Finding the Right Communication Touch Points Requires Fresh Thinking

A recent article in the Harvard Business Review – which continues to provide solid contributions to the analysis of social media’s impact on culture and industry – argues that many marketers are using an outdated model and spending money and effort in the wrong places. The article states: Consumers still want a clear brand promise and offerings they value. What has changed is when—at what touch points—they are most open to influence, and how you can interact with them at those points. In the past, marketing strategies that put the lion’s share of resources into building brand awareness and then opening wallets at the point of purchase worked pretty well. But touch points have changed in both number and nature, requiring a major adjustment to realign marketers’ strategy and budgets with where consumers are actually spending their time. [I added the bold for emphasis.] The authors take a fresh look at the “funnel” marketing model where awareness drives consideration which drives purchase. According to their research, today’s consumers take a much more iterative and less reductive journey of four stages: consider, evaluate, buy, and enjoy, advocate, bond.

Variations of this new theory have been around for a while, but what I found interesting is questioning if and how this critical analysis would apply to communications – both internal and external. In other words, are we focusing our communication efforts in the wrong places and events, and perhaps also using the wrong channels and tools? Let’s take internal communications as an example.

Traditional employee communication “touch points” have focused on seminal events like orientation, staff/company meetings, quarterly updates and annual workplace campaigns like benefit enrollment. In terms of channels, many companies still favor traditional, formal push formats like email, memos and staff meetings – though many are exploring more interactive, virtual channels and transforming their intranets into dynamic social platforms. In fact, the bulk of internal communication seems to be event-driven and episodic, rather than an ongoing dialogue. The question all communicators should ask is: are these the right “touch points” to reach our employees, and are we using the right methods to interact with them? When are our employees most receptive to information? When are they likely to discuss news with peers or leaders? When might they want to add their own opinions or ideas to the mix?

Using the proposed HBR paradigm, I suggest that most internal communication programs are lacking in the following areas:

• Consideration – Organizations devote considerable effort to attracting talent and even branding the work experience (or the employee value proposition) but I would argue too many consider the “sale” completed once the employee is hired. That approach is short-sighted, given the chronic percentage of disengaged employees and the attrition of key talent at many companies (particularly after the initial honeymoon year.) Like consumer brands, companies need to pursue a sustained approach that seeks to keep employees engaged well past the point of hiring.
• Evaluation – Though employees are in some ways a captive audience they are likely to engage in the same evaluation process as consumers, and may seek input from peers, third-parties and even competitors when assessing the relevance and credibility of internal messages or even the quality of their workplace. This evaluation is also likely to generate questions and comments from staff. From my observation, few companies provide an adequate process to manage this deliberation process, presumably assuming employees will simply accept the information (and directives) at face value. Another point that probably fits here is that evaluation by employees should ideally allow ways for them to contribute their own ideas and feedback to company programs and policies.
• Advocate – While most companies devote considerable resources to identifying and leveraging their consumer fan base, far fewer take a similar approach with their internal advocates. Progressive companies need to consider not only how to leverage their influential ambassadors inside the company, but also how to mobilize their staff outside the firewalls. In my experience, many companies aren’t even aware of the profile and actions of their employees on networks like Facebook and Twitter, and even fewer have a proactive program to harness staff and alumni as informal advocates with external stakeholders.
• Bond – While many companies are exploring new ways to drive internal collaboration under the guise of productivity, few are focusing on helping their staff network and share content for the sake of cultural alignment and personal connection. If we’ve learned nothing else from the explosion of social media, it’s that people want to connect with each other. Still, some companies make it difficult for staff to communicate – or even identify each other – using corporate channels, probably due to concerns the chatter will be a distraction. And company email doesn’t make the cut in this regard.

An additional observation that doesn’t fit in the HBR model is that many companies focus only on their own formal communication channels to communicate with employees. Given the explosion of mobile technology and prevalence of social networks, a better approach would be to assess how employees communicate inside and outside the company and find relevant ways to participate in that digital conversation. Continuing to push out information through enclosed channels that may be an after-thought to most employees is not a viable solution.

Perhaps the best approach for companies is to treat their employees as consumers – or even free-agents – who require the same sustained attention as people considering brands and products. Keeping staff informed, productive and loyal is a full-time marketing challenge.

Intranets Slow to Become Enterprise Social Platform

According to a recent report – aptly named the Intranet 2.0 Global Study – the use of social tools on corporate intranets has boomed…sort of. The findings suggest most global organizations have at least one social tool on their intranet (in the majority of cases a blog platform), but a fully integrated “social intranet” – with a range of tools that are widely available and prominently featured – is still quite rare. (Thanks to my friends at Prescient Digital in Toronto for their post on the study.)

This finding is consistent with my professional experience in recent years. Even as social media use (and hype) explodes, companies are still reluctant to leverage their intranet to full advantage as a social media hub. In theory, it should be relatively easy to leverage existing intranet platforms – many of which come with built-in social tools and/or options. Some CMS platforms are like social media swiss army knives – with a full array of 2.0 bells and whistles. But most intranets are big, expensive systems and many companies seem unwilling to invest in adjustments or new technology. Changes in strategy and technology are often laborious. The alternative, for some companies, is to leverage the plethora of available cloud options – which can satisfy virtually every social media need, ranging from the basics (micro blogging, staff profiles) to the more esoteric (crowd-sourcing.) Just today, I read about the upgraded Chatter platform – which seems to provide a robust enterprise social media toolkit.

Each of these approaches has obvious benefits – and some challenges – but neither seems to have much traction inside most companies. Why not? Well, I would suggest the inherent risk-aversion of IT departments is still a big factor, as are cultural inertia, lack of leadership support and funding considerations.

Other studies – including this Engagement Survey by the IABC – suggest the issue goes beyond the intranet, and reflects a broader ambivalence about using social media within the enterprise. In the 2010 IABC report, the intranet was the second most popular communication channel after email – almost ubiquitous across the corporate world. But only 12% of the same respondents said they used social media tools (on the intranet or otherwise.) Digging a little deeper, the findings suggest a limited use of specific tools:

• Discussion boards – 32%
• Internal social networks – 30%
• Wikis – 26%
• Yammer – 10 %

[I'm not listing blogs since there was no obvious break-down of internal vs. external use.]

Perhaps the most telling statistic in the whole survey – over 60% of top executives are not participating in any internal social media tools. Until that changes, change will be slow to come – no matter what technology solution is being considered.

Real Digital Divide is Enterprise Firewall

The past couple of weeks has been pretty much business as usual in the exciting world of communication technology: product innovations (e.g. Google’s cool new instant search function or Apple’s new iPod line); new applications with huge potential (e.g. alliance of Chatter with Seesmic social platforms); competitive jockeying pushing companies to building a better “mousetrap” (e.g. Google joining foursquare and others in the location game). Outside corporate firewalls, it’s a fascinating cycle of restless creativity, new technology, cutthroat competition and strategic soul-searching…with huge benefits for consumers and businesses eager to leverage the new technology. It’s easier (and more exciting) than ever for individuals – and even networks of peers or colleagues – to stay informed, communicate, share ideas or advice, be productive…or just be entertained.

The contrast between this fertile, dynamic environment and life behind corporate firewalls is striking – and the gap may be getting bigger. While it’s true that some companies (particularly smaller organizations or the usual suspects in the technology field) are forward-thinking and courageous when it comes to technology, which translates into integrated social media programs that seek to bridge the potential divide between external and internal programs, based on my personal experience most are operating in a world closer to 1984 than 2010. (I’m going on personal experience and anecdotal data here…It’s tough to find updated stats that differentiate social media within the Enterprise from external activities, but this report is useful context.) When I was at Dell, for example, they intentionally leveraged their external platforms (notably Direct2Dell blog and IdeaStorm crowd-sourcing) with their PR and customer service systems within the organization, ensuring that the feedback and issues raised in the blogosphere were incorporated and addressed within the organization. The bridge between external and internal was wide open, so to speak.

Most of what I’ve seen, alas, is far from this ideal. Forget trying to find companies that use location-based applications within the firewall, for example, which would seem to offer huge potential to make internal communication more local and relevant. Many companies are still working on (or thinking about) basic networking tools or blogging platforms – likely still engaged in discussions about risk vs. reward. And in terms of technology devices, I can count on one hand companies that use smart phones or advanced portable devices (like the iPad or netbooks) with their staff – at least beyond senior executives – which seriously hampers their ability to leverage the advancements in mobility, wireless ubiquity and delivery of rich content. For most organizations, the intranet is their trojan horse for communication technology inside the firewall – for better or for worse. (Check out this blog post for another perspective on Enterprise 2.0 progress.) Some are able to introduce and use pretty advanced tools through new CMS platforms (the latest version of SharePoint has enough features to fulfill most basic networking and collaboration needs), but dramatic changes typically occur when companies get plug-and-play enterprise platforms that introduce new capabilities – such as Jive, Yammer or BrightIdea. And even with companies dabbling in pretty advanced technology, the odds are high that their internal efforts are lagging behind their marketing or PR activities (and tools) and/or not fully aligned.

The reasons for this reluctance and hesitation have been well covered – resources, legal risk, culture, inertia, ignorance – and there is merit to some of these explanations. And I would never advocate just jumping in head first…introducing technology for its own sake, without a robust strategy and business imperative. But the greater risk to organizations is that their archaic internal communication programs become so detached from external progress than they become totally irrelevant. And it won’t be just the younger workers – raised in an ecosystem on information on demand and advanced social media – who will get disillusioned and disinterested. It’s time for internal communication leaders and professional to start with a blank slate to (with apologies to Robin Williams) seize the day and utilize the incredible technological power inherent in the new devices and programs.

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.

Finding Social Media Talent Like Needle in Haystack

Over the past few months, I’ve been involved in a few corporate job searches (including some for my own team) that require talented communicators who have experience with social media. Should be easy, right? This is one of the most important trends impacting marketing and communication in years and has fueled endless hype and soul-searching in several professions. But not so fast. The reality – from my humble observation as a hiring manager in communications – is that there are very few professionals who can legitimately claim to understand both PR and social media. Part of the reason for this is few companies are actually involved in social media (recent reports suggest only 15% of Fortune 500 companies have blogs), so the number of professionals with hands-on experience in the field is still very limited. What does exist – based on the resumes I’m getting – is a range of highly specialized workers who aren’t necessary appropriate for a Web 2.0 communication gig: web designers and architects; IT experts who understand the technology but not the strategy; technical writers; renegade bloggers; old-school communication experts; and, intranet or Web writers. Very rarely will you find somebody with skills and experience that cross across the technical, practical and strategic sides of the equation.

Most of the folk I have found with this rare mix are in agencies, who seem much further ahead than their corporate cousins on this topic. This is probably as it should be - PR and specialized agencies should be on the cutting-edge after all. And I’ve had great experience with importing agency talent into a corporate gig. But no matter who I hire, the sad reality is that there are still few professionals who have the experience and aptitude to help companies navigate into social media. I’m hoping that changes over the coming years.

Enabling Employees Key to Competitive Edge

A study by the Economist Intelligence Unit suggests that giving people (employees) the information technology tools, infrastructure, and support they need to do their jobs effectively will help your company outdistance the competition. The study’s main conclusions are:

• The more a company empowers its employees to make decisions, the more likely it is to perform better financially and competitively.
• True enablers use technology to improve collaboration, encourage risk-taking, and optimize decision-making.
• Companies categorizing themselves as “true enablers” are three times more likely to be more profitable than their competitors.
• Compared with other types of firms, companies described as “true enablers” have a higher proportion that are more profitable than their competitors.

The study defines enablement as the organizational structures, informational technologies, and other resources that make it possible for employees to make decisions. In other words, trust your employees to make the right decisions. Not surprisingly, the study found that when it comes to IT, there is a significant “enablement gap” in most companies. Sound familiar?

Though many CIOs might disagree, most IT departments are strongly risk-averse not yet prepared to give employees the leeway they need to find information, indulge their creativity and collaborate with peers. It’s hard to feel “enabled” when you can’t get access to the Internet, or even download the latest version of Visio or Firefox. Though IT has valid reasons to be cautious in terms of loosening the controls and providing new tools – notably security – this new study suggests there is far more reason to take a leap of faith and give employees the technology platform to reach their full potential. IBM and Sun are two companies that have embraced this approach, to their benefit. Let’s hope other follow in their footsteps.

Supporting the Mobile Workforce

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.

The Website as Destination

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.”

Tips for (Internal) Corporate Blogs

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.

My Next Project?

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….