Sunday, April 18, 2010

Evangelist or Communicator?

In his article Are you a ‘social media evangelist’ or a communicator?, Steve Crescenzo says:

“Some of us (and you know who you are) are turning into social media evangelists – wide-eyed, drooling, SM zombies who want to push our organizations at breakneck speed into the social media waters without thinking things through. … Some of these folks don’t even have a communication plan, but they still want help diving into social media.”

This triggered my underlying personal discomfort with the newness and unknown of social media communication, and got me asking myself:  Can we distinguish between what is right for our communications and organisations versus what is just trendy at the time?

Please do not take this the wrong way; in no way am I suggesting that we (as communicators for our organisations) should not be engaged with social media and incorporate SM into our very communication strategies and plans.   However, I do think we need to step back every time an overenthusiastic tech geek or persuasive web guru tries to sell the idea or need for every single new tool and product that becomes available.

We must keep in mind a lot of these tools are new not only to us, but to many others as well, and we need to ensure we're not being intimidated from doing what's right in each case, which requires a combination of monitoring and listening to audiences and our clients, our experience, consultation with web communications consultants perhaps, and ultimately, our gut feelings.

I think some online networks, just as in the 'real' world,  can be potentially dangerous waters. We all need to remember that and carefully evaluate every tool and strategy in relation to what is happening at the time and the need.

“If we go riding into our organizations like wild-eyed cowboys hell-bent on changing the very nature of how we communicate without taking into consideration the fear that many organizations have of social media, we’re not doing anybody any good. That’s why it’s critical that you be a communicator first and social media expert second," says Crescenzo.  "Before we can help our organizations use these tools properly, we damn well better understand them ourselves."

3 comments:

  1. Nadia,
    I loved that quote you put at the end by Crescenzo, and I couldn’t agree more. It is I very important to know how to communicate first, and be good at it, before acting to be a social media expert. Look at Nestle, where did that lead them? ...rather not say!
    The thing is, of course it's never good to dive into something new just because everyone else is. Although social media isn’t really new anymore...It is important to distinguish whether you should or shouldn’t go online, if you have the time and commitment to, if you really know how to use, if it will benefit and so on. And it's never good to start being online and then realise you just can't cope with it, because that's not a very good image you are making of yourself right?
    And let's not forget, whatever goes online, stays online, so there is no 'deleting'. At our expert panel the other week, Criag McGill said something very interesting. He said that if your business is strong, and has a good reputation (and these are just a few) there’s really no point going online on social networks. He gave an example of Apple... Apple gets promoted by its fans through pages and groups they create. However, Dell promotes its discounts online, and they have seen an increase in their sales. So it is very important to know whether you need it and if it’s suitable for you before you follow the crowd!

    ReplyDelete
  2. Excellent examples Sophia; they drive home the message perfectly of applying the right social media tools at the right time.
    In regards to your reference to Craig McGill, if I'm understanding you correctly, I agree with what he said about the need for a good reputation and strong business to begin with, however I'd have to disagree with his message that as a result, 'there's really no point going online on social networks' because even a strong reputation can quickly become tarnished if an organisation is not engaged online and monitoring their online audiences' commentary about them. This alone, from a crisis communications standpoint, is good enough reason for all organisations to be engaged with social media. On the positive side, organisations can use the opportunity to tap in to their audience and listen, in a low-cost environment; in a way that may not have been possible before.

    ReplyDelete
  3. The statement 'there's no point in going online' makes me think that all the buzz around social media as being symmetrical communication, grunigian and so on is only another argument for which all that falls under grunig's excellence is not entirely true, as organizations are seeking only for reputation.

    ReplyDelete