ROI Revisited

Charlene Li of Forrester Research has now released (blog post) her research paper into meas­uring the return-​​on-​​investment (ROI) of business blogging. I was promised a copy of the paper when I signed up for a webinar on the subject back in October, so hope­fully I’ll be able to report in more depth soon without coughing up the $279 that Forrester is asking.

[Update: Yay — got my copy. May take a few days to digest.]

Li says that the report found six main benefits cited by those com­panies inter­viewed: “greater brand vis­ib­ility in main­stream media on the Web, word of mouth, improved brand per­cep­tion, instant­an­eous consumer feedback, increased sales effi­ciency and fewer “customer service-​​driven PR blowups.”

In relation to the GM Fastlane blog, researchers found that when all these factors were costed, the blog “gen­er­ated $578,000 in value on an invest­ment of $291,000″. Impressive figures. However, these benefits were measured against quite specific goals: “to share inform­a­tion about its products and to start a dialogue between GM leaders and cus­tomers” was a main one (or two). The report measures the cost of getting 100 people to comment on the blog, compared to the cost of getting equi­valent customer insight through focus groups “at the cost of $15,000 a month, or $180,000 a year”.

This kind of begs the question — or two ques­tions. First, are those two things equi­valent? I’m a big fan of company blogs, make no mistake, but I am not sure they are. Second, what about if you only spent $5000 a month on those focus groups? Does that mean that your blog actually made a loss? Yes, it would, if your stated aim is obtaining that feedback and nothing else.

A similar case might be brought against ‘word of mouth’ as a goal. If you take the ‘advert­ising equi­valent’ approach — a common, if unpop­ular, metric of PR activ­ities — then you may or may not be able to show a return. But are those things ‘equi­valent’? Surely, you’ve achieved some­thing very dif­ferent by not using advert­ising to stim­u­late word of mouth.

Lots of ques­tions, and I’m not an expert. I guess my feeling is that:

(a) While attempts to distil blogging ROI into an Excel sheet are undoubtedly a very good idea, and perhaps the only way some mar­keting execs will be able to get the plan past the grumpy FD, I think it’s a good idea to make your aims fairly broad. Measuring the power of a blog against the cost of focus groups (or advert­ising; or tra­di­tional PR; or more service reps; or a longer devel­op­ment cycle) is poten­tially putting the blogging champion into a corner if the afore­men­tioned grumpy FD turns round with an altern­ative, less costly plan to deliver the same result.

(b) It’s pretty hard to measure the returns on some­thing that’s actually very dif­ferent to its altern­at­ives by costing up those supposed equi­val­ents. Having a business blog is not the same thing as doing some PR, some advert­ising and some focus groups. It can allow you to achieve some of the same aims, but it also has its own unique benefits that aren’t easily achieved in any other way. I’d say that achieving the impres­sion that people are listening at your company is one of the main advant­ages of the blog format, for example. So is having a better Google position for your CEO’s name. So is the ability for cus­tomers to talk to that person in an intimate way. The equi­val­ence model doesn’t really help measure ROI on these benefits.

Check Li’s blog post — linked above — for a good list of blogging ROI FAQs. Look forward to getting my hands on the paper.

Technorati: , , ,

Share this post:

Digg This
Reddit This
Stumble Now!
Buzz This
Share on Facebook
Bookmark this on Delicious
Share on LinkedIn
Bookmark this on Technorati
Post on Twitter
Google Buzz (aka. Google Reader)

Possibly related:

8 comments to ROI Revisited

  • I think blogging is very similar to PR. You may think it’s dif­ferent, but in many ways third party cred­ib­ility — which is my defin­i­tion of PR — is garnered. Whether that’s place­ment in a search engine or a cross link to another blog is irrel­evant. The vis­ib­ility of the entity is raised by other parties.

  • I’m not so sure — though it depends on your PR rep­res­ent­a­tion, of course — but blogs are also ‘first party’ cred­ib­ility. You can talk to the MD, which is golden as an opportunity.

  • I’d say blogs in their own right are about as credible as advert­ising. It depends on how dis­cerning the reader is…

  • I don’t know if “business” blogging means a business as it faces cus­tomers or as it faces its employees.

    But, in terms of facing cus­tomers, the poten­tial for 3rd party cred­ib­ility is there. I am thinking of the Trump Blog which I have visited a couple of times. It purports to be an inform­a­tion provider and a uni­ver­sity if you pay a fee, but in reality it is a big PR engine. I wonder what the ROI is on this site? It’s got to be huge.

    Ian, I like your point on 1st party credibility.

  • Ian. This does Forrester no good at all.
    The whole advert­ising equivelent argument is juts not credible. This is shoe horning social media into press advert­sing metrics.

    Blog comments are not ads, they are edit­orial; Blog commenst can be nice and nasty does this mean negative value; Blog comments are net­worked; blog comments are lurked; blog comments interact with other rela­tion­ship clouds (Digg? Flickr? YouTube? etc).
    What do we mean by ROI? Is this dis­counted ROI; is the invest­ment of the third party bloggers included — and where; is The Long Tail and assets or on the trading account? There are so many flaws in the meth­od­o­logy that I wince.

  • David — I hope it’s clear that I mostly agree with you. I like the idea of under­standing the costs and gains asso­ci­ated with blogs — and I think it’s important that social media cham­pions are credible and account­able. However, yes, equating it to the equi­valent cost of some other mar­keting activity feels misguided.

    Bob — the Trump blog sounds like it’s probably not the best example of embra­cing this format!

  • I read a piece on this subject by Drew B’s take on tech PR. Drew linked to a Forrester mar­keting model to help you cost your company blog.

    Not very con­vin­cing at all.

    Yes, busiensses need and should measure ROI on their mar­keting activ­ities. But Forrester and many other busi­nesses have missed the point. It’s as much about repu­ta­tion and building com­munities, in this case business communities.

    What will the fin­an­cial director cost that at?

    If a blog is to make a real dif­fer­ence to a business it must be set-​​up with a view to com­ple­menting current mar­keting, not for ticking boxes and assigning dubious values to its success.

    Afterall blogs and social media can reach influ­en­tial and hard to get customer segments. What is the value of this attribute when it is applied well?

    Let’s start applying numer­ical values to lit­er­ature: story vs expres­sion= great­ness of novel

  • […] ROI Revisited | twopoin­touch: web 2.0, blogs and social media: As blogging becomes an accept­able way to make money, nat­ur­ally people will figure out more ways to fin­an­cially forecast success. […]

Leave a Reply

  

  

  

You can use these HTML tags

<a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>