I thought the big news this week of the departure of the head of the Google Plus social networks was a tailor-made opportunity for me to push the reset button on Digital Dialogue. This is something I really want to talk about. There is a lot of chatter taking place in the social networking/digital community about whether this is just a run-of-the-mill leadership change at Google or it symbolizes something about the future of Google+, the most misunderstood and most-maligned social network in the bunch. Well here's my take: this should be a great time for Google to regroup and reboot the social network. Google, stop trying to be Facebook. Stop trying to beat Facebook. Stop trying to require people to use Google+ as a passageway to other Google products that they really want to use (like YouTube). Be who and what you are and emphasize what you bring to the table. Imitation as a form of flattery doesn't work in the social media space.
If there is one marketing strategy that will never work in a million years, it is the decision to force a product onto the public. Even if it is a good product, people will never embrace it when they are introduced to it through coercion. That's just human nature. It is never a good idea to cram a product down people's throats, eve if it is something they need. If you identify your primary audience or clientele, do your research, create a good product in response to that research and then properly market it, it will sell itself. People naturally resist being forced into anything when it comes to products and services. I believe you run away as many or more potential happy clients than you stand to gain when you force something on people. To me, that was and has been the problem with Google+ from the beginning and I am surprised it was so blatant. I am more surprised that strategy was allowed to persist. Incredible.Almost like a robbery in broad daylight on the town square.
So here is my suggested approach now that this is a pausing point for Google+: calm down. Pull back the reins totally from the forced-on-you product approach. Heck, disconnect it from YouTube now just to show "good faith." Can you de-link it from GMail? Just let the social network "be" for a while. Let it breathe on its own and see what develops. Hold off on any new flashy features (it gets more confusing with every new feature introduced...they all seem like desperate moves ). Be fully confident and honest about what you have created and let the digerati decide how and when to use it and for what. Most social networks just pop up on the landscape and they let the public decide how good it is or whether it is even going to gain traction through digital word of mouth. Be willing to enjoy true success by risking failure.
Personally, I like Google+. I don't really call it a "social network" like Facebook, but rather see it as an information network. It's a place I got to find out what other people are saying and sharing about topics I am interested in. I do not go to Google+ to see what "friends and family" are up to because, quite simply, no friends or family are on Google+ actively. I suppose they just signed up (forced to maybe???) but don't ever use it. They are likely among the great multitudes who were walked down the Google+ aisle in front of a shotgun.
I firmly believe Google+, with its clever design that I find appealing, would have been much farther along today had it stuck with traditional marketing. I don't think it would have topped Facebook in number of active users, but I bet the average monthly time spent on the network would have been much better and it never would have acquired the degrading tag, "Ghost Town." I also think the name (too late to change that now I guess) was a misnomer. The name should have emphasized and included "Circles." That's really where it tried to be different, right? It was a way to share information in Circles. Google+ sounds like a new, more powerful household cleaner ("you tried Google, now try Google Plus!"). Wouldn't Circles have been a cooler name? Or Google Circles? Even "hangouts" is a nebulous name? What's a hangout? A more meaningful name would have been Live Circles. Just thinking out loud.
I believe Google+ has a place in the digital community and is something people are looking for in social networking and in information sharing. But Google+ can never become all that it can be through artificial demand. That's like sharing to the wrong circle.
Here are some other commentaries on this week's Google+ news:
http://time.com/77080/if-google-heads-to-the-grave-at-least-itll-have-direction/
http://www.fastcompany.com/3029725/most-innovative-companies/whats-next-for-google
http://www.mediaite.com/online/google-reportedly-junking-google/
http://mashable.com/2014/04/24/google-isnt-dead-its-just-overexposed/
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/04/25/google-plus-dead_n_5212819.html
