,

Chapter 24

A Tale of Two Cities

WEB 2.0 AND THE EVOLUTION OF CRM 2.0

As in Charles Dickens's novel, A Tale of Two Cities, this chapter is set amidst a revolution that depicts the quandary facing individuals who stand for something more significant than the status quo. While not as dramatic or profound as the experiences depicted in Dickens's book, a tale of two cities exists between the current state of affairs in customer relationship management and the idea of what relationships should symbolize for today's businesses amidst this social mutiny.

The foundation for CRM, customer relationship management, was set in the 1980s and was traditionally viewed as the technology and doctrines governing marketing automation, sales automation, and customer service.

As Web 2.0 gave rise to a genre of social computing and collaboration, the enterprise infrastructure, business paradigm, value chain, and workflow were forever transformed. Processes and methodologies were suddenly placed under the microscope finding the search for new opportunities for efficiencies and innovation, and thus Web 2.0 spawned an era of Enterprise 2.0. In the process, CRM experienced a renaissance and was ripe for a new name to reflect the impact of Enterprise 2.0 and Web 2.0 on customer management. While many suggestions were introduced, this new generation of CRM was captured most effectively as CRM 2.0. Led by Paul Greenberg (author of the best-selling book CRM at the Speed of Light), Axel Schultze, Christopher Carfi, Mei Lin Fun, Brent Leary, and Andrew Boyd, among others, CRM 2.0 would rise alongside Enterprise 2.0, reaching its apex in innovation and visibility in 2007 and 2008.1

But while CRM 2.0 was gaining support, social media was rewriting the playbook for customer influence and interaction.

Social media emerged in parallel as a sprawling ecosystem for breeding influence among customers and set the stage for something more significant than CRM 2.0.

While CRM defined an era and captured the processes, systems, and ideologies that promoted streamlined relationship management, CRM in and of itself didn't imply social interaction or internal adaptation. And although CRM 2.0 was rooted in thoughtful intentions and efforts, its lifespan was finite.

It just didn't meet the demands and ongoing requirements of a more socially aware society of influencers.

Starting in 2007 and 2008, Social CRM gathered momentum. Brent Leary,2 Paul Greenberg, Filiberto Selvas,3 Ross Mayfield,4 Jeremiah Owyang,5 and I,6 along with among many others, rallied support for a more social form of customer relationship management.

In July 2009, Paul Greenberg officially shifted focus from CRM 2.0 to Social CRM in his post, “Time to Put a Stake in the Ground on Social CRM”:7

The debate and discussion about what defines Social CRM, aka CRM 2.0, vs. its traditional parent has been going on for about 2 years pretty regularly, and started, according to thought leader Graham Hill, almost a decade before that.

Personally, I'm done defining it and am moving on. I think enough time has been spent trying to decide what we're calling it and what it is. I think that we've reached the point that though there is no one point of view, there is a general idea of what we have. So this post, which will be on ZDNET and PGreenblog is my stake in the ground for the definition of Social CRM.

The focus was now on socializing the infrastructure of CRM. Thus Social CRM (sCRM) focused on creating an infrastructure that recognized the value and input of customers and the systems and processes required to connect with them now and over time. sCRM also introduced new feedback loops to process outside intelligence.

sCRM represents a shift from managing customers to listening to and engaging with them across the organization. It includes:

• Methodologies
• Business strategy
• Technology platforms
• Collaboration, internally and externally
• Conversation
• Human interaction
• Human culture
• Customer
• Experience
• Influence
• Relationships

Social CRM reflects the maxim of social democracy and forged a decree that crowdsourced governing principles and innovation. It helps companies take heed and adapt to the will and influence of its peers and customers through public forums and networks.

The customer is now recognized as the social consumer.

The shift in the outward focus and inward adaptation of organizations that recognize the power and extent of online conversations will soon discover that the C in sCRM slowly disappears.

TWITTER AND SOCIAL NETWORKS USHER IN A NEW ERA OF RELATIONSHIPS

My foray into the Social Web and D2C (direct to customer) engagement as a complement to traditional media harkens back to the early days of bulletin boards, which would later evolve into communities such as Yahoo! Groups and, ultimately, social networks. I also paid great attention to the early era of websites created by HTML-savvy enthusiasts who shared news, thoughts, rants, and observations related to their passions and interests. These influential sites would serve as the precursor to blogs.

But here we are, many years later, and mainstream brands are finally starting to pay attention. We're waking up to a new world of opportunity that changes nothing less than how, what, where, to what extent, and with whom we communicate.

The Internet was the harbinger for individuals to establish authority and control and the Social Web would forever transform business dynamics.

Even though millions of consumers active in the Social Web beckoned for participation from brands, it would take Twitter, and a couple of years of incredible growth, to serve as a great catalyst for the reinvention of CRM and how we identify, track, respond to, and manage online conversations. Twitter essentially made everyone in the world of CRM and CRM 2.0 pay attention. It sparked the change for how brands truly engage across the Conversation Prism, aka the Social Web, and served as the guiding concepts for the formalization of sCRM.

Online discussions, rants, and observations are either alarming and motivating brand managers or luring them into entrapment scenarios. But the reality is that real-time dialogue fuels connections and perceptions in the statusphere, blogosphere, and online communities. It's this swelling tsunami of chatter that will only intensify.

As we discussed, this swelling activity necessitates brand involvement from almost every outward facing department, not only marketing, sales, channel, and service, to proactively share answers, solve problems, establish authority, and build relationships and loyalty, and to do so one tweet, blog post, update, and like at a time.

In the world of business, social media forces companies to augment the offshoring of reactive customer service with the nearshoring of proactive engagement. The conversations that power social media spark a sense of urgency for brands to identify influential voices and talk to customers where and when relevant conversations are transpiring.

In an interview with Jon Swartz of USA Today, Bill Tolany, global coordinator of integrated media at Whole Foods Market, shared his views on the new service landscape, “Social media is a natural extension of customer service.”8

Whole Foods has more than 50 Twitter accounts and growing—tweeting on topics as specialized as cheese, wine, and specific items, with each participant trained through the integrated media department.

In the same article, Swartz interviewed Elissa Fink, vice president of marketing at Tableau Software, to discuss how Twitter was improving the experience for users of the company's business software: “The more ways you provide customers to contact you, you're more likely to satisfy them. It shows you're listening to them.”

And as Salesforce.com CEO Marc Benioff observed in USA Today, “Brands aren't about messages anymore. Brands today are conversations—and today the most important conversations are happening through social media such as Twitter and Facebook.”

Dion Hinchcliffe documented in his blog at ZDNet the rise of sCRM and the advantages of using social software to reinvent customer relationships.9 He observed that in sCRM “the elimination of decades of inadequate communication channels will suddenly unleash a tide of many opportunities, as well as challenges, for most organizations.” Hinchcliffe also observed four key aspects of Social CRM:

To help us visualize the sCRM architecture, Hinchliffe created a helpful infographic titled “The Social Business Front Line: Customer Relationship Management.”

In this graph, he places the sCRM management network between businesses and customers, where partnerships are forged and cultivated. Also connected to the sCRM network are workers who oversee and participate in relevant interactions and also a silo that captures collective intelligence through community-generated activity.

With sCRM, the focus is on people placing the onus on the company's front line to ensure that productive collaboration and the brand resonate. Hinchcliffe marks this through five Key Attributes of the Social Business Front Line:

WHEN THE S IN SCRM STANDS FOR SELF-SERVING

I'd be remiss if I didn't at least share with you some of the more controversial ways that sCRM is channeling its inner CRM through the automation of consumer and prospect engagement. Not unlike many of the direct marketing initiatives, spanning from e-mail to snail mail, sCRM is already emulating the one-way broadcast systems that new media missionaries have so diligently rallied to socialize (see Figure 24.1). If we think that for one minute marketers, executives, and salespersons will forget all that they've learned through their years of profiteering, we're highly mistaken. New media doesn't affect us, until it does.

In one such example, a television network used Twitter and an sCRM system (described in the tool section) to promote a new series. In this case, the back channel proved lucrative to the promotional campaign. Using a Twitter-based framework similar to systems employed by e-mail marketers, this freely available sCRM Twitter application enabled network marketers to search Twitter for all tweets related to the actors of the program. The software automatically followed each person using the branded Twitter account (the show), sorted the tens of thousands of reciprocating follows by influence and relevant keywords, and then automatically sent prescripted messages by DM (direct message) to each person—without human intervention. The promotion of the show was deemed a success, with more than 100,000 individuals qualified and more than 20,000 DMs sent in a single push.

This particular initiative was solely focused on one-way promotion. None of the responses from the back channel effort were ever read, acknowledged, or addressed. It's the difference between broadcasting and engagement.

But imagine if they were one and the same. Imagine what could have grown from this interaction? The system actually accommodates both outbound and inbound sCRM—remember, most tools should embody technology and the supporting ethos of relationship management. As responses arrive, the system, along with a program manager, could have easily assigned conversations to the appropriate individuals representing designated groups.

To embrace inbound conversations is truly what the s represents in sCRM. It's a shift in mindset and purpose—all it takes is a plan and a supporting process or team. This is social media!

For example, on any given day on Twitter, movies, music artists, TV shows, and products literally become the talk of the town—well, of Twitterville,11 at least—with many actually earning enough momentum to become trending topics (roughly 4,000 tweets per hour). These priceless conversations represent one part of an sCRM process. We know their level of interest on the subject. Basically, we have the tools right now to capture that dialogue, gather intelligence, and channel the data into databases for immediate response and engagement programs or future campaigns or both. Yes, we can create social databases that are organized by relevant interest graphs. But right now, most businesses are missing this opportunity to capture this vital input. These invaluable opportunities are fleeing into the digital horizon.

VENDOR RELATIONSHIP MANAGEMENT (VRM)

In December of 2006, Christopher Carfi wrote about vendor relationships management on his blog, The Social Customer Manifesto, and offered a simple, but important message, “This [VRM] needs to be on your radar.”12

Carfi documented the history and development of VRM, tracing back to its roots in 1999 when the concept of vendor relationship management was referred to as tekram (market spelled backward).

Doc Searls made the case13 for consumer-powered influence in respect to vendor management, and Mike Vizard coined VRM in response during a Gillmor Gang podcast in September 2006.14

Paul Greenberg responded to Carfi's hosted discussion on VRM with an observation that would serve as one of the movement's credos: “The vendor and customer have to collaborate to optimize the relationship. It is no longer one-sided. That means that the customer's management of the relationship is the recognition of the partnership that successful implementation demands and there has to be skin in the game on both sides.”15

VRM at its core is reciprocal to CRM, capsizing the concept of talking at or marketing to customers and shifting the balance of power in relationships from vendors to consumers—preferably somewhere in the middle. Like sCRM, VRM is representative of a greater mission. While sCRM is focused inside out, VRM focuses on outside in. Using tools and a technology ecosystem as examples of VRM, think Priceline and Lending Tree from a product perspective and Get Satisfaction from a service angle.

As described by VRMLabs, VRM is a customer-vendor locked seesaw: “Customers and vendors are a locked see-saw [sic] with one hugely outweighing the former. Like with a real world see-saw, the fun is spoiled for both. Giving individuals tools to redress the balance, the pressure from customers should level the players.”16

VRM is the symmetry of customer and vendor collaboration, and the implementation of the relationship into relationship management.

As such, Project VRM was established by industry champions to ensure that the oscillation between customer and vendor is uniform. Project VRM is a development effort at the Berkman Center for Internet and Society at Harvard University, and is led by Doc Searls, a fellow with the Center. It is a community-powered wiki with real-world sources, extensions, and implications that foster discussion, participation, and partnerships between technologists, market experts, customers, and vendors to establish guidelines and platforms to improve the relationships between vendors and customers. As noted in the “About the Author” page of Project VRM, “It is Doc's [Searls’] belief … that VRM is required to bring a useful and productive balance of power between vendors and customers, supply and demand—for the good of both—in the marketplace.”17

When reviewing the progression of CRM and its supporting categories and descriptions, the word automation was omnipresent. As we've learned from our time together, automation is a word that's usually absent from the descriptions of social media and sCRM—this is especially true in reference to engagement.

In the end, the goal of VRM seeks to enhance the relationship and interaction between demand and supply by providing more efficient and mutually beneficial solutions for demand to partner with supply.18

As in any relationship, for VRM to have a positive impact, vendors must find compelling incentives, while customers seek solutions through newfound empowerment.

VRM represents hope and challenges so as to define paths to resolution and coalition.

THE VALUE OF SOCIAL CUSTOMERS

In Paul Greenberg's CRM at the Speed of Light: Social CRM Strategies, Tools, and Techniques for Engaging Your Customers,19 he discusses the correlation between advocacy (evangelism) and loyalty.

One way to measure advocacy is through a net promoter score (NPS), a trademarked metric system developed by Fred Reichheld, Bain & Company, and Satmetrix. Introduced by Reichheld in a 2003 Harvard Business Review article “One Number You Need to Grow,”20 the NPS analyzes how businesses can create more promoters and fewer detractors. Reichheld expounded on this idea in his 2006 best seller, The Ultimate Question: Driving Good Profits and True Growth.21

The key to NPS is evaluating the value inherent in the answer to a very simple question, “How likely is it that you would recommend our company [or product] to a friend or colleague?”

The answer is rated between 0 and 10 and, based on the score, the respondents are grouped into one of three categories, detractors (0–6), passives (7–8), and promoters (9–10). The next step is to then get feedback on why they scored as such in the attempt to empower advocacy.

In 2003, Werner Reinartz and Dr. V. Kumar published the “Mismanagement of Customer Loyalty,” a pioneering study on the connection between customer profitability and loyalty.22 Their findings concluded that not all loyal customers are profitable, and not all profitable customers are loyal.

Did you catch that part?

If anything, the social customer is, at the very least, becoming much more prominent and influential than ever before.

In 2008's Managing Customers for Profit: Strategies to Increase Profits and Build Loyalty,23 Dr. Kumar introduced a series of new equations and ideologies. Among them, customer brand value (CBV) and customer referral value (CRV) extend customer lifetime value to anticipate customer behavior and quantify social value and potential profitability. For the purpose of this discussion, and the book in general, let's examine CRV for a moment. Dr. Kumar defines CRV as the ability of managers “to measure and manage each customer based on his ability to generate indirect profit to the firm.”

Like Reichheld, Dr. Kumar studied the alacrity of consumer referrals. However, the difference between the work of Reichheld and the work of Kumar is the extent to which the original question, “Would you refer this to someone you know” is asked and answered. Dr. Kumar believes that the true value lies in the answer to the question, “Did you actually make the referral?” and what happened next: “Did they actually become a customer?”

We need to measure the click to action!

While businesses analyze the breakdown in activities to improve sCRM, we can identify active voices online, whether or not they're customers or prospects, because the social customer isn't the only catalyst for advocacy and action. The true promise and future of relationship management lies among “The Social.”

VRM + SCRM = SRM

Ross Mayfield, founder of SocialText, developed a versatile dashboard for enterprises seeking to collaborate internally with co-workers and externally with customers and stakeholders. He often refers to the engagement iceberg,24 in which only a small portion of customer conversations and engagement are truly visible, while most occur beneath the water line and thus, out of view. Mayfield also notes that the nature of the dialogue and how conversations progress throughout the Web usually require more than one person or department to engage.

As we've covered practically everywhere in this book, each online conversation worthy of response can be directly matched to specific divisions within an organization and usually rank in this order:

As already discussed, in listening, we find conversations inevitably map to specific departments. Thus, the nature and sentiment tied to the social ID and response mechanisms require workflow to introduce resolve by the specific disciplines they affect. As a result, when we view conversations as they map interdepartmentally, the C in sCRM begins to disappear (see Figure 24.2).

Thus, the observations tied to real-time activity demonstrate the reality that every department eventually needs to socialize. Much like the divergence between CRM and CRM 2.0 and that of CRM 2.0 and sCRM, sCRM now starts to represent something much bigger than just social customer relationship management.

Customers are now merely part of a larger equation that also balances vendors, experts, partners, and other influencers.

sCRM and CRM look at the value of a customer using a variety of tools and methodologies such as customer lifetime value (CLV) and customer life cycle management and the value of commerce that can be attributed to the customer relationship over time.

We're moving away from an era of simple listening, monitoring, and responding to an age of direct engagement (reactive and proactive) in concert with the management of this activity. It's rooted in our ability to essentially become the person, not just the customer, whom we want to embrace and inspire. As such, existing customers and prospects are only part of a much more sophisticated equation. Or said another way, customers are now playing one of the leading roles in a more elaborate production, sharing the stage with other cast members that represent all facets of business workflow and governing channels of influence.

NO BRAND IS AN ISLAND

Social relationships management (SRM) is a credo aligned with a humanized business strategy and supporting technology infrastructure and platform. SRM recognizes that all people, no matter what system they use, are worthy of our attention—even if it's just listening.

SRM adopts a doctrine that champions:

• Collaboration over conversation
• Listening over intermittent searching and research
• Action and resolution instead of monitoring
• Personalization over automation
• Adaptation over ignorance

Relationships management or SRM is much more than engagement strategies and tactics. It requires completely revamped tenets and infrastructure to support relationships and empowerment. We can't expect people to always come to us. We must build bridges that also go directly to them.

SOCIAL BUSINESS TAKES A HUMAN TOUCH; NO, REALLY

The socialization of media is the undercurrent for the Industrial Revolution of our time. Yet, here we are today, forcing social media into the aging paradigms that the social revolution set out to upset in the first place.

Businesses still weigh the return on investment of participation. Teams debate over who owns the company's social presences. The parochial in middle and upper management see it as either a playground or an extension of existing broadcast channels. Champions believe it is a time to engage and improve experiences. Visionaries recognize its ability to socialize the entire business. Yet, almost every example we see today of successful social media endeavors is, in reality, siloed and disconnected from the rest of the organization.

The list goes on and on with little resolution, as we are focused on real time versus the real world. We need not only champions, but we now need leaders to help us cut through the red tape and unite the organization behind a flag of relevance and evolution.

Everything starts with recognizing that we must cater to an audience whose parts are, in fact, greater than its sum. We must partition our social strategy to engage the diversity of the social consumer and address the unique requirements and attention of each (see Figure 24.3).

This is about humanizing not only the brand, but also the methodologies that govern customer relations and adapting the systems that support it.

Socializing CRM

sCRM is the hot ticket in Enterprise 2.0 at the moment, yet its champions are mired in technology as are the champions for social media in general. We're blinded in many ways by the networks and our need to listen, respond, and update. But we miss the intimacy necessary to learn, adapt, and earn relevance. And now, we're consumed with wiring Twitter, Facebook, LinkedIn, Foursquare, and Yelp into our existing CRM infrastructure to help us automate enlightenment and engagement. While we close gaps caused by the distribution and scale of the Social Web and the people who define it, we fail to see the human touch points to connect with the right people in the right places at the right time. That is, after all, where scalability resides: the ability to engage influential consumers in a one-to-one-to-many practice to amplify intention, purpose, and value.

In essence, we're practically fooled into a belief that we should not overthink social, but not doing so, we trivialize the opportunity, ultimately investing in a program that at the end of the day, falls short of meeting the needs of the social consumer.

To answer these questions, we must have a vision of the experience and actions we wish to introduce into these rich and active social ecosystems. Yes, this is a click to action, and for businesses to socialize CRM, they must socialize the entire business. Not all of the three Fs (friends, fans, followers) are created equally. Individually, rarely collectively, they are looking for substance, direction, recognition, and even empowerment. To activate the Social Web and unlock meaningful conversations, we must look beyond customers. We must officially recognize all those who influence their actions and introduce a conversational workflow that traverses the business chasms to learn and lead—in public (see Figure 24.4).

SOCIAL SCIENCE IS THE CENTER OF SOCIAL BUSINESS

One of the celebrated companies renowned for its innovation in social customer service is actually a lesson in how social anything becomes great PR. When you look behind the scenes, you actually see more duct tape and rubber bands than fluidity and polish. Business units are still siloed and even the chief executives have gone on record saying that the acts of engagement do more for the company's image than it does for the improvement of products and services. Just look at your favorite social media source and you'll see an endless array of examples of how brands are succeeding in social media. Again, most of them are basking in the brilliance of individual victories, some are actually breaking through the internal barriers that prevent collaboration, and others are simply stunts designed to spike conversations, sales, and a good public image. Nothing wrong with it … especially if it works as intended.

You and I are here together, right now, to do something greater. It's up to us to lead the way for the socialization of business, understanding that it's an uphill journey for the foreseeable future. But in the end, our experience and triumphs are unparalleled.

Social media is the gold mines of anthropology, sociology, and ethnography. To excel here, we must embrace social science to create and earn relevance. Some businesses already get this. For example, Intel employs anthropologists such as Genevieve Bell to understand how certain cultures adopt technology and also how products should be designed with humans represented in every step of the process. I challenge businesses seeking to socialize their business to hire social scientists to not only understand culture and its role in consumerism, but also to humanize the processes and systems erecting to facilitate engagement and social CRM. It takes a human touch to embrace and inspire the social consumer, build communities, and activate advocacy. If we can hear, see, and feel the customer and all those who influence them, then why would we think social is where we can excel. Surely, it's not because we show up. It's only because we earn and deserve our place within each network.

We must humanize our brand, our products, and our processes to improve and influence experiences. Doing so will help us find our voice, our mission, and our purpose … our cadence. Give people a reason to connect with us, trust us, and represent us.

NOTES

1. Bob Thompson, “Social CRM: Strategy, Technology or Passing Fad?” Customer Think (September 16, 2009), www.customerthink.com/blog/ social_crm_strategy_technology_or_passing_fad.

2. Brent Leary, “Social CRM: Not Your Father's Customer Relationship Management,” Small Business Trends (May 14, 2008), http://small-biztrends.com/2008/05/social-crm.html.

3. Filiberto Selvas, “Are the Cool Kids Leaving Facebook? So What?” www.socialcrm.net/.

4. Ross Mayfield, “The Social C.R.M Iceberg,” Ross Mayfield's Weblog (August 11, 2009), http://ross.typepad.com/blog/2009/08/crm-iceberg.html.

5. Jeremiah Owyang, “The Future of Twitter: Social CRM,” Web Strategy by Jeremiah Owyang (March 22, 2009), www.web-strategist.com/ blog/2009/03/22/the-future-of-twitter-social-crm/.

6. Brian Solis, “Twitter and Social Networks Usher in a New Era of Social CRM,” PR 2.0 (March 20, 2009), www.briansolis.com/2009/03/twitter-and-social-networks-usher-in/.

7. Paul Greenberg, “Time to Put a Stake in the Ground on Social CRM,” PGreenblog (July 6, 2009), http://the56group.typepad.com/pgreenblog/2009/07/time-to-put-a-stake-in-the-ground-on-social-crm.html.

8. Jon Swartz, “Businesses Use Twitter to Communicate with Customers,” USA Today (June 26, 2009), www.usatoday.com/tech/news/2009–06–25-twitter-businesses-consumers_N.htm.

9. Dion Hinchcliffe, “Using Social Software to Reinvent the Customer Relationship,” ZDNet (August 18, 2009), http://blogs.zdnet.com/ Hinchcliffe/?p=699.

10. See www.kluster.com/.

11. Shel Israel, “Twitterville: How Businesses Can Thrive in the New Global Neighborhoods,” Portfolio (September 2009), http://redcouch .typepad.com/weblog/twitterville.html.

12. Christopher Carfi, “VRM: Vendor Relationship Management,” The Social Customer Manifesto (December 18, 2006), www.socialcustomer.com/ 2006/12/vrm_vendor_rela.html.

13. Doc Searls, comment to Christopher Carfi's post, “Vendor Relationships Management” (Dec 19, 2006), www.socialcustomer.com/2006/ 12/vrm_vendor_rela.html.

14. Gillmor Gang, http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/projectvrm/VRM_discussion_in_podcasts.

15. Paul Greenberg, comment to Christopher Carfi's post, “Vendor Relationships Management” (Dec 18, 2006), www.socialcustomer.com/2006/ 12/vrm_vendor_rela.html.

16. About VRM Labs, www.vrmlabs.net/about/.

17. About Project VRM, http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/projectvrm/About.

18. Project VRM Main Page, http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/projectvrm/Main_Page.

19. Paul Greenberg, CRM at the Speed of Light: Social CRM 2.0 Strategies, Tools, and Techniques for Engaging Your Customers 4th ed. (New York: McGraw-Hill Osborne Media, 2009).

20. Frederick F. Reichheld, “One Number You Need to Grow,” Harvard Business Review (December 1, 2003), http://harvardbusiness.org/product/one-number-you-need-to-grow/an/R0312C-PDF-ENG.

21. Frederick F. Reichheld, The Ultimate Question (Cambridge, MA: Harvard Business Press, 2006).

22. Werner Reinartz and V. Kumar, “Mismanagement of Customer Loyalty,” Harvard Business Review (July 1, 2002), http://harvardbusiness.org/ product/mismanagement-of-customer-loyalty/an/R0207F-PDF-ENG.

23. V. Kumar, Managing Customers for Profit: Strategies to Increase Profits and Build Loyalty, (Upper Saddle River, NJ: Wharton School Publishing, 2008).

24. Joshua Weinberger, “Social Media Maturity Model: 30 Posts, 30 People, 30 Days,” Destination CRM Blog (June 1, 2009), www.destinationcrmblog.com/2009/06/01/social-media-maturity-model-30-posts-30-people-30-days/.