I'm a big proponent of social media marketing and I believe it will continue to play a large role in marketing as we continue move through the next decade. However, with that being said I also know that companies fear social media in general.
They fear handing over their brand to their consumers as well as how employees will use social media and how it will affect their brand both directly and indirectly. This is a warranted fear as we've seen in the past year. I can certainly understand where they are coming from and I would like know your opinion since it's something I've been debating for a while now.
Has the line between professionalism and personal been blurred when it comes to social media? While I agree that transparency and authenticity is important in the success of social media marketing at what point can that transparency and authenticity hurt a business? I'm not just talking about large corporate businesses here, but I'm also talking about entrepreneurs.
What are your thoughts? Can being too personal harm your business or marketing efforts? Should there be guidelines and if so how should they be defined so that they protect the brand represented without losing personality?
I want to know your thoughts - Social Media Marketing - Is There a Line Between Professional and Personal?
Read what others had to say about this debatable topic.
Connect With Laura: Facebook | Twitter | LinkedIn | Google Plus
Laura,
Great question(s).
From talking to CEO’s and senior executives here in Australia, this is a top of mind concern and interestingly brand damage isn’t their #1 concern.
The macro issue is clearly the personal/professional line – though I see this line in different lights:
1. How does a senior executive deal with issues of etiquette – who to connect to? What are the boundaries regarding online exchanges? (as you highlighted)
2. What do you do when someone takes an honest admission and turns it into a storm?
3. How do you deal with employees who are dismissed who then use social networks to unleash hell on an organisation?
Is there an easy answer to your question or my questions? No!
Yes I believe you can be too personal – but I also believe these obligations are two-way. I think consumers need to pull their heads in and realise that their demands for openness, honesty, transparency, etc also means we sometimes make mistakes and they as consumers have a mutual obligation to be accepting, patient, and reasonable.
Let’s focus on this mutual obligations point…because none of us are perfect are we!
That’s definitely a great point, Laura!
What I belive is that SM will expose what the companies are made of – THEIR PEOPLE!!!
Companies made of great people shouldn’t fear this exposure, since they train and take care of their people. Unfortunately, not every company behaves like that…
If a company just try to take the most of its resources… oops… people, and does not do a good job at motivating and providing a good work environment… yes, they must get scared!
Everything is changing but people.
I am not alllowed to talk to the press in my company. But I can create a Springform.me account. See? The control is gone! So companies would better take care of what will define their future: PEOPLE!
@Mark great insight – “mutual obligations” is a fantastic phrase to use in this scenario.
@luciano – Really? Companies are made of people or companies employ people? I have to refer to Mark’s phrase “mutual obligations” – while it’s important that companies understand the value in people – I don’t think that we as “people” should hold social media over their head by saying “treat us well or else.” Eek – that’s kind of a scary thought really.
Hi @marketing,
I didn’t mean that people should use SM as a “threatening gun”.
My point is that when people are free to say what they think, they’ll do exactly that.
SM is a leverage for free talking, and as long as it’s natural to people to talk better about people that treats them well (and the opposite is also true), companies must get used and comfortable with the idea (instead of trying to “be in control”).
Of course the “mutual obligations” concept applies very well here – if you’re not fair with your company, it will appear in SM as well!
So it’s not about generating a conflict (people x company), but about achieving an unpreceeded level of transparency about the fairness of the game (a collaborative game – please don’t get me wrong)
Luciano,
The point you make in your first comment is really relevant – what you’re describing in simple terms is the company’s culture. So for companies where there is a high degree of trust, investment, and openness – then they really have little to fear and much to gain from allowing responsible participation in the social sphere.
In my opinion, culture is one of, possibly the greatest barrier to whether a company can easily or successfully harness the opportunity of social media.
This is indeed a good question Laura. My personal opinion is that transparency and authenticity does not hurt a business. Social Media gives any business the opportunity to really “connect” with their customers and gives the customers the option of finding out more about the company they are dealing with.
The world has become a lot more distrustful and I feel that a business can only benefit by using social media in order to improve business relationships with its customers and gain more exposure.
In regards to whether you can become too personal or not, I think yes but it’s hard to say where the line begins and ends and is probably dependent on the business itself. A large corporate company will no doubt have a little less “personality” than say a smaller outfit.
Great responses guys. I do think there is a line between professionalism and personal.
I think that if we “rant”, “rumble” or “complain” all under the umbrella of social media or blogging, we must take into account how it may affect how our own business or the businesses we work for and how consumers may perceive what is said.
Don’t forget to check out other opinions here.
I love hearing what you all have to say.
My firm belief is that you need a) some thorough guidelines in the form of a communication policy, plus any other ‘personality’ rules that you want your social communicators to work to, and b) a carrot approach, rather than a stick. Threatening to punish people who say the wrong thing will only spread fear and mistrust of communication on behalf of a brand; Instead you should motivate and incentivise people to do good work, whilst making sure they have a good set of rules and frameworks to stick to at the same time.
I agree with Henry Elliss’s post. At the end of the day, if you are representing a company you must be, and act, professional at all times. That said you don’t want to be too ‘corporate’ in social media – additionally a uniform approach won’t work across the sectors, you have to tailor to your core audience.
social marketing is to leverage the free written opinions and ideas of the customers which companies use to benefit their business . i think rather than punishing employees companies should use adequate communication model of trust with their employees in order to save the brand in the open market.