#SMMStandards Progress and Roadmap: Marklein and Paine Present the First Social Media Measurement Standards at the Dublin Summit

Last week at the Dublin Summit (AMEC's 4th European Summit on Measurement) Tim Marklein and Katie Paine presented the results of social media standards-setting work by the Coalition and the Conclave. You can view the whole side deck here (Download SMMStandards_MarkleinPaine_Jun15'12,) or just keep reading for a summary.

This presentation detailed the first concrete results and recommendations of a standards-setting process that has involved many people and meetings and a lot of hard work. See this post on the #SMMStandards blog for a list of some of the people involved.

Here's a quick summary of Marklein and Paine's presentation:

Over the past couple years, a cross-industry collaboration of major measurement players set itself the task of working to develop social media standards. They decided to address these six initial priority topics:

1. Content Sourcing & Methods
2. Reach & Impressions
3. Engagement
4. Influence & Relevance
5. Opinion & Advocacy
6. Impact & Value

by moving through the following four steps for each:

1. Working group development of preliminary guidance,
2. Develop a discussion guide,
3. Develop interim standards,
4. Develop approved standards.

Progress has been made on the first of the topics, Content, in the form of a standard content sourcing and methodology table that details just what goes into a measurement program. This table will provide transparency and easy comparison between programs and vendors, similar to a food nutrition label. The idea is that if a company completes this form for a project then they will get certified by AMEC with a special seal of approval (like Good Housekeeping). Here is an example, filled out with details of a hypothetical measurement project:

For each of the other five topics, preliminary guidance and actions for the next year were reported:

Reach & Impressions

• Accurate impressions data is hard to source, especially globally
• Be transparent about sources used and clearly/correctly label charts
• Definitional confusion across media types and disciplines
• Impressions; opportunities to see; circulation; reach; frequency; total vs. targeted reach; visits; visitors; followers; fans; views
• Multipliers should not be used – in fact, dividers are more appropriate
• Few of your followers “read” every tweet; only 8-12% see Facebook posts
• NEXT ACTION: Work with IAB and Media Ratings Council to find common ground. Publish discussion document in Sept/Oct (PRSA, AMEC, IPR and Conclave events).

Engagement

• Engagement is an action that happens after reach, beyond consumption
• Engagement could be but is not necessarily an outcome
• Engagement manifests differently by channel, but typically measurable at three levels – Low, Medium and High – based on effort required, inclusion of opinion and how shared with others
• Low examples = Facebook “likes” and Twitter “follows”
• Medium examples = blog/video comments and Twitter “retweets”
• High examples = Facebook shares and original content/video posts
• Clients prioritize differently, but engagement “levels” are consistent
• NEXT ACTION: Publish discussion document in Sept/Oct (PRSA, AMEC, IPR and Conclave events).

 Influence & Relevance

• Influence is something that takes place beyond engagement
• “You have been influenced when you have thought something that you otherwise wouldn’t have thought or done something that you otherwise wouldn’t have done.” – Philip Sheldrake, “The Business of Influence”
• Influence is multi-level and multi-dimensional, online and offline
• Not popularity; not a single score
• Domain & subject specific – relevance is critical
• Influencers should be identified and rated using custom criteria via desk research, not purely on automated algorithms
• NEXT ACTION: Publish discussion document in Nov/Dec (SNCR and WOMMA events).

Opinion & Advocacy

• Sentiment is over-rated and over-used
• Not the end-all, be-all qualitative measure – other factors to consider
• Sentiment reliability varies by vendor and approach – be transparent
• Opinions, recommendations and other qualitative measures are typically more valuable than raw sentiment and increasingly measurable:
• Opinions (“it’s a good product”)
• Recommendations (“try it” or “avoid it”)
• Feeling/Emotions (“That product makes me feel happy”)
• Intended action (“I’m going to buy that product tomorrow”)
• Coding definitions, consistency and transparency are critical
• NEXT ACTION: Publish discussion document in Nov/Dec (SNCR and WOMMA events).

Impact & Value

• Impact and value will always be dependent on client objectives
• Need to define outcomes in advance – will likely span multiple business goals, especially for social (crosses disciplines)
• “ROI” should be strictly limited to measurable financial impact; “total value” can be used for financial and non-financial impact combination
• Value can be calculated in positive returns (sales, reputation, etc.) or avoided negative returns (risk mitigated, costs avoided)
• Key performance indicators and balanced scorecards are helpful to connect social media impact to business results/language
• NEXT ACTION: Publish discussion document in early 2013.

--WTP

###