Eurostar Crisis Shows Social Media Not Optional

The disruption of Eurostar’s train traffic in the “Chunnel” last week holds a valuable lesson for those intent on leveraging social media to communicate with customers: the biggest risk is not in diving too deep…but not deep enough.

In the aftermath of the crisis the communication folks at Eurostar admitted that their social media programs – focused narrowly on push marketing activities – were of limited use to communicate with customers during the crisis. They are planning to totally rethink their social media approach in 2010. Apparently, Eurostar’s various platforms (notably on Facebook and Twitter) were not set up to manage a robust Q&A with customers but rather to promote its “Little break, big difference” campaign. Eurostar made the best of the situation and leveraged their existing marketing platforms, but frustrated customers had to hunt for Eurostar updates (including the CEO’s apology on the “Little Break” website.) Hard to believe, but Eurostar and Eurostar-UK Twitter handles were not formal company channels. The company eventually put an apology letter from the CEO on its corporate website. Needless to say, the vacuum of official Eurostar information and real-time updates compared unfavorably with the torrent of complaints and speculation by customers and interested observers.

There are several valuable lessons on social media engagement here for communication professionals:

• Don’t make it hard for customers to find you…or talk to you…or ask questions. Eurostar’s platforms were either dormant, irrelevant, silent or branded with obscure marketing names the average customer would never have heard.
• Make sure you are prepared to quickly get out your message where the conservation is occurring…not just your own platforms (even if they are excellent).  With real-time search and mobile updates its critical to quickly fill the information vacuum during a crisis.
• Be careful to limit and/or silo your social media strategy. Having marketing as the lead manager proved disastrous for Eurostar. Ideally, any program should be fully integrated and managed by a cross-functional team. Branding, messaging and technology should be aligned and complementary.
• Do a good inventory of all relevant pages/sites on major social networks – which typically unearths a number of rogue corporate and employee sites – and implement a strategy to inject a formal presence in the mix.
• Remember that social media platforms by definition are about conversation – not just pushing information. So learn to listen and respond…all the time.
• Don’t ignore the critical role – and potential reach – of traditional media channels, which can also help get key messages and updates out. Eurostar CEO comments were featured on BBC updates – but not soon enough for stranded passengers.
• Have a clear policy for employee online behavior and commentary. Some of the comments I saw on Twitter and Facebook appear to be Eurostar employees, but it’s not clear if they are speaking as observers or in a formal role. Furthermore, their comments are decidedly mixed.

Ultimately, the biggest lesson here is that social media is too prominent in the communication (and marketing) mix to leave as an after-thought or one-shot marketing campaign. Companies that dip their toes rather than take the plunge do so at their own peril.

Search on Steroids Means More Changes for PR

This past week Google took a few big strides in the race to offer the most comprehensive online search technology – introducing some new features which allow users to see real-time updates and further personalize their findings. Search results will now automatically include a stream of real-time (and constantly updated) comments from social networks, news feeds and blog posts. Searches on Google will now include real-time updates from sites like Twitter and Facebook. The findings will also be further personalized based on previous searches by the user. Google also introduced an interesting new feature allowing users to use a photo (taken on mobile devices) to get information on the object in the picture. Check out a blog post on the announcement here and news coverage here and here. (The original announcement by Google, complete with video examples, is here.)

Most of the coverage and blog conversation about Google’s announcement focuses on how this will impact the search engine race, particularly the impact on upstart Bing and networks like Twitter and MySpace (who have their own upstart search functions).  But speculation on the implications of “supersearch” on PR – and communication professionals – is just beginning, and no less interesting. Here are my initial take-aways.

• Companies focusing on using SEO to manage their profiles on Google will have a harder time, since now a good part of the results will come from more fluid, unpredictable networks like Twitter – where conversation is much harder to follow, and very difficult to shape.
• These changes give social networks even more prominence and potential clout than before, so organizations that do not have a formal presence on these sites need to quickly devise a strategy for building a credible profile – ideally through an influential group of friends/fans/followers. Putting up a corporate page on Facebook or MySpace and letting it gather dust is no longer an option.
• Since Google makes it that much easier for users to find breaking news and commentary on any topic – and uncover emerging content trends – it becomes more critical that communicators themselves keep abreast of relevant developments and online chatter. If monitoring the Web was important before – relatively easy using aggregators like NetVibes and Google Reader –  it’s become an absolute necessity now.
• In a similar vein to the point above, managing a crisis becomes a more dynamic and challenging exercise in this real-time, robust search environment. Communicators eager to quell rumors or address a contentious issue need to consider if and how they can implement their strategy within this cacophony of search data. At minimum, they need to find an effective way to get the word out (perhaps through their own friends/fans on these networks or sympathetic bloggers.)
• Companies who use Google for Web search on their internal systems will be able to leverage the new real-time technology, but those on the cutting-edge will want to explore how they can use the same search logic with their own proprietary platforms and sites – such as their intranet or internal networks. This would allow employees to benefit from the latest commentary and news on salient internal issues, which previously might have been buried in emails, rogue sites or hidden files.
• Finally, it may be stating the obvious but organizations that don’t yet have clear policies and protocols for online use are at even higher risk of a self-inflicted reputation implosion. Staff need to understand what they can and can’t do on the Web – whether it be on their own time or as formal representatives of a company. The heightened popularity of Twitter and Facebook and increased profile on general search substantially raises the stakes.

Ultimately, the lesson for PR professionals is simple: ignore these changes at your own peril. The pace and scope of progress in communication technology requires sustained observation and planning.

Employees Key Ingredient of Corporate Reputation

There’s been plenty of discussion and printing dedicated to the topic of corporate reputation, with a few chestnuts emerging as common themes – such as the merits of building a “goodwill bank” and the quick and dramatic impact a crisis can have on reputation. There are also many consultants selling their respective solutions to improving or rehabilitating a tarnished reputation. In my observation many of these programs leave out the employees; too often the diagnosis and prescription is heavily (if not exclusively) focused on external stakeholders. (A popular evaluation metric used by the Reputation Institute looks at “workplace” as a key factor, but their approach is based more on perceptions of the employer brand than employee outreach or behavior.)

There are several reasons why activities related to corporate reputation need to fully involve employees:

• Companies intent on measuring and managing their reputation ideally need to follow the same steps internally they would with consumers or customers: assessment, gap analysis, prescription, outreach, progress evaluation, etc. On the assessment front…employees need to fully understand and embrace the desired reputation to effectively deliver on the brand promise, so evaluation of their opinions and ideas is critical. Making assumptions about what employees know, feel or want on any topic is a risky strategy. Employees are a key part of the opportunity (or problem) and the solution.
• Employees help form the existing reputation and need to buy into the desired reputation.  Some would argue a desired reputation that is not relevant or credible with employees cannot become reality, so any reputation program has to consider the internal gap and include appropriate solutions to move the employee needle. In short, new reputations cannot be developed in a vacuum.
• Much like in broader change efforts, the more employees are involved in defining the solution/strategy the more likely they are to be fully engaged…so companies should consider how they can engage employees in the process of defining and enhancing the corporate reputation. At minimum, companies should think about soliciting & leveraging the ideas and best practices of their teams.
• With the advent of social media, employees are more likely to help shape and drive the brand identity and reputation of companies online – employees are potentially the most credible fans and advocates, but also the most devastating critics. (This goes beyond the occasional “rogue” employee that breaks rules and ends up on YouTube, like these guys.) In the social media context individual, peer-to-peer interactions often have more traction than traditional, generic marketing activities. So any reputation program should – at minimum – have a clear roadmap for how employees can help drive the reputation through their formal and informal online activities. (FYI – the external reputation analysis can confirm how much employees drive the opinions…good or bad.) Some progressive companies have taken this a step further and developed programs to fully leverage their employees as an army of online ambassadors and fans (e.g. Dell.)
• Whatever the gap between desired and existing reputation, employees must be provided with the direction, tools and support to help achieve the ideal reputation…after all they are the ones developing/delivering relevant products and services and shaping customer interactions. This can go well beyond communication into HR programs, training, recognition, incentives and so on.
• To give credit, many companies address the direct link between their employees and their reputation in their community outreach programs, but these are often limited, choreographed initiatives where employees are encouraged to participate in specific, company sponsored programs. I would argue these programs are almost seen as a price-of-entry for any company and provide limited reputation benefit unless they are seen as particularly noteworthy. Furthermore, I know from personal experience many companies don’t explain the purpose or importance of these outreach activities to their employees. In short…not good enough.
• The inherent value of an integrated, multi-audience reputation program is it helps ensure the program is focused & aligned across various stakeholders and internal teams. Too many companies fail to make clear links between their brand, reputation, vision/values, etc. and employees are left confused, so it’s important to have a holistic approach that connects the dots.

With all the effort and spending in the area of corporate reputation, it’s time to put further thought in the critical role of employees in the development, promotion and protection of company reputation.

 

Social Media Leaders Build on Momentum

I continue to be startled by the widening gap between companies breaking new ground in social media and others who continue to dither or resist any involvement. Recent campaigns by innovative companies like Best Buy and Coke brings this separation into even more  stark contrast.

Best Buy has long been an innovator in the area of communications, so their new holiday campaign should not be a surprise. The most interesting element is perhaps the launch of their Twelpforce Twitter account – which is staffed by 2,500 sales and support folks who are available to respond to consumer questions or comments. The Twitter team/link is being promoted on a new television campaign – replacing the website address of past years. Best But is also leveraging its Facebook page to make it easier for users to ask friends for product advice, or even send email tips to relatives of your interest in certain products. In a cool twist, the company is introducing 25 tiny URLs to encourage users to send select product tips via email and social networks. Check out this New York Times article on the Best Buy holiday campaign here.

Coke is another company trying something new. Never one to do things on a small scale, the company is launching a campaign called Expedition 206, which involves recruiting amateur “Happiness Ambassadors” to travel the world through 2010 and document their quest through videos, Tweets, blog posts and so on. The final selection is being left to consumers. Check out a summary of the campaign here. Coca-Cola is no stranger to social media and already has one of the most popular Facebook pages (which apparently was created by two users) with almost 3.9 million fans. (As a side note on Coke’s bumpy path to social media enlightenment, check out this AdWeek post. )

Gap is another company with a promising holiday campaign. They are partnering with Yahoo to encourage consumers to record and send video greetings via a mobile recording studio in NYC. The clips – complete with options for customized holiday music – can then be posted and forwarded using the full range of digital channels and social networks. Consumers will also be encouraged to rank video greetings, and the most popular will win prizes. I also noticed Sears is launching a holiday-themed networking site and using widgets and text messages to flag holiday promotions. Even a traditional retailer like Kohl’s is jumping into the fray. So this isn’t the usual high-tech cast of characters.

My point here isn’t really to argue whether these campaigns are compelling or even very creative, and we’ll have to see if they deliver on their marketing objectives. But at least these companies are trying to respond to the shift in consumer habits and fitting social media into their marketing mix. True, some of these efforts may be clumsy and even ill-advised, but better to try and fail – and learn along the way – than to stubbornly stick with outdated and dubious tactics. Nobody said progress was pretty.

 

Is Social Media Really About the Deals?

A new study of U.S. consumers by Razorfish suggests that old-fashioned discounts and promotions are the key to engaging online consumers. Even more shocking, the data implies that consumers favor deals over conversation – the mantra of social media – and aren’t as passionate about brands as previously believed. Like others – including the folks at Razorfish – I was somewhat surprised by this finding, since the ethos of social media seems to shun the hard sell and emphasize authentic relationships over transactions or brand profiles. Razorfish’s analysis on the data suggests otherwise: While conventional wisdom holds that consumers don’t want brands encroaching on their social or personal lives, this is far from the truth. The myth of marketing-free social spaces is just that. The “dialogue” between brands and consumers is not only frequent, but also welcome. Check out this post here for a good discussion of the findings, and another interesting take from Neville Hobson here.

If you look beyond this headline, there are other interesting findings that all confirm the Web is dramatically transforming how consumers interact with brands:

• Consumers’ online experience has a big impact on their brand perceptions and purchase decisions – the digital experience (via branded activities) is now the message, and driving awareness or impressions is no longer sufficient
• Consumers want to interact, regardless of whether brands are willing participants: 73% have posted a product or brand review on a web site like Amazon, Yelp, Facebook, or Twitter
• The Web is not only a place to build a brand, it can also make or break it (65% of consumers report having had a digital experience that either positively or negatively changed their opinion about a brand – of those nearly all said their digital experience influenced whether or not they made a purchase)

Whether or not this survey is representative, I think the lesson here is that the rapid evolution of social media impacts not just technology or economics, but also consumer habits and norms. Communication and marketing professionals need to avoid retrenching behind dogma or cherished views and be open to new trends and ideas – even ones that may clash with tradition or prevailing wisdom. I suspect some social media pundits will attack or ignore this survey and defend the need for “pure” online conversation devoid of blatant commercial interests. That’s their right, but it would be missing the point. After all, isn’t the core power of social media that it gives consumers the power to drive online conversations and commerce? Maybe we need to listen to them a little more carefully.

Second Life Still Alive and Well

Many big developments in technology seem to follow the same pattern: launch, hype, boom, more hype, backlash and, too often, bust. Or at least rumors of bust. But usually this pattern is more hyperbole than reality. Take Second Life as an example. When Second Life emerged a few years ago the hype was deafening, and a host of companies (including Dell, where I worked at the time) rushed to build virtual islands. Then the buzz gradually died down. Some companies left, disillusioned about the difficulty of generating revenue or leads through their island. Others stayed on but struggled to find value or purpose in their investments. Many just stayed away, confused by the technology. Some in the media and blogosphere suggested Second Life was heading towards the crowded bone-yard of technology.

Well, Second Life is alive and well – if you’ll pardon the pun. In terms of size and reach, Second Life shows some pretty strong numbers – though it must be said there are skeptics regarding these statistics. But beyond the crude numbers, I would argue Second Life is showing resilience and relevance through the innovation of its inhabitants. With the benefit of virtual experience, many are finding the benefits of Second Life may be more nuanced than pure marketing – for example cutting communication costs or developing new learning modules.

For a look at some of the creative uses of Second Life – ranging from e-learning to virtual meetings and collaborative design – check out these recorded sessions from the Gronstedt Group, a consulting firm that has long advocated the benefits of 3-D online environments like Second Life. [Disclosure - Anders Gronstedt is a friend and did work for me when I was at Dell.]

Perhaps the most important recent development is the announcement of Second Life’s new platform for the enterprise – which will allow companies to deploy their own, customized virtual environment behind their firewall. This beta program – set to formally launch in Q1 next year – addresses concerns about security and firewalls that have caused many organizations (including the last one I worked for) to stay away from Second Life. Check out Fast Company’s take on this development here.

As this coverage notes, the potential for companies to leverage a “closed” Second Life platform to improve and expand their internal communications is huge. The interactive, graphic and multi-media properties of SL lend themselves well to everything from virtual meetings to project collaboration and training. This particularly holds true for global companies with dispersed or telecommuting workforces. The possibilities are exciting…and endless. Yesterday I participated in a briefing in SL that featured an architecture firm that develops designs using a wiki “tree”, which allows visitors to propose and rank design additions or changes on existing projects. If companies are paying attention, I suspect some of those who avoided or left SL may take a second look. It would be well worth their time.

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.

Is Cloud-Computing The Secret to Internal Communication Progress?

A recent post by the folks at Melcrum in the UK provides evidence that more companies are adopting cloud-based collaboration platforms (in this case Google Apps) for their internal communications. Last week Jaguar and Land Rover announced they were also switching to Google. And Google isn’t the only big player in this emerging field: IBM recently introduced its own cloud collaboration suite.  (I haven’t even mentioned the host of new providers that offer services that go well beyond email, calendars and file-sharing – notably internal micro-blogging and networking tools.)

Anybody who has worked inside an organization is familiar with the debates that occur on this issue. For the cons, there are typically concerns about information security and integration with firewalls, while on the pro side the main motivations tend to be lower cost and a more efficient, integrated platform that is accessible through any Web connection. In  my experience, the naysayers are often in IT while proponents are employees looking for better ways to collaborate and communicate with peers. Coincidence? For many companies – slowed by balkanized email networks, weak IT governance and outdated infrastructure – going to a cloud platform is an easy way to start fresh using external resources, often at much lower cost than an infrastructure overhaul. For smaller companies, it’s almost a no-brainer. I’ve been involved in several start-ups in recent months and all of them are using cloud-based platforms for their email, file storage and collaboration needs – at no cost.

So why so much resistance? Likely a new version of the proverb that you can’t be fired for buying IBM – many prefer to play it safe. I’m certainly not a technical expert, but I suspect that the popular chestnuts about unreliable cloud networks and data risk are overblown. I’ve experienced far more problems with internal systems than the occasional blip with cloud-based applications. And is there a network anywhere that is more robust than Google? Companies should certainly do their due diligence, but when the status quo for many employees is working on creaky, inefficient systems – if they even have access to their network – there is no excuse for at least not considering the cloud.

Two More Reasons Companies Need to Pay Attention to Social Media

If companies needed any more reasons to get off the sidelines and start thinking about social media…

Reason #1: Staying Ahead of New FTC Regulations

The recently announced FTC guidelines on testimonials in advertising provide the first specific guidance from government on endorsements and disclosure in social media. Bob Pearson from the WeissComm Group suggests companies will be held more accountable for the behavior of their employees, so they should familiarize themselves with the regulations and ensure they take steps to limit their liability. In effect, companies will no longer be able to skirt (or flaunt) informal Web etiquette and will be held responsible for their online communication activities. Bob suggests all companies – big or small – follow this short checklist:

1. Require truthfulness and disclosure in all social media outreach

2. Monitor the conversation and correct misstatements

3. Create social media policies (with clear transparency and disclosure rules) and training programs

[Full disclosure: Bob is a friend and my former boss at Dell.]

Reason #2: Getting Ready for Real-Time Search

In recent weeks, there’s been plenty of online discussion about the emergence (and importance) of real-time search, which captures live updates on networks like Twitter and Facebook. A recent New York Times article posits that announcements by Google and Microsoft that their search platforms will include Twitter is just the latest evidence of this trend. (FYI: Facebook public updates will soon be available on Microsoft’s Bing.) Though the NYT article focuses on the potential revenue implications of real-time search, companies would do well to also study the PR impact of this trend on their own search results.  BusinessWeek recently posted a good summary on this topic.

What I thought was the most insightful take on this issue came from Charlene Li at Altimeter, who in her post on the topic writes: This trend towards micro media requires companies to pay attention to the real-time and social web for marketing, support, and competitive strategies. Here’s why. First, Google and Bing will filter search results based partly on timing and authority (as well as location.) Li argues this means consumers will more easily be able to influence search results through Twitter content, links and re-tweets. Conversely, companies will no longer be able to rely on their traditional page ranking, fueled by their SEO strategies. So even for companies not active on Twitter, their customers (or critics) can more easily influence search results related to the company in question. Li suggests a recipe to address this shift in search strategy:

• Develop a nimble, comprehensive listening strategy that includes social networks and incorporates internal processes, roles as well as robust analytical tools
• Change the marketing mindset that says generating more positive (self-serving) content will tilt the search balance, since the search filters will leave out irrelevant messages with no authority or following
• Marketers must focus on building relationships with people who have influence and authority on networks like Twitter – which means fostering relevant discussions with consumers and followers/friends

Even for companies with a defensive mindset who hesitate to jump into social media, these and other developments suggest their time as spectators is coming to an end.

Customer Reviews Becoming The Killer App

It’s become accepted dogma that in the booming internet economy customer rankings and comments heavily influence brand reputation and purchase decisions. (Check out one recent study here and another by Forrester here, as well as an article on the phenomena in the New York Times .) A story last week in BusinessWeek suggests that for Amazon.com – the pioneer in customer reviews – the consumer ratings have become a key reason for the site’s popularity, and the company’s enviable reputation. Over the years, the online retailer has expanded its community feedback features to include personal “wish lists” (that can be shared) and various discussion hubs to facilitate consumer conversations on broad or specific topics. (Check out the variety of review options using the example of the new Microsoft 7 OS here.)

The BusinessWeek article argues that this trove of consumer generated content (in this case reviews) has become a main attraction for viewers – and an important competitive advantage for Amazon.com. With one of the world’s largest collections of consumer reviews, the site is a magnet for users intent on getting information or browsing for products. The article describes the new breed of “information-based shoppers” as a major shift in the retail environment, reflecting a stronger focus on due diligence (largely through the internet) and increased cynicism about traditional advertising or marketing. The focus on finding impartial information and value fits it perfectly with the emergence of a new consumer frugality.

There are numerous lessons here for retailers – and communication professionals – but perhaps the most important is to remember the outcry when Amazon.com originally decided to post the consumer reviews – both good and bad. This was seen as heresy to some marketers intent on presenting their products under the best light and stifling any negative feedback. While there is still debate whether a product can survive negative reviews, there is little discussion about the importance of allowing consumer comments and rankings.