You Can't Handle the Truth!

It's not often I write a post that simply restates something said elsewhere, but this post from Harvard Business Review, When Your Company Culture Isn't Ready for Social Media, struck a chord. I think it's a good topic to start off the new year in our ongoing discussion of the use of social media in a business environment.

There is a lot of talk about the "how" of social media -- how to create a Facebook Page or how to monetize Twitter, etc. -- with less emphasis about the "why," and even less about whether a particular company's corporate culture is even ready for its use. 

"Do we really want to have a two-way conversation with our employees, partners, and suppliers?" is the question asked in the Business Review post, and it's one that every CEO must ask of his/her own company. 

The post cites two examples as case-in-point. 

1. An executive publishes her first blog post, primarily addressing her employees, but open to the public. She intends for the blog to help the survivors of a recent downsizing, mentions that those who left the company are talented employees, and that the survivors should do things that replenish their spirit. The wife of a laid-off employee sends the CEO a letter demanding the resignation of the executive because she finds the section on replenishing the spirit frivolous and insensitive. What would your CEO do?
2. The company implements an internal-only social networking platform that allows rating, tagging, and comments on products and services. A new service, offered by HR, receives very low ratings and negative, but not mean-spirited, comments. The head of HR requests that all the comments and the ratings be taken down. Would your company approve this request?

How a company responds to those scenarios is telling of its readiness to incorporate social media.

I'm happy to report that, based on a recent incident with a user of our Web content management software, my company, Bizzuka, is on its way to a more open, transparent culture. 

Here's a quick run-down:

1. It started with this tweet from a user. (I've blocked the username/avatar to retain the user's privacy.)

2. I responded via the Bizzuka Twitter account, asking how we can help and what we could do to make the product better. 

3. Our CEO entered into a dialog with the user which resulted in our inviting him to provide input on how we can improve the component. 

The truth is the user was right. Our photo gallery is not up to par and needs to be fixed. This encounter provided just the impetus we needed to move in that direction. 

Even though Bizzuka is a small company, I wouldn't be surprised to see this type of thing happen with greater frequency. (In fact, I hope it does.) What, then, can be learned from this incident which will help us better prepare for subsequent ones?

Understand the shift to peer-to-peer communication has already happened. 

That leaves you with several alternatives. You can: 

• Take the ostrich approach, stick your head in the sand, hoping that it will go away. It won't.
• Choose to continue to play by the old rules of top-down-command-and-control communications, keep the message close to the vest and purge comments that contain anything negative.
• Play catch-up, but in a reactive sense with no real plan of engagement. -or-
• Be pro-active. Understand that the game has changed and make the necessary changes to your corporate culture to adapt. Creating a well-thought out social media engagement plan is a good first step.

The Harvard Business Review post suggests the following: 

"[P]ilot a small project, focused on a specific business need. For example, a new product team could use a private, secure social networking tool to communicate with each other and store important documents, training guides, past correspondence and feedback from customers. 

"[I]mplement a broad scale, highly focused tool, such as an expert employee directory with additional social networking capabilities progressively turned on as the organization acclimates. 

"[C]reate and launch an Innovation Jam — a one-day idea generation day created to engage the entire workforce on ways to improve and enhance current products and services or propose new ones."

Understand that trust is a commodity in short supply. 

Consumers are increasingly skeptical of advertising and marketing messages. They trust other consumers like themselves, before they trust us. 

In their social media manifesto, Trust Economies, authors Chris Brogan and Julien Smith assert, “We are suspicious of marketing. We don't trust strangers as willingly. Buzz is suspect. It can be bought. Instead, consumers and business people alike are looking towards trust. We want our friends to tell us it's good. We want someone we know to say we should look into it.”

We need to do everything within our power to secure the trust of our customers. 

Authenticity and transparency are the ultimate keys to effective social media engagement. 

Though much ballyhooed, these two words represent the chief cornerstones of social media marketing. I call them the double-helix of social media DNA. It is in a company's best interest, in every way possible, to inculcate these into both external and internal communications. If it is trust that needs to be gained (or regained), this is the place to start. 

It's not easy to change a company's culture to one that's open and honest, willing to take criticism on the chin, even letting it live on the Web site or blog, but change we must. 

What other lessons do you think can be learned? And, how is your company doing? Leave a comment stating an example of where you've seen change happen. 

Comments

[Marc Meyer]

Paul, I'm curious but really want to know what you think the answer is to your statement-"Understand that trust is a commodity in short supply." Why do you think that is? What has caused trust to be in high demand but short supply? Great Post.

[Paul Chaney]

Good question Marc. Answer: Part turn of a phrase and part because I believe consumers don't offer trust in brands as readily as in times past, thanks in part to brands over-promising, but under-delivering.

Think about it. You drive through your local fast food joint and see a poster containing an image of a huge hamburger laden with all kinds of toppings. Looks good we think to ourselves. I'll try that. Yet, we know the sandwich we get in the pasteboard box is not going to look quite as alluring.

Conversely, one could make the argument that we put our trust in brands everyday. We trust that the food at said fast food joint is going to have the same flavor as the one across town or, for that matter, the one across the country. We trust that the dry cleaners is going to correctly clean and press that dress, or that the fuel we put into our cars has the purity that's advertised on the pump.

Still, I think that, thanks to the over-abundance of choice, consumers tend to hold brands to higher standards and, as said before, are more skeptical nowadays.