« A walk in the snow with not-so-strangers | Main | Pat Robertson, zombie metrics and other things that just don’t die »

January 04, 2010

Comments

Related Backlinks

Do you see a pricing metric for 'increased engagement' in the future?

local seo company

Does engagement mean that response between engaged parties is immediate, or does latency not matter? How quickly must one (or an enterprise respond) to those with whom we are engaged?

seo services

Does engagement mean that response between engaged parties is immediate, or does latency not matter? How quickly must one (or an enterprise respond) to those with whom we are engaged?

cheap lacoste shoes

I believe that this organization takes the opinions of people like me into account

oil mill

This is excellent information, Katie. The USO example you gave really helped to make your points clearly. Thank you, as always, for sharing your insight and expertise.

Coach Outlet

Itis a moving story!

David Geddes

What I really like is that you break down the levels of engagement. It frustrates me that so much of the social media engagement buzz treats low-level activities ad ends in themselves.

My other frustration is that most corporations are not at the level of sophistication that they can appreciate all this. last year's presentation by Bill Margaritis (FedEx) at the IPR Summit on measurement was a visionary statement from a company that does get it. But I recall Bill saying that it took him about 10 years to get internal buy-in. This kind of company is rare. Keep up the good fight.

David Geddes

Katie -- This is an excellent post because you break down the levels of engagement. Too many assume that a level 1 engagement metric is sufficient. Now "real" engagement carried cognitive components (they can be measured by metrics you describe), but there is also an emotional or affective component relationships. This is clearly visible in the Grunig questions. Can this be measured other than through a survey? I am less sure.

Everyone should remember that this is engagement for a very specific -- and today very small -- audience, people who use Twitter.

SEO

Really appreciative. I believe in Grunig's theory.

Laurel Miltner

This is excellent information, Katie. The USO example you gave really helped to make your points clearly. Thank you, as always, for sharing your insight and expertise.

Laurel (@laurelmackenzie)

misty moyse

good read
as some say, if everything has a price, what is the ROI for the often times lengthy engagement model (may not yield volunteers, donations, advocacy, for a while)

Jen

This is a test comment from TypePad support.

Lauren Vargas

You warm my heart talking about Grunig! ;) Thank you for the shout out. There is so much more to engagement than turning up the volume.

Lauren Vargas
Community Manager at Radian6
@VargasL

Queen of Measurement

Lets see if this will accept comments now.
Ed, yes, I do see a pricing metric for engagement but it will be highly industry and product specific.
Rich, yes, latency does matter, but at different levels depending on the objective and the sales cycle.
Tom - I think the rapid rise of Twitter use in travel and tourism is amazing. its one of the few places that following someone on Twitter is a real measure of engagement.

TomCayman

This is an excellent post as a point of reference for some simple mileposts in the development of a customer relationship.

Stripping it down though, the blog title is key... engagement=relationship.

Analysing that, what we must all look for in engaging online is :
- first - knowing who our customer is
- second - knowing where they are
- third - being there to tell our story and give them a chance to be part of that story.

A lot of my work is in the travel space, and where I find many in travel PR (and travel journalism) are losing their way right now is with the rapid onslaught of new ways for the customer to gain and absorb information in many ways, many channels, many levels.

I recently blogged (https://mccallumsolutions.com/2010-the-year-of-the-customer/) that you can't control engagement with the customer anymore, you can (at best) mediate.... that is quite the learning curve for all of us, but particularly the PR industry.. but some are learning, and they WILL thrive.

Rich Reader

The model is generally good, though I wonder a little about the persistence of engagement given the latency between acts of engagement.

Does engagement mean that response between engaged parties is immediate, or does latency not matter? How quickly must one (or an enterprise respond) to those with whom we are engaged?

I like the lurker-to-action- taker ratio, though we should agree to exclude flaming trolls as action takers, as their actions are involuntary (e.g. coughing, sneezing, Tourette's syndrome, and nervous fits).

Funny in an odd way, on page 556 of Grunig's relationship theory ( https://www.instituteforpr.org/files/uploads/IPRRC_11_Proceedings_4.pdf ), dependability is called into question in the indiscriminate use of bullet points:

2. I believe that this organization takes the opinions of people like me into account
3. when making decisions. (Dependability)

in my opinion, that's not Dependability


Ed Hartigan

excellent stuff Katie - thanks.

Engagement goes so many levels deeper than that first exchange. I have been explaining this (badly it would seem!) to some colleagues who are attempting to put a price on engagement, and even on Level 1 engagement, to borrow your term.

Do you see a pricing metric for 'increased engagement' in the future?

thanks

Ed

The comments to this entry are closed.