Syndicate

About Me

Alexandros Poulos Photo Alex - Alexandros Poulos is Covisio's Managing Director and co-founder. He enjoys technology marketing, innovative thinking, and living by the sea.

Alex is the main contributor of the On the Scene marketing blog.

Learn more about me here.

My Twitter Updates

Archives

 

Social Media Monitoring Tools In Action: Radian6 vs Alterian / Techrigy SM2


Not too long ago I followed a nice discussion on Ken Burbary’s blog about social media monitoring tools. Ken had come along some noticeable inconsistencies in the results reported by two leading social media platforms, namely Radian6 and Alterian/Techrigy SM2. Since we have been working here at Covisio with both of these tools for a while now, I agreed to post a few numbers based on our own experience from a real-world listening campaign that we are currently running for one of our clients in the enterprise software space.

Before moving on, a couple of disclaimers:

  • My purpose is not to rate one tool vis-a-vis the other. As a matter of fact we have used both tools successfully to help clients with their marketing plans and that’s what really matters at the end. For this analysis here, we used the standard Radian6 version with one (paid) user account login to have access to the system (but no paid topic profile) and the Freemium version of SM2 – a setup similar to what a user evaluating both platforms might come up with (though both Radian6 and SM2 do offer 7-day trial versions of their full products).
  • The results are from just a single project; they by no means constitute an all-inclusive comparative analysis of the two platforms. By the way, here’s a pretty detailed post by Jason Falls actually comparing the use of Radian6 to ScoutLabs, another social media monitoring tool.
  • I understand there are differences between the two technologies in terms of what sources they use to pull data from and what internal technologies they use to classify the data and produce their reports. So I am aware that some variation in the reported results is to be expected. But how much is too much?

Now, we monitored data from 4 searches across all media types and for a period of 30 days:

  • Search #1: company name.
  • Search #2: industry term.
  • Search #3: industry term.
  • Search #4: product acronym (with a set of keywords to exclude as well as a set of source urls to filter out).

So, let’s look at what the tools came back with.

The first overview graph shows significant variations in the number of results returned from each tool with Radian6 consistently returning more items than SM2 (from 50% more to 450% more). The overlap (defined as per search, the # of same results divided by the # of total results from the tool that produced the lesser # of results) in the results of the two tools ranges anywhere between 30% (for a product acronym search with lots of noise) to 100% (for a straightforward company name search).


The second and third drill-down graphs show serious inconsistencies as well. Radian6 indicates that the predominant media type is blogs, while SM2 indicates that the predominant media types are either Twitter or “other”.

The bottom-line is that there are both quantitative and qualitative variations in the results reported by Radian6 and Alterian/Techrigy SM2 for the same search profiles. And there is limited overlap in the reported results, which seems to indicate that the search spaces covered by the two tools are very dissimilar. This to me is understandable, but I would expect to be able to adapt the tools (one way being by configuring their url filters, i.e. what urls to include and what to exclude) so that they start converging at least to identifying and tracking the most relevant conversations within an industry. At the end, although it is clear that social media technologies are still evolving, it is also clear that social media monitoring tools can be made extremely useful to (marketing, branding, customer service, R&D, legal, etc.) organizations, but not without a well-thought-of human investment to understand the results, interpret the findings, and take proper actions.

P.S. I am planning a follow-up post to discuss some of the things we learned when evaluating these social media monitoring tools and planning social media listening campaigns.

UPDATED (9/22/09): For a more complete analysis on the above social media monitoring results from Radian6 and Alterian / Techrigy SM2 towards the quality vs. the quantity of the results, here’s another graph on the relevancy of the results reported from each tool.

The graph shows that both tools deliver over 85% of relevant results for normal searches, but noise margins rise significantly for more involved searches (for example in search #4 the main keyword is a software product acronym that is our interest, but the keyword also matches names of religious groups, scientific techniques, and schools; despite the fact that the search has been configured in both tools to exclude results that contain certain keywords or are sourced from certain urls, the noise margin is still very high). More involved searches obviously require better optimized and more regularly updated search configurations to filter out irrelevant items based on context and source in order to maintain acceptable relevancy in the tools’ reported results.

Technorati Tags: Alterian, listening campaign, Radian6, Social Media Monitoring, social media tools, Techrigy SM2


Bookmark and Share
Print This Post   Email This Post  

9 Responses to “Social Media Monitoring Tools In Action: Radian6 vs Alterian / Techrigy SM2”


Tweets that mention Social Media Monitoring Tools In Action: Radian6 vs Alterian / Techrigy SM2 | On the Scene -- Topsy.com says:



[...] This post was mentioned on Twitter by covisio. covisio said: Blog post – Social Media Monitoring Tools In Action: Radian6 vs Alterian / Techrigy SM2 | On the Scene http://tinyurl.com/mo7xwa [...]

 

Connie Bensen says:



Hi Alex,
Thanks for taking the time to compare tools.

I have been working with Techrigy SM2 for a year, so I’ve talked with many that are considering both solutions. There are some factors to consider when comparing tools.

1. Spam filters will great affect results. Were both searches optimized? Was the content relevant in both tools?
We know that our spam filters are a bit more assertive and because of this we allow users to turn off the spam filter. So my question would be what percentage of content in other tools is irrelevant?

2. How to manage and analyze the search results? SM2 offers the ability to create categories making it possible to analyze across unlimited categories which makes reporting so much easier.

3. What about sentiment, tone and a customizable dictionary?
SM2 offers automatic sentiment and tone. And we have a customizable dictionary that accommodates various verticals.

Techrigy SM2 also allows full historical results back to fall 2007. This offers a huge flexibility in allowing the user to compare the conversations over this past year to the previous year.

Also, in considering pricing there are some differences. Techrigy SM2 is multiple profiles and we don’t charge additional fees for more users.

I’d be happy to show you the category aspects in SM2. Our customers find it quite powerful!

Connie Bensen
Director of Community Strategy
Techrigy / Alterian
@cbensen

 

David Alston says:



Hey there Alexandros,

Just dropped you a line at the office and left a message on voicemail. I thought I’d let you know here as well in case you see this first. We certainly pride ourselves on providing the broadest coverage in the biz so I’m glad your analysis backed that up. Having great filtering, segmentation and sentiment analysis options go without saying in this industry but what I would really love to know more about is the specific variances as you discovered them if you are up for it. We’re always up for building on what we have.

Here’s my number if you get a chance – 506-444-1905 – and my email is attached to this comment.

Looking forward to connecting and learning more.

Cheers.
@davidalston
Radian6

 

Alex says:



Hi Connie,

Thanks for the note. You are absolutely right that a buying decision involves a number of factors including quantity and quality of results, depth of analysis, availability of more advanced metrics, ease-of-use, flexibility, and, of course, pricing. And probably even more factors depending on the exact needs and goals of the potential user. However, my focus here is more on what types of variations on the quantity and quality of results are to be expected between social media monitoring tools for similarly optimized searches.

Now, you make a great point regarding the relevancy of results. I went ahead and updated the original blog post with a graph that shows the percentage of results that were relevant for our campaign’s scope. Both tools do reasonably well there, except for the one search that is based on an acronym that stands for a number of terms (only one of which is of interest to our campaign). In that search, the noise margins are very high for both tools, especially due to the high number of Twitter posts that provide very little context for keyword filters to effectively work on to exclude non-relevant content. So, although the searches were actually optimized in the same way in both tools, it is the case that more detailed and ongoing optimization is still required in both cases to achieve meaningful numbers.

Maybe what I am trying to say here is that there is no silver lining. Social media monitoring tools (like search engines a few years back) provide us with a new wealth of information (within certain variations from technology to technology that do need to be analyzed to some level) that was previously unavailable. However, turning this information into intelligent and effective decision making still requires human involvement at a strategic and tactical level.

-Alex

 

Alex says:



Hi David,

Thanks for the voice mail and the comment.

Regarding the blog post, it was not intended as a vis-à-vis comparison, but it always gets interesting when you put down actual numbers. The numbers are from a real-world listening campaign we are running right now for one of our clients and they are accurate to our best effort of being objective and impartial. No hidden agendas really. What we tried to do early on for this client was to see if there were any variations in the results we were seeing from Radian6 vs SM2. Some variations were to be expected obviously, but where do you draw the line? Anyway, it seems Radian6 did provide a broader coverage for this particular case (and search configuration setup) and we might even be able to dig a bit deeper to try to pinpoint what’s reported differently by each tool. Do you have anything specific in mind when you say you would like to look further into the variances? On our side, we should have a few suggestions that may help filter out more noise and improve search effectiveness (at least maybe for this case).

-Alex

 

laurent says:



Hi Alex,
Very interesting analysis.
Your last graph shows that context has to be taken into account when evaluating the relevance of a conversation. Words have many meanings depending on the context in which they’re used and, to my knowledge, search is context agnostic.
eCairn, company I co founded, has a slightly different approach. To find relevant conv, we don’t start with search, we start with “social”. Social means our users first identify the “relevant people” (they form a community) then grab their conversations which then can be filtered according to the specific. That way, searching Amazon in the cloud computing community or lithium in the social web community always bring back results about amazon web services or lithium technologies.
It’s just a different approach but I thought I would made you aware it exists ;-)

Laurent

 

Alex says:



Hi Laurent,

Thanks for your comment, much appreciated. You are absolutely right that context is important in effectively and efficiently turning social media monitoring results into insightful, actionable, and valuable engagements for companies and brands. Especially if certain topics can mean different things in different communities, markets, geographies, and so on. The ability to filter in/out or cluster conversations based on the relevancy of channels, sites, influencers, communities is indeed important and something that social media monitoring tools should definitely provide in one way or another. However, in our experience, identifying, focusing, and staying on top of the relevant communities is more often that not an ongoing activity that requires both social media monitoring tool intelligence and human involvement.

-Alex

 

laurent says:



Alex
Totally agree with your last sentence. As a matter of fact, I always tell people I talk to that they need at least 1 person for a few hours per day if they want to reap the benefits of being part of the communities.

“The ability to filter in/out or cluster conversations based on the relevancy of channels, sites, influencers, communities is indeed important and something that social media monitoring tools should definitely provide in one way or another” – that’s what eCairn provides. If you’re interested, I’d love to tell you more.

You can reach me at laurent.pfertzel@ecairn.com if you wish.
Laurent

 

7 Steps to Selecting a Social Media Monitoring Tool | On the Scene says:



[...] among the tools, there may be certain case studies (see Ken Burbary’s post and an older post of mine), but there is no conclusive evidence that one tool does better than another for certain [...]

 

Leave a Reply