Posts Tagged ‘outreach’

Rethinking “Influencers”

RipplesWho are the influencers in your market? Are they the top-of-mind attention grabbers, are they the lower-profile up-and-comers, or are they the long tail, the people with relatively few readers but who make up a good chunk of pages 2+ in Google’s search results and who, in time, could develop a sizeable following?

I ask because I’ve had a couple of conversations recently that have made me reconsider who I look at as “influencers” in client markets recently.

What’s an “influencer?”

I’ve always defined “influencers” quite narrowly. I’ve thought of them as the people who, when they speak on their key topic, make others sit up and take notice. I tend to define that group narrowly based on criteria like engagement, traffic, on-topic posts and so on.

I’ve started to wonder if I’m defining that group too narrowly. What about the people who have built up communities around their brand – people who are engaged in whatever that person writes about (for example Brogan who, despite his modesty, gets a lot of outreach because his voice online is LOUD)? What about the people who don’t have a large readership or engaged community yet, but who are starting out and may develop that in future? Do you consider them influencers in your market or not?

Finite resources

One concern with defining a list of influencers too widely is that your resources are finite. You can define a core group of 20 or 200 influencers, but as the group grows, so the attention you can devote to each one diminishes.

If you define your group too narrowly you risk getting lost in the ever increasing noise out there. If, however, you define it too broadly then you become incapable of building the relationships you need with those people. Where’s the line?

If you think strategically, the answer to those questions depends on your objectives. Your goals for your communications, and the measurements you use to define success, will affect how you define your audiences and, through that, your “influencers.” If your objectives change, so may your approach to defining that group.

Despite those in social media who may say otherwise, when you get back to basics it’s a numbers game – your client needs to generate a profit. You need to meet your targets, whatever they are. How you reach those numbers can differ – though relationships with a few key influencers or a network of quieter voices. Still, the numbers never go away.

What do you think? Have you tended to lean one way or the other on this spectrum? How have you approached this in the past?

Image credit: Oranje

Don’t “Message” Me

Remember the time when the standard response to any media question was to repeat essentially the same line over and over again?

I certainly do – I spent several years working in government communications, where Q&As essentially parroted the same answer back (yes, “parrot” is a verb for the duration of this post), largely regardless of the question.

It irritated me at the time and seeing it now annoys me even more.

Nowadays, more and more people are realizing that, especially on TV, repeating the same thing doesn’t make you look smart or informed. It makes you look rude and disconnected. Yes, you may get that soundbite, but if you’re live on air, you’re more likely to look like a tool.

The same thing goes for online outreach. Throwing out company messages and stilted corporate wording simply doesn’t work. Social media is all about people. If you can’t be a person, don’t expect people to react well to you.

This doesn’t mean you should just go around damaging your company’s brand by spouting-off about everything. Choose where you engage, address the issue in question and answer questions thoughtfully, while advocating your point of view as best you can. It also doesn’t mean you should go into interviews or onto websites unprepared for questions, but that preparation might be better as a series of general bullets around which you can frame your answers, rather than speaking points you regurjitate verbatim.

Don’t “message” people; talk to them.

What do you think?

Pragmatism Over Purism

When I first got into social media, I was a purist. By that I mean I would evangelise for companies to go out, do their own engagement online and build their own relationships. Every time. Without fail.

Over the last year or so, however, I’ve developed into more of a pragmatist. Like it or not, I’ve found that as I work with more clients from the consultancy side that their answer will often be something like "I hear you and I agree with you, but I just don’t have enough time to do that."

Do you just tell these companies that they shouldn’t get involved in social media until they can find the resources to engage as Dell, Zappos, Comcast or Molson do?

If you’re talking about writing a blog, then perhaps they should wait (I’ve already given my thoughts on ghost-written blogs). If you’re talking about monitoring and outreach then maybe not, as long as you’re open about who’s doing the outreach.

It’s not ideal, but sometimes have to compromise… not your ethics, but your approach. I’ve done it – it’s not my first choice but sometimes the ideal approach isn’t the feasible one.

You can do your client justice by acting as their representative online. Let’s face it, in a downturn where budgets and staffing is being cut, you could find yourself waiting a long time before your client can find those extra resources. Social media purists might not like that answer, but I suspect the average person would be quite happy that a representative of Company X is engaging with them, regardless of who pays their salary.

A more important question is whether the company’s culture is ready for online engagement. Do they really want to hear what people don’t like about them? Are they really ready to respond… genuinely, without trying to ‘spin’ their way through these situations? Do they really want to help, or do they just want to look like they do?

If you don’t get the right answers to questions like those, consider that the company may just not be ready. They’d be better served by starting to listen to what people are saying and learning from it before starting to reach out and engage with people.

Only once you can get satisfactory answers to the question of if the company is ready for online outreach should you start worrying about who does that outreach. The ideal then is for the company to do it itself, but if that’s just not possible then so be it.

Pragmatism takes preference to "take it or leave it" purism. The only exception is when it comes to your ethics.

That’s my take, anyway.

What do you think?

6 Tips For Engaging Online

Online outreachIf you’re new to the social media "scene," it can be scary (just ask the folks at Motrin). For a company used to "controlling the message" through carefully crafted news releases and press conferences, engaging in it can be even scarier.

Here are six tips to help that engagement go a little more smoothly:

Disclose who you are

If you’re engaging on behalf of your employer, be up-front with that fact. That can be in your comment, in your bio (if it’s visible), in your username; whatever. Just make sure it’s clear.

I suggest this from an ethical perspective (and yes, Keith, also because of the potential backlash) – I think pretending to be something you’re not is a bad idea.

Choose your words carefully

You can make your life considerably easier by researching the questions that people are likely to have  and the issues they’re likely to raise (ask the support/customer service team!) and proposing some very rough "messages" that you can use in those cases.

I’m not talking about "messages" in the old-school communications sense. Don’t regurgitate the same thing each time someone asks a certain question. Your pre-approved set of generic points gives you a base to riff-off and helps you to avoid upsetting your boss, while still allowing you the freedom to speak directly to the other person rather than in their general direction.

Avoid bureaubabble

This relates to the "messages" I mentioned above.

Don’t become a mindless message machine.

If someone’s post just calls for a quick "thank you" then just say that! Don’t be a machine – speak like a person, because that’s what you are and that’s the expectation in these forums. While remembering that you do represent a company, be as conversational as you can.

Avoid corporate speak" wherever possible.

Ask

You’re unlikely to have the authority to make decisions for your company. If you’re not sure about something then ask.

Set parameters

Sometimes your overlords will be comfortable in trusting you to just go out and engage on the company’s behalf. If so, fantastic.

Other times, management may want a little more input into what you say.

In that cases, I have two recommendations:

  • Start to gently educate people about the nature of social media, the cultural changes they may need and the increased effectiveness that results from empowering you to engage on your own;
  • Set some parameters for your engagement.

What parameters? For starters:

  • What you’ll do
  • The options you may recommend (consider triaging posts)
  • The timelines in which your boss needs to respond (you might have better luck in not getting fired if you position this as a way to increase effectiveness rather than just setting deadlines for your boss)

Establish an engagement policy

Set an engagement policy. Lay out, in clear terms, where you’ll engage with people but more importantly, where you won’t. For example, you may want to avoid conversations involving personal attacks, offensive language or obvious trolls. State that up-front (perhaps in the ‘policies’ section of your website) so you can point to it when people ask why you didn’t engage in a particular discussion.

What other recommendations would you add for companies getting ready to engage online?