Ten actions to take from our latest web marketing campaign

Email

Following the result that most of our visitors come through email or direct publicity we have been looking more closely at how our email “New at IFPRI” is used by the recipients. Looking at opening rates and click through rates we can get an idea as to the interest in the different materials. We have found the increased click through rate from images versus text and more interest in shorter materials.

Action: increased focus on email campaign, analyzing and changing formats.

Social Media

We were surprised to see how quickly social media is building an audience for our materials. Evidently different products are more suited to the audience than others, hence the video was widely retweeted on Twitter, whilst the book itself less so. It was also critical to make best use of tags to attract new audiences, to follow more people with the IFPRI twitter account to build followers, and to attract retweets from larger or key audience accounts.

Action: include lessons learnt in the social media guidance under development

Video/Multimedia materials

The success in the video product in attracting more users and raising awareness shows the importance of considering multimedia products. We are increasingly developing presentations to explain new findings, products or services. Key to this is hosting these materials where the user is looking for them, we therefore make extensive use of YouTube and Slideshare.

Action to develop explanatory materials as presentations or interactive products.

The Website

With everyone emphasizing the importance of web2 and social media tools for web communication it was interesting that our results underscored the value of the website in bringing an audience to IFPRI products. We have learnt from the keywords used to access the site and the focus on the topical interests of the user rather than the organizational structure of the site.

Action: We have developed more topics pages on the website (our work in focus) and developed a series of options for users to subscribe to content by topic (RSS).

Facebook and Linked In

Analysis of visitors to Millions Fed showed the importance of Facebook and Linked in for attracting a targeted audience.

Action: Continued development of LinkedIn to attract alumni of IFPRI and development of Facebook to capture a younger audience.

Quoting reach rather than just numbers of visitors

We discovered in the course of the analysis the value of quoting our visits as a proportion of the overall internet population of a country. We would like to develop this idea and compare with others.

Action: Compare statistical analysis of IFPRI reach with other development organizations working in agriculture and food policy research.

Dialup and low bandwidth

We found that dialup connection is still used to access our site but only from Germany, India, the US and Australia. We will continue to ensure fast loadtimes, and caching of our materials.

Action: We are looking to provide more guidance to low bandwidth users, and promoting more email delivery rather than a very low bandwidth version of the site.

Access by mobile phone

We found that very few people view the site with a mobile phone.  But are investigating further whether this is because we don’t offer a mobile interface.

Action: In a similar approach to above, we would prefer to promote the use of feeds and email for accessing our content on mobile phones.

Measuring success

By our own standards we were very successful in raising awareness of the product and the strategy of using more social media and web2 tools to get the message out clearly worked. However in terms of readership of the final product, other web-based publications produced during the year were more widely read.

Does the social web enable me to find more unique information or just more of the same?

The video Information R/Evolution and the post From The Information Age To The Connected Age are describing two trends of the social web.

The social web can enable users to more easily find the exact information they were searching. But if the scarce resource of the connected age is attention, then we are likely to see a surge of new ways of and tools for marketing and PR in the battle for audiences.

As producers of information and products learn how to use the social web to reach people, these same tools will be weakened in their function to facilitate access to the best information in favor of the loudest voice. How do we know that the loudest voice is the one we want to listen to? and if it tells us what we want to hear, why would we not listen or even go look for an alternative one?

Research debates have very similar problems: Big names are favored and have a lot of influence, newcomers and dissidents have to accept the supremacy of the established voices. But, do the big names always produce the best information? or did were they just lucky to have one great idea that made their reputation?