Notorious R.O.B.

I’m reasonably sure that none of you currently reading this has ever thought that those three terms belong together. But they do!

Recently, I got into a discussion with the inimitable Teri Lussier about Fred Astaire vs. Gene Kelly. Well… to be fair, it wasn’t much of a discussion. More of Teri beating me about the head rhetorically speaking. So naturally, I went searching for information on the difference between Astaire and Kelly.

And found this:

“People would compare us, but we didn’t dance alike at all!” Kelly said in a 1994 interview, quoted in the Associated Press obituary. “Fred danced in tails – everybody wore them before I came out here – but I took off my coat, rolled up my sleeves and danced in sweat shirts and jeans and khakis.”

It was the natural quality that was so attractive in a Kelly musical. While most of Astaire’s films existed only as a framework for his great dance numbers, a Kelly musical was more likely to pretend to be a “real” story in which the characters spontaneously burst into song and dance, almost to their own surprise.

In fact, here are the differences made visual:

Fred Astaire is just… ethereal. He doesn’t even look like he’s dancing in some cases, as if twirling and tapping his way across the floor were the most natural thing in the world.

And yet, there is something of real artifice in his dancing in a strange way. I simply can’t relate to the man, in some ways because of his perfection. Some of it may have to do with the characters he’s playing, or the time when those movies were made, but there’s really something unapproachable about Astaire, something forbidding in the purity of his perfection. As Rainer Maria Rilke wrote, Jeder Engel is schrecklich (“every angel is terrifying”).

Now, here’s Gene Kelly:

Gene Kelly’s style is much more muscular, much more physical, if you will. I’m always aware that Kelly is actually dancing in his dance numbers, in a way that I sometimes forget that Astaire is doing.

But I’m also able to relate to Gene Kelly in a way I never could with Fred Astaire. This is a man doing something that is unnatural, and doing it exceptionally well. But you never forget the essential humanity of Gene Kelly as a person in his dances. Yes, he’s capable of incredible athletic and acrobatic and balletic feats — but I feel that I’m watching a person do those things.

With Astaire, I sometimes feel that I’m watching a spirit, an angel, a personification of dance, do those things. And it isn’t the same.

I realized there’s a rough analogy to be made here between “traditional” marketing and “social media” marketing for real estate. Fred Astaire to Gene Kelly is like “traditional” marketing is to “social media” marketing.

Fact is, in the 21st century, there is no longer such a thing as “traditional” marketing — one would be hard-pressed to find a broker or agent who completely rejects web-based marketing initiatives in favor of only print, open houses, and MLS books. The books themselves no longer exist, after all.

The question, really, is one of perfection vs. authenticity.

The best of ‘traditional’ marketing — for example, sites like Corcoran.com, is reflected in its execution. Something like the Virtual Book is a pretty slick implementation, as is something like My Dream Home. Neither of these things are “social” in any way, but you can’t help but admire the execution. Even if we don’t go so far as to call it “perfect”, fact is that perfection of execution is the goal of these kinds of marketing campaigns.

Done right, they evoke admiration from the user, as well as a measure of, “Gee whiz, I wonder how they did that!”

In contrast, ‘social media’ marketing tries — Gene Kelly-like — to go for authenticity in lieu of perfect execution. The goal with blogs, for example, shouldn’t be to present a perfect face to the world, but to present a human one. It isn’t about the professional quality of the photographs, but about the opinions of the realtor who is presenting the property. It isn’t about the beauty of the market report, but about its genuineness.

Of course, the best ‘social media’ marketing is pretty admirable too — just like Gene Kelly isn’t exactly a slouch in the dance department. The point is that the goal is different.

There is one further point to be made.

Gene Kelly was still a dancer, one of the best of his generation (or any generation). He wasn’t just some random guy who ran around prancing and pretending that was dance. He still put in the time, understood the principles, and practiced being a dancer.

Having a blog does not make you a ‘social marketer’ anymore than simply throwing your body around makes you a dancer. Twittering 24/7 does not mean you’re engaging in ‘social media’ anymore than prancing around makes me Gene Kelly. And ‘social media’ is not an excuse to completely ignore basic rules of marketing.

On the flipside, the true marketers in our industry (myself included) need to raise our game some. If we’re not going to go for authenticity, then by golly, we’d better shoot for perfection of execution like a Fred Astaire & Ginger Rogers number.

Perfection vs. authenticity. Here’s another look — watch and be inspired:

-rsh

UPDATE: Teri Lussier has posted a response that is worth reading in full.  Don’t miss more singing and dancing!

Ines asks a fantastic question:

What would happen to your business if your blog or favorite Social Media Site were to disappear tomorrow?

Her entire post is worth reading, as it relates quite a bit to disaster recovery, data security, and copyright maintenance.  All worthwhile things to think about.

My followup question is:

What if nothing happens?

Ines herself opens up with a testimonial to the effectiveness of social media for real estate:

Web2.0 and Social Media Works – I don’t care what the skeptics have to say, but we have proven it and keep coming up with new ideas to implement on a regular basis.  Sometimes I feel like I am preaching to the choir here on Agent Genius because if you are taking the time to read here, it means that you get it and don’t need reinforcing.

As one of the skeptics, allow me to ask, “what do you mean by proof?”  Anecdotes are not the plural of evidence, as scientists are fond of saying.  Because I work in the hazy discipline of marketing — which too often can seem like voodoo — I have to turn to my inner geek and ask what he would want to see.

I want metrics.  I really want metrics.  I’d love for some consultancy in the RE.net to do a statistically valid A/B testing to show that realtors who have blogs and social media operations have XX% higher return on assets, or higher profit margins, or something.  I’d love to be able to show that a realtor website that adds a blog updated a minimum of three times a week results in an additional 35 transactions a year, holding all other factors equal (i.e., no new hiring of top agents, no new branding campaign, the same number of yard signs deployed, and so on).  That sort of quantifiable metrics is the closest thing we marketers have to “proof”.

Because I believe that there is significant confusion in the industry between the message and the medium.  And Marshall McLuhan notwithstanding, I maintain that there is a difference in most professional services, and particularly in real estate.

The message — that a particular realtor is a professional, who is knowledgeable, friendly, competent, and so forth — could be conveyed (and should be conveyed) in every medium from telephone to web to personal interactions.

Does it really matter that the medium — in this case, the Internet and all of its myriad flowerings — is one thing or another?

Would a quality agent or quality broker really be unable to get the message out if the social medium she is using disappears?  Somehow, I doubt it.

-rsh

I am endorsing Todd Carpenter of Lenderama for the Social Media Manager position for the National Association of REALTORS. His plan is a solid one, and his experience with the RE.net makes him an invaluable resource.

However, I am rather concerned for Todd, and I make the endorsement with a good deal of reluctance and hesitation.

The concern and hesitation have nothing to do with Todd — he’s the ideal, perfect candidate in so many ways. Rather, what gives me pause is NAR itself. I don’t know how serious they are about embracing the fundamental changes necessary to make social media meaningful.

Reason #1: The Position

By rights, this should be at least a VP position in NAR, perhaps reporting to Frank Sibley, SVP of Communications, or to Bob Goldberg, Senior Vice President, Marketing & Business Development & Commercial Services, & President & COO, REALTORS® Information Network. Actually, if I were running NAR, this would be a Senior Vice President position on par with Frank and Bob, because it encompasses so much more that simple communications, more than marketing, more than business development.

“Social Media” as a phrase gets thrown around quite a bit, and I rather think most people either have no idea what it actually means, or use it as a convenient shorthand for “blogs, Twitter, and all that web stuff”.

What they don’t understand perhaps is that “Social Media” is media first and foremost. It arose out of the infancy of the blogosphere when individual bloggers were pounding the mainstream media (“MSM”) into the ground with their analyses, factchecking, and highlighting of little-reported stories. It has since evolved into an actual newsgathering operation on many fronts (see, e.g., Michael Yon).

If I take NAR at face value, creating a Social Media strategy means that it wants to supplant the MSM as the source of information on all things real estate to the American consumer. I do not believe this is NAR’s goal, and if it were, I do not believe that NAR is well-suited to running such an operation for a variety of factors. (Least of which is the inherent bias of real estate agents in reporting on real estate.)

So I have to take NAR not at face value, but at some code phrase value, thinking that what NAR really wants to do is come up with a strategy for helping REALTORS market more effectively to consumers by using the Web. Let us, then, instead use the term “Social Marketing”.

Because what NAR is really looking for is a “Social Marketing” strategy, I do not believe that the position has enough power within the organization to be truly effective. I could be dead wrong on that, of course, especially if the senior leadership from Dale Stinton on down are completely, 100% behind the effort, and are willing to listen to the Social Marketing Manager (“SMM”) and implement his/her plans.

My experience with large organizations, however, suggests to me that unless a position has (a) significant budget control, and (b) significant staff, it lacks power.  The job description is silent on either point.  Further, given that there are titles such as “Managing Director” at NAR, it leads me to believe that this position is at best a mid-level worker-bee position, rather than a strategic leadership position.

Todd can be the SVP of Social Marketing for NAR; he has the experience, the insight, the knowledge, and the connections.  He’s almost too qualified for this role.  So I endorse him, but with concern that he’ll spend most of his tenure banging his head against a brick wall… and silenced because he’s now part of the Establishment, instead of being a voice from outside the walls.

Reason #2: Fundamental Shift

So why does this position need to go from being a Social Media Manager to SVP of Social Marketing?

Because a social marketing strategy, in order to be effective, has to be disruptive to all of the existing marketing of NAR, most of its infrastructure, and vast parts of the membership.

I just don’t know if the people at NAR understand just how fundamental a shift it represents to go from the traditional marketing/communications model to a social marketing model.  I fear that they see this as more or less a “hey, we need to teach agents how to blog” distraction, rather than the kind of seismic change that will impact everything from membership to government relations.  And if NAR doesn’t see that, then it is far more likely that the needed initiatives will be stifled at birth within the organization, rather than given the juice and the horsepower to proceed.

To pick just one example, is NAR willing to completely suspend their idiotic advertising campaigns because the Social Media Manager insists that those ads are ruining the basis of social marketing: TRUST?

Again, I could be wrong, and I hope to be wrong — but the signs are not good.

Reason #3: Social Marketing Is Unproven

Finally, the uncomfortable truth of the matter is that social marketing in real estate is still unproven.  Anecdotes are not the plural of evidence.  That some blogger-agents are able to do enormous business does not establish in and of itself that social marketing is what is responsible for their success.  For all we know, it’s all of the other things that the blogging agents do that makes them a success, such as getting local knowledge, having professional ethics, and a rock-solid understanding of real estate fundamentals.

There has never been, to date, a systematic study of the ROI from blogging and other social marketing activites.  None.

The ‘good anecdotes’ are counter-balanced by the ‘bad anecdotes’ that show that some agents who are major RE.net figures, with top-notch SEO leading to excellent Google rankings, and are elite Twiterati nonetheless sell a fraction of the houses that the non-techie agent down the street sells.

No major (say Top 20) real estate brokerage has a track record showing the impact of social marketing on their revenues, on their profitability, on their efficiency, on customer retention, etc. etc.

Even if Todd is the greatest social media guru who has ever lived, and NAR is completely and 100% behind his efforts… it simply may be the case that social marketing does not have a dramatic impact in real estate.

After all, we are still talking about seven year cycles in between purchases.  How much blog reading about houses is the consumer going to do once he’s bought the damn house?  This is a market fundamental that no amount of Twittering can change.

I have faith in the transformative power of the web and the connectivity between humans it enables.  I believe that social marketing does have a positive impact on brokerage, done correctly.  I have faith; what I don’t have are facts.

Todd is the Right Man; Is this the Right Job?

So I am left with endorsing Todd as being the right guy with the right plan and the right skills.  He’s a leader, an inspiration, and a mentor to so many of us in RE.net.

Question is… is Social Media Manager the right job?

-rsh