DISQUS

gravity7 · 2 months ago

Great post Chris. I like the shift of emphasis from netPromoter to netTrust, as it really gets at the importance of viewing audience participation as a two-way street, more mutually beneficial if reciprocal and conversational.

I wonder if components of netTrust might include different kinds of social capital. I've been thinking recently in terms of the market's sociability, as you note, and wondering if for different kinds of brands/companies there might be different kinds of capital at work. Say, social capital as trust capital, reputation capital, aspirational or attraction capital, credibility capital, among others.

Brands get attention off the talk that propagates them across an audience, either tightly, within a consumer's social graph, socially, or broadly and publicly. This all has to do with the proximity consumers feel towards a brand, and which is reflected in how they identify with and through it.

The thing about marketing is it always has to legitimate its medium as well as its message. That's where capitalism and its message and values differ from traditional social values (which come by means of social and cultural traditions). The audience on social media can be so much more effective for distribution and visibility because it works through personal and social relationships, and through the attention people give each other and seek for themselves.

We're still unable to measure and quantify this deeply but it seems only a matter of time before we learn the social patterns and discourses that can tell us what moves and audience and how. It would be interesting to sit down and capture what would go into the netTrust score. We should do that!

nileshbabu · 2 months ago

thx for valuable "add-on" to the article. gr8t!

Gerard Corbett · 2 months ago

Chris:

Impressive dialogue! Much food for thought. A lot of words. Great acronym. I think it reminds me of a cat's MEOW! What you are really speaking about is the age- and time-tested practice of building a product that someone wants and needs and sustaining a trusting relationship with the customer for a long time through thoughtful, delightful, and compelling service.

Best,

Gerry Corbett

Damien Basile · 2 months ago

Chris, this is a very important topic you have gotten into here. I know Brogan based his book with Julien on this but we are definitely in need of a score that takes into account all aspects of engagement.

Twitter.grader does this a bit but it isn't stable or encompass enough points, let alone publish their algorithm to what they're basing their ... Read Morescore on. Influence, trust, breadth and depth of contacts as well as how each person/brand in your network affects your score with their score all needs to be taken into account.

Trust is only one component to it. It should be more along the lines of a NetValue Score. Value takes all these components into account. I'd definitely love to hear more on this subject from you. It's time a Value scoring system become standardized and put in place. Up for the task?

kareng7 · 2 months ago

Sure, call it MEO. You have to call it something. Now can we find a new word for "engagement"? You know, the way "grok" was created to mean a holistic level of understanding something. We need a new word for the holistic level of being into something actively, which includes trust and all that other jazz.

Kristanna · 2 months ago

Hi....I was wondering this topic only.The topic is describe very nicly.This is very useful for me.Thanks chris for such an informative article.

Kabel

Keane Li · 2 months ago

This is a great article. Thanks for sharing.

KDPaine · 2 months ago

you make my brain hurt! great stuff, but there are established questions to measure trust that I think you should be using: specifically you ask them if they agree or disagree with these statements: Trust
1. This organization treats people like me fairly and justly.
2. Whenever this organization makes an important decision, I know it will be
concerned about people like me.
3. This organization can be relied on to keep its promises.
4. I believe that this organization takes the opinions of people like me into
account when making decisions.
5. I feel very confident about this organization’s skills.
6. This organization has the ability to accomplish what it says it will do.

David Berkowitz · 2 months ago

Really great, thoughtful post here. A couple things I'll comment on:
1) Re: NetPromoter vs. NetTrust - would you really promote a brand you didn't trust at all? Isn't trust more of a threshold it has to cross - like you don't actively dislike it? A lot of people don't particularly trust Apple or Google but tell people about their products/services extensively, so there's some implicit level of trust. NetPromoter could still work in this context, where as trust is one of those thresholds that needs to be met in order to get a better NetPromoter score.
2) Part of me really likes the name of MEO, but then it's also hard to wrap my head around (could just be my head though). With SEO, you know it's about search engines. With SMO you know it's about social media. "Market" and "engagement" and "market engagement" are all really big words/concepts. Even as succinctly as you defined them here people perceive them as much bigger than that. So then you might consider something like Value Creation Optimization, but what's value? And how far do you take it? Say you're providing a ton of value to consumers but at the expense of the environment or employees' health plans, or say you provide a lot of value to shareholders but not as much to most others. How well do you fare then?

david · 2 months ago

I have always been a massive fan of the NPP score as just the most simple client satisfaction approach. Equally, I love the idea of a single score to measure the impact of engagement. I think one of the qualities of the NPP approach is that the one question is a very 'active' question ie it is asking me to refer company x to person y. I was just wondering if there is a more active way of asking the same question so rather than 'do I trust brand x?' 'would I trust brand x to.......?' do something.

If we think of the different ways in which a brand can engagement across an organization should we perhaps apply the question to different functions to get a measure of the impact of engagement across those functions.

for example: On a scale of 1 to 10...
...would I trust brand x to give the best customer service experience?
...would I trust brand x to develop the most innovative new products/services?

The last thing I want to do is make it more complicated but it would be interesting to find a way of measuring trust in a more active way.

Love the concept - great post