Second class of the series was as insightful as the first. It was also interesting to watch university professors discuss topics that are typically associated with “young people,” such as social media, and discuss these topics from a more analytical perspective. It was a pleasure to see thoughtful analysis behind the recommendations, some of which I tried to follow intuitively before.
“Many organizations… do not have a strategy.” The class started with an explanation of the strategy itself. (Interesting, the fact that many companies do not have a strategy is noted in a few business books and not that hard to see in the industry.)
Content-related roles in the organization, and in the mind of content creators might not be based on the right criterium. Content strategists sometimes define their role in the aspect of the media they are using. “I am a blogger.” Better to think about who are you and what knowledge can you bring to the audience. What role do you want to play?
This was one of the most interesting points in the class (from my perspective). In many cases, the type of media is confused with type of content, and this confusion seem to be common in the business setting: “we need more video!” Ah, it is as useful as a statement: “We need more pieces of paper!” Though destingtion of content and media in marketing I understood well, the idea that the same confusion can happen in the role definition was a very valuable insight.
The class also discussed different approaches to “content strategy.” Though I would consider “Nurture” part of marketing, and the realm of marketing automation, it was interesting to see how this topic is perceived from the content perspective.
Engagement is least effective
Just throwing in content and measuring it with the metrics available in Facebook and Twitter is the least effective way to go
The class paid specific attention to B-to-B content, and offered very insightful community classification (which, I think, is applicable to both B-to-B and B-to-C).
An interesting example of B-to-B community: private communities for CEOs. Participants are vetted to make sure they are who they indicated they are, and competing companies might be separated into different communities to make them more comfortable. (Clearly, these efforts require significant expense… the community must bring business benefit to the organization and be appropriately staffed).
My experience with communities was curious. Companies might set the communities, though the objective and “how would it benefit the business” may not clear. In this case, asking the business to explain the objective for the community, typically results in a vague answer: “check with the community manager, they have some goals…”
The classification below is an excellent explanation when experts or peer-to-peer approach should be used. In one situation I experienced, the company wanted to implement a peer-to-peer community, but the community members would be adamant that all they wanted to do was to connect with experts. Now I understand the underlying principle of the disconnect.
Social Media should be taken very seriously as a market research tool. People talk on social media before they talk anywhere else about a specific problem or issue. Example: social media indicated unhappiness related to use of certain type of manufacturing approach by Lego brand. The indication was small, but it preceded a more significant outcry that had to be addressed by changes in manufacturing.
Excellent class, full of insights, tips, and analysis of the fundamental points that easy to overlook in day-to-day efforts. Highly recommend!