No man is an iland

A lot of people are writing about what Facebook’s new messaging system means for your current email tactics.

So let’s not go there. (You’ll find relevant links at the end of the post).

Instead, let’s look at it as a marker…a staging post in the evolution of online communication: does “Project Titan” have wider things to say about how we need to communicate with our audience?

The most important lessons of the Facebook announcement come not from the nature of the platform itself, but from the goals, principles and thought processes that led to its development.

And what are these lessons?

Lesson 1: Hurrah…email is not dead

OK, let’s clear this out the way.

As Facebook’s Mark Zuckerberg said when introducing the new system:

“This is not an email killer. This is a messaging system that includes email as one part of it.”

The incorporation of email in the new system is implicit recognition of the continuing value and longevity of the channel.

It recognizes a need to integrate Facebook with email to extend the former’s reach…to allow Facebook users to communicate more easily with the majority of the online population who aren’t also users.

But email advocates shouldn’t rest on their Facebook-branded laurels.

There are a lot of clever folk at Facebook and the company’s survival depends on understanding communication needs among its audience.

This is what they came up with for the characteristics of “next generation messaging”:

“seamless, informal, immediate, personal, simple, minimal, short”

That’s not going to fit every communication need or audience, but it’s still worth just reflecting a minute on those seven words. Specifically…

Lesson 2: It’s about communication, not channels

Facebook’s “seamless messaging” concept throws the emphasis back onto communication as a whole and away from the “channel battle”.

People don’t want to use email or send a text or chat…they just want to communicate.

They may have preferences for the medium they use to communicate certain content with certain people, but it’s the communication itself that’s really important.

Marketers, in particular, tend to think in terms of channels. In the battle for budgets and self-justification, the medium can become more important than the message.

That inevitably leads to a disconnect between “senders” and “recipients”. Instead of asking “what email should I send?” or “how can we use SMS marketing here?” we should perhaps first ask:

“What’s the best channel or combination of channels to use to communicate effectively with our audience and reach our goals?”

Lesson 3: Low-friction communication and simplicity

Another goal behind Facebook’s new system is to remove “friction” and “technology” from the online communication process…to reverse the trend toward feature overload and messaging clutter.

Email marketing can take a hint from that, for example by:

• Ensuring sign-up forms and sign-up processes are clear and simple.
• Giving people choice and control through preference centers, but without subjecting them to choice overload
• Limiting the information required at or after sign-up to what’s really needed (or finding alternative ways to collect the same information without burdening the subscriber)

Simplicity might also extend to the content itself. Will future subscribers have an even greater preference for short, punchy messaging rather than long-form content? Will text-only email make a return?

Lesson 4: Portability

The idea of seamless channel-agnostic messaging also reflects a trend toward location-, time- and device-independent messaging. More people want to be always on, everywhere they go, whatever device they have with them (PC, laptop, netbook, tablet, smartphone…)

Now combine that concept with the explosion in smartphone ownership and use.

It’s clear that mobile email should be high on the email agenda.

That’s a design issue: people expect your email to work well wherever they read it. And they will read it on different devices using different applications.

And it’s a strategy issue. In a world of instant gratification and 24/7 availability, how does that change campaign timing and content?

Lesson 5: Back to the individual

Perhaps the most important lesson is what Facebook is saying about communication styles, and how it will build expectations of how people communicate with each other online.

A common thread though Facebook’s presentation is supporting personal, meaningful conversations.

Now I don’t expect a personal, meaningful conversation with the company that sends me printer ink. We don’t have that kind of relationship.

But…

…the changes at Facebook reflect and drive the general social networking-induced expectation of authentic communication, based on personality and value. Something that email marketing also needs to reflect.

Lesson 6: Connectedness and control

The need for personality, authentic communication and value, in turn, drives trust. And value and trust become critical factors as more and more messaging systems build in easy ways to restrict access to inboxes.

Facebook’s new “social inbox” messaging system turns the user’s contacts into a de facto whitelist. Like Gmail’s Priority Inbox, it gives users more control over whether messages reach them and/or in what order they are presented for viewing.

This is where trust and value come in, because if you deliver both, this encourages users to make a formal connection to the sender. And that formal connection (friend, follower etc.) will increasingly count at places like Facebook as an indicator of a priority communication source.

Put simply, online messaging systems are trying harder and harder to winnow out the not-so-important stuff from people you’re not on best terms with.

One approach is to then encourage people to formally connect with you, with appropriate calls to action and links to Facebook pages etc.

But underlying this approach is the obvious, but forgotten, need to deserve that connection. Which is where creating value and being trustworthy come in.

(Trust? Personality? Value? Sounds familiar…has anything really changed?)

If you don’t deserve the connection, don’t expect to get it. You’ll be locked out of some prime communication centers. Which, frankly, might be what many users want…keeping some places for personal messaging and others for business or commercial messaging.

Fun, isn’t it?

Lesson 7: No, the kids will NOT end up like us

Email acolytes argue that a lot of these trends and the gravitation toward SMS, Facebook etc. is not a big issue, because however big they might be among younger folk, these communication patterns will change as they get older. Facebook is for high school students.

That’s true, but only partially true.

The Facebook generation will carry their preferences, habits, patterns of behavior, communication styles and technological familiarity with them as they age. They may modify them, but they won’t abandon all of them.

A generation brought up on apps and mobile and Facebook and LOL OMG SMS will not drop these habits completely in the same way they might swap a skateboard for a Skoda.

Facebook is building a platform for new generations. One with a different understanding of privacy and different expectations, habits, skills, needs etc. to people like me. That’s how the world has always worked.

And this will change perceptions and use of channels like email. To suggest otherwise is, frankly, denial.

Lesson 8: No panic

None of the challenges and trends and concepts addressed above will happen overnight.

Some may not happen at all.

None will happen just because Facebook introduced a new messaging system.

And entire audiences won’t suddenly be reduced to gibbering message addicts, incapable of understanding more than 140 characters worth of text.

The relevance of the new Facebook system, like Gmail’s Priority Inbox, is not (just) due to its features and practical impact on today’s email marketing, but what it says about where messaging is heading online. And forewarned is forearmed.

Agree?

Useful links:
10 Ways for E-mail Marketers to Survive Facebook Messages
5 Implications of the New Facebook email services
Facebook launches new multichannel Messages system
What Facebook’s New Messaging System Means for Marketers
5 Connected Marketing Tactics to Prepare for Facebook Messages
Facebook messaging roll-out: Titan or Titanic? (with lots of links)

Find related articles:

• Channel: Email marketing strategy | Email and social media

My son has finally become my technological superior.

He is 10. (I’m proud I held out so long.)

This great life-changing experience (involving a new smartphone and my inability to use it*) caused me to sit and reflect on my inadequacy in other fields of digital life, notably online marketing.

Here are seven mistakes I and many others have made, which I pass on in the hope you can stay ahead of the next generation longer than me.

1. Don’t be seduced by high-profile stars

You look at a social media guru’s stream of Twitter messages and think, “Holy retweet Batman, I gotta get tweeting.”

You look at big brand’s busy Facebook page and think, “Holy page update Batman, I gotta get on this Facebook thing.”

You look at the creative emails from your favorite apparel retailer and think, “Holy open rates Batman, I gotta do more email promotions.”

Not necessarily.

The profile and (apparent) success of various channel stars has a seductive pull. But none of them share your business model, goals, skills, resources or audience.

We shouldn’t seek to emulate these stars simply because they are there. Instead, we should look to them for inspiration where the channel they work in and the tactics they use also fit our situation.

2. Don’t be seduced by channel hype

As a dedicated digital hypochondriac, each day I wake with the thought “what new development will kill my business model today?”

A healthy awareness of the competitive environment is good. But panic isn’t.

Marketing headlines can leave you thinking your lack of an integrated multichannel marketing system or star status on Facebook will be the death of your business.

But it’s not like that.

There’s pressure to do certain things in online marketing. But a lot of that pressure comes from:

• Journalists interested in a hot story (not in helping your business)
• Vendors interested in selling (not in helping your business)
• Experts interested in self-vindication and self-promotion (not in helping your business)

Don’t ignore them, because the same sources also have a great deal to offer. But take the headlines and ask “does this make sense for me and my market?”

In many cases, “Does this make sense?” is all you need to ask.

The value of each channel to you and/or your organization guides you on where you focus efforts and how much you invest in acquisition and messaging. Among the things to consider are how different channels differ in terms of:

• Acquisition costs
• Suitability for relationship building
• Suitability for customer dialogue/service
• Suitability for driving responses through that channel and others
• Availability of actionable analytics and subscriber data
• Message costs and reach
• Risk

None of that is easy to assess and compare, but a simple awareness of channel differences is an important start. They are not different ways to reach the same end, but different ways to reach various ends.

The last point in the list – risk – is often ignored online and can be reformulated as “Who owns the channel?”

Email, for example, is an intrinsic part of the Internet itself. It’s near ubiquitous, built into the very infrastructure of the online world.

Nobody “owns” email.

Your email list and website are, broadly speaking, hostage to nobody (email delivery issues notwithstanding). Nor are either likely to disappear.

Other channels, particularly new social ones, are not so fortunate.

Twitter, Facebook, LinkedIn etc. are all private entities. You have a presence there at the discretion of the owners. If any of them “dies”, your relationships there die with them. And you are hostage to the beneficence of these owners.

There is no suggestion that any of these locations intends exploiting their position of power “unfairly” or is likely to disappear anytime soon. But the risk is there.

3. Don’t be seduced by feel-good metrics

The early hunter, crossing the plain with spear in hand, probably focused on the small deer in front of him rather than the herd of mammoths hiding in the wood.

Which might explain why we focus on the numbers right in front of us, rather than the bigger numbers hiding in the spreadsheets.

Likes on Facebook! Followers on Twitter! Open rates on emails!

We know our business goals. We know what metrics really matter. And still we fuss and obsess over the ones that don’t matter quite as much.

And this despite every article on measuring success telling us not to focus on these feel-good metrics. If you’re building a house, you’re goal isn’t “to reach 25,000 bricks”, but that’s how we behave.

I have no solution, but two suggestions:

1. The perceived importance of a metric is often proportional to how easy it is to find it.

If you know the metrics you should be paying most attention to, then set up a reporting system, spreadsheet, whatever to make getting those numbers as easy as possible. There are, for example, basic ROI calculators out there (example).

If email marketing campaign reports started off with profit and revenue numbers and buried open rates on page 17, we wouldn’t be having this conversation.

2. If you can’t kick the feel-good metrics habit, then take the trouble to understand what they truly measure and how that relates to your end goals. Then at least you have a good chance of drawing out the right insights from your analysis.

4. Don’t be seduced by terminology

Email senders have readers. Except most of them don’t read your emails.

Twitter folk have followers, a word that is totally out of proportion to the tenuous link that joins the follower to the followed.

Even Facebook’s “like” is disingenuous, as those keen to disparage a page owner will “like” them in order to gain posting privileges.

Most “followers”, “friends” and “readers” offer their allegiance only for as long as you offer them value through your updates, posts and other messages.

If you tip the value exchange too much in your favor, then their loyalty will be exposed for the delicate thing it is.

Actions speak louder than words: don’t let the word describing a relationship lead you to overestimate the actual strength of that relationship.

And don’t forget  that this relationship varies within each channel too.

For example, how many of your Twitter followers are following thousands in a never-ending dance to the tune of “I’ll follow you if you follow me”? Good luck getting any attention there.

Or do you have a segment of followers adding you to their Twitter lists to better access your words of wisdom? In such cases, the word follower has real meaning.

5. Don’t worry about what you get back from the time and money invested in a channel

When we analyse results, we tend to make two errors.

The first is analysis in isolation. Did the time I spent on Twitter produce enough positive outcomes to justify the effort?

That question is incomplete.

It’s not (just) about whether the Twitter response justifies the time on Twitter, but whether the Twitter response justifies not spending that time elsewhere.

It’s not enough to get a positive ROI. It has to be better than the alternatives. An obvious concept that’s often forgotten in the rush to justify a personal channel preference.

Email experts will, rightly, tell you that investment (of time or technology) in segmentation will boost end results. If you analyse in isolation, you jump into segmentation. And you get a good return for your new investment.

But the right approach is to ask if the money or time invested in segmentation might be better used elsewhere for an even bigger response.

The promotional value I get through Twitter justifies the time I spend there. It does not, however, adequately compensate for the time lost to other activities. I’d be better off writing more content, for example.

If I was a rational human being (or had a boss), I’d spend less time on Twitter.

The second error is also analysis in isolation. Channel results are typically limited to those observable through the channel itself. So email responses are measured as opens, clicks on links in emails, and conversions that follow a click (like a sale or download).

That’s fine, but the next level is to find ways of measuring responses to email that come through other channels. When you send an email out, does it get people to, for example:

• Go to Google and search for your brand/products/services?
• Visit your real-world store?
• Type in your website URL directly?

There are many responses we don’t capture, but which impact the value of that channel to your overall results.

The only way to be sure of a channel’s true worth (and thus to make the right investment and tactical decisions) is to follow Kevin Hillstrom’s advice on holdout tests.

6. Avoid “the weight watcher’s butter” syndrome

Don’t spread yourself too thin.

For many organizations, you can find justification to be active in numerous channels. Even if it’s just an obligation to appear “cutting edge”.

But the net is filled with Facebook pages, blogs, Twitter accounts and email newsletters that started strong and faded quickly. Is it better to have no presence at all than a crappy one?

Is it not better to start small and grow than start big and shrink? The latter builds expectations and fails to meet them, the latter builds expectations and exceeds them.

If you have to be present everywhere, but can’t be everywhere, then design this presence so it:

1. Still offers something meaningful there (however small)
2. Has minimal maintenance requirements

7. Don’t listen to me

Finally, as I’ve written before:

“Are you implementing new tactics because some Englishman in Austria with a blog said they worked, because they make intrinsic sense for your audience and model, or because you tested the ideas and found them beneficial?”

Any other lessons you’d care to add?

*…but note I am still way better than him at Angry Birds.

Find related articles:

• Channel: Email and social media

I really enjoy producing the Famous Inboxes series. So I’d like to do more. But this site is about practical email marketing, so there’s a conflict there. The happy solution:

The latest inbox - Napoleon Bonaparte – is over at the Famous Inboxes’ new website:  FamousInboxes.com.

New inboxes will now appear much more frequently and also cater to the thousands of people who liked Darth Vader’s inbox and wondered why on earth it was on a marketing website.

If you’d like to get updates of new inboxes, the new site has its own feed, Twitter account and Facebook page (my first real venture into the mysteries of Facebook).

Hope you’ll join me over there!

Find related articles:

• Channel: None (just a friendly update)