Why And Why Nots of Social Media

875 views

Published on

January 2010 CASE Presentation within Communications and Marketing track with Tamsen McMahon, Director of Digital and Strategic Initiatives at Sametz Blackstone Associates.

Published in: Education, Business, Technology
0 Comments
2 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

No Downloads
Views
Total views
875
On SlideShare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
19
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
100
Comments
0
Likes
2
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide
  • Domino’s
  • Motrin moms
  • NEED IMAGE!!
  • J. Owyang: Common to grassroots movements within corporations, adoption happens at the lowest levels at the company, rather than from a centralized group. You’ll see individual business units define their own strategy, pick their own tools, engage their own vendors, and communicate with the market on their own terms. Common to companies that haven’t put a strategy in place, depending on culture, this could be detrimental as resources are not used efficiently, data is spread on multiple systems, and the right hand doesn’t know what the left is doing.
  • Why: Content owners, product experts and market specialists (GB) Why Not: Resources are not used efficiently, data is spread on multiple systems, and the right hand doesn’t know what the left is doing. (TM)
  • J. Owyang: Common in organizations where power is centralized, we may see a central team formed to organize social media. This team defines the policy, best practices, vendors, and tools. This team which will commonly found in corporate communications and supported by PR will often dictate the direction of social media. Expect a dedicated role or sub-group to appear either experiential marketing, new media, or interactive media to eventually be born out of the group, where social media is centralized. Social media is a grassroots movement, so common dangers can be gagging the natural voice of conversations of product experts with customers using these tools, so a centralized team needs to be more of a support organization to the enterprise, not a controller.
  • Why: streamlined branding and messaging, coordination, eventual resources (TM) Why Not: no voice of the content and product experts (GB)
  • J. Owyang: This coordinated model has a central organizational unit that provides best practices, sets policy, supports infrastructure but encourages conversations at the edges of the company. More about empowering business groups to partake in natural social media discussions without hindering, this group will be more of a coordinator, and less of a controller. Expect to see this model to occur as social media infiltrates every nook and cranny of a business, and at a certain point, a company as an enterprise can’t ignore the raging groundswell. Cautions to this model, as overly coordinated programs will be difficult to achieve, and may be ineffective to different unique markets that a large company may have. Like the tower, having a centralized group at a large enterprise is always going to slow down natural conversations so focus on empowerment, rather than control.
  • Why: coordinated, yet empowered (GB) Why Not: Not another policy, process and procedure! Slows down flexibility; could cloud targeted needs (TM)
  • Why: experiment! (GB) Why not: disorganized (TM)
  • Why: No action, no harm, no foul! (GB) Why Not: missed opportunity; stifling employee morale (TM)
  • Why: personable and authentic (GB) Why not: potential for not enough brand messaging (TM)
  • Why: coordinated, blessed and empowered (GB) Why Not:
  • Why: total empowerment; authenticity Why Not: chaos!
  • Back to: Areas of focus Multiple lines of business You’re managing a portfolio of brands! Your education programs Your young adult programs Different exhibitions… Retail.. How are they branded? Is the master brand earning credit??
  • Will swap out with more recent graphic
  • J. Owyang: Estimated with about 80% corporate brand and 20% personal brand this account may be a corporate branded account, although it’s clear there’s an individual participating. Example: ComcastCares, which shows the account is run by Frank Elliason, or CiscoNews, by John Earnhardt Pros: This account maintains the face of the corporate side, yet shows a human element, building trust with the community. Cons: The account may be limiting itself as the community may come to expect and rely on the individual person to participate.
  • J. Owyang: These accounts are 100% personal content and have no tie or mention of corporate or branded information. These personal accounts, either created by an individual that doesn’t want to be associated with their employer –or their employer won’t let them is void of any corporate ties. Example: There are various personal accounts, without any affiliations to brands. Pros: This account has no tie or risk to a brand. Cons: Although the risks are reduced, so are the opportunities. The chance to evangelize the brand with their community are lost. Which type is right for your social media endeavors? It depends on the culture and goals of the organization. Expect many brands to have several of these accounts (For example, Cisco has types 1, 2, and 3) within their social arsenal). Type 1 may be useful for sharing facts, Type 2 may be helpful for support, Type 3 may have advantages in evangelism and type 4 may be helpful for employees that have little connection to the product or customers.
  • Why And Why Nots of Social Media

    1. 1. CASE District I — 29 January 2010 <ul><li>Social </li></ul>of Why The & Whys nots Media
    2. 2. Speakers <ul><li>Tamsen S. McMahon </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Sametz Blackstone Associates </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Director of Digital and Strategic Initiatives </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>[email_address] </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>@tamadear </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Gene Begin </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Babson College </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Marketing Director, Undergraduate School </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>[email_address] </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>@gbegin </li></ul></ul>© Sametz Blackstone Associates
    3. 3. <session>
    4. 4. Why <ul><li>social media </li></ul>
    5. 5. If Facebook were a country, it would be the world’s third largest.
    6. 6. <ul><li>… and be only five years old. </li></ul>
    7. 7. <ul><li>Social networking is more popular than email . </li></ul><ul><li>Mashable.com </li></ul>© Sametz Blackstone Associates
    8. 8. <ul><li>Social networking is more popular than email. And porn . </li></ul><ul><li>TIME Magazine </li></ul>© Sametz Blackstone Associates
    9. 9. Why <ul><li>not </li></ul>
    10. 10. It’s uncontrollable!
    11. 11. It’s unexpected!
    12. 12. It’s unsustainable!
    13. 13. structures
    14. 14. The doughnut © Sametz Blackstone Associates
    15. 15. Why/ <ul><li>not </li></ul>Why
    16. 16. The tower © Sametz Blackstone Associates
    17. 17. Why/ <ul><li>not </li></ul>Why
    18. 18. The solar system © Sametz Blackstone Associates
    19. 19. Why/ <ul><li>not </li></ul>Why
    20. 20. policies
    21. 21. No policy © Sametz Blackstone Associates
    22. 22. Why/ <ul><li>not </li></ul>Why
    23. 23. “ No!” policy © Sametz Blackstone Associates
    24. 24. Why/ <ul><li>not </li></ul>Why
    25. 25. Spokesmodel © Sametz Blackstone Associates
    26. 26. Why/ <ul><li>not </li></ul>Why
    27. 27. Spokesmodel © Sametz Blackstone Associates
    28. 28. A-team © Sametz Blackstone Associates
    29. 29. Why/ <ul><li>not </li></ul>Why
    30. 30. The train (all aboard!) © Sametz Blackstone Associates
    31. 31. Why/ <ul><li>not </li></ul>Why
    32. 32. strategies
    33. 33. Four profile strategies © Sametz Blackstone Associates Personal content / behavior Organizational content / behavior
    34. 34. 100 % organization © Sametz Blackstone Associates
    35. 35. 100 % organization © Sametz Blackstone Associates
    36. 36. 20 % personal 80 % organization © Sametz Blackstone Associates
    37. 37. 40 % personal 60 % organization © Sametz Blackstone Associates
    38. 38. 80 % organization 20 % personal © Sametz Blackstone Associates
    39. 39. 20 % organization 80 % personal © Sametz Blackstone Associates
    40. 40. 100 % personal © Sametz Blackstone Associates
    41. 41. How to figure out what’s best?
    42. 42. <ul><li>We take a scientific approach… </li></ul>
    43. 43. the method <ul><li>0 Define the question </li></ul><ul><li>1 Observe </li></ul><ul><li>2 Investigate </li></ul><ul><li>3 Hypothesize </li></ul><ul><li>4 Experiment </li></ul><ul><li>5 Analyze </li></ul><ul><li>6 Retest </li></ul>
    44. 44. O <ul><li>define the question </li></ul>
    45. 45. <ul><li>What’s the best use of social media in my organization? </li></ul>© Sametz Blackstone Associates
    46. 47. 1 <ul><li>observe </li></ul>
    47. 48. <ul><li>Grow bigger ears – and eyes. </li></ul>Paraphrase of Chris Brogan
    48. 49. 2 <ul><li>investigate </li></ul>Scope Audiences Content Resources Outcomes Measurement
    49. 50. Scope
    50. 51. Audiences
    51. 52. Audiences
    52. 53. <ul><li>Resonance & Dissonance </li></ul>
    53. 54. Content
    54. 55. © Sametz Blackstone Associates
    55. 56. Resources
    56. 57. Outcomes © Sametz Blackstone Associates
    57. 58. Measurement
    58. 59. 3 <ul><li>hypothesize </li></ul>
    59. 60. <ul><li>For {scope} , {content} from {sources} , used across {tools} , will produce {measured} {results} with {audiences} . </li></ul>© Sametz Blackstone Associates
    60. 61. 4 <ul><li>experiment </li></ul>
    61. 62. <ul><li>Observation ≠ participation. </li></ul><ul><li>You have to do it . </li></ul>© Sametz Blackstone Associates
    62. 64. 5 <ul><li>analyze </li></ul>
    63. 65.  Numbers  Sentiment  Actions
    64. 67. 6 <ul><li>retest </li></ul>
    65. 68. <ul><li>It takes practice. </li></ul>
    66. 70. Why/ <ul><li>not </li></ul>Why
    67. 71. </session>

    ×