Yes, it's that time of the year and here I am again sitting in the lecture hall of the St Anne's college in Oxford.
Many familiar faces here - a but surprised to hear that majority have come to ECF for the first time! That means a lot of new, fresh discussions and challenges - I am really looking forward to all that.
The first presentation is by Greenpeace International. When you think innovation – look at Greenpeace. When are they going to stop being so cool? It's so annoying (this is pure jealousy speaking obviously).
So Jusi Kivipuro leads on mobile innovation in Greenpeace International and he will tell us how GP is using it in their campaigns.
Mobiles now outnumber PC worldwide by 5 to 1. However they are used in different ways than we do:)
Some stats I have that confirm this but are also encouraging in terms ...
“By 2013 mobile phones will overtake PCs as the most common Web access device worldwide.”*Gartner ‘Top Predictions for IT Organizations and Users, 2010 and Beyond: A New Balance’. Jan 2010
“For the first time, there will be over 1 billion mobile devices accessing internet by year-end , gaining quickly on the 1.3 billion PCs accessing the internet – as the former is growing at 2.5 times the rate of the latter”
Frank Gens Senior. VP & Chief Analyst, IDC. Speaking in 2010
Mobile is a bridge btw the real world and the internet. People get in touch when it suits them.
This bridge is Augmented reality – it doesn’t have to be this literally – it could be an SMS service which gives you info based on your location (I know of an example I think in Finland where you can get the appropriate bus schedule based on your location)
Case study - China
Looking at comm and campaigning.
Will look at fundraising in the future.
Wanted to run a number of pilot campaigns
Held three different campaigns to reach the new tipping point in mobile campaigning
300k subscriber to comms from Greenpeace - recruited over 18 months.
10 different mobile channels tested and created KPIs for engagement. [WOW]
Campaign - banned pesticides are used in the production by millions of farmers in China. Tried to improve regulation by getting supermarkets to change their sourcing policies and consumers buying habits.
Service for women who do all the shopping - which helps them in shopping and recommend produce for their favourite dishes.
Apps, mobile site, MMS, MMS
SMS - is the unifying platform that everyone can use while Apps are more exclusive - different operating systems, smartphones. But people who are using them are the heavy consumers. So they might be most active/most influential, although not the highest in numbers.
MMS - ads in MMS magazines. In China people read a lot over mobile. When you click on the ad you find the subscription service for GP info.
SMS push campaign - bought the list of people and asked them if they want to receive info about safe food.
Subscriptions followed by a serious of messages with info about sfae food and produce. Then they would have a link to a mobile website. Plus offline events and radip
Also paper ads promoting iphone apps. Had iphone ads as well as s60 - difficult to find developers for the former.
Took time to think about different channels they can use.
Marketing web to mobile - so people can sign up and get GP mobile guide to use it when they need it - so not trying to move them from web to mobile... Show how important it is to think the journeys through. Cos on the face of it, you wouldn't push people from online where you already g=have people one step away form a conversion....
Mobile was cost-effective for Greenpeace.
They could send messages that people wanted to receive. And they didn't kill and trees!
Audience questions
Good comment from the audience - in order to do mobile correctly, charities need to sort out their mobile websites first. Totally agree with that - so often we need to do the shiny stuff rather than sort out the basics, while basics bring better results...
Another question - Greenpeace focussed on reaching out to middle classes. They didn't try to reach farmers as they were not their primary audience.
Interactive service where people could reply to SMS' from GP? They did contemplate Ask Greenpeace type of service... Google developed a service where a farmer can ask a question and Google generates answers from the search and then they get pushed to human being if answers can not be found...
This sounds like that project in Nigeria 'Learning about living' for children is schools to ask questions about reproductive health. They could do it via web, phone and mobile. Mobile performed best - 10,000 text in the first month, hardly any questions through the web form, and there were pre-set answers that would be played back to the user... (stats from 2008)
Showing posts with label digital. Show all posts
Showing posts with label digital. Show all posts
Tuesday, 22 March 2011
Thursday, 8 April 2010
UK elections 2010: Vote matching apps
Knowing that UK elections are around the corner, I have been looking out for different vote matching websites. The websites take you through a number of questions and then give you your own personalised short-list of political parties to vote for.
Votematch.co.uk
The first votematch.co.uk website I ever saw was for the London mayor elections in 2008. Apparently it was used by over 40,000 Londoners . It was a neat little website produced by Unlockdemocracy - you choose whether you agree or disagree with statements which in turn produces your shortlist plus you can sign-up to get an SMS reminder how to vote on the day. The website was easy and quick to use although the statements were bias - all the non-lefty statements were leaning towards right-wing so I would be surprised if UKIP and Conservatives made anyone's shortlist.
For this elections, Votematch.co.uk has been seriously vamped up - in addition to the website, there is also a votematch application on Facebook. 30 questions, user indicates if they agree or disagree and then at the end of the process they indicate which are the most important policy areas for them. Thirty questions did feel like too much at one point, but because statements were written in normal language and were fairly distinct, it managed to keep my attention and get me to the end of the process.
MyVoteAdvisor
Few days ago I came across this website.
It's a really nicely done website very usable in its use of design and layout. However, the mechanics of it are really complex - users are asked to chose the parties they are interested in, then chose between 11 areas of policy (from environment, health and defence to immigration and education) and then rate party responses to 5 questions within each area.
If, like me, a user chooses 3 parties - that is over 100 policy statements to read and judge. In addition, a user can rate how important each of the 5 questions within a policy area is... Phew! It gave me a headache.
Also, the party statements were probably taken out of policy documents and as such, most are impenetrable or can be understood in a number of different ways. So just skimming through won't do.
Although the website creators instruct the visitors many times that they can skip some of the 11 policy areas, I found it easier to drop out of the process altogether than rationalise and grade how much I care about different issues.
My short-list
And in case you are interested, this is what my voting shortlist looks like in the order of preference:
My voteadvisor - greens, Libdems, Conservative, Labour.
Votematch - Lib-dems, Labour, UKIP, Conservative.
Yes, there is a little Hitler in all of us ;)
Vote power
Just today my Twitter friends all told me how powerless their vote is thanks to this neat website. I was confused by their tweets "The power of my vote is 0.12" - I wasn't sure if that was good or bad. But the assumption is that democracy = 1 person, one vote. So 1 is ideal. And then there is the whole explanation on how this index was devised which was super interesting (if you like stats).
Slapometer.com
This one doesn't really help you chose who to vote for. It's more of a light relief after you've been diligently researching party manifestos, listening to leaders and others debates, etc...
Vote with the back of your hand. Surprising how much fun it is to be violent.
Election challenge/
I love this website!
Ideas are user generated - some are odd, some just plain stupid, others are very good. Every user can say if they think other people's idea are good or bad as well as add their own idea. The varied ways of describing good and bad ideas keeps user attention for a long time - this is the only of the elections websites which kept me going for some time. People's ideas are published on Twitter as hot - if they are voted for by people or New - as new ideas come up.
CountMyVote
A website that shows you what the "real" situation is in marginal seats and therefore who you should vote for if you want to vote tactically. Who are the main two parties going head to head. In my constituency the fight is between LibDems and Labour apparently. If only! Then I realise that the stats are based on the votes by website visitors.
Votematch.co.uk
The first votematch.co.uk website I ever saw was for the London mayor elections in 2008. Apparently it was used by over 40,000 Londoners . It was a neat little website produced by Unlockdemocracy - you choose whether you agree or disagree with statements which in turn produces your shortlist plus you can sign-up to get an SMS reminder how to vote on the day. The website was easy and quick to use although the statements were bias - all the non-lefty statements were leaning towards right-wing so I would be surprised if UKIP and Conservatives made anyone's shortlist.
For this elections, Votematch.co.uk has been seriously vamped up - in addition to the website, there is also a votematch application on Facebook. 30 questions, user indicates if they agree or disagree and then at the end of the process they indicate which are the most important policy areas for them. Thirty questions did feel like too much at one point, but because statements were written in normal language and were fairly distinct, it managed to keep my attention and get me to the end of the process.
MyVoteAdvisor
Few days ago I came across this website.
It's a really nicely done website very usable in its use of design and layout. However, the mechanics of it are really complex - users are asked to chose the parties they are interested in, then chose between 11 areas of policy (from environment, health and defence to immigration and education) and then rate party responses to 5 questions within each area.
If, like me, a user chooses 3 parties - that is over 100 policy statements to read and judge. In addition, a user can rate how important each of the 5 questions within a policy area is... Phew! It gave me a headache.
Also, the party statements were probably taken out of policy documents and as such, most are impenetrable or can be understood in a number of different ways. So just skimming through won't do.
Although the website creators instruct the visitors many times that they can skip some of the 11 policy areas, I found it easier to drop out of the process altogether than rationalise and grade how much I care about different issues.
My short-list
And in case you are interested, this is what my voting shortlist looks like in the order of preference:
My voteadvisor - greens, Libdems, Conservative, Labour.
Votematch - Lib-dems, Labour, UKIP, Conservative.
Yes, there is a little Hitler in all of us ;)
Vote power
Just today my Twitter friends all told me how powerless their vote is thanks to this neat website. I was confused by their tweets "The power of my vote is 0.12" - I wasn't sure if that was good or bad. But the assumption is that democracy = 1 person, one vote. So 1 is ideal. And then there is the whole explanation on how this index was devised which was super interesting (if you like stats).
Slapometer.com
This one doesn't really help you chose who to vote for. It's more of a light relief after you've been diligently researching party manifestos, listening to leaders and others debates, etc...
Vote with the back of your hand. Surprising how much fun it is to be violent.
Election challenge/
I love this website!
Ideas are user generated - some are odd, some just plain stupid, others are very good. Every user can say if they think other people's idea are good or bad as well as add their own idea. The varied ways of describing good and bad ideas keeps user attention for a long time - this is the only of the elections websites which kept me going for some time. People's ideas are published on Twitter as hot - if they are voted for by people or New - as new ideas come up.
CountMyVote
A website that shows you what the "real" situation is in marginal seats and therefore who you should vote for if you want to vote tactically. Who are the main two parties going head to head. In my constituency the fight is between LibDems and Labour apparently. If only! Then I realise that the stats are based on the votes by website visitors.
Wednesday, 25 November 2009
Evaluating and Monitoring (impact of) digital communications
Monitoring and Evaluating Online Projects With online communications we can measure and evaluate a lot more than in offline communications. The trick is to understand what stats are relevant/useable, what they tell us and what we can learn from them.
What do we mean by 'impact' in the world of digital communications and how we evaluate it.
Metrics:
Open rates, click-though rates
Conversion rate
Page views
Visits
Email sign-ups
Referrers
What can we evaluate online?
-how many people came to the website
-how many times people loaded (viewed) the page
-where they went after they viewed the page
-where they came from, what they searched for to end up on that page
-we can even analyze the behaviour of a specific segment of people ( for example -everyone who visited a page, or came from a specific location)
-how many people successfully took a journey we’ve set through the website
email
-how many people opened an email (HTML)
-how many people clicked on the links
-how many people who opened the email finished the journey (for example, donated or took a campaigning action)
etc, etc
Based on this data we can get a good idea of how successful a specific content is, what positioning of elements on a web page leads to more conversion rates etc..
Impact
In order to be able to measure impact you need to be clear about your communication strategy and how this contributes to impact of you initiative.
So old-school comms planning is the key and I always try to do it in an iterative way with the teams I work with:
1.When you identify objectives (why are you producing a piece of communication) immediately think how you’ll know that you’ve achieved it. Can you measure this – do you have internal systems set up to do it? If not, have a think again.
So for example a typical objective would be “To educate our supporters about XYZ”. How will you measure this? By the number of email sign-ups? Number of packs distributed? Online survey of your supporters before and after? None of these answers is wrong, but they do clearly set out what would reaching a specific objective mean for your organisation.
By asking these questions you identify the RESPONSE you need from your supporters.
2.Who is your audience? What are they like? Are they likely to respond in the way you want them to respond? If yes, great, but if no, maybe you need to rethink your objectives and therefore your response?
How to set your targets?
The best way is learning from the past or from baseline studies.
Or you can just evaluate by monitoring trends – for example, “%increase” or “more of ….”. But then you need a baseline which shows what the current situation is – so you have something to compare to.
If no baseline, compare to same industry benchmarks (e-benchmarks study),
Baselines
E-benchmarks study - US http://www.e-benchmarksstudy.com/
Performance benchmarks - UK - www.fairsay.com
What do we mean by 'impact' in the world of digital communications and how we evaluate it.
Metrics:
Open rates, click-though rates
Conversion rate
Page views
Visits
Email sign-ups
Referrers
What can we evaluate online?
-how many people came to the website
-how many times people loaded (viewed) the page
-where they went after they viewed the page
-where they came from, what they searched for to end up on that page
-we can even analyze the behaviour of a specific segment of people ( for example -everyone who visited a page, or came from a specific location)
-how many people successfully took a journey we’ve set through the website
-how many people opened an email (HTML)
-how many people clicked on the links
-how many people who opened the email finished the journey (for example, donated or took a campaigning action)
etc, etc
Based on this data we can get a good idea of how successful a specific content is, what positioning of elements on a web page leads to more conversion rates etc..
Impact
In order to be able to measure impact you need to be clear about your communication strategy and how this contributes to impact of you initiative.
So old-school comms planning is the key and I always try to do it in an iterative way with the teams I work with:
1.When you identify objectives (why are you producing a piece of communication) immediately think how you’ll know that you’ve achieved it. Can you measure this – do you have internal systems set up to do it? If not, have a think again.
So for example a typical objective would be “To educate our supporters about XYZ”. How will you measure this? By the number of email sign-ups? Number of packs distributed? Online survey of your supporters before and after? None of these answers is wrong, but they do clearly set out what would reaching a specific objective mean for your organisation.
By asking these questions you identify the RESPONSE you need from your supporters.
2.Who is your audience? What are they like? Are they likely to respond in the way you want them to respond? If yes, great, but if no, maybe you need to rethink your objectives and therefore your response?
How to set your targets?
The best way is learning from the past or from baseline studies.
Or you can just evaluate by monitoring trends – for example, “%increase” or “more of ….”. But then you need a baseline which shows what the current situation is – so you have something to compare to.
If no baseline, compare to same industry benchmarks (e-benchmarks study),
Baselines
E-benchmarks study - US http://www.e-benchmarksstudy.com/
Performance benchmarks - UK - www.fairsay.com
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)