From today, some of our posts are being republished by Futurelab as part of their Marketing & Strategy Innovation Blog. They bring together a small collection of bloggers who, in their words are
…the world’s sharpest minds in marketing and strategy innovation. People who spark exceptional insights in their field of expertise and inspire their readers to action.
It’s a great collection of people on the site and fantastic to be part of the team. You can read our posts and those from others on the Futurelab team over on the blog (and you can see my profile here).
While I think the recommendations for embracing the online and social element are spot on, I take issue with the scale of the index.
Indexes are a fantastic way of boiling down opinion into a key metric. But in this case, it is based on people rationalising an emotion. How does one quantify and distribute influence? The Internet, as a repository of information and channel of communication and commerce is undoubtedly important, but I think its value is overstated. TV and press retain a large influence, but it may be earlier and less conscious that the Internet. These therefore shouldn’t be overlooked, particularly once synergies and media multiplier effects are counted into.
As you mention, the way that Internet drives is also very category specific. On some occasions it is as word of mouth recommendation, on others it is as a trusted transactional offering. It is of vital importance to distinguish between these and take action appropriate to your particular offering.
Still, it was a very thought-provoking study, and credit to Harris Interactive and Fleishman Hillard for adding to the conversation
I agree with what Simon says and have been mulling this over myself. Measuring influence or intent are notoriously difficult and I suspect the results of the study are worth some deeper investigation. We know that people trust recommendations from others more than they do marketing messages from the brand. And people probably associate the Internet more with the wealth of customer-created content; by contrast they associate TV and print media with the traditional advertising. They probably don’t think of the influence of a recommendation in You Magazine or on Loose Women, yet this kind of influence is no doubt huge. I know many brands who know that getting coverage in either of these places is one of the most successful ways of influencing customers.
So where does this leave us? I suspect that Internet is more influential than TV or print, but would like to investigate more the reason or source of this increased influence. I also think we should be comparing like-for-like. How does a recommendation on a TV show compare with personal recommendations online.
As Simon says - a good debate should be started here.
