2. Agenda
● What do you want to achieve?
● If you build it they don‟t have to come
● Connecting and engaging with your users
● Without sales how do you measure
success?
● Lessons learnt
Los Angeles | London | New Delhi
Singapore | Washington DC
3. Step 1 – define objectives
● How could SAGE
support researchers &
academics?
● What is the right
solution for our users?
● What would be in it for
us?
Los Angeles | London | New Delhi
Singapore | Washington DC
4. The research lifecycle
Identify
research opps
Manage the
research Find
process collaborators
Disseminate
Secure support
findings
Analyse
research Review the
data literature
Collect
research
data
Los Angeles | London | New Delhi
Singapore | Washington DC
5. Los Angeles | London | New Delhi
Singapore | Washington DC
6. Los Angeles | London | New Delhi
Singapore | Washington DC
7. Existing communities – pro‟s
● Quick and easy set up
● Low/no cost barriers to entry
● Low effort for users
● Familiarity for users
● Your community may already be there
Los Angeles | London | New Delhi
Singapore | Washington DC
8. Los Angeles | London | New Delhi
Singapore | Washington DC
9. 3rd party communities – con‟s
● „Rented‟: not your data
● Inflexible
● Be wary of the T&C‟s!
● Functionality is fixed
Los Angeles | London | New Delhi
Singapore | Washington DC
10. Build your own social network
● Choose your
functionality
● No brand dilution
● Member data
● Content ownership
● £££££
Los Angeles | London | New Delhi
Singapore | Washington DC
11. White label networks
● Cheaper option
● Ning, wordpress, pluck, socialgo…etc…
Los Angeles | London | New Delhi
Singapore | Washington DC
12. www.methodspace.com
Los Angeles | London | New Delhi
Singapore | Washington DC
13. Los Angeles | London | New Delhi
Singapore | Washington DC
15. Engage your members!
Creators (24%)
Conversationalists (33%)
Critics (37%)
Collectors (20%)
Joiners (59%)
Spectators (70%)
Inactives (17%)
Los Angeles | London | New Delhi
Singapore | Washington DC
16. Clear calls to action
Los Angeles | London | New Delhi
Singapore | Washington DC
17. Planned content
Los Angeles | London | New Delhi
Singapore | Washington DC
19. Los Angeles | London | New Delhi
Singapore | Washington DC
20. Was is a success?
● Visibly provided as “support space” for
students and academics
● 10,000 members (7% active members)
● Held up as a model when talking about
publisher innovation
● Authors beginning to use the space to
engage with their readers and get
feedback on their books
● Engagement with content (particularly via
email)
Los Angeles | London | New Delhi
Singapore | Washington DC
21. Some closing tips…
● Keep your objectives clear & simple
● Set targets, but keep realistic (and flexible)
● Plan your content!
● Give it time (lots)
● Join up your marketing
● Horizon scanning?
Los Angeles | London | New Delhi
Singapore | Washington DC
22. Thanks for your time
Katie.sayers@sagepub.co.uk
@katiesayers
Los Angeles | London | New Delhi
Singapore | Washington DC
Notes de l'éditeur
Technology is not an objective but a way to reach that objectiveGeneral perception is that you put up a website and people will come if they like your brand etc. Content and engagement is what counts not the site being live. Also, what’s in it for your users?So, how did we connect and engage with our marketHow do we measure whether we set out what we wanted to achieve? We could measure book sales (but would be very low) and so would usage (paid usage is what we push so usage on free content is not a business objective for us). Need to utilise different metrics and evaluate the data in a different way.
Example of a research lifecycleThe shape of the web is very similar for all four subjects and the perception is that social networking is most useful for the dissemination of research findings, in research collaboration and, perhaps surprisingly, in helping to identify research opportunities. (CIBER findings are the same as SAGE’s so that is reassuring!)Wanted to try and find a solution for academics to help them with the two key issues and community sites were reviewed as one of the options. On various surveys we have done, we felt the academics weren’t using FB for research (perhaps socially but they weren’t merging the two) and there wasn’t a great take-up on twitter either (people didn’t have the time). Also – issue of privacy, academics didn’t want to be contacted by non-academics or lots of students when the students should have been going to their own tutors. Beginning to see trend to people not expecting one way messages, people being happen to share content, research ideas and share outside of their institution, conferences. Felt people communicated by listservs so how we were expecting them to engage wasn’t dissimilar to what they were already doing. We also had the mantra, let’s not be afraid and make mistakes. If it doesn’t work, we “fail fast” and move on.
Also – very consuming – where do the resources lie for building the site. IT? Marketing? Product development?
Advocacy and perceptionAndy Field spaceDavid Silverman textbook spaceAllow members at share and disseminate research