Lock n Key of Social Search is owned by Google

Amit Kumar, Managing Director, IdiscoverIndia.com
Search as we all know today is synonymous with Google. The prime motivator for search is information -- or we can say ‘pertinent information’ -- users want this quick and invariably trust the search engine such as Google to find this for them.

Recently, there has been enormous hue and cry about the ensuing role of Social Search and how it possibly could be the next big thing. To understand what Social Search is capable of doing and in which form, it is important that we first understand the term Social Search and its delivering platforms and then reach a conclusion on who can best leverage it.

As we are all aware of what ‘Search’ means, for greater general interest let’s define Social Search:

“Social Search is a methodology that determines how pertinent the search results are based on various socially relevant interactions or contributions of users. The influencing factors could be something like shared bookmarks, website links, user votes, user comments, social bookmarking, etc.”

So, if you look at the above definition it becomes pretty obvious that Social Search is already an existing subset of General Search, which in-turn is largely influenced by Google. So let’s not pose our question as Social Search vs. General Search, as they are practically the same and instead let’s consider how the likes of Twitters and Facebooks on earth as the delivering platforms of Social Search, will differ from Google and likes? Also can these Social Platforms be the next big thing for Search?

Personally, I do not agree to the notion of Social Search (through another player like say a Twitter or Facebook) becoming as big as Google. I think there is a huge potential and validation of social acceptance for any business or individual and if that can come out in the form of Social Search, I am all for it. However, in the current scenario there is no other player poised to take advantage of influencing search through social relevance, the way Google is.

Let’s consider the differences between ‘Search’ as we know on Google and ‘Social Search’ through others:

Nature of Search

Whereas generic search engines search for information and classify their results based on the relevancy of information, the social search is primarily an aggregator of general views of public sample (and we can discount for how information is collected, processed and displayed in both the cases). People do not necessarily seek validation from search engines per se to get all sorts of information. They just seek choices and in turn form their own opinions based on their interaction (both present and past, online and offline).

True to its characteristic, search is such that in most cases it’s about finding and allowing the user to make his or her own opinion, in the process being assisted but not necessarily been told. If you notice, today as internet users are getting savvy, people are using longer search phrases and even digging deeper into search results to get to their answers.

The nature of search is such that most people (some cases can be exception to this as the differences some vertical searches bring about are tangible) do not want a search engine A for advice on health and search engine B for advice on travel, etc. People do that when they have already formed their loyalty which they do with various brands anyhow.

Composition of the Search itself

Would a search on social network be different than a General Search? I think it would. We go to General Search to look for answers or choices whereas we come to Social Search for validations.

For example, if someone was looking to travel to India, her first task would be to get more information pertaining to travel to India and invariably she would look up Google to search. At this point she is not necessarily looking at social acceptance of Travel to India. However, the same person, once she has narrowed down her choices and plan, may or may not seek any form of validation. And this validation comes through many forms, both online and offline and not necessarily through social search only.

Hence, I would be of the opinion that the composition of Social Search is largely post- experience or purchase, whereas the General Search is largely pre-purchase or pre-experience.

Volume and Scale of Search

I think one of the biggest differences between the available Social Search (read Social Search networks) and General Search (pure play Search Engines) is the reach and volume of searches taking place on General Search engines vs. any of its Social Search counterparts. Moreover, add to this the fact that most of the Social Search is fragmented and confined to its own active users.

With Google looking in face of about 80 per cent of the total search market, and none of the social networks having figured out a way to monetize, it remains an uphill task for others to play catch up.

Collection of Search

One of the major differences in the two searches is Long Tail. It is widely accepted that the Long Tail concept which indicates high number of unique searches carried out by users but not searched frequently, clearly tilts the scale in favour of General Search. As social search might rely on users filling in searches they would be in fairly disadvantageous position when compared to the automatic crawlers of General Search indexing millions of websites.

Another aspect is that there is very little difference in collection points of the two searches. On the one hand the General Search uses large strands of behavioural search combined with small subset of user-specific search, the Social Search combines large set of data (provided its scaled to that extent) specific to the user but with very limited behavioural data across segments.

This largely impacts the search result, as there could never be more people voluntarily consenting to a particular form or vote than an automated result based on algorithm.

Impact and Measurement

I think if we just look at purely from an impact point of view, General Search with its consolidated reach and readiness is far more impactful in creating awareness than say a Social Search. Having said that I think Social Search is very impactful in creating influence or a validation or vote of confidence or in more cases in creating even a negative influence. On a purely measurement basis, General Search is far more measurable and it’s ROI (return on investment) is clearly trackable as compared to Social Search.

Now that differences between the two searches in question have been called out, one can pretty much say without dismissing others that “Google is as much a Social Search engine as anything else out there”. There is very little left out on the plate for others to make a business of this. Google with its enormous reach that translates into user data (both personally identifiable information and behavioural), social networking website, transactional gateway, email and perhaps largest ad-network, fortunately or unfortunately, is poised very strongly and pretty much owns “the lock and the key” to Social Search.