Bridging The Social Divide

(click for larger image)

Over the weekend I had a flash of clarity while listening to a podcast from Jeremiah Owyang about companies trying to gain a significant a foothold in "Social Marketing".  There was one particular moment that crystallized things for me.

"Most companies treat social media like interactive marketing which is computer to consumer, social media is people to people"

This is really the core issue and what currently represents a divide between the worlds of interactive marketing, and organizations who choose to participate in social media beyond pushing content. The gap itself is bridged by participation, meaning that a company empowers PEOPLE to engage and interact with other PEOPLE. This means public and private conversations, activity in comments and a commitment to be responsive in real time. This is potentially messy business and requires a long term commitment.   Interactive or digital marketing techniques traditionally do not include this dimension and as outlined in Owyang's podcast the end result often times comes across as traditional marketing using a social channel or worse, can result in a community backlash.

In order to bridge the social divide between interactive marketing and something that looks more genuinely like a commitment to meaningfully participate in networks, it's going to take organizations participation itself. Which means people on the company side getting off the sidelines and getting involved. The great irony of this post is that on the sidebar of this blog it says:

"Logic+Emotion exists at the intersection of business + experience design—where passive consumers become active participants."

I wonder if it's time to swap "passive consumers" for "passive companies".  Maybe it's time for all of us to become active participants?

Comments

[Samantha LeVan]

One area that companies could start with is with employee-monitored message boards. While consumers will often talk to each other through this channel, getting feedback from an actual, real employee initiates a sense of trust and respect for the company. The marketing and branding comes through in honest, unscripted answers to customer's questions and concerns, so rather than "here's our brand" in a graphic or video clip, it becomes "Let me explain our company to you personally".

I am all about changes to typical marketing techniques to empower the customer as well as a company's employees.

[Bonnie Larner]

*Maybe it's time for all of us to become active participants?*

Yes, yes, yes David. Now that I've been a member of triiibes.com for over two months, all I can say is yes, yes, yes. People to people is the only way to go. And grow.

So much new "interactive" signage, self- service kiosks, etc. popping up all over. To what end? To help make it easier and easier for businesses not to have to have to interact with human beings - employees and customers alike.

You hit it David. Hold on to it.

bonnie larner

[Franklin Bishop]

I do believe that social media is person-to-person. Get one person from your company and put him on social media sites so that people feel like they get to know him.I just think that can extremely help your business and show that you are a business for the people.

[John Hislop]

It does seem like a good idea to have a company employee respond to queries on social media sites but how can it be made to work? A considered response will probably take 10 minutes to write, maybe much longer, that is at the most 6 responses an hour, say 50 per day.

If yours is a small business it is prohibitivly expensive to employ 1 person do this, if a large business, an army of staff would be needed.

I wonder how the ROI on such an initive would look.

[David Armano]

John,

Couple of weeks ago I visited the HQ for Obama. It didin't look exactly like an army, but I bet there were a lot of folks who were very responsive.

Also, Dell has about 60 people on their team I believe who
are starting to work this way. Don't know if it's impossible, but does require a commitment.

[Jim Hoff]

Good post. I agree the gap is bridged by participation -- and participation is a requirement -- whether it's leveraging social media to engage customers or to engage employees.

As you note, "This is potentially messy business..." To me, that's partially because participation brings personality, and personality is messy, engaging, fun, and risky. But absolutely critical.

[Mike Spataro]

David,

Interesting post. I can confirm in my day-to-day dealings with brands that they don't yet have the hang of this one-to-one communications model. It's very foreign to many people in marketing, traditional or interactive.

Mike