Being vs. Using Social: Intention Conflicts

by Jay Deragon on 01/13/2010

While brands are using social the majority of them do not understand that being social has to match up with using it. The different between the two is transparent to the marketplace of “buyers” and they have little time to waste when attempting to interact with you.

Using social to market your stuff while not being social is considered anti-social  and not in alignment with the intent of the marketplace.

What Is Considered Anti-Social?

There is a host of behaviors reflected by what, where, when, why and how you either take or give people value in the way you enable or constrain an engagement.  While many are now touting engagement marketing the fact is that the very word “marketing” doesn’t imply “social” to most people whom you try to engage buyers.  The reality is that people are actually trying to engage with you and their intentions are not relevant or relative to what you call “marketing”. Marketing, and its related practices, is and never has been considered a relational process for buyers rather a mass messaging process for suppliers.

Buyers Are Trying to Engage You

Marketers trying to engage buyers is a reversal of the intent of the buyer. When buyers want something their intent is to first find it, assess its value, determine a price point and to see what others have experienced in the relationship with the seller. For the seller to truly engage the buyer they must focus on:

  • Enabling the buyer to find you easily without traps, tricks and delays (the first engagement)
  • Providing relevant and relative information that is in alignment with the buyers intent. (attention)
  • Provide “value” in terms of the experience, information and in a relational manner. (attraction)
  • Being transparent in terms of other buyer experiences  (affinity)
  • Demonstrate intent to serve the interest and intents of the audience (relational)
  • Enable buyers to act according to their intents, whether a purchase, a referral or simply a desire to engage for informational purposes (actions)

The internet has enabled buyers to find things fairly easily. However when they find you most of you create barriers to allowing buyers to engage. Your web site has pop ups, forced registration, the content is not in context to buyer intents and their first experience constraints them from engaging with you for whatever purposes.  Still motivated to engage buyers may simply decide to call you only to experience:

  1. Difficulty in finding out how to actually contact you.
  2. When they are able to contact you they end up being put on hold
  3. Then they are passed from one department to another
  4. When finally engaged with  someone that person cannot fulfill the buyers original intent
  5. Motivated to share this experience with you they are forced to send emails to info@comp[email protected] which reflects no real person receiving the buyers communications.

Buyers see and experience your use of  “social media” to propagate your message, your deal of the day or their email was spammed with your message (all considered anti-social). Even with these anti-social engagement methods a few may respond when your message matches their intents at any given time.  Then they attempt to engage with you and experience 1-5 above.

You might have gotten buyer attention by using social media but their desire to engage was met by your inability to “be social”. My father used to always say “walking the talk is different that talking the talk.

{ 11 comments }

T.S. Elliott ? February 25, 2010 at 10:19 am

RT @mikeelliott: Problem with co.'s and social media is most "use social media" before understanding how to "be social" see: http://bit.ly/d8swVR #irchat

Mike Elliott February 25, 2010 at 10:18 am

Problem with co.'s and social media is most "use social media" before understanding how to "be social" see: http://bit.ly/d8swVR #irchat

MB Cosulting NJ January 26, 2010 at 2:31 pm

Being social is a reflection of how well the organization serves people’s intent (internally and externally)http://short.to/13bo3

Gene De Libero January 20, 2010 at 5:38 pm

Being vs. Using Social: Intention Conflicts. http://bit.ly/7PioLf

Robert Coates January 14, 2010 at 8:55 am

Thoughtful look at using the social. Also applies to training? Being vs. Using Social: Intention Conflicts http://bit.ly/4oy6Wh

Judith Germain January 14, 2010 at 7:13 am

Being vs. Using Social: Intention Conflicts: http://bit.ly/7uzhT4

Michael Zeuthen January 14, 2010 at 2:04 am

RT @b3buy: Being vs. Using Social: Intention Conflicts http://bit.ly/4oy6Wh While brands are using social the majority of them do not un …

Mitch aka Misupilami January 14, 2010 at 12:50 am

Being vs. Using Social: Intention Conflicts #branding #socialmedia http://ow.ly/WjQq

Online Affairs January 14, 2010 at 12:50 am

Being vs. Using Social: Intention Conflicts #branding #socialmedia http://ow.ly/WjQv

JDeragon January 13, 2010 at 10:31 pm

people are trying to engage with you & their intentions are not relevant or relative to what you call "marketing".http://is.gd/69ryR

JDeragon January 13, 2010 at 2:47 pm

While brands are using social the majority of them do not understand that being social has to match up with using it. http://bit.ly/6I0Xdd

Comments on this entry are closed.

{ 14 trackbacks }

Previous post:

Next post: