Consumer Voice: Size Matters

Ten years ago after leaving StreetWise, one of the pioneers in developing fan based advocacy communities, my business partner and I launched one of the first platforms for brand to consumer collaboration in North America. Our first client was Nestlй (Butterfinger) and shortly thereafter Apple, Disney, Coke, Nike and many of the leaders in online innovation started leveraging our services.

There were only a few companies playing in the space at this time, but they had very different views. In fact, Forrester, the leading analyst in the space, said it was like a religious war. Our competition believed that customer communities should focus on insights and be limited to a specific number of members, all of whom would receive a monetary incentive.

We on the other hand believed the exact opposite. We felt there was no reason to limit the number of consumers we were collaborating with and that if we created the right "value proposition" through content and access that we would not have to pay people for sharing their ideas.

I must admit that it is surprising to me after so many years that the debate over community size is still taking place. If a brand manager were trying to empower consumers or deliver consumer voice into the boardroom, why on earth would he/she arbitrarily limit the number of voices they are listening to? And should insights be their only goal? What about the opportunity to build advocacy in the process as well?

After reading (or rereading in many instances) the papers, books and blogs published by those supporting smaller insight communities, the main reason supporting this philosophy/approach is the fact members can build relationships and share more naturally. For those who believe in the power of crowdsourcing, this argument will be difficult to understand.

Also, with the right technology solution, even in larger communities you should always have the ability to segment or create smaller groups to participate in specific events or activities when appropriate. Thus, the question remains: why would you ever want to limit access to your brand from those who are willing and interested in helping you build such?

Possibly the reason is the cost of member incentives or the ability to manage or understand the larger quantity of information captured. Again, if you create the right value proposition for community members, by providing them with exclusive content or unique access to the brand or products, there is no need to pay for participation. And with the right technology solution, brands can leverage social listening tools, text analytics, and the community itself to determine what comments, themes and trends deliver true insights.

One other possibility supporting smaller communities is that companies focused on insights, primarily run by researchers, do not have the proper skill set to create engaging, collaborative environments, which encourage member participation. As I have come to learn, consumer engagement is an art that requires a very specific expertise, developed over many years.

Ipsos has been building and managing large and small communities for years. We have seen success with both and continue to serve our clients based upon their needs. For example, we recently moved four smaller communities (managed by a competitor) into one single environment to gain efficiencies, as well as increase member-to-member interaction. The transition participation rates have increased significantly, as well as the quality of insight. Thus, further illustrating there is no magic number and that success is based upon creating the right value proposition for members.

So with this in mind, I guess the question for brands is very straight forward: do you want to conduct traditional offline research online or do you want to take full advantage of the opportunities technological advancements have provided and open up a real channel of communication for consumers; one where you can ask, listen, discuss and collaborate in real-time, while driving advocacy through the process?

Granted, creating this type of environment takes time and the commitment to maintain ongoing engagement, but is there any relationship more important, and if not, why would you ever want to limit this relationship to just a select few?