Best Practices in Viral Marketing

Author: Nemanja Rodi Suupervisor: Elina Koivisto January, 2012

About the Authors

Nemanja is an MSc in marketing student at Aalto University School of Economics and a marketing teacher at Helsinki Business College. He is passionate about digital marketing communications and consumer behavior on the internet.

Elina Koivisto (M.Sc.) is a researcher at Marketing Department of Aalto University School of Economics. In addition, she is responsible for coordination of research within MediaMark research initiative. Her topics of interest include sustainability and ethicality of consumption, branding, fashion marketing, virtual consumption and business model innovations. She teaches marketing, consumer culture and fashion marketing at Aalto

Executive Summary
The research presented below concerns the phenomenon of viral marketing, more specifically identifying the critical success factors thereof. In addition to analyzing possible CSFs, this research was concerned with clarifying the role of viral communications within the broader scope of integrated marketing communications. Thirdly and finally, the aim was also to understand what the possible ways of measuring and evaluating successfulness of a viral marketing campaign are. The reason for these research objectives is the ever increasing usage rate of internet platforms by consumers which opens up new possibilities of reaching out to them and engaging them in a dialogue. In addition to this, it was necessary to understand the progressions found in the world of digital communications and thus reconcile and differentiate the concepts of word-of-mouth, viral marketing and social media marketing. To find the answers to proposed questions two data sources were identified: the thus far published academic literature on the topic and the knowledge and insights of practitioners, namely digital marketing specialists from Finland and abroad. Therefore the first part of the research paper is a literature review, giving an overview of the theoretical discussion in the field, whilst the second part presents inputs from 10 specialists, acquired through semistructured, in-depth interviews (the majority of respondents are ad agencies strategists). The findings show that viral marketing is a digital progression of a concept as old as marketing itself, called word-of-mouth. The emergence of the internet enabled a much more rapid and far reaching dissemination of content which, unlike with word-of-mouth could now be interactive and contain multimedia elements. Viral marketing however was frequently associated solely with videos containing over-the-top content and as such was a highly sought promotional tool by companies between 3-5 years ago in Finland. Nowadays it is primarily social media marketing, which, even if called differently, is a tool designed to yield for the most part same kind of results as viral marketing did and as word-of-mouth does. Therefore, reconciliation between the concepts would be that we can define viral marketing as a marketing communications strategy designed to generate positive word-ofmouth communications among desired audiences, both online and offline and both on social media and other internet platforms. As social media platforms have dramatically grown in the past several years, they have in a way succumbed the internet unto them which made them the primary and most important internet hub to launch viral campaigns from. It is important to note however that there are several purely viral forms such as e-mail campaigns and advergames - however, in addition to these, any marketing communications piece has the potential to go viral should the right tactics, as described below, be in place. Going viral, according to the findings, means that after consuming the message one feels compelled to share it with another person from her/his social network, thus acting as a dissemination medium. Two critical success factors have been identified which need to be satisfied in order to increase the likelihood of any marketing communications message going viral and those are: social object and viral mechanics. Social object is a quality of a message which compels the consumer to perpetuate its existence and it is two-fold: on one hand, the content must relevant to the targeted audience and on the other it must yield at least the

lowest threshold of desired interaction i.e. the act of sharing; ideally, however it has the power to yield more elaborate interactions between the sender and the recipient such as being a conversation starter. Three types of content have been identified as those that increase the propensity of a messages viral outbreak: entertaining, interactive and positive messages. Entertaining content was chosen as the safest bet from a variety of several different types of content it is however important to note that the type of entertainment consumers seek has progressed from five years ago when viral marketing was peaking in Finland, from edgy and over-the-top to back-to-basics type of entertainment. Namely, the quality to be sought is originality and the type of entertainment which captures the essence of an experience shared by many e.g. differences between genders, competition between Finland and Sweden etc. Original in this context does not imply genuinely new, but rather something which has not been seen recently. In terms of interactive messages, it has been noted that this type of content is gaining more and more in popularity. The types of interactivity are many and are essentially a matter of marketers creativity. They could include: advergames and social advergames (e.g. making a Facebook version of a common childrens game with a prize to be won and easy-to-share features), customizable messages (allowing one to customize the message before sharing it e.g. putting friends pictures in a flash application with a storyline and then sending it to that friend), talking to consumers (e.g. creating an interactive video in which a character makes a phone call to the phone number one has submitted before viewing the video; creating extensions of TV campaigns where special videos are recorded as responses to viewers comments) alternate reality games (creating elaborate gaming scenarios in both online and offline worlds that involve quests to be completed individually and in groups). Finally, positive messages i.e. the content which reflects inspiring ideals of consumers or the world around us are those that increase the likelihood of being shared. In addition to this, positive messages could also be pieces that showcase brand transparency and e.g. open company doors to consumers and show them social and environmental responsibility efforts undertaken by the company. A single campaign can also contain all these three types of content (examples presented in the findings section). In addition to the social object quality of the message and the types of content likely to go viral, one must make sure to have the proper viral mechanics in place. This is not to say that the content of a message could not motivate a viral spread on its own, however, with the clutter of messages in the digital realm, it is better not to expect consumers to make the extra effort and e.g. copy/paste the hyperlink and e-mail it to a friend. Instead, the rule that should be abided is: make it as sharable as possible. This, naturally, means embedding different types of share options such as a Facebook like or e-mail button. In addition to the sharing features, other viral mechanisms include the choice of platform to launch the campaign from (brands social media page, brands website, campaign website, blogs, e -mail databases etc.) and digital extensions (online versions of offline marketing communication pieces). Putting viral mechanisms in place also allows us to track the spreading of a message and the dissemination rate most of these tools however limit us to the quantitative data which also restricts viral marketings role within the integrated marketing communications context. Namely, the findings show that virality can be and is mostly used for such marketing objectives as raising awareness and shortening market adoption times. The respondents do not disqualify the possibility of viral marketing doing more, however they assert that they have not attempted to do more with it, to a certain extent due to limiting feedback they

receive on such campaigns efficiencies. It did emerge though that, should a campaigns content be positive, as described above, we can expect the feelings of loyalty to be fostered and the brands positive image to be reinforced. Other than that, the greatest strength of virality lies in its capability to reach far and spread fast however, this on its own serves little purpose. When designing a campaign with the intent for it to go viral, one should always ask themselves: when virality occurs, what do I do with it? Which other IMC tools will work synergistically with the viral effort and what is the big objective? Viral marketing can only do so much (swift raising of awareness, quick market adoption etc.), however it is probably the best tool for it. Throughout the research several examples are presented whereby virality resulted in the kind of ROI which traditional advertising barely ever could achieve. Please refer to the rest of paper for an in-depth elaboration of the findings presented above.

Contents
ABSTRACT ...............................................................................................................................................................7 INTRODUCTION ..................................................................................................................................................7 ORIGINS OF VIRAL MARKETING ................................................................................................................8 VIRALITY DEFINED........................................................................................................................................ 10 FORMS AND PLATFORMS ............................................................................................................................. 12 HOW DOES A MESSAGE BECOME A VIRUS? ....................................................................................... 14 THE POWER OF VIRAL MARKETING ..................................................................................................... 15 EVALUATING SUCCESS OF VIRAL MARKETING CAMPAIGNS ................................................... 17 RESEARCH METHODOLOGY ..................................................................................................................... 18 THE FINDINGS .................................................................................................................................................. 19 Viral Marketing Defined .................................................................................................................................. 19 Critical Success Factors .................................................................................................................................... 20 Social Object.................................................................................................................................................. 20 Entertaining Content ............................................................................................................................... 22 Positive Content ....................................................................................................................................... 23 Interactive Content .................................................................................................................................. 24 Viral Mechanics ............................................................................................................................................. 26 Is It Only About The Buzz? ............................................................................................................................ 28 DISCUSSION ........................................................................................................................................................ 30 MANAGERIAL IMPLICATIONS ................................................................................................................... 31 LIMITATIONS AND FUTURE RESEARCH .............................................................................................. 33 REFERENCES ..................................................................................................................................................... 34 APPENDIX ........................................................................................................................................................... 36

ABSTRACT
This research paper concerns the nature of viral marketing campaigns and identification of their critical success factors. The first section is a literature review that presents a summary of findings of all key aspects of viral marketing ever since it emerged to the scene. The latter section contains the findings of a series of interviews conducted with viral marketing professionals from advertising agencies and companies. The findings show that any marketing communications message has the potential to go viral provided that the social object it contains is audience relevant and that the proper viral mechanics are in place. Three types of content are identified which increase the likelihood of a marketing communications message going viral and those include: entertainment, positive messages and interactive content. Furthermore, the findings show that the role of virality within integrated marketing communications remains primarily associated with short-term marketing objectives such as sales, raising awareness etc. however not exclusively so, depending on the type of content of the campaign in question.

INTRODUCTION
The growth in number of internet users has been dramatic ever since this platform came to existence. According to internetworldstats.com, European countries lead with highest internet penetration levels, with Scandinavian and Benelux countries topping the chart (Finland 85,3 % of population) 1 . A lot has been said and written about how this has affected our everyday lives, interpersonal relationships and how we go about conducting business in the digital era. However this research paper will focus on the marketing side of the story. In particular on how an old concept of word-of-mouth has evolved with the influence of the internet into something we call viral marketing today. Viral marketing is one of the buzzwords that have been present in the realm of marketing for slightly more than a decade, yet there is not much written about it and that which is written is frequently incoherent the definitions proposed to this date share the notion that viral marketing is a consumer-to-consumer process, and that it is related to word-of-mouth communication, however they differ in all other aspects (Vilpponen et al.2006).
1

For more information, go to www.internetworldstats.com

Nevertheless, we have witnessed a number of great success stories of viral marketing which inevitably challenge other marketers to give it a try and achieve the kind of ROI that traditional advertising barely ever could. Part of its appeal lies in the apparent simplicity of viral marketing initiatives leading us to believe that big budgets are not a must and that its the good ideas and marketing creativity that suffice e.g. the BlendTec Will It Blend? campaigns budget for the first video was less than 100$ - the subsequent 100 videos were of the same format and production value, and resulted in a 700% sales increase and significant increase in brand equity (Briggs, 2009). On top of that, rising consumer apathy as well as advertising cost force marketers to seek new ways of successfully reaching desired audiences and establishing rapport with them.

ORIGINS OF VIRAL MARKETING

Word-of-mouth is an old concept in marketing and it refers to a form of interpersonal communication among consumers concerning their personal experiences with a firm or a product (Richins, 1984). It is a complex phenomenon and generally not something that can be controlled directly (Allsop et al.2007). Nevertheless it is of great importance to organizations as it is a thousand times as powerful as conventional marketing by the measure of sales figures and purchase decision time (Silverman, 2001). Pruden and Vavra (2004) state that word-of-mouth is the highest ranked technique used by consumers to not only gather information but also to make purchase decisions. Furthermore, Cruz and Fill (2008) assert that consumers like to talk about their involvement with products and services for a variety of reasons including prestige and status that may arise through ownership or a need to share their purchase experiences in order to help others. Seth Godin, in his blog, suggests that we simply like to talk about stuff if we perceive it to be good. Word-of-mouth has greater influence on consumer behavior than print ads, personal selling, and radio advertising in certain circumstances (Engel et al.1969) due to the perceived objectivity and credibility associated with the parties involved (Cruz and Fill, 2008). There is some disagreement in the existing literature when it comes to the question whether word-of-mouth and viral marketing are the same or essentially different concepts. Klopper and Montgomery equate word-of-mouth with viral marketing by saying that viral marketing is just another buzzword for an already defined concept, called word-of-mouth (WOM)

(Klopper, 2001) and, furthermore, claim that viral marketing has been described in the marketing literature for more than 30 years but termed word-of-mouth or the diffusion of innovation (Montgomery, 2000). Most other authors however, focus on the differences i.e. the progression from word-of-mouth to viral marketing. Granitz and Ward (1996), in their research on usenet participants comments, found that viral marketing primarily differs from word-of-mouth in that WOM is spoken while viral marketing is written. Another major difference is that viral marketing is free from constraints that may arise from ones circumstances of his/her background, appearance, status etc. In other words, the possible anonymity of viral marketing message forwarder allows for more truthful communication, devoid of any boundaries. However, this was no longer the case with the emergence of social media and individuals shedding their anonymity on the internet. Another major difference between the concepts is the strength of the social ties (see Brown and Reingen, 1987; Granovetter, 1973; Krishnamurthy, 2001). Brown and Reingen (1987) describe these ties to be strong when the social group members are familiar and willing to share with one another. Conversely, weak ties are when these relationships are superficial and do not include openness and willingness to share. According to Granovetter (1973), weak ties play a crucial role in word-of-mouth message dissemination as they enable a message to travel between the social groups, thus amplifying the reach. If we think about spoken word-of-mouth and digitally spread information on the web, we can see how these weak ties would be more likely to be employed on the web, thereby initiating an explosive spread of a message. For example, a message about a company or a product might be shared within a social group with strong ties, overheard by someone that does not belong to the group, and passed on within a new social group with strong ties at the same time, information (a hyperlink, textual information) posted on ones Facebook page, is equally accessible to all Facebook connections of this person, regardless whether the poster is linked by a strong or a weak tie with them. Seth Godin argues that word-of-mouths reach is short in the sense that the message goes from sender to receiver and usually does not spread any further. On the other hand, a viral marketing message, according to Wind and Mahajan (2001), spreads quadratically and not linearly, meaning that the network members capacity to spread messages is equal to the square of the number of network members. Essentially, this means that consumers infected

with a viral message will ideally infect more than one user each, thereby ensuring the exponential spread of the message. Based on the views presented above, it is safe to conclude that viral marketing is indeed an evolved form of word-of-mouth - its digital progression. The primary difference is the platform on which the message is contained which enables it to travel fast and reach far. Besides the amplified reach, the character of the content has evolved as well in the sense that the message can now be in various forms including text, images, sounds, videos, games etc. The message no longer has to be a result of an experience between a consumer and a brand, intense enough to motivate the consumer to spread the message a much more superficial experience, and not necessarily related to the brand, is enough to motivate the consumer to pass the message along (for more, see Eckler and Bolls, 2011; Brown et al.2010).

VIRALITY DEFINED
The term viral marketing was coined by Steve Juvertson and Tim Draper in 1997 to describe the manner in which free e-mail service called hotmail was promoted. Namely, the signature line of every e-mail message sent through hotmail, the first online free e-mail agent, contained an invitation to create a free hotmail.com account. This method of promotion was understood to be viral in character as the message was being passed on by users themselves, thereby contaminating one another with this virus. The word viral obviously stems from the word virus, symbolizing the manner in which the message spreads, without the negative connotation of the word. Marketers soon saw the potential benefits of this form of marketing communication and today, 14 years later, there is a variety of viral marketing success stories, books, academic articles, research projects and even agencies specializing in viral marketing. Various terms have been used to describe this form of communication including: viral marketing (Juvertson, 1997), buzz marketing (Thomas, 2004), word-of-mouse (Goldenberg et al.2001), viral stealth marketing (Swanepoel et al.2009), referral marketing (De Bruyn and Lilien, 2004), viral advertising (Porter and Golan, 2006) etc. While most authors agree that all these synonyms refer to the same concept, they do not necessarily agree on the key element of it, namely virality, or the way in which the message spreads. Cruz and Fill (2008) claim that viral marketing communication concerns the informal, peer-to-peer electronic exchange of information about an identifiable product or service. Furthermore, they suggest that viral

marketing is not another form of advertising, therefore the distribution of a message should not be controlled by financial means. This is in line with the definition proposed by Phelps et al.(2004) who alienate viral marketing from advertising and describe it as the process of encouraging honest communication among consumer networks. Another view coherent with these is that of De Bruyn and Lilien (2004) who assert that the goal of electronic referral marketing is to use consumer-to-consumer (or peer-to-peer) communications, as opposed to company-to-consumer communications, to disseminate information about a product or a service, hence leading to its rapid and cost-effective market adoption. Conversely, some authors claim that we do not have to solely rely on consumers efforts in message dissemination but rather can facilitate this process if necessary. Swanepoel et.al(2004) claim that viral stealth marketing is an electronic word-of-mouth communication that is spread in an exponential and contagious manner using the highly effective platform of the electronic mediumthe people spreading these marketing messages are required not to disclose the fact that they are being paid to promote the product for the organization. This view is in line with previously proposed explanation by Kaikati and Kaikati (2004) who consider viral marketing to be one type of six different stealth marketing techniques (besides celebrity marketing, marketing in video games, marketing in pop and rap music, brand pushers and bait-and-tease marketing). Wilson (2000) proposes a compromising view by stating that viral marketing is any strategy that encourages individuals to pass on a marketing message to others, creating the potential for exponential growth in the messages exposure and influence. Another compromising view is that of Watts and Peretti (2007) who introduce the big-seed marketing which combines viral marketing tools with old-fashioned mass media in a way that yields far more predictable results than purely viral approaches like word-of-mouth marketing. They suggest that marketers create and launch multiple viral initiatives simultaneously thereby increasing the chance that at least one of them catches on and spreads like a virus instead of relying on the content of just one campaign to generate the desired results.

FORMS AND PLATFORMS

There are various forms of viral marketing campaigns and platforms used for their execution. Some of the most popular forms include sending e-mail messages to current customers and encouraging them to pass them on. When designing these e-mail messages developers should note that messages that spark strong emotion humor, fear, sadness or inspiration are likely to be forwarded (for more, see Phelps et al.2004). Another common form is seeding videos on websites such as youtube.com and relying on the content of the video to stimulate viewers to pass it on - viral advertising relies on provocative content to motivate unpaid peer-to-peer communication of persuasive messages from identified sponsors (Porter and Golan, 2006; for more, see Eckler and Bolls, 2011). Third most common form would be creating advergames, simple, easy-to-adopt and easy-to-play computer games that in some shape or form contain a marketing message (for more, see Ferguson, 2008). Besides the above described forms of viral marketing and platforms that contain them, marketers have their hands untied to employ/invent any other form which would essentially work and is viral in nature. Some of these unorthodox, and not-easy-to-categorize examples include: Subservient Chicken 2 , Tip Ex Hunter Shoots a Bear 3 interactive videos that allow viewers to type in commands resulting in the video protagonists, chicken and hunter in these cases, performing these commands. This kind of viral campaign is some sort of fusion between a seeded video and a very simple advergame after viewing them, one can notice their tremendous simplicity combined with original entertainment value. A similar campaign to these is that of football club Sporting Portugal 4 where viewers are asked for their phone number after which an interactive video starts during which the protagonist makes an actual phone call using the phone number
2 3

http://www.bk.com/en/us/campaigns/subservient-chicken.html http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4ba1BqJ4S2M 4 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=--jZFUPr49Q

entered by the viewer. Thanks to this simple video/advergame and the buzz it created, this football club had record ticket sales in a matter of days. IKEA Facebook Showroom IKEA published photos of furnished rooms on their facebook page and invited members to tag pieces of furniture with their own names thereby winning them. The tagging functioned on a first-come-first-served basis. The Blair Witch Project5 the filmmakers created a website containing a false piece of information about the film being a true story and its makers disappearing during the production of the film. This sparked interest in the public and resulted in the highest ROI in the film industry ever recorded. There are many more viral marketing campaigns that are hard to categorize including Million Dollar Homepage6, Google Invite Only Pre-Launch etc. One form of entertainment that has emerged in the last decade is alternate reality games, interactive narratives that play out in the real world with participants shaping the story and its ending. In other words, these are real-life computer games, performed on the internet, through physical meetings, telephone conversations etc. The most successful alternate reality game to date is considered to be Why So Serious7 which involved millions of players across 177 countries over the period of 15 months. This game, as most other alternate reality games, was, in fact, a viral marketing campaign promoting the film The Dark Knight. It was the highest grossing film of the year 2008 in the USA and according to its producers, big part of this success was due to the alternate reality game that preceded it. Perhaps this can be explained through rising consumer apathy and advertising rejection caused by the marketing messages clutter in which the modern day consumers find themselves. Perhaps consumers crave to see something new, a type of advertising that does not intrude, intercept and persuade, but the kind that engages, entertains and satisfies. According to an old Roman proverb, panem et circenses, all that humans need are bread and games. In the developed world, where acquiring bread for most is not a struggle due to economic stability and consumer affluence, marketers can step in and provide games. Perhaps that is why viral marketing comes in so many different forms, most of which are engaging and entertaining. Viral marketing, as an offspring of traditional advertising, is allowed to break boundaries,
5 6

http://www.blairwitch.com/ http://www.milliondollarhomepage.com/ 7 http://www.whysoserious.com/

showcase unconstrained creativity and provide consumers with something they cannot see on TV.

HOW DOES A MESSAGE BECOME A VIRUS?

Most authors agree that one of the key success factors of viral marketing campaigns are the consumers who pass on the message. Cakim (2006) refers to these individuals as efluentials and claims they are key in generation of viral messages. Other synonyms used to describe these individuals include: evangelists, sneezers, super spreaders, high social networking potential persons, super e-mailers, influencers etc. While several authors analyzed consumers motivations to pass the viral message along (see Phelps et al.2004, Brown et al.2010, Eckler and Bolls, 2011), very few tried to discover a way to identify the most effective message spreaders. If we briefly analyze the world of personal seeded videos that went viral i.e. received a great deal of attention (hits/views), we can see that in many cases it was bloggers who played a crucial role. We have seen in many cases that the actual viral explosion happened only after some media attention was directed towards the campaign (e.g. Dove Evolution8). Nowadays, media is significantly fragmented on account of new entries such as bloggers, vloggers and all other forms of non-corporate (or corporate), niche (or mass) media voices that are emerging thanks to the internet. Bloggers are the dominant voices within their audiences and if they find a viral campaign or e.g. a seeded personal video interesting enough to post on their blog, this kind of exposure could create the avalanche effect. Perhaps, bloggers are some of the key efluentials that marketers should go after when launching a viral campaign. Scott (2010) suggests that companies should establish relationships with bloggers by reading their blogs content and engaging in a discussion with them. He claims it is ineffective to simply make a list of relevant ones and send them a press release on the campaign, but instead we should build genuine bonds with them and then when we have some content relevant for them, ask them to publish it.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iYhCn0jf46U

THE POWER OF VIRAL MARKETING

We have witnessed a myriad of success stories where individuals achieved the kind of exposure and success that they have never dreamed of, after only uploading a single video on youtube.com. The best example would probably be teenage pop star Justin Bieber who in less than three years went from being just another teenager to recording a CD, publishing a book, a film, guest starring in a dozen of TV shows (including CSI and SNL), being nominated for and winning many awards (MTV awards, Grammies etc.). On the corporate front, one of the greatest successes is the Will It Blend?9 viral marketing campaign. It was an investment of one hundred dollars and some creative thinking that resulted in 700% sales increase and immeasurable raise in brand awareness since the viral campaign began 5 years ago. The videos that make up the campaign are simple, one to two minute productions, within which a character named Dickson blends various objects (iPhone, Chuck Norris action figures, marbles etc.) in a blender, which is this companys primary market offering. According to Briggs (2009) who analyzed this particular campaign, Will it Blend? was such a great success because it was authentic and involved elements of popular culture. Another, more recent, example is that of the Old Spice (The Man Your Man Could Smell Like 10 ) campaign consisting of a TV advertisement that was followed by a series of youtube.com videos made with the same tone as the TV advert and in the form of responses to youtube.com viewers questions and comments. The campaign received a considerable amount of attention in the form of hits, references in popular culture and advertising awards. It is important to note that both of these campaigns successes are partially to be credited to mass media involvement. Blendtecs campaign received a great deal of attention in the early stages in the form of airtime in various TV talk-shows as well as numerous mentions on many popular blogs. The Old Spice campaign started as a TV advertisement originally and was followed up by the internet campaign extension. This is not to say that these campaigns would not have yielded a great deal of attention on their own nevertheless, the power of mass media cannot be neglected. The virality of a campaign means that being exposed to it
9

10

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lAl28d6tbko http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=owGykVbfgUE

results in the viewer wanting to share this experience with someone else by exposing them to it as well. Marketers should primarily create content that is viral enough in nature to ensure replication of the virus. In order to achieve maximum results though, marketers should also target various media voices and try to get them on board. Arguably, the media will present those stories that have already generated enough interest in the digital realm and are thus safe bets in a sense it is only a matter of quantity i.e. number of hits, shares, comments and so forth, rather than a question of a particular type of content. The bloggers/vloggers (Perez Hilton, Shane Dawson, Arjan Writes etc.), games (Angry Birds) and viral pieces (corporate: Will It Blend?, Sporting Portugal etc. and individual: Rebecca Black, Diet Coke and Menthos etc.) have been picked up by the media only after having achieved significant popularity on the internet. Hence, the corporate media, instead of being threatened by the democratization of media i.e. user generated content, it capitalizes on it and draws ready-made pieces from it. The threshold exposure which the campaign needs to pass before it becomes interesting enough for media to pick up on it will probably be drifting away further and further as an increasing number of companies and individuals have their take on viral marketing. Nevertheless, if we want to achieve the kind of viral success as the companies presented above have, it will have to be a combination of the campaigns quality and some media exposure. According to a study conducted by Esomar in 1999, a customer experiencing good customer service is likely to share this information with three other persons, while a customer experiencing bad customer service will do so with nine other persons. This can have devastating effects on a companys brand image if we factor in the intensifying effect of the digital platform as we have seen in cases such as with AOL11 and Comcast12 bad customer service videos that went viral. In the case of AOL, a customer tried to cancel his subscription which turned into a futile attempt as the customer service representative was determined to keep him as a customer without paying any attention to his reasoning. As for Comcast, a technician that was invited to fix the faulty equipment fell asleep while doing so. In both cases, customers recorded the bad experiences they had with the companies, uploaded these videos to youtube.com where they generated a lot of attention from viewers as well as from

11 12

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xmpDSBAh6RY http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CvVp7b5gzqU

media. These companies became synonymous with bad customer service and are still struggling to clean up their image.

EVALUATING SUCCESS OF VIRAL MARKETING CAMPAIGNS

Several researchers and industry specialists have tried to define parameters for measuring and evaluating success of viral marketing campaigns, however their findings are somewhat incoherent. According to Helm (2000), the primary purpose/objective of viral marketing is maximizing reach. Contrary opinion would be that of Jim Nail (BoD, WoM Marketing Agency), who states: To succeed in WOM marketing, you need to find that segment of real ardent fans and create special programs and tools that will empower them to share that enthusiasm...I think viral is an extension of the loyalty discipline (Ferguson, 2008). According to Juvertson (2000, p.2), who was the first to define viral marketing, ideal viral message will convert and retain a large number of recipients as new users...penetration, loyalty and frequency are appropriate evaluative criteria. Cruz and Fill (2008) who conducted a research on viral marketing evaluation state that the approaches used to measure and evaluate the relative success of viral marketing communications are many and varied. Futhermore, they claim that these approaches range from changes in attitude and behavior, including the number of new users or levels of loyalty, to measures of reach, frequency, penetration, speed of transmission and the content of conversations, to mention a few (Cruz and Fill, 2008). Essentially, they assert that there is no single criterion that could be used as a measure of success of a VM campaign instead they propose distinct goal setting at the beginning of the planning process which then serves as a success evaluation tool for the campaign. They propose a framework which starts with defining a VM campaigns goal as being either cognitive (reach, awareness, knowledge), behavioral (hits, downloads, dissemination rate) or financial (ROI, brand equity developments as a result of the campaign). Subsequent steps involve defining the target audience, deciding whether the message is overt/covert commercial or non-commercial and finally choosing the media to launch it from (e-mail mobile phone, seeding website, blog) and the message format.

RESEARCH METHODOLOGY
One of most ambitious research endeavors to date aimed at identifying critical success factors of VM as well as defining a framework for evaluating its success was that of Cruz and Fill (2008) resulting in a set of evaluation criteria that could be used. That research project however included a sample of only five respondents which challenges the possibility to generalize the findings. The authors themselves acknowledge the need to validate these findings by including a larger sample. With this research project I will try to increase the understanding of the phenomenon of viral marketing to do so I will set three research objectives (elaborated below), two of which have previously been examined through the research of Cruz and Fill (2008) (exploring VMC evaluation criteria and exploring the evaluation of VMC). A sample of 10 respondents is chosen and these include viral marketing specialists (most of whom advertisers) from Finland, Sweden and Austria. The method will be semi-structured interviews through which I will try to shed some light on the following issues (objectives of the research): Isolating key success factors of successful viral marketing campaigns Defining the purpose of viral marketing what marketing communications objectives does viral marketing serve best within IMC? How can effects of viral marketing campaigns be measured?

The questionnaire consists of 10 open-ended questions and is in the appendix of this research. The data will be analysed by employing two methods depending on the research objective: namely, for the first research objective, the grounded theory approach will be employed whereby the emergent concepts and ideas will be synthesized to form a framework/hypothesis, while the questions related to the latter two research objectives will be based on an existing theoretical framework. The framework used for creating questions regarding the second and third research objective is that of Schultz et al.(1994). This framework presents four possible effects of different integrated marketing communications methods. My goal is to identify to which of these viral marketing has the capacity to contribute to.

THE FINDINGS
Viral Marketing Defined

The opening question of the interviews was to define viral marketing. Respondents have elaborated on their views of the concept by using terms such as word-of-mouth and sharing content. Essentially, what the findings show is that viral marketing is a term referring to a concept as old as marketing itself the concept of word-of-mouth. It is the consumers perpetuation of a marketing communications message within their social networks. For marketers it has always been the holy grail as it is a free form of promotion with greater credibility stemming from the familiar source. It was renamed into viral marketing once the digital platform came into existence thus forever altering the message sharing mechanics. A majority of respondents (6 out of 10) pegged viral marketing as pass and something that stopped being a buzzword around three years ago. Respondents, most of whom advertising agencies executives, claim that companies no longer ask for the viral component in their marketing campaigns. The social media zeitgeist is reflected in companies requests in so that Facebook presence is becoming an imperative in their integrated marketing communications. Respondents explain companies requests for social media presence to be poorly reasoned and mostly motivated by a need to do the same as most other companies are doing. The actual need they have from social media presence is to use it as a marketing communications channel, sometimes a service channel and ideally create some fandom in the digital realm and through it, initiate positive word-of-mouth. This goes back to the essence of viral marketing and suggests that it is in fact not pass, just like word-of-mouth is not something that is pass the emergence of social media simply provided a useful tool to execute campaigns with virality as an intended outcome. While the emergence of internet enabled rapid transference of a message between the sender and recipient, the emergence of social media made it even easier for senders to send these messages to large audiences that include ones personal and professional networks and the public in general. Whether we nowadays call it viral marketing or social media marketing is irrelevant for marketers for consumers on the other hand it might be as the word viral itself is not as much of a buzzword as it used to be. Positive word-of-mouth with quick and far-reaching spread is what we are after and with users being more connected than ever before, virality has more potential than ever.

When describing viral marketing as a buzzword of several years ago, respondents most frequently referred to e-mail campaigns which, due to newly passed legislation in Finland, are no longer allowed in the form in which they existed. They referred to seeded videos just as frequently, and claimed that, due to saturation, companies no longer ask for the creation of those. Through further discussion with respondents we established that viral marketing in its essence is about the free distribution of a message motivated by the nature of its content email campaigns and seeded videos are simply two of many forms of marketing that can go viral and even though these particular forms are generating less interest from consumers and thus companies, virality remains a desired effect of marketing communications. Between 3 and 5 years ago, when viral marketing (in the form of seeded videos and e-mail campaigns) was peaking in Finland, it was rather easy to generate consumers interest and achieve the viral effect; nowadays, due to saturation, it is much harder.

Critical Success Factors

Social Object
The two critical success factors in a marketing communications message going viral are social object and viral mechanics. Social object refers to a quality in the messages content which makes it relevant for users and motivating to pass it along. This quality of a marketing message is twofold: on one hand, the appropriation of the marketing message through its re-distribution demands that the messages content be relevant and representative of the ideal the message consumer is or strives to be; on the other hand, it has to generate interaction between the

sharer and the recipient at varying degrees, ranging from the simple act of sharing to engaging in play centered around the campaigns message (e.g. alternate reality games, social advergames etc.). This means that the perpetuator of the marketing communications message needs to perceive the message as relevant not only for her/him, but also for the recipient to whom the message is passed along. The messages content itself needs to be such to ideally elicit an interaction that goes beyond simple prolongation of the message to be a conversation starter or something which creates more dynamics between the sharer and the recipient such as a challenge (social advergames). Simply put, there is no generic formula on which type of content works better. When it comes to valence, Eckler and Bolls (2011) claim that messages with a positive emotional tone are more likely to be passed along (regardless of the type of content), as opposed to those with negative emotional tones. The respondents in this research claim that the messages content needed to be something overthe-top in the time when viral marketing was peaking in Finland, whereas nowadays it is not essential. With social media as the primary platform for realizing such campaigns, the social aspect takes precedence over the extravagant content hence, most viral campaigns seen lately in Finland come in forms of social advergames, where the idea is quite often rather simple, while the act of involving friends to participate and sharing is easy. When describing what kind of content would be most successful in creating this social object quality of a message, respondents most frequently use the word relevant. In a sense, that does not differentiate communications with viral potential from any other type of marketing communications. After further discussing about viral content specifics, we managed to isolate several attributes that this content should have if it is to go viral.

Entertaining Content Among different types of content such as humor, violence, sex-appeal etc. all respondents chose humor as the safest bet. Other forms were described as potentially successful in creating the viral effect, however also characterized as double-edged swords to the companys brand image. Humor in itself however, can contain elements of violence and sex-appeal, however as long as it is the dominant element, the message becomes less potentially harmful to the brand image. The type of humor embedded in marketing messages intended to become viral has changed as well. Initially, when viral marketing was a buzzword, this humor needed to be something the consumers could not experience through traditional advertising channels. Viral marketing was afforded a license to kill in the sense that it could go overboard and contain elements that would normally be deemed as inappropriate to be shown on television or in magazines (e.g. Quicksilver Dynamite Surfing
13

). While doing marketing

communications on the internet was still a new thing, generating the desired PR effect promptly was much easier. Nowadays, consumers are more sophisticated due to experience with viral marketing and expect more than an over-the-top video that contains elements of comedic violence, or a video posing as a self-made, amateur piece with the brand elements embedded discretely in it. This is why the safest bet, humor, has morphed from shock-value humor to relatable humor. As internet users converted from anonymous and voyeuristic to personal and transparent, due to the emergence of social media, they became more particular about the content they choose to consume and pass on. The respondents elaborate on this type of humor as simply relatable on a great scale, original and essentially good. This is not to say that modern-day consumers cannot be shocked, nor that embedded shock-value would not yield the desired effect. Most of the respondents simply elaborated that the hype of viral marketing is over and when creating content we need to go back to basics and just make it good. The risk-taking aspect of viral marketing is more expressed through original ideas nowadays, rather than something edgy. One of the respondents illustrates this with a campaign his agency designed for McDonalds whereby a simple game was distributed on Facebook within which users would draw French fries out of a box and the one with longest one drawn would be able to claim an actual burger at the restaurant while the one to draw the shortest one would have to treat others who participated in the game to McDonalds
13

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JR_naKxLEPc

burgers. The idea is rather simple, however quite original and thus a success story. The amount of time necessary to participate in the game is longer than that of viewing an advert, thus the time of interaction with a brands advertising is prolonged. Besides originality it allows interactions between the user and the content and among users, the importance of which is elaborated later. When describing this viral marketing humor 2.0, respondents use keywords such as original and relevant. As our presence on the digital platform is maturing, so are the marketing communications practices on it. Viral marketing becomes less experimental and untamed and goes on to become another marketing communication method, the specifics of which are now better understood by marketers. Humor, in particular, goes back to its roots of being relatable in so that it captures an experience or an idea shared by many. If on top of this marketers manage to make it original (as compared to other campaigns), the probability of viral success will be increased. A humorous marketing communications piece may be enjoyed by its respective audience, however for the members of this audience to share it, it should be something that has not been seen already, or at least not in the immediate past. As described earlier, the act of sharing means incorporating the message into ones pe rsonal integrated marketing communications, thus representativeness of the message partially rests on its originality. According to several respondents, the emotions that drive and shape our identity forming practices in the digital realm are rather primitive and include the need to show-off by being first in the know which does not sound like too extraordinary of an idea in the information age. This is corroborated by the fact that on many websites the button which allows sharing some content on ones Facebook wall (the like) is accompanied by the tagline Be the first of your friends to like this.

Positive Content Another type of content which respondents described as potentially successful in creating the viral effect would be positive messages. The exact words respondents used to describe this type of content would be inspirational, transparent and positive. In essence, this is nothing new to advertising and PR, only now, we have these marketing communications messages as digital pieces easily sharable by a click of a button. These positive messages on one hand have a positive outlook on life thus creating an ideal of a better world and better versions of

ourselves in it. On the other hand, they could present aspects of a brand that would be unknown to users before, such as specifics about manufacturing or materials extraction by making the life cycle of the product more transparent, the user feels more responsible and more in control of the implications of using this particular product. The respondents have illustrated these types of content with examples such as The Fun Theory14 - a series of videos showing how human behavior could be modified for the better if the alternative way of doing something was more pleasurable. In the principal video, called Piano Stairs, bypassers exiting the Stockholm subway are faced with a choice: escalator or stairs that look like piano keys and produce actual sounds while one is walking on them. According to the video, 66% more by-passers chose the stairs and from what can be seen from the video, enjoyed their walk very much. The core idea behind this video is to raise awareness and stimulate interest for Volkswagens Blue Motion Technologies which enable environmentally friendly performance of their latest cars. The Fun Theory generated over 26 million views across 18 videos in YouTube. In terms of transparency, one of the respondents illustrates its importance by explaining how opening the doors of their business and allowing the public to view the information on supply chain specifics, such as procurement of raw materials and environmental and social responsibility related to it, has immense effect which is two-fold: naturally, this fosters loyalty and builds brand equity, and at the same time it has viral potential. The transparency zeitgeist is bigger than viral marketing and perhaps not sufficiently capitalized on in viral marketing. It seems that in practice, when it comes to viral marketing and PR, virality is rather associated with destructive pieces of information spreading and harming a brands image, than, as this respondent explained it, opening the doors of the business, and involving the public in what happens behind the scenes.

Interactive Content That which then comes next as one of content types that could elicit desired viral effects is interactivity and play. Interactivity is of course in the definition of viral marketing as sharing marketing communications messages with members of ones social network is in fact interaction. However, these messages, besides being consumed and shared, could perhaps
14

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2lXh2n0aPyw

also be altered along the way. We have seen many examples of customization in campaigns whereby viewers would modify the content and consume it that way (ICA Eco-Dance15, Yearbook Yourself16 etc.) or engage in play with the content (TipEx Hunter Shoots a Bear17, Subservient Chicken18, Why So Serious?19). Personalization of marketing messages is not a critical success factor per se, but perhaps something which, if done right, could contribute to the overall success of the initiative. The findings show that interactivity is indeed important and is typical to viral marketing. If combined with good content it could lead to consumers spending more time with the brand and getting involved more deeply. This reasserts the new definition of viral marketing capable to serve more marketing objectives than just creating buzz (elaborated later). One of the examples of interactivity provided by respondents is again the The Fun Theory: Piano Stairs namely, in the other part of this campaign, individuals could send in their ideas on how to improve the behavior of traffic participants by making it fun, which is the philosophy of Volkswagen Blue Motion Technologies. The best submissions were awarded and included in the campaign. In fact, when it comes to this particular campaign, it contains all three types of content explained here. The idea/entertainment value is original in recent advertising, the viewers could contribute to the campaign with their inputs and finally the tone of campaign is rather positive in so that is inspiring and showcases good citizenship on behalf of the brand. Most of the respondents however did not contribute with examples of interactive campaigns while interactivity was stressed as important by most respondents, almost to the point of consensus, few of them have created these up to this point. What makes viral marketing viral is the fact that the message consumer passes it on and thus incorporates it into her/his own integrated marketing communications through the act of dissemination which brings us back to the notion of social object. The social object thus means that the message content, besides abiding all rules for creating marketing message content, has to take into account the appropriation thereof by the consumer who is the messages perpetuator. The nature of the social object is entirely context dependent and could be

15 16

http://www.enteraward.com/viral/ecodance/ http://www.yearbookyourself.com/ 17 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4ba1BqJ4S2M 18 http://www.bk.com/en/us/campaigns/subservient-chicken.html 19 http://www.whysoserious.com

understood through marketing research. This context refers to the consumers and brands profiles.

Viral Mechanics
brands social media page blogs e-mail databases campaigns own website / brands website Share option that allows the content to be shared through ones social media page / e-mailed Sharable, internet versions of existing offline campaigns

Platforms Sharing mechanisms Digital extensions

The second vital ingredient in a marketing message going viral, besides the social object it incorporates, are the viral mechanics that facilitate its realization. Both are equally important as the advent of these mechanics is what catalyzed the transformation of word-of-mouth to viral marketing. Viral mechanics refer to a) platforms from which campaigns are launched and on which they are contained b) embedded mechanisms for sharing and c) digital extensions of campaigns in traditional media. The principal social hubs of the internet are the social media platforms they came into existence several years after viral marketing has and have given an additional boost to the speed and distance to which virality can spread. It has come to the point that most of viral marketing is contained on these platforms and thus this is perhaps why respondents renamed viral into social media marketing. Obviously, the social media is an ideal platform for viral spread of messages as it is extremely easy for users to share information, within their social networks, which now include persons from multiple spheres of their lives (professional, academic, personal etc.). This enables the message to travel between social networks. At the moment, in Finland, Facebook is the most interesting platform for companies to create presence on and initiate positive word-of-mouth. Respondents, however argue that other platforms such as YouTube and Twitter could perhaps yield greater results. Namely, the attraction of Facebook may lie in the popularity of the like feature / simplicity of sharing at the same time, respondents argue that the value of a Facebook like is rather limiting in so that it tells us how much attention a certain communications piece has gathered and not much more - essentially it depends on what the objective of the campaign is and the logic of the social media platform a brand has presence on. According to one respondent, Twitter yields more qualitative and thus valuable data than

Facebook, as there people actually want to discuss with you and have something to say, which makes it more valuable than a Facebook like. When it comes to sharing mechanisms embedded in the message, respondents, nearly in a consensus, stress the importance of making a message as easily shared as possible. This is not to say that consumers would not find ways of spreading a message with exceptional content and valuable social object. However, it is these mechanics which increase the likelihood the message viewer will pass it along. In simplest terms it could be a share button embedded in the seeded video, advergame or any other form of digital marketing. Another blatant example would be that of the (facebook) like feature which enables the easy message spread. Once an item has been liked it will appear on ones Facebook wall and thus become visible to that persons all Facebook connections. The rule to be abided is the easier the sharing, the better besides providing an easy and stimulating way for consumers to share content, these mechanics also serve the purpose of tracking tools for marketers. As explained in the beginning, any form of marketing communications can become viral if the viewers start spreading word-of-mouth in both offline and online and environments. Naturally, the online environment provides grounds for faster and further spreading and it is hence important to make digital extensions of offline campaigns if we want them to go viral. This can be done in two ways: either simply making the exact same content shown in television adverts available online, or making a continuation of the campaign in the online environment. Some forms of continuations of campaigns in the online environment could include uncensored, uncut and extended versions of videoclips, which according to some of the respondents generate less interest nowadays as opposed to several years ago; otherwise, we can make interactive versions online and one of the biggest success stories of this would without a doubt be the Old Spice campaign (The Man Your Man Could Smell Like20) whereby the same character from the TV advert was answering questions of viewers in a series of videos created afterwards.

20

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=owGykVbfgUE

Is It Only About The Buzz? The second major question of this research was regarding the role viral marketing plays within the integrated marketing communications. The respondents were asked questions based on the IMC framework created by Schultz et.al 1994 which outlines four different possible effects the various IMC tools can create. These range from behavior (purchasing, signing-up etc.) to attitudes towards the brand, being on the other end of that continuum. In a way the question seemed to be redundant as viral marketing is somewhat perceived as synonymous with creating short term PR effects, the buzz, the awareness, which are then later built on by other IMC tools. Therefore the question rather morphed into: can viral marketing do anything more than just create buzz? Most of the respondents believe that it can in spite of the fact that they only used it exactly for the purpose of creating buzz. Namely, they elaborate how the strength of viral marketing lies in its capacity to swiftly raise awareness of a certain object in question or to generate sales, sign-ups etc. In the words of one respondent: viral marketing is more about some idea spreading quite fastso I think the strength in it is that something goes from one person to many, quickly. At the same time, they do not disqualify the possibility of viral marketing being engaged as a tool to foster the feelings of loyalty towards a brand, as well as creating a positive image of the brand in the public. If we go back to the different types of content the respondents outlined as those that could increase the likelihood of a viral outbreak, we can perhaps infer that the different marketing objectives can be reached by viral marketing by incorporating different types of content in the message (entertainment, interactivity and positive messages). If the message contains entertaining content that is original (Will It Blend 21 ), it has a chance to become viral and result in immediate increase in awareness and sales. That particular campaign contained the element of interactivity as well in a way that youtube.com viewers comments would be scouted for new ideas on what to blend in the next video. If, however the message is positive in nature, as described above (either being inspiring or showcasing brand transparency), then it has the potential to reinforce the positive image of the brand (The Fun Theory: The Piano Stairs). When it comes to Volkswagens BlueMotion Technologies environmental responsibility is
21

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lAl28d6tbko

incorporated in the product itself, as these technologies are concerned with better environmental performance of Volkswagens automobiles. The campaign done for it thus inevitably was a PR effort as well. Perhaps it is this fusion of advertising and PR, packaged in a digital communications piece, which opens up possibilities for virality which does not only serve short-term marketing objectives, but is rather capable reinforcing the positive brand image and thus building brand equity. One word that was stressed when it comes to viral marketing doing more than just creating buzz was integration. Viral marketing which does more than just buzz is rarely seen and we can best capitalize on it if it works synergistically with other IMC tools. Most of the repondents expressed that virality should not be an end but rather a means to an end in other words, they wanted to stress that creating the buzz is something which later or simultaneously needs to be capitalized on, with another marketing communications effort, as virality itself is just generated attention. The success of a campaign depends on the goals set for the entire IMC campaign. The isolation of the viral effect is hardly possible. Any kind of feedback is limited to tracking mechanisms embedded into digital pieces created by and contained on a brands fan page or website. The tracking is limited in some platforms (youtube.com) and even in those where it is not, the data that we have at our hands if only quantitative (how many shares, what is the reach, the dissemination rate etc.) It is also this limitation of virals feedback to quantitative data which constrains marketers from associating other IMC objectives than just awareness to their viral efforts. Should future mechanisms allow us to get a deeper understanding about the act of sharing on behalf of consumers, the definition of VM might change. When evaluating successfulness of a campaign at its end, one should go back to goals set prior to its launch this research will hopefully direct marketers as to what kinds of goals to associate to their viral efforts as well as which types of content and mechanics to choose in relation to those goals. Even though respondents elaborated on techniques they use in order to create the viral outbreak of a marketing communications piece such as creating the social object and putting the viral mechanics in place, they say how they can never be sure whether it will be happen or not. The fact is that internet is flooded with attempts at viral marketing most of which end up being failures. Once a campaign with the intent to go viral has been launched, it is possible to stimulate it to some degree, if the initial results prove to be disappointing. This however, according to the respondents, is limited to the technical aspect of the campaign, namely the viral mechanics; the content itself can be only slightly modified, and even so, only

peripheral elements, not the quintessence for instance, if it is a social advergame with a prize to be won, we can increase the potential gains. If however the core idea was wrong from the beginning, the campaign will not become viral and attempts to modify it after its launch will prove to be futile. When asked if they had to or how they would counteract a negative piece that went viral about their brand, they nominate the basic PR approach of damage control to be employed. As for isolating certain audiences more prone to participating in viral marketing, all respondents suggested tech-savvy, younger audiences, either teenagers or young adults, up to the age of 35. None of them disqualified the possibility of creating this kind of campaign for the elderly, however none of them have done it. The particular group of people they did show interest in are those who have the high social networking potential, a dominant voice in the digital realm and a propensity to share. Bloggers were described as the most common target to be used as seeds of a campaign, motivated by various forms of incentivizing.

DISCUSSION
Most researchers of the topic of viral marketing to date have defined it as a phenomenon outside of the realm of advertising and something that is for the most part or in its entirety out of advertisers control (Phelps et.al 2004; De Bruyn and Lilien, 2004; Rosen, 2000). This research however shows that advertisers consider it to be a form of advertising. In fact any form of advertising can be viral, if the word-of-mouth communications start in both offline and online worlds. On top of that, there are a few forms which are purely viral, such as advergames and e-mail campaigns. Virality or word-of-mouth, is the desired effect and the reason why campaigns that elicit it are pegged as viral campaigns. Through content creation, choice of platforms and other considerations, advertisers try to ensure that virality happens they do admit that, even though viral marketing is much better understood nowadays, than 5 years ago, it is still quite hard to state with certainty whether a campaign will go viral or not. This, they argue, is partially due to quickly changing consumer behavior in online environments. These research findings are along the lines of those by Kaikati and Kaikati (2004) and Swanepoel et.al 2004 when it comes the dilemma whether incentivizing efluentials (Cakim, 2006) makes this form of marketing communications stealth marketing. Nearly unanimously

have the respondents explained how incentivizing is part of the process of planning virality naturally, it is impossible and wrong to incentivize each member of the desired audience, hence giving incentives to efluentials only increases the chances of a campaign going viral, it does not ensure it for virality to happen, all other critical success factors, elaborated above, would have to fall in place, hence, even with incentivizing, virality is not within control of advertisers, but rather the degree of uncertainty is reduced. Cruz and Fill (2008) develop of typology of viral marketing forms, these being: video, picture, text and advergame. This research renders any kind of such typologies redundant as, in the literature review, we have seen that some forms could hardly be categorized as either videos or advergames and essentially it is not really important that they are. When asked which of these forms they believe would work best, the respondents assert that it is the wrong way to go about devising a viral campaign. The rudimentary consideration is an idea that satisfies the social object consideration and is of one the three mentioned types of content that are likely to be passed on. One respondent describes this by saying that five years ago technological considerations would have gotten much more attention than nowadays since these mechanics are quite developed by now, marketers can focus all of their attention on the content itself. The example which illustrates this is that of the tt Drinkero campaign, designed to raise awareness and induce trial of the new beverage in the Finnish market. It was launched both online and offline, however it is not the technical aspects of the campaign launch which are to be attributed for the massive success, but rather the content which is in line with the entertainment value content, as described above.

MANAGERIAL IMPLICATIONS
When creating a campaign with the ambition for it to go viral, marketers should have a clearly defined role for it within their broader IMC contexts. As shown above, virality will best contribute to raising awareness of a particular object, stimulating immediate actions on behalf of consumers such as purchasing, sign-ups etc. however, if devised properly, it could reinforce the positive image of the brand, leaving longer lasting impressions, as well as induce users to spend longer periods of time interacting with the brand. It is important to note that achieving the viral effect is rather a means to an end, and not the actual goal itself. When it is integrated with other marketing communications approaches, viral marketing

could prove to be a rather powerful tool, as none other has the capacity to spread a message as far or as fast. The important question to ask oneself though, before creating a campaign, is: what do we do with virality once we have it? What happens next? The next important question is what the actual campaign will be. It is necessary to understand the target audience as thoroughly as possible, which essentially is not anything new or groundbreaking, but rather the way marketing communications have functioned since the conception. The one step further we need to go in the case of communications we desire to go viral is a) to understand why it would be important for the sharers to share i.e. include your message in their personal IMC and b) does this message have the potential to generate interaction between the sharer and the recipient at any degree. When we look at marketing communications message perpetuators, and think of them as either the dominant voices, influentials, such as bloggers, on one hand, or everybody else in the targeted audience on the other, the motivation to pass the message along can either be an incentive or the social object within it. We can incentivize influentials, but not all other members of the target audience. If we look at influentials who pass the message along pro bono, and try to understand their motivations, we will probably have an answer as to why would anyone pass a message along. This is because, ones personal communications function in a similar way ones blog does through the content of our Facebook wall we express our opinions, create basis for interaction with members of our social networks and construct our digital identities. If we understand what the members of our target audiences consider to be relevant and worth interacting over, we will have the messages content. The content, whether it is entertaining, interactive, positive or a combination of these types, needs to also abide all rules for brand representativeness. It is not that hard to get everyones attention once, with content that is over-the-top; it is hard to get the right kind of attention and to embed brand elements wisely. Finally, making this content as sharable as possible will increase the likelihood of it being shared in the end. The viral mechanics need to be the last consideration in this planning process, however a critical one, because with the advertising clutter in the digital environment, including that which has the ambition of going viral, we should assume that users will not invest the additional effort to spread the message only because of the social object quality of it is good and the content is something extraordinary. Therefore, it is important to make it as easy as possible for them share.

LIMITATIONS AND FUTURE RESEARCH

The sample of ten respondents was big enough to make inferences presented above with high degree of certainty. However, a differentiation emerged between the views of two groups of interviewees: advertisers and marketers from companies. Most respondents (8 out of 10) were in fact advertising agencies executives or planners and thus the findings of this research lean more towards the thinking they have. It was mostly marketers from companies who discussed the importance of fusion between advertising and PR when creating a viral campaign, and the possible impact such a campaign could create. Perhaps, a research could be done that specifically focuses on one or the other group. Another topic that could be dealt with in more detail is the content of messages and relevance thereof from the perspective of member of target audiences. In other words, how relevant would content have to be for a person to perpetuate the marketing message and what are other factors that interfere with this decision. When it comes to interactivity as a feature on the rise among many viral campaigns, it would be interesting to further research what are all forms of interactivity that campaigns created so far incorporated. We can see some examples of substantial interactivity, such as in alternate reality games, where the target audience members spend significant amounts of time participating in this game and thus with the brand it would be interesting to see how these elaborate and long-lasting interactions affect brand perception and feelings of loyalty in consumers.

REFERENCES
Allsop, D.T., Basset, B.R. and Hoskins, J.A. (2007), Word of mouth research: principles and applications, Journal of Advertising Research, Vol. 47 No. 4, pp.398-411 Briggs, C. (2009), BlendTec, Will It Blend?: Viral video case study, SociaLens SL-0001, January 2009 Brown, J.J and Reingen, P.H. (1987), Social ties and word-of-mouth referral behavior, Journal of Consumer Research, Vol.14, December Brown, M., Bhadury, R. and Pope, N. (2010) The impact of comedic violence on viral advertising effectiveness, Journal of Avertising: Spring 2010; 39, 1; ABI/INFORM Global, pg.49 Cakim, I. (2006), Online opinion leaders: a predictive guide for viral marketing campaigns, in Kirby, J. and Marsden, P. (Eds), Connected Marketing: the Viral, Buzz and Word-ofmouth Revolution, Butterworth-Heinemann, Oxford, pp. 107-18. Cruz, D. and Fill C. (2008), Evaluating viral marketing: isolating the key criteria, Emerald Insight, Marketing intelligence and planning, Vol. 26, No. 7, 2008, pp. 743-758 De Bruyn, Arnaud and Gary L. Lilien (2004), "A Multi-Stage Model of Word of Mouth Through Electronic Referrals," eBusiness Research Center Working Paper, February. Eckler, P. and Bolls P. (2011), Spreading the Virus: Emotional Tone of Viral Advertising and Its Effect on Forwarding Intentions and Attitudes, Journal of Interactive Advertising, Vol.11, No.2, Spring 2011 Engel, James E., Roger D. Blackwell, and Robert J. Kegerreis (1969), "How Information is Used to Adopt an Innovation," Journal of Advertising Research, 9 (December), 3-8. Ferguson, R. (2008), Word of mouth and viral marketing: taking the temperature of the hottest trends in marketing, Journal of Consumer Marketing, Vol. 25 No. 3, pp. 179-82, ISSN 0736-3761. Goldenberg, J., Libai, B. and Muller, E. (2001), Talk the network: a complex systems look at the underlying process of word-of-mouth, Marketing Letters, Vol.12, No.3, pp.211-23 Granitz, N.A and Ward, J.C. (1996), Virtual community: A sociological analysis, advances in consumer research, Vol.23, pp.161-166 Granovetter, M.S. (1973), The strength of weak ties, American Journal of Sociology, 79 (May), pp. 1360-1380 Helm, S. (2000), Viral marketing: establishing customer relationship by word-of-mouse, Electronic Markets, Vol. 10, No.3, pp.158-61 Juvertson, S. (2000), What is viral marketing?, Retrieved June 8th, 2011 from: www.dfj.com/cgibin/artman/publish/printer_steve_may00.shtml

Juvertson, S. and Draper, T. (1997), Viral Marketing, Draper Fisher Juvertson website, retrieved June 6h, 2011 from: http://www.dfj.com/news/article_26.shtml Kaikati, Andrew M. and Jack G. Kaikati (2004), "Stealth Marketing: How to Reach Consumers Surreptitiously," California Management Review, 46 (4), 6-22. Klopper, HB. (2001), Viral marketing: A powerful, but dangerous tool? Proceedings of the 3rd annual conference on the World Wide Web Krishnamurthy, S. (2001), Person-to-person marketing: the emergence of the new consumer web, Retrieved June 6th, 2011, from: http://faculty.washington.edu/sandeep/d/p2pqjec.pdf Montgomery, Alan L. (2001), "Applying Quantitative Marketing Techniques to the Internet," Interfaces, 31 (2), 90-108. Phelps, Joseph E., Regina Lewis, Lynne Mobilio, David Perry, and Niranjan Raman (2004), "Viral Marketing or Electronic Word-of-Mouth Advertising: Examining Consumer Responses and Motivations to Pass Along Email", Journal of Advertising Research, 44 (4), 333348. Porter, L. and Golan, G.J. (2006), From subservient chickens to brawny men: a comparison of viral advertising to television advertising, Journal of Interactive Advertising, Vol.6, No.2, pp.30-8 Richins, M. L. (1984), "Word of Mouth Communication as Negative Information," in Advances in Consumer Research, Vol. 11, Thomas C. Kinnear, ed. Ann Arbor, MI: Association for Consumer Research, 697-702. Scott, D.M. (2010), The New Rules of Marketing and PR: how to use social media, blogs, news releases, online video and viral marketing to reach buyers directly, Jon Wiley and Sons Seth Godins Blog, The mechanics of word-of-mouth (2007), Retrieved on June 6th, 2011 from: http://sethgodin.typepad.com/seths_blog/2007/04/the_mechanics_o.html Silverman, G. (2001). The secrets of word-of-mouth marketing: how to trigger exponential sales through runway word-of-mouth New York: AMACOM Swanepoel, C., Lye, A. and Rugimbana, R. (2009), Virally inspired: a review of the theory of viral stealth marketing, Australasian Marketing Journal, May 2009; 17, 1; ABI/INFORM Global, pg.9 Thomas, G.M. (2004), Building the buzz in the hive mind, Journal of Consumer Behavior, Vol.4, No.1, pp.64-72 Watts, D. and Peretti, J. (2007), Viral Marketing for the real world, Harvard Business Review, May 2007, pp.22-23 Wilson, Ralph F. (2000), "The Six Simple Principles of Viral Marketing," Retrieved June 6th, 2011, from: http://www.wilsonweb.com/wmt5/viral-principles.htm

Wind, J. and Mahajan V. (2001), Digital Marketing: Global strategies from the worlds leading experts New York: Jon Wiley and Sons

APPENDIX
The questionnaire: GENERAL
1. How do you define viral marketing? 2. Is viral marketing part of your integrated marketing communications strategy? (how so, please elaborate) (alternatively, if a marketing agency: when you are commissioned to design a VM campaign is it ever part of IMC or a single independent campaign) 3. What kinds of viral marketing campaigns did you execute? a. audience b. campaign form (e-mail, video, adver game, other) c. platform / method (e-mail sent to whom? video seeded where initially? etc.)

OBJECTIVES & MEASUREMENT

4. As for viral campaigns/virality of IMC and following IMC effects: i. transactions (purchasing, leasing, registering/signing-up etc.) ii. partial transactions (website visits, calls, information gathering w/out making a transaction etc.) iii. affiliations/relationship with the brand iv. feelings/attitudes towards the brand - Which effects did you measure for your campaign (and in relation to virality i.e. isolated effects of virality within IMC)? Why? How? o did you have measurable behaviors set in advance as objectives for the viral element in the IMC (if answer: virality just happened, wasnt planned, then: what element in the campaign do you believe created this?) - Generally speaking, to which end of that continuum does VM/virality of a campaign contribute most? o (alternatively, should VM be used for getting consumers to engage in transactions or to create attitudinal shifts? For which is it better? Why?) 5. When it comes to planning virality: a. did you have an embedded call to action with a measurable response rate? b. besides this, is there any other way to plan, stimulate and control virality? How? c. When it comes to unfavorable virality is it possible to offset it? How? 6. What kind of financial metrics can be done in relation to virality?

ISOLATING KEY SUCCESS FACTORS

7. Do you believe VM works better for certain a. audiences (demographic/psychographic). Which? b. in certain forms (seeded videos, e-mail campaigns, advergames, other). Why?

8. Content-wise what elements should VM campaigns contain in order to ensure spread of the message? a. humor b. violence c. sexuality d. shock-value e. other? 9. How important are efluentials in spreading the viral message? a. how did you engage them? b. does it include financial incentives sometimes? c. how relevant are bloggers for message spread? 10. How important is interactivity in VM? a. What forms of interactivity?