The title is borrowed from the traditional proclamation – ‘The King is dead. Long Live the King’. What is basically meant (and I am taking this from Wikipedia) is that in certain monarchies of France and England, the transfer of sovereignty occurred instantaneously upon the moment of death of the previous monarch. In this blog post, I am using it to highlight that how a stand alone non interactive website (basically 1.0) is dead and without fail, its time for websites powered by social media (Websites 2.0) to take over!!
It is very common to see companies scrambling to get their website up. In few cases, some basic essentials of website are missing, but in most the marketers have no clear agenda on why they are building one. It’s not too surprising to see websites being made because it is a standard launch activity to do. It is more like a job in the task list at the time of product launch. The brand manager gets it executed because it was expected out of him or her.
Few service sectors like airlines or banking are using sites to either generate more business or cut the customer servicing costs. So if nothing else, they are at least generating some value. But by using social media tools, they could heighten the positive customer experience on their site. Because there is absence of social media tools, the hits quickly dry out and then money get pumped into traditional media to boost website hits. Not only is this model financially viable in the long run but also it kills the basic principles on having a website.
The point here really is ‘Whether a website is creating value for the company more than just providing a digital presence.’
Let’s dwell a little deeper and attempt answering this question below.
Q) Why does anyone come to a corporate website?
1. To know more about the company – People would rather go to Wikipedia more often to either know more or check credibility of the company
2. To watch its advertisements – Wouldn’t they go to You Tube for that
3. How about buying its products – Really? How many Indian websites have secured e-commerce transaction facilities. At most, I have heard of few companies tying up with common third party e-commerce portals to sell their products online
4. To read product reviews – It’s independent sites like mouthshut or reviewstream where one will heads to if one wants product reviews
5. To learn how to use a product – Then one would visit sites like WikiHow, Wiki Answers and Yahoo Answers that get visited. And anyway, not many company websites have provided ‘How To Use’ section.
6. To know the price – There are price comparison sites that provide you a feature to compare similar products or services and offer you cheaper options
7. To get recent news about the company – A reader would rather head to a company’s blog as it would be more up to date and also personal in nature
8. Because you just love their brands – Then you would rather become a fan – a feature so widely available on social networks like Facebook.
So again, really why would anyone visit a company’s website?
People aren’t visiting corporate websites because:
1. Companies make their websites as if they were brochures online. Standard stale information with pretty images or faces. Or more like hoardings or billboards which is completely one way and non interactive medium. Websites are Just meant as an announcement board.
2. Most corporate websites have stock images of nicely dressed young men and women either shaking hands or walking out of conference room. Honestly, hasn’t a picture of this already flashed in your mind by now. Yeah, they all appear the same – no unique identity
3. The websites are screaming with brand messages staring in your face about just how good the brand is in delivering its promise. As a potential customer, why would I believe any reviews about that brand on its own site
4. There is no place for people to create community or forum to interact and share their experiences about the product or service. There must be a platform where positive and negative views both are allowed and a potential customer is free to make that choice.
5. Every corporate wants to build a rosy picture rather than a correct picture. So the websites end up with images of men and women, people of different skin colours etc basically anything that connotes that you are an equal opportunity complier and believe in fair trade. This would be an ideal thing to do if actions of that company collaborated with the images.
So what can be done about it?
1. Host a blog: Gives user more recent news about the company and its products. Allows the user to comment and interact with the company
2. Build Communities: This will create value. Companies can build brand specific ocmmunities so that people who have bought that product can come and discuss more about it. Also companies can share tips and suggestions on its features or maintenance or anything of value to the consumer
3. Share positive and negative reviews: This will build up the credibility immensely for that brand. It won’t be surprising to find people calling it a honest brand buying it as they appreciate that brand value.
4. No authoritative tone: The voice and manner of communication needs to be informative, thought provoking, appealing and inviting to consumers.
5. Hire Windchimes Communications as consultant on social media strategy. You could start by reading more about social media and their services on their website
There are several social media platforms that can be integrated with the website. It’s important to be clear with the objective before build a website. Till then save those precious advertising rupees – coz an economic slowdown could be right down the corner!!
Comments
Tags: Blogs, Corporate Website, Social Media tools, Windchimes Comm
I discovered your homepage by coincidence.
Very interesting posts and well written.
I will put your site on my blogroll.
🙂
Respectfully, no. “Conversation” certainly has it’s place. But “presentation” is the profile of a system based on property and possessive individualism.
– Amanda
[…] Another fellow blogger added an interesting post on Corporate Website 1.0 is dead. Long Live Corporate Website 2.0 …Here’s a small excerptHire Windchimes Communications as consultant on social media strategy. You could start by reading more about social media and their services on their website. There are several social media platforms that can be integrated with the … […]
@Dan. Thanks for your kind words and linking with our blog
@Amanda Pls elaborate on your statement ‘presentation is the profile of a system based on property and possessive individualism’
Nimesh Shah
Educative posts, sound as lesson SMM-101 🙂
Training B-school grads or re-training of Corporate Marketeres in Website 2.0 essentials may bring the desired change for better service to the customers.
Thanks.
Yes, that’s a good idea. I guess one is most open at that lifestage and it’s best to tap the person then
Nimesh,
I understand where you are coming from in writing this post. I agree with much of what you have written. I do have a problem with your assumption, or perhaps my interpretation, that marketing is a zero sum game. As a Internet Marketer, I must evaluate all internet tools and decide which is best for my clients overall goals and objectives and I would not make such a blanket statement.
History is littered with examples of claims that a new technology meant the death of the former:
– TV was the end of Radio.
– The Automobile was the and of rail service.
– Airlines would be the end of shipping.
– Email would mean the end of the postal service.
There still remain today examples of when a “website 1.0” is the best tool to accomplish a portion of the marketing plan. Should it be used for more then what it is best suited for, NO!
If I could be so bold, I would state that companies and organizations need to understand when social media is the best means of accomplishing their marketing goals. Companies like ours might look at a situation and say it is an obvious choice, but the reality is that unless they can be shown the value in a tangible way, knocking down conventional wisdom will not shift their marketing budgets to your recommended strategy.
Good Hunting,
As usual Tim, wonderful perspective thru your comments. I guess I as much look forward to reading your comments as much as writing my own blog posts!!
The key message that I would like to give out to marketer with this post is to be clear with the objectives of the website before building one. It shouldn’t be used as label in digital space. There should be distinct deliverable attached to it based on which it should be evaluated.
I do agree my blog post title does seem a tad dramatic but if that makes a marketer wake up and question whether he is generating enough value from his site then it does the trick
Nimesh,
Thanks for the kind words. And congratulations on writing a post that accomplished your objectives and spurred our collective comments.
We are agreed that understanding objectives by defining “success” is best accomplished before a choice of internet tool is selected. Additionally, the relationship between client and agency depends on this foundation to be set before the project begins.
Keep up the great work!
Good Hunting,
I check the corporate websites when finding out about a company but then I also read articles about them.
I find it interesting that the last company that I have been really researching and setting up Informational interviews with. They have the anti company blog which I did find insightful.
I also check sites like Crains and Hoovers. Though Hoovers basically charges you now these days.
But I agree that they are basically stale and there are other ways of obtaining information.
Thanks Tim
@Jamie – Websites are imporant – just that they need to remain relevant with time for that brand otherwise the reason to visit them ceases to exist
While the theory of posting blogs for interaction and posting both good and bad reviews is ideal, it doesn’t perform in a balanced manner for most companies. Unless your brand envokes a followship like Apple or Wii, then you’re most-likely not going to have a very high readership on your blogs and will receive much more negative comments than positive because, and lets be honest, how many people take the time out of their day to go to a corporate website and post positive comments about the products or services they received? That’s what consumers expect. They expect functioning products and adequate service. They wouldn’t have come to you if they didn’t expect to receive what they wanted. So when they get it, they are satisfied and go on with their life. When a company rocks their world, either by over-delivering on their promise or by failing to live up to the expectations, that’s when a consumer will take further action to engage with you. And let’s again be realistic, not many companies consistently over perform on the positive side. They try to do a good job, they try to meet expectations, they try to make a profit. So while I’d love to post the good and the bad of all comments, I think what you’d see would look very lopsided to the consumer even though there are many many satisified customers out there, And therefore this would hurt a companies image and goal of attaining new customers. For regular companies, they need to find different ways to engage consumers. What is the answer? I’m not sure, I’m still hunting, but some things that work are appointment systems, ordering systems for immediate delivery of perishable goods (Pizza Hut, etc.) and live chat. Everything else on the site is really truly there to get “picked up” by the search engines and their ever-changing logorithms.
I get your point Lana.
Let’s also be realistic in saying that not consumers are out there to malign companies. It’s only when they buy that company’s product or service and are disappointed do they start to grumble. And they would want to resolve this amicably. But so many sites don’t have reaching out mechanism or if they do, no one is listening on the other side. It is out of sheer frustration that consumers then go to independent site reviews and vent their anguish against their company.
My personal experiences have been that most in cases by just listening to them, people are willing to forgive and forget. It’s the arrogance of some companies of not listening to people who have issues with their brand that puts off customers.
Companies like Apple have won fans purely by listening to what their consumers wanted to say!!
Think about it!!
Hi
As promised Nimesh, i would like to add onto Corporate Website 2.0 idea. I would call this “Co Creating with the Consumer”.
Technology is evolving fast and (if not for the Recessionary mood), PE and other moneys are available for ideas that deliver better solutions at a lower cost to consumers. This has a far reaching effect in terms of Technology ROI. For any organization to milk revenues out of a technology investment, it takes time. However with the redundancy rates of technology it becomes difficult to forecast when a disrutive technology would make an existing one a thing of the past. Thus Organizations need to build stickiness around their products/services. This would also help them beat the fragmentation economics in the market and get a premium over others.
This is where a Corporate website 2.0 idea can be extended to something that is called the “consumer co creation”. Every product / service has a base element and a Value added part to it. Normally product/business managers work out the best fit product/solution which they think works best in the market. However the corporate website can be engineered that they provide the “base” and allow the consumer to choose his “value added” services. For the value adds their would be a premium charge. At the end of the day the consumer is satisfied because the product is order made according to his needs. The example in question is Dell which makes computers that have been oredered by the consumers. I am privy to many companies that make a product with a long luandry lists of “firsts” and “bests” and yet the consumer buying them only uses 10% of the “full monty”. The conusmer thus pays money for stuff he doesnot want and may or may not get the stuff he wants in the product hes paid a fortune for.
Increasingly companies identify this but there is not enough that has been done to make this idea see the light of the day…
I am with you on the thought of allowing consumers to select value added features on top of the base product.
My big concern would be at different function – supply chain. One of the biggest taks of customization is to ensure that you have best manufacturing practises that allow the user to personalize and yet not cost too much to the company. It’s a challenge to have nimble inventories so that your working cap is not blocked and yet have all the parts that are offered as part of value addition.
On another note, marketers must have clear cut ROI set for themselves when they design their website only then will they be clear on the amount of monies to spend on it.
[…] the old way of doing things, companies make use of intranets or websites as static tools. Employees can search and find, but have limited ability to participate and […]
[…] Internet and social media sites are the first places to seek news, products and services related information and to find out about latest trends. In that sense, instead of being afraid of social media, […]
[…] online presence to ensure that users find them when they are searching or researching online. Mere website presence won’t be enough – but it will require presence in communities, discussion forums, blogs, […]
[…] that is no longer the case, and some are saying that there is little need for the brochurewear that exists currently, and that it should be […]