Google+ is a relatively new social platform developed by Google, and was publicly launched in 2011. The service was created to compete against established social media but in my opinion, has not proven to be unique enough to compel people to engage on a regular basis.
Google+ is a relatively new social platform developed by Google, and was
publicly launched in 2011. The service was created to compete against
established social media but in my opinion, has not proven to be unique enough
to compel people to engage on a regular basis.
In order to become successful, I think that Google should reassess what it wants
Google+ to perform. Google+ should focus on its primarily on its core
competencies such as Circles, Hangout and Photos; services that have proven
to be used and implemented by users actively. Google+ should not get
automatically subscribed to if a person uses any other Google service, as this
dilutes the impact of the brand drastically.
I referred to the following links and have incorporated them in my research:
Please watch this video by Wall Street Journal titled: Google+ vs Facebook: It's No Contest
The video describes Google+ as a ‘Ghost Town’. Even with millions of users being added, most
people are not actively engaged in it, as they are on Facebook.
It can be seen at: http://on.wsj.com/LC4Km1
DM654: Strategic Technology - Individual Assignment #2 (Failed ST)
Project By Ali Akbar Sahiwala
Google+ had come under strong
criticism at the time of its launch
for prohibiting the use of
pseudonyms or nicknames,
which caused privacy and
conﬁdentiality concerns. The
decision has since been reversed.
Nonetheless, people are often
skeptical of Google’s privacy
policies as it tracks user data for
its own beneﬁt.
Barriers to Entry Created
Google+ enhanced products are
vast, including YouTube and
Gmail (and totally 120 Google+
integrations so far); while signed
up with Google+, Google counts
any usage of these components
as engagement with Google+. No
other competitor can match such
capabilities or offer such a
Google never articulated how or if
it intends to make money off its
social network. Analysts describe
their goal is to prevent migration
of Internet users to Facebook and
other social networks, improve its
core search advertising business
and gain new income streams. To
date, it appears that the main
ﬁnancial goal of Google+ is to
obtain personal data about users
to better target ads to them
across all of Google.
While Google+ does not feature
any ads now, analysts determine
attracting major brands could be
the ﬁrst step to an important,
high-margin revenue source. In
order to do that, Google+ must
entice people to engage with it
actively, something it has not yet
succeeded in performing.
Google+ focused initially on
catering to unhappy Facebook
users who held privacy concerns.
Privacy concerns are still
prevalent however, as Google+
plans to use proﬁle names and
photos when a person shares
RJ Metrics found ‘active’ users on
Google+ took an average of 12
days between each post and 30%
of people who visit Google+ post
once and then never return again.
During the launch of Google+,
businesses tried to make brand
pages but Google asked brands
to stop creating proﬁles;.This
caused controversy and forced
Google to accelerate plans for
brands. The fact that Google+
was launched years after
Facebook, following several failed
attempts to make social media
platforms over the years also put
it at a big disadvantage.
While Google+ has some original
features including Hangouts,
analysts and some consumers
say the distinction is not enough
to lure Facebook members away
and persuade them to build a
network of contacts from scratch
Google+ is responsible for merely
2% of social shares, e-commerce
and media/publishing as of Q2
(April through June) of 2013.
These prove the service has had
a very low ability to tap into the
larger market and displace other
competitors and the time spent
on other platforms.
Google used its various products
to merge with Google+,
transforming it from a platform
into Google’s “identity service”, as
described by chairman Eric
Schmidt. I believe this dilutes
their brand as a social media
platform and makes it confusing.
Users like myself, consider it as
an add-on that we do not
necessarily interact with as we
use other Google products.
Google+ integrates a range of
features from across Google to
its users in addition to a number
of features like Circle, Hangouts,
Huddle, Sparks, etc. However, this
can be reﬁned as it needs to pull
together all of its separate
services in a cohesive way, with
every service thoroughly
Fosdick Curve Measurement
In my opinion, Google+ appears
to be at its’ peak adoption phase
as the number of active users
grew to 300 million users. Earlier
in 2013, Google+ became the
second biggest social media
platform by surpassing Twitter.
There is an urgent need for
Google to come up with new
technologies to make it further
innovative, or else it may end up
like a commodity.
Roland Smart, VP of marketing
for Involver, a social media
marketing ﬁrm, noted that Google
has taken a reactive rather than
proactive stand; after making
strong apps, they have tried to
get a social fabric to ﬁt between.
Google has a very strong line-up
of products, but this will not
necessarily make Google+ a
more popular platform to use.
Google announced in Fall 2012
that its social networking site
was home to 400 million
members with more than 100
million active monthly users.
Despite these numbers, many
people are apparently continuing
to ignore Google+. Google has
been unable to win over brands
and businesses that have instead
turned to connect with customers
on competing social media sites.
Some companies complain that
Google+ has a highly restrictive
canvas. Its proﬁle pages are more
limited than on Facebook or
Twitter because they don't
support iFrame, a Web standard
that allows multiple Web pages to
be embedded within a main page.
The User Interface is quite
complicated for average social
users; with many options to
choose from and different
features to simply post up
information, the interface is
deemed highly unintuitive and
needs time and effort to
understand and use.
Trafﬁc dropped drastically after
Google+ was initially launched to
the public as it doesn't offer
additional services that other
social media platforms lack.
Google+ began providing some
features, which helped it become
an alternative but competitors
began adding similar features,
causing Google+ gradually to
lose strong appeal.
Steve Yegge, a Google engineer
had posted in a rant that
“Google+ is a knee-jerk reaction, a
study in short-term thinking,
predicated on the incorrect notion
that Facebook is successful
because they built a great
product”. He explained that the
premise of Google+ is flawed as
that they are trying to deliver
another social media platform
which seems like a late move- not
one that is original.
Engagement & Experience
LinkedIn is beating Google+ for
shared content with a 3% share,
meaning Google+ users share
even less than users of a website
that is mostly used for business
networking. Third party reports
indicate public posts on Google+
are very low and weak user
engagement. Other ﬁndings
indicate non-mobile visitors to
Google+ spent on average three
minutes on the network a month,
between Sep ‘12 to Jan ’13.
There are a couple more criteria
that I omitted, as listed below:
Enablement & Pain Resolution,
Here is a list of reasons why I think Google+ is a failed service currently on the market: