-based approach: “In a comprehensive series of studies, [researchers have] identified that team brainstorming leads to production blocking (the inability to articulate ideas when others in the team are speaking), evaluation apprehension leading to censoring of potentially good ideas, and free riding (i.e., collective performance measures impeding individual incentives to perform). Previous research has shown that team members affect one another’s perceptions, judgments and opinions. [Detailed observation] has found that often “high-status” members dominate the discussion.” Consider your own experiences in team brainstorming sessions. I have certainly seen groups latch onto an inferior idea, then quickly dismiss better ones. And who hasn't had doubts about an idea with which their manager is enchanted, yet kept quiet for political reasons? Not to mention the problem of groupthink. So what's the solution? If crowdsourcing lacks the power of collaboration, and collaboration's weakness is that it limits the quality of ideas, where can a leader find the most innovative ideas? The Wharton authors' research suggests a hybrid approach that looks something like this: Convene to discuss the problem and objectives. Give everyone a clear assignment: return with a specific number of ideas, by a set deadline. Work individually on the problem. Regroup to present the ideas and formulate a plan of action. The study does not make many recommendations for this final step. I suspect that one en-vogue practice (writing all ideas on a whiteboard and giving each team member an equal number of sticky notes to mark their favorite ideas) likely produces better outcomes than choosing as a team, given the drawbacks of group dynamics mentioned earlier. Yet I wonder if an independent and knowledgeable panel, removed from the idea creation process, wouldn't make better selections.
Is Social Media Destroying Real-World Relationships? [INFOGRAPHIC] АВТОР: Danny ДАТА ПУБЛИКАЦИИ: 15.06.2012 ИСТОЧНИК: http://mashable.com/2012/06/14/social-media-real-world-infographic/ АННОТАЦИЯ: наглядная инфографика, показывающая как социальные медиа влияют на жизнь общества. There’s no doubt social media enables us to organize our real-world relationships, and even meet new people outside the digital realm — both of which can be great, life-enhancing things. But could social networking have an adverse effect on our quality of life? Consider this: 24% of respondents to one survey said they’ve missed out on enjoying special moments in person because — ironically enough — they were too busy trying to document their experiences for online sharing. Many of us have had to remind ourselves to “live in the now” — instead of worry about composing the perfect tweet or angling for just the right Instagram shot. Worldwide, Facebook users spend 10.5 billion minutes each day surfing the site — and that doesn’t even include mobile use, according to the company’s IPO filing. Collectively, that’s nearly 20 years per day that people spend living online instead of offline.
Social Organization Facebook users in India, the United States, France, the United Kingdom, Australia, New Zealand and Singapore all spend an average of more than 20 minutes on-site every day. In Singapore, the figure is a whopping 38 minutes.
Полностью инфографику можно посмотреть тут.
Crowdsourcing and Crowdfunding Explained
АВТОР: CrowdsourcingOrg ИСТОЧНИК: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-38uPkyH9vI АННОТАЦИЯ: посмотрев видеоролик, вы сможете узнать как можно использовать краудсорсинг для управления «шумом толпы», поиска инвестиций и реализации своих идей, а так же узнать историю возникновения краудсорсинга.