Part 2 of the interview with Dirk Songür of Neue Digitale / Razorfish . Part 1 is here, it .
Matthias Bastian Dirk, wb! ;)
How differenzierst the social media and the community manager?
Dirk Songür: I think the difference is "control." The control of the community platform. If discipline can enforce the company's own communication rules, or user, it is community management. Social Media Manager, however, are more likely to move platforms on which they can not exercise any administrative control, such as Twitter. In social media management is more about the influence of opinions, so the users can not "dictate administrative".
Matthias: influence - the community manager tried yet, too?
Dirk: He added, however, much more control over culture and tone of the dialogue. I have more direct impact on the community. Social Media Manager, for example, troll attacks are delivered relatively helpless. You can only try to communicate to find a solution. That does not mean that the community manager should continually exert administrative control. He must also give the community freedoms so that they can develop.
Matthias: And what about self-administered areas in remote communities, such as a Facebook fan page? Since you have at least some control - is the community or social media management?
Dirk: It comes down to how much control is actually present. For example, Facebook: My area is very small. Users have the option to leave the area very easily and still talk on the same platform over me. Just one click - and the user can talk about the company, without being subject to control.
Matthias: Do you think that you can assign more community management of the PR, so a dialogue-oriented, while the social media management tends more towards marketing - with a focus on the dissemination of push messages?
Dirk: I would not go so far as to deny the social and media manager dialog. It's definitely more at Buzz, yes. But over time so Buzz is only successful if the user will be picked up also. It is not without support. And this task is in turn the community manager. Social media management and community management are married. They work hand in hand. A Social Media Manager is a half community manager and a community manager, half a Social Media Manager. But it could not do the job of the other.
Matthias: Why?
Dirk: The Social Media Manager is more of marketing-oriented direction. It aim is to influence people to steer it, just classic marketing psychology. When it comes to community management commitment, dialogue, long-term relationships.
Matthias: then does the analogy with PR and marketing so relatively well.
Dirk: Yes . That hits surprisingly well. However, both the social web to learn - PR has perhaps relied too heavily on PR and marketing to communication without feedback channel.
Matthias: Do you think it is necessary or possible to differentiate within a community different user types?
Dirk: necessary and in any case. There are groups and Sub-groups, ie types of people. And as this is another act a crucial question. Maybe a group is bad for another. Or it may be possible to achieve a positive effect when it attracts a certain type of people on the community platform.
Matthias: How can we differentiate these user types, times from a troll?
Dirk: This is inherently difficult, there are different models. It's about psychology, group dynamics and many other things. I prefer the typology of Bartle from the gaming area. From an empirical survey out he has identified four types of users. Killer, so the other people do nerves. Achiever who are interested in a certain status are gaining. Then, the Explorer, which are the ones who are less interested in the game itself but rather on the complete system. And then there are Socializer - which does not care who only talk to each other. And this typology can be applied to other community platforms. Trolls such as the killer.
Matthias: Can these guys for always as clearly differentiated from one another?
Dirk: No, these are rare and usually extreme hybrids. In addition, yes it is also possible that a user goes through a development within a community. He begins as Killer and ends on a Socializer, for example.
Matthias: And how does this affect user types against each other?
Dirk: For example: Does a community many killer, there is less Socializer. This can be well demonstrated on existing communities - in the 4chan community (be aware: explicit content) example, I have less people who want to just chat nice. If I have a lot of people who want to chat just look good, it is again quite attractive for Killer, who just want to disturb these people happy. There are certain dynamics. Therefore, the Bartle-system is so good - it can be on a basic level much room for interpretation.
Matthias: And where do you see the opinion leaders in this typology?
Dirk: This is the Achiever. Someone who has achieved a lot, is always credible. And credibility is distinguished from the opinion leaders.
Matthias: How can a company influence on the composition of the user community? Sure, trolls can be off.
Dirk: If one needs to lock, you have probably already done something wrong - it is more about a platform to build so that it is not attractive for the users that you do not want to have in the community. For example: In SchülerVZ get there only to purely invitation. The killers, it makes it very difficult to become a member, for who is considered an annoying guy who will not even invited. Way there is a certain amount of social control.
Matthias: And beyond?
Dirk: There are also rules of design. I can generally take on color or design the exterior of a community very much influence. With a "calming platform" in terms of layout and design, for example, you could attract more Socializer.
Matthias: So one should consider in advance which user types one for the success of their own platform needs?
Dirk: And then accordingly design the platform, exactly.
Matthias: But as a company, I would like so, for example, the platform must be available to everyone, then what is?
Dirk: There are also communities that are easily accessible, but then restrict the entry into the community to communicate. XING it is easy to clean, but you can not write to everyone there and spamming. There is a certain threshold - these are mechanisms that allow the user to unfold to some degree, but it bothers anyone else. The privacy rules on Facebook are such mechanisms.
Matthias: But if I want to keep things simple, how close such as in an Internet forum where users from the beginning to each other - then it becomes more difficult, or not?
Dirk: Again, there are mechanisms. For example, a score counter for the number of posts, the favored opinion makers or Achiever. Or a percentage display of XING as described in detail the profile was filled out - this is also a great indicator of how seriously the user a platform.
Matthias: But a troll can be annoying with all his most posting on an Internet forum has the people. How can you prevent it?
Dirk: Well, if he does enough already, beautiful. It's more about permanently keep unwanted elements. Conversely, if I want to encourage Socializer, so people who are only to communications made, then the community will also be designed accordingly. Perhaps it is not important that you prefer the Mass also will, but you want to uphold a certain quality - as one must then define what quality means for the platform. For example, the user could even rate how nice to find other users. Since then enjoy the Socializer
Matthias. This is strongly in the direction Self-control by the community.
Dirk: These are all mechanisms to promote a community that certain types and that certain behavior. I can, for example, especially when it comes to killer or trolls, look for a certain language and technical concepts to monitor the choice of words. In a community for young people has, for example, normally a different vocabulary, so that maybe the 40th, which should not gonna wind up there, can filter out on certain key words. There are a whole range of tools that can be employed so as to encourage certain behavior or the Platform for unwanted groups less attractive. You will never be able to control completely, but it's about a bit to lead.
Matthias: about behavior control: what do you think because of reputation systems? For example, if presenters give to deserving users higher ranks, as in an internet forum.
Dirk: Basically, it is important that the person who gives the reputation that has a certain credibility. If I give away or sell ranks, they have no value. If you recruited as an operator of a platform presenters from the community, then one must make sure that the remain credible.
Matthias: And if the user's reputation, "give" each other?
Dirk: Then we need to make sure that this system is driven with no advantage of you, for example through bots. The system must remain credible and thus maintain its real value.
Matthias: What makes up for a social network?
Dirk: There is a kind of meta-community platform, on which spontaneously or can specifically establish communities. There you can create a community, can join the people who have the same emotional attachment to the topic.
Matthias: And what is up for a community platform, does not belong to a social network?
Dirk: a pure community platform is always tied to a theme. But even that is limited in a forum such as one can have several themes. Then there is the definition again difficult.
Matthias: Wherever the community platform may be now - you should see it in every case. This is not an easy task because to be flooded by the large amount of user-generated content companies with quasi Information.
Dirk: Yes, it is a difficult task. to monitor his own community platform is already not easy, but if trying to involve all, it is still more complex. I believe that many companies are not able to afford the self and rely on external providers must. Or at least it would not be economical because it would come to invest too much to go where the service providers already are. It is not enough simply to sit only an intern, searched Google and works through feeds and blogs.
Matthias: Rather, what needs to be done?
Dirk: You have a certain broad spectrum and a strategic cover. You need to decide where to look for it. And as you look at what exactly - and how does one prove that, what you see there, actually relevant. There are also other factors, such as the cultural characteristics of communication in a community. "This product sucks" for example, is not necessarily involve negative - when it comes to vacuum cleaners. You have to set the content that is found in a context in order to get a meaningful evaluation. But exactly what is important, as only can be shown that communities are actually relevant for companies.
Matthias: How can you make a good qualitative analysis of user-generated content on its feet? Is it all in software?
Dirk: Qualitative analysis is always to To a certain extent, human control. The automated evaluation is now not bad - it can even recognize context. For example, irony. A certain ability to abstract is available. However, the error rate is still too high, therefore, is for a complete qualitative analysis still requires manpower.
Matthias: So it makes sense to use software to create an analysis that goes into the width - about ways of communication courses and target groups to recognize.
Dirk: And these results can be interpreted qualitatively, yes. In social media monitoring simply go to the analysis of many more manual Working stuck. This analysis can not be done automatically.
Matthias: You know, the concept of "Idea-communities" (eg Idea Storm Dell ) - this is a concept that monitoring can help to some degree, because customers in a community "lures" are structured so that the contents of which are otherwise difficult out looking at other communities would have to directly delivers the company?
Dirk: clear, since it no longer has the huge burden of manual analysis. But these communities are limited, of course, on the product and innovation management. As otherwise, people talk about the company that you get there with not.
Matthias: OpenID and related technologies - this is an important topic in the future of the community management?
Dirk: Yes . About these technologies, we have directly a potential userbase. If, for example, "Facebook Connect" starts, can log on to another Facebook user community platform with Facebook user data. In addition, it saves the operator some legal responsibilities.
Matthias: And what about the user data? The completed profile? They've got a value for companies.
Dirk: I do not think . What companies are really interested, not the e-mail addresses for a little advertising, but the relevant "special interest" information.
Matthias: But how do you get when people do not fill out the profile that the company purports to them, but rather to bring the of Facebook?
Dirk: The company 'm going to retrieve additional profile information.
Matthias: But what is the probability that a user fills it when it is not at login "forced" to be?
Dirk: The test would be an interesting question. Apart from that, but you can also for instance on "Facebook Connect" still get a share to access the user data.
Matthias: Super Dirk, thanks for the detailed interview! Now we are through.
Dirk: The have told you before.
Matthias: This time I mean it, but Sun :)
0 comments:
Post a Comment