More Than Ever…The People are the Brand

Communication guru Shel Israel touches on a compelling idea in a recent post on the relationship between personal brand(s) and corporate brand(s). I was particularly drawn by his comment on how people are becoming a central element of the corporate brand: “Personal brand is changing corporate and product brand in an increasing number of cases. This changes who shapes brand and why and how it is done. It changes how markets perceive brands and this is an area where little thought and conversation has emerged so far.”

Israel argues that traditional marketing messages focusing on “big brand” themes positioned through a corporate and/or homogenous voice are giving way to increasing personalization…and the humanization of corporate brands. This is being fueled by the advent of social media platforms that are based on individual participation and contributions. It’s interesting  to note Israel uses Dell as an example – which I experienced first hand as a member of the Dell social media team. Dell started to turns thing around when it started listening – really listening – to the online conversation but also because individual employees jumped into the conversation. All the platforms – both internal and external – were populated with real people who answered questions, shared ideas and tried to resolve complaints. Some of them – like Direct2Dell moderator Lionel – became key representatives of the Dell brand online.

This trend toward personalization is likely to gain momentum. After all, companies are engaging individual leaders (and sometimes employees) as blog authors, Facebook friends and Twitter voices.  Videos and podcasts feature company experts and guests in informal settings. Discussion boards are hosted by groups of company experts, some with large followings. Even websites are less impersonal, often featuring profiles and individual guides or hosts. As Israel notes, marketers are eager to leverage this movement towards the humanization of brands – since it’s inherently more credible and resonant with customers – but the very notion of diverse, individual voices makes this difficult. And that’s not a bad thing. For better or for worse, company reputations and identities will become more closely identified with the collective actions and voices of their employees, rather than paid advertising or impersonal PR campaigns.

Technorati: Blogosphere Vibrant, Getting More Influential

Technorati’s annual “State of the Blogosphere” is full of interesting findings, but the headline is that the influence of the blogosphere on everything from politics to marketing continues to grow. [Note: the survey is limited to bloggers and data from the U.S.] Here are select findings:

• The blogosphere (in the U.S.) is doubling in size every 230 days
• Hobbyists (who blog for fun) make up 72% of bloggers
• Though Pros (who blog full-time for a company/organization) make up only 4% of bloggers, they are becoming more prolific and influential
• Twitter has had a big impact on the blogosphere, fueling the dramatic rise of micro-blogging…up to 74% of bloggers now use Twitter
• The blogosphere continues to take over turf historically owned by traditional media sources and journalists
• Self-expression and sharing expertise continue to be the primary motivations for bloggers, and 70% of all respondents say that personal satisfaction is how they measure the success of their blog
• For pros, the key measure of success is traffic – or unique visitors
• Blogs cover a wide and diverse range of topics – including many niche subjects
• Most bloggers describe themselves as “sincere”
• Reasons for blogging range from sharing opinions and expertise (popular with hobbyists) to attracting new clients or business opportunities (more important for the pros)
• 30% of respondents say it’s important they conceal their real identity – most for fear or harassment
• Most bloggers are positive about the impact of their blogging on their personal and/or business lives

No real surprises for me in these findings, though the relatively small number of core professional bloggers seems disproportionate to their profile and influence. Then again, this tendency mirrors the trend of the small minority of people who contribute or comment on blogs. The one finding that seemed dissonant is the plurality of bloggers who feel compelled to conceal their identity. I’m not sure how this fits with the ethos of transparency, but they clearly feel compelled to separate their blogger persona from their personal identity.

FYI: Technorati is posting additional comments and articles, so look for updates in the days ahead. A couple of third-party comments on the report are here and here.

IKEA Backlash Shows Two Sides of Fan Passion

The recent criticism aimed at IKEA in recent weeks – much of it on Twitter – is just the latest reminder that companies change their iconic brands or products at their own peril…particularly when they do so without consulting their most ardent fans. IKEA’s apparent misstep? Switching the font in its catalogs to the more pedestrian (some say ugly) Verdana font, from the original customized Futura. Check out  this account of the debate in Maclean’s magazine, and others in Time and a popular blog.  Keep in mind, folks, that we’re talking about changing the font – not a price or product – and only on the printed catalog, not the web platforms.

This story brought to life a few axioms we like to throw out over discussions on marketing:

• It’s great to have passionate fans, but it’s often the most committed customers that react negatively with “their” favorite brand changes
• Design and visual identity is as much a part of corporate identity as products or advertising – with fonts and logos being the focal point
• Surprising your most ardent fans with important news is rarely a good idea
• Social networks are as effective in spreading bad news as good news
• Everything matters when it comes to brand image – look, font, music, color, tone…etc.

The most important lesson here may be that companies need to consider their fan base – as much as possible – in any decision involving products or the brand. IKEA likely thought they were making a fairly innocuous change – seems very logical when you read their explanation – but they would likely have detected instant and strong opposition had they tested the idea with customers or influential third-parties. If we needed another reminder, customers  really are co-owners of the brand.

Lessons from Companies in the Social Media Trenches

Two recent surveys of leading companies point to the progress and potential – but also the challenges – of engaging in social media. Great context for those wondering  what everybody else is doing.

First up…a new survey of 400 global companies by Deloitte, which focused on the perceived benefits and potential of online communities – or “tribalization of business”. The headline of this study is: good progress and plenty of promise…but it’s tough to find the right formula for maximum success.  As the survey puts it: “While enterprises are effectively using online tools to engage with customers, partners, and employees for brand discussion and idea generation, organizations are continuing to struggle with harnessing social media’s full potential.”

Key takeaways include:

• There are signs that company use of social media is maturing,  with the notable example of a shift to consider online “lurkers” (or observers) rather than just active users in online communities
• Companies still struggle with the main obstacles of building online communities – getting users to join, stay engaged and return – and use participation as the main metric for success (the study suggests there are more useful analytics, such as search engine rank and links/citations on other sites)
• The  top business objectives for online communities are (in order): increasing word-of-mouth, customer loyalty and brand awareness

The Deloitte authors provide an interesting prescription to companies engaged in social media that reflects the need for a new perspective and approach:

• Think tribe – not market segment
• Think network – not channel
• Think customer-centricity – not company-centricity

The folks at McKinsey have also spent a considerable amount of their grey matter studying the implementation and impact of social media. One of their most interesting products is an interactive report on Web 2.0 featuring results from their annual survey of 1,700 business executives. (FYI – You may need to register to access the full report.) The survey provides a great snapshot of where companies are investing, what they’re trying to achieve and what technology they are deploying.

Too many findings to show here, but here are some highlights (I’m sticking to Top 3 for each):

• Most important technologies and tools: Blogs, social networking, wikis
• Technology/tools being used internally for developing products & services: wikis, blogs, social networks
• Technology/tools being used internally for managing knowledge: wikis, blogs, RSS
• Technology/tools being used internally for enhancing company culture: blogs, social networking, podcasts
• Technology/tools being used internally for fostering  collaboration: blogs, social networking, wikis
• Technology/tools being used internally for training: videos, wikis, podcasts
• Technology/tools being used internally for finding and recruiting  talent: social networks, blogs, videos

Not surprisingly, the mix of tools used to interact with partners and customers differs from the internal recipe…as do the objectives. In fact, it’s interesting to look at what McKinsey has categorized as main objectives for each audience:

• Partners: achieving better integration, lowering purchase costs, developing  products, solving problems
• Customers: acquiring new customers, improving customer service, developing products, helping customers interact, marketing
• (Employee objectives are noted above.)

There were a couple of surprises for me in the findings. One is the relatively low ranking for micro-blogging…which belies the hype for Twitter and similar internal applications (e.g. Yammer). The other is the low profile of “prediction markets” – which I take to include crowd-sourcing platforms popularized by Dell and Starbucks. Perhaps the most disappointing  (though not surprising) finding is that senior executives are the lowest users of Web 2.0 technology. Therein lies one of the biggest challenges for communication and marketing professionals – it’s hard to sell Web 2.0 strategies to executives who don’t use or understand the technology.

FTC Adds Muscle to Web Ethos of Authenticity

The Federal Trade Commission (FTC) has introduced new rules that add muscle to the prevailing etiquette of social media that frowns on questionable endorsements or testimonies. For reports and commentary, check this article in AdAge and this post in Mashable. Going  forward, bloggers and others using social media platforms will have to clearly disclose any “material connection” to an advertiser – including payments or free products. Fines will run up to $11,000 per incident. [Clarification: This claim was apparently incorrect. See explanation from FTC here.] This issue has been a heated discussion on the Web in recent years, as marketers have stretched the limits of acceptable practice while trying to present individual testimonies, reviews or comments as authentic. (For one example, see the recent tussle on the bloggers driving Ford Fiesta cars.)

Most of the comments on this move are positive, welcoming  the new clarity and expecting the rules to make it harder for unscrupulous marketers pushing fake “word of mouth” to ignore the previously informal rules. Although the regulations focus on blogging, celebrity endorsements and advertising, social networks like Twitter will be impacted by the new rules.

Though transparency and authenticity ultimately drive credibility on the Web, these rules should reduce egregious abuses and help users make informed judgments on content. Another step in the evolution of social media.

Crisis Fosters Innovation at Ford

Sometimes a crisis fosters greater innovation and risk-taking in organizations…and that’s a good thing. As exhibit A check out the latest developments at Ford, which is making some impressive strides in social media.

Ford’s comprehensive efforts include posting content and commentaries on sites ranging  from YouTube and Facebook to Twitter and Flickr. Nothing revolutionary there, but they’re apparently also allowing unusual freedom on how their content is used – notably allowing folks to share and adapt photos and videos. And they’ve recruited a number of consumer bloggers to drive their cars and provide updates – with no apparent restrictions on content. Perhaps the  smartest thing they’ve done is to develop a social media hub – The Ford Story – which acts as an online clearing house for the various platforms and features links to relevant third-party sites and content. Ford is also working to enlist employees in the online outreach, hoping most of them will act as advocates for the company and its products.

Though some critics say Ford’s recent efforts are not perfect (can they be?) you can’t argue with the strong effort and intent. In fact, Ford’s digital communication manager himself answers some of these criticisms on various blogs. Nice touch. Implicit in this campaign is an understanding that consumers ultimately own the reputation of a company…no matter how much a company would wish otherwise. Ford may become a great case study of rehabilitating a brand through dialog and crowd-sourcing rather than  just traditional marketing and advertising.

Mixed Signals on Evolution of Social Media

A few news items from the past week or so confirm that the growth and evolution of social media is not  a linear or neat process. Take a look:

• A global study by Nielsen found that average users spent 17% of their time on the internet visiting social networks and blogs, up from 6% a year ago. The study also found that year-over-year online advertising spending on the top social network and blogging sites increased 119 percent since August 2008.
• This week the coach of Texas Tech football team Mike Leach banned the use of Twitter by his players – at any time – calling  Twitter and Facebook “stupid distractions” for narcissists. He added the Facebook pages of his players would now be closely monitored. The reason for the  ban appears to be recent Twitter posts by two players – including one that suggested coach Leach was late for a meeting.
• The U.S. Government launched a new internal site making a range of social media tools and applications available for download and use. The online storefront will allow government agencies to browse and purchase cloud-based IT services – including Slideshare, Flickr,  Facebook and FriendFeed.
• The venerable BBC in the UK has announced it is relaunching its websites with a strong focus on social media applications, notably adding capability for real-time comment on current news and embedding videos.
• Google announced a new application – the Sidewiki – that allows users to add comments along websites, with one of Google’s mysterious algorithms ranking the comments by relevance and quality.

I draw a few conclusions from these updates:

• Innovation continues to fuel a steady wave of new social media applications and ideas…and keeping track – let alone figuring out which ones will survive – is a daunting task;
• While some are on the frontier and fully embracing social media, others continue to fight a rear-guard action that seems geared to protecting a “command and control” communication model;
• The audience for the Web and social media tools alike continues to grow at a rapid clip;
• There is still no magic formula for making money with/on social media platforms, but there are still plenty of investors that see huge financial potential in the technology.

Obama Feeds the Media Beast

A recent article in New York magazine makes some fascinating arguments about President Obama as the multi-platform, ubiquitous communicator-in-chief. The article suggests Obama and his team are deliberately – and effectively – managing this sustained communication output to brand the president, influence public opinion and direct policy discussions. Obama is described as the ultimate “content provider.” Though there are critics to this saturation strategy, it appears that the public still likes hearing from the President and assigns him considerable equity as a leader. One key implication of this strategy, the author suggests, is that messaging becomes a dynamic, demanding 24-hour contact sport.

Of course, what’s not mentioned in  the article is that many other politicians – or even pundits – are also making every effort to leverage the vast and protean media landscape. It’s just that they are not as consistently effective, and lack the global platform and profile of the President. Furthermore, it’s increasingly difficult to stand out among the profusion of media noise, as numerous companies and bloggers can testify. Despite the apparently insatiable demand for information, there is a saturation point for most users. The challenge for content providers – and their communication partners – will be to avoid just adding their own  fire hose to the mix and figuring out where and when it makes most sense to communicate.

PR Still Out of Sync with Social Media

A recent post by prominent blogger Robert Scoble – who among other things is a columnist at Fast Company – serves as (yet another) plea to the PR industry to stop “bad pitches.” Scoble complains  in his post that his efforts to push back on unwanted and/or misdirected pitches sparked a backlash of criticism from PR pundits and staffers alike. His point – instead of listening and learning too many PR staffers vilify the critics and stubbornly go on their merry way like it’s 1999.

Unfortunately, I’ve seem plenty of evidence first hand that supports Scoble’s unflattering assessment. Recently I witnessed so-called social media experts at one firm suggest they intended to pitch to a variety of influential bloggers… just because they were influential. No matter that they had no real news, that the pitch (as it was) had no topical connection at all to these bloggers or that the company had established no relationship whatsoever with these bloggers. One can imagine the reaction this would have generated with the recipients. Some agencies seem unable even to reassess the relevance and value of their services, still promoting bulk coverage in traditional media as the ultimate measure of communication success. I’m not honestly sure why the industry continues to demonstrate this blind spot around social media and continue to push blunt,  mass pitching. Perhaps it’s due to the fact much of the dirty work in agencies is still done by the most inexperienced (and inexpensive) staff. Maybe it’s the pressure to product results – no matter what they are. Whatever the cause, until agencies overhaul their tactics and respond to the complaints they will continue to turn influential pundits like Scoble into critics rather than advocates. Worse, they will push existing and potential employees out of the PR business.

Social Media – Use With Caution…But Don’t Avoid It

The latest polemic about the perils of on-line communication – in this case the unfortunate Twitter comments by a Ketchum executive – provides more fodder for those who fear to tread in social media. Check out the summary of the developments on this AdAge post.  Certainly, there  is a lesson here (if we needed another one) that what you post on-line - no matter where it is or how innocuous it appears – can rapidly spark a domino effect of unintentional consequences. In this case, the Twitter post (with unflattering comments about Memphis) was discovered by FedEx employees, who in turn turned up the volume by sending their response to a broad swatch of FedEx executives. Once the executive was identified (he was in Memphis to present to FedEx as a social media expert) Ketchum was forced to do some predictable mea culpas.   

But I tend to agree with this AdAge columnist that the original tweet wasn’t much of a smoking gun, and that the tension increased largely because of the agency-client dynamic. So if there is a secondary lesson it’s that when you post on your own behalf – even through an alias on Twitter – you always need to consider how the content will reflect on your role as a PR professional, or agency representative. The line between personal and professional is nebulous and quickly forgotten when comments are lifted out of context or – as in this case – the content straddles the line.

Already, this small dust up is being leveraged by those who like to focus on the risks and uncertainties of social media. The incident has been mentioned to me several times within the context of “see what can happen…” with the unspoken suggestion that it may be better to avoid the whole messy thing altogether.  Few would deny the dynamics of social media – the global reach, the permanent legacy, the nasty vitriol, the shifting etiquette – require caution and thought. But the fact a pseudo scandal can spread quickly and unpredictably is no reason to avoid the Web.