Let's not be telling clients and companies that "WOM is free!" Why not? Because it's not true.

WOM (Word of Mouth) explained here.

This "WOM is free!" notion is simply not true. In fact it's altogether untrue. I've seen this written and heard this said lately by professionals and I just shake my head.

(I shake my head left to right as in "oh no!" rather than shaking it up and down as in "ah, yes!").

Encouraging WOM (aka "buzz") or word-of-mouth marketing is an investment of time or money. Or both. For example...

If you make a stellar product or service that yields buzz, you have invested both time and money into making that product or service so very stellar...and WOM is the result of the time and money you wisely spent in creating value for your audiences.

If you develop an amazing event or program that yields WOM, then you have invested time and money into conceiving, planning, producing and promoting the event or program that engendered the well-deserved WOM.

If your company joins a community to increase its profile and WOM--vis-a-vis a blog, a social network or a microblog like Twitter--your company's employees are spending time interacting with that community. My assumption of course is that you don't pay your employees for their time with magic beans.

The same goes for listening and monitoring conversations. You see, the practice of turning the freely given information into intelligence also requires an investment of time. Now, if you retain a company to do the monitoring for you then you are also spending money on this exercise...as my assumption is that you don't pay the monitoring company in magic beans, either.

If you're a consultant that publishes a blog or develops a groovy program for the community, then you are spending time on that program versus another groovy one. And, while your talents are your asset, time is your commodity.

Time well spent? Absolutely.

But time is money.

If you are a consultant, agency or firm that is retained by a company to "generate buzz for us!" then that company is investing money into the consultant, agency or firm. It's usually referred to as a retainer and paid in greenbacks (vs. magic beans).

Now, social media tools are quite cost-efficient. Especially when compared to, say, a glitzy primetime TV ad campaign or display ad in the Sunday edition of The New York Times.

But social media requires an investment of time. As well as some savvy professionals, or employees. And I think I've pretty well established that time = money. And that savvy professionals require more than magic beans.

Ergo, WOM is not free.

It's actually one of the best investments you make in your customers and prospects.

Fact is, I think it actually decreases its perceived value when we say WOM, or leveraging WOM's insights (as in monitoring conversations), is free. Getting attention from our audiences is not free, either. In fact it's some of the hardest work you'll ever do and you'll spend both time and money doing it.

And that's the truth.

Unlike "WOM is free!"

(which is an untruth)

PS: All that said, WOM by customers and consumers is "given" freely. They spend their time doing so because they love (or hate) your product, service, cause, book or idea just that much. The only time it's not given freely is when pesky organizations pay people to blog about products or services that they don't really care about, they just care about getting paid. And those companies are usually "outed" and that results in negative WOM...which, consequently, is VERY COSTLY to organizations.

PPS: I've nothing against magic beans ;-).

Comments

[Mario Vellandi]

Ain't that the truth? Nothing is truly free, basic economics tell us that. Ultimately, programs and initiatives are investments to generate positive benefits. While we can't expect WOM, we can certainly try to make it happen, and measure it. The process is the same as it's always been; communication technology is just an enabling factor and tool.

[Cam Beck]

Well... as long as they're *magic* beans...

[CK]

@Cam: So you like them magic beans? Well then come here my little pretty, I've got some delicious apples for you while I'm at it. (Snow White reference, I'm sure you know this).

@Mario: Yup, the process 'tis the same. We work hard and smart and do our jobs--which involves new technologies. Those technologies lower barriers and thusly, increase competition. (hence our work is more exciting but necessitates more savvy--and that's not free).

[Gavin Heaton]

Jeremiah Owyang was talking about startups hiring marketing VPs who focus on social media over "marketing". Crazy if you ask me. But hopefully the CEOs of those companies are reading this post first ;)

[jon burg]

Social Media is earned, not bought.

You can buy a strategist, you can enlist a social media shop, you can build a community or sociable element into your marketing/media/promotions. But viral and mass UGC participations are anomalies, not the general rule.

There is a general perception among the not-yet-familiar that social=viral and viral=free.

Relationships can be engineered if the correct social value propositions are properly activated both in-market and across markets.

And while SM may not be free, a community of unpaid brand advocates are far more cost efficient and effective (though not necessarily at scale) as paid media.

Thanks for sharing, will be passing this gem along to a number of my co-workers.

[CK]

@jon: "And while SM may not be free, a community of unpaid brand advocates are far more cost efficient and effective (though not necessarily at scale) as paid media."

Far more effective. See, my aim as marketer is not so much to build social-network sites and fan groups for clients. My objective is to build a strong enough product, clever marketing programs and customer relationships that customers (evangelists) create them for the brands. That's success.

And that takes time and money in doing our jobs right. Because trust from our audiences is earned, too :-).

@gavin: but social media IS marketing, to your point. I read his post and I "get" that companies want marketing VPs with a foot in both camps--and in this community we do, but we are the minority. So I understand that the CEO feels he needs to make that choice since, well, he runs a social media company. But 2.0 does not negate 101. It builds on it. Anyhow, you know all this all too well.

[Ryan Karpeles]

WOM happens when you're worth talking about. Attaining that worth is incredibly difficult. In fact, I'd argue it's the most costly marketing you can ever do.

[gianandrea facchini]

CK, WOM is not cause you have to spend a lot of time in understanding your company and your brand. I mean a lot more deep understanding as you get in touch with an engaged consumer.
And Wom is not for all. You must understand if you need it or if you go for it because of its hype.
Feel free to check my latest post of few days ago: it's my presentation at the workshop about Wom and its metrics that I gave in Milan.

[gianandrea facchini]

errata corrige: WOM is not free because....

[Drew Stauffer]

This is a great point. I used to be in the mindset that WOM was basically free, but now...not so much.

Good post to open my eyes.

[Dave Young]

For a brick and mortar retailer, there are 3 basic strategies. Only 3. All can be 'purchased.'

You are absolutely correct when you say that WOM is not free.

1. Architectural
2. Kinetic experience
3. Generous

All of the remarkable things you can pass along about a business will arise from one of these 3 areas...sometimes more than one. Of course, doing all 3 is a WOM hat-trick!