Results and Effectiveness

14,000 members recruited, 672 conversation threads generated and 2,072 posts in total. (This is comparable to a frequency of two eDMs per week being sent to an average of 65 attendees per IBM event.) IBM started only 25% of all threads but stimulated 85% of the groups posts The cost to drive a first conversation with an IBM expert on Smarter Cities Connect was $46 compared to $549 for EVENTS. Delivering an efficiency of platform – 11.9 times more cost effective. IBM experts increased their LinkedIn contacts by 18%. FOUR direct inquiries from members looking to collaborate with IBM.

Creative Execution

Whereas private sector CEO’s had many connecting platforms, in the public sector they didn’t. We introduced the LinkedIn Smarter Cities Connect group so IBM could be a brand filling this gap. We created a reason for city leaders to engage and interact with like-minded individuals. The group is searchable and it brings in new city leaders as they search for answers. Strategically placed IBM ad units filled with case studies and videos also appeared linked to IBM subject-matter-expert conversations. This group also supported face-to-face events by (1) driving event registration; (2) extending the ‘audience’ base (live updates for non-attendees); (3) amplifying the shelf-life of the event content. New group members were recruited by paid digital media, online sponsorships, and at events. Banner widgets pulled in real-time discussions from the group which were exported to relevant third-party websites. Non-member visitors were able to join the conversations in a couple of clicks.

Insights, Strategy and the Idea

The business objective was to generate IT solution sales amongst major Asia Pacific cities. The marketing objective was to establish credibility amongst city leaders. The communication objective was to replace expensive face to face events with a more efficient engagement media channel. The city leader audience was not IBM’s traditional audience. They implemented plans which, if they didn’t work, were at high risk of losing their mandate and power. They needed somebody that they can trust and feel ‘critic proof’ should something go wrong. City leaders needed to feel that they weren’t making a decision without really understanding the issue. They had an expertise gap compounded by a sense of isolation. They didn’t know where to turn to and resorted to management consultancies. City leaders needed a connecting platform with peers and experts and IBMers needed a common platform so as to more efficiently establish their expertise.