Thanks to everyone who came out to the Carrotmob at Epicenter! It was more fun than a barrel of monkeys, as they say. I finally got some stats from Epicenter on about how much we spent: If you compare what Epicenter takes in on a normal Thursday between 5 and 10pm, and what we spent between 5 and 10pm we spent 996% (10x) of what they would usually get! Which is great, since at the first event we spent more like 300% of their usual take. In fact, Epicenter reports that this was the biggest night of spending in the history of their business! That makes me happy. Of course our total spending amount was much less than the first event, as expected, since people were buying totally different (cheaper) products, and the crowd wasn’t the same (as I’ll discuss below). And remember, the impact of the event is posted here. Now let us recap!
Let’s See How We Did!
So, when we designed this campaign, the goal was to try out some new things, and experiment so we could get an idea of what works and what doesn’t when you’re planning a Carrotmob. You can read our full post on this from July here. Let us now return to the 6 research questions we put forth, and see how we did….here they are:
1. What happens when you allow the public to vote for the winner of a Carrotmob?
2. What happens when you use qualitative value judgments to decide who wins a Carrotmob event instead of simple quantitative measures?
3. Is a campaign necessarily weakened when the mob spends relatively smaller amounts of money?
4. How does reputation compare to cash in terms of importance for a coffee shop?
5. How does a campaign on a weekday with no afterparty compare to a campaign on a Sunday followed by a free concert in Dolores Park?
6. Will people vote for those businesses who have not made change, or those who have already made change?
1. What happens when you allow the public to vote for the winner of a Carrotmob?
The people I’ve talked to about this seem to have a bit of a consensus that people voted not just for the actions the cafes would take, but also for the people. People have even told me that they thought the Carrotmob event would have a bigger impact if Cafe Madeleine had won, but they voted for Epicenter anyway because they loved Mark and Chris, and wanted to reward them for what they had done. I’m actually quite satisfied with the impact of this event, because as this blog post explains in detail, Epicenter really is doing an awful lot, and they’re doing it enthusiastically. But nevertheless, this really underscores that when you let people vote for a campaign, there are two different actions they are taking. First, there’s the initial vote for who wins. Second, there’s the act of showing up and spending money. In the act of voting, the only thing you’re being asked to do is choose who you like, so there may not be as much critical thinking going on. But when you’re asked to spend money at the event, you think more about the impact. I got more people questioning me during the event about what Epicenter was going to do than I did during the entire voting process. So while I think that the democracy was good just for the sake of democracy, and also good for getting people engaged, I’m not sure that the wisdom of the crowds is always going to be better than a panel of experts at determining who should win. It really comes down to whether your goal is to maximize the measurable impact of the campaign, or to do what the community feels most warm and fuzzy about. Both are OK. This decision should be left with the organizer in each community. But the next time I plan an event, I am not necessarily going to put it to a vote.
2. What happens when you use qualitative value judgments to decide who wins a Carrotmob event instead of simple quantitative measures?
I guess I already sort of addressed this one. I think I prefer the quantitative approach whenever it’s practical. We don’t have time to be wishywashy on our effectiveness. However, sometimes it’s impractical to do anything but a qualitative approach. I expect that will be true as we scale up and deal with businesses that have more complex supply chains and logistics and so on. When it’s really apples vs oranges, a qualitative approach (and democracy) feel a bit more appropriate.
3. Is a campaign necessarily weakened when the mob spends relatively smaller amounts of money?
No. A smaller group of people spending smaller amounts of money felt different…it didn’t feel like as much of a circus, and in a way it wasn’t quite as exhilarating, but it accomplished what we set out to accomplish. I’ll elaborate in the next question…
4. How does reputation compare to cash in terms of importance for a coffee shop?
What’s important here is what the expectations were for the event. My expectations were to answer these 6 research questions. Epicenter had a few goals of their own in mind:
- They wanted to promote awareness about their cafe
- They wanted to promote the fact that they can have a vibrant evening scene, which their daytime customers might not have known about.
- They wanted an event that went smoothly, was well-organized and safe
- They wanted some free press exposure
At no point did they set specific goals for revenue. They wanted reputation more. And we wanted to see what would happen with a campaign that was based on reputation. So we nailed those 4 bullet points, and in general Epicenter is happy with the results. At first we worried that they may have stocked up on too much perishable food in anticipation of the onslaught, but after checking it out, we actually did a pretty good job of eating their food, although they have a little extra fish. They also would have made more cash if they hadn’t staffed as many people that night. Better safe than sorry, but they could have gotten by with one or two fewer hands on deck. But Mark put this in perspective, explaining that they have looked at different types of advertising before, and this event got them an immense amount of free, positive “advertising” that they didn’t have to pay a dime for. So we have successfully provided precisely the type of value that they wanted most!
5. How does a campaign on a weekday with no afterparty compare to a campaign on a Sunday followed by a free concert in Dolores Park?
I think this campaign was very different from the first. It’s funny, because the nature of the event changed since I first posed this question. In July I thought we would be having an event in the morning and throughout the day, and that people who worked downtown would rally their officemates to come grab a cup of coffee. Instead, Epicenter ended up winning, and they serve food and alcohol in the evening, so they were excited about doing an evening event. Furthermore they were too far from the morning commute to be a practical choice for people looking to quickly grab their morning coffee. Suddenly, the event went from being an event with no afterparty to being an event which was entirely an afterparty for the workday. So the party atmosphere was actually similar to that of campaign #1. However, I think doing the event on a weeknight was actually a big roadblock that prevented people from coming. A lot of people have a tight schedule of things they need to accomplish after work, and this event wasn’t particularly convenient for people who have to get home for other things.
6. Will people vote for those businesses who have not made change, or those who have already made change?
Touched on this one above.
Now, time to tackle a couple big questions:
QUESTION 1: Why did fewer people show up to this event than the last one?
In the first event, the Facebook event had 116 people who said “yes”, 68 “maybes”, and probably 400+ people showed up. This time we had 188 who said “yes” and 197 “maybes”, yet far fewer people showed up. For the sake of science I went through all my Facebook friends who RSVP’d “yes”, to count how many of them actually showed up (I didn’t count anyone affiliated with Carrotmob or Virgance). Out of those friends who said they were coming, 12 people did show up and 31 people didn’t show up. So why? The worst answer to that question would be that people aren’t excited about coming to a Carrotmob. But I don’t think we have an enthusiasm problem at all. I think we didn’t make it easy enough for people. Here are a list of factors that may have prevented people from coming:
- the location was far away from public transportation
- the location was far away from where people live
- the location was far away from where people work
- thursday is a more difficult and busy day than sunday
- the evening is a more difficult time than early afternoon
- people were tired from work
- some of the novelty could have worn off after the first event
- people didn’t see a direct connection between how much money they spent and the change that would result
Here are a couple factors that were NOT responsible for a smaller turnout:
- promotion. many thousands of people knew about this event. way more people than knew about the first event. we were in all sorts of email lists and tweets. this wasn’t the problem.
- people not liking the cafe. everyone is absolutely nuts for Epicenter Cafe. people love it.
So, my guess is that the biggest factor was the location, and the second biggest factor was that it was scheduled for dinner time on a thursday after a long day at work. That’s my take. What do you think? So if that’s true, then we’ve learned that weekends are probably better, unless we have a low-impact way to fit into peoples’ daily routines a little better.
QUESTION 2: How successful was this event?
There are different ways to define success. Here’s how I think we did for each one:
Did the event have a big impact?
Yes.
Did the business make a lot of money?
They had a very good night, but it had potential to be better. But we didn’t design this event to maximize spending.
Did the business enhance their reputation?
Yes. This was the top goal, and it was a huge success. Of course, the effect of this has to be judged over time. We’ll see what the extra impact of the press is once it comes out…
Did people enjoy participating and have fun?
Yes! People actually had more fun at this one than they did at the first one, mainly because we got rid of the line. The line made for a great video, but it wasn’t sustainable. This event was fun, and sustainable.
Did we spread the message about Carrotmob?
Yes! We were all over the place, and more press yet to come….
Was it safe, and did we avoid problems?
Bingo.
Was it simple to plan?
No. It was an elaborate event, from filming all the videos of the cafes to having plans for how to keep a long line entertained. I don’t regret making it complex, because it was definitely worth everything we learned from it. But I wish I didn’t spend so much time figuring out a totally unnecessary “security plan” to submit to the SFPD. We were ready for a lot more than we needed to be ready for. Which is, of course, the smartest way to plan an unpredictable event.
Did we learn from it as we were hoping to?
YES!
So all in all I would call the event a big success by most measures. The bottom line is that I designed a campaign that succeeded in all the big ways I had planned for it to succeed. At the same time, I didn’t design this campaign to have a huge line, and as a result I feel a little blah about it, since I realized that I wanted a huge line. The takeaway from this is that long lines make organizers feel good. But since Carrotmobs should be designed to benefit the consumers and the businesses, I think it’s best if I get over my desire for a crazy line in every campaign. This campaign compelled Epicenter to make great changes, and rewarded them with exactly what they wanted. A long line can be a valuable gimmick to help an event “make a splash”, but as this movement matures, the idea of shooting for a long line will become increasingly gimmicky and unnecessary. I’m starting to get used to that idea.
Let’s make sure that what Epicenter did for Carrotmob is never forgotten. When you go there, tell them Carrotmob sent you. And if you appreciate what Epicenter has done, they will probably appreciate a nice review on Yelp. Show love!
Mission accomplished.
San Francisco’s Third Carrotmob!
