Resonance

Just had a read through Contagious trend report of the year. Here´s some comments:

1. Movements – The new world order.
Been in the pipeline for some years now. That´s exactly one of the main reasons why purpose tied in driven marketing is key. Exepct more user driven media – but not on old school one way tools like most blog technology these days. Look out for more “democratizied” tools to come. Also read The New Capitalist Manifesto, Clay Shirky, Mark Earls o.s My preso on the subject: http://www.slideshare.net/joakimnilsen/the-marketing-revolution-caused-by-3000000000-people

2. Projects, not campaigns.
This is a old one, but just recently being adapted more broadly in our business. Pepsi, Ford, NIKE, Dell, Starbucks, Imsdal, Mack, TV 2, Solo, VW, Tine amongst the pioneers. Look out for more focus on actually improving products and helping customers on the expense of trying to change perceptions about products and services. But please do not forget the magic ingredient, only “useful” gets you only that far. BTW Kudos to brazillian F.biz for their OMO Liquido Super Concentrado “Super Nice Training Center”.  It´s key to activate the market: http://www.slideshare.net/joakimnilsen/activate-the-market

3. Marketing as service design.
The key for effective marketing is to create solutions that integrate customers and potential new customers even more so that the brand becomes a platform for rich interactions – this gives the brand unique valuable data that should be used to steer future marketing initiatives. Look out for more solutions that i.e morphs mass media and citizen journalism. http://aresonance.posterous.com/dont-be-an-echo-lead-new-article-in-adasia

4. Social and beyond.
Always on. Yes. That´s all you need to know. 365, 24/7.

5. Identity online.
The user is the hero. Well, in my opinion it´s much more important to serve group dynamics with the copying mechanism in mind.  A person is a person through other persons. So don´t focus on the self-interested individual in your marketing. It´s not about me. It´s about us. We did one go though: http://awards.mfcampaign.net/Imsdal/

6. Technology
Read all about this here: http://www.slideshare.net/MediaFront/forward-to-reality-physical-computing-the-next-level-of-web-interaction

7. Data.
Facebook aims at taking everything living. Humans must open up everything. And we just can´t resist. Diaspora and Path will not succeed, yet.

8. Augmented content.
Seconds screens will never merge with the first screens. TV2.no will be at the forefront in 2012. Right now TV conversations are  drowned in a stream of tweets and wallposts.

9. Money.
Cash is king. Digital is queen.  

10. Hack culture.
The age of remixing is finally taking off. Look out for tons of entrepeneurs. Look out for cultural jamming!

11. Music.
Just one word. The first usefriendly service that gives musicians the cut they deserve will prevail.

12. Content.
Context.

13. Retail
Will become more important than ever. The stuff sourunding you will want to talk with you.

14. Gaming.
Game mechanics. Look out for more subtile use of this. Efficient.

15. Publishing
3.000.000.000 new authors awaiting to be published. Well. They don´t wait anymore.

16. Design
Distortion reality field.  

Most important trend:
Trend is for now – love is forever

Scandinavia on top 10.
Japan on 33.

Mobile changes social from a "check-when-I'm-at-a-PC" experience to one that pervades everyday life. The use of smartphone as a second screen is also booming. Checking email, social networks, browsing and visiting your site/service/app?

Here are the 42 countries, ranked in order of their smartphone penetration rate percentage, per capita. You also see the ranking, the name of the country, the national population rate, the national mobile phone subscriber count, and the migration rate of mobile subcribers to smartphones; and finally the rate of smartphone penetration per capita.

Rank . Country . . . . . Population . . Subs . Sm'phones . Migr.Rt . . Per Capita

1 . . . . Singapore . . . . . . . . .   4.9 . . .   8.1 . . .   4.4 . . . . 54% . . . . 90%
2 . . . . Hong Kong ***  . . . . .   8.0 . . . 14.0 . . .   4.9 . . . . 35% . . . . 61%
3 . . . . Sweden . . . . . . . . . .    9.3 . . . 13.6 . . .    4.8 . . . . 35% . . . . 52%
4 . . . . Australia  . . . . . . . . .  21.6 . . . 29.8 . . . 10.2 . . . . 34% . . . . 47%
5 . . . . Spain  . . . . . . . . . . .  45.5 . . . 58.9 . . . 20.8 . . . . 35% . . . . 46%
tie 6 . . Denmark *  . . . . . . .    5.5  . . .  7.6 . . .   2.4 . . . . 32% . . . . 44%
tie 6 . . Israel ***  . . . . . . . .    7.0 . . . 11.0 . . .   3.1 . . . . 28% . . . . 44%
tie 8 . . Finland *  . . . . . . . .    5.4 . . .   9.6 . . .   2.3 . . . . 24% . . . . 43%
tie 8 . . Norway *  . . . . . . . .    4.9 . . .   6.2 . . .    2.1 . . . . 34% . . . . 43%
10 . . . New Zealand ** . . . .    4.3 . . .   5.5 . . .   1.8 . . . . 33% . . . . 42%

11 . . . UK . . . . . . . . . . . . .   62.1 . . . 82.4 . . . 25.0 . . . . 30% . . . . 40%
tie 12 . Italy  . . . . . . . . . . . .  60.2 . . . 87.8 . . . 22.8 . . . . 26% . . . . 38%
tie 12 . Netherlands  . . . . . .  16.7 . . . 19.7 . . .   6.3 . . . . 32% . . . . 38%
tie 14 . Austria  . . . . . . . . .    8.4 . . . 13.0 . . .   3.0 . . . . 23% . . . . 36%
tie 14 . Taiwan ***  . . . . . . .  23.0 . . . 31.0 . . .   8.2 . . . . 26% . . . . 36%
tie 16 . Greece ** . . . . . . . .  11.2 . . . 15.6 . . .   3.9 . . . . 25% . . . . 35%
tie 16 . Ireland ** . . . . . . . .    4.6 . . .   5.6 . . .   1.6 . . . . 29% . . . . 35%
tie 16 . Portugal ** . . . . . . .  10.7 . . . 17.0 . . .   3.7 . . . . 22% . . . . 35%
tie 16 . USA . . . . . . . . . . . 319.1 . . 319.4 . . 111.8 . . . . 35% . . . . 35%
20 . . . South Korea ***** . . . 48.6 . . . 54.0 . . . 16.4 . . . . 30% . . . . 34%

tie 21 . Canada ** . . . . . . . .  34.1 . . . 26.5 . . . 10.4 . . . . 39% . . . . 30%
tie 21 . Switzerland * . . . . .     7.6 . . .   9.7 . . .   2.3 . . . . 24% . . . . 30%
tie 21 . France  . . . . . . . . .   62.8 . . . 66.0 . . . 18.8 . . . . 28% . . . . 30%
tie 24 . Germany . . . . . . . .   82.0 . . 107.7 . . . 23.0 . . . . 21% . . . . 28%
tie 24 . Belgium* . . . . . . . .   10.7 . . . 12.8 . . .    3.0 . . . . 23% . . . . 28%
tie 26 . Poland **  . . . . . . .   38.0 . . . 49.2 . . .   7.1 . . . . 14% . . . . 19%
tie 26 . Malaysia ** . . . . . .   28.1 . . . 36.6 . . .   5.2 . . . . 14% . . . . 19%
28 . . . Russia **  . . . . . . .  140.0 . . 234.4 . . . 25.0 . . . . 11% . . . . 18%
29 . . . South Africa  . . . . .   50.6 . . . 58.8 . . .   8.7 . . . . 15% . . . . 17%
tie 30 . Czech Rep ** . . . .   10.4 . . . 14.2 . . .    1.7 . . . . 12% . . . . 16%
tie 30 . Hungary ** . . . . . .   10.0 . . . 11.4 . . .   1.6 . . . . 14% . . . . 16%

32 . . . Thailand **  . . . . . .   68.3 . . . 78.3 . . . 10.0 . . . . 13% . . . . 15%
tie 33 . Japan ***** . . . . . . 126.9 . . 126.8 . . . 18.1 . . . . 14% . . . . 14%
tie 33 . Brazil ** . . . . . . . . 197.7 . . 229.5 . . . 28.0 . . . . 12% . . . . 14%
tie 33 . Romania **  . . . . .    21.1 . . . 31.0 . . .   2.9 . . . .   9% . . . . 14%
36 . . . Turkey . . . . . . . . .    76.0 . . . 66.3 . . .   8.3 . . . . 13% . . . . 11%
37 . . . Ukraine **  . . . . . .    45.0 . . . 52.1 . . .   4.5 . . . .   9% . . . . 10%
tie 38 . Indonesia **** . . . . 229.0 . . 212.0 . . . 18.1 . . . .   9% . . . .   8%
tie 38 . Mexico ** . . . . . . . 111.1 . . . 99.3 . . .   8.7 . . . .   9% . . . .   8%
40 . . . Slovakia ** . . . . . . .    5.4 . . .   6.5 . . .   0.4 . . . .   6% . . . .   7%

41 . . . China ** . . . . . . . . 1360.0 . . 961.3 . . . 77.1 . . . .   8% . . . .   6%
42 . . . India **  . . . . . . . . 1220.0 . . 973.0 . . . 33.2 . . . .   3% . . . .   3%

 (no star) average of both studies (best number)
 * using surrogate data for Netsize, then averaged (second best number)
 ** using only Netsize/Informa data
 *** only using Google/Ipsos data
 **** Indonesia: using only half of rate from Google/Ipsos (because surveyed only city penetration)
 ***** Japan and S Korea: These numbers are NOT indicative of how advanced phones are in those countries, while technically are reasonably accurate measures of 'only smartphones'

http://communities-dominate.blogs.com/brands/2011/12/smartphone-penetration-rates-by-country-we-have-good-data-finally.html

Here´s a follow-up to all the Facebook updates recently. http://aresonance.posterous.com/joakim-read-about-hemmorhage-facebook-changes

IMPORTANT: Like Edelman says, Fans won’t see posts that much unless they interact with a page, but they won’t interact with a page unless they see and engage with its posts.

Best days to reach with posts: Thursdays and Fridays.

A study of 200 brands by Buddy Media found that those posts outside of normal business hours – in the early morning, at the end of the business day or late at night – had 20 percent higher engagement rates than average

A brand should ideally only post once per day.

From Edelman:
The best time to target fans, determined through research and testing
To determine the best time of day for a page to post, Jeff Widman of PageLever recommends calculating the average life span per post by posting an update to the page, and recording its impressions, likes and comment until the rate of new impressions and likes slows down. Using this strategy, one could create an average lifespan per post based on time of day, and could then experiment with different times.

The number of times per day to target fans
The number one reason users “unlike” a brand is because they post too much.[i] However, the larger the Facebook fan base, the more times a brand could post. Knowing the average life span of a post – which, according to Widman, is nearly 23 hours – can help determine when the next post should come. Based on this formula, a brand should ideally only post once per day.

When to break the rules
There are times when fans will be more responsive to fewer or more posts, or posts at different times. A brand’s timing methodology is not a steadfast rule, but more of a guideline. For example, if a Canadian brand regularly posts at 11 a.m., it wouldn’t be appropriate to do so on November 11 during Remembrance Day ceremonies. Any brand posting at 12:00am on January 1st would have divided attention of their fans. Posting during times when natural disaster strikes, or major political events occur, could yield the wrong kind of attention. Alternately, if a brand is having an event – such a product launch or contest – increased impressions per post can warrant increased posting.
The sensitive issue of timing, combined with the need to develop engaging and relevant content, affirms that a Facebook marketing strategy should be both strategic and insight-driven. Brands should test what timings work best for them to ensure they’re optimising content, and treat their timing methodology as a guideline and not a steadfast rule.

According to Moss Kanter, there are six interrelated ways that great companies use institutional logic:
A Common Purpose
A Long Term Focus
Emotional Engagement
Partnering with the Public
Innovation
Self-Organization.

A Common Purpose: “Purpose and values—not the widgets made—are at the core of an organization’s identity, and they can guide people in their efforts to find new widgets that serve society.”

Institutional Grounding: “An investment in activities and relationships that may not immediately create a direct road to business results but that reflect that values the institution stands for and how it will endure.”

Emotional Integration: A process used by the Shinhan Bank after its acquisition of Chohung Bank that involved holding a series of retreats and conferences intended to spread strategic and operational information and also to foster social bonding and a feeling of being “one bank”.

Emotional Engagement: Great companies go beyond ubiquitous statements of corporate values to nurture a dialogue to keep “social purpose at the forefront of everyone’s mind and ensure that employees use the organizational values as a guide for business decisions”.

Innovation: “Companies claims that they serve society become credible when leaders allocated time, talent, and resources to national or community projects without seeking immediate returns and when they encourage people from one country to serve another.”

Self-Organization: “Self-organizing communities can be a potent force for change, propelling companies in directions they might not have taken otherwise. People with no formal orders serve as explorers and entrepreneurs.”

http://www.forbes.com/sites/csr/2011/11/07/why-corporations-with-a-social-purpose-perform-better/

What do you think about Roger McNamee´s controversial TED presentation? Apple vs Google, HTML5, Windows is dying, his vision of the future. Right or wrong – interesting hypotheses.  

<iframe width="560" height="315" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/aR6jLD1USW0" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

I remember writing this in my blog in 2009:

“The biggest mistakes companies make, he says, are implementing a tool-based, as opposed to people-based, strategy and simply choosing the best-known communities."

Anyone else get a familiar feeling reading this quote from Matt Rhodes? Seems that some companies just don´t want to get it. Replicating without remixing is adding more shit in more places. It´s so wrong in so many ways. Yes, you can work out a strategy and launch fast. You should do it fast. Speed wins. But you need to have a strategy in place. You need an ideal! Way too much focus on tactics these days.

Will Social Tools lead to a new Enlightenment?

Will social tools like YouTube,Twitter, Facebook, Wikis and Blogging lead to the questioning of the authority of Corporations and lead to a new enlightenment? What will the impact be? How will this transform businesses? How will a company be able to lead the way? What will be the role of marketing?

There´s way to much focus on conversations without taking into consideration that it is not the self-interested individuals but networks of trust you need to add value to in today´s socialized marketplace. It´s not about tactics, which will never be the key for success, but about leading the way by activating and creating remarkable actions.

How do you succeed by simply open up for conversation? You need a big ideal, and then use the appropriate preferred tools used by your target group available at the time your operating - be it 2009, 2012 or 2050.

As long as a corporation do not possess a big ideal that leads the way both internal and external, opening up solely for conversations is way too frightening and uncontrollable for those involved and not at least a waste of resources with probably devastating consequences.

Another issue is the personality to the existing corporations. How is it possible to embrace the socialization of the marketplace without a fundamental change in corporation personality? Unless your´re still talking about how to lure customers all over again...

Hell, I´m all for using social technology to change corporations instead of only trying to reach out to customers. But that my friends, is some challenge where I don´t see any viable and concrete model yet. For any positive disruption coming we need to see a realistic model. I´d say start at the right end. What´s your ideal? Do you have a pulse to do it?

/////

I´ve stressed this fact for a long time now. So will not post an 2011 update on the topic. You´re probably fed up hearing more from me about it anyway. But maybe you would be interested in how COKE, a brand with a clear Ideal, is thinking today. Here you go:

From the study conducted by Cisco Systems by InsightExpress with 2800 respondents from 14 countires:

“One of every three college students and employees surveyed globally (33%) believes the Internet is a fundamental resource for the human race – as important as air, water, food and shelter. About half (49% of college students and 47% of employees) believe it is "pretty close" to that level of importance. Combined, four of every five college students and young employees believe the Internet is vitally important as part of their daily life's sustenance.”

1 out of 4 says updating Facebook is more important than partying, dating, listening to music or hanging out with friends.
91% have a Facebook account globally.
80% check their Facebook page at least once a day.

Wow.

I predict that personal chatter and meaningful social interactions will move away from Facebook. It´s now becoming a conscious place to “stage” your life and personal brand.

62% of Mobile Users 25-34 own Smartphones

Smartphone penetration among 55-64 is only 30 percent, but it jumped 5 percent this quarter.

After christmas I prdeict a jump to 75% overall...

A new study by Nielsen “Women of Tomorrow”  shows that Social Moms (one child and who participate in social networking) is more active on social networks on mobile devices than other females.  50% vs 39%

This segment is 85 percent more likely than the general population to share frequent advice about beauty and cosmetic products, 28 percent more likely to provide frequent advice about online shopping/e-commerce and 6% more likely to post a product review online.

The higlights of the report also says that Social moms who actively participate in social media are 81 percent more likely to become a fan of or follow a brand online, 86 percent more likely to post a status update, and 84 percent more likely to comment or post content than the general population.

Not sure who they are compared to though, females who are not actively participating in social media?