This is part three of a series of posts about using social media metrics.
- In part one I explain why I advise some clients to adopt a “dynamic brochure” social media strategy, focusing on publishing, listening, and “pulse” without setting numerical goals for “likes” or other metrics.
- In part two I dig into benefits that justify a dynamic brochure strategy.
- In this part I examine why it’s common for people to make fallacious assumptions about the value of social media engagement.
- In future posts I’ll look at ways to begin measuring social media ROI, or expand its measurement, and technology platforms that can help you do it.
This is not the porn industry here, kids, and this is not about buying a house… SIZE DOESN’T MATTER!
– Steve Olenski, Too Many Social Media Marketers Still Believe Size Matters
Don’t worry, it’s normal (statistically speaking) for people to fool themselves with statistics. So normal, in fact, that the fields of psychology and statistics can tell you exactly where things go wrong. Read on to find out how you and your organization can avoid being fooled by the Fundamental Attribution Error, Sampling Biases, and Information Cascade when you are evaluating social media metrics.
But first, what are we being fooled to believe? People would like to believe that more social media followers are better, more comments are better, more shares are better, etc. This might be, but isn’t necessarily, true. In fact the opposite may be true. Sometimes less is more. Consider the following hypotheticals, based loosely on real world examples:
- What if an ultra portable laptop computer maker paid a large sum to Continue reading “3 ways we fool ourselves with social media metrics”