KDPaine's PR Measurement Blog

"Can't we all just get along?" or perhaps just eat lobster.

Okay, for the record, I am currently working on "Social Media Standards" with at least five different organizations, and I know of at least two others that are attempting to define them. Never mind the numerous agencies, corporations and others that are working on their own definitions of amorphous terms such as "engagement" "influence" and god forbid "ROI."  So when I read this morning's post from Comscore I wasn't sure whether to be overjoyed or overwhelmed.  Obviously any movement towards standards is good, right?  I'm not entirely sure. I think Comscore has done a great job of addressing a problem, while at the same time acknowledging the existance of two completely definitions of "unique visitors." Essentially what they've done is give us a new term "unique browser" and yet another decision to make.

So here's my suggestion. Lets get representatives from IAB, WAA, SNCR, PRSA, IPRA, IPR, AMEC, CIPR, CPRF in a room.
Let in anyone else that wants to join in the fun. Lock the door. Provide adequate amounts of  lobsters, steam clams, beer and wine (statistically proven to be good for measurement discussion) and not let anyone leave until we've agreed on the one thing that the clients want -- a set of simple prinicples that we all adhere to. I'll provide the house, the lobsters and the wine. Who wants in?  

 

Do we have standards, or just alphabet soup?

You know that a technology is maturing (aka getting old and ossified), when everyone starts talking about imposing "standards" on the industry.

Which is why I was getting  a bit pessimistic for the future of social media. First there was the WOMMA guidelines, then IAB came out with theirs last month.  SNCR and the IPR formed task forces on the topic of social media measurement standards, agencies got into the act, and rumor has it that AMEC and CIPR are about to unveil their standards as well.In the interest of transparency I am a member of the IPR and SNCR task forces, and am a special advisor to the CIPR task force. So if anything, I'm a big part of the problem.

But really, I need not have worried. social Media is evolving so quickly that most of the so called "standards" are really guidelines. The good news is that almost everyone agrees that a single standard isn't ever going to be a reality, and that no matter what, you need to start with agreed upon goals and objectives. So far so good. 

The problem is that many of these guidelines are so generic that they leave the marketplace even more confused. Lets take the recently published IAB guide. The first probem with the IAB guidelines is the title. The use of the word "social media measurement and intent " had me scratching my head at the subject line. Turns out that to the IAB world "intent" is the same as "goals and objectives" (at least I think that's what it means.)

The second problem is that they are force-fitting a bunch of concepts into a three word acronym. The framework is based on three principles: Intent, Awareness/appreciation/action/advocacy and benchmark (which in my version of addition is actually six concepts, but then this is advertising after all.) Other than the obvious convenience of having it spell out the name of the organization, IAB -- get it -- I doubt if this ads clarity to the conversation at all.

Then there's the second concept of the 4As -- which is not the 4As we think of as the American Association of Advertising Agencies, but rather the concepts that you are supposed to use to develop KPIs (Key Performance Indicators) . Except that as anyone knows, awareness is measured, NOT by the number of folowers on Twitter, but on what people's perceptions are, typically discovered thru a survey.  But IAB claims that visiotrs and likes are the same as awareness.

They also claim that part of the "A's"  includes hard financials as in Cost Per Impression (which assumes you can get accurate impression counts for social meida)  Cost per Engagement (which assumes you can agree on a definition of engagement), Cost per Lead  (which assumes that you aren't selling thru resellers or retail outlets) and Cost per Refrral (which assumes you can identify all your referrals). And what does ASS-U-ME stand for? 

The biggest problem with all of these guidelines, and the reason there may yet be room for more, is that they are written by the IAB -- as in ADVERTISING. Nothing against them, but to them its a world that you can control.  And that' is a world that no longer exists. Just ask a few former dictators in the Middle East.

This isn't to say that the IAB guide isn't worth reading. In fact, at the end are some very good  case studies  which very smartly bring up other benefits of social media like its impact on customer service, product development and business strategy.

it's just that you have to wade thru an awful lot of fog to get there.