Jerome Pineau on #socialmedia

You know my creed by now: "If you find yourself in a comfort zone, you're probably parked illegally." - It mostly has to do with the power of growth through change, and the ability to adapt via experience and continuous learning. Stagnation is bad. Change is enriching. As scary as it is, it makes us better, tougher, and more valuable. And in this day and age, I believe this to be particularly pertinent. This is why I've decided to take on a new career challenge recently, and to return to my professional roots, namely the software industry.

No I'm not leaving social media. And no, I'm not leaving Switzerland. Those are changes I was not willing to make. Hell no! :) But I will be looking at the luxury watch industry from the consumer perspective from now on. Because I just started in my new position as Global Web Support Content Manager at a software company here called Autodesk. Autodesk sells design software and chances are, if you look around you, inside or outside, pretty much every object you see (and every movie for that matter) has been designed and or prototyped using one or more of their products. Including your watch!

I think it's interesting to look back on my past experience in the luxury watch industry - things happened so fast and furious since November 2009 that I never really took the time to retrospect on the overall experience.

Well first of all, truth be told, I had the opportunity to join the great horology family through the "back door", as they say.  As anyone in this industry will tell you, people don't just waltz into this universe out of the blue. It's a closed, highly-sealed, jealously-protected world. I was one of the very rare folks who did, thanks to social media, and the foresight of a brand called Marvin Watches.

As such, I was also the first person do be doing social media full-time in the watch industry. Yes there were other forum or community managers, but I'm talking about someone 110% dedicated to everything and anything social media - and someone from outside the "family" - with free reign to try things out, experiment, make mistakes, and innovate. I was seen as some kind of UFO (especially hailing from California!) and was sometimes interviewed by the watch press about it.

In a short time, I identified most of the key industry influencers, and managed to learn enough about the industry to avoid screwing up too badly. In the process - and I didn't know this initially - I made some really good friends. I tried to pick up as much technical information as I could (thanks to J-F Ruchonnet, Elizabeth Doerr, and my buddy Ben at Hodinkee for a lot of it - to name a few), but that was the easy part. The political, cultural, and social intricacies of the industry came later, little by little.

I'd like to think we did really well with Marvin. When I first started out, you couldn't find the brand anywhere online. Zero mind share. No Twitter, no Facebook, no videos, no blog, no buzz, no press. Zilch. The 160 year old brand had completely vanished from the radar. Nobody had the remotest clue about it, and no one was covering it except of course for Ariel Adams, the human watch encyclopedia. Within six months we had a thriving community, strong presence on major social media channels, blogger interest and press (I think we did like 50 mentions in that time period), and industry recognition for being "on the edge" of this new horology frontier. And customers started realizing we were a different breed of watch company (heck, we actually talked to them!) - and they in turn started talking to others. The rest is history. We did a comparative analysis after six months on returns from traditional marketing/advertising vs. what we'd accomplished with a tiny social media budget (and I mean tiny). Social media won overwhelmingly hands down both in sales and mindshare.

Shortly thereafter, I had the opportunity to work directly for Jean-Claude Biver as Hublot's social media and web strategist. J-C, as many call him, is to the watch business what Steve Jobs is to the technology world. In other words, the giant of the industry. If you want to get to the top of the power ladder of horology, it doesn't get much better than this. And when you have the blessing and the ear of the industry's most powerful man on a daily basis, that's an experience you never forget. In a short time, we mapped a social media strategy for the company both for the Western world and China. We also launched Hublotista, their exclusive customer online community, brought Radian 6 in-house, built an editorial approach for a corporate blog, launched mobile apps, and a whole bunch of other behind-the-scenes projects I can't even talk about.

After all this I came up with the idea to create a web radio show called the "First live international web radio show about watches and the people who love them". Why? Well you can read the details here. In a little over six months, I interviewed virtually everyone who's anyone in the watch industry in short 30 minute segments live, uncut, and unedited. Why no one else in the industry ever thought of doing this in this format is beyond me - but I thought it was important to show the human sides of these people, and allow the public to access them one-on-one, no bullshit, up close and personal, and without the usual shielding from marketing, PR, and all the usual protective layers. I never had anyone blow me off or refuse an appearance. Well okay maybe two or three :) Thanks to the show, my audience and I met some truly amazing human beings. And if you want to really know and understand those who make this industry tick, then check out the replays. I promise you'll dig them.

In a fairly short while, I had a chance to evolve among a wide range of industry players - from the smallest shops to the largest corporate players of the industry. It was fast and furious. I made some really good friends in the process - bloggers, CEOs, watchmakers, journalists, photographers, agency people, PR folks, designers, and of course, fans and customers.

In the process, I hope (and think) I made some worthwhile contributions. No matter what happens, I can always say "I've been on the inside" - and that privilege is very, very rare, and very exclusive - believe me. It certainly gives you another perspective on life. Sometimes I think it's a little bit like being an astronaut. It's hard to truly describe it to "civilians" once you return to Earth - one of these things where "you just had to be there".

In light of my recent post about the Swiss watch industry's digital future, and facing an amazing opportunity at a software company called Autodesk ($8B market cap, 10M customers, 7,000 employees, 85% market share), I decided it would be wise and fulfilling to join their Global Content Strategy team. The company is on a major growth path (which, in these economic times, is truly impressive!), and pursuing an aggressive social media and customer relationship strategy on a worldwide scale that I'm very happy to be part of.

I'll keep on blogging here, obviously, about all things watches and social media - I'll be writing about the watch industry from the consumer side and perhaps contributing on other sites as well. Here's the first question I've been asking myself for the past several weeks: what the heck brand can I possibly buy for myself now that I know better? You'd have asked me two years ago, I would have said Rolex, like any other idiot. Having been on the inside certainly makes that decision a thousand times harder! :)

Je réflechis depuis lontemps sur ce qui se passe dans le digital et les réseaux sociaux du monde de l'horlogerie de luxe suisse. D'ailleurs je passe une bonne partie de ma vie à apprendre et à cogiter sur le sujet :) Vous vous souviendrez peut-être de quelques billets récent évoquant une certaine léthargie, la difficulté de convaincre certains clients, les nuances du digital appliqué au luxe. Et plus récemment, bien sur, mon blog sur les marques horlogères pour lesquelles il doit faire bon bosser (dans le domaine du digital bien sur), et puis l'étude récente de L2 sur les QI des marques de luxe horlogères sur Facebook (c'est pas brillant).

De plus, comme vous le savez, je viens de rentrer de la conférence ChinaConnect 2011 qui s'est déroulée à Paris récemment. J'y ai découvert et confirmé une masse impressionante d'informations sur le digital et les réseaux sociaux la bas - J'en ai retenu quelques points intéressants sur ce blog aussi.

Et finalement, ceux d'entre vous qui me suivent depuis un bout de temps savent bien que, quoique né à Paris, je viens des USA ou j'ai passé quasiment toute ma vie avant de venir savourer les plaisirs de la vie helvétique. Cela ne me permets certainement pas de me prononcer en tant qu'expert sur le marché américain, mais j'ai quand même une petite idée de comment fonctionne une societé entièrement vouée aux réseaux sociaux depuis leur création - puisque, de plus, le concept à été inventé la bas! :)

En combinant tout cela avec un an et demi d'évolution et d'expérience diverse dans le milieux du luxe horloger dans le coeur même de la bête, je pense pouvoir partager avec vous quelques réflections rapport au status des réseaux sociaux et du development digital dans cette industrie.

Un an et demi, c'est court, surtout en Suisse ou le temps coule un peu plus lentement qu'ailleurs. Mais dans le monde du digital et des réseaux, c'est presque une éternité. Et ce que je constate, c'est que notre industrie est toujours, dans de nombreux cas, encore en train de "réflechir" à si il faut ou non se lancer dans les réseaux sociaux, et comment. Le problème, à mon avis, c'est que le temps de cette réflection est révolu. Dans les grands marchés sourtout, comme les USA, le Japon, ou la Chine, par example, la question ne devrait même plus se poser car la réponse est dorénavant plus qu'évidente.

Les marques qui se demandent encore si elles devraient vraiment se lancer dans les réseaux sociaux, en l'occurence, on raté le métro et sont probablement en voie de disparition. Dans les marchés émergents comme la Chine, l'Inde, l'Afrique, et certains pays du Moyen Orient, ne pas avoir de volonté ou de strategie digitale est suicidaire. C'est tendre le cou au bourreau.

L'autre problème, ce sont les codes du luxe qui eux-mêmes sont en pleine mutation. Pas au niveau produit vraiment, mais surtout au niveau psychologique, voir intellectuel et socio-économique - la crise a contribué à cela bien sur, mais n'en est pas l'unique catalyseur. Ces changements accompagnent des fluctuations socio-politiques au niveau global. Vous souvenez-vous de la scène finale de Terminator 2? Voila ou nous en sommes.

Le luxe a des niveaux de maturité et d'acceptance différents selon les marchés et les populations - voire la Chine (un si grand marché que même à l'interne ces nuances regionales sont énormes) comparée à l"Europe ou les USA, par example. Le luxe ne s'exprime plus comme avant, devenant parfois politiquement incorrect dans nos societés occidentales qui virent à gauche (les fossés d'inéquité se creusant), alors que la Chine, qui y aurait cru, est en fait en train de nous ré-apprendre à faire du vrai Capitalisme!

Face à ces changements subtils et fondamentaux, l'industrie horlogère suisse a, pour la plupart, complêtement raté le coche. Au lieu de se plier à la vague, d'écouter, d'en tirer les conclusions qui s'imposent, et d'agir, ils se raccrochent à la sainte "tradition" dogmatique, se refugiant encore et toujours derrière le protectionisme périmé du label "Swiss-Made" - alors que l'industrie même vient de se castrer à ce sujet, ce qui n'est pas tombé dans les oreilles sourdes des investisseurs étrangers.

Les réseaux sociaux (dans le sens générique du terme, donc le relationnel digital) sont la seule et unique façon de faire face à ces vagues de changement mondiaux pour plusieurs raisons:

Question de vitesse
Les changements arrivent três forts et três rapidement. Les marchés peuvent changer de gout, de préférences (les trends), et d'influenceurs d'un jour a l'autre. Le bouche-à-oreille, c'est instantané. Les institutions et les gouvernements peuvent facilement changer en un coup de Facebook, et cela en quelques heures parfois, et non plus sur des années comme au paravant. Ce nouveau rythme de vie est trop rapide pour une industrie trop lente qui peine à suivre. De plus, les étalements de production, l'établissement de magasins physiques, tout cela représente des investissements énormes de temps et d'argent axés sur 3-5 ans - donc sur des cycles qui ne correspondent plus à une vitesse de reaction essentielle dans ce nouveau contexte. Il serait logique d'investir et de re-axer une bonne partie des chaines de distribution classiques sur le commerce digital d'ailleurs (e/f/m-commerce) mais la encore, l'industrie est trop réticente et a pris des années lumiêres de retard, comme pour tout ce qui est mobile (smartphone, tablette, etc).

Question d'envergure
Il n'est pas possible d'agir sur un marché global partout à la fois et en permanence sans les réseaux sociaux. Les clients (ou les interessés) sont à présent partout, à toute heure, sans conscience des changements de fuseau horaires, et animés par une culture basée sur la gratification immédiate. Justifié ou pas, c'est ce que le client demande. Il faut donc lui répondre en conséquence. Sinon, le concurrent va s'en charger - et le concurrent, il risque fort de ne pas être Suisse lui. Il est casiment impossible de couvrir la planète physiquement, même avec un CEO et du personnel qui passe sa vie en avion. Ces jours sont révolus.

Question de savoir
L'information arrive tellement vite et tellement furieusement de toutes les directions à la fois qu'il faut être en écoute permanente et partout, au risque de rater quelque bribe cruciale. Déja, il faudrait mieux écouter et consulter le personnel à pied d'oeuvre dans les marchés, ce qui ne se fait parfois pas assez, mais sans les moyens digitaux de mesurer et d'évaluer le changement constant en temps réel, une marque courre vite à sa perte. C'est pain bénit pour la concurrence.

Question d'humain
Comme dit mon ami et ex-mentor Robbie Coleman, "les réseaux sociaux, ca fonctionne bien seulement entre les mains de ceux qui eux mêmes comprennent les gens". Ca à l'air tout bête comme aphorisme, mais c'est pourtant le bon sens. Beaucoup de marques ne comprennent pas leur clients existants ou potentiels - ou ne s'en donnent pas la peine. Sans les réseaux sociaux, ils ne peuvent pas progresser la dessus, et écouter pleinement, anticiper les besoins à venir, les problèmes existants sur le terrain, les attentes des gens, et les changements relationnels dans les rapport humains qui influent sur le luxe et sa consommation. Conclusion: des clients peu satisfaits qui parlent à d'autres clients potentiels, qui eux s'addressent - vous l'aurez deviné - à la concurrence, sans même passer sur votre site web!

Notre industrie a décidement mis bien trop longtemps à s'adapter ne serait-ce qu'au concept du digital et à l'accepter comme étant incontournable. Bon, il y a des exceptions, c'est clair. Il y a un an, j'aurais dit que cela était normal - après tout, c'est neuf tout ca. C'est révolutionnaire, c'est mal maitrisé, difficilement mesurable en tableaux Excel. Bref, beaucoup de caractéristiques qui passent difficilement dans la culture suisse, il faut reconnaitre.

Mais à present, de ne pas se décider et ne pas y aller à fond, je trouve cela suicidaire et frôlant l'incompétence. C'est maintenant ou jamais. Et si on ne s'y met pas sérieusement, d'autres s'en chargeront aux USA, en Chine, et autre part, la ou l'on s'y attend le moins (c'est toujours comme ça). D'ailleurs, les investisseurs chinois ont déja ouvert la chasse à la marque suisse depuis quelques temps. Ils ne sont pas fous eux! :) Comme disait mon arrière grand-mère, par ici la bonne soupe! Rien ne dure éternellement.

L'industrie horlogère suisse a survécu à bien des intempesties, L'avènement du quartz dans les années 80, combiné avec une méchante crise financiére a bien failli en avoir raison. Dieu merci, dans ces moments difficiles, il y a eu des hommes comme Jean-Claude Biver et Nicolas Hayek qui ont su sauver la partie et éviter la catastrophe totale. Mais cette fois-ci, j'ai du mal à imaginer qui pourrait se poser en sauveur d'une industrie en crise digitale qui, j'ai bien peur, va aussi lui infliger beaucoup de dégats dans les années qui viennent. Et cela me fait beaucoup de soucis.

I've been thinking a lot about the state of social media in the luxury industry and, of course, specifically in the watch segment for obvious reasons. You might recalls some recent posts about this like the one about lethargy, dealing with clients, specific issues in luxury social media, and lately of course the one about cool "socially-inclined" brands, and watch brands with (or without) Facebook IQs.

Additionally, as you might know, I recently returned from the ChinaConnect 2011 Conference in Paris, France where I discovered (and confirmed) a boatload of information about social and digital in the world's largest market (read Part I, II and III of my feedback about it).

To top it off, those of you who have kindly followed me for a while know that, albeit French-born, I come from the USA, and that I spent my entire life there until recently. That doesn't make me a US market expert by any stretch of the imagination, but it does give me a little insight into how things should work in an optimal "social-mediatized" culture. Heck, social media was invented there! :)

Combine all this with eighteen months of learning and evolving in the Swiss luxury watch industry from the mothership, and I think all of the above combines to give me a pretty special (if not unusual) perspective on the whole matter of social media in tic-tock land.

Eighteen months is short by Swiss standards (by any standard for that matter) but almost an eternity in digital time. What I notice is that the industry is still "on the fence" in many cases - still trying to decide whether to go for it or not. Problem is, in my opinion, that the go/no-go decision point is way past the point of no return. In the largest luxury markets to date, namely the USA, Japan and China, the question of investing in "real" social media or not is beyond moot - the answer is quite obvious.

If you're wondering about engaging in social media at this point, you've missed the boat, and you are D.O.A. And in growing markets like China, India, Africa, some Middle East nations, and Brazil, to name a few, not having a social media strategy is just plain suicidal. You're giving your lunch away.

The other problem is that luxury codes themselves are mutating. Not products per say, but the intellectual and socio-economic factors affecting and defining luxury are shifting - and these changes accompany ongoing global socio-political fluctuations. Remember the ending scene from T2? We are there. Luxury has various levels of maturity and acceptability in different markets - namely Asia (China) versus Europe or the US, for example. Old codes are changing and evolving in a world where the consumers, not the brands, now hold power. Luxury is no longer expressed as it used to be - often politically-incorrect as the Western world is shifting liberal (in the US sense of the term) while China, of all places, is re-teaching us what Capitalism is all about!

The Swiss watch industry is for the most part completely missing the boat on this. Instead of riding the wave, listening, and drawing conclusions to drive longevity, they're paddling centuries of "tradition" dogmatism and safety in the comfort of the almighty "Swiss-Made" (which, incidentally, was recently castrated by the very own system it was designed to protect!).

Social media (in the generic sense) is the only possible way to "ride the wave" in the maelstrom we face. Why? Several reasons:

Velocity
Things move very fast. Markets change as do tastes, trends, and geographic power points. Institutions, opinions and governments now turn on a dime. Changes occur in days, not years. This new global life pace is way too fast for the Swiss watch industry to adapt adequately. Especially since production plans are etched out on 3-5 year periods, and physical retail locations represent huge investments. One obvious tactic would be to progressively re-route distribution to online channels (mobile or not) but the industry is far behind on e/f/m-commerce.

Reach
You cannot physically reach every corner of the world where something significant may or may not be happening, or where customers may or may not need support or an ear. Simply put, unless you are actively engaged in social media, you can no longer cover your markets effectively. No matter how many frequent-flyer miles your CEO might boast about. Period.

Intelligence
Information keeps coming in fast and furious from all directions. Unless you're listening broadly and continuously, you will inevitably miss vital pieces of intelligence. It's bad enough when brands don't listen to their own people in the field - which happens often enough - but not having the digital means to measure and evaluate ever-changing data is deadly in this new world (dis)order.

It's about people, stupid
As my friend and ex-mentor Robbie Coleman likes to say, "Social media only works at the hands of someone who understands people" - This apparent truism is often at the source of the industry's reluctance to fully embrace social media - in essence, most brands really don't understand people and, more dramatically, their own customers. Nor do they have the means to anticipate their future needs, aspirations or rewoven social fabrics.

Our industry has been slow - very slow - to fully embrace social. A year ago, I would have said this was understandable. Today, I believe it's suicidal and incompetent at best. The day of reckoning is here, and if we don't get our act together, believe you me others in the US and China soon will. In case you haven't noticed, Chinese investors have declared open season on Swiss watch brands in the past months. Nothing is eternal. Stay tuned...

The industry survived the economic crisis and Japanese quartz assault of the late 1970s and 1980s thanks in part to men like Jean-Claude Biver and Nicolas Hayek. But at the present time, I'm not seeing any such saviors for the digital crisis I believe will soon hit the Swiss watch industry - and that worries me.

L2's Facebook IQ Ranking for luxury brands recently came out, and obviously I was interested in looking at watch company rankings in the report as I've been tracking them myself on Mark Zuckerberg's platform for over a year now. Here's the "just-the-facts, mam" low-down (out of 100 companies):

#24, IQ = 126 (gifted) - Omega
#28, IQ = 123 (gifted) - IWC
#34, IQ = 115 (gifted) - TAG Heuer

#44, IQ = 106 (average) - Mont Blanc
#46, IQ = 104 (average) - Piaget
#54, IQ = 97 (average) - Hublot
#65, IQ = 90 (average) - Vacheron Constantin
#66, IQ = 90 (average) - Raymond Weil

#71, IQ = 85 (challenged) - Jaeger-LeCoultre
#72, IQ = 84 (challenged) - Movado
#74, IQ = 83 (challenged) - Bulgari
#75, IQ = 80 (challenged) - Chopard
#78, IQ = 78 (challenged) - Cartier

#91, IQ = 57 (feeble) - Harry Winston
#92, IQ = 54 (feeble) - Audemars Piguet
#94, IQ = 47 (feeble) - Rolex
#98, IQ = 30 (feeble) - Patek Philippe

Interesting you say? My though exactly. You can read the post and associated report to draw your own conclusions, but I think the following stands out:

First, notice there are only 17 brands included (I didn't count Ralph Lauren or LV as they are not watch companies per say) out of probably 600 or so luxury Swiss watch brands (and 120 or so on Facebook). Now truth be told, I'm not sure why brands like Beaume & Mercier (140,000 fans) or Frederique Constant (65,000 fans) were not included. Still, we're talking about a very small minority of watch brands (5.6%) - even supposing twice as many (34) might be significantly present on Facebook.


Conclusion: this industry is still dipping a toe in the social media waters at best. And yes, I do believe Facebook to be a bellwether of social media "juice" for watch companies. Even if you take the luxury industry as a whole, fashion and cosmetics are significantly more advanced than the watch segment. This is not only for Facebook mind you, but for every other digital endeavor not the least of which are e-commerce and mobile (there are no interesting branded mobile watch apps currently in existence, even if Zenith somehow made this list, and e/f/m-commerce are still taboo).

Second, the high-end legacy "heritage" flagship brands really suck at this. AP, Rolex, Cartier, Jaeger, and Patek are at or near the bottom of the barrel. Matter of fact, Rolex doesn't even have a branded Facebook page. This is surprising since clearly we're not talking budget issues here. I think the people at the top are simply not interested in doing social media. To me it's no longer a matter of ignorance, but a calculated decision to simply stay out of the fray for whatever reason. Or maybe just "pretend" to be playing in the sandbox. They could easily kick ass in the socio-digital world if they wanted to. They choose not to.

It's funny because, before reading this report, I would have told you about progress, and how nicely watch brands have advanced up the social media ladder in the last 18 months. I would have talked about hope, progress, catching up to other luxury segments, and new, forward-thinking leadership (especially in the independent brands). But in fact, I would simply have been fooling myself - that's the price one pays for having industry blinders on too long.

Because when you look at the big picture - compared to other industry segments or, God forbid, other industries altogether (think FMCG, high-tech, software, fashion), the watch industry's presence on social media networks is anemic at best. Is it better than several years ago? Sure - couldn't be much worse - but all things considered, given available budgets, emergence from the "crisis" everyone so happily touts to the press, and well-documented benefits of social media in this industry, it's a truly pathetic situation. This report only serves to point that out for Facebook, but it's the same in other channels, when not worse.

The upside exists for the few smart brands who might somehow wake up and realize the amazing competitive advantage this situation actually presents. But I said "smart brands"... As my ex boss Jean-Claude Biver used to say, "We are very lucky, because we're at the bottom of the barrel, and so the only way is up!"

No I didn't go out and take a survey, although I wish such a report would exist. But horology being a rather secretive world, it's never easy to get information about what it's like to be on the "inside" of watch companies. People clam up. I mean it's Switzerland for Christ's sake. Nobody opens their mouth here. Least of all in the tick tock world. And the few who have are swimming with the fishes on the bottom of Lake Geneva :)

No, what I'm talking about are the top ten brands I think (or know) might be cool to work for as far as social media is concerned. Mind you, this is based on my personal perception - Ok, and a little inside knowledge perhaps. Heck, I interviewed most of these people.

It's not easy doing social media work for any Swiss watch brand. Let's face it, most of them were dragged kicking and screaming into this new social thing. I think there are probably around 600 active Swiss watch brands, around half of which have a presence on Facebook - significantly less on Twitter or Youtube. And most of them still think social media is just conventional carpet-bombing marketing or PR applied to new improved digital channels.

Nonetheless, as we say in French, "Au pays des aveugles, les borgnes sont rois" (in a nation of blind men, one-eyed men rule - sounds better in French, trust me) and so there are, in my opinion, some more progressive "social" watch brands than others. Some brands who really "get it" - or at least strive to. But what might those be?

Here's a list I came up with (in no particular order) each with a 1 to 5 ranking for Product, People, and "Coolness" categories - all reasons (albeit not exclusive) to be doing social media work for a given watch company these days IMHO (note: I insert a question mark on the People scale when I'm not equipped to judge and a link to their interview when available).

#1. Bremont (Product: 4, People: 5, Coolness: 4)
Compelling history, British brand. Awesome owners, kick-ass product. Huge room for growth. [radio show]

#2. Linde Werdelin (Product: 5, People: 4, Coolness: 5)
Beautiful product, original, great Nordic design, smart owners, outside-the-box marketing. Genuine and personal customer-centric approach. [radio show].

#3. TAG Heuer (Product: 4, People: 3, Coolness: 3)
Only brand who can claim genuine watchmaking innovation in the past 400 years. Already very active online (enough so to score a 115 IQ on the L2 Facebook IQ report). Cool CEO who used to sell FMCG with a great pool overlooking Lake Geneva. I know this because I interviewed him a short while ago :)

#4. MB&F (Product: 4, People: 5, Coolness: 5)
Owner Max Busser is an industry legend in the world of independent brands. Progressive and original. UFO product. Powerful, intelligent and opportunistic marketing and communication approach. Max was also my first guest on the radio show.

#5. Maurice de Mauriac (Product: 3, People: 4, Coolness: 3)
Under-the-radar brand in Zurich with solid bespoke product. Exclusive niche market. Brilliant founder (also not from the industry) with an offbeat and very subtle humanized one-on-one marketing approach.

#7. Xetum (Product: 3, People: 4, Coolness: 3)
Based in San Francisco. Unbelievably cool and humble founder (rare in this industry) Jeff Kuo (not from the watch industry) has an original, clean, simple and genuine product line. Big potential in key US and Chinese market segments IMHO. [radio show]

#8. IWC (Product: 5, People: ?, Coolness: 3)
Iconic German brand founded by an American. With L&S, probably one of the most breathtaking watch products out there. Clean, crisp, and...German. Very active online and a solid based of rabid fans community. Their forum manager Michael Friedberg will be a guest on my show next week actually.

#9. Audemars Piguet (Product: 5, People: ?, Coolness: 2)
Too iconic a brand to even be cool anymore :) - AP is what most brands can only dream of one day becoming. They seemed to have gotten a good start on social media but then Hublot lured their employee away, and since then I'm not sure what's going on there. They had an ad out, which I applied to - but never even got an acknowledgement for. And their CEO never answered my request for an interview - Come to think of it, not sure why I'm including them in here... :) Oh, yes, it's Genta's Royal Oak, silly me! :)

#10. Jaeger-LeCoultre (Product: 5, People: 3, Coolness: 2)
Iconic brand. No marketing per say as the product itself is the "marketing message".  CEO Jerome Lambert told me to take a hike when I asked him to appear on the show, which didn't really surprise me as this type of communication is not really in the brand's genes. Nonetheless the gal responsible for their social media initiatives is really cool and quite good IMHO (although not sure why she protects her Twitter account...)

#11. Money
Following the money (or its sources rather) can be a little tricky in China. You have old money and new money, money made in the public sector (lots of corruption there) and money made in the private sector (natural resources and real estate being two of the biggest sources). Then you have people making the transition between public and private, and those benefiting from family connections (a huge booster in China). The Chinese culture is not a wealth flaunting one - discretion is prized in China. For every exuberant millionaire, there are two others hiding behind him.

#12. Cars, cars, cars
The Chinese market is gaga over cars. Cars are the most discussed topics online (blogs, BBS, etc) closely followed by mobile. Audi and Mercedes Benz got smart about the Chinese market years ago. Both went after civil servants and high-level government workers with Audi completely controlling low-end to mid-level managers and Benz basically owning the upper crust segment. Everyone in the Chinese government either owns a set of rings or a three-pointed star. Matter of fact, that's how you recognize them :)

#13. UGC
I knew this before the conference, but it was pointed out there again, and I think it's strategically important - Chinese people are very big on content creation - like 43% big versus our meager 23% in the West (namely the USA, Europe is lower).  This means they are culturally a much more "engaged" audience than the US and clearly Europe.

#14. Avatars
Chinese people aren't huge fans of "self-branding" - They would much rather use an online avatar (cartoon self-representation) than an actual mugshot or picture. As a result, social media networks (like QQ) encourage users to "dress up" (customize) these avatars using products like eyewear, fashion, or makeup. And this can be brand-driven for the right price. The same can be said for application "skins" - People can customize their QQ apps with their favorite brand themes and colors. Of course brands pay through the nose for this priviledge. Katching.

#15. Micropayments
My understanding is they're way more mainstream in China that in the West. China has no credit cards but plenty of debit ones apparently. Gaming is huge in China and companies like Tencent are making a killing on micro-selling every object imaginable to digital players from farming tools to ustensils and clothing (which can also be branded - now you're collecting from the brands as well - katching).

Part II of my series of insightful tidbits on the Chinese market picked up during the ChinaConnect 2011 Conference in Paris last week (see Part I here).

#6. It's All About Video
There's no Youtube in China - as usual, there are several Chinese versions of online video like Youku or Tudou. Video watching and sharing is hugely popular over there - much more so than in the Western world. See what luxury brands are doing lately on Youku. These sites are used and function like cable TV. And posted videos are considerably longer than those we are used to on Youtube. This is partly due to the fact that Chinese TV tends to suck, notwithstanding its massive coverage (CCTV-1, the official State channel is most popular for, guess what, news!)

#7.  C2C
"Copy to China" - It's what they call the Chinese concept of copying then adapting existing social networking platforms. For every SNS we have in the West there are several different Chinese versions of it. This results in a hugely complex and diffuse landscape of everything from MSN to Facebook, Twitter, and Youtube "clones" - some of which are regionalized or targeted at various age and/or cultural segments. Yes, it's complicated.

#8. Mobile Devices
Virtually everyone in China has a mobile device (smartphone mostly) with QQ running on it. There are close to a billion mobile devices in China. Do the math. Did you know people look at their smartphone on average 900 times a day? This is what Warwick Hill, 3rd Space CEO claimed during the conference. Mobile is an extension of the Chinese body - it's an inborn part and parcel of the Chinese netizen. Not having a mobile strategy for a brand in China is simply nuts.

#9. Beauty Codes
The Chinese have different beauty codes than we do in the West. Especially for women. White skin evokes death (heroin chic look? Don't even think about it). Haggard, distant looks are not appreciated. Seductive poses and any sexual suggestions are frowned upon. Lips should be small and red, not voluptuous. And a woman should always be smiling and looking you in the eyes in an ad. Slanted eyes with corners pointing up are caricatural (and insulting) at best.  Why do many brands still violate these codes year after year in their advertising is a hard to understand.

#10. M, F and E-commerce
In lower-tier cities, there are few malls, stores, and retail outlets. Especially for luxury brands. People like to shop online by necessity. Additionally, the logistics of online commerce in China are extremely cost-effective, and much cheaper than brick & mortar investments. Why? Because shipping and delivery are virtually free for companies. It doesn't cost a fortune to maintain armies of bicycle-riding delivery people. China Post, on the other hand, has no notion of "bulk mailing". And forget about the convenience of tracking a parcel. Nonetheless, stuff does get to you, and if not, you don't have to pay!

Hanging out during a break

I've been pitching the first ever European conference on digital marketing to the high-end Chinese consumer for many weeks now. I thought I'd get a couple of good tips on this fascinating and remote market, but never in my wildest dreams did I think I'd be coming home with such a treasure trove of insight. Short of actually spending a lot of time in China - the old "boots on the ground" approach - this conference was as close as I've come to a better understanding of the challenges at hand for brands who want to (1) enter the largest market in the world, and (2) not embarrass themselves in the process. In the next several posts, I'll do my best to share some of the highlights and salient points of the conference from my social media perspective.

#1 Market composition
Contrary to popular belief, China is not a homogeneous market. Rather, it behaves more like a regional federation of sorts with different areas, customs, languages, populations, and even cuisines. So when you talk about the 470,000,000 or so Chinese netizens, you're really talking about a fragmented and diverse population. And trying to market to the whole instead of carefully targeting on a sociao-regional basis is not an optimal strategy.

#2 Stereotypes
The Great Wall, the Forbidden City, past Emperors - all the classic Western geographic or political stereotypes applied to China do not speak to the new generation. Matter of fact, you might even be insulting them by applying such themes to your product - I'm thinking, for example, of luxury watch dials depicting the Forbidden City. It's "has-been" and says "I haven't bothered to learn about the new China".

#3 Age matters
Yes, China has an aging population, like much of Europe, and that in itself constitutes a major challenge to its future growth. Nonetheless, the vast majority of Chinese netizens are under 34. The ratio is even larger for  mobile communities. The average QQ user is in the 17-25 age range. If you're not talking to a young, tech savvy, mobile-ingrained audience, you're not talking to China (unless you're Vacheron Constantin I suppose).

#4 Kids and the Cult of Family
Remember the one-kid policy? Guess what: it means that kids are at the center of Chinese life. If you figure four grandparents, two parents, and a housekeeper, that's seven people on average dedicated to serving each Chinese papoose. This, along with the cult of family, are two of the most powerful marketing levers in the Chinese market.

#5 Marketing Works. Sometimes.
How about a non-Chinese brand selling tea to an entire Chinese nation? Lipton was at the conference explaining that one. You see, Chinese people drink green tea. And they don't like black tea. That's right - and Lipton found out the hard way. Worse yet, they don't like or use tea bags. Bummer if your entire product line revolves around these two things. Nonetheless, Lipton was still able to overcome these great odds and penetrate the market by positioning their teas as strategically-timed "avant-garde" social experiences (and hiring the right bloggers). The "Lipton Moment" has now become hip in China with the younger professional crowd. Hey, everybody's doing it - maybe you should as well! Which comes to show that marketing does work sometimes, if not cheaply :)

Nathalie Omori on categorizing Chinese wealth

Voici la deuxième - et dernière, je vous rassure tout de suite :) - partie de mon interview pendant la conférence sur la gestion de communauté et des réseaux sociaux à Neuchatel le 18 avril dernier. Dans ce segment, je réponds aux questions suivantes de Contenu&Cie:

• Comment gérer au mieux une crise de "badbuzz"
• Que doit faire une marque pour se lancer sur les réseaux sociaux?
• Quel interêt à être sur les réseaux sociaux pour les marques de luxe?
• Le luxe et les réseaux sociaux sont-ils compatibles?
• Quel est l'avenir du métier de community manager?

Voila, j'espère que cette petite tournée digitale (ainsi que sa première partie) aura pu répondre à certaines de vos questions, ou même en susciter d'autres, en quel cas vous savez ou me joindre - je suis tout ouie :)

I had a revealing moment recently I thought I'd share. It's pretty rare when I send my mom work-related stuff, but I thought she'd enjoy the two recent videos I posted from the Neuchatel conference and the ensuing interview last April 18th.

See, my mom, like most moms I suppose (except maybe Gary Vaynerchuk's), doesn't know or understand much about what I do for a living. She understood more when I was in the software industry than now. Most of the time we talk, she'll ask "how's the watch selling going?" - and I'll say to her again "Mom, I'm not in sales, I'm in community and communications." - and she'll typically come back with "well whatever, as long as your clients are happy and paying..." - My mom's a very practical woman :)

So I was a little surprised when she came back to me about the videos with this remark (translated from French):

"Well I'm not surprised to realize now that you prioritize human contact - but in fact, it's a sales technique with a new face, which is likely to succeed as so many people these days are feeling left out."

It turns out that, in the social media ROI polemic often taking place these days, my mom is more in tune with the Olivier Blanchard's no-nonsense, "show me the money" school of thought than Gary V's "show me the loving" more "emotional" approach. The optimal approach is probably a combination of the two.

More important to me was her remark about people feeling "left out". Especially in the context of the exchange I had on LinkedIn recently (Managers of Luxury Group):

Me:

I'd be interested to hear (read) what your perception of "real world experience of shopping" for luxury items might be?

Simon:

...Visually stimulating, everything about luxury caries with it stunning imagery in design, makes you feel important, loved, special and valued. I believe people need to feel that they have personal value. Some seek this through the association of items that are considered scarce and special. Entering a visually stimulating boutique and being cared for personally by a trained assistant who is focused totally on me...

Everything Simon describes has to do with self-worth and being "cared for" - Here's the deal: it's really not about the product! Luxury is in the human contact. We've become such self-contained, isolated pods in a mass-media world, that genuine and crafted interaction with our peers has become a luxury. This is why community has become so important again. And why "social media" is quickly replacing traditional push marketing - especially in the luxury segments. We're out there to sell love baby! :)

I know what you're thinking: "flower child". So let me rephrase: it is by "loving" and valuing people that we will end up selling to them - Not by bombarding them with "me, me, me" - even on pretty mobile channels. You need to start with the loving. And those who fixate on financial ROI from day one are putting the cart before the horse.

As the adage goes, no one does business with people they don't like. And people don't trust folks they don't like first. But a lot of brands still don't get that. Make your customers feel "important, loved, special and valued" - when's the last time that happened to you? I know it didn't happen to me last time I visited Louis Vuitton in Saltzburg Austria.

And sometimes, I think the men who hold high places in these companies would be well advised to get "closer to the heart" of their customers and fans.

I like militaristic metaphors. Perhaps it's a cultural trait. But I always end up drawing strategic and tactical parallels between business and warfare. For example, I like to call traditional mass-media marketing tactics "carpet bombing". A more modern version would be "shock and awe". It's a little bit of what some very major luxury brands do when backed by the proper financials. When I hear people complaining about being "bombarded" with advertising, it think about the reprise of the social media fallout shelters where conversation and "human" is supposed to replace incessant push marketing. Phew! There's a relief.

In that context, I recently re-read this 2002 article from Joel Spolsky, a guy I admire a lot because he's super smart,  super focused, super ballsy, and takes no prisoners - not unusual for an ex Israeli paratrooper:

When I was an Israeli paratrooper a general stopped by to give us a little speech about strategy. In infantry battles, he told us, there is only one strategy: Fire and Motion. You move towards the enemy while firing your weapon. The firing forces him to keep his head down so he can't fire at you. The motion allows you to conquer territory and get closer to your enemy, where your shots are much more likely to hit their target. If you're not moving, the enemy gets to decide what happens, which is not a good thing. If you're not firing, the enemy will fire at you, pinning you down. I remembered this for a long time. I noticed how almost every kind of military strategy, from air force dogfights to large scale naval maneuvers, is based on the idea of Fire and Motion. It took me another fifteen years to realize that the principle of Fire and Motion is how you get things done in life.

Re-reading this also reminded me of a much more recent article by Bill James - another brainy social media dude. Bill's premise is simple: why are we spending so much time and effort trying to figure out a sales and revenue ROI model for social media, when in fact the real ROI at this transitional stage can only be gauged in terms of online market penetration? In other words, if brand X fails to engage customers where they predominantly interact, namely online, then brand Y will do so, and eat its lunch in the process. So the "R" in ROI is simply the privilege of not becoming obsolete. So simple a child can get it - why so few "experts" or CEOs do is beyond me.

If you follow that logic, we are once again looking at military metaphor - It's an advancing beachhead. Capture and control. A digital D-day all over again if you will. And Fire & Forget most definitely applies. Strangely enough, very few watch brands seem to get that - the exception being Hublot - I can tell you from personal experience Hublot lives and breathes Fire and Motion. Maybe not so much in the social media realm, but nonetheless effective, as Basel 2011 results have once again shown.

The other lacking tactical asset in the industry? Decision speed. There again, Hublot rules. Because decisions involving personnel, opportunities, and (typically) huge sums of money are made on the spot and in the field. By a single commander. This ability to react in real time, bypassing the usual bureaucratic nonsense, and to focus massive firepower on neuralgic issues is the very heart of Hublot's power and success. This is why they're unstoppable - To this day, I look around, and I still don't see any another brand operating this way. Including the smaller ones. What a shame.

Because this kind of speed and flexibility, when backed by solid (not necessarily huge either) finances, is in fact the only tactical asset a small brand can have in this industry. Ideas are good, execution is key, but speed (including response time) is everything. It's the world we live in, you snooze, you lose. Of course, Switzerland isn't known for speed - quite the contrary - and herein lies the rub. Swiss operating mode is not adapted to modern reality.  Least of all in the horology sector. Watch brands don't necessarily do poorly because of poor product, poor strategy, or poor finances - they do poorly because they're too damn slow. If there are exceptions, I've only met one so far. If you know of another, I'd love to hear about them!

We still have significant confusion out there trying to differentiate between what community managers, social media managers, and social media strategists do for a living. Part of the problem is that a lot of us don't fit nice and tight into a specific "bucket" but tend to do a little bit of each in our daily work.

Nonetheless, I thought it might be interesting to list questions one might encounter in each segment. It might help frame each job a little better for some - or maybe confuse some (hope not!) - time will tell.

But often enough, in my opinion, questions reveal more than answers ) - So to give you a better understanding of the competencies for each category, I thought back hard about some of the questions I got when wearing each hat in the past. It's clearly not exhaustive but a good sampling I feel:

Things you might ask as a community manager

• Should I build a custom community or just assemble one on Facebook?
• Is it OK to let people create their own fan page using our brand name?
• What are people saying about us on the web?
• What happens if people bad-mouth my company online?
• How many fans/followers should I expect being in the _________ industry?
• Should we be active in this forum?
• How can we generate community interest from live events?
• What happens when our community grows beyond manageability by one person?
• Do we use your personal name or a generic brand address (like community@brandname.com)
• Should we setup a code of conduct for our community? If so what goes in there? 
• What can we do to boost our Facebook and Twitter fan numbers?
• How do you measure the health of the community?
• Why our members are leaving/not participating?
• What editorial lines would be appropriate for our blog?

Things you might ask a social media manager

• Should we be using Facebook applications? How about tabs?
• Is it better to be on Youtube or Vimeo? How much video should we produce monthly?
• What's the optimal length for a product video? How about an interview?
• Should we connect our blog to Facebook and Twitter? How?
• Will a Facebook ad campaign increase my fan count? How will I then keep them afterwards?
• What's the best way to integrate social media networks into my existing website?
• Do you know who the most influential bloggers are in the ____________ industry?
• What's the best way to boost our SEO? 
• Should we experiment with location-based services? If so, how?
• How will we police user-generated content as submissions increase?
• Should I translate my side/page/blog into various languages?
• How do we keep ahead of or in pace with the technology?

Things you might ask a social media strategist:

• As a global enterprise, should we segment or centralize our Facebook presence?
• What should my mobile strategy look like?
• What should we be doing in China and how?
• What's the most efficient way to monitor our brand online?
• What approach should we take to selecting appropriate social networks to be in?
• Should we be investing in mobile apps or mobile sites (or both)?
• What are the best markets to build critical fan mass from initially?
• How can we use social media to understand our customers better?
• How do we source and manage content for our blog/page/community
• Should we produce content or outsource it?
• How do we tie in with existing PR/Marketing departments?
• How can we best leverage internal resources to enhance our social media presence?
• How can we beat competitor X at this game? What is he doing well and poorly?
• Are we ready to do this given our internal resources? What will it take?
• How do we scale up to millions of fans/followers?
• Is Facebook really appropriate for a luxury brand like ours?
• What kind of people with what skill sets should we be hiring?
• How do we measure the ROI on our efforts?
• What are the political ramifications of truly embracing social media?
• How much does it cost to do this well?
• What and how are the others doing?

Again, this isn't an exact science. I'd be interested to see what you guys think I should add, remove, or reshuffle from these lists.

Une des choses les plus difficiles à faire en tant que consultant indépendant dans les réseaux sociaux (ou qu'agence), c'est de déterminer la tarification de nos prestations.

Quand j'étais consultant en informatique, cet excercise était beaucoup plus facile. Parce que selon le moment de l'année, l'état du marché, et le genre de client, je pouvais facilement estimer le prix a facturer à 5% près. Je savais exactement ce que valais mes prestations dans chaque marché et j'ajustais donc mes prix en fonction.

De plus, je facturais toujours à l'heure (la facturation prix fixe par projet mieux vaut éviter), et j'arrivais toujours à estimer précisement le temps que ca me prendrait. Les clients comprenaient clairement ce qu'ils payaient, et ce qu'il allaient en tirer. Et puis le concept de la facturation à l'heure n'a rien de nouveau - les médecins, les avocats et les garagistes facturent de la même facon, et tout le monde comprend le concept. Malheureusement il n'en est pas ainsi dans les réseaux sociaux.

Pour les prestations de réseaux sociaux, cela fonctionne différemment. Tout d'abord, les gens ne comprennent pas bien ce que vous allez leur fournir (ou comment). Ensuite, ils ne saisissent pas bien quand on leur parle de facturer à la carte. Je m'explique: allez consulter ce billet de Mack Collier par example. C'est un article que j'ai souvent envoyé à des clients potentiels, car leur premiere question est toujours "Combien cela va-t-il me couter?" Mais en fait, je pense que cette démarche n'est pas judicieuse.

Dans son "menu", Mack inclut les composants classiques de la gestion des réseaux, à savoir un blog, une page Facebook, un compte Twitter, une stratégie et une feuille de route. Ensuite il indique un tarif horaire, et il inclut de la formation et de l'audit. Je pense que ses chiffres sont dans les normes (pour peu qu'il y en aient) et en tout cas en ligne avec ce que j'ai pu observer ici venant d'autres agences. Alors faisons un peu de maths, en prenant les moyennes de sa catégorie "Most Charge" (la plupart facturent):


Postulons en plus (c'est plus un fait qu'un postulat) qu'une activité dans les réseaux sociaux ait besoin d'au moins une bonne année pour porter ses fruits. Sur un an, le cout se chiffrerait donc à $12,750 + 11 * $7,750 voir $98,000. Evidemment, il s'agit ici d'un minimum absolu, mais on est dans les eaux.

Bien sur, il y aura des couts supplémentaires. D'autres réseaux à exploiter selon la stratégie établie (Youtube, LinkedIn, etc), de l'évènementiel, une équipe de photo/vidéo, le référencement, les campagnes Facebook, la veille, les outils d'analyse, la génération de contenu, sans oublier le dévelopement mobile! Généralement, j'estime le cout total de base à $150,000 par an minimum. Et si vous faite le calcul, il s'agit en fait d'une masse salariale d'un employé à plein temps bien equippé, qui s'occuperait de tout ca à l'interne (et encore, pas avec un énorme salaire, donc peut-être un débutant).

Encore une fois, tout cela ne représente qu'une activité de base sur les réseaux. Et cela en supposant, naturellement, que votre stratégie se trouve inclure un blog, une page Facebook, et une présence Twitter - ce qui est habituel mais pas toujours nécessaire. Et bien sur, chaque client n'aura pas besoin de la "totale". Surtout si le client a déja une présence sur les réseaux - en quel cas il aura peut être simplement besoin d'un rajout, voir d'un coup de pouce sur une des plateformes déja mises en oeuvre. Mais généralement, selon mon expérience, le client typique part de zéro - il a peut être commencé à mettre l'orteil dans l'eau, mais à peine.

Et ce client, qui a du mal a saisir ce que sera le montant de son investissement, ne s'intéresse pas forcément aux couts individuels d'un blog, d'une page Facebook ou d'un compte Twitter. Il ne comprend même pas nécessairement la différence entre toutes ces plateformes. Le client, typiquement, a deux objectifs clairs: faire connaitre sa marque, et augmenter ses ventes. Et il veut une idée globale des couts, tout en sachant exactement ce qu'il devra débourser chaque mois pour sa trésorerie. Et puis il préfere aussi qu'on s'occupe de tout ca pour lui en un seul endroit, sans avoir a donner de la tête (et du temps!) à gauche ou à droite avec différents intervenants, et à gérer de multiples factures.

C'est pour ca qu'à mon avis, facturer à la carte (en essayant de justifier chaque tronçon) n'est pas une méthode judicieuse pour les indépendants de notre métier - et cela particulierement dans le luxe. Il est plus aisé de travailler de manière holistique, en mode "package". Non seulement la démarche est plus facile a comprendre (et à expliquer), mais elle correspond aussi mieux à une approche efficace sur les réseaux sociaux.

Car gérer une présence sociale ne se fait pas, a long terme, a coup d'essai par ci et par la, en faisant l'impasse sur un réseaux ce mois-ci, sur un autre le mois suivant. Il faut avoir une vision de haut, et une approche "clés en main". Tous les composants doivent etres présents, connectés, et fonctionnels ensemble de facon cohérente et continue.

Essayer d'économiser un peu d'argent en faisant juste un petit morceau par ci ou par la n'est pas une bonne stratégie a mon avis. C'est une perte d'argent dans une action vouée à l'echec. Il ne faut pas rentrer dans cet engrenage. C'est pour cela que, depuis peu, à moins que le projet soit extrement "chirurgical" et spécifique (analyse de réseaux existants, proposition de stratégie), je n'offre que des propositions de gestion "clés en main" dans lesquelles je m'occupe de tout de A à Z, quitte à faire entrer (en les gérant) des équippes d'appuis pour combler les compétences manquantes (web, video, mobile, etc). Quoiqu'il en soit, je m'occupe donc entièrement du bébé de la naissance à la majorité :)

Et vous, quelle a été votre expérience dans ce domaine? J'aimerais bien votre feedback.

One of the hairiest challenges as an independent social media consultant (or an agency for that matter) is how to price social media services.

When I was a software consultant, that part was a lot easier. Why? Because given the time of year, the state of the market, and the type of client, I could pretty much pinpoint within 5% what the appropriate asking price might be. I knew exactly what software development went for on an hourly basis in my markets, and so I bid accordingly.

What's more, I always billed on an hourly basis (fixed cost billing is a dud), and I was always able to estimate time required to finish the job. The client typically understood what he was paying for, and what would be handed off at the end of the contract. Payment-wise, he also grasped the concept of hourly billing. Doctors, lawyers and mechanics bill that way - it's a fairly obvious concept. Unfortunately not so in the social media realm.

With social media, it's a whole different ball game. First, people don't readily understand what it is you can deliver (or how). Second, they don't understand when you price services "a la carte" - what do I mean by this? Well take a look at Mack Collier's How Much does Social Media cost companies in 2011? post here. It's a reference I always like to send prospects, as their first question often is: "How much is this gonna cost me?" - But now I'm thinking that's the wrong way to go about it.

Mack's menu comprises the "usual suspects" of a social media meal. Namely, a blog, associated content, Twitter, Facebook, and strategy/roadmap plan. Then he throws in an hourly rate window, training, and auditing. So far so good. I happen to think his numbers are actually on the money and consistent with what I've seen around here from agencies. So let do a little math now, taking averages on his "Most Charge" numbers:

Blog from scratch with content: $4,000/mo
Blog from scratch with some content: $2,750/mo
Existing blog enhancement: $3,000/mo
Blog posts: $250/post

Twitter from scratch: $2,000/mo
Existing Twitter  enhancement: $1,750/mo
Existing Twitter coaching: $1,750/mo

Facebook page launch and management: $3,750/mo
Facebook page launch $3,000/mo

Social media strategy: $5,500/mo
Social media strategy (limited outsourcing): $4,500/mo

Social media strategy audit: $3,500

Social media consulting: $137.50/hr
Social media training: $535 - $875/hr

Now let's just take some averages for each activity - just to get a ballpark:
Blog: $3,000/mo
Twitter: $1,750/mo
Facebook: $3,000/mo
Strategy: $5,000 (per month, but one month per year should suffice)
---------------------
Total: $12,750 first month, then $7,750 each additional month.

Let's assume further (it's more a fact than an assumption) that a successful social media program needs to be continued for a period of at least one year to have the slightest chance of success. This brings your total basic yearly costs to $12,750 + 11 * $7,750 = $98,000 over the first twelve months. Naturally, this is a very basic estimate but it's in the ballpark if you ask me.

Yes, you'll have additional costs. Maybe other networks to leverage (Youtube, LinkedIn, etc) , probably some live eventing, photo/video work, SEO, Facebook campaigns, monitoring, analytical tools, content generation, and let's not forget mobile! All in all I typically estimate around $150,000/year minimum. Which, if you think about it, is around what you'd spend bare bones on a well-equipped full time employee doing everything internally (without a huge paycheck).

Remember now, this doesn't include more than the very basic stuff. It also assumes your strategy calls for a blog, Facebook and Twitter presence (typical, but not a sine qua non rule). Now, of course, not every client will need the full Monty. Especially if said client already has a social media presence - in which case he may just need an additional component, or some enhancements to an existing platform. But in my experience, those are the exception. The typical client I see is starting from scratch - with maybe a foot in the water, but barely.

And this client, struggling to price his total investment cost, doesn't particularly care what Blog, Facebook or Twitter management will cost him individually. Nor does he really understand (or care about) the difference between them. The client typically has a simple goal: build mindshare, increase sales. And he wants a "big picture" number. With a handle on his monthly costs. And typically, he also wants someone to handle all of this for him, without having to deal with Peter or Paul (and pay each separately) for various areas of work and/or expertise.

This is why, in my opinion, billing (and trying to justify) a la carte pricing is self-defeating for social media consultants - specifically in the luxury industry. It makes better sense to work with a holistic, "full package" approach. Not only is it simpler to grasp, but it also corresponds to what social media is all about. It's not a shot in the water here and there. A touch-up here, and an experiment there. A successful social media program (and consultant) needs to have a big picture approach. Holistic and turnkey. All the pieces must  connect and work together seamlessly and coherently.

Trying to save some cash by doing "just a little piece" here and there is not a strategy, in my opinion. It's a waste of money with poor outcome probabilities. Not something you want to get involved in. This is why from now on, unless the project is very specific and focused or targeted (as in, an analysis of existing state, or a strategy proposal), I offer "turnkey" packages where I handle everything together in unity - bringing other teams and competencies in if required. But always "nurturing the baby" from a 360 perspective.

How about you? What's your experience been like? Inquiring minds want to know :)

Here's one that really caught my attention this morning. It's from a new social commerce company - a very hot trend indeed.

I first read about the company in a BOF article.  As usual I immediately went to their website to create myself an account - because I'm just compulsive like that - I need to try out new "social" stuff out immediately. In the process, I noticed their We're Hiring section, and as I can usually tell a lot about a company based on its job listings, I clicked on it! Here's what it says:

"Svpply exists to reinvent retail online, and we're gunning for Amazon. Our users are dedicated, our team is tiny, and we’re looking to build this thing into a monster."

Right there and then, I didn't even bother reading further - I know these guys are going to kick ass or die trying. Why? Couple reasons:

1. They're targeting a well-identified mammoth. It's big, it's everywhere, it's easy to find, and it's slow.
2. They have the simplest goal statement - One sentence and everyone "gets it".
3. Mark Twain once said "They did not know it was impossible, so they did it!"

Which is really what it's all about in this business isn't it? Unfortunately it's so rare to find mission clarity these days. Most places you read about generate their mantras using this tool it seems. But Svpply's approach and spirit is precisely what evangelists live for and gravitate towards. It's contagious. And they're going to find the right people, trust me.

So if you want to hire among the best, you better be going after Amazon, Apple, or Rolex, or whatever is big, established, and seemingly invincible, and have a one-sentence mission statement. No matter what industry you happen to be in. What's the mission statement at the company you work for?

Comment faire démarer une communauté?
Une question fut posée quant aux méthodes utilisées pour "ensemencer" la communauté Marvin au tout départ. J'ai répondu qu'on avait ciblé, trouvé et convaincu des influenceurs clé du web qui nous ont aidé à "répandre la bonne nouvelle" - donc évangeliser - le retour de la marque sur les marchés, et cela initialement sur les USA mais aussi sur la France et la Suisse.

J'ai aussi mentionné les forums horlogers, car multiples discussions sur Marvin existaient deja dessus depuis longtemps. Ce qui m'a permis de découvrir un reseau important de collectioneurs/amateurs Marvin aux USA, et en Europe. Rien d'étonnant pour une marque de 160 ans! Ces gens on eu un impact important sur la "renaissance" de la marque et le renflouement de nos communautés sur Facebook et Twitter. Et puis après cela, beaucoup de bouche à oreille, de presse officielle, et aussi des concours sur certains blogs horlogers et "lifestyle" très ciblés qui ont eu un succès quantitatif appréciable.

Infuser ou diffuser dans les reseaux?
Une autre problèmatique évoquée fut celle de la strategie "mono ou multi" dans la mise en place de pages Facebook (cela s'applique à Twitter et autres réseaux également). Pour de larges communautés, et les marques à envergure globale, faut-il mieux segmenter une présence digitale par marché, par continent, voir par langue, ou tout integrer dans un grand "melting pot" centralisé, quitte à engager des CM compétents dans (et conversants dans la langue de) chaque region? Pas de réponse "meilleures practiques" à mon avis, car sur le terrain, on voit les marques gérer cela de maniere differente (voir Air France vs. EasyJet par example, ou encore Swatch vs. Hublot). Chaque cas est particulier, et lié a la stratégie de base et à la "culture" ou a l'historique de la marque je pense. Je reste persuadé que l'important (comme toujours) est d'agir en fonction des besoins et demandes des fans/clients concernés - Pour cela, encore faut-il savoir ou et comment leur poser la question.

Le CM en tant qu'independant ou resource interne?
C'est une question qui se pose beaucoup en ce moment. Faut-il mieux "louer" un community manager dans une agence ou l'engager à plein temps au sein de la société? Je pense que la premiere chose à explorer, c'est l'existance d'une resource interne. Sans cette option disponible, il existe des avantages au recrutement direct aussi bien qu'au mandat avec une agence ou un(e) indépendant(e).

A l'interne: immersion totale dans la marque, investissement de formation justifiable, un seul maitre à servir.
A l'externe: bénéfice des connaissance de l'intervenant(e) dans d'autres domaines (donc pas d'oeillères liées à une industrie spécifique), voir chez les concurrents. Expérience riche et variée, contacts dans le business sur les compétences complementaires, et flexibilité dans les horaires et les déplacements si nécessaire.

Facebook en passe de devenir trop lourd et trop polué?
A force de croitre en taille et en puissance, la plateforme Facebook devient-elle trop bruyante et diluée pour servir d'outil idéal de communication de marque (et surtout dans le luxe)? Je pense que le risque est en effet réel, en tout cas pour certaines marques, et j'ai d'ailleurs écrit un billet à ce sujet récemment.

Voila - Il y a eu bien d'autres questions et discussions hier soir et si vous en avez d'autres aussi, n'hesitez pas a me contacter - je suis facile à trouver aussi 24/7 sur jerome.pineau@gmail.com :)

Pas besoin d'évoluer bien longtemps dans le monde du community management suisse avant de tomber sur Olivier Tripet, un gars hyper sympa. Olivier est aussi le fondateur d'une association qui se nomme Swiss Community Managers Association [#scma_].

Je crois qu'il était le premier à faire cela en Europe d'ailleurs. Ce groupe, qui ne cesse de croitre, rassemble un vrai palmarès de tous les community managers de Suisse romande pour discuter du métier entre professionels et partager de l'information pertinente avec le public avide d'information sur ce métier tout nouveau.

L'association organise souvent des conférences ou des professionels viennent s'exprimer. C'est ainsi qu'il y a quelques semaines, Olivier m'a demandé si je voulais bien participer en tant qu'intervenant pour discuter du community management dans le monde du luxe. Cela se passe lundi prochain le 18 avril au muséum d'histoire naturelle de Neuchatel [map]. J'ai tout de suite accepté avec grand enthousiasme, surtout que pour une fois, l'évènement se déroule à coté de chez moi sur Neuchatel - et non pas à Genève! :)

A vrai dire, je ne suis pas un adepte des présentations Powerpoint formelles- je préfère mille fois une vraie discussion interactive à une présentation unidirectionelle. Par conséquent, vous ne me verrez surement pas faire défiler des "diapos" durant la soirée. Je crois que je vais plutot faire une petite intro rapide, et puis répondre à des questions, parler aux gens, et surtout essayer d'écouter et d'apprendre quelque chose. Voici les sujets que nous aborderons:

• Les origines et les objectifs de cette nouvelle profession
• Comment debuter dans la carriere
• Experience verticale ou horizontale - les avantages et les inconvénients
• Comment se batir des competences dans une industrie inconnue
• Défis et opportunités specifiques au monde du luxe

Et on verra bien ou tout cela nous mêne. Si vous êtes dans les parages, j'espère que vous vous joindrez à nous. C'est facile de se garer, l'auditorium sera rempli de gens brillants du métier, et je me suis laissé dire qu'on servait l'apéro et des amuse-bouche après le spectacle et rien que ça déja, ca vaut le déplacement non? :)

If you navigate the Swiss Community Management landscape for any amount of time, you're bound to come up on a really good guy called Olivier Tripet. Olivier started an organisation called the Swiss Community Managers Association [#scma_].

He was, I believe, the first one to do so in Switzerland and perhaps even most of Europe (Germany might be an exception). This growing group brings together the who's who of Community Management in the country to discuss common issues and share insight and experiences.

Every so often, they invite speakers to their conferences. And several weeks ago, Olivier asked me if I could speak about community management in the luxury industry this Monday, April 18th. The conference is hosted at the Neuchatel Museum of Natural History [map]. Needless to say, I was more than happy to oblige - especially since, for the first time ever, this meeting will occur outside Geneva in my home base of Neuchatel :)

Now, truth be told, I'm not a big fan of Powerpoint presentations - I'm more of a whiteboard kinda guy anyway. So you won't catch me flipping through endless slides during the presentation. I'm more at home with conversations than one-way presentations. So I'll probably fly through the major points quickly, and then talk to people, answer questions, and try to learn something in the process. We'll be discussing community management in the following contexts:

• Origins and purpose of this new function in the enterprise
• Starting out in the career
• Vertical and horizontal industry experience - pluses and minuses
• Building competencies in unknown industries
• Luxury-specific challenges and opportunities

We'll see where that gets us. If you're in the area, I sure hope you'll drop by - parking is easy, the room will be packed with really smart local social media people, and I'm told there will be cocktails and munchies afterwards so that in itself is worth the trip if you ask me :)

I just read this interesting guest post by Eric Schwartzman on Scott Monty's blog. The topic focuses on private B2B social networks of course, but it made me think a little more about what's going on in the luxury watch industry now - and what I think might happen as time passes (no pun I swear).

Early on, Eric quotes Steve Rubel:

"In our rush to amass friend and followers...we're assembled online social communities that are so loud and so constant, that it's become difficult to use them for more then mundane conversations."

And that's if you're lucky I'd say. The post then discussed the alternative, namely private "intimate" social networks and their genesis, naming Beluga and GroupMe as examples. In the luxury world, you have several such "private" networks as well. ASW is an invitation-only platform. It has a dedicated watch forum. GILT is semi-private. LuxurySociety is invite-only with a B2B focus. Just to name a few.

Nowadays, many watch brands are on Facebook and Twitter. I say "many" because I've only tallied 118 on Facebook and 89 on Twitter so far. And I know there are probably hundreds if not more active ones worldwide. On these "public" playing fields like Facebook, they shoot far and wide - and wait for the chips to fall. Sometimes you win, and sometimes you lose. Ahead of the game: Swatch, Hublot, and B&M.

One thing's for sure, it's all about quantity right now. It's not a bad military strategy actually. It's important to invade and occupy as much territory as possible very early on in a conflict, as long as you can keep advancing and maintain supply lines. And Facebook "likes" farming is nothing short of a major battle at the moment.

But then, some high-end brands also maintain private social networks for customers - folks like Hublot, JLC, or DeWitt, to name a few. These are private gated communities they can manage and throttle at will - with authentication at the door - often tied into an electronic warranty card or device. In the current landscape, some cash-infused brands are hedging their bets on being anywhere and everywhere - just in case one channel doesn't pan out, or another takes off unexpectedly.

If I were a betting man, I'd wager that exclusive private brand networks will continue to multiply and thrive. For high-end brands, I'd even suggest investing more in those than Facebook, Twitter or the other "usual suspects" - Why? Because public networks are too "noisy", and too diluted.

When you buy a First Class ticket on an airline (or better yet, on something like OpenSkies), you're really buying speed, privacy, access and isolation from the "masses". Social is great, but social with the "right people" is ten times better. Elitist outlook? Not really if you believe the nodes of an exclusive luxury community, namely its members, must also be "luxury" material - What does this mean in human terms?

It means they're good, connected people you can trust and count on. It means they're leaders in their field. It means their reputation is spotless. It means they have connections and access you can trust hands down. If this sounds Masonic, you're on the right track :) - It means they share life and behavioral values. Their word is their bond. Their discretion absolute. And their commitment to the tribe unwavering.

This kind of prime, luxury human "capital" is what private luxury networks can contain. Much harder to build and nurture than amassing "likers" on Facebook by the hundreds. But much more in line with a luxury offering. Because ultimate luxury is human luxury - a very rare commodity indeed - and one not easily attracted by just any brand. And I also believe these groups should remain as small as possible. Because there is luxury in intimacy.

What do you think? Are private luxury networks elitist and old-school, or likely to take on a major role in  luxury social media?

Tac Anderson certainly thinks so. And he makes the point in a recent blog post starting out with "This one goes out with love to all you social media, job hopping, circus freaks. You are my people." - I think it's a great post. In my opinion, we don't address "delicate" social media career issues hardly enough. I agree with a lot of what Tac says. Clearly, he's "been there done that" - Of course, I might have tempered this part a little:

"We’ve also jumped around a lot because we’re super ADHD and often come from non-traditional background. Basically we’re about as stable as circus freaks."

But only because in my experience, I've found social media people - and community managers in particular - to be very calm and stable, especially under fire. And quite the opposite of "hyperactive" or "freakish". Maybe that's why women seem to be so well-suited to (and recruited into) CM jobs recently - something I've been pondering as well lately.

In either case, what Tac doesn't address fully in his post is the other side of the coin. So I asked myself, is this phenomenon about nature or nurture? Do social media employers also encourage this behavior? I think so in several ways.

First, in many cases, companies hire social media "gurus, ninjas or experts" - I'm not exactly sure why. Clearly they're not reading Jeremiah Owyang. And hiring social media talent without doing so guarantees a bullet in the foot.

Second, sometimes companies hire social media talent without fully understanding the "breadth" and magnitude of the role. We're not just Facebook and Twitter feeders. Social media actors are central to the enterprise communication hub. The head of communications will be the social media/community manager. It's only a matter of time. Their impact is felt across the enterprise, like it or not. It's a strategic position. And it's disruptive beyond belief. The political ramifications can be, shall we say, brutal. Most CMs I know or read about are genuine human beings who consequently suck at politics. They vote with their feet.

Third, dirty little secret #1: too many social media people are paid crap. Except several gurus, ninjas and experts - but we know what happens there (see my first point). I'm not suggesting social media folks frequently walk for financial reasons alone, but when I see employees paying $40-$70K a year for this type of work, I have to ask, "what did you expect?"

Fourth, I think it's really hard for employers to distinguish between "client" and "agency" types of social media managers. Some of us will never be comfortable long term working for a single client. And others cannot possibly juggle multiple accounts for either intellectual or "moral" reasons.  Employers should clearly distinguish between the two personality types and hire accordingly.

Fifth, it is hard, if not impossible, for many employers to provide enough growing space for social media people. We're not "static" kind of people. The "bigger platform to succeed from" Tac refers to in his piece is either available in an organisation or not. Employers should think long and hard about that to avoid "caging" super stars.

Finding and (especially) keeping star social media talent is not rocket science, I swear. And social media people are not inherently different from any other critical staff - or worse circus freaks than certain CEOs for that matter :)

To avoid  a revolving door problem, you simply need to give them proper compensation, empowerment, responsibility, support, and the opportunity to kick ass. I'll leave you with a suggestion:

In the Israeli Army, there's an interesting management concept. They take new, totally unproven people (after proper psychological vetting) and catapult them to the top of the command structure straight away. Then they sit and watch how the guy does. The logic is flawless: each person will eventually "bubble down" to his proper capability level and stay there. Or not. Those who don't downgrade become the top commanders. Talk about motivation! It's a compelling top-down approach, and I'm convinced it works in business as well - especially for social media people.