Feeds:
Posts
Comments

Posts Tagged ‘Edelman’

 

Edelman_marquee-01

If you aren’t familiar with Edelman’s Trust Barometer project, you should be. I can’t think of any other organization out there that has been able to peel back the layers of trust in the business world as effectively.  (If you know of other work I should be looking at, please leave a link in the comments.) Anyway, I want to share some of their findings here because understanding them will help everyone build and grow better companies. This isn’t just a PR topic. It affects everything: Brand management, communications, operations, retail, customer service… everything.

First, the checklist. Below is a graphic that shows 16-trust building attributes every organization needs to be aware of (and gauge). It looks like this year, Edelman added categories (what they call trust performance clusters): Engagement, Integrity, Products & Services, Purpose, and Operations. I can’t poke a hole into this. It’s solid.

Edelman Performance-Clusters

Since I am as much a fan of best practices, brand strategy and change management as I am a fan of data, insights and infographics, you can imagine how stuff like this makes me feel like a kid in a candy store.

Here’s another piece of the Trust Barometer project: shifts in trust around the world year over year (YoY). To be clear, the graph does not illustrate consumer trust in the countries listed, but rather how consumers in each of these countries tend to trust companies, media, government institutions and NGOs. (If you think of it as a sort of cynicism graph, the US, the UK, Germany and France are a lot less cynical about all four sectors today than they were a year ago. We’re not out of the woods yet, but it’s a good sign.)

Edelman Slide6

Edelman’s Trust Barometer report for 2013 is summarized really well in this video. (If the link below doesn’t play, click here.) It’s less than 3 minutes long and packed with a ton of really fascinating info, so keep your finger near the pause button. And no, I wasn’t paid by Edelman to push their report or say nice things about them. I ran into this yesterday on the Facebook. I was impressed by it and thought it was well worth sharing with you guys.

What’s particularly fascinating to me:

1) Tech companies seem to inspire the most trust and banking/financial institutions the least amount of trust.

2) Leadership and corporate culture are cited as the primary causes of corporate wrongdoing. (And rightly so.)

3) Globally, CEOs have less than a 50% approval rating. Only 18% of people expect business leaders to tell the truth, and 13% of political leaders to tell the truth. That is execrable.

What it means: a) we have a global leadership problem, and b) people are no longer blind to it. If that shouldn’t trigger a wake-up call, I don’t know what will.

Interestingly, people tend to still trust institutions far more than the leadership of said institutions. In the US, for instance, 50% of people trust business institutions, but only 15% trust their leadership. That’s a  35 point gap. When it comes to government, those numbers fall to 38% and 10% respectively, for a gap of 28 points.

Our trust in people – particularly in those who should be our leaders – is eroding. Fast. This is a major problem and it needs to be addressed. And no, cool Superbowl ads and cosmetic rebrandings won’t fix this. It’s a deeper problem and it is going to take serious, grown-up, deliberate work to fix it.

The only thing I wasn’t super impressed with was the “diamond of influence” and the media clover leaf thingamajigs at the end of the video. It isn’t that they are wrong (they aren’t) as much as they attempt to fix a leadership problem by addressing an operational problem. To use a medical analogy, it’s a little like trying to cure someone’s brain tumor by enrolling them in a social graces class. The solution just doesn’t match the problem.

Here’s a thought: Before you can address changes in operational models, you have to address the gaps in leadership that are the root causes of said operational problems. For instance, if you focus first on working with the organization’s leadership on baking the 16 attributes of trust into their vision for the company and then operationalizing them, maybe you have something that might work. Then and only then do you bring in the diamond and the clover leaf – to address the how of your why and what.

Always match the right solutions to the right problem. Otherwise, your business solution runs the risk of being little more than the corporate version of a cargo cult: a lot of mimicking and parroting, but absolutely no hope of generating real results. If you have a leadership problem, address that. Don’t beat around the bush. Don’t skirt the issue. Address it and fix it. Start with an audit of your organization, using the 16 trust attributes as potential areas of improvement.

Food for thought. Discuss.

*          *          *

Looking for straight answers to real questions about value, process, planning, measurement, management and reporting in the social business space? pick up a copy of Social Media R.O.I.: Managing and Measuring Social Media Efforts in Your Organization. The book is 300 pages of facts and proven best practices. (Go to smroi.net to sample a free chapter first, just to make sure it’s worth the money.)

And if English isn’t your first language, you can even get it in Spanish, Japanese, German, Korean and Italian now, with more international editions on the way.

CEO-Read  –  Amazon.com  –  www.smroi.net  –  Barnes & Noble  –  Que

Read Full Post »

Moneyball - Courtesy of Sony Pictures.

I finally watched Moneyball over the weekend. I’m not a big baseball fan but it held my interest, partly because it was based on a true story and partly because the movie really wasn’t about baseball at all. It was about old thinking vs. new thinking, about industry politics vs. the heresy of innovation, about dinosaurs desperate to hang on to a failing model that sustains their livelihood even when that model is clearly broken, ineffective and no longer relevant.

The scenes in which Oakland As’ general manager Billy Beane (Brad Pitt) locks horns with his cadre of coaches and scouts over how to do more with less, about how to break the cycle of mediocrity plaguing their organization, about how to get results again is brilliant, not because of the writing or the acting but because it is spot on target. How do I know this? Because I have been in that meeting hundreds of times. Well, not that particular meeting, but in others exactly like it. And every week that goes by, I find myself sitting in that meeting again and again and again.

In the US, in Europe, in Asia, the same meeting goes on almost daily. The conference table is always basically the same, the fluorescent lighting too. The players, they’re the same as well, everywhere I go. Only the vocabulary changes, the industry lingo, but the meeting, it’s the same and it goes pretty much like this:


Billy Beane
: Guys, you’re just talking. Talking, “la-la-la-la”, like this is business as usual. It’s not.
Grady Fuson: We’re trying to solve the problem here, Billy.
Billy Beane: Not like this you’re not. You’re not even looking at the problem.
Grady Fuson: We’re very aware of the problem. I mean…
Billy Beane: Okay, good. What’s the problem?
Grady Fuson: Look, Billy, we all understand what the problem is. We have to…
Billy Beane: Okay, good. What’s the problem?
Grady Fuson: The problem is we have to replace three key players in our lineup.
Billy Beane: Nope. What’s the problem?
Pittaro: Same as it’s ever been. We’ve gotta replace these guys with what we have existing.
Billy Beane: Nope. What’s the problem, Barry?
Scout Barry: We need 38 home runs, 120 RBIs and 47 doubles to replace.
Billy Beane: Ehh! [imitates buzzer]

What we see in this scene is a roomful of insiders with a century and a half of industry experience between them, and yet they haven’t figured out that their model is outdated, that their “experience,” is no longer enough to keep moving forward. They carry on day after day, season after season, doing the same thing over and over again, half-expecting a different result, but then again, maybe not. Worst of all, most of them have no idea what the problems plaguing their organizations actually are. A lot of it is just operational myopia. Some of it is also ego: they couldn’t possibly be wrong. All that experience and intuition, the entire industry’s decades-old model… how could things have changed that much, right?

And yet they are wrong, the model isn’t working anymore, and instead of listening to the guy in the room who sees it and knows how to fix it, they treat him like a punk. When he wants to do something about it, they push back. Hard. In Moneyball, he’s their boss. Imagine when he is just a Director or a VP, or even just an account manager. Imagine how quickly he gets overruled then. I’ve seen amazing people get shut down and pushed out of organizations over this sort of thing. I could give you names and dates. I could make you ill with true stories of stupidity and petty politics, of wasted opportunities and complete operational failures that turned what could have been huge wins for companies that needed them (and customers who demanded them) into case studies in wasted potential. And as tragic as  these stories would be, they are no different from the opportunities that will be wasted this week, and the next, and the one after that, always for the same reasons, always because of the exact same thinking and business management dynamics.

I see that scene, that meeting, that discussion being played out almost everywhere I go, especially when it comes to social media and social business: guys sitting around a table, treating social like it is just an extension of the same old traditional digital marketing game they all understand and desperately want to stick to. And so they make strategy decisions based on models that don’t apply at all to the social space, they insist on using measurement schemes that aren’t the least bit relevant to it or the business as a whole, and worst of all, they make hiring decisions that absolutely make no sense at all for the new requirements of social communications. Why? Because even though the game has changed, no one in the room wants to accept that it has. No one in the room wants to adapt. No one in the room wants to look reality in the eye and do what needs to be done to actually win. Talk about it, sure. Use cool new words like earned media and engagement, definitely. But actually change anything and adapt to a new model? Nope. Not happening. The change management piece that comes with social business integration, the piece that is absolutely vital to it actually working, that piece is still DOA.

Here’s another conversation that also goes on “offline” at every company (agency or brand) around the world right now in regards to hiring decisions that touch on social media management. Here it is again, through the filter of Moneyball:

Peter Brand: There is an epidemic failure within the game to understand what is really happening. And this leads people who run Major League Baseball teams to misjudge their players and mismanage their teams. I apologize.
Billy Beane: Go on.
Peter Brand: Okay. People who run ball clubs, they think in terms of buying players. Your goal shouldn’t be to buy players, your goal should be to buy wins. And in order to buy wins, you need to buy runs. You’re trying to replace Johnny Damon. The Boston Red Sox see Johnny Damon and they see a star who’s worth seven and half million dollars a year. When I see Johnny Damon, what I see is… is… an imperfect understanding of where runs come from. The guy’s got a great glove. He’s a decent leadoff hitter. He can steal bases. But is he worth the seven and half million dollars a year that the Boston Red Sox are paying him? No. No. Baseball thinking is medieval. They are asking all the wrong questions. And if I say it to anybody, I’m-I’m ostracized. I’m-I’m-I’m a leper. So that’s why I’m-I’m cagey about this with you. That’s why I… I respect you, Mr. Beane, and if you want full disclosure, I think it’s a good thing that you got Damon off your payroll. I think it opens up all kinds of interesting possibilities.

Every company has a Peter Brand either on staff or sitting in a stack of CVs. Not necessarily in the sense that they are geniuses with statistics  but in the sense that they see the forest from the trees, that they see what needs to be done, but every time they open their mouths, they get shot down. Worse, if they open their mouths too much, they’re gone. And if their CV doesn’t have the bullet points and keywords that hiring managers were trained twenty years ago to find relevant, they don’t even get considered for the position.

If I see one more social media leadership position go by default to candidates with “big agency digital experience” or “big brand digital experience,” I am going to throw my pencil at somebody’s head. There is the medieval thinking in action, right there. There’s the primary reason why almost every social media program on the planet is failing to produce results, why three fourths of companies still can’t figure out how to calculate the ROI of their social media programs, why most brands see less than 1% of engagement from their followers and fans after the first touch, why “content is king” is failing, and why increasingly, “social media” strategy and budgets are shifting to ad buys on social networks. That’s right: For all the talk about earned media and engagement and conversations, social media account roles are starting to go to media buyers now. (Here’s some insight into it.) Everyone loves to talk the talk. Almost no company is willing to actually walk the walk. That sound you’re hearing is the banging of traditional marketing hammers pounding nails into social business’ coffin.

You want to know why most big brand social media programs aren’t gaining real traction? Why they don’t work without a constant influx of ad spending? Why nobody sticks around when the “free iPads for likes” promotions are gone? Start there: no one in the room gets it. No one in the room wants to get it. And when someone in the room does get it, he or she doesn’t keep their job for very long. You think most companies are going to hire, promote and support change agents all on their own?

So the real question is this: Do you want to actually score some real wins or do you just want to spend big marketing budgets and play at being a digital big shot?

It’s a real question. In fact, it’s the most important question you might ask yourself all year. Because the answer to that question will determine whether or not you still have a job in two years. No wait… I misspoke. The answer to that question will determine whether or not you have the job you want in two years, and yes, there’s a difference. A big one.

When you find yourself looking for your next gig (and you will eventually,) do you want to just be the guy who was SVP digital at (insert big brand/agency here) or do you want to be the guy who took (insert big brand/agency here)’s theoretical social media and social business programs, and turned them into the new industry standards, into the business model that everyone will be copying and basing theirs on for the next decade? It’s a real question. Which guy do you want to be? The dinosaur or the pioneer? If the answer is the latter, then are you going to have the huevos to go against the grain? To take chances on whom you hire, what kinds of programs you launch, where and how you invest your budgets? Are you willing to stick your neck out and do it right? Or is it more likely that you’ll just play it safe, hoping that the system will just carry you for another decade or two, that the CEO or CMO you will interview with next won’t notice that your job was basically to spend ad dollars and shuffle digital board pieces for the CEO’s monthly show-and-tell meeting?

Who do you want to be? What do you want to build? Do you want to just wear the jersey or do you want to win? Hold that thought. Here’s another key piece of dialogue from the movie, after Billy Beane’s gamble has paid off, after he has started turning some wheels in a big way. He responds to an invitation from John Henry, owner of the Boston Red Sox, who tells him this:

John Henry: I know you’ve taken it in the teeth out there, but the first guy through the wall. It always gets bloody, always. It’s the threat of not just the way of doing business, but in their minds it’s threatening the game. But really what it’s threatening is their livelihoods, it’s threatening their jobs, it’s threatening the way that they do things. And every time that happens, whether it’s the government or a way of doing business or whatever it is, the people are holding the reins, have their hands on the switch. They go bat shit crazy. I mean, anybody who’s not building a team right and rebuilding it using your model, they’re dinosaurs. They’ll be sitting on their ass on the sofa in October, watching the Boston Red Sox win the World Series.

And a couple of years later, they did.

So let’s talk about our world again for a minute. Let’s talk about what’s coming, about tipping points, about momentum: Ford not only hired the right guy (Scott Monty) a few years back but gave him the authority to build a solid program there. The result: some serious wins on just about every front, from customer perceptions to purchase intent to customer loyalty and recommendations. Even car design was impacted in 2010 by the importance of social communications in the Ford organization. Edelman Digital seems to be doing something similar (I keep running into some pretty solid folks there, notably Michael Brito and David Armano). Want to see something cool? This is one of the things they’re working on. Starbucks caught an early train with that too. So did Dell. What sucks is that in 2012, virtually no one else has even tried to keep up with them. For all the money being spent and all the “case studies” being pushed around the conference circuit, most companies are still fighting it, still refusing to accept that the game has changed – worse, trying to keep playing with old methods, with old thinking, with old, outdated skills and CV bullet points. But there will come a day when someone will be given the authority to build out this new model, when it will blow everyone out of the water, and when the blindfolds will have to come off. That day is coming. What side of change do you want to be on then?

Old thinking will not score wins here. Old tactics, old hiring, old measurement, they’re all wrong for these new marketing, communications and business models. They just don’t work anymore. If you don’t believe me, that’s fine. Keep watching your margins erode. Keep watching your digital dollars go to waste. Keep laying people off and outsourcing every last business function you can’t afford to keep in-house anymore. Keep pretending the world is the same today as it was five years ago, and that what you were doing five years ago will still be relevant five years from now. Whatever makes you feel better. Keep doing the same old thing that used to work, back before people carried smart phones and iPads. Keep thinking that the guy you just hired because he spent ten years managing digital for a fast-food brand knows fuck-all about building capacity and traction for a social media program, let alone produce concrete business results for you. Keep coloring the same old boxes with the same old crayons and see how far you’ll get.

_ Okay good. What’s the problem?

We need to fill a VP Digital role.

_ Nope. What’s the problem?

All right… Whatever. We need to fill a VP social media strategy role.

_ Nope. What’s the problem?

We need to hire someone with proven global digital management experience, Billy. Someone with Disney or Nike on their CV. Someone with serious digital campaign experience.

_ Nope. What’s the problem, Barry?

The problem is, we’re not growing our Facebook community fast enough, and our content isn’t seeing the numbers we want. We need a…

_ Nope. [Imitates buzzer]

Get unstuck. Watch Moneyball and let the light bulb go off in your head. Then go find your Peter Brand and hire the shit out of him before someone else does. If you’re lucky, you’ll save both your career and your company in the process.

*          *          *

Here it is. A whole book on how to make social media work from a business standpoint. ROI is covered, along with a lot of process elements that tie back to it. If your favorite social business “expert” doesn’t seem to get this stuff yet, don’t feel bad about sending them a copy. Knowledge is never a bad gift.

CEO-Read  –  Amazon.com  –  www.smroi.net  –  Barnes & Noble  –  Que

Read Full Post »

Before I begin, here are links to the three events mentioned in the video:

July 17: Americas Mart International Gift Show – Atlanta, GA

July 20 (not July 21, as I wrongly stated in the above video): Gaspedal’s Supergenius conference – New York, New York

July 27-28: ADMA Forum 2010 – Sydney, Australia

Okay. Now we can begin.

From solo operator to corporate front: The evolution of manufactured Social Media expertise in 2010

I guess it was just a matter of time before we had to revisit the issue of bogus Social Media “experts,” so today is as good as any to do just that. This time though, rather than drop the hammer on the latest Social Media certification scheme or outrageous Social Media R.O.I. equation/calculator, let me just speak in more general terms. Not that I particularly feel obliged to protect the guilty, but we can do this without pointing any fingers. Actually, for this topic, it works better if we don’t.

What I want to shed a light on today isn’t the lone “Social Media Expert” who tried his hand at being a day-trader, then got into SEO, then found himself out of a job for a few months and finally figured he’d try his luck as a Social Media consultant… because hey, how hard can it be, right? *sigh* We’ve already been down that road and I can’t think of anything to add at this juncture. No, today, I want to bring up another type of “Social Media expert” altogether: The kind that earns his or her validation from the company they work for, mostly as a marketing ploy engineered by said company.

Consider a scenario for a moment (and I am not making this up, so pay attention): Consulting Firm XYZ realizes that there is big money in Social Media consulting and services, say in the enterprise space. Every single one of their big clients is asking them for help on the Social Media front, first in terms of research and fact-finding, then in terms of strategy, then integration and training. They need to act fast or they might not get that business. What to do?

There are two ways of going about this: The first – Putting together a team of people with actual experience in these matters. Identify them internally or hire them as needed. The second – Grabbing the handful of consultants who did your initial research and fact-finding when it comes to Social Media, and change their respective titles to reflect their needed “expertise” in light of their new client-facing roles. One is the right, ethical, smart and professional way of getting into the Social Media consulting business. The other is the complete opposite of that.

Intelligent and ethical choices designate the winners in the long run

Let me be clear about this: Many firms and agencies choose the first of these choices. Companies like Edelman, Ogilvy, Radian 6, Deloitte and New Marketing Labs have already snatched up some pretty solid names in the space – an indication that they are taking their task and their clients’ well-being seriously. These companies would tend to fall into the good category. Sadly though, not all consulting firms and agencies have chosen the same path. More and more, I keep running into firms that knowingly appoint people with no experience or savvy to “Social Media Director,” “VP Social Business” and other such roles, then aggressively market them to their unsuspecting clients in order to secure lucrative consulting contracts.

Not that some consulting firms haven’t been doing this with other disciplines for decades, but this one hits a little closer to home. Besides, until now, internally manufactured experts at least had some semblance of experience. At worst, they received a decent degree of training before being thrust into their clients’ unfortunate laps to learn their craft as they went. Now though, when it comes to Social Media integration and program development, not so much. It’s like the bar has been lowered a few more notches, and that isn’t something we should turn a blind eye to.

How to manufacture a bogus Social Media expert for your company in 10 easy steps

So here’s how the process of manufacturing internal Social Media expertise works:

Step 1 – Identify the pigeon: the individual who isn’t really good at what s/he was hired to do, but is someone’s protegé within the organization and could fit into this role well enough. “Let’s see… Who fits that description… Ah yes. Jackson. Someone call Jackson in here. What?… Yes, tell him to bring his pencil.”

Step 2 – Send Jackson on a two-week fact-finding mission to find and browse through every study, article, report and policy ever written about Social Media. (We’ll come back to this in step 4.) “Yes, Jackson. Google. With a G.”

Step 3 – Build Jackson a personal website and a blog. Tell him to get a Twitter account started. Better get on Facebook too. Oh, and LinkedIn, just for good measure.

Step 4 – Remember all of that research Jackson did for Step 2? Yeah… Get the web guy to create a page that agglomerates all of those “resources” on his new website. A) It’ll look like he really knows his stuff. B) It’s great for SEO. C) With a resource like that, we’re sure to attract a few bloggers and e-journalists.

Step 5 – “Get the PR team rolling. We need to get our man some speaking gigs and a few key quotes in industry pubs.”

Step 6 – “Call our print people. We need to make sure Jackson gets published asap. Pull some strings. We need this.”

Step 7 – “Mortimer, make sure jackson blogs once per week. Yes, make him if he doesn’t want to. Same with Twitter. I want a daily tweet from him, with a link to something we own. Wait… on second thought, never mind. We’ll let Legal handle all that.”

Step 8 – “Make sure that Jackson’s personal website looks nothing like ours, but throw in an easy-to-spot disclaimer that clearly identifies him/her as our employee. No sense throwing bait without the hook. Yes, our company name needs to be italicized.”

Step 9 – “Call the PR team again. Let’s make sure everyone knows we’ve named Jackson VP of Social Business. Yeah, contact all the big bloggers too. Some of them might share the info with their networks. Oh, and email our clients. Yes, all of them.”

Step 10 – “Book a few rooms for SxSW and Blogworld. Jackson needs to be seen. Let’s see if we can sponsor a party while we’re there too. We have some leftover marketing money from that thing last month anyway.”

Voila. Before you know it, someone with zero background in the space as of three months ago is suddenly an expert working with Fortune 100 clients for a prominent consulting firm. Just. Like. That.

Smoke, mirrors, and the proverbial wool in the age of Google: Wrapping it all up with a simple job title

Now imagine you’re a company looking to build a Social Media program, and you don’t know where to start. The consulting firm you work with comes to you with a Social Media consulting package. They introduce you to their “expert,” Their VP of Social Business, with his own team of social media consultants. You google the guy. You find his website. You find the extensive list of resources he linked to on his website, along with a handful of quickly drafted $150 reports done internally by research interns last summer. He has a twitter account, a Facebook profile and even a blog with a good dozen posts on it you can’t really understand, but they’re filled with links. Looks good, right? Why should you doubt any of this? Seems legit enough.

After all, why should you doubt marketing from a company looking to generate millions of dollars in Social Media consulting fees after an investment of less than $10K in web design and PR? Hell, they didn’t even need to staff up. All they did was shuffle a few consultants around then printed them new business cards to reflect their new… expertise. Bam. Instant new service offering.

This isn’t theory. It isn’t a what if scenario. This is all too real. This actually happens, and it happens within very large, reputable firms as well as small fly-by-night ones.

All of this to say: Be cautious. Do your homework – not just on the firm itself, as it might otherwise have a stellar reputation and an impressive list of clients, but more specifically on the “experts” your consulting partners bring to your table. Just because a company you hire to help you tells you their experts are indeed experts doesn’t make them so. Do your homework. Research the “experts.” Don’t let well-designed websites and fancy titles fool you.

7 simple ways to separate legitimate  professionals from manufactured experts

Here are some things to look for before you throw your money away on a complete disaster:

1. EVERY person worthy of occupying a Director or VP level position in the Social Media, Social Business or Social Communications space has been involved in some sort of social/digital publishing for 3-5+ years. Typically, this manifests itself as a blog. Case in point: NML’s Chris Brogan and Keith Burtis, Francois Gossieaux, Geoff Livingston, Valeria Maltoni, Orange’s Yann Gourvennec, Neville Hobson, R6’s Amber Naslund, Ford’s Scott Monty, Seth Godin, Brian Solis, Jeremiah Owyang, Edelman’s David Armano, Ogilvy’s John Bell, … All have been actively involved in the Social Web for years. They didn’t get into it six months ago or just last year. They have been in it from the start, and as a result, they know what they’re talking about. These folks are respected in the space because they helped build it. They are the caliber of people consulting firms should look for in a hire. Period.

Find out how long your consulting firm’s “expert” has been blogging. Less than 2 years? Proceed with caution. Less than 8 months? Look for expertise elsewhere.

2. Read their blog. What do you find? Crap content just to fill a page 3x per week and provide search engines with carefully chosen keywords, or is the content actually helpful, well researched, shrewdly analyzed and intelligently presented? Does this person care about what they do, or are they just doing what they need to in order to “be in the game?” Does their content give you ideas or just regurgitate someone else’s articles and content? Speaking of original content, how much of what they blog about is THEIR content? (Hacks like to borrow and appropriate content. Get a sense for whether or not this individual really knows their stuff or is merely a parrot with a fancy title.)

3. Blogging isn’t everything. Lots of people have been blogging for 5+ years but couldn’t manage a Social Media practice if their lives depended on it. Who have they worked with? What have they done? What is their background? What relevant mix of experience do they bring into the role? Were they an SEO expert a year ago? And a day trader before that? If so, be careful.

Note: Though there is no clear path to Social Media management savvy, the individual’s story has to make sense. Maybe they were a corporate marketing guy who fell in love with the Social web and started incorporating it into their company’s activities. Maybe they were an artisan who used Social Media to tap into communities and figured out how to apply those lessons to business.  Maybe they were a tech or a baker or a PR manager or a Customer Service manager who realized how Social Media might change the game for their discipline and have been tweaking the model ever since. Everyone capable of functioning at the Director or VP level in the Social Business space has a story to tell about how they came into the space that involves passion, an idea, and a very specific path. Look for it. Ask to hear it. Conversely, the manufactured “experts” don’t have a story. They just showed up a few months ago because the time was right to jump in. It’s a simple litmus test, and one that usually works quite well.

4. How do they handle themselves on Social Channels? Do they ever respond to comments? If so, how? Are they using Twitter, Facebook and LinkedIn as mere broadcast vehicles, or do they actually care enough about the space and their role in it to engage, respond and participate in discussions? How fluent are they with dos and don’ts of various Social communications platforms? Have they demonstrated on these channels the ease and fluency that you would expect from someone with real experience under their belt, or are they merely “there,” kind of floundering?

5. Who outside of the organization and its clients can vouch for them? Don’t ask their boss. Don’t ask their HR person. Don’t ask their other clients either. You might as well ask their mom while you’re at it. Find validation outside of their immediate circle of interest.

6. In their initial meetings with you, do they speak more than they listen? Do they lead with a 5-step “program” or a “P.L.A.N.” rather than trying to see how to organically grow a program within your organization? Do they make you wait for even the most basic feedback rather than discussing possibilities and ideas right there and then? Red flags all. Once the sale is made, then what?

7. Do they care? This is a simple gut check. If they’re into it, if they are passionate about the space and what you might do together, you’re probably on the right track. If they aren’t passionate about any of this, then be very careful where things go. Social Business management without genuine passion is like a folk singer without stories to tell: It won’t go very far. Look for passion. Genuine, burning, infectious passion. Yes, even in a consultant.

Caution for now, but expect clear skies eventually

So again, be cautious. This line of work hasn’t been around long enough for professionals to be able to establish themselves as clearly to outside onlookers and prospective clients as, say, plumbers, designers, attorneys, restaurateurs or journalists. Nobody was a Director of Social Communications ten years ago. Five years ago, even. This line of work is still fairly new, even to those of us who have been involved with it for the better part of a decade, and in some cases longer than that.

Five years from now, the waters won’t be as murky. Hacks will have fallen by the wayside and those with a real aptitude for this type of activity will have emerged as clear professionals in their field. But until then, proceed with caution. Do your research. Don’t confuse a job title, a neat website and some fractal Social Networking activity for anything more than just good marketing.

Cheers.

Read Full Post »