Engagement Labs, a techonology and data company based in Canada, has used their eValue metric to rate the top beer companies on Twitter. First, the list:
|1||Miller Lite (@MillerLite)|
|2||Stella Artois (@StellaArtois)|
|3||Bud Light (@budlight)|
|4||Coors Light (@CoorsLight)|
|7||Labatt Beer (@LabattUSA)|
|8||Pabst Blue Ribbon (@PabstBlueRibbon)|
|9||Samuel Adams (@SamuelAdamsBeer)|
|10||Corona Extra (@CoronaExtraUSA)|
The eValue metric basically counts up retweets, responses, and links, is what this laymen understands. Their press release makes it sound a bit more fancy, but that has to be how the sausage is made in the end. Looks like time between tweets and responses is part of the last measure.
The eValue score is composed of Engagement, Impact and Responsiveness metrics. Engagement is the level of interaction content receives on a specific social network, Impact is the unique reach content receives on a specific social network, and Responsiveness measures how much, how fast and how well a brand responds to actual conversations amongst its users.
This definitely has value, particularly if you are a public relations professional at one of these brands. Their social media campaigns are basically being rated by the three most interesting aspects. The company nails it when they point out what kept Heineken from climbing higher in the rankings. "Heineken, came in sixth place on Twitter according to our eValue tool, yet had the highest Impact score and the second highest Responsiveness score. Where Heineken fell short was in their Engagement score measuring their audience's interaction with their content. A small shift in Heineken’s efforts on Engagement can help improve their interactions and resonance with their targeted audience,” said Bryan Segal, CEO of Engagement Labs.
Is there a way to improve these metrics? I wonder if quality of interaction was measured, for one. Here's the latest tweet from Miller Lite, which impressively has 89 retweets and 166 favorites despite containing very little content.
Gather your #ItsMillerTime pics from beaches, BBQs & everywhere in between. Big things are about to go down. https://t.co/jXTIgWtP3K— Miller Lite (@MillerLite) May 19, 2015
Fine. Good. It's a campaign. But scroll down the replies, and they aren't all positive. Two of the sixteen are negative, and five are nonsensical. They all probably counted as 'engagement.'
Engagement Labs couldn't be reached in time to talk about this in depth, and maybe it's impossible to nail this aspect. After all, Twitter is full of trolls. Every brand probably gets negative replies. Maybe all attention is good attention in the end. There's no mention of quality of interaction in the literature, though.
The other thing that came to mind is that these brands all promote tweets. Was that controlled for in any way? It seems it's probably a lot easier to get engagement if you have a marketing budget that includes pushing your tweets in front of people. How about the feed for Deschutes Brewing, which gets very few negative responses, responds quickly to inquiries, has interesting RTs, and has an active community surrounding it -- without the benefit of promoted tweets? Perhaps there could be another bracket at least.
This stuff is hugely important to the brands. The full data could help any brand improve their social media presence. That doesn't mean there's no chance it could use some tweaking.
EDIT. We got a response to our questions from Bryan Segal:
Q: “I know from personal experience that some RTs and responses to the national brands are negative, especially from the craft beer community. Was there ever a thought of looking at the types of words used in RTs and responses to get a sense of the interactions? Some of these tweets were also promoted by pay, did Engagement Labs consider 'correcting' for that in some way? It seems that an RT of an unpromoted tweet should maybe get a little more 'credit.'”
A: The eValue tool uses a complex algorithm that had been in development for over 6 years. The tool is used to evaluate a brand's social media performance to help agencies, publishers, marketers and businesses better understand their social media ROI. The tool does not simply aggregate likes, shares, favourites and retweets, in fact it’s quite complex. eValue measures three main sub scores - Engagement, Impact and Responsiveness along with over 300 sub metrics including response quality, organic reach, mentions per 1000 followers, admin replies, response time, etc. to create one top level KPI - an eValue score. One of our sub metrics - Admin Response Quality looks at how the admin responds to comments - Are they bringing new content into the conversation - such as a link or video? As well the tool takes into account Response reception which measures how the response was received - Has the reply engaged further discussion? Been liked, retweeted or shared? Moving forward in our product roadmap we will be incorporating Sentiment score plus an Analysis of Sentiment for all retweets, replies, quotes to posts.
In regards to paid vs organic content, our tool currently scores all content the same, regardless of paid promotion. However, promoted post detection is also in our roadmap for this year. Once incorporated into our algorithm we will be able to separate paid reach vs organic reach.