Last week, I traveled to Chicago for the Forrester Consumer Forum. While the content is always interesting and engaging, I felt like something was missing.

Then I realized what it was: metrics.

As a researcher, I thrive on numbers and metrics. Yes, it’s valuable for me to hear how Pizza Hut is evolving its brand, how Best Buy is better serving its customers, and how Hilton is providing a consistent experience across its brands. But it’s more valuable for me to know that through its OnQ project, Hilton was able to garner a 360 degree view of its customers, which in turn increased its cross-sell revenue 50% from 2006 to 2007.

I am not alone in my love of metrics. What marketers want now more than ever is proof that their invested dollars are achieving business goals. They need proof that social-networking efforts are not just creating thousands of fans on Facebook, but that these fans are actually advocating the brand or purchasing product.

Analytics are essential in the planning and development of all marketing initiatives, but marketers must think through how these metrics apply to the overarching business objectives. According to one Forrester analyst, companies too often measure the success of an initiative only within the platform selected for the initiative. For example, if the company runs a campaign driving people to become Facebook fans, success is measured by the number of fans instead of a positive lift in brand awareness or an increase in sales. Marketers continue to evaluate emerging media. They should always attempt to map these programs back to tangible and measureable business goals. The ultimate goal is a holistic metric that reflects the intricacies of today’s digital world.

How is your organization measuring the success of your marketing initiatives?

In a moment of weakness, I volunteered to sit on the local school PTA board.

With an intro like that, this blog can go so many different directions, right?  Here’s where I’m going: we all live in the interactive space 24/7/365, but not everyone is dedicated to checking Facebook religiously.

This brings me back to the PTA.  

You would assume that this group would find the value in a social networking solution. Granted, I was suggesting Ning, a private social network. But my recommendation didn’t go over well even though I set it up and taught folks how to use it. For some reason, this group believes a flurry of reply-all e-mails among 25 people is a better communications solution than posting a message in one place, one time. 

Mindboggling, but I think I found the reason for this madness in Forrester’s recent report, The State of Consumers and Technology: Benchmark 2009.

According to Forrester’s research, younger folks (those under 40) still remain the biggest users and contributors to social networking sites. More than a quarter of young singles, couples and families consider their role with social networks to be what Forrester terms “creators.” In addition, one out of every five is a “critic,” offering up reviews and recommendations.

In contrast, social networkers over 40 tend to fall into the “spectator” group. Nearly a quarter identify themselves as “joiners,” meaning they may visit social networking sites and even maintain a profile, but they don’t actively create new content. Their level of participation on the spectrum of social network usage pales in comparison to the under-40 crowd.

So scroll back to the second paragraph, where I confidently stated, “We all live in the interactive space 24/7/365.” Let me amend that.

The reality is that people live in the interactive space their way. For some, social sites like Facebook are still places to visit and observe, but not completely participate. Basic digital tools like e-mail chains, so passé for us Facebook/Twitter/Ning-leaning netizens, are primary communications tools for others — including my new PTA friends, many of whom are over 40 (sorry ladies).

My PTA experience has reminded me of the need to take the ultimate “consumer” into consideration before selecting a communications vehicle. Sometimes, old school may be the smarter option, in spite of your affinity for new school thinking.

A recent post from my colleague made me think about the power of face-to-face meetings. I’ve spent a lot of time talking to customers. In research, you do qualitative projects like focus groups, and you do quantitative projects like polls. But you rarely get into a car and drive out to the country, where farmers are cutting hay and ranchers sell calves to each other at the local IHOP. As a point of disclosure, I am a city person. The prospect of the “country” requires some purchases, including Sudafed for enhanced allergies and Dramamine for all the senseless driving around since there are no street signs in the country. (Thank goodness there was a pink tractor that could be used as a landmark!)

But there’s a lot to learn out there. If you look at the U.S. adult population in MRI, nearly a third, or 60+ million people, live in C & D (mostly rural) size counties. That means that if you are a retailer, a third of your customers live in a mostly rural environment. And when I say rural here, I mean really rural — cows, horses, red barns and silos. People shop differently in these areas. People relate to each other differently.

So how do you learn more about folks in outlying areas? The old-fashioned way: you sit down and listen over a meal. These people have a lot to say: most of these folks have never been listened to by any national brand in a meaningful way. You get insights you would never learn in a focus group in one of 10 major cities in the country. Or in a 1,000 complete quantitative survey.

You know what else you get from these customers? Loyalty and advocacy. In a small community, people talk. I know that the 10 people we spoke with that morning in a small country town in Texas will all tell at least one person about the group and how it made them feel. I would bet they tell more people about the group because the president of the company rolled out for this group and really listened to them. This particular face-to-face dialogue is a rare opportunity in my line of work. It gives new meaning to the notion of qualitative research.