1000 Heads

Helping brands’ stories travel further and faster
  • Mail
  • Twitter
  • Flickr
  • foursquare
  • linkedIn
  • instagram

Posts Tagged ‘brand presences’

‘Socially engaged companies are in fact more financially successful’

Tuesday, July 21st, 2009

ENGAGEMENTdb’s 2009 report links the level of social media engagement to the increase in revenues of the 100 top companies from the 2008 Business Week/ Interbrand Global Brands survey over the past year. The Altimeter Group/Wetpaint study makes the bold claim that ‘the most valuable brands in the world are experiencing a direct correlation between top financial performance and deep social media engagement. The relationship is apparent and significant: socially engaged companies are in fact more financially successful.’ By rating companies on their own engagement index from 1 to 127, the report found that the most engaged brands saw their revenue grow over the past year by 18% while the least engaged brands saw losses of -6%.

As ReadWriteWeb points out, the link between the two scales (engagement and revenue) cannot be proven, so it’s important to take the implied corollation with a pinch of salt. However, the report’s findings on quality as well as quantity of engagement are very interesting. It organises brands into four ‘engagement profiles’: mavens (engaged deeply in 7 or more channels), butterflies (engaged lightly in 7 or more channels), selectives (engaged deeply in 6 or less channels) and wallflowers (engaged lightly in 6 or less channels).

As expected, brands ranked as mavens significantly outperformed their peers, maintaining strong revenue growth even through the recession, and were headed up by the usual suspects: Starbucks, Dell, eBay, Google, Microsoft. But drilling down a little further suggests that our do less but better mantra has a sound financial basis: for the brands without the resources or inclination to maintain numerous bells-and-whistles presences, the selectives significantly outperformed the butterflies. Deeper but more targeted and relevant engagement seems much more effective than jumping on bandwagons without a strategy and spreading yourself too thin.

What do you think? Check out the ENGAGEMENTdb homepage for more commentary on individual brands and download the full report here.

'Socially engaged companies are in fact more financially successful'

Tuesday, July 21st, 2009

ENGAGEMENTdb’s 2009 report links the level of social media engagement to the increase in revenues of the 100 top companies from the 2008 Business Week/ Interbrand Global Brands survey over the past year. The Altimeter Group/Wetpaint study makes the bold claim that ‘the most valuable brands in the world are experiencing a direct correlation between top financial performance and deep social media engagement. The relationship is apparent and significant: socially engaged companies are in fact more financially successful.’ By rating companies on their own engagement index from 1 to 127, the report found that the most engaged brands saw their revenue grow over the past year by 18% while the least engaged brands saw losses of -6%.

As ReadWriteWeb points out, the link between the two scales (engagement and revenue) cannot be proven, so it’s important to take the implied corollation with a pinch of salt. However, the report’s findings on quality as well as quantity of engagement are very interesting. It organises brands into four ‘engagement profiles’: mavens (engaged deeply in 7 or more channels), butterflies (engaged lightly in 7 or more channels), selectives (engaged deeply in 6 or less channels) and wallflowers (engaged lightly in 6 or less channels).

As expected, brands ranked as mavens significantly outperformed their peers, maintaining strong revenue growth even through the recession, and were headed up by the usual suspects: Starbucks, Dell, eBay, Google, Microsoft. But drilling down a little further suggests that our do less but better mantra has a sound financial basis: for the brands without the resources or inclination to maintain numerous bells-and-whistles presences, the selectives significantly outperformed the butterflies. Deeper but more targeted and relevant engagement seems much more effective than jumping on bandwagons without a strategy and spreading yourself too thin.

What do you think? Check out the ENGAGEMENTdb homepage for more commentary on individual brands and download the full report here.