Does WOM really scale?

By Tom Messett

I’ve been thinking a lot about reach, scale and the ripple effect recently, so when I spotted this comment on James Whatley’s recent post on the “word of mouth election” it really hit a chord. James Pearce says:

“Mass media is the only way to reach the masses. The masses are the only way to get elected.

How could one possibly have a conversation with tens of millions of people? (If you know, this could be a once-in-a-lifetime gig ;-) )

Obama’s real success was to use web & social media to raise huge amounts of money, not to get voted in. That that money was then spent on traditional campaign media such as TV, radio and print – to reach a far larger constituency than ever existed on Twitter – is the real story.

(That the tech & media in-crowd forget how statistically insignificant they are is, sadly, another).”

It got me thinking about a fundamental question often asked about social, and in particular about so called ‘social CRM’ – “How does it scale?” – And the real answer is that it doesn’t! As James accurately points out, it is very difficult to have good quality, personal conversations with millions of people (let alone tens of millions), so in that case James must be right: the only way to reach the masses to, say, get elected president or to build awareness of a new product or service, is via traditional media. Certainly these guys think so:

But that misses the point. What we do – word of mouth – isn’t about having millions of conversations with millions of people, that is impossible; it’s about starting conversations…

The difference is this: a good WOM campaign isn’t something you talk to the brand about, it is something you talk to your friends about and they talk to their friends about,. The great thing about this: it’s infinitely scalable and anything can be a source of conversation as long as its fun and disruptive.

So lets revisit James’ example: Obama. He didn’t just succeed in raising lots of small donations via social, he succeeded in getting people talking, to each other about him. He was many things and love him or hate him, the voters talked about him. This created anticipation, excitement and ultimately: votes.

What do you think?

Like this?

Brought into the world on Wednesday, May 19th, 2010 and filed under 1000thoughts.

  • http://www.learnpurple.com/ Sally Brand

    This is food for thought……WOM is very powerful…people are always ultimately going to go on recommendations from their friends or colleagues over even the glitziest of ad campaigns

  • http://www.learnpurple.com/ Sally Brand

    This is food for thought….WOM is so powerful and people are ultimately going to believe the recommendations of their friends and colleagues over even the glitziest of ad campaigns

  • http://www.stuartwitts.com/ Stuart Witts

    Totally agree, and I think this is why WOM is so frightening and difficult to understand for traditional marketers. Unless you monitor every conversation on and off line it is impossible to truly measure the impact.

    The Obama campaign had an end-game, the presidency, but I don't believe it's possible to hand the victory to either form of marketing.

  • http://whatleydude.com James Whatley

    I think that's a great post Tom, good job.

  • http://www.spice.co.uk/ Eric Swain

    I think the problem for many WOM efforts is that many people/agencies/brands misunderstand the fundamental driver of WOM success: a quality offering that people want to talk about. If the offering/solution/product is underwhelming any WOM campaign is doomed from the start.

    It seems to me that often organisations think they need to create an interesting “something” (e.g. publicity video, shocking event, etc) to act as the catalyst and talking point for the campaign. But without substance behind it, the stunt will be talked about for awhile but the connection to the brand won't be made or lasting.

  • thomasmessett

    Thanks for the comment Stuart, I agree that it is difficult to measure the impact of WOM initiatives but it is by no means impossible. Having a robust monitoring system in place that picks up a good sample of online conversation, a clear understanding of KPI's and what sucesss looks like and analysts who understand the data will go a long way! Also, overlaying sales stats and other business metrics and benchmarks from before and after the campaign you can build a real picture of the impact of a WOM initiative.

  • thomasmessett

    Thanks James!

  • thomasmessett

    Hi Eric, I do agree to an extent, but really a quality offering is the foundation of all business success, not just WOM success! I have actually written about this before on my blog in some more detail: http://bit.ly/bcpSzq.

  • http://www.spice.co.uk/ Eric Swain

    Tom, I agree (to an extent). A quality offering is essential for most. However, I think a lot of large, established brands lack that quality and get by on long-standing reputation, consumer habit, and mass exposure underwritten by big money campaigns. It's difficult for them to develop super fans and brand advocates with their mediocre offering(s).

    I shall read your blog post now and (most likely) agree with it. Thanks!

  • http://matthewgain.com Matthew Gain

    Great post put very simply. Well done.

  • http://twitter.com/Tom_Messett Tom Messett

    Thanks Matthew, glad you liked it!