Building ROI into your Social Media Plan A presentation to the Social Media Club – Louisville and the Kentucky Chapter of IABC Katie Delahaye PaineCEOkdpaine@kdpaine.comwww.measuresofsuccess.comhttp:/kdpaine.blogs.comMember, IPR Measurement Commissionwww.instituteforpr.orgNovember 17, 2009

Why Measure?

“The main reason to measure objectives is not so much to reward or punish

individual communications manager for success or failure as it is to learn from the

research whether a program should be continued as is, revised, or dropped in favor of another approach ”

James E. Grunig, Professor Emeritus, University of Maryland “If we can put a man in orbit, why can’t we determine the effectiveness of our communications? The reason is simple and perhaps, therefore, a little old-fashioned: people, human beings with a wide range of choice. Unpredictable, cantankerous,capricious, motivated by innumerable conflicting interests, and conflicting desires.”

Ralph Delahaye Paine, Publisher, Fortune Magazine , 1960 speech to the Ad Club of St. Louis

First, some numbers

• Years to Reach 50 million Users: Radio (38 Years), TV (13 Years), Internet (4 Years), iPod (3 Years)…Facebook added 100 million users in less than 9 months…iPhone applications hit 1 billion in 9 months.

• The fastest growing segment on Facebook is 55-65 year-old females

• 80% of Twitter usage is on mobile• 78% of consumers trust peer

recommendations , only 14% trust advertisements

• Only 18% of traditional TV campaigns generate a positive ROI

• 90% of people that can TiVo ads do

3

Conquering your fears

• If it’s not working, why keep doing it?

I’m afraid that metrics will reveal that my program

isn’t working • If you’re deaf to the

conversation, only your enemies will hear it

I’m afraid of what I’ll hear

• It’s not about justifying, it’s about improving

I’m afraid I won’t be able to justify my

program/existence

• You should be fired for not showing any numbers

I’m afraid I’ll be fired for not showing the

right numbers

• Learn the language of business first, measurement will follow

I’m afraid to admit that I don’t know how to measure

Signs that it’s the end of measurement as we know it 1. 48% of respondents to a PRWeek study said they

were moving $$ out of advertising budgets into Social Media. Only 18% said they were taking $$ away from PR.

2. Procter & Gamble is now paying for engagement, not eyeballs

3. Sodexo cut $300K out of its recruitment budget using Twitter

4. Immunize BC measured SM success via share of discussion, increased awareness and shots given

5. HSUS generated $650,000 in new donations from an on-line photo contest on Flickr

6. NWF generated 85,000 new potential members with a Twitter hashtage (#NWF)

7. The Red Cross measures the effectiveness of Twitter via lives saved and property lost

8. IBM predicts the ends of advertising as we know. Also receives more leads, sales and exposure from a $500 podcast than it does from an ad

9. 11 Mom’s turned around Wal-Mart's image and delivered measureable increases in sales.

Eyeball counti

ngHITS Engag

ement

MSM Online Social Media

A measurement timeline

Old School Metrics

AVEsEyeballsHITS (How Idiots Track Success)Couch Potatoes# of Twitter Followers (unless you’re a celebrity)# of Facebook Friends/Fans (unless they donate money)

Page 7

The definition of timely has changedThe definition of reach has changed

GRPs & Impressions are impossible to count (and irrelevant) in social media

The definition of success has changedIt’s worse to be ignored than to be criticized The answer isn’t how many you’ve reached, but how those you’ve reached have responded

Page 8

Old School PR 21st Century Role of PR

The New Definitions

The Engagement Decision Tree

Awareness

Consideration

Preference Trial Purchas

e

FindObserv

e/Lurk

Participate

Engagement

Purchase/Act/Link/WOM

Goals for Social Media

1.Marketing/leads/sales/2.Mission/safety/civic

engagement3.Relationship/reputation/

positioning To fix this Or get to this

Goals drive metrics, metrics drive results

11

Reputation/Relationships

Relationship scores

Recommendations

Positioning

Engagement

Get the word out

% hearing

% believing

% acting

Sales

Engagement Index

Cost per customer

acquisition

Web analytics

Sales leads

Marketing Mix Modeling

Goal

Metrics

What do you need to measure?

Impact (Outputs/Out

takes)

ROI (Outcom

es)

Did audience behavior change?

Did the right people show up?

Did your relationship change?

Did sales or revenue or profits increase?

Did you get the exposure you wanted?

Were your messages communicated

Did your relationships improve?

Change the conversation, improve your reputation

Improve your reputation

Listen first, then respondStop doing stupid things

Negative coverage over time

Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr2006 2007 2008

0

5

10

15

20

25

21

2

5

21 1

4 42

1 12 2 2

1

10

9

4

1418

21

12

10

15

14

7

26

2

10

4

12

2

3 1

1

1

4

2

2

1

2

5

3

2

2

2

Entr

ies

ROI is an equation

Revenue minus cost = ROIRevenue = $$ in or $$ not spent

HSUSFlickr Revenue: $650,000Contest Cost $1000 ROI = $649,000

SodexoTwitter costs: $30,000Cost savings: $300,000Net savings (ROI): $270,000

Correlation exists between traffic to the ASPCA web site and the organization’s

overall media exposure

-

100,000

200,000

300,000

400,000

500,000

600,000

700,000

0

50,000,000

100,000,000

150,000,000

200,000,000

250,000,000

300,000,000

350,000,000

Web

Sit

e Vi

sito

rs

Expo

sure

Overall Exposure

Web Traffic

Tying activity to development/marketing goals

0

50,000,000

100,000,000

150,000,000

200,000,000

250,000,000

300,000,000

350,000,000

Exposure

$0

$200,000

$400,000

$600,000

$800,000

$1,000,000

$1,200,000

$1,400,000

$1,600,000

$1,800,000

Donations

Overall exposure

Online donations

17

Goals, Actions and Metrics Goal Action Output

Metric Outtake Metric

Outcome Metric

Increased distribution

Use phone coupons to drive consumers to stores to demand “I want my Sweet Scoops”

Number of coupons distributed vs redeemed

% increase in awareness and preference

% increase in distribution sites.

Generate consumer demand to boost distributor orders

Start “Healthy Hedonist” blog and Twitter Account

Number of posts, links Page rank , followers

% improvement in awareness, preference scores.

Number of comments, number of links, “engagement metrics”

Use Facebook to distribute coupons and collect fans to demonstrate demand to distribution channel

Number of fans/followers

% willing to take action on behalf of Sweet Scoops.

Number of fans taking action to notify distributors.

The 6 steps to Social Media ROI

1. Define the “R” – Define the expected results?

2. Define the “I” -- What’s the investment?

3. Define the metrics (what you want to become)

4. Determine what you are benchmarking against

5. Pick a tool and undertake research6. Analyze results and glean insight,

take action, measure again

Step 1: Define the “R” Why Social Media?

What return is expected? – Define in terms of the business or mission.

What problems is Social Media supposed to solve?

What were you hired to do? What difference are you expected to make?

If you are celebrating complete 100% success a year from now, what is different about the organization?

If your Social Media is eliminated, what would be different? 20

Step 2: Define the “I”

What is the investment? PersonnelAgency compensationSenior Staff time Opportunity cost

21

Step 3: Define your Key Performance Indicators (KPIs)

22

The Perfect KPIGets you where you want to go (achieves corporate goals)Is actionableContinuously improves your processesIs there when you need it

KPIs should be developed for: Your own propertiesDifferent tacticsOther influential sites

Step 3: Define your Key Performance Indicators (KPIs) carefully because you become what you measure

Cost savingsEfficiency

Cost per message communicatedCost per new lead/customer acquired

Productivity: Increase in employee engagement/moraleLower turnover/recruitment costs

Engagement: Ratio of posts to comments% of repeat visitors% of 5+min visitors% of registrations

Trust:Improvement in relationship /reputation scores with customers and communities (Loyalty/Retention)

Thought leadership: Share of quotesShare of opportunities

Message penetrationPositioning on key issuesImprovement in favorable/unfavorable ratioImprovement in Optimal Content Score (OCS)

23

Engagement metrics

% increase or decrease in unique visits In the past  month,  what % of all sessions represent more than 5 page views % of sessions that are greater than 5 minutes in duration % of visitors that come back for more than 5 sessions % of sessions that arrive at your site from a Google search, or a direct link from your web site or other site that is related to your brand % of visitors that become a subscriber % of visitors that download something from the site % of visitors that provide an email addressRatio of posts to comments

Courtesy of Eric Peterson

The ConceptDifference in share of votes

between Bloomberg & Thompson: 5 Difference in campaign cost:

$95 millionCost per share point = $19

million

Reducing cost per share point gain

Applying share point gain to your business

Share of discussion before social media campaign: 10%Share of discussion after social media campaign: 20%Cost of social media campaign: $20,000Cost per share point = $2,000Correlate to market share or compare to awareness gains

Emerging benchmarks Past PerformanceThink 3

PeerUnderdog nipping at your heelsStretch goal

Whatever keeps the C-suite up at night

Step 4: Define your benchmarks

27

The competitive landscape

Technorati mentions with high authority

Cingular7%

Sprint7%

Verizon10%

T-Mobile75%

US Cellular1%

Company "sucks" mentions in Technorati with high authority

US Cellular2% Cingular

16%

Sprint12%

Verizon19%

T-Mobile51%

Blogs and Twitter dominated the social media landscape

29

Digg

Video

Social Network

Photo

Forum

Twitter

Blog

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70%

9%

26%

20%

38%

6%

4%

53%

37%

4%

9%

20%

65%

Consumer Education Non-Profit

Consumer organizations are far more likely to see Undesirable Discussion than non-profits or educational institutions.

30

Undesirable

Desirable

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%

9%

91%

2%

98%

22%

78%

Consumer Education Non Profit

*For each mention, we determine whether it leaves the reader more or less likely to donate to, partner with, volunteer for or otherwise support the efforts of Non-Profit Organization. If it leaves the reader more likely, we consider it positive. If it leaves the reader less likely, we consider it negative. If it doesn’t sway the reader one way or the other, we consider it neutral.

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

Does not Contain a Message

Contains a Message

71%

29%

98%

2%

73%

27%

Consumer Education Non Profit

Key Message penetration lags the non-profit average

31

Focus on fewer key messages with shorter statements

32

0 5 10 15

Number of Messages Tracked

Average Number of Words Per Key

Message

12.75

10.5

8

6

6.5

2

Consumer Education Non Profit

Recommendation: Less is more when trying to get your messages across. We recommend reducing the number of key messages and simplifying and shortening the key messages that are tracked.

Most conversations were making observations rather than expressing support

33

Expressing criticism

Giving a shout-out

Rallying support

Asking a question

Making a suggestion

Offering an opinion

Advertising something

Expressing support

Making an observation

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90%

10.00%

85.00%

1%

2%

2%

3%

4%

4%

39%

45%

2%

3%

69%

26%

Consumer Education Non-Profit Average

Overview of Key Metrics

Bookmark.

Facebook

Ext. Blogs

Inst. Blogs YouTube MSM

SOV 2% — 8% 9% 11% 7%

Popularity

230 bkmks

500/mo. — 20 links

150k views —

Engagement 59 cmts 1 day 13 cmts

2-12 cmts 2 cmts —

% Positive 20% 32% 54% 50% 15% 15%

% Negative 0% 0% 4% 0% 1% 2%

Strat. Mess. 40%† 18%† 42% 42%† 18% 38%

Peer 1 was the competitive leader in all but YouTube, where Peer 4 and Peer 3 led.Actions attributed to individuals were responsible for most content, except on YouTube.

Rank Order

Facebook YouTube Social Bookmarking

External Blogs

Institutional Blogs

1 Campus Life

Events Courses Faculty Campus Life

2 Sports Campus Life

Projects, Non-Research

Research, Physical Sciences

Events

3 Technology Faculty Research, Physical Sciences

Institution Overall

Institution Overall

4 Product Services

Courses Events Expert Commentary

Institution Sub-Groups

5 Events Institution Overall

Faculty Events Admissions

Few subjects appear across all forms of social media, so tailor outreach accordingly

Step 6: Pick a tool

1. Content Analysis2. Survey3. Web Analytics

Step 6: Selecting a measurement tool

Objective KPI Tool

Increase inquiries, web traffic, recruitment

% increase in traffic#s of clickthrus or downloads

Web Analytics: Google Analytics, Omniture, Web trends

Increase awareness/preference

% of audience preferring your brand to the competition

Survey: Online -- SurveyMonkey, Zoomerang or Mail

Engage marketplace Conversation index greater than .8Rankings % increase in engagement

Web analytics or Content Anatlysis: TypePad, Technorati Omniture, Google Analytics

Communicate messages

% of articles containing key messagesTotal opportunities to see key messagesCost per opportunity to see key messages

Media content analysis –

% aware of or believing in key message

Survey

37

Content Analysis requires a content source:

Free: Google News/Google Blogs, RSS

feeds, Technorati, Social Mention, Twazzup,

$500+ Radian 6, Techrigy, Sysymos, Visible

Technologies, Scout Labs, Cyberalert, CustomScoop, e-Watch

38

A way to analyze content

AutomatedHuman:

Census vs random sampleSentiment vs TopicsThe 80/20 rule – Measure what matters because 20% of the content influences 80% of the decisions

39

A coding methodology

TonalityWhat messages were communicatedHow you’re positioned on key issuesDominance/Prominence/VisibilityAuthoritySubject of the article/postingWho was quoted?Products, events, initiatives, battles mentionedOptimal Content Score

Standard classifications of discussion

• Acknowledging receipt of information

• Advertising something• Answering a question• Asking a question• Augmenting a previous

post• Calling for action• Disclosing personal

information• Distributing media• Expressing agreement• Expressing criticism• Expressing support• Expressing surprise• Giving a heads up

• Responding to criticism• Giving a shout-out• Making a joke• Making a suggestion• Making an observation• Offering a greeting• Offering an opinion• Putting out a wanted ad• Rallying support• Recruiting people• Showing dismay• Soliciting comments• Soliciting help• Starting a poll• Validating a position

Standard classifications of videos

AdvertisementAnimationDemonstrationEvent/PerformanceFictionFilmHome VideoInstructional VideoInterviewLecture

MontageMusic VideoNews BroadcastPromotional VideoSightseeing/TourSlideshowSpeechTelevision ShowVideo Log

Why an Optimal Content Score?

You decide what’s important:Benchmark against peers and/or competitorsTrack activities against OCS over time Positive:

Mentions of the brandKey messagesPositioningVisibility

Negative OmittedNegative toneNo key message

43

How to calculate Optimal ContentQuality score +1 0 -1

Score Score ScoreTonality Positive 3 Neutral 0 Negative -3

Positioning Contains 2 Doesn't contain 0

Positions the competition favorably or positions Sargento negatively -2

Messaging Contains 3 partially contains 0

Does not contain or miscommunicates key message (neg mess) -1

Quotes Contains 1 Does not contain -1Competitive mention

Does not mention Competition 1

Competition mentioned prominently -3

Total Score 10 0 -10

Visibility Score+1 0 -1

Score Score Score

Brand Photo Contains 3 Doesn't contain 0Contains competitive photo -5

Dominance Focal point 3 Not a focal point -1Visibility Headline mention 2 Top -20 % of story 0 Minor mention -2Target publication Top Tier 2 2nd tier 0 Not on target list -2

Total Score 10 0 -10

Optimal Content Score

Charting OCS over time between divisions

Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul2007 2008

-100%

0%

100%

200%

300%

400%

500%

Optimum Content Score Relative to CompetitorsThe Percent Difference Between Each Business Unit's

Average Optimum Content Score and theAverage Optimum Content Score of Tracked Competi-

tors for each Business Unit

SAS

IDS

IIS

MS

% D

iffe

ren

ce

DIB

FBX-T

ALR-67(V)3

DDG-1000 MSE

APG-79, APG63

AESA for F-15E,Army MTS

VIIRS delays

Glory APS and VIIRS vs. com-petitors' EPX

ASAT, Patriot

ERGM cancellation

Patriot (Korea)European MD radar

RISS, GBS

MALD, AMRAAM

APG-63 (v3)ATFLIR

NPOESS; BOE B-52 jammer

RIS JPL

Surveys require:

A defined sampleA list – a way to get to that sampleAgreement on what questions you need to answerA survey instrument/questionnaire A testA way to analyze data SPSS SAS

46

Aspects of relationships

Control mutualityTrustSatisfactionCommitmentExchange relationshipCommunal relationship

47

Components of a Relationship IndexControl mutuality

In dealing with people like me, this organization has a tendency to throw its weight around. (Reversed)This organization really listens to what people like me have to say.

TrustThis organization can be relied on to keep its promises.This organization has the ability to accomplish what it says it will do.

SatisfactionGenerally speaking, I am pleased with the relationship this organization has established with people like me.Most people enjoy dealing with this organization.

CommitmentThere is a long-lasting bond between this organization and people like me.Compared to other organizations, I value my relationship with this organization more

Exchange relationshipEven though people like me have had a relationship with this organization for a long time; it still expects something in return whenever it offers us a favor.This organization will compromise with people like me when it knows that it will gain something.This organization takes care of people who are likely to reward the organization.

Communal relationshipThis organization is very concerned about the welfare of people like me.I I think that this organization succeeds by stepping on other people. (Reversed)

How to implement relationship metrics

Step 1: Conduct a benchmark relationship studyStep 2: Implement PR programStep 3: Conduct a follow up relationship studyStep 4: Look at what’s changed

Web Analytics Require:

Google Analytics/Web Trends/OmnitureUnique URLsData delivered in parallel with content analysisAbility to correlate and integrate data SPSS/SAS

50

Look for failures firstCheck to see what the competition is doing Then look for exceptional successCompare to last month, last quarter, 13-month averageFigure out what worked and what didn’t workMove resources from what isn’t working to what is

Step 6: Analysis - -Research without insight is just trivia

51

Best Practices:

Correlations to bottom-line impact

DonationsMembershipsSign-upsLeads

Using SMM for planning

Define the time frame, market/topic you want to studyUse Google News, Technorati or Radian6 to identify the conversations around the topic Analyze the conversations for type, tone and positioningLook at share of positioning, tone or conversation

Benchmarking against your peers

Looking at what the best doSetting goals accordinglyUse data to persuade recalcitrant spokespeople

Social Media in CrisisListen instantly to a wide range of influencersIdentify weaknesses in communications, customer service, or in the product

Improve your reputation

Listen first, then respondStop doing stupid things

Case Studies

For all institutions, most postings were simply making an observation or distributing media.

Page 54

3

6

1

1

7

36

1

29

5

15

14

2

16

1

2

12

7

2

6

2

24

787

3

2

203

12

12

46

11

1

3

2

1

4

1

4

3

6

2

1

13

2

2

1

13

2

6

18

4

1

1

5

35

3

17

2

8

9

1

1

1

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%

Acknowledging receipt of information

Advertising Something

Answering a question

Asking a question

Augmenting a previous post

Calling for action

Disclosing personal information

Distributing media

Expressing criticism

Expressing support

Expressing surprise

Giving a heads-up

Giving a shout-out

Making a suggestion

Making an observation

Offering an opinion

Playing a game

Rallying support

Recruiting people

Showing dismay

Share of Conversation Types

Arizona State

Michigan State

Penn State

Purdue University

University of Michigan

44.2%

6.5%

30.9%

49.5%

100.0%

100.0%

100.0%

1.6%

53.9%

100.0%

26.9%

23.1%

10.8%

38.7%

72.7%

10.9%

15.5%

46.1%

66.6%

27.3%

35.1%

39.7%

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%

Acknowledging receipt of information

Advertising Something

Answering a question

Asking a question

Augmenting a previous post

Calling for action

Disclosing personal information

Distributing media

Expressing criticism

Expressing support

Expressing surprise

Giving a heads-up

Giving a shout-out

Making a suggestion

Making an observation

Offering an opinion

Playing a game

Rallying support

Recruiting people

Showing dismay

Share of Engagement by Conversation Type - Institutional Blogs

Arizona State

Michigan State

Penn State

Purdue University

University of Michigan

cx

Share of conversation vs share of engagement

Page 55

2

2

1

2

1

6

5

3

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

2

2

2

1

2

1

2

1

4

2

1

4

2

1

1

4

1

6

7

6

2

2

2

2

1

3

2

3

1

0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20

Faculty

Students

Research, Physical Sciences

Courses

Research, Earth Sciences

Projects, Non -Research

Financials

Alumni Topics

Research, Life Sciences

Staff

Admissions

Legal News

Other

Research, Agriculture

Policies

Institution, Overall

Campus Life

Research, Social Sciences

Share of Subject

Peer 1

Michigan State

Peer 2

Peer 3

Peer 4

15.3%

68.7%

100.0%

4.4%

33.3%

96.8%

28.6%

34.9%

12.5%

43.3%

28.6%

13.0%

38.3%

100.0%

23.6%

66.7%

6.3%

28.6%

20.8%

2.3%

95.6%

33.2%

5.8%

28.6%

100.0%

86.8%

13.0%

31.0%

22.1%

3.2%

71.4%

43.5%

18.8%

94.2%

56.7%

14.2%

13.2%

53.2%

28.4%

21.1%

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%

Admissions

Alumni Topics

Campus Life

Community Relations

Courses

Events

Faculty

Financials

Institution, Overall

Inventions

Legal News

Other

Partnerships

Policies

Projects, Non - Research

Research, Agriculture

Research, Earth Sciences

Research, Life Sciences

Research, Other

Research, Physical Sciences

Research, Social Sciences

Staff

Students

Share of Engagement by Subject - ,External Blogs

Peer 1

Michigan State

Peer 2

Peer 3

Peer 4

The vast majority of discussion in external blogs is neutral.

Page 56

23

29

12

14

20

5

8

4

1

4

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

University of Michigan Purdue University Penn State Michigan State Arizona State

Share of Tone

Negative

Neutral

Positive

71%

3%

29%

94%

83%

42%

58%

6%

14%

58%

42%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

Arizona State Michigan State Penn State Purdue University University of Michigan

Share of Engagement by Tone - External Blogs

Negative

Neutral

Positive

Overall Comparison of Georgia Tech Social Media Outlets

57/17

0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

25%Share of Youtube

Share of Social Bookmarking

Share of FacebookShare of Institutional

Blogs

Share of External Blogs

Georgia Tech

Competitor Average

• Based on 2007 data, Georgia Tech outperformed its peers in Facebook presence, but significantly lagged peers on other social media.

• Post-2007 media monitoring has not included a social media dimension due to funding constraints, but this will be important to trend as feasible in the future.

Definitions: YouTube: a video sharing site. Social Bookmarking: a site where members can display media they have found on the web. Facebook: a social networking site. Institutional Blogs: blogs hosted and owned by schools studied. External Blog: any blog post that is not hosted by an institution.

Share of All Coverage

User Generated Media 58

During a crisis, UGM channels more likely to be negative

UGM amplified negative traditional media coverage.Unusual negative stories, like MIT’s fake bomb scare, became popular on social bookmarking sites. Negative news linked to politics was a mainstay on external blogs.Facebook profiles amplified each of these effects, and also included critical pieces from campus newspapers.

0.0%0.0%0.0%3.8%

1.9%

14.5%

10.6%

1.9% 0.5%1.3%

13.2%

0.8%

YouTube(1,718 | 194)

SocialBookmarking

(310 | 5)

InstitutionBlogs

(317 | 12)

FacebookPopularTopics

(76 | 21)

External Blogs

(367 | 26)

TraditionalMedia

(2,802 | 154)

Georgia Tech Only All Institutions

Percent of Content Considered Negative Per Channel

59

UGM channels offered equal opportunity for message communication

18%

18%

42%

24%

42%

40%

YouTube (N=194)

Social Bookmarking(N=5)†

Institution Blogs(N=12)†

Facebook PopularTopics (n=22)†

External Blogs(N=26)†

Traditional Media(N=154)

Percent of Georgia Tech Content That Communicated One or More Strategic Messages

Where people get the content they share on Facebook

Sources of content

Genre of content

Understanding brand ownership of online video content

N=2,555,691

Peer Organizations

4.33%

Your Organization0.18% Other

Organizations8.65%

Individual Users86.84%

Use ownership to signal brand participation

Provide alerts for possible brand management issues

USO Case Study

63

Conversation Type January February March

Making an observation 142 152 46

Expressing support 20 40 261

Offering an opinion 18 1 1

Rallying support 4 4 5

Advertising something 10

Asking a question 1 2 6

Distributing media 4 2

Making a suggestion 2 3

Giving a shout-out 1 2 1

Calling for action 1 2

Expressing criticism   1 1

Disclosing personal information 1 1

Putting out a wanted ad   1

Expressing agreement   1

Recruiting people 1

Answering a question 1

Expressing surprise   1

Grand Total 206 213 321

0 50 100 150 200 250 300

Rallying support

Asking a question

Making an observation

Expressing support

4

5

22

40

24

221

Mentions

Conversation Type by Message Saturation

Contains no message

Contains One+ Message

0 50 100 150 200 250 300

Rallying support

Asking a question

Making an observation

Expressing support

12

178

34

83

Mentions

Conversation Type by Tone

Positive

Neutral

Negative

Moving conversation from observation to support

Social Media OverviewMarch 2009

65

SourceEngagement

Index

topix.net 19

community.babycenter.com 15

liveleak.com 12

patsfans.com 10

forum.militarysos.com, 9.7

michaelyon-online.com 4

forum.gon.com 2

americamatters.org 1

outboundnews.com 1

flickr.com 0.7

us.allscoop.net 0.67

moaablogs.org 0.5

swymer.wordpress.com 0.5

youtube.com 0.1

0 5 10 15 20 25

icelebz.com

us.allscoop.net

buzzhollywood.com

topix.net

video.aol.com

forum.militarysos.com,

flickr.com

youtube.com

1

2

1

2

5

3

2

1

3

5

4

21

16

Top Sources by Message Saturation

Contains no message Contains One+ Message

Media Engagement & Online Giving

Red line indicates media impressions

35,152,789 OTS

6,253,852 OTS

Thank You!

For more information on measurement, read my blog: http://kdpaine.blogs.com or subscribe to The Measurement Standard:

www.themeasurementstandard.comFor a copy of this presentation

go to: http://www.kdpaine.comFollow me on Twitter: KDPaineFriend me on Facebook: Katie

Paine Or call me at 1-603-868-1550