According to one of our class readings this past week, blogging is listed as one of the "do or die" functions of an organization that wants to succeed in the 21st century, yet I’m not convinced that blogging is all that chapter one from Naked Conversations claims it to be. While I agree that no one like reading or is moved by press releases that often hit the media void, I am also not convinced that consumers are flocking to blogs of major corporations. And while blogs are growing at a phenomenal rate, I know that I have rarely, actually come to think of it, never gone to my favorite brand company to see what the employees are blogging about. I frankly don’t care.
And while there is no doubt that blogs are increasing in popularity and at a rapid rate, the blogs that I continually read usually have to do with friends or family that I want to keep in contact with, even if from a distance. Followed by a few industry blogs to keep my finger on the pulse. I feel like I should make this confession quietly, preferably in a dark room. But I have a feeling that I’m not really the exception when it comes to this.
That being said, getting employees who emulate the brand of their company to speak out publicly about products, activities, and company values is one of the most genuine ways to directly link consumers to companies and a wonderful way to receive direct consumer feedback about what is and is not working. In my mind worst sin is not “not blogging” but rather not finding opportunities to connect with consumers. If this is a blog, that’s great, it can be a wonderful tool, but it is insignificant if it does not gain readership. Most important, as the chapter points out is word of mouth and genuine conversation. I believe that whether or not communication is on a blog, in person, on a website, or in a growing number of other ways it matters less than what the interaction feels like to the consumer.
Which is why I was so delighted to read the Customer Evangelist Manifesto. (http://www.changethis.com/1.CustomerEvangelist#) Finding individuals to personally embody particular brands, listening to those customers and being loyal to those customers is the most important business decision I believe a company can make. These are people who’s “beliefs are based on emotional connection, deep-seated convictions and the promise of a better way” (CEM, 4). Further more, “evidence shows that acquiring a new customer is five times more expensive than keeping a current customer happy. Moreover, customer profitability tends to grow the longer a customer stays with you. It costs less to keep them coming back for more” (CEM, 11).
I believe that the six tenets listed are much closer to the do or die strategy that companies need to adopt. In simple terms (some of them my own summary):
1) Continuously gather customer feedback
2) Make it a point to share knowledge freely
3) Build word-of-mouth networks
4) Create community
5) Make it easy for a customer to try it
6) Focus on making something better.
Being a member of a community, be it social, organized or self-created involves understanding yourself as an individual in relation to a community of others. For better or worse, we are each a part of many communities over a lifetime. Granted, some may be more desirable than others, but nevertheless, we are born to parents, raised in a geographic space, and belong to organizations often before we are ever conscious of what this affiliation actually means. Furthermore, we have a role in that community with labels and titles and we are defined by how we portray ourselves AND how others reflect back to us. Identity is both created and perceived. In Henry Jenkins paper, Interactive Audiences, he looks at communities as defined by Levy 1) organic social groups, 2) organized groups, and 3) self-organized groups.
The traditional association to community is a fascinating concept and has been explored at length by psychologists, anthropologists, and any number of other disciplines. However, the question is whether a community actually changes once it is self-selected by common interests rather than propinquity. What happens when a social network is possible without “geographic constraints?”
I can see this argument going either way, and not being an avid member of an online community I do not consider myself an expert, however I will venture to share my observations. It seems to me that the most shocking moment might just be the realization that an eclectic taste is likewise shared by others who are equally passionate about the topic. And it doesn’t matter what it might be. A young neighbor of mine recently started a no cussing club at school. It received enough attention that he put it online and within four months had over 2000 members in his club. It went international and just as kids all over the world were flocking to join others kids were drawn to it to mock or destroy the club.
But the question is, are these groups inherently different than other social groups? On a surface level I would say, yes. Online communities are different than other affiliations because the barrier to join is only online access. However, at a core level everything I know about these communities mirrors traditional associations. The truly deep social networks often know about intimate details in one another’s lives and offer support, encouragement and drama, just like any other network. One other major difference however might also be the ability to leave a network like this with significantly less tangible repercussions.
Another interesting issue in this exploration is the role of identity in these spaces. In some ways, identity can drastically vary, changing appearance, physical ability, and behavior. I have heard some notable scholars dismiss issues of identity, and am not sure why this is not a more interesting subject. I personally find identity very intriguing and am looking forward to building upon my “alternate identity” in virtual MTV.
Neighborhood
Explore friends, family, friends & family, or entire neighborhood.
