Search the Archives

  • Participation is Different from Engagement

    Posted on May 21st, 2009 by Spike and currently 8 commenting.

    I’ve been chewing on this idea lately. Maybe it’s because of WOMM-U in Miami last week or maybe it’s the conversations we’ve been having with marketers on the brand side of things. But both the terms “participation” and “engagement” are being throw around a lot these days. And they’re also being interchanged – which I think is a big mistake and is further clouding the word of mouth marketing waters.

    Because there’s a difference. Can you tell me which word belongs to which definition? One is “to take or have a part or share, as with others; partake; share” and the other is “to occupy the attention or efforts of.”

    When you go to your meetings today, you’ll see the difference. It’s between those that are sitting in the meeting – and participating by just showing up – and those that are adding to the conversation because they are engaged. In other words, you can participate without being engaged. Engagement is the step beyond participation.

    So many companies are just seeking participants in their word of mouth and social media efforts. “Come participate in our campaign. Upload your videos and pictures. Come on, be present, so we can count you adn your eyeballs for our metrics.” But those that engage – those that earn “the attention or efforts of” (especially the efforts), are the ones that are building something that will last. It’s the beginning of a movement. Which would you rather have?

    Share The Love
    SubscribeBlinklistBloglinesBlogmarksDiggdel.icio.usFacebookFurlMa.gnoliaNewsVineRedditStumbleUponTechnorati
    Tags: , , , , , , , ,
  • http://www.gravit8.com Chris Bailey

    Spike, I think you’ve nailed something very important and it goes just beyond semantics. Another way of looking at this is asking: Which is a vital prerequisite for commitment: participation or engagement?

    I think also that there’s cycle working here, too. What does a community member do after they’ve joined? It’s easier for a company to ask for participation at the front-end of the relationship and then bring them into engagement. But there needs to be a strategy for this plan to take shape.

    So, yes, participation is different from engagement. In many ways, these two qualities are still about a user who is focused on their own needs. I’d like to suggest a third quality that aims for a true relationship: stewardship. A company must execute a plan to get their users from participation (stage 1) to engagement (stage 2) to stewardship (stage 3) where a user feels they are a partner in the community and invested in its growth.

  • http://www.l2soft.com Will V

    This is the most insightful post I have read all morning!

    Just like those who follow your tweets or join your facebook group. A ton of people like to just follow or become a part of something, but less than half of them will actually comment or start conversations. It is important to think of what the motives are before executing any marketing initiatives… do you just want participation or engagement?

    Will V.

  • http://www.worthwhile.com Chris Rackley

    It’s interesting, because just yesterday I had a similar conversation with a client regarding their web site, though the terms were never used.

    You can have a site that will have a good number of visits, etc.; but see almost no business from it. Those would be “participants.” But if your site (or more appropriately, its content) can drive people to it and have them take action on it (add comments, user reviews, contact you), it’s a totally different ball game.

    The point was, on the Web, it’s very easy to build a beautiful site that promotes participation, but lacks engaging factors.

    So thanks, Spike, for helping me put words to my thoughts.

  • http://www.socialmediabuyingguide.org/ Walter Roark

    You’ve made a very insightful distinction that reflects the behavior of members in a social community. Every owner of a site wants engagement and interaction from its constituents, but you need to build in activities that encourage real engagement. A few examples might include seeding a thought-provoking blog that stimulates conversation, and giving your members ample opportunity to share comments, photos, videos and ratings. The creation of groups and the posting of events are also activities that keep individuals involved. Either way it is accomplished, thank you for pointing out the difference between committed thought leaders and casual observers in a social networking community. Also, Brains on Fire is one of our favorite blogs at the Social Media Buying Guide. Keep up the great work on your site.

  • Pingback: Beyond Engaged Community Members…Think Stewardship | Gravit8 Social Relationship Marketing :: Chris Bailey

  • http://ariwriter.com Ari Herzog

    By asking a question at the end of your blog post, you are asking for engagement. How many corporate meetings end with a question and not a “Thank you for coming” declaration?

  • http://www.closerlook.com David Ormesher

    I think Chris is right that participation and engagement are part of the continuum, and the mistake is not seeking participants, but making that the end. Engagement, and then stewardship or evangelism, still start with an invitation or experience that cuts through the clutter enough to attract participants. One of the discussions/debates we’ve been having with a CPG client who is quite knowledgeable about consumer advertising is the difference between measuring awareness (participation) and engagement and the value of taking the relationship to the next level.

  • http://www.brewpoint.com Christy Brewer

    Yup, and I’d argue further that “participation” and “engagement” have two sides, as well. The company looking for someone who is truly engaged, and not just participating, has a responsibility to *be engaging*. Also, the people who show up have a choice to simply become participants, or take one step further and commit to being engaged in whatever it is the company has to offer. Sometimes, the company has no control over whether someone will simply participate, or take the engagement step. As long as the company is committed to creating an environment in which people can engage, the rest will happen as it’s supposed to.