illumiblog

Remember the old shampoo ad where a shampoo apparently became popular when “she told two friends, and so on, and so on, and so on”? That in a nutshell is the concept of “social epidemics” in marketing. And new research says the people doing the “so on” are more important than the “she who told two friends” – the initial influencer.

 
Marketers in recent times have been enamored by capturing the attention of the group Malcolm Gladwell calls “influentials” to build effective marketing strategies, to launch  “social epidemics” caused by marketing techniques you have heard of – viral marketing, buzz marketing, etc. All this focus of resources and positioning to woo this small group of individuals who are considered to be influential and well-connected enough to capture the attention and business of untold number of consumers may not be so effective, according to new research from sociologist Duncan Watts of Columbia University. And this bodes well for those of us with smaller budgets for communications – simpler, Web-based social marketing tools that help large numbers of people to reach and influence others like them are as if not more effective than trying to find the elusive trend leader. Meet the new important group  - the “accidental influentials.”

 
Professor Watts’ research, highlighted in the February 2007 Harvard Business Review, suggests that the assumed “ twp-step flow of information” – from the media to the influencer and then to the rest of the population – which has been assumed for sudden trends in fashion and other areas is not necessarily so. It seems from this research that non-celebrity individuals actually influence few people.

 
The “global cascades” that occur – the widespread movement of influence through networks – such as millions of people viewing the same video on YouTube is, according to Watts, not the work of a few influencers, but actually “ a critical mass of easily influenced people who adopt a brand after being exposed to a single influencing neighbor.” Timing, proximity and situation seem to be key in the impact of this “accidental influencer” in launching a chain reaction. So anyone could be key in launching a new global trend, what Watts says is “mostly an accident of location and timing.”

 
I believe this says to us in faith groups and non-profits that low-cost, social networking tools than enable the building of virtual networks – creating ways for community to occur – are good uses of limited time and budget for communications.

 
For more information, see the February 2007 issue at harvardbusinessonline.hbsp.harvard.edu/

Filed by Sheila under Electronic Media, Marketing