Two Social Media Camps in the Enterprise

I amazes me how much of my time is spent these days talking with people who represent some of the world's largest companies. This is really different for me, but it is where this social media journey has taken me.

I am convinced that for most large companies in many huge categories, the issue is no longer whether or not social media should be used. That genie is out of the bottle. If they want to engage a next generation that is coming into the marketplace and filling corporate seats, they must use it. What little analytics there indicate stupendous growth rates and this means that social media can no longer be disdained or dismissed.

The stress point has now moved to how the enterprise will use social media and I hear a lot about this these days. In nearly every company I talk with, I hear about those who understand that social media is something new and different from traditional marketing. It is not about putting messages into foreheads. It is about the enormous wisdom and efficiency to be gained simply by having conversations with customers, prospects, employees and partners. Clearly I am a champion of this camp.

But in my conversations with people who will be remembered as early pioneers of the new path, there is muttering and trepidation of another camp, one that is often being pushed by the traditional marketing people who see social media simply as another channel to push out brand awareness and product-related messages. It is another way to have the corporation talk about the corporation rather than listen to customer concerns, complaints or even compliments. This camp believes that early days of wide-eyed dreamers like me have passed and now that social media is swimming in the mainstream. It should be treated as mainstream marketing treats everything, a mechanism for the one-way pushing of message.

My Camp #1 friends are very concerned that those efforts by members of their enterprise will ruin it; will take social media and bend and distort it and thus ruin it for the rest of us. If Company XX marketing department produces smarmy social media programs, it will damage the credibility of Company XYZ's social media champions.

I have to admit, there is that danger. But I don't think it will come out that way. I don't think that someone who uses the new tools the way I happen to think they should be used will have their reputation suffer,  Let me tell you why.

So far, nearly every deceptive social media attempt has failed. Real people come to blogs and social media in search of real people they connect to. They are looking for content which is useful or interesting. Regular social media followers understand that Microsoft, for example,  does not, think with one mind, but with nearly 60,000 of them that GM does not speak with one voice or language, but with over 275,000. The 85,000 or so Intel employees do not march in step with each other and their taste in the drummers marking cadence is quite diverse.

So if you blog with transparency and candor about your corporate job and the guy down the hall is devising a character blog by a talking moose to extend brand, he or she may hurt the brand or simply waste company resources, but that effort will not hurt yours, and that is why, in the long run, the simple, interactive credible path will prove to be the wise course for most companies whose employees take pride in their products and services.

My views have very little to do with "soft values," that non-tangible feel good stuff that many executive officers frown up. It has more to do with the smartest business course. Technology has made conversations scalable. You can talk with customers in seconds all over the world. The cost of it is quite low. If you give your audience something valuable. If you show you are listening, you will gain significantly in customer retention, loyalty and their carrying your virtues forward with tools that put word of mouth on steroids.

Quite simply, social media is more efficient than traditional marketing. It lets you build better products and services. It shortens the time-to-customer. It is less costly than advertising and more effective. It gets the people most passionate about your company to talk to others where they have more influence than celebrity endorsement. It is more credible by far than traditional PR. It gives  your company greater prominence in search engines by orders of magnitude over traditional web sites.

Quite simply social media makes pragmatic business sense as both a customer relations engine and as a marketing, support and development cost-cutter.

There may be two camps in the enterprise today. But I have very little doubt that one will get larger as the other withers in atrophy.

Comments

[Paul Grant]

"So far, nearly every deceptive social media attempt has failed. Real people come to blogs and social media in search of real people they connect to. They are looking for content which is useful or interesting."

So true. I will never forget the bitter disappointment of looking up http://www.information-revolution.org/ after seeing a gorilla marketing poster plastered in a busy London street. The site was (at that time) unbranded and apparently 'grass-roots' yet immediately the punters could 'smell a rat'. In turn the real proponents emerged and revealed their hand... having lost those social connections that may have played an important role, had they not been patronised. Transparency and integrity will stand the test of time.

[Jonathan Trenn]

Shel

It's not that I disagree with your central thesis, but I have caveats running through my brain.

I still think that there are a ton of companies that wouldn't really benefit from social media. For instance, I just used Windex to clean some windows. Should Windex be using a social media strategy? I love Tropicana Orange Juice. Should they try to start an online community?

The 275,000+ employees of GM (showing the company doesn't speak in just one voice) or the 85,000 employees of Intel...should they all be part of the social media strategy of those companies?

Companies such as GM and Intel are geared more toward social media because they either involve high end considered purchases (cars) or innovative technology (Intel).

I'm thinking that there is yet another camp...one that social media, in it's present form, doesn't apply to. The social media tools are there. At least in the current environment.

[Mike Spataro]

I also talk to many people in companies who are getting ready to participate, but I believe the reason many haven't just yet is because they are working on how to do it the right way. Crazy as that sounds because it should be simple, they are putting in place the right resources and processes to be long-term participants. I see a major shift in this area over the next 12-24 months.

[Jonathan Trenn]

Mike - excellent point. I think part of the problem is that the current tools somewhat limit what can be done. Again, do the folks from Windex start a blog, a podcast?

Also, for a lot of companies will end up using strategies that result in one on one communications - not the quickest way to get results.

The methodologies are only beginning to be developed.

[kenekaplan]

Now this is a great discussion! It may be evergreen, worthy of updating every once in a while.

Dial up, dial down. That's what marketing strategists are likely to do as they put more resources into social media. That's great for managing ROI and timing new product releases. But there's something else here: People.

Whether you're a renegade, tight-lipped or just workin' for the man...it's individuals who are best using social media. They're doing it to help their companies, but also their careers (everything's on the record -- and it's rare to stay at one company forever).

My point: at Intel, we don't need every employee participating, but we are encouraging them if they want to. For many participating with social media, sparks of passion ignite the desire for sharing and pouring more of ourselves into everything we do. This is remarkable, infectious and inspiring and pulls in people with like minds and similar tastes.

That's how we all got here. Thanks, Shel!

[Bob Duffy]

Good post Shel. This has been on my mind lately. I feel I often have a foot in both camps. I sense that something in the middle will prevail.

I do believe that social media is a medium for the community, and as you describe, any manipulation will fail. But as a marketing guy I believe there is a place for businesses to build brand affinity in those dialogues. I think you need a balanced perspective like this to be successful. We should appreciate the medium for what it is so we can best market in it. I’m not sure why that scares some, but it does.

In the non-virtual world, local Kiwanis, Elk Lodges, Rotary Clubs and Chambers of Commerce have leveraged local communities to perpetuate their business interests, while also building value in the communities they serve. A corporate blog or affinity program in a social network could achieve the same end by establishing value to the online community while serving a commercial interest.

Bottom line for me, is social media connects business closer to the customer. That is an amazing opportunity that marketing cannot ignore. I suspect we will be horrified when it’s badly exploited but we will also be delighted by truly innovative programs. Like anything else the bad stuff just makes you appreciate the good stuff and sets the bar higher.

[shel israel]

Bob,

Thanks for your kind and candid comments on the post, Bob. As a recovering publicist myself, I can understand where you are coming from. But, if I may put this delicately, if you put one foot in two camps it exposes your most private parts to severe kicks from either side. You are probably better off picking one of the two and sticking with it. Traditional marketing has a long ramp. It does not end tomorrow. I do not propose the termination of advertising, PR and marketing. The problem is the best practices of the old are bad practices in the new. And therein lies a big problem.

[shel israel]

Jonathan,
products
What if Tropicana used a wiki to share info with growers, and it's supply chain? How about a CEO internal blog to the ecosystem on issues impacting corporate reputation and safety? Same issue for Windex. Social media can be used for conversations in the supply chain, with a company ecosystem, to learn from real customers about new products or services. Social media has a warehouse filled with conversational tools. I suggest the companies you name might use social media when they think beyond companies pushing products.

[Tish Grier]

Hi Shel...

well, the thing you said in your comment above makes the most sense: "the best practices of the old are bad practices in the new"...

Yet the thing is that the new "soft" skills that will constitute the new best practices are perceived as being simple and easily learned by anybody out there. Thing is, they're not.

Not to mention that it seems the folks who cling to the old best practices simply do not want to hear from the new best practices people--that is unless the folks who speak new are just as versed in speaking old. Which, IMO, is part of the problem.

Marketers can't spend all their time just yapping to other marketers in social media space. When they do that, they simply are creating their own echo chamber and thus perpetuating the perception that "soft" skills are easy and legacy experience is foundational for the "right" kind of social media experience they need. No wonder progress is slow (but it's no different than in, say, journalism.)

[Paul Grant]

I believe it is our mistake to assume that all products and brands need their own social community portal.

If we remember that social media networks are only tools and platforms but that what gives them life is people, then products like Windex can find appropriate ways to tap into social media where their relevant demographic is - even if that is in many places. The key is to have a strategy, not a solution.

It would be remiss for a company to simply avoid social media because it somehow doesn't compute into a direct translation with a particular product type.

http://www.dewmocracy.com finds a way to elect drink flavours in a social world - but does that mean all drink brands should? It's too late. What is hip today, is passé tomorrow.

In some sense large brands and particularly government are seemingly tentative and cautious in their approach to social media, preferring instead to wait until the dust settles. Realistically, it doesn't seem that the dust is ever going to settle. Obviously many of today's SM players will drop by the wayside in time or be acquired and assimilated into larger aggressive organisations on their way to world domination.

So how to navigate through this dynamic and changing landscape (or seascape with icebergs as the case may be)?

The trick for executives to have an overarching strategy that informs all their decisions and implementations of content. In this way there is continuity and careful deployment of messages and conversation in the places where the target demographic is operating.

Much like the 'hippest clubs' of our (my) youth, there was never one place that was the definitive all-time location to be. As humans age and make a logical progression through the years, there are different priorities and criteria for meaningful engagement. I think quite a bit of the 'current thinking' is caught up in the hype of what is possible and not concerned enough about the 'people'.

A successful long-term interactive strategy will factor in the changing needs of the target audience and grow with them as they take their particular journey. Meanwhile, perhaps a new strategy embraces the upcoming generation and follows and nurtures them using the newest tools and preferences. The brand's message and persona needs to remain consistent nonetheless.

[Christina Tierney]

I have to agree with several of the comments here suggesting that not every major corp (or small to medium for that matter) should participate in social media.

However, if a product or service is being developed somewhere, anywhere that will eventually have a customer or client...a conversation WILL naturally occur. And if companies whether they are Top Fortune or not wishes to nurture strong relationships with authentic transparent conversations, they WILL have to participate in some form of Social Media or another...today they have no choice. It will boil down to "when" and "how" will the corp participate.

I loved how you described the traditional marketing professionals trying to take Social Media and squish it back into "their" box. I present every day to clients on what Social Media is and is not. And I always tell them...this is not about the Corporation's Marketing Department controlling a "message" anymore. This is about the courage to embrace sincerity and honesty. Because no one wants to listen to your "shtick" any longer.

I also tell clients that if you are going to continue to insist on resistance and shoo away real acceptance of authentic communciation DONT BOTHER! Wait until your ready. Otherwise you are just flushing marketing dollars down the drain.

Loved It Shel! Thanks as always.

[Michael Seaton]

Great post Shel.

[RichardatDELL]

wow...some great material here shel!!!

[GreenNetizen]

Hi Christina,
We met at Blog Orlando.( Martie ) I've been off in a different direction for the last couple of months and trying to get back on track. Wondering about books that help a new blog business know how to use the social marketing approach to plug into all that you write about. You can post on Facebook if it's easier. Hope you are doing well.

[Jenna]

Blogged about this article too. Check it out at: http://marketingandnewsocialmedia.blogspot.com/2008/02/social-media-is-needed-in-corporate.html

[kenobi]

Jonathan - no, Tropicana Juice should start a community, but yes, they should set up a profile on one - say Facebook. As long as there's a purpose, call to action or value in that conversation - e.g. asking customers for opinion on new flavours or recipes. Coca Cola could have avoided the whole new recipe debacle if socmedia was around back then.

It's not an either / or decision - it's about applying each marketing strand to the most relevant platform.

[kenobi]

*should not start a community*