Within 5 minutes of trying Google+, I feel confident to give it my thumbs up. This is because it was obvious from the get-go that it addressed one of my biggest problems with Facebook. Specifically, the separation of our social groups into circles and the control over what we share and with whom. While Facebook does allow the categorisation via checkboxes, I just don't feel that this has been made easy enough in the current user interface. We already know that usability and simplicity separate the winners from the losers – just look at the Ipod vs. the Walkman. So people end up creating separate profiles (business vs. personal), regularly 'culling' friends and generally posting less but basically am imperfect situation currently exists.
What is Google+?
It's Google's social network on invitation only at this stage (and called a 'project' as its development is ongoing – nice touch!). To learn more about the key features of Google+, I recommend you just play around with it. It looks significantly like Facebook once you're at your homepage but appears less cluttered (perhaps due to the absence of advertising … ahem). The features it offers are:
- Circles: a great way of organising (and separating!) your contacts
- Streams: equivalent of Facebook status updates
- Hangouts: like groups but with ability to use your webcam
- Huddle: basically a group chat
- Sparks: a content sharing tool organised around topics using +1 function
- Photos, Chat & Mobile
For more on the functionality, I refer you to this Slideshare deck by Nixon McInnes, "Google+ - What is it and should we take notice?" or this post by Anton Koekemoer, How to get started with Google+.
To learn more about the content sharing capabilities of Google+, I recommend reading
Will it succeed where Facebook hasn't?
This is the $64 billion question with initial critics comparing a snapshot of the numbers and declaring "No!". However Google+ has reached 18 million users in a record time that it took Facebook 2 years to do. Looking at the trend though, while in net numbers Facebook is edging towards 1 billion people, the winner of the social media war will be based on success in the following 3 areas.
- Content Production
- Search
- Revenue
- Content Production: Content = Time Spent
Facebook's success in raw numbers is also potentially its downfall in the fact that people have too many "friends" and time spent is based on the fine mix between content production (status updates and pictures), participation (likes and comments) and consumption (the reading).
This problem arises when there is:
- Blurring of circles: Your nanny, niece, client, mother and next door neighbour are all your "friends" but you don't want to share the same information in the same way with all these people. Normally, one would control finely what you tell, to whom and when as part of your relationships with people in your networks and the intimacy created when someone shares something with you decide to share back. This is incredibly difficult if not impossible on Facebook causing a hesitance to post.
- Annoyance: I have recently heard of various people annoyed with other people based on their posts e.g. someone told me "I never post pictures of my children as there is a guy who is constantly posting pictures of his baby – does he think we are all interested?" Of course, when I heard the latter comment, I did wonder, 'are other people thinking the same about me when I post a picture of my baby?'. Needless to say, I am much more reluctant to post now. Is this how others feel too?
- Too many contacts: According to anthropologist Robin Dunbar, humans are cognitively capable of connecting with only 150 people at a time. With more than that, it becomes impossible to manage your relationships on Facebook and you end up neglecting contacts and not being able to return an email, comment, wish happy birthday or poke back when perhaps you should have. Here is a great article on Wired.com about the limits of our friendships.
- Less contribution: Facebook taps into our voyeuristic interest in "other people's lives" as well as our inherent laziness to avoid emailing or picking up the phone to get the information. Facebook dishes the information up on a silver platter but it only works if people keep up the dishing. Since social media is reliant on the 90-9-1 principle (90% of people read the content, 9% contribute and only 1% actually produce), the poor ability to share and control what to share with which 'social network' or circle has and will result in less content production and therefore less interesting content for consumption. If you check Facebook 5 x a day and the same people still have the same content, you're just not going to check as often and spend less time on Facebook. This can result in less time spent.
Google+ has its circles organised from the get-go with a clearer system of what to share with whom. This is outlined in greater detail in this excellent post "4 things to know about Google+" by Urs E. Gattiker of ComMetrics.
- Search: Where Google+ is Great
It's interesting that the battle for social media will boil down to integration with search. The Sparks and Huddles are great features offering a consumer benefit combining social networking with the content on the web on the basis of interest. It clusters people not just around other people they know (Facebook) but around interesting content and relevant topics (Twitter). This is an area where Google are perfectly poised to marry the two and where Facebook has yet to do. The partnership with Microsoft and Bing will be able to combat this if Microsoft is able to further integrate the two technologies and platform to mimic the same utility.
- Revenue: Facebook Monetising Fast
Audience reach is achieved through the model of Paid-Earned-Owned media. Facebook seems to have become the "one-stop audience shop" as it achieves all 3.
- Paid Media: Facebook pages have contextual display ads and while I feel it clutters the interface) but I'm sure there are enough click-throughs on these ads to justify its existence
- Earned Media: This is traditional PR in social media form and the ever popular 'like' function. There is debate as to the actual value of a like, while some say it's worth 29p in media value, others argue its worthless since its often achieved through the trade of content or a discount rather than being a genuine like. Groups, communities and fan pages strengthen this further by facilitating the sharing of brand related information. Google have this in their +1 feature, so the path is paved for further monetisation.
- Owned Media: When I worked at Microsoft, specifically in the area of custom solutions and branded entertainment, we were always delivered a microsite as well as a traffic strategy. These days brands just host a Facebook page i.e. "fish where the fish are" and don't even need to claim their own URL, entirely keeping traffic in the Facebook ecosystem and eliminating the need for a (micro)site.
PLUS
- E-commerce: The online transaction side of Facebook is also increasing as a distribution channel. Check out this article on F-commerce with interesting facts and brands.
Of course, the commercial success of Facebook does depend on the usage by the audience. For example, Microsoft has a huge audience base on MSN (Windows Live) Messenger, but if less people are logging in and using IM, what value is this to advertisers at the end of the day? The fatigue or decline of Facebook is only just beginning, however it is something to be aware of.
Google+ on the other hand doesn't have ads or fan page equivalents (yet) however one can envisage later down the line 'sparks' and 'huddles' around relevant topics e.g. P&G could sponsor a 'Spark' around toddler tantrums 'brought to you by Pampers' and then arrange a 'Huddle' with Jo Frost - Supernanny.
In conclusion, I predict that:
- While Facebook has massive global audience, the usage will decline further due to the poor separation of social groups and ability to control over what to share with which group. Google+ has benefitted from social anthropological hindsight gleaned from Facebook's first mover advantage.
- Combined with the content from search, their technological expertise and their own critical mass as everyone's entry point to the web, they have a strong chance of creating a winning social network for the future provided they pursue the monetisation path and engage with brands for advertising and e-commerce on the paid, earned and owned levels.
Please let me know your thoughts and comments below. Thanks!
