Sensei Blogs

B2B Marketers Have No Funny Bone

sam_fiorella@hotmail.com(1 Sam Fiorella) — Tue, 06 Nov 2012 00:00:00 GMT

Last week’s exchange on the place corporate blogs have within the modern marketing mix inevitably featured the oft-used buzzword: “humanize,” as in “a blog is an excellent opportunity to humanize your brand.” The term represents the concept of making a business more relatable to its customers, moving beyond marketing-speak, product brochures and spec sheets to showcase the personality of the company and those it employs. Humanizing a brand is supposed to make a business more relatable to its customers and thus more likely to earn their loyalty and patronage.

Among the many tactics and social channels purported to humanize a brand across the blogosphere, the one not given enough due is humor. Business-to-Consumer (B2C) industries such as Old Spice, Taco Bell, E-Trade, Blendtec and Budweiser have famously leveraged the tactic but, even with some stellar examples of humor-filled campaigns in the Business-to-Business (B2B) space, few have dared to show such personality.

Are B2B vendors and buyers really so staid and boring? If you’ve attended any B2B conference or trade show after-party, you know the answer. So why is humor still considered a four-letter word in this space? I argue that it’s less about marketers’ lack of a collective funny bone as it is about their education on the subject.

Comedic Marketing is Risky Business

Humor is a double-edged sword; it can connect two people over a shared experience or divide them with a cut-to-the-bone sarcastic comment. Often the very same sentence can elicit both reactions. So is it more about risk?

It might be a calculated risk, but when grounded in truth the payoff can be huge. Even though it was created many years ago, the benchmark used by modern marketers for humor in B2B marketing is still IBM’s “Mainframe: The Art of the Sale” campaign.

Created by Tim Washer, the unchallenged king of comedy in B2B marketing, the story connects with the audience because it’s real and even through its humor it says something the audience wants to hear. Fans of the television sitcom The Office will see the similarities in the deadpan humor and how close it walks the line of reality. “You can't just be funny, but you have to say something. You have to have a strong point of view and make a case for something,” comments Tim Washer in an interview with MarketingProf’s Matthew Grant.

Most B2B customers are, in fact, people.

Yes, most B2B customers are, in fact, people. That’s not my attempt to infuse humor into this article but a statement on the reality of B2B marketing. We sometimes forget that it’s people who research our products, test them and make decisions on whether or not to purchase. And, as people are known to do, our decisions are often impacted by our personal feelings and connection to the business and the people pitching us. And that brings us back to concept of humanizing your brand.

"How do you humanize a B2B brand? How can you take a brand like an IBM that people don't have a relationship with on Facebook and share [its] stories?” asks Tim. "Much of it," he said, "is just telling the truth, but doing it in a humorous way.” It seems that the key ingredient to humorous B2B marketing is less about the “Yuk-Yuk” factor but the truth it’s based on.

The other lesson to be learned from this successful campaign was that the butt of the joke was not IBM’s product but the problem customers sought to cure. As with other effective marketing tactics, humor must be used as a content marketing strategy focused on improving your customer’s business, not yours.

Join the discussion: why is humor used so little in B2B marketing? Too risky?

Sam Fiorella
Feed Your Community, Not Your Ego

The Corporate Blog Challenge

sam_fiorella@hotmail.com(1 Sam Fiorella) — Sun, 28 Oct 2012 00:00:00 GMT

Last week I posted an article asking if corporate blogs had become sacred cows. I questioned the logic of a corporate blog remaining the center of a social communication hub when readership is down, competition for attention is increasing and our audience’s preference is evolving towards shorter, more visual content. Why are marketers so unwilling to accept that, in some cases, the value of a corporate blog is diminishing?

The question sparked a good conversation across many of the social channels that it was shared in. A common theme to those who disagreed with my suggestion was that if readership is down, the problem is not competing social channels or the audience’s changing preferences but the quality and format of the corporate blog itself. Most argued that the corporate blog is still THE place to represent your brand and maintain control of your message without the public or social-spin that can derail your efforts in other channels.

I agree that a corporate blog is an important element in the social mix and also that most corporate blogs fail to provide the value readers seek and thus fail to retain regular readers and/or drive value from it. However, I disagree that simply revamping these blogs will make a large difference. The reality is that our audience has moved on.

I’ll Take The Challenge

Those of you who know me know that I love a great debate and that I never back down from a challenge. So for a moment, I’ll accept the argument that the fortunes of corporate blogs can be reversed by reimagining their structure and content. So let’s consider what would have to be done to a typical corporate blog for it to remain a viable social hub for its business.

My point of view: today’s corporate marketing challenge is no longer the lack of quality blogs, but the audience’s content consumption habits and preferences. With this in mind, below are the 3 key changes required by corporate blogs to remain relevant:

1.   Go On a Diet
Blogs posts need to shed a few words around the middle. Few visitors have the time or desire to read long, drawn out articles. Shorter, hyper-relevant and more frequent messaging is critical to attract and retain readership today. Further, the audience is increasingly accessing content from mobile devices that are not ideal for long-form content. I’m not suggesting that longer articles should not be posted, but they might be better served as downloadable whitepapers or e-books.

2.   Get a Make Over
In his SNL skit “Fernando’s Hideaway,” Billy Cristal stated so eloquently, "It's not how you feel...it's how you look...” Corporate blogs must take a lesson from the market, which is exploding with more visual content. So instead of posting 1,500 word articles, why not create and post visual slide decks, video interviews, podcasts or image galleries (please no kittens) instead? Get out of your comfort zone, try on something new and watch the reaction.

Secondly, your site should be refitted using responsive design so that its layout is dynamically reshaped based on the display capabilities of the device accessing it such as smart phones, tablets, netbooks, laptops and oversized desktop monitors. Maintaining a consistent customer experience is critical to branding efforts as well as content consumption.

3.   Start Dating
Once you’ve lost a few words and had your makeover, get out there and meet new people! You can convert your blog into a true social hub by replacing infrequent posts with a grid of feeds from all your other social channels such as Twitter, SlideShare, YouTube, Facebook, Google+, LinkedIn Groups, etc. This creates a speed-dating environment within your blog that allows your audience to better mingle with you and your content. Alternatively, you can join blogger communities using services such as Triberr which connect complementary bloggers who support each other through distribution and commentary.

Lastly, allow your audience to generate some of the content within your site. This might be the biggest challenge for most since a corporate blog is seen as “the voice” of the brand but in reality, your audience is more interested in their peer's experiences with your brand than your views on it.

So there you have it. Me arguing the "other side". Not sure I've convinced myself that a corporate blog should always be the center of a business' social efforts, but if it has to, a change in strategy is certainly in order.

Where do you weigh in (see what I did there?) on this debate? Can a corporate blog upgrade to compete with the changing needs of its audience? Or should it bother? Share your arguments for and against in the comments below.

Sam Fiorella
Feed Your Community, Not Your Ego

Have Corporate Blogs Become Sacred Cows?

sam_fiorella@hotmail.com(1 Sam Fiorella) — Thu, 25 Oct 2012 00:00:00 GMT

“Sacred Cow” is an idiom referencing the eminent place cows have in Hinduism. Figuratively speaking, a sacred cow is something which is immune from question or criticism. After challenging the #bizforum community on Twitter last night with the question: “Are corporate blogs still relevant?”, I’m beginning to think that corporate blogs have become sacred cows.

A corporate blog is defined as one branded by a corporate, non-media entity such as Staples, Proctor and Gamble, Abercrombie & Fitch, American Family Insurance, CitiGroup, Chrysler, etc. and not spearheaded by a single social-celebrity employee.

Blog readership as a whole is increasing but bloggers are on the decline as many are choosing to put their words down on Facebook pages or bite-sized quips on Twitter, as reported in eMarketer’s study on blogging entitled The Blogosphere: Colliding with Social and Mainstream Media. The increase in blog readership seems to be based on the rise in popularity of media or curated blogs such as Huffington Post, Mashable, Forbes, McKinsey Quarterly and the New York Times. Many of these blogs have the same content, but adoption and readership for the latter is growing while, for most, corporate blog readership is stagnant or declining.

My premise is based on the following realities:

    - the public’s appetite for content and information has grown and continues to increase
    - the consumer’s desire to engage with the brands they love continues to grow
    - the channels and devices that share content continue to innovate and expand
    - the competition for readership is growing exponentially
    - the reader’s attention is increasingly challenged by digital “noise”
    - the average person has less free personal and professional time to read

As the consumers’ need for – and access to – information grows, their appetite for content channels is evolving beyond the current mediums.   New channels and engagement options such as micro-blogging (eg. Twitter), social networking (Facebook, LinkedIn, Google+) and visual media (YouTube, Pinterest, SlideShare) are disseminating content with fewer characters and greater speed than blogs could ever hope to achieve. The more content the public wishes to consume and has access to, the greater the appeal of new media that provide easily digestible headlines.   These new channels are syndicating the same content for corporations that their blog predecessors shared, yet drive much more interest, engagement and return.

I’m arguing that the long-form corporate blog post that was once mandatory and the preeminent forum to educate customers, provide value-added information and demonstrate a brand’s personality, has proven to be just a stepping stone to modern delivery channels.

Holistic Content Strategy

Last night, many within the #bizforum community stated that you cannot argue for or against the value of a corporate blog, because the ROI from social engagement comes from an holistic content strategy that integrates content across many channels. I agree with this sentiment but refuse to be bounded by the gravity of past business practices, especially after reading Rebel Brown's book on Defying Gravity.

An holistic content strategy does not require the dissemination of content across EVERY social channel. Most agreed with that concept yet few are willing to acknowledge that the one channel which could possibly be removed from the mix is the corporate blog. Ask marketers to remove Twitter or Pinterest from the mix and they don’t bat so much as an eyelash. Suggest that the corporate blog might no longer be a relevant medium within the social mix and I’m branded a heretic.

When challenged, most presented an argument for what a corporate blog can do for the business, when the real consideration should be what IT IS doing for the business. Few even know.

See: The Corporate Blog Challenge

Should corporate blogs be forgotten completely? Of course not. Faxes are not commonplace in everyday business communications but they still exist. Even with a declining audience, a corporate blog can provide value in SEO link strategies and fodder for Google ranking but even then, social sharing and other tactics are beginning to challenge that value as well.

What started off as me questioning the current value of a corporate blog has evolved into a question about the reverence marketers give the blog. Has it been elevated to sacred cow-status? An untouchable deity in the social media mix beyond reproach and questioning?

What are your thoughts? Has the need for and value of a corporate blog diminished?

Sam Fiorella

Feed Your Community, Not Your Ego

Blogs are Thought-Provocation Not Thought-Leadership

sam_fiorella@hotmail.com(1 Sam Fiorella) — Fri, 20 Jul 2012 00:00:00 GMT

A trend is forming in our collective online engagement: less is more. Some maintain that Twitter’s ever-growing popularity is championing this phenomenon: build it and people will speak in headlines. On the other side of the spectrum, you have those who argue that micro-blogging sites have formed in response to our jam-packed lives and the resulting need to communicate more efficiently.

Which came first, the chicken or the egg? Did technology force communication brevity or did technology simply evolve to address the need? Answer: It doesn’t matter. The force that brought us here is irrelevant; the fact is we’re here. We’ve become a society that demands more and more input across more and more channels, which has fuelled our collective information Attention Deficit Disorder.

Following suit, most bloggers are increasing their production with shorter, pithier and more headline-grabbing copy, which I will argue makes it near impossible to provide true thought-leadership. In fact, pundits claim that “thought-leadership” has become such a buzzword or business jargon that it – and the channels that claim to provide it – lack any true value.

The term was coined in 1994 by Joel Kurtzman, editor-in-chief for Strategy & Business magazine. The concept was to illustrate business leaders and their innovative ideas or business theories. Traditionally businesses and scholars have attempted to share thought-leadership through whitepapers, books and/or seminars, which required a thorough deep-dive into specific practices. Their goal was to educate the audience and impart the earned wisdom of the practitioner. This term and concept used to be reserved for people with years of proven experience. Fast forward to today and the term “thought leadership” is thrown around like barbeque sauce at a county fair Rib Festival.

Have Blog, Will Provide Thought Leadership. Or not, whatever.

Recent studies show that there are over 164 million blogs on the Internet and over 123 million people who read blogs. See where this is going?

Image Source & Stats

The greater the data sources provided the more we seek to absorb, regardless of the quality or content. As a result, there is less quality being shared and more headlines in an increasing array of formats. We blog, we tweet, we pin, we share, we podcast. We give thumbs up, bumps up, and rate our virtual high-fives across a dozen devices connected to our homes, cars, offices and body parts.

Businesses are quick to capitlize on corporate blogging but, it seems, with an eye towards brand awareness and customer acquisition. Using blogging for true thought leadership would require a greater investment research, writing talent, and real-life experience testing the theories promoted. More importantly, it requires a bigger time investment on the part of the prospective customer, which current trends indicate is a price they're not willing to pay.

With so much emphasis on volume, speed and brevity can a blog truly provide thought leadership anymore? Have blogs been relegated to thought-provocation instead of leadership? Is that enough? What say you? Join the debate; Agree/Disagree?

Sam Fiorella – Sensei
Feed Your Community, Not Your Ego

Is Free an Asset to Content Marketers?

sam_fiorella@hotmail.com(1 Sam Fiorella) — Tue, 17 Jul 2012 00:00:00 GMT

I came across a rather colorful comment on a Facebook thread recently that criticized a web site for requiring a name and email address to access the article she began reading. Her indignation at the request was evident in the language she chose: “Let me read what I want to read for free or f@%$ you, I’m outta here”. Normally I’d ignore those who resort to such prose but the subsequent (more professional) rants and virtual “nods of agreement” from others reminded me that there’s little appetite for paid content, even when payment is due as limited personal information.

I wondered if the objection so many have with this request is a privacy issue. Overwhelmingly, the public seems to subscribe to a plethora of social networks as well as social and mobile apps with no hesitation for privacy concerns. Studies continue to demonstrate that few, if any read the actual Terms and Conditions they so willingly check “I Agree” to. And in most cases, the networks and apps they subscribe to are folly in comparision to the exchange offered by many businesses and news sites online.

I’ve often quipped that as a nation we’ve accepted lower privacy standards for the right to public voyeurism through social channels. Yet ask those same people to provide a valid name and email address to access good thought-provoking content and they’ll go out of their way to create and maintain fake email accounts or turn to Facebook with spirited outrage.

Is there too much content on the Web?

Maybe the issue isn’t privacy at all but the customer experience? A well-known marketing slogan for Tootsie Pops once asked: How many licks does it take to get to the center of a Tootsie Pop? Today that question might be: How many clicks does it take to get to the center of a web site’s content?

I wonder if there is simply too much content being produced on the Web today that there is no willingness to take a few extra steps to access quality content; to provide the producer some value by means of your personal information, which may enable them to continue to produce that content?

Yes, they may sell your information or use the collective audience profiles for targeted advertising campaigns but isn’t that a fair price to pay for equally targeted and valuable content? Have our standards for content fallen to such low levels that we’re willing to tell Facebook our most intimate secrets but not be willing to provide basic personal info to serious content producers? What does this say about us?

Newspaper and magazine subscriptions have steadily declined and paid digital content was a failed experiment for most in the media industry. Even the early success of E-Newsletters, which required at a minimum the user’s email address are now in decline in favour of free RSS and Social Feeds for that same content. There’s no question that the media industry has been turned on its ear due to Internet’s public access and sharing culture but what are the ongoing implications for businesses and content marketing?

Can free be valuable?

Often we’ve been asked about the return a business can expect from investment in content production and open public dissemination when the audience is no longer prepared to invest – financially or otherwise – in such content. We were never questioned when the content was blatant advertising and “about me” marketing messages; however, to be effective, marketing content today must provide personal value (information or entertainment) to the audience beyond marketing speak. Something that requires greater investment, is challenged with increased competition and is more difficult to produce.

So can free content drive value for the business producing it? My belief has always been that the value is generated by the author and not the reader. Great content marketers should not be afraid to produce and offer content without encumbrances.

They should be afraid of:

- producing content that does not add value to their readers

- producing content that does not demonstrate their understanding of their reader’s needs

- not producing content for fear of ROI

- not producing content period

Don't wait for your audience to deliver you that value - create it through great content.

I’m turning the debate over to you. Is there value in free content produced by corporations? Or is there simply too much content being produced for any to be considered valuable? Does the author dictate the value generated as suggested? Join the debate in the comments below.

Sam Fiorella – Sensei
Feed Your Community, Not Your Ego

The Business Value of Proficient Tweeting

sam_fiorella@hotmail.com(1 Sam Fiorella) — Thu, 20 Oct 2011 00:00:00 GMT

I was recently categorized as a “social chatterbox” by a colleague, referencing my frequency of tweets and engagement with followers on Twitter.

…I’ll give you all a few moments to nod your head in agreement…

I’ll admit that for a split-second my reaction was to be insulted but that quickly passed since I’m not hung up on what people think about me but more importantly – and frankly – because being a social chatterbox has improved my business skills. Yes, Tweeting has improved my business skills, which both I and my clients benefit from.

How you ask? (OK, pretend for a moment that you asked)

Speaking in Headlines

The 140 character restriction of a tweet forces you to edit your thought down to its core meaning; the nucleus of your argument. While some call this “speaking in headlines” and criticize the medium and its posts for having little value as a result, I argue that those who learn to do it well provide more insights than those who require a 2,000 word blog post to convey a sentiment. And with the often-cited “content overload” that is modern day media, the ability to convey an impactful message in the fewest words possible is a definite virtue and business asset.

You know when you’ve been successful: a well-written Tweet elicits an intellectual and/or emotional response within your audience base, which results in replies and re-Tweets. Ambiguous Tweets fail to impact your audience and drop with a resounding thud.

The exercise of creating a tweet that connects with your audience forces you to think and re-think your understanding of the subject. It’s not uncommon for me to edit a tweet 5 or 6 times before I publish it. In each edit, I have to carefully select the words that convey my intentions in the limited space available. The act of determining appropriate wording challenges me to clarify my real thoughts on the subject. In fact, at the risk of sounding schizophrenic a Tweet has often had me

arguing with myself in order to debate what I really wish to convey.

Consolidating a sentiment down to 140 characters or less generates an internal dialogue that has been the genesis of many of the articles that I've written. Participating in Twitter conversations and chats has been the best education and inspiration for defining my point of view and advocating it on behalf of my personal and corporate brand.

And in the end that’s what it comes down to. What do you stand for? What is your point of view? With so many voices and “noise” out there, differentiating yourself and getting your message heard is becoming increasingly difficult. Proficient tweeting is an excellent resource for both sharpening your message and sharing that message with a greater audience.

What say you? What is the business value, if any, of proficient tweeting?

By Sam Fiorella
Feed Your Community, Not Your Ego
Follow on Twitter.

Blogging Accountability and Respect for Your Audience

sam_fiorella@hotmail.com(2 Jeff Wilson) — Mon, 15 Aug 2011 00:00:00 GMT

I have been meaning to explore this topic for a while but a recent post by Olivier Blanchard has convinced me to write it now. If you read his post and the comments – and I recommend you do - you will notice he caused quite a controversy; not by the topic but the inferences made within it and the style in which it was delivered.

It raised the issue of blogger and author accountability.

But before I begin, I need to frame the discussion and a possible perceived “conflict of interest” that some of you may have and I would assume some will claim. The huckle buckle over the aforementioned post has to do with Olivier’s use of a single example to support a passionate diatribe on deceptive copy. The example used is from an event that my firm, Sensei Marketing, is co-producing with Social Media Club called Social Media Masters. Olivier made valid points about the importance of copywriting, which lead to the copy in question being updated; however, his argument was undermined by some fairly inflammatory inferences and the unnecessarily dramatic comments that flowed from all parties afterward.

For me, I found the whole melodrama quite an amusing exploration of the human character. It was fascinating to watch the commentary in particular as this really to me is where the value runs deep.

So if you are an enterprise marketing leader with bloggers/authors on staff or an author/blogger looking to connect and/or disconnect (as the case may be) from your audience, please… read on!

Self vs. Public Perceptions

I’ve always lived by the words “the accountability for a message lies on the creator”. If I create a message, the reaction that message creates is a direct result of my words, style, and tone. Therefore, if my audience responds poorly/negatively, I created a message that influenced that reaction, either consciously if it was my intent; or unconsciously if it was not my intent or had latent unresolved emotional issues with my subject or audience.

The reverse of the above situation of course is when I create a message where my audience responds well. Then I also own that and perhaps I understand or respect the emotional/logical needs of my audience, again either consciously or unconsciously, for a positive response.

I explain this because it’s very important to understand the following for anyone who creates content or manages those who create content. Every word we choose to use builds a perception in those who read it. At the same time, these words are interpreted for tone (which goes to respect) and style (which goes to character) to create an experience – positive, negative or indifferent. Every experience augments audience perception one way or the other.

The kicker is that depending on how we perceive ourselves and our own messages, our perception can often vary wildly from that of our audience. So while we may think we created a great, compelling argument it can be perceived as negative.

Depending on who you are, you might be quite aware of the above and therefore decide to create controversy on purpose, which I believe is the case here with Olivier Blanchard. And let me say that I don’t believe there is anything wrong with creating controversy. I myself have done it numerous times on purpose to challenge current thinking or stir things up.

Others however may not be cognisant of the impact their message, tone and style has on the audience and therefore need to become aware of these factors to align their own perceptions with that of their audience.

What is the Intent of Your Writing?

Everyone who writes needs to be aware of their intent. This accomplishes two very, very important things.

It telegraphs and aligns your perception with the audience. This allows for a deeper connection, even in controversy.
It prepares you, the writer, for any backlash you may experience from the audience so your response has positive intent.

Where many writers fall down and go on the defensive to rationalize their writing or message is when they start with one intent and then change intent based upon audience reaction. This is particularly important if you are going to write critical pieces.

Owning Your Actions

We have all witnessed this. It is the moment when someone is “called out’ for their actions and that person shifts accountability for their own actions onto something or someone else. For me, it tends to be disappointing when I see it in the same way its admirable to see someone own their actions, no matter the consequences.

It must go back to when we were kids and a deeply ingrained behaviour to point at a sibling and say “he did it!!” or “it just fell” or my personal fav: “I dunno…”

It’s kinda cute when it’s a kid but it’s fairly pathetic when its an adult.

So here’s the thing... regardless of whether we own up to it or not, the decision to write, blog or tweet is ours alone. Every single word is chosen by us and when we hit that submit or send button we are 100% responsible for it.

To be clear, I am fairly certain that nationality, race, religion, politics, up bringing, etc do not make you choose certain actions or say certain things. It’s a cop out to claim that. .

Respect for Your Readership

How many of us have read articles or blogs where it is clear that the author does not have respect for their audience. Again, it is seen and felt in the words, tone and style. As a writer, respect for your audience is the one thing you can never lose unless your intent is to polarize your audience into love-hate categories.

Some classic respect blunders…

- Belittling your audience or a rival in the blog, article or comments. If you have to step on others to raise yourself up, you are guaranteed a short stay at the top.

- Using a condescending tone. Nothing shows contempt for someone more quickly than using a condescending tone. And yes, all writing has a tone whether you mean it to or not.

- Arrogance. When you act like or tell people you are the smartest person in the room it typically means you’re not. Even in cases where you may be, no one likes to feel inferior. Arrogance also keeps a person from saying they were wrong.

- Not listening to or acknowledging reader counter arguments or comments.

Some of these are obvious to see and others are not. At the same time, all can be felt and perceived by the audience and really, that’s all that matters.

Watching for these Traits in Your Enterprise Bloggers

While these traits are much more prevalent in authors or independent bloggers, they can come up in the enterprise and not always right away. The best approach to spot potential problems is to stay vigilant on comments.

A blog post or article can sometimes go wrong and that’s forgivable, but comments, particularly critical comments are flash points where you will spot unfavourable traits if they exist at all.

In the end, we own our actions as much as we are responsible for our reactions to what others do or say. Whether we choose to travel a darker road is up to us. Just know that the reward for either path is to reap what we sow.

On Olivier’s post

As for Olivier’s post, well my opinion is it is possible it was personal vs. SMC to some degree, but I have had instances where I have seen/read something that singularly inspired me to write an article or post. Really no way to know and depending on your perceptions or how you feel about the man personally, you could go either way.

What I can say is my perception was he showed a lack of respect at points which was his choice. He’s a big boy and knows the pros and cons of that kind of approach. Whether you as a reader choose to take issue with it is your call.

Same applies to the people making the comments. They chose to comment and respond to him and own those actions. Should he apologize? Not in my opinion. He didn’t do anything wrong.

Me, I approached it like a scientist studying human behaviour patterns. I found it all quite fascinating.

Jeff Wilson

Content Support Critical for Social-Empowered Employees

sam_fiorella@hotmail.com(1 Sam Fiorella) — Mon, 25 Jul 2011 00:00:00 GMT

Empowering employees to engage customers, influencers and prospects in their preferred online channels is one thing; ensuring those same employees have relevant social content accessible when their customer engagements call for it, is another. Encouraging employees to travel through the socialsphere without the proper content support will have a negative impact on program adoption, employee morale and brand reputation.

Consider an inside sales rep who engages an influential blogger online or a customer service agent who uncovers an upsell opportunity through a Twitter dialogue. What information do they provide? Where do they obtain such info? Is it the most current and approved content? Is the information authorized for public dissemination? Posting or sharing private, out of date or incomplete information will not only impact the brand, it will negatively affect potential sales opportunities.

Without this support, most will revert to the safe “broadcasting mode” and post product feature and benefit statements in response to social media queries, which we’ve learned is not a successful content-strategy for corporate social engagement. Successful online dialogue is achieved when the brand’s representatives or advocates support their audience with information that betters the customers’ lives or businesses without relying on product sales pitches. In some cases this requires industry-specific statistics, discussing the merits of competitive products or referencing content and strategies that don’t related to the business’ offering at all. And, of course, in other cases a product sales pitch is exactly what is needed or requested but when shared online, the public nature of the posting and the resulting implications must be considered before it is shared.

That’s a lot of considerations for departmental personnel who are encouraged to build online communities and relationships with the business’ audience. Given all their other tasks, what are the chances that misleading or invalid information will be made public? [cheat sheet: highly probable]

Dynamic Social-Content Repository

Corporations who wish to truly empower their employees to interact online would be wise to provide a themed content repository capable of querying and presenting appropriate content based on a stated need. At a minimum, a searchable, categorized repository of social content would be helpful; ideal would be an intranet that suggests social content to be shared based on employee-activity. Whichever methodology suits your business or budget, below are some thoughts on how such as system could be leveraged by a corporation’s silos:

Industry-specific or product-specific fodder and editorial calendars for corporate bloggers
“Teaser content” with links to appropriate “conversion links” for internal sales teams managing online questions via Twitter or other social channels
Internal subject-matter expert matrix for customer service representatives
Approved corporate videos for HR teams engaging communities online
Approved sound bites for all personnel when the corporate brand is challenged or in times of crisis

Company or product content used in sales proposals, face to face meetings or internal extranets may not be appropriate for social broadcasting. At a minimum the sound-bite nature of social communications requires a different copywriting style to deliver the biggest impact.

An investment in such an application would reap many rewards including:

Empower employees to more actively and effectively engage more customers, prospects and influencers
Mitigate the risks associated with communicating in a public forum
Protect the brand and its reputation
SEO impact through authorized content & sound bites
Make the difference between achieving a return from online engagement or not
Increase internal dialogue and generate greater content from internal subject matter experts departments
Improve cross-silo communication and information sharing

What experience has your business had with misused content in the public space? Does your business provide such a tool? Contribute to the dialogue by posting your comments below.

By Sam Fiorella
Feed Your Community, Not Your Ego
Follow me on Twitter