Today I saw Brett Miller’s (Chief Operating Officer, CPR Communications) presentation on Social Media for behavioural change campaigns at the Melbourne Social Media Summit 2009.
He began by talking about the traditional steps involved in these campaigns 1.Define the behaviour that needs to be changed, 2.Tell people of the consequences of not changing this behaviour and 3. Tell people of the rewards of conforming to this behavioural change. Effective change campaigns also need to empower people.
Traditionally these campaigns were designed to grab attention using a mix of traditional promotional tactics and try to steer the people towards the program or to the set of tools that will help them change there behaviour. EG: The QUIT campaign for quitting smoking. Call and receive your kit.
He continues by stating that this is one way that obviously has its limitations. It involves sending stuff to people in a static way and not getting anything (feedback) back from them. There is nothing done to encourage them to maintain the change and connection can be at a distance with a potential risk of missing specific audiences that cannot identify with the chosen campaign tactics. Sure this method has encouraged excitement in a behavioural change and enticed people to join the cause and even change behaviour initially but not maintain it.
Social media, he adds, gives the campaign extra tools to use and an opportunity to engage with people that traditional methods might not reach. It gives a two-way connection with a “community” and enables you to not only find communities, build and connect communities, but more importantly to do so in real time, see a response and adjust the campaign to suit if needed.
Brett advocates that instead of just trying to drive the change, we can use social media to maintain this behaviour and activation long after the campaign has ended. Especially by connecting targeted people to others that have been through, or are going through the change themselves.
He continues by giving the run down on the pros and cons of some well known social media channels;
Social networking sites – can communicate to the masses, are great for segmentation and also gives a great network building ability without too much manpower. There are downsides, like the public leaving unflattering comments which can be a challenge especially for old fashioned communicators who like to “control the message”. However if you have well structured campaigns, this can work well.
Twitter - “If ever there was a platform to allow you to herd cats – this is it” It allows you to communicate quickly what is happening with your campaign, and instantly. Its a great way of driving people to the information that you want people to see and to maintain that activation. The downside is that you do need to be very careful how you manage this interaction.
Blogs – You can use twitter / facebook and the like to herd communities to blogs, which are great for finding a way to give a voice to a whole range of other people who can advocate the program. You can drive these communities to other blogs that might not be a part of the campaign, but support the same message. Again, there are downsides – you need to find the time to maintain blogs, and if needed moderate the messages. You also need to be careful about drawing that moderation line. (what will and won’t be moderated)
Media Sharing - Such as YouTube or Flicker. Part of the effectiveness of this channel is to allow your material to be mocked. Your message is still being conveyed, even if the content has been mocked or even defaced – Its getting to more people. It’s downsides are a little more obvious.
Common themes mentioned throughout his presentation were;
Activation - no activity in these platforms is death.
Two way connection - scary for alot of communication professionals as people will express views and you will need to think about and respond to these.
Control - You will give up control. Most of the stuff you get out through social media channels can be used against you, but it will also help to get your message out.
Which community? - you have to be clear about who you are trying to talk to, their behavious and what drives them. The advantage is that there is most likely a community that already exists that you can tap into to leverage your campaign.
Brett Finished by closing with the following comments;
If you think about the functionality of the platforms (dont just see them as delivery mechanisms) you can use this to your campaigns full advantage
These platforms offer a new approach to engage interaction and maintain activation however they are still being used as an information delivery tool (most of these behavioural change campaigns are run by government who are mainly risk averse). The ability to harness the power of social media in a behavioural change campaign (as done with political / marketing / brand positioning campaign) would be limitless.
I would be keen to hear from anyone that has used Social Media to drive this type of campaign.