Which of the London 2012 sponsors won the ‘Socialympics’? [infographic]

Olympic finale: BT ad tells London to 'take a bow'Social media consultancy Sociagility has published a report on the comparative social media performance of the 25 main London 2012 Olympics sponsors that has found those that performed best used social to focus on engagement not just brand awareness.

Among the key findings were that there was a significant number of brands did not appear to engage with social media at all – or only sporadically. While for some, it appeared that social media activation was undertaken in isolation or as an afterthought – or as merely an amplifier for advertising campaigns.

Given the emphasis placed on the “social Olympics” that is hugely surprising and a missed opportunity for those brands that took this approach. It serves as a reminder that some brands still don’t get social media.

The study found that some brands, including BMW, Cadbury, Cisco and P&G, benefited from starting early while others, like Adidas, British Airways, BT, Coca-Cola, EDF and Visa, concentrated their efforts later on when Olympics fever was at a peak.

While it was the “social Olympics” few campaigns centred in ‘social’ or had social fully integrated.

Some smaller brands proved themselves to be more agile and outperformed larger ones on the Sociagility rankings by adopting what appeared to be a more proactive policy of engaging in real social dialogue.

However, for non-sponsors ambush strategies did not appear to generate impact in social media sufficient to compete with sponsors.

Sociagility co-founder Tony Burgess-Webb said: “There is clearly a lot of learning to be done by brands. For some brands this was indeed a ‘socialympics’ – as it was for so many ordinary people. Other brands never left the starting blocks.” (Click to expand graphic).

A summary report and the full dataset can be downloaded from http://www.sociagility.com/socialympics.

  • http://www.TronvigGroup.com James Heaton

    This makes me curious about the connection between total money spent and the delivered impact in each case. How does the spend and specific tactical choices affect the outcome? Specifically, is there a strong correlation between gross expenditure and ultimate effectiveness? Or is itl (when we are operating at these spend levels) just a matter of who pours more cash Into the till?

  • Pingback: Which of the London 2012 sponsors won the 'Socialympics'? | The … | London 2012()

  • http://www.twitter.com/swemeatballs78 Pras Murukesvan

    Quite surprised that Nike didn’t generate any impact according to this report. Thought they did quite well with the release of the ‘Find your greatness’ ad which was well received from the majority of marketing media channels and featured quite frequently on my social media timelines.

    In saying that not hugely surprised that according the above, quite a number of campaigns weren’t fully centred in social or had ‘social’ integrated – just releasing a video clip on youtube, adding a hashtag or QR code to tv/poster campaign or even tweeting about your products is enough.

  • http://www.twitter.com/swemeatballs78 Pras Murukesvan

    *meant ISN’T enough even.