I’ve had the interesting experience this year of being asked to be a judge for the top 100 social media brands. The launch event is tonight and the report is now available here.
The number crunching analysis had all been carried out by the organisers Brandwatch and Headstream. As judges we were asked to comment on whether:
1. For the main part, the brand provides value based content in its social spaces, rather than focusing on pushing traditional marketing ‘messages’
2. The brand provides a consistent presence on its social platforms, demonstrating an ‘always-on’ approach to community engagement
3. The brand prioritises the community over its own agenda, valuing and responding to the community’s contributions, needs and ideas
4. Overall, there is the sense that the brand has established a powerful community spirit across social spaces – a certain ‘Social Brand Factor’ that’s hard to define, but undeniably present.
Faced with the task of evaluating 100 different brands I quickly came up with a couple of surrogate measures of how the companies were engaging. One was to look at their twitter stream to see if there was any evidence of re tweeting anyone else’s comments. The other was to look at their Facebook page and see if anyone other than the brand was doing any posting.
I won’t comment on the individual final positions (except to say that Innocent deservedly won) but what I found fascinating was that, at least as far as I could see, small companies and the cause related sites interacted quite well with their customers whereas for the Corporate world it was broadcasting as usual.
Does this fit with anyone else’s perceptions?