Opinions Social Media

Why Most Brands Will Fail at Social Media

Posted by Eric Anderson on August 19th, 2010 at 2:00 am

Dear Brand,

I’m sorry to be the one to tell you: your company is going to fail at social media. I don’t mean “fail” in a massive flame-out, Moms-Hate-Motrin sort of way. You’re going to fail in the most ordinary of ways, and so subtly that you may not even notice at first. Sure, you’ll still have some Facebook fans, some Twitter followers, and maybe even some positive social mentions. But that’s the end of the ride. You won’t transform your relationship with your customers in any meaningful way, and thus you’ll be only marginally better off than if you had sat out social media in the first place.

Evolution often looks gruesome in close-up, but in the grand scheme of things, your failure is a good thing. It makes room for fitter species. Because we’re all scrapping over a very limited food supply: consumer attention.  At the current rate of social media consumption, and absent some radical shift in brand behavior, most brands will be effectively shut out of consumers’ overtaxed social attention within the next 3 years. Consider that in a 6-month period in 2009, the number of Twitter accounts followed by the average user rose 360%, while the average number of tweets per user rose nearly 400%. As consumers divide their attention between more and more tweets, will they instead multiply the attention they give to brands on Twitter?

Of course not. They’ll stop following you or learn to ignore your tweets entirely, giving their attention instead to that rival brand -- you know, the one with the reputation for over-the-top customer service? Your rival’s success in social media was as predictable as your failure, because customer engagement was in their DNA. For them, social media was a natural extension of the customer collaboration they were already doing. For you, it was a free ride that ended early.

I recently wrote a book that offered some predictive models for when brands would succeed or fail in social media; I felt like all the needed evidence could be found in mathematics – by looking at the comparative payoffs for social media participation – and in history, by looking at past successes and failures in attempts at mutual cooperation. But I’ve since found even better evidence in behavioral psychology, in the work of Professor Dan Ariely of Duke University. In his book Predictably Irrational, he argues that we behave very differently in the presence of social norms, such as visiting a relative’s house for a meal, vs. market norms, such as paying for a meal in a restaurant. Ariely and his colleagues conducted a number of experiments that brought these norms into conflict – asking strangers to help move a couch, for instance, vs. offering to pay them to move it. He found that whenever social norms were in place, even the slightest attempt to introduce market norms threatened real and lasting damage to the social relationship – like trying to persuade one’s date that the cost of theater tickets is worth a little quid-pro-quo at the end of the evening.

This is principally why so many brands that go out on dates with consumers get their faces slapped and end up sitting at home watching the end of Letterman.  They were in it for all the wrong reasons. Better behavior wasn’t in their nature, and in most cases, they weren’t ready to change their nature.  Sure, you read about Nestle getting all up in their Facebook fans’ faces, and you allow yourself a little smugness: “We’ll never be like Nestle.” Probably not. But you can easily blow it in a much less spectacular way, simply by wanting more from consumers than you’re willing to give back.

Rest assured, social media failure is not the end of the world. While your savvy competitor uses social media to drive real changes in the way they interact with customers, you’ll simply move on and find other modes of survival better suited to your nature. These will be modes governed by market norms, like paid advertising, discounting, ubiquitous clown mascots, etc.  There’s nothing wrong with that. But it’s better to learn these things about yourself early, before some starry-eyed marketer like me convinces you to make a social media bet that you can’t pay off.

I used to advise clients that it’s easy to dip your toe into social media marketing. I now think that advice is outdated. The pond is getting crowded, and consumers are quickly figuring out which brands are in for the long haul and which are trolling for cheap leads. Real social media success means being willing to mobilize your organization behind what you uncover. It means investing considerable time in conversations you can’t immediately monetize. Are you ready for that? Then disregard everything I said about your impending failure; you’re going to be just fine.

7 Responses to “Why Most Brands Will Fail at Social Media”

  1. Matt Delman says:

    Very well said! I feel like the biggest reason these brands will fail is that they're not willing to spend those man-hours on something that's doesn't show that immediate ROI you mentioned.

    You're completely right about that -- the brands who are willing to spend 6 months, 12 months, etc on building that community so they can eventually monetize the conversations are the ones that are going to succeed. And people can definitely tell when a brand is not being honest and open in social media, which is another key point of those companies that are going to succeed in using the tools.

  2. Mazher Abidi says:

    "It means investing considerable time in conversations you can’t immediately MONETIZE"

    I really hate that word.

    It's an obsession I really don't understand. Traditional offline PR isn't always immediately monetized yet companies still do it. How is social media any different?

  3. This is one of the best posts I've seen in a while on the impact of social media. I often say that social media occupies both realms as potential "game-changer" as well as "just another marketing tactic". You have articulated the reasons for this perfectly. For some companies with the right cultural DNA, social will propel them to new heights. For other companies, it will simply drive a few more impressions, clicks and maybe "feets in the seats" of events. And that is OK. Really well done!

  4. Thanks Michael; I like your articulation of this problem as two "realms" that can exist side-by-side. I'm glad it came across that I think the tactical use of social media is still viable, albeit limited, and those limitations will actually increase as attention gets stretched.

  5. We saw a similar culling out of the uncommitted in the early days of Search. Now that all of the important keywords are owned, the late players are scrambling for the "long tails".

    With Social Media, "Positioning" changes from getting 1st place in the prospects mind to getting a place in the prospects' networks' bandwidth. As you point out so clearly, that bandwidth is finite. And it is quickly being occupied by the already-interesting.

    Which is why I keep coming back to your blog. Thx for your insights. -JN

  6. So true. Most companies will fail in their half-baked attempts to become popular through social media. After attempting to educate a number of people on using Facebook and other tools, in the end it usually comes down to either paying someone else to help you maintain a consistent content-driven presence, or mutating themselves to include social media activity into their DNA so it's a regular activity they have incorporated into their lives.

    As popular as social media is, I've started recommending clients to focus on a blogging based campaign uber-optimized with SEO so they show up well in search engine results. They can use past materials from old email newsletters (if they haven't already) which saves them time and effort, and often companies have tons of past material/content they never considered using.

    Even then, we usually have to help them for the first 6 months to get the content going out consistently. Once they start getting a ton of new leads in, the interest in investing seriously in social media starts to happen. I love what Zappos is doing. They really have social in their DNA, and they set a great example of what it takes to do it right, all the way down to their core.

    Thanks for the insight, great article.

    Trevor Eisenman

  7. Eric Anderson says:

    Thanks Trevor. Very interested in your approach of starting clients out with solid blogging. It's a good way for them to test their readiness for and commitment to contributing to the content stream. So many companies start with wanting to plant a flag in social media, then worry about the content after.

Leave a comment