Facebook Causes is oft criticized for its ability to build causes with tens of thousands of followers yet relatively few donations. But is it really the fault of the program, or the tendency for organizations deploying Causes (as well as a wide variety of social media tools across the Internet)? Isn’t the problem that we’re relying on tools instead of interacting with key stakeholders in communities?
To that point, it’s people that drive social media, not tools. And so while an app can get people to join, it can’t make the right kind of ask for donations that an influential member of a network could. A network of 100 influentials with strong connections can make a much bigger impact than 100,000 passive followers with no vested interest in the cause (brand, company, effort, etc.).
To demonstrate this point, I decided to use my birthday as a fundraising mechanism to raise money for the Clean Energy Coalition. It seemed like a natural fit for this purpose, 70k members in the organization’s cause page and $996 in donations as of May 15th. With a decent, but certainly not the largest Facebook network of more than 1500, I embarked on my birthday cause campaign to raise at least an initial goal $500 for the cause, if not tripling the funds to date.
As of 7 p.m. today, the eve of my birthday, I had raised $452. I had increased the amount of financial donations by almost 50% in just two weeks. Imagine what 100 of me could do. $50,000? $100,000?
The evidence is obvious. Facebook Causes isn’t really the issue. The Cause application is just a tool that works best when people use it to fundraise, for their birthday or in general. Social media that involves commitments works best when people drive the initiatives as opposed to software programs.
P.S.
Thank you to everyone who donated to the Clean Energy Coalition on my behalf. I really appreciate it. My interest in the Coalition, Live Earth and other green efforts is a sincere one.
As I said in the original citation, for me the environmental crisis is the challenge of our generation. While we are focused on the current economic issue, it’s apparent that the ecological changes we are all facing continue to accelerate. We need to collectively ban together and change our lifestyles and habits to save energy, water and other precious resources while reducing our carbon footprint.
One of the biggest barriers to success can be traditional political positioning, the legacy of past representations and stances. Organizations can be encumbered with their prior actions, permanently creating a legacy that will always be part of the fabric of their brand reputation. And rebellious types can permanently alienate the establishment. There is no market space that seems to embody this quite like the environmental arena, where “treehuggers” regularly do battle with “suits.”
Unfortunately, the rebellious treehugger and the corporate suit were very appropriate images as short a period ago as five years. That was before Al Gore put to bed the questioning of global warming’s legitimacy . Now, in my opinion, that dichotomy is hurting the green movement.
While appropriate positions to combat or not combat political activism, it’s time for these antagonistic positions to move on as part of our ecological history. Yes, there is room for further political discourse, but it’s no longer a world of black and white. This is particularly true now that a vast majority of Americans and companies see general environmental action as a good move.
The common ground has to be taking action, whether that’s using filtered water instead of bottles, or refitting factories and buildings for energy preservation. All actions equal forward motion. That’s the common ground.
What should be viewed as wrong is extremism on either side. The only requirement for participation in sustainability is a desire to participate, from activist to large energy companies. Positive activity fuels more activity. Everyone wins when we all move forward in leaps or baby steps. That’s the positioning of now, and the environmental view we should all encourage regardless of our political stance or history (suit image by Greg Verdino).
We need a sense of compassion for the problem, and forgiveness for past legacies… So long as there is genuine interest to move forward in a progressive fashion (as opposed to greenwashing).
That’s one of the reasons why I really enjoy the Live Earth work. It’s about embracing everyone in an effort to move forward rather than get stuck on old positions. In that sense, it’s a recognition of the very significant problem we have, something that affects every single person on this planet.
Companies and organizations have a real hard time understanding why the traditional message doesn’t seem to work in online social environments. Yet, if you think about the way we as human beings relate to one another it really shouldn’t be that much of a mystery.
The above social profile chart highlights just the tip of the human interest iceberg. It demonstrates a multifaceted level of online interests and representations. If you consider that people parse themselves into communities using these and other interlocked personality attributes, it becomes easier to understand what motivates any given individual. We identify ourselves online in several ways, including:
Physical location
Family status (and age)
Profession
Hobbies
Religion
Social beliefs
Politics
That’s why you see so many subject matter specific forms of social media. From community groups and blogs to loosely knit Twitter “echo chambers” and subject-matter specific social networks, there’s interest/lifestyle, geography specific topics discussed everywhere. Any given individual can participate in a wide variety of these media, cross-pollinating across diverse mesh-like groups of communities. The human conversation is a rich, complex one that varies from person to person.
The failure for traditional communicators occurs when they try to deliver an unsolicited simple message in this diverse conversation. In essence, an organization probably plays a very small role in this picture. Yet most organizations fail to realize that. Instead they try to insert themselves into the dialogue as the center point of the conversation.
By providing one dimensional approaches — i.e. traditional messaging — organizations fail to compel most people to participate. In essence, they are like the bull in the China shop, and because the message is so controlled and obvious no one wants to engage.
Smart social media empowers conversations beyond the message. It embraces human nature and the strange mesh-like conversations that occur between us and our collective interests. That’s why a strong social media effort understands there’s more to the stakeholder than a simple purchase interest. Instead of talking “inner tubes” a bicycle tire company may facilitate or participate in a larger conversation about rigorous outdoor exercising, including bicycle rides.
When an organization successfully participates they engage beyond just a linear hit with a stakeholder within an interest group. Instead, they compel that stakeholder to engage and talk, usually in a public social media environment. If favorable, this creates more momentum within and beyond that person’s vertical topic area, touching several of the individual’s social network interest areas.
Consider how if I became a successfully engaged stakeholder my conversation could impact several interest areas across my social network. In fact, using the above “clean energy” example, you can see many areas could be touched as denoted by shades of green. It’s not as simple as just touching my social cause friends. In fact, the only area where it could be met with lukewarm results would be the larger communications network I participate in.
Command and control messaging just doesn’t work as well in social worlds. What does work is an engaging approach towards developing relationships and fostering community action. That requires a more sophisticated approach that starts with talking with people, and the need to listen and understand their motivations.
“It might not be intuitively clear to non-participants that a company representative’s consistent high-quality engagement in community is necessary to reap the benefits of community, but for community managers, the relationships they are building make it very clear. Those relationships would go cold without consistent engagement.”
I really enjoyed the ReadWriteWeb Guide to Community Management. Under Marshall Kirkpatrick’s gifted hand, this savvy report delivers the basics for any CxO or CMO considering developing their own social media community. In particular, I love the focus on hiring or appointing a community manager to start.
Most companies want to start with a campaign or an initiative, and that’s the wrong focus. Community Management quickly and aptly points out that social is not about PR per say, more about networking, thus the need for a continued outbound presence. A face of the company, if you would. Without a community manager, companies can fail to harness the many benefits organized social media can offer.
There were several aspects of the report that really seemed to be of service to the marketer trying to figure this out (I assume that most people reading this will be marketers). There’s a heavy focus on the confluence of the many outbound customer functions from PR and marketing to customer service in the report. It’s essential to understand that no one traditional skill set will do the job. Further, social is about engagement versus advertising. There’s a great discussion here on the topic.
There’s a heavy focus on measurement, which is great. I don’t know how many times I hear that you can’t measure social media, and while the report admits to the ambiguity of measurement, I wholeheartedly agree when it says, “Community managers should establish methods to measure their own impact on other departments’ bottom lines.” Frankly, if you can’t determine measurement, then you have no strategy. Strategies are to achieve objectives, and objectives are measurable.
Finally, there’s a great discussion on what makes a good community manager, including statistics and personality type. This is very helpful for organizations trying to hire or identify this role within the company. Guidelines are given for how to participate within and manage the community, too.
I did have a few nitpicks with the report, and for the sake of balance I will offer them. First, the report does say right off the bat that Twitter is a place any company should be and Facebook more than likely could be difficult, but that group pages can work. In the beginning, the report also highlights a blog as a must have, yet we know most blogs fail. Given that, should blogging be so openly embraced?
For the record, I question Twitter’s value sometimes. While I see how Virgin America can be happy with 15K followers, I question whether this kind of reach has any real marketing impact for the company. Straight up truth: Twitter is dynamic and fast, but it’s not a broadcast medium for consumer companies. However, it is a great place to organize and interact with your die hard community members and influencers. Twitter has good uses (See Buzz Bin Twitter primer) and bad uses, so look beyond Shiny Object Syndrome before drinking the Kool Aid in full.
The other nitpick was the personal brand conundrum. While the report acknowledges having a singular voice does not scale, it does not dive in deep on how to handle this issue. It’s a quality problem derived from success, but it would be helpful for companies to see the value of scaling on a team level.
Overall, I highly recommend this report. Any company considering a community management strategy should by the ReadWriteWeb guide as it will give them great insights into this growing professional discipline.
It’s Memorial Day. To commemorate, I took a photo walk on the National Mall and captured some shots, which hopefully demonstrate the patriotic essence one can’t help but sense in DC during this weekend. Other forms of social media commemorating our veterans:
Ever feel like you were in Groundhog Day? You know, where you relive the same day over and over again? That’s how I feel whenever I speak to a corporate group about social media. Communicators are so afraid of losing control of the message, of people saying negative things about them.
That’s why I love the hutzpah my client Air New Zealand demonstrated this week. It’s new ad showing baggage handlers – one of which is Rob Fyfe, the CEO of the company – and stewardesses painted naked on the job.
The video – promoting full transparency in airfare charges — has caused quite a stir. The point is New Zealand doesn’t jack up the prices when you get to the airport with hidden fees. In an era when all consumers are tired of being lied to or fooled by companies, this is a refreshing stance – candor and transparency.
Yet Air New Zealand took it a step further and created something that would cause a stir. I think the point made is beyond the pricing. Having met with this client, it’s who they are. They have fun, they don’t care, and enjoy making travel kicky. Consider their Gayest Flight promotion from a year ago. Social media is about being you and Air New Zealand definitely feels comfortable showing its character.
Best yet, they’re not afraid to take a few licks in the media or on the blogosphere from conservative types. Getting Google scars – something any successful company has these days – is part of communicating. You can’t please everybody all the time, unless you are saying nothing at all. And at that point you’re just not marketing – at least not well.
I travel a lot, usually two cities a week, and get to see many places. Last week’s trip to Detroit for the United Way’s Staff Leadership Conference affected me more than most (photos here).
The epicenter of America’s economic crisis has to be Detroit. A city already beleaguered by long-standing auto industry woes and economic plight, the recession has hit the city hard, driving it into depression. Real estate prices in the region are at astonishing low rates.
Nothing emphasized the hard times more than a trip to the restroom at the convention center (I always have to go frequently before I speak. Yeah, I know: TMI.). On my way out, two gentlemen walked in and physically blocked my exit, demanding a donation from me. I politely declined while knifing my body between the men and through the door. No harm, no foul, but I did get a security guard to escort the gentlemen out.
Several reports of missing laptops coincided my experience. Chalk it all up to signs of the times in Detroit, where things are pretty desperate right now. Crime is but a by-product.
Such times bring a natural exodus. Yet, many of this city’s citizens refuse to give up. They love their hometown and are committed to sticking it out. And that’s what makes this situation so heart-rending, and yet full of hope.
Bottoms and Faith
It wasn’t all scary bathroom trips. There was the genuine kindness most Detroit citizens emote. They are good people who want you to feel welcome, and that is clear. When I discussed such problems, they were quick to defend their hometown, too. Detroit’s a good place, they said universally.
I met with GM’s Social Media Wonk Christopher Barger for coffee. Barger is a transplant who has only lived in Detroit for two years, but like other residents adamantly defends the city.
Barger told me of the city’s commitment to work through this, to change its business focus, to evolve and grow through the time. He cited the incredible family first and stick-togetherness that’s almost universal throughout Detroit. And the city’s hope that a new focus on green, from the Volt and other auto initiatives to attracting general ecologically friendly industries could turn the tide. Perhaps even more tenacious was an attitude that this will take years, and that people were ready for the long haul.
Unlike New Orleans, another city that’s suffered great duress recently, there is no natural disaster to blame for Detroit’s situation. When New Orleans suffered the horrible knock out blow that Katrina delivered, associations and sports leagues rallied to host events there and infuse travel dollars. United Way did Detroit a service by being there, and talking with my friends in the organization it was a natural choice. It would be great if the U.S. events industry in general would also rally around Detroit.
Because of the nature of this situation, America seems to have abandoned Detroit. That’s too bad, because I admire the city’s people.
Detroit reminds me of my youthful days in a severely depressed Philadelphia during the 80s, where I spent my weekends in Center City. I remember watching on TV as Mayor Wilson Goode bombed MOVE’s headquarters and burned down two city blocks. That was Philly’s bottom. That city was in hell then. I was personally mugged in the midst of a crowded street, and had my car broken into twice. Other family members suffered worse crimes. You never felt safe, and were always watching your back in the city.
Yet Philadelphians – like Detroit’s citizens – were committed to their culture and kept trying to move the yardstick forward. Twenty years later, it’s a pretty cool city that for the most part I recognize, but only in the way you recognize an adult who was once a child from your past. Same, but different.
I know it’s bad right now, Detroit, but I love your heart. Keep the faith, things can and probably will get better.
Now that almost everyone across the political spectrum agrees that we are facing an ecological crisis, the main challenge of the green movement seems to be getting people to actually change behaviors. But this challenge is greater than it seems. It involves changing lifestyles that have become central to our culture for the past 100 years, ever since electricity has become part of our lives.
One of the best examples of marketing this lifestyle change is the Smart Home Green + WIRED exhibit at Chicago’s Museum of Science and Industry (pictured above). This fun exhibit takes green and conservation needs and mixes it with the sexy, sizzle of the geekery known as WIRED! But more on this later. First, let’s take a look at the communications challenge that the green movement faces.
Three Big Hurdles
This inability to get past acknowledging the ecocrisis and actually acting upon it reminds me of an old adage. If a frog decides to jump off a log what happens? Nothing. He just “decided,” he didn’t do anything to actually physically leave the log.
So people talk green, but don’t act green. They keep taking 20 minute showers, leave the lights and computer on, and buy gas guzzlers while avoiding hybrid cars or mass transit. Companies greenwash their marketing message, and then serve bottles of water and print every email possible. As we can see, green is not necessarily pure green, it’s light green, medium green, and dark treehugger green (or any shade in between).
There’s a core of barriers stopping green from achieving immediate movement status with people. These issues are beyond the political differences that stand between the various range of liberal and conservative stakeholders in the ecomovement. For green to be quickly and successfully adapted, these hurdles need to be addressed by environmental groups, companies, and governing bodies alike:
1) Green products and services are technological innovations, too. That means the diffusion of green is suffering from the usual cycle of innovators and early adopters, as discussed by Everett Rogers in his timeless classic, “Diffusion of Innovations.” So while they make sense, they’re unproven, expensive and quite frankly, most people don’t feel comfortable (safe) buying these products yet.
2) The cost of green does not outweigh the cheapness and comfortable lifestyle of the current carbon footprint. And the good samaritan argument is not compelling enough to get people to move forward. Many feel the situation needs to get worse before people act. The most common lament I hear about this from green bloggers and environmentalists is, “by the time the crisis hits, it will be too late!”
3) There’s still a school marmish attitude towards green. I associate the word “conservation” with this attitude. In short, beyond the economics, beyond the fear of new technology, it’s just not cool or sexy to be green. It’s the right thing to do, but so is staying home on school nights. :)
These three factors equal a massive communications problem for everyone, businesses and consumers alike. And to me, this is not a public awareness campaign, more the need for green companies to make their wares attractive to end-users — as opposed to the right thing to do. We need Steve Jobs now, not Al Gore.
Green + WIRED = Sexy
Remember when nerds were really just nerds? You know, dorks?
Well those days are long over. The iPhone culture means being a geek girl or boy is sexy, and popularity contests for follower or friend counts dominate discussions of what makes for a good community member. Social media and tech geekery has become avant garde.
Nothing epitomizes this more than WIRED magazine, which has been at the forefront of the tech revolution for past two decades. Heck, WIRED even has a sexiest geeks contest every year.
One of the more interesting aspects of WIRED editorial coverage is its evolution beyond Internet related matters into the environmental space. Exhibits like the Green + WIRED teaming make environmental technology more than just the right thing to do, or an act of conservation. Accompanying efforts online, include blogs like EcoGeek and ecofriend are adding to the fire.
The geekification of green technology has begun in earnest, and in it lies great promise for societal adoption of environmentally progressive purchasing en masse. The discussion and seeding of green tech amongst innovators and early adopters in today’s geek community hastens the adoption curve. We’ve already seen the widespread adoption of social media and Internet access toys like netbooks and mobile Internet phones over the past few years.
It’s no secret that when there’s an air of panache associated with products, people are willing to pay a higher price for them. Hello iMac! Making green technology products more than the right thing to do, and adding an air of attractiveness to them is just smart.
In our current context, these activities open green tech to a new stakeholder beyond the do-gooder ecologist. And they add an element of sex appeal to green. While the climatologist is necessary, it’s time to move beyond brow beating environmental action into slow adoption. It’s time to market green + geek.
Often, I’ll get asked which books I suggestfor social media. Sometimes I’ll quip, “[Besides Now Is Gone,] How to Win Friends and Influence People.” But in reality, while it’s something of a joke, but also a pretty serious recommendation (Image: Happy by kkoshy).
Dale Carnegie’s principles have stood the test of time because they are about fostering better relations amongst people. And the classic mistake with social media is to treat it like a mass communications vehicle, when it’s a conversational form that builds relationships. Social media is about a larger community and its concerns, as opposed to a litany of messages. There is no better set of guidelines for this then “Friends.”
For the United Way’s Staff Leaders Conference, Meg Keaney and I presented best practices for tactical social networking. We decided to embed and apply Dale Carnegie’s principles in the larger presentation (available here) to the three main social networks in the workplace: Facebook, LinkedIn and Twitter. We walked our participants through these suggestions online.
The exercise was actually pretty challenging, and it forced me to consider a lot of my actions on and offline and how I’ve strayed since I last read “Friends.” Here’s what we discussed:
Become a Friendlier Person
1. Don’t criticize, condemn or complain.
2. Give honest, sincere appreciation.
3. Arouse in the other person an eager want.
4. Become genuinely interested in other people.
5. Smile.
6. Remember that a person’s name is to that person the sweetest and most
important sound in any language.
7. Be a good listener. Encourage others to talk about themselves.
8. Talk in terms of the other person’s interests.
9. Make the other person feel important – and do it sincerely.
Actions to Be Friendlier on Facebook
Comment on friends’ status updates, ask questions
Remember your friends birthdays
Repost their links, initiatives if you find it worthwhile
Say or post something that makes you happy, and explain why
Recommend a friend
Actions to Be Friendlier on LinkedIn
Congratulate job changes
Ask someone a question related to their experiences
Answer posted questions
Refer people who you admire
Write a recommendation for someone who you enjoyed working with
Actions to Be Friendlier on Twitter
Reply to someone’s tweet
Retweet someone’s tweet
Suggest people follow someone, and don’t do it as part of “Follow Friday.” Follow Friday is a meme and lacks sincerity and impact.
Write a positive tweet about something good
Don’t engage in negative personality-attack tweeting
Win People to Your Way of Thinking
10.The only way to get the best of an argument is to avoid it.
11.Show respect for the other person’s opinion. Never say, “You’re wrong.”
12.If you are wrong, admit it quickly and emphatically.
13.Begin in a friendly way.
14.Get the other person saying “yes, yes” immediately.
15.Let the other person do a great deal of the talking.
16.Let the other person feel that the idea is his or hers.
17.Try honestly to see things from the other person’s point of view.
18.Be sympathetic with the other person’s ideas and desires.
19.Appeal to the nobler motives.
20.Dramatize your ideas.
21.Throw down a challenge.
Actions to Win: LinkedIn & Facebook
Create a group to engage thought leaders, interesting parties. Ask their opinions.
If logic/position is not factual, ask them how they came to that position.
Don’t say they’re wrong, yet state your facts. Ask them what they think.
Socratic method is a great way to engage. Sometimes writing out logic in an online group helps expose and address weaknesses.
Admit & amend wrongs
Challenge people to come up with answers.
Acknowledge and seriously weigh responses on any of these issues.
In areas of conflicting opinion, ask people to find a compromise.
Give credit to anyone who contributes to ideas used.
Actions to Win on Twitter
Engage in a dialogue on meaningful issues.
Remember, Twitter is public. Let folks save face.
Admit and amend wrongs.
Don’t flame, rather ask and state your dialogue.
Give people an out. It’s 140 characters, not a debate club.
Look for the positive result, and celebrate it. Laud your conversation partners
Be a Leader
22.Begin with praise and honest appreciation.
23.Call attention to people’s mistakes indirectly.
24.Talk about your own mistakes before criticizing the other person.
25.Ask questions instead of giving direct orders.
26.Let the other person save face.
27.Praise the slightest improvement and praise every improvement. Be “hearty in your
approbation and lavish in your praise.”
28.Give the other person a fine reputation to live up to.
29.Use encouragement. Make the fault seem easy to correct.
30.Make the other person happy about doing the thing you suggest.
Actions to Lead (Across All Social Networks)
Rather than dictate answers, ask questions of the community.
Give the minority a respectful voice and place within the discussion.
Self deprecate rather than attack others.
Thank and encourage other people’s contributions.
Reward top participants!
Make as many heroes as you can.
Suggestions and multiple options work. Directions don’t.
Certainly, we just scratched the surface on Carnegie’s principles and how they apply. What would you add?
LinkedIn is the network that no communicator really seems to love. Complaints about not getting it, and its hard to use interface, or the inability to promote/communicate virally with large groups of people are common. Yet its staying power and growing strength are undeniable.
From left to right: Chris Brogan, Kathryn Jennex, Sarah Merion, and Lewis Howes
Lewis Howes’ short primer, “LinkedWorking” made the communicators’ problem – and the solution – clear to me. Communicators struggle with LinkedIn, but not because it lacks robustness or the viral nature of other networks. There are many people getting dynamic results out of LinkedIn everyday. Instead, it gets back to the old one-way “we’re promoting” mindset versus the two-way nature of conversational media.
At its heart, LinkedIn is made for brass tacks networking. It’s where people meet and greet online, just like they would at a real networking event. It makes sense that some of the bigger successes on LinkedIn have come from recruiters and business developers. They understand how to communicate one-to-one.
Communicators naturally migrate to what is going to get them the biggest reach per touch. They want to broadcast messages rather than have conversations. In many ways, that’s why within our community Twitter has become so hot and LinkedIn has not. If successful at building a following in Twitter, communicators can broadcast messaging and links to thousands with one strategically written 140 character “message.”
If one has a LinkedIn following, that too can occur, but the very architecture of LinkedIn forces a more genuine conversation focusing on both parties. One person or company’s viewpoint has much less sway. You really have to participate on LinkedIn.
That’s why I like Howes’ book. It’s short and sweet, and provides reminders for great networking principles, and how they apply on the social network that more than any forces you to actually talk with other people. What a great way to really dive into LinkedIn.
Failure to Communicate: Learnings from the Ongoing Cooper Union Battle:
The BuzzLine – Week 4 – Blanched, Broiled or Fried?: