There have been a lot of discussions around how to measure social media. While most seem comfortable measuring the “media” aspect (after all, it’s what we are comfortable with) there is an uncertainty around measuring the “social” part. Mainly because there’s a lot of confusion―especially within corporations and agencies—as to what “social” actually means.

Over the last few weeks, I’ve been compiling a list of measurements that have been offered by Chris Brogan, Brian Solis, Larry Weber and from recent conversations on Plurk with two social media practitioners, Amber Naslund and Jane Chin. The list includes:

• Links
• Traffic
• Threads
• Comments
• Page views
• Trackbacks
• Registrations
• Unique visitors
• Net Promoter Score (NPS)
• Number of positive mention
• Customer Lifetime Value (CLV)

It contains a lot of metrics that marketers are used to―or at least should be familiar with. Typically, the discomfort and confusion occurs when marketers try to tie these metrics back to ROI.

During a recent Plurkshop, hosted by David Alston of Radian6, the measuring of social media effectiveness was discussed and a question kept popping up…

Is ROI the right measure for social media? The very interesting responses suggested that perhaps the “I” should be measured as Initiative, Involvement or Interaction.

Another important area also surfaced during the Plurkshop: listening. Ultimately, listening is the most important―and valuable—aspect of social media. That said, can you effectively measure the impact of listening as it relates to the new ROI? Maybe. Maybe not.

But, here’s an example of how not listening makes the argument for a new ROI:

Recently, a business associate made a virtual introduction via LinkedIn. This person’s only intent was only to connect two marketers that might have some common interests, networks, etc. The person introduced to me was with an agency. I reached out, sent a note saying hello, introducing myself, etc. The response received: “when can we set up an appointment to discuss our services with you?” What?! Are you kidding? But you probably new that was coming, didn’t you?

My next response, “I think the purpose of the introduction was to get to know each other, etc., etc.” Their response: “We do have a PR offering, so if you ever have a need, please keep us in mind.”

It’s obvious that this person only wants my business and could care less about developing a relationship. So, I ask a test question: “do you offer social media services?”

The response: “[Yes]. We also perform social media audits, and participate in blogging on behalf of our clients. We actually do quite a bit in this area. Please tell me if you would like to learn more.”

Interesting. (Yes, I know, the response is wrong on so many levels. A topic for another time.) If this person would have “listened” to my suggestion of getting to know one another and perhaps stopped to consider having an actual conversation, about something other than the services the company offered, they would have learned something very valuable.

As a rule of thumb I never hire a new vendor without having a relationship first—a rule that I have followed for over 14 years. (And I don’t mean a long standing relationship, but heck a conversation or two would have been nice.)

The value of not listening? On a project basis, let’s call it $10,000. On an on-going basis for a year, let’s say $50,000. Perhaps it’s not a lot of money, but it is money that they will now never earn.

Listening: $10,000-$50,000
Not Listening: $0

And that, my marketing friends, is an example of the new ROI (Initiative, Involvement, or Interaction) and the “social” of/in social media!

(Note: To help preserve anonymity, I did not include all information in the e-mail transactions, but the essence of the conversation is factual and is being used only to show an example.)

[Image purchased from iStock]

10 Responses to “The Value of Not Listening”