You might have realized by now the assertion that every
business needs to establish some noteworthy presence in the virtual world has
become most analysts’ new mantra. This assertion is true and for various
reasons; the web has become a stronghold for big time clientele: the web, as a
promotion tool and with the right techniques, offers the best
price-to-effectiveness ratio, I could go on and on but I don’t want to bore you
with the obvious.
The onslaught of social networks, particularly, has
enabled businesses/organisations to envelope just about all corners of their
clientele in today’s socially fragmented world.
I was listening to a local radio station the other day
and made an interesting observation during a diminutive conversation between a
presenter and a caller so I decided to scrutinize the issue in an analytical
perspective (since a business analyst’s job, which I aspire to be, is drawing
trends from the general to the specific). The caller enquired about the
station’s ill fated Short Messaging Service line and raised a grievance that the
use of social networks and electronic mail has become the ONLY means of
text-based input from the listeners’ side as not every listener is tech-savvy.
As expected, the presenter blatantly replied that the radio station will see
what it can do about the matter. From this data I deducted that the station has
done one of two things; they assumed that they’ve established an even bigger,
connected market on social networking sites and decided to ignore the older, less
technically informed (or tech-savvy) audience or they have deliberately chosen
to cater only for the connected audience. Whichever route they took, their
choice was myopic at best factoring in that serving the mid to lower class has
always been the station’s modus operandi.
I think this radio station has missed the point why
social media is used as a marketing tool. It is used to reach a pre existing
audience that either have their attention and finances diverted somewhere else,
prefer to use these networks for communication wherever they can, or are just
downright slothful to use more direct methods of contact. Let me clarify this
point by means of metaphor; let’s make the word “kids” a representative for
“connected audience” and the words “cooked carrots” as a representative for
“communication”. Are you still with me? Good! Now kids, for the most part, dislike
cooked carrots as they do veggies in general. Despite that, though, they happily indulge
in “carrot cake”. Boom! Therein lays the answer.
I’ll admit, comparing cooked carrots to carrot cakes is a
dreadful comparison even by idiot standards but that isn’t the point here. The keyword is “carrot”. In a
nutshell, social media is a pipeline for the connected audience. Not the end
all, be all means of communication.
Now, using the preceding scenario as a basis for analogy
and drawing from patterns this trend is naturally designed to follow, I have
come to this logical conclusion; it is not very hard for business
decision-makers to confuse a new audience for a new market segment and end up involuntarily
tempering with (and possibly defeating) the business’ corporate strategy. The
fact that we’re at a transition phase (analogue to digital) doesn’t help much
either.
I imagine a strategy in the telecommunications department
of a nationally renowned company would be something akin to a fishing net which,
depending on its size, catches basically every known creature that roams the
sea (I shall spare a fishing rod the ignominy of comparison times). Per
research, as a business analyst I am not involved in the construction or
definition of the business’ corporate strategy but (and that’s a big but) this
error does affect my work as a business analyst (in an Information Technology
sphere) in that my solutions will not be in synch with the company’s uneven
corporate strategy which would potentially end up costing the company more,
assuming I’m a freelance business analyst or more resources, both tangible and
intangible, will be needed.
If I, the business analyst, was swift in compiling a
convincing integrated report (only the strategy, environmental, and social
contexts) that is in line with the company’s base corporate strategy, the company’s
decision-makers should play suite and be swift in identifying this error and
act upon its root course.
If it’s left unattended though, the consequences might be
dire considering the high possibility and probability that this new audience
(which is mistaken for a new market segment) just flows with the current of
innovation (“prostitute” audience much?) meaning the company would have to
alter their strategy each time something new floods the market which isn’t wise
by any stretch of the imagination.
On that bombshell companies should take heed not to
overlook their base audience in their corporate strategy lest they lose their most
faithful clientele and end up adrift in a sea of a merciless, unorthodox market.
That’s basically my 2 cents. Leave any questions in the
comments section.
