Factors that complicate online monitoring

One of the current challenges in the field of social media is the analysis of online reputation. Aside from the tools that we use to analyze what is said of a brand on the web, the fact of carrying out a monitoring online, given the real possibilities currently offered by existing solutions, is always subject to certain factors that are often strongly complicate the process.

Then I'm going to summarize the aspects which, from my point of view and based on my experience so far, can complicate, affect or devalue an online monitoring. They are as follows:

(1) Do not choose the keyword (or keywords): this is especially significant in tools such as Radian6, where the key words are fundamental. You should never take the choice of key words lightly.

(2) Deficiency of automated monitoring systems: perhaps the word would be imprecision or inaccuracy, but the fact of not knowing which tool or tools to use when monitoring online comes - as I said-that there is no tool "that serves for everything". Therefore, as I studied in the previous post, the human factor is key in this area, due to its critical capacity, which allows to perform as vital analysis of monitoring results.

(3) Have a default idea and not wanting to change it: this fact could cause data out in a certain way on purpose and we faltemos to the reality/truth.

(4) Wanting to measure too many things and not really focus on objectives: can sometimes fall into the trap of excite us with the measurement of certain aspects which, in reality, they are not interesting for our objectives. For example, in the case of a start-up that is at an initial stage and that will get income, only if you get records on their website, why waste time in measuring the evolution of our their on Facebook? What really matters is to analyze the traffic to your website and see how they behave there users. We will have time to analyze the behavior of Facebook fans or Twitter followers when there is a really important volume, i.e., a critical mass that acts as a community.

(5) Monitoring only when there are problems: a reactive attitude is an option, but in my opinion, it is not the best. When we have a certain amount in social networks, it is highly recommended to perform monitoring online monthly, weekly, or in very specific - for example, during specific campaigns cases daily. Anyway, as I said, should have very clear objective of such monitoring and not fall into errors such as the one explained above.

(6) Focus only on the terms and ignore the not endorsements: another very important aspect of monitoring, and that often is not often pay attention, is what is not said, what could be called the no mentions. I.e., often we obsess on present results about what is being said or said about a particular brand, but we do not pay attention to what is not being said or said. This is a big mistake. Why? Because it gives us a huge clue about if our communication efforts to position ourselves through a certain brand attributes, always focusing on positive aspects are well focused or whether, on the contrary, we must change that approach.

As I said at the beginning, these factors are that I have frequently found in processes of this kind, but obviously there may be others. In this regard, I would like to know your experience in this field, during processes of monitoring and online reputation.

You know, because of other factors that complicate the process? I encourage you to share your experiences... greetings and thanks!