think native

I don’t think an online movement has ever attracted the kind of naked contempt and sometimes actual anger that Twitter does, from those who don’t understand it.

So when I have a friend who is asking incredulously why I waste my precious time on Tweetie or Tweetdeck, this is how I try to explain it.

It’s not a glorified Facebook status

I think much of the confusion comes about as a result of people viewing it as a social networking tool. I don’t believe that Twitter is about conversation, like Facebook or discussion forums or even instant messenger. As the term ‘microblogging’ suggests, the focus is much more about broadcasting.

It’s is about sharing valuable stuff; news, opinion, ideas, entertainment (for some of us hearing somebody rant about their tube journey constitutes entertainment).

No, I’m not interested in what Britney had for breakfast either

So if Twitter is a multi-million-channel broadcast network, then you simply need to choose which channels you find most valuable. If you don’t want to know celebrity gossip or the latest football transfer rumours or the finer points of fluid dynamics, then choose accordingly. After all, one man’s tube rant is another’s comedic gold.

There are no lead times to sharing

Not even the time it takes to write a blog post like this. That valuable stuff I mentioned earlier can be sharing instantaneously, in some cases making that valuable stuff even more useful.

It allows valuable stuff to travel across our natural spheres of connectedness

You don’t have to create valuable stuff in order to create value - the Retweet allows this valuable stuff to quickly jump the usual barriers to word-of-mouth, utilising a myriad number of people who overlap into different circles of influence. This is why an idea can spread so quickly across the Twitterverse.

It feels good to share

Whether it’s the cynic’s opinion that everybody wants their 15 seconds of internet fame, or a more humanist one, that everyone wants to feel that they’re contributing to the greater good; there’s no denying the personal satisfaction when something you have found or created begins to spread through the community. It’s kind of addictive. But that’s ok, because it means more people will share more valuable stuff more often.

So that’s what I reckon Twitter is for - probably the only slightly controversial thing I’ve said is that Twitter isn’t about conversation. However, as with this blog post, there’s always an opportunity to discuss something that’s been shared - so it’d be great to hear what you think.

July 6th, 2009
by Mark Sng & Zaid Al-Zaidy, Saint @ RKCR/Y&R

Classical marketing has always been fond of useful mnemonics. Acronymic devices from our AIDAs to our SWOTs to our PESTs have given us a way of structuring strategic considerations, variables and ideas. Of course, probably the most famous and ubiquitous of all is the 4Ps of marketing.

At Saint, we wanted something just as simple that applied to engaging an audience in the age of digital. We wanted a way to distil the inherently complex and fast-moving landscape of human and corporate relationships in a million-channel environment into a topline playbook that reminds us of the key components for any engagement strategy. We wanted to create a structure that looked to the enduring truths of human interaction rather than the specific technologies that might be in vogue at any point in time, so that corporations have the strategic confidence to invest in a rapidly evolving space.

So without further ado, please let us introduce you to the 4Cs of brand engagement; Conversation, Culture, Collaboration and Compensation.

Conversation:

This has been the most seismic shift for ad men and brands to adapt to – understanding that brands are most powerful not when they exist in beautifully produced TVCs and pithy advertising slogans, but when they form part of the stories their consumers are telling.

This first, most vital C is about the need for brands to listen to, participate in, stimulate and in some cases facilitate conversations. We believe the iconic brands of the future will act more like a person than a corporation, empowering their own employees to engage in micro-conversations with consumers wherever these may be taking place.

Culture:

So brands must, more than ever, exist in conversation. This means that simply having a ‘positioning’, a set of key messages and an endline is not enough to get consumers to understand and buy in to your brand (arguably this has always been the case, it’s just more visible now that conversations are stored online).

Instead, branding must be viewed within the context of multichannel touchpoints, some of which are ‘owned’ by a us, many that are not. The only way to create the kind of consistency of meaning for a brand in this environment is by defining and continually demonstrating what a brand stands for. Understanding how you translate what your brand stands for for a variety of situations is absolutely key, because people don’t form their opinion of brands via the advertising they see.

Of course, to get this right is not just a marketing endeavour but will have organisation-wide ramifications, but starting with a communications strategy is a great first step.

Collaboration:

However brand culture isn’t something that can solely be defined by marketing departments and ad agencies. The strongest brands allow their consumers to co-own and co-create this culture, and this C is about the need to try to drive not just attention but also participation in order to really connect. The meaning of a brand means much more when framed through personal experiences - and the best way facilitate this is by getting our audience to join in.

Giving consumers a sense of ownership over the brand and its assets not just deepens engagement but is also more likely to breed advocates and evangelists.

Compensation:

Last but certainly not least is the need to make sure we reward our audience for their time and attention. With the decreasing focus on interruptive styles of communication it becomes foundational to think about the “what’s in it for them” question – and base any tactical execution on real consumer value.

Whether this value comes in the form of entertainment, utility, a platform for self-expression, information or monetary, brands really do have an obligation to ensure their marketing has a reason for being in the eyes of the consumer.

So there are Saint’s 4Cs of brand engagement – hardly prescriptive but we hope helpful at highlighting the key areas to address in order to encourage users to love your brand.