• Home
  • About
  • Authors
    • Bart Schutz
    • Dirk Franssens
    • Guido Jansen

  • Persuasion Techniques
  • Tips & ab-tests
  • Theories & Research
  • Events
  • Presentations & Downloads

Home » Theories & Research » The quest for Social Money!

The quest for Social Money!

Posted by: Dirk Franssens    Tags:  brand loyalty, online community, social network    Posted date:  February 22, 2012  |  6 Comments


    • Tweet

    More and more brands are creating an online community. Either on social networks such as Facebook and Google+, or their own. There has been a lot of interest in the Return on Investment by the marketing community.

    “Does spending money building an active online brand community lead to more customer expenditure?”

    University of Michigan

    Scientific research by the University of Michigan (professor Puneet Manchanda et. al.) revealed multiple interesting findings. The bottom line: Yes, 19% more.

    The logic of spending ‘social dollars’

    Looking at the increase of online marketing budgets, or the many job offerings for online or social marketeers suggests companies realize there is a positive ROI on communities. Moreover, brands such as Ikea (IkeaFans) or Disney (MyDisney) created their own online community and motivate its users to actively engage with each other, preferably about the brand. Conversations range from sharing experiences, reviewing new products, and recommendations and advice for usage.

    The rationale behind the money spent on building a social brand community is simple. Customers, who actively engage with a brand in an online brand community, will be more loyal to that brand. Brand loyalty in turn, will lead to spending more money on that particular brand. This makes sense and seems very logical.

    This consumer spending after engaging with a brand in a social community has been defined as social money: money spent by members of an active brand community on that particular brand. In other words, this social money can be directly attributed to the social behaviors that these costumers engage in with that particular brand. The 2 million-dollar questions are:

    “Does having an active brand community lead to more brand loyalty?”

    “And does this increased brand loyalty in turn lead to more social money?”

     

    Time for science!

    Quite some research has been conducted to study the link between engaging with your customers online and brand loyalty. There is also some evidence that brand loyalty lead to more spending on a brand that has an active social community. However, this research usually uses “intention to buy” as their dependent measure and we know that intention does ‘not always’ translates into actual behavior. Moreover, the direct link between engagement, brand loyalty and online spending has not yet been properly tested.

    A good test of this hypothesis should make use of:

    • Two groups: an experimental group consisting of people who actively engage with a brand on a social network, and a control group consisting of similar people whom do not engage with that brand
    • A measure of actual shopping behavior instead of measuring buying intentions
    • Longer term data collection, to compare pre- and post engagement online shopping behavior

    Puneet Manchanda, a marketing professor of the University of Michigan, and his colleagues did just that. They saw a perfect research opportunity when an online retailer decided to build an online social community. Using a quasi-experimental design, they were able to measure how much of the online shopping expenditure on that retailer could be attributed to its members actively engaging with the retailer’s in its online community.

     

    And now for the results…

    What they found was that social money account for about 19% of revenue once customers join an online community. That is a 19% increase in spending on that retailer after the launch of the social community. In case of this retailer, that meant an average added value of about €100 per customer per year (unfortunately, the authors were not allowed to disclose the total revenue per client to put this added value into more perspective). This rise in spending could be attributed to an increase in frequency of visits and not so much to an increase in shopping cart value or conversion rate. Thus, these customers came back more often and therefore bought more products.

    So: Do setup a brand community (that is, when setting up and maintaining an online community costs you less than the profit you make over a 19% sales increase…)

    This research suggests that – if you haven’t already – you should set up your own brand community and actively engage with your customers. Use your online community to create more brand loyalty. Science now proved that – purely financially – it pays off. In fact, the researchers commented that for a brand with a single product (such as Heineken or Douwe Egberts) the pay-offs might even be bigger. The retailer used an umbrella structure to sell many different products of various brands (books, office supplies, etc.) from different brands. Brand loyalty is likely to be even stronger and more persistent for firms marketing a single brand. And of course there are other benefits such as customer insights, product improvement suggestions et cetera.

     

    Discussion

    There are however some questions left to be answered. For example, does setting up an online brand community attract new customers? What should be the focus of a brand in its online community to strengthen brand loyalty? For example, a brand could focus on strengthening existing brand beliefs and attitudes, on active engagement with its community to find out more about their customers, on letting members co-create or review new products, or, most likely, a mixture off the above.

      • Tweet
      About the author
      Dirk Franssens
      Living in Amsterdam, currently working in Utrecht, > 5 years experience in the psychology of changing behaviour. My current focus is online persuasion: the art of optimising consumer dialogue with the use of persuasion techniques. I studied Psychology at Maastricht University and received my PhD at the same university in 2010. During my time as a PhD candidate, I specialized in systematically analysing and changing behaviour. Contact me: dirk@onlinedialogue.nl Add me: http://nl.linkedin.com/in/dirkfranssens Twitter me: dxfranssens
      • http://twitter.com/BartS Bart Schutz

        Great article Dirk!

        It would be interesting to know more exactly what sort of community the particular retailer has setup: 
        How could and did consumers engage within that community? 
        And was it a purely retailer-branded community, or did they use an existing community (or platform)?
        Did they develop themselves, or did they use existing (ie SaaS) solution?
        …

        And would the results apply for other sort of communities as the one used?

        • http://twitter.com/dxfranssens Dirk Franssens

          This retailer set up a “Facebook like” community. Members complete a profile page including profile picture. On their profile page they can indicate their personal preferences (e.g. thriller lover, writer x fan), and they can add and interact with their friends (i.e. private content). Members can also create public content, such as providing recommendations for certain books or movies, or creating a top 10 reading list, etc. 

          So, it is a retailer-branded community which was created by the retailer itself. It took some effort to set up an active community but in the end it paid off and the community became very lively and active (and spend money on the retailer). The results are thus specifically related to brand-related communities. The question remains whether creating a brand community on Facebook type social networds yield the same effects. The benefit of a brand-related community compared to a Facebook type community might be  that at present a brand community allows for more interaction between consumers and between consumers and retailers. 

      • Pingback: The quest for social money! | BetterChange

      • Gjalt-Jorn Peters

        Very interesting study, thank you for point our attention to it, and thank you for the clear concise description. I have one question though.

        As this study used a quasi-experimental design, they did not randomly assign participants to the two conditions, but used participants that had already decided for themselves whether or not to use the social networking facility. This means that the participants who did differ from those who didn’t on at least one variable (i.e. willingness to use the facility), and probably on more variables (e.g. spending behavior).

        How can the researchers (and you) know, therefore, that the networking facility causes this difference in spending behavior? Maybe it’s just a consequence of differences that already existed between the groups of participants, in other words, the social networking facility influenced nothing?

        • http://betterchange.nl Dirk Franssens

          Hello Gjalt-Jorn,

          Thank you for your compliment and your question. You are right in pointing out that they used a quasi-experimental design and as such did not randomly assigned participants to one of two groups. However, in their analysis (which I didn’t discuss here in this post) they performed various robustness test, where they controlled for various factors (e.g. demographics, previous buying behavior, etc.) to control for these potential differences. What they found was that the effect remained significant. In fact, the 19% increase in spending was observed after controlling for these confounding factors.

          But yes, it is difficult to control for the attribute “willingness to join online community” which is why I think more research is needed (preferably a prospective study where it is possible to randomly assign participants) to substantiate the claim by the authors, and to see what the added effect is of creating an online brand community.

        • http://www.betterchange.nl/ Dirk Franssens

          Hello Gjalt-Jorn,

          First, my apologies for this very late reply to your question. I posted this reply a few hours after you posed your question but I used the wrong procedure.   

          So, thank you very much for your compliment and your question. You are right in pointing out that they used a quasi-experimental design and as such did not randomly assigned participants to one of two groups. However, in their analysis (which I didn’t discuss here in this post) they performed various robustness test, where they controlled for various factors (e.g. demographics, previous buying behavior, etc.) to control for these potential differences. What they found was that the effect remained significant. In fact, the 19% increase in spending was observed after controlling for these confounding factors. 

          But yes, it is difficult to control for the attribute “willingness to join online community” which is why I think more research is needed (preferably a prospective study where it is possible to randomly assign participants) to substantiate the claim by the authors, and to see what the added effect is of creating an online brand community.

      • Popular Posts

        • 5 effective, but controversial conversion tips
          ‘Conversion rate’… Online persuasion is ‘pretty often’ used as a means...
        • The quest for Social Money!
          More and more brands are creating an online community. Either on social networks...
        • "Autonomy": a Super Persuasive Technique (+ 5 conversion tips!)
          Autonomy is our innate and universal need to be causal agents of our own lives. Our perception...
        • "Mimicry" Optimizing online conversion? Mimic your customers behavior!
          Why does a sales rep always mimics my smile or my body posture? Well, that is because...
        • "Fear Appeals" An online persuasion booster?
          The art of online persuasion sometimes lies in small details. It is not only about...



       
      • Post Tags

        ab-tests achievements acting human behavior profiling carrots & sticks choice paradox cialidini commitment conversion conversion rate conversion rate optimization conversion tips decision making deliberation without attention effect delighters Dutch event emotion affect heuristic emotions event example feedback feedforward framing gaze cueing incongruency insula negative gazing nuclues accumbens online marketing online persuasion online persuasion technique peak-end-rule perception perceptual contrast Persuasion presentation price inhibition priming rationality reciprocity set completion subconsciousness subliminal reïnforcement supersuasion wheel of persuasion
      • Twitter: @ePersuasion

        • After a session in Sao Paulo last week, @gxjansen will talk about Online Persuasion again today in San José, CA at #JWC12. Kick some ass!
        • RT @Ruugie: Just subscribed for the Launch Alert of the #WheelofPersuasion! http://t.co/U6CNbGiV via @Barts #onlinetuesday
        • RT @GBarrere: Just discover the great blog of @ePersuasion : http://t.co/7SgziRlb
        • @GBarrere Thx :)
        • @arjanharing and now 4 the "abundance principle" (There's yet another post" ;-P )
      • Contact Us






       
      All right reserved 2012 - Online Persuasion