Category Archive

The folks at Dell continue to push the envelope in the area of social media and recently came out with their perspective - or manifesto of guiding principles - on supporting an increasingly mobile workforce. Check out the post here. [Full disclosure: Until several months ago, I worked at Dell in the social media team and was involved in defining and implementing the company's social media strategy.] Dell’s ideas are insightful and provide a good roadmap for any organization trying to address the ubiquity of mobile devices, digital content and peripatetic workers. Perhaps their smartest move is to look at the issue from the perspective of the end-user, rather than the IT geeks or corporate leaders.

What really hit home after reading this post is how far some companies are lagging in this race for relevance and connectivity with workers. While some companies are juggling which multimedia device or platform to use (iPhone or 3G phone?) others are simply trying to get their workforce connected to the internet…or even intranet…through clunky old computer terminals. The idea of cell phones for their workforce is still years away. There are many reasons for this digital divide - culture, cost, geography - but the biggest may simply be awareness. Keeping up with the Web 2.0 revolution is a challenge - even for IT departments - and many organizations are hard-pressed to keep updated on trends and developments, let alone try to explain them to their leaders. The saving grace of the rapid progress is that it may be possible to skip some steps in the race to get workers connected - the solution today (PDAs) may be replaced by a better one tomorrow (the next version of iPhone.) The biggest mistake, however, would be to just give up.

A recent post by Edelman’s Steve Rubel argues that with the increasing proliferation of websites and myriad new applications it becomes inevitable that the era of sites as mega destinations will become a thing of the past. The focus is now on portability of the experience - the ability to find the site from anywhere, anytime rather than having to return to the source website. This makes sense to me, though I believe sites (or networks) like Facebook that allow multiple applications may remain important web locations - or at least starting points.

Since I’m wearing a hat as an internal communications leader these days, it made me wonder if and how this trend is relevant to employee audiences. For many companies, communication professionals are still struggling to convince executives about the merits of social media, and those on the cutting-edge are still few and far between (at least from what I can tell.) So I suspect this issue will remain a topic of conversation among a few practitioners rather than an imminent  reality. But I think there is merit in explaining to these same leaders that the days of the big intranet is perhaps gone - or at least that it can remain relevant if we make it possible to access the intranet through various digital tools and channels, and that users can customize not only the content for the access points. So to build on the metaphor I’ve been using on the issue…it’s no longer “build it and they will come” but rather “build it and make sure users take it with them wherever  they go.”

My former colleague and fellow Canadian Joe Thornley shared his “do’s and don’ts” for corporate blogs in a recent post, and they provide a very good checklist for any potential company bloggers out there. Since my focus these days in on internal communications, I reviewed the list with an employee audience in mind and - no real surprise - many of the rules still apply. Take a look.

 Do’s 

Listen first -Probably the most relevant tip with regard to internal corporate blogs. Unfortunately, I see a real tendency to want to harness this new channel to push yet more messages to employees. This is the area I will be focusing my efforts in my own company before single post is written. I also intend to increase the ways we can actually “listen” to the workforce beyond rare, formal surveys and polls. Or else, we’re talking to ourselves.

Write about things you are passionate about -Again, this is not the first instinct of many executives when they begin to write for an internal blog. The default is usually to write about corporate news or priorities, and you’re lucky if the folks writing feel strongly about these fairly prosaic issues. It’s also a tough sell to convince executives (or internal experts) to inject their personality into their posts, not just their expertise.

Give without asking for a return -See above…not a normal reaction for executives steeped in discussions of ROI and driving engagement. The challenge is to convince them these things will come, but if and only if they provide something of value to employees through the blog and folks decide to join the conversation. It’s also important to note that a blog will quickly uncover anything that is not genuine or authentic, so any concern for the employee had better be real.

Keep it positive - This may be easier to do in an internal context. In fact, the challenge may be reversed in a corporate setting, working to avoid sugar-coating problems or dancing around unpleasant facts through corporate hype or fluff. There may already be too much positive communication in most corporate settings - and some of it is likely somewhat fabricated or embellished.

Be patient and persistent - No argument here. It takes time to build an audience, to find a voice and to foster a real, vibrant conversation. This holds true for an internal blog even though in theory the employees are a ”captive” audience. Provide relevant and valuable information and allow robust, candid commentary…and they will come.

Dont’s 

Don’t use a ghostwriter -I am a strong advocate that internal authors should essentially write their own posts - even the CEO. Though it’s OK in some circumstances to help them out or do some light editing, they should provide most of the copy in their own voice. Without authenticity, the impact of the blog will be severely limited. This is a tough one for many executives used to plenty of hand-holding and direction in the development of their speeches and memos.

Don’t fake it -I make the case with my peers that to be credible an internal blog must be timely, transparent and candid. As Joe notes, blog readers can be ruthless and unforgiving at the mere hint of a cover-up or lie. Though the criticisms may not be as overt in an internal blog, lack of credibility will quickly corrode the relevance of the blog.

Don’t give up -May not be as relevant for an internal blog, but valuable advice nevertheless. This is not a short-term process with immediate rewards. Like many good things in life, it takes time to develop a good internal blog. After all, this is about building new relationships across levels, locations and communities. That’s not something that can happen overnight - particularly in companies without a tradition of internal conversation.

Out on the cutting-edge fringes comes a new idea that has a great deal of appeal to me - establishing a social network within the firewalls of a company - an internal Facebook, so to speak. Check out this post to see details. (Full disclosure - thanks to Paul Walker at GCI for the tip.) Though this idea entails some technology challenges, it may be an easier pitch than trying to convince corporate leaders to let their employees access their external networks - even if they do so in informal company groups.  Typically, internal directories and collaboration tools are high on the list for employee intranets, so I suspect this kind of network would be popular and productive. Another thing to put on my list….

Picked up a post on Mashable that nicely captures choices for the key web trends for the past year. The only big one I would add - though it might seem like stating the obvious - is the increasingly dominant role of Google as an economic, cultural and technological force on the Web. For better or worse, what they decide to do (or buy) has major ripple effects on the vast internet ecosystem. Though some fear this power, I’ve yet to see any negative impact of Google’s domination in my daily interactions on the Web - quite the opposite, in fact - so I’m withholding  my judgement.

Looking beyond the core Web trends into related developments in PR, I guess the most prominent trend is simply that companies are slowly, sometimes reluctantly, adopting some of the tools and ethos of social media in their communication activities: corporate blogs, internal wikis, RSS-enabled intranet portals, islands on Second Life, crowd-sourcing sites, social press releases, Twitter networks…and so on. There’s also been a steady increase of activities that could be considered marketing - or sorry…relationship building as the CMOs would define it. 

I see most if not all of these trends are positive developments. The twin disciplines of PR and marketing (as well as advertising to a lesser extent) have already greatly benefited, I would suggest, from being blown inside-out with the liberating gusts of Web 2.0 ideas and tools. PR, in particular, was (is?) in need of a major overhaul; name another profession with such a dubious reputation, stifling inertia, propensity to flirt with the dark side of ethics and insular thinking. Let the winds of freedom blow…. 

A recent BusinessWeek article does a good job of capturing the debate and developments around the issue of building social networks for employees. The article highlights two of the central questions related to this topic:

• One is whether to build an employee network - or even to allow employees to access existing corporate networks outside the firewall (e.g. virtually every major company has a Facebook network…though many are not sponsored or supervised)
• Assuming you want to proceed, a central question becomes whether to leverage the existing external networks, to create a new network on the internet or to build a network within the firewall

On the first question, I would argue that denying employee access to Facebook and/or ignoring the trend towards networking is akin to sticking a finger in a massive dike…the decision is short-sighted and unrealistic.

On the latter question, there is merit to all three options, but also distinctive challenges. For those companies who fear breaches of confidentiality or have a workforce that is grumpy and likely to be highly critical, it may make more sense to initially create an in-house network. For others - particularly companies whose employees are likely to be advocates and already have a high profile on the net, it probably makes sense to create an external site.

But the important point here is to recognize that employees are already active on networks, and that there are already conversations going on about the company. So the question becomes whether there is benefit in harnessing that employee networking for the company’s benefit. Furthermore, the tools that make social networks so attractive can be leveraged to drive collaboration and alignment across an organization. With that background, it seems like keeping the digital door shut tight is an exercise in futility, and probably bad for business.  

I just returned from presenting at a Conference Board event in Chicago, which was focused on engaging employees in the brand. The workshop I facilitated with my good friend David Kippen at TMP Worldwide was about how to manage a brand in the face of the Web 2.0 revolution. It’s always an interesting gauge to compare notes with peers at an industry conference or event, and this one was no different. Here are some of my main observations:

• At this point virtually all companies or organizations in the session were aware of social media - though some only peripherally - and are thinking about if and how they get involved. From my unscientific poll of attendees, most seem intent on doing something, though what exactly they are not sure. A few had already started down the path of setting up wikis or blogs.
• There appears to be much more focus on how the Web 2.0 tools can be leveraged with (and for) an internal audience. This is great news, given the huge potential to leverage these tools to engage employees in relevant conversation, foster collaboration and leverage internal best practices and ideas.
• The IT and Legal departments are universally seen as the biggest barriers (perceived or real) to getting involved in social media. On the Legal side, the complaint is understandable - though I made a case at the conference that Legal’s resistance is often overstated and it’s not an onerous task to define clear rules of engagement (either for internal or external tools.) Still, there are numerous nervous discussions about worst case scenarios (what if our employees share secrets or badmouth the CEO?) despite the fact this can already happen over the phone, email, etc. The IT criticism is more problematic, and is certainly in line with my own experience and observations. The department that should be leading the charge in exploring and adopting new tools and technology is too often a laggard, stubbornly resisting change of any sort with little or no valid reasoning (is it really valid to suggest it takes several months for a project to get on the “roadmap”?)
• Folks from a wide range of departments - Corporate Communications, HR, Marketing, Internal Communications - were represented at the event and actively involved in the discussions. This is an excellent trend, since in most cases it will take a robust cross-functional effort to devise and implement a social media strategy.
• In some cases, Marketing seems to be leading the corporate charge in social media. On the one hand this is good, since the marketing folks are typically savvy in online trends and technology and certainly know their way around digital content (like videos and websites.) On the other hand, this should raise some red flags, since though smart and well-intentioned, folks in marketing are the most likely to ignore the informal rules of engagement and push the envelope into pushy and ill-advised pitching.

All in all, it was good to see this topic front and center in yet another industry event. Slowly but surely, seems like the PR industry is catching on that this is most definitely not a fad.

I had some interesting  conversations last week on the topic of employee communications, notably if and how organizations are adopting the lessons of social networks and the Web into their internal strategies. I think the verdict is decidedly mixed. Some companies continue to hesitate on making the shift from traditional communication to dynamic conversations. In some cases the caution is valid (for example in unionized manufacturing environments) but in many it’s a function of ignorance and/or inertia. Other organizations have made good progress - introducing internal blogs, wikis, RSS capability, customized intranet portals, robust search engines, digital content production, interactive training modules…among many others. And the point of these tools is not the technology, but rather the philosophy behind them - to foster candid dialogue, faciliate peer-to-peer collaboration, encourage employee input and innovation, provide relevant and interesting training, allow for time-shifting of information, and leverage existing or potential networks of like-minded workers. But often these successes focus on the basic internal mandate - helping employees do their jobs efficiently and effectively.  

What I don’t see nearly as often is companies that strive to make their employees fans of their company, and ultimately active ambassadors outside the organization. From my experience, these are areas where few companies dare to tread and even fewer succeed. The companies that do this well - Nike, Apple, Patagonia - have found a formula that fosters legitimate commitment and passion among their employees. It starts with liking (loving?) the products and services provided by the company, of course, but also includes strong affinity with the vision and beliefs of the organization. How do the companies do it? I think it starts with the basics - make sure your employees use (and like) your own products.  Let them define and represent the brand inside and outside the work environment. Foster a true sense of community. Treat them like your main marketing asset, not an after-thought.

Once you have this well informed, excited group of employees the next step is leveraging them as advocates for the company (and brand.) Let them interact with customers or share their thoughts on the company blog - or their own blog. Give them the tools to create and share their own marketing materials (like viral videos.) Make them the focus of external events or presentations. And of course, let them use and promote your products.  

Why does all this matter? Can’t we just focus on making sure they do their jobs and drive revenue? Think of it this way. Even with effective internal communication, you can have a workforce that is either invisible or critical outside the company. The ideal is to have a majority of employees act as your de-facto marketing army, spreading the good word with customers and peers alike. No matter where your organization is on this spectrum, it all starts with empathy and respect for the employees. Passion and alignment cannot be forced or manufactured. Maybe it’s just about treating your employees like customers…your best customers.

Update: What is a company’s worst nightmare? Employees that turn against the company and corrode the brand reputation - think of them as “kryptonite” ambassadors. See this  BusinessWeek article on the problems at Wal-Mart stemming from disgruntled and cynical employees.

In a conversation with a senior communications executive last week, I raised a topic that could easily brand me as a heretic, or even lunatic - I asked if managers were still the most critical and effective communication channel for employees. Sure, I was being a devil’s advocate, but I’ve been thinking about this issue for weeks and decided to air it out.

Here was my logic. With the advent of Web 2.0 technology and the dramatic changes in how people access, share and discuss information, is it possible that managers are less relevant and critical to the employee communication process? At many forward-thinking companies (including the one I work at) you can find a combination of the following developments that have totally changed the communication environment:

·         Intranet portals with RSS capability - which allows employees to “pull” relevant information as it is posted – and the ability to personalize content

·         Increasing use of webcasting and sophisticated video-conferencing tools – which bring executives and other employees “face-to-face” on the desktop or screen

·         Blogs that foster vigorous dialogue – both between executives and employees and among the workforce

·         Wikis or other virtual project management tools that allow increased peer-to-peer collaboration and user-generated content

·         Increasing use of podcasts, which allow employees to download and “time shift” content and access it when it’s most convenient

·         Internal crowd-sourcing tools that allow employees to suggest (and even rank) ideas

·         Expanding use of mobile technology – ranging from the ubiquitous BlackBerry to devices like the iPhone – that allow virtually any content to be shared, accessed and stored using a mobile device

·         “Virtual” sites like Second Life to conduct training sessions or conduct employee meetings

·         And finally, more employees are working virtually from the road or the local coffee-shop with free wi-fi…and that’s not even factoring in the expanding use of online stringers and ad-hoc teams who can’t even be considered employees

The impact of these developments is that many employees can (at least in theory) access critical information much more easily, more conveniently and in more rich formats than ever before. (And that doesn’t even touch on information they can access through external channels.) And none of these channels requires a manager.

So does that mean managers are no longer important in the communication chain?  I would say they still are…but less so. Just as we learned that email and intranets are not a panacea, there’s probably still a need for the “high touch” to go with this new wave of “high tech.” All the research I’ve seen suggests managers are still the most trusted and relevant information source for many employees. And there will always be a role for managers to reaffirm, interpret and customize corporate information to make it more relevant to their teams or regions – whether they do that in person or using the tools listed above. Furthermore, in some working environments – like manufacturing facilities or call centers – new technology is not as prevalent or useful as it is for the typical peripatetic professional. Still, it’s worth taking a close look at this issue and fighting the inclination to just accept conventional wisdom – even for the most sacred dogma of internal communication.    

Just read an interesting report on corporate intranets in the Wall Street Journal - of all places. ( http://wsj.com/reports) The premise was that too many intranets are “due for a makeover” and that far too few are delivering on the huge potential of the available technology. Based on my observations over the years (on both the agency and corporate side) I unfortunately have to concur. The most egregrious flaws: too much clutter, clunky navigation, inadequate search capability, stale content, a surfeit of corporate hype or fluff, and a confusing tangle of competing or unrelated sites. Too many intranets don’t even effectively serve their most elemental function - to act as an information portal for employees.

There are some obvious fixes: adding RSS capability, robust collaboration tools (like wikis), use of vlogs and podcasts, and elimination of stale or rogue sites. But the best recipe for success is to apply the same rule that drives success in the Web 2.0 environment - put yourself in the shoes (or sandals?) of your users…in this case the employees. At too many companies (including some I have worked with/at) employees can’t find what they need, can’t pull what they want, can’t collaborate or communicate with their colleagues and/or can’t contribute to the site. And presumably, some employees are simply turned off by the ill-advised layout “vision” of the site designers. All of these shortcomings can be addressed by leveraging emerging technology to make intranets a more engaging, user-friendly, personalized and collaborative environment. But ultimately, it’s about building intranets for the employees, not for the CEO.