A while ago I wrote a blog post on Wal-Mart and its failed social networking endeavours. Many comments I’ve received regarding that post pointed out that Wal-Mart, in general, is not a very well liked brand. Therefore, regardless of what they do, they would never succeed in that type of open environment.
Although I understand that point and agree with it to a certain extent, I do not believe that it’s impossible for companies who don’t have the best reputation offline to do well in an online environment such as social networking. Through my research I’ve come across a surprising example of one company that has done incredibly well online; a company whose success is quite unexpected.
The company I’m referring to is Microsoft. I would argue that, comparable to Wal-Mart, there are many different interest groups that like to rally against it, but for some reason, Microsoft has managed to develop strong and healthy communities.
The difference: Microsoft has focused on its strengths and has managed to deliver tangible results. The best example, Microsoft’s “i’m making a difference” campaign on Facebook has 67,800 members in its group and has raised $1,409,788 for different charities since March 2007.
I’m is an initiative that donates to a social cause every time a user sends an instant message (IM). Windows Messenger has partnered with ten charitable organizations: The American Red Cross, Boys & Girls clubs of America, National AIDS Fund, The Humane Society of the United states, ninmillion.org, National Multiple Sclerosis Society, Sierra Club, UNICEF, StopGlobalWarming.org and Susan G. Komen for the cure. “Every time you start a conversation using i’m, Microsoft shares a portion of the program’s advertising revenue with some of the world’s most effective organizations dedicated to social causes.”
Windows has taken a non-aggressive approach to advertise its brand, leading people to associate it with a charitable cause and framing Microsoft’s MSN messenger service in a positive light. This initiative is mutually beneficial since it allows Microsoft to build goodwill among consumers while at the same time gain more MSN Messenger users since it has always lagged behind AOL’s AIM service in the United States. With social networks, companies have an opportunity to develop applications or groups that may not be directly related to selling products but can create goodwill and brand equity in other ways.
Not directly related to social networking, but another creative way Microsoft has gotten people to use its IM service (this time catered to Canadians) by holding a contest giving Canadian msn users a daily chance to win $1,000. Users simply have to log in and register once, and they are automatically entered into the daily draw. Users may then increase their chance of winning the money by sharing news of the contest to friends on facebook or on their Windows Live “Space”.
Comments RSS
| TrackBack URI
Hey Ming, I think there’s one key difference between these two examples - Microsoft, while indeed a behemoth, has had a thriving collaboration model / developer network operating since the 1980’s (online since 1993) that has endowed it with a following in the millions. Sure, it’s not the coolest company in consumer terms but for programmers they’ve built a following that can easily be mirrored on a Facebook page - i.e. the success might not be that surprising.
Comment by Dan Herman - May 8, 2008 4:19 pm
Your comment: “Wal-Mart, in general, is not a very well liked brand,” is absurd.
You must be paying too much attention to the media. Every day, people vote with their pocketbook and it’s obvious that Wal-Mart is winning by a landslide.
Comment by Ken Leebow - May 9, 2008 6:50 am
Ken, that’s a fair point. But on the flip side, if someone was to write “Wal-Mart, in general, is a very well-liked brand” could equally be viewed as “absurd”.
I guess, what I should have written in my post to make it clear is that Wal-Mart, obviously does have fans; but in an online environment - doesn’t do a great job at leveraging them. For example, on their Wal-Mart facebook group (that no longer exists) instead of being a space where people talked about how they love Wal-Mart (which there obviously are, as you point out - people are opening their wallets) where were they [those fans] when people were posting anti-Wal-Mart pictures on their page and writing anti-Walmart content on their wall.
Microsoft, on the other hand has focused on a positive aspect of their business that people get excited about and are willing to express that excitement on an online, public forum.
Comment by Ming Kwan - May 9, 2008 4:23 pm
It’s by no means scientific, but here’s the number of results produced for google searches of several phrases related to Wal-Mart:
9,120 “I love Wal-Mart”
18,000 “I hate Wal-Mart”
11,300 “I love WalMart”
19,600 “I hate WalMart”
To be fair, there’s also quite a few fans that “like” Wal-Mart too:
3,780 “I like Wal-Mart”
28,800 “I like WalMart”
Comment by Alan Majer - May 9, 2008 4:54 pm
For a more scientific approach to these metrics, I used Googlefight to analyze whether more people love or hate Walmart.
The results:
“I love Walmart” = 851,000
“I hate Walmart” = 585,000
Comment by DH - May 9, 2008 6:15 pm