Embed Size (px)
DESCRIPTION
A white paper based on research among the fifty finalists in the Media Momentum Awards 2011. It looks at how they use social media to communicate and manage their reputations and suggests some areas of best practice as well as identifying potential blindspots.
Citation preview
Reputation Management in the era of social media
“Organisations have to engage with their users and cannot shield negative comment any longer. [If you] don’t engage you get slagged off; [if you] do engage and you get slagged off but you can at least defend yourself!”
Executive Summary 2
Introduction 3
What do digital media leaders do with social media? 4
Social media in context 7
Mapping where influence lies 9
Digital Gatekeeper 10
Blind spots 12
Conclusions 14
Contents
1
The companies at the forefront of digital media are also leading the way with their use of social media. Our research shows that for the vast majority – over 80 per cent – not only is social media a key element in their communications mix, but it is playing a significant role in other areas from sales to customer service. For many there is no longer a choice as to whether to use social media or not – it is simply the hygiene factor that gets them through the door in conducting their business.
But, they also recognise that it is not the whole answer. Traditional
broadcast and national print media are still seen as the biggest
drivers of reputation, although trade press has fallen behind
influential blogs in this respect. The power of the buzz from social
media on reputation and sales is also well recognised.
Many regard several social media platforms as already essential to
their businesses, with more agreeing that this will be the case in
the next 12 months. However, they are cautious on the credibility
of some of the information shared in these forums. Monitoring,
establishing influence and tracking how information transitions
across the digital and offline media, is acknowledged to be
important. However, the lack of agreed or widely used methods to
monitor and rate this could lead to developing blind spots, missed
opportunities and risks as opinion, rumour and conversations
impact reputation.
The role of communications agencies is already intrinsic to
managing reputation in the social media environment, with several
organisations relying on PR agencies to monitor, inform and engage
with social media. This white paper outlines a continuing and
growing role for proactive management of reputation with social
media as the context and the channel for engagement.
Executive Summary
2
Introduction
Influence today is more widely dispersed, faster evolving and ever more connected. Digital technologies have helped consumers, communities, pressure groups and even individuals organise themselves and get their voices heard. This digital media revolution is fostering a more open and transparent world in which communication of views from all segments of the population is exploding. However, there are also risks as ‘un-mediated’ conversations where emotion, personal opinion and personal agendas can be imposed without the need for balance, fact or reference to a wider picture.
The world of contested communications is one where drivers of reputation are harder to identify and reach, and increasingly challenging to influence let alone manage. This is an issue for all organisations but what about the companies that exist solely in this space, the digital media businesses themselves? Are they driving the revolution or are they just as much at its mercy? How do they view the role of these emerging platforms and influencers? Are they ahead of the game in engaging with them? How do they rank digital influence against the traditional opinion shapers of mass media, government and the City?
By investigating the attitudes and approaches of the next generation of digital media companies – those which can reasonably be seen as at the cutting edge of the ongoing digital explosion, this white paper seeks to answer some of these questions. We also hope draw a new map of influence for the digital world and provide organisations of all types with a way to navigate it and decide how, where and when to target the various reputation shapers. Finally, it will look at the fundamental aspects that must be right and work across all channels to ensure a consistent and unified view of an organisation, or an individual, no matter which audience or which channel.
MHP Communications is a proud sponsor of the Media Momentum awards created by GP Bullhound. These annual awards celebrate the most successful high-growth and emerging digital media companies in Europe. The shortlisted companies include some that are household names and some that are quickly emerging as the next generation of leaders. The shortlist includes innovative online consumer services such as Ratedpeople.com, Wonga and Skrill/ Moneybookers, cutting-edge digital media agencies including Adconion and InSkin Media, mobile marketing firm Upstream, web and mobile digital video leaders Orcadigital, and online music company Deezer.com.
As part of our support for these awards MHP has used its access to the shortlisted companies to survey their approaches and opinions on the use of digital and social media channels as reputation management tools. Our thinking is that the insights from these digital leaders will not only shed light on some of the key trends in the space, but will also help create some guidelines
for other organisations that are perhaps not so advanced in their digital integration.
We asked the shortlisted organisations to complete a short questionnaire using the online SurveyMonkey tool. The questionnaire covered a range of issues from personal use of social media, to corporate goals related to its use; from relevance and credibility of different social media platforms to relative importance of profile in traditional and emerging media.
We also engaged five of the respondents in deeper interview-based questioning designed to unearth anecdotes and personal viewpoints that illustrate the core data.
Although the survey samples are small, and we don’t claim any statistical robustness for the data, we do believe that the profile and position of our respondents as leaders in highly relevant businesses at the cutting edge of the digital economy makes their views and insights interesting and a useful guide for others as they deal with the issues of managing reputation in a world of contested social media.
3
What do digital media leaders do with social media?
For the purposes of our research and this white paper we’ve used a generalised description of social media that encompasses user-generated content such as Wikipedia, blogs, YouTube, Flickr etc, communications and community services such as Twitter, Facebook, LinkedIn etc, location-based services like Foursquare, and crowd-sourced answers sites such as Quora. Whilst this is by no means an exhaustive list it does represent the main areas of social media interaction, and provides recognised examples of each.
The first notable finding of our research is that whilst a significant majority of our leaders (over 80%) use social media for communications and public relations and over half (61%) to keep themselves updated, there are a number of other uses that are establishing themselves among this group. Just under a third (28%) report that they are now using social media directly for sales and a quarter are using it for customer service. We believe that this is a significant development that other organisations should take heed of.
The benefits of social media as a way of both communicating with and, perhaps more importantly, listening to, consumers and other stakeholders in your business are both quite apparent and well documented. What is clear is that for those in the vanguard social media is just a normal part of the daily communications mix. As Marco Veremis, president and founder of Upstream, commented:
“It is definitely becoming more and more important and I suspect it will probably become entirely dominant. In an environment where yesterday’s news is old news, it’s the most appropriate channel to get out your message fast and make sure it proliferates faster than any ‘engineered’ form of news dissemination.“
What is interesting is that although the intense level of engagement was welcomed and seen as driving more honest and open relationships, commentators also recognised the challenges and the stresses this brought. As Will Neale, founder and CEO of
Orcadigital, commented:
“Organisations have to engage with their users and cannot shield negative comment any longer. [If you] don’t engage you get slagged off; [if you] do engage and you get slagged off but you can at least defend yourself!”
4
Keeping myself updated
about what's happeningCustomer serviceCommunications and
public relations
Others
Sales
0%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
80%
90%
100%
70%
10%
61.1%
22.2%27.8%
83.3%
11.1%
Q. What do you use social media for as a business?
The Findings
5
Veremis reiterated that these ‘naked conversations’ are not necessarily comfortable for all organisations:
It [social media] drives transparency and exposes artificial or less than 100 per cent truthful claims. Maybe this is not yet visible in all industry sectors, but it is moving towards that direction fast. In the same way that a poor 5 star hotel is instantly exposed through Trip Advisor, so a listed company that is less than accurate in its claims and eventually private companies as well will be exposed. In this perfectly transparent environment with open feedback from any source it pays to follow Polonius’ advice: ‘This above all: to thine own self be true’. Quite a challenging shift of philosophy for most organizations accustomed to years of ‘dressing up’ themselves in line with their ‘target audience’.
So, if as it seems, embracing social media as a communications channel at the heart of the business, and one which is driving transparency, our research shows that the leaders are already taking it to the next level of engagement: using social media as a way of acting upon this information. Whether this is a reaction – using social media channels to respond to customer service issues (22% doing), or as a proactive method to create sales (28%), organisations need to consider who within their businesses should be using it. Larger organisations, especially those with mass-market consumers are already formally allying social media with their customer service functions. Not only does it provide a cost effective route to identify customer issues, but, if done well, can turn potentially negative consumer comments into positive buzz around responsiveness and commitment to finding solutions. It goes without saying that taking this step can only be reputation enhancing if the commitment to better service and responding to customers positively is real.
One of the themes that consistently played out through our research, particularly in the interviews, is the need to be transparent and authentic in all that you do – both in social media, but more fundamentally in all your operations and values
as a business. The era in which any organisation can hope that consumers or other stakeholders will ‘not find out’ is well and truly over.
With this in mind it is imperative that all staff with access to social media (which means all staff) are trained and at least aware of the impact that their posts, tweets, updates etc can have on the corporate reputation. Corporate social media policies, whilst difficult to enforce, should have a role in at least setting out the parameters and guidelines as well as identifying the risks and potential consequences of ill-considered activity.
However, our view, built on the insights of the Media Momentum shortlist, is that establishing a social media policy is just one tactical response. To really make the most of social media, as well as minimising the risks to reputation, organisations should establish the strategic goals which they hope to attain using social media. If social media is left to ‘just happen’ then the chances are that it will remain unfocused and difficult to manage. Organisations that have clear, established reasons to interact with specific audiences via social media are more likely to see real benefits.
Establish clear goals
The overwhelming majority of the Media Momentum leaders (95%) have clearly established goals for their use of social media. The actual goals varied from building awareness with customers and prospects (84% indicated this was a goal) to attracting new talent (listed by 47%). What is important in our opinion is that these organisations have taken the time to think about what they want to achieve, have identified distinct objectives and then used these to shape their approach to social media.
6
Nearly two thirds of our survey (58%) said that they used social media for both personal and business ends, with much lower percentages using only for personal (10%) or only for business (16%). However, the lines between the two are blurring. Some said that they used different platforms for different parts of their life, most commonly typified by LinkedIn for business and Facebook for ‘personal’, but as one commentator noted, it’s quite easy to connect the dots on these:
“A Google search on a particular individual reveals on the same page their corporate profile, their LinkedIn info as well as Facebook and Twitter - and increasingly all will merge in a single interface. It can be very uncomfortable for many executives who naturally will try to be less open about their personal profile and focus more on their corporate profile and reveal only the personal aspects that seem compatible or acceptable.” - Marco Veremis, President and Founder, Upstream
Q. What are your goals from using social media: what do you want to achieve for you/your organisation?
Attract funding
Drive sales with customers
and prospects
Generally raise profileBuild awareness with
customers and prospectsHave not established
specific goals
Create visibility with
partners
Attract talent0%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
80%
90%
100%
70%
10%
15.8%
52.6%
5.3%
47.4% 47.4%
57.9%
84.2%
For my businessFor both personal and business use
It depends on which social media platformFor personal use
57.9%
15.8%10.5%
15.8%
Q. In what capacity do you most frequently use social media?
7
Social media in contextAll of our leaders are keen advocates of social media as part of a business communications and reputation management strategy. However, not all social media is created equal in their eyes. We wanted to investigate how important specific sites are, and also how much they trusted the information they found there. We also wanted to see how well social media stacked up against ‘traditional’ media as a driver of reputation for their organisations.
The good news for LinkedIn as it looks to an IPO is that 43 per cent of our leaders felt that it was already essential to their business, with a further 50 per cent feeling that it was relevant. Facebook – as noted above, often seen as the ‘personal’ social network for ‘friends and family’ rather than business was nevertheless still seen as essential by 18 per cent of respondents and relevant by 55 per cent. However, unlike LinkedIn, 18 per cent of people saw Facebook as irrelevant to their business today.
With all the media buzz around Twitter we may have expected it to score better as a business tool for our social media mavens. However it was beaten into 4th place by YouTube. Although both were rated as essential by 21 per cent of the survey (the same as Facebook), 64 per cent rated YouTube as relevant and 14 per cent as not very relevant whereas the corresponding figures for Twitter were 43 per cent relevant with 14 per cent stating that it was currently irrelevant to their business. Surprising as this is we should remember that for all the media coverage Twitter generates its actual user-based is comparatively small compared to Facebook and although does have a big reputational impact because of the numbers of journalists etc that follow Twitter, may have less of an impact on consumers directly than either Facebook or YouTube. If your social media strategy is to reach customers then Twitter’s
importance will currently be less than Facebook’s.
Q. How relevant do you feel the following are to your business?
YouTube
Wikipedia
Quora
Essential
Foursquare
Relevant Not very relevant Irrelevant Don’t know/have not heard of
0%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
80%
90%
100%
70%
10%
93.3%
Relevant and credible?
The credibility of information found on these sites is also important, and again Twitter performs less well than some with 32 per cent of people feeling that it was not very credible, and seven per cent not credible at all as a source of information. It should be noted that the research was conducted before the recent media furore over claimed leaks of celebrity affairs and super-injunctions from the UK courts.
The credibility of Facebook information was also doubted despite the importance attached to the site (as detailed above). The majority (57 per cent of our sample) felt that Facebook information was not very credible or not at all credible, compared to 93 per cent that felt LinkedIn was a very credible or credible source of information. Wikipedia also rated very highly in this area with the highest percentage (36%) seeing its information as very credible.
In spite of some misgivings over the credibility of the information from these sites the next 12 months seem likely to see all increasing in importance to businesses. All of the social media channels listed except one saw an increase in the percentage of people rating them as essential or relevant to their business in 12 months time. The exception was LinkedIn which is predicted by this group to wane slightly in importance. Although 50 per cent of people feel it will be essential in 12 months time (and increase of 8 per cent over today’s rating), a growing minority (nearly one in six) see it as not very relevant in 12 months time. However, it is predicted to remain the joint favourite alongside Facebook which jumps in the rankings with 50 per cent rating it as essential to their business in 12 months time.
8
YouTube
Wikipedia
Quora
Essential
Foursquare
Relevant Not very relevant Irrelevant Don’t know/have not heard of
0%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
80%
90%
100%
70%
10%
93.3% 33.3%
13.3%
6.7%
20%
20%
6.7%
Q. How relevant do you feel the following will be to your business in 12 months time?
YouTube
Wikipedia
Quora
Very Credible
Foursquare
Credible Not very Credible Not Credible at all Don’t know/have not heard of
0%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
80%
90%
100%
70%
10%
93.3%
Q. In your opinion how credible are these services as sources of reliable information?
9
The disconnect between relevance and credibility on Facebook can perhaps be explained by its reach. As a way of engaging with customers and prospects it is almost certainly likely to remain essential for some time. However, using it as a platform for connections and conversations with the public is very different from using it as a source of information.
Twitter may also suffer in a similar way. Our respondents do expect it to become more important over the next 12 months, with 43 per cent rating it as essential and 31 per cent as relevant, this despite almost the same percentage (43%) regarding information on Twitter as not very or not at all credible. Of course, with Twitter a lot depends on who you follow, and the specific relationships with known individuals will certainly influence your attitude to the credibility of their tweets..
Mapping where influence lies
In addition to investigating the views of our Media Momentum leaders regarding different social media channels’ importance and credibility, we also wanted to contextualise the impact of social media ‘coverage’ compared to other forms of communications and reputation building. We asked the leaders to rate the impact on their reputation of a range of ‘PR outcomes’.
Perhaps unsurprisingly, the traditional mass market media still came out on top. An interview broadcast on TV or radio was seen to have a significant or huge impact by virtually everyone (50 per cent – huge, 43 per cent significant). National newspaper coverage came
a close second; 36 per cent said it would have a huge impact, 57 per cent a significant impact. What was surprising was that an interview on an influential blog came third, before trade media either on or offline. Over fifty per cent felt a blog interview would have significant impact and 26 per cent a huge impact on their reputation.
It seems clear from this that traditional national media are still massively influential – not only due to reach and role in creating widespread awareness, but also in being a direct influence upon other influencers such as city audiences, regulators, customers and staff. There is still no comparison to the broadcast interview that identifies you and your spokesperson as the opinion leader on a topical issue.
What is interesting is the relationship between this and social media buzz. The popularity of bookmarking sites and applications that share links and stories is testament to the role of social media as an amplification of news and content of interest to a specific community. Research published this month by Pew Research showed how Facebook has become the second biggest driver of traffic to top US news sites (after Google), indicating, in the words of the report authors:
“If searching for news was the most important development of the last decade, sharing news may be among the most important of the next.” - http://pewresearch.org/pubs/1986/navidage-digital-news-environment-audience
So, the impact of that national news interview may not just be the large primary audience, but the echo it causes across social media
Interview in a
national newspaper
TV or radio
broadcast interview
Interview in relevant
trade publication (print)
Interview in relevant t
rade publication (online)
No impact
Interview on
influential blog
Video interview
on YouTube
Twitter buzz and
re-tweets linking
to your website
Other social media
'buzz' such as wall posts,
likes or viral video
Some impact Significant impact Huge impact
0%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
80%
90%
100%
70%
10%
Rating Average3.31
Rating Average3.44
Rating Average2.69
Rating Average2.75
Rating Average3.06
Rating Average2.60
Rating Average2.63
Rating Average2.44
Q. Please rank the following in terms of the impact they could have on your brand or reputation.
Digital GatekeepersThe fact that influential blogs are rated as more impactful than trade media could say a great deal about the changing nature of the media landscape, the quality of trade media and the type of organisation we surveyed. However, it suggests that specialists who have built a following in social media are increasingly powerful in shaping reputations. Previous work with brands such as Sony Playstation, Vodafone, Sage and Adobe has indicated that there is generally a well defined and relatively small group of online commentators that can not only instigate and lead online debate, but also help it cross over between online and traditional media worlds. We term these individuals ‘Digital Gatekeepers’.
These people often have journalistic backgrounds, or have developed specific areas of technical or market understanding either through working in the sector, or studying it (as academics, analysts or consultants) and now contribute to debate around key issues on an ongoing basis. Most of our Media Momentum leaders recognised a group of digital gate keepers within their markets and understood the importance of engaging with them. Nearly two thirds (60 per cent) knew who the specific individuals were in their world and had engaged with them. Of the remainder a fifth (20 per cent) were sure that they existed but did not yet know who they were. Less than ten percent had not seen evidence of the transitioning of stories between on and offline worlds through specific gateways.
As communications consultants we regard it as one of our primary roles to identify these key individuals and ensure that we can reach them with key news and opinion, but also that we closely monitor them to get an early warning of stories and hopefully
present at least an opportunity to put out our version of the truth. Acting at these transition points can be the difference between a negative story reaching mass media uncontested, and getting a
balancing view included.
Listening briefEffective monitoring of the social media space is obviously key, not only to identify potential negative stories as soon as possible, but also to provide barometers of customer and market sentiment. Monitoring should, in our opinion, extend wider than brand, product and personnel mentions, to include wider conversations about issues and topics of interest and relevance to you. Spotting where customer interest lies, and the language they are using to describe it can uncover significant opportunities for reputation building, profile and sales.
Our research showed that the most common form of monitoring was to set up Google Alerts with over 90% of respondents doing this. A significant proportion also used free tools dedicated to monitoring social media (such as Social Mention and RSS feed readers). However, very few had either bespoke in house or paid for social media monitoring tools (less than 10 per cent for each). PR agencies were also often tasked with providing this service (40 per cent reporting that their agency did this) – which makes sense
considering that most agencies also monitor traditional media.
We believe that the need for human intervention in the area of
10
Yes, I know who they are and I have proactively engaged with them
I know who they are, but have not engaged with them
No, I don't know who they are, but I'm sure they exist
No, I've not seen evidence that this happens or that they exist
60%
6.7% 20%
13.3%
Q. Can you identify the ‘digital gatekeepers’ of your brand who influence journalists and who help transition stories, news and opinion from the social media sphere to traditional media?
Set up Google AlertsUsing free tools like
Social Mention and
feed readers
Using paid for tools
like Radian6
With proprietary
in-house tools
My PR agency does
this for me
We do not monitor
online conversations
0%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
80%
90%
100%
70%
10%
93.3%
40% 40%
6.7% 6.7%
0%
Q. How do you monitor online conversations?
11
monitoring is quite crucial. Whereas in the field of traditional media monitoring, we (as an agency) seldom have to work out and explain the relevance of a newspaper or trade journal, the reverse is true for social media. Understanding what is just ‘noise’ and can be ignored with little risk and what is potentially damaging, is a complex and ever-shifting task. Identification of the digital gate keepers, and looking at their feeder networks helps, but it is also important to look for the issues that are gaining momentum and become more than isolated rants.
Checking the influence of those discussing you and the issues that matter to you is key in determining which rants to focus on. The most frequent way of undertaking this according to our respondents is to do a search on the commentator or their site (46 per cent did this). Other options are manually tracking back through comments and links to investigate frequency, reach and tone of other comments and posts, as well as looking at who connects to them (40 per cent did this) Although some of this can be automated with tools like Klout (www.klout.com) few used them (under 10 per cent) with one third of people (33%) relying on their PR agency to investigate and advise on the relative influence of commentators. Most worryingly a fifth (20%) did not know how to, or did nothing to investigate or validate the influence of online commentators talking
about their brands.
Ask my colleagues and/or PR
agency whether they've heard
of that person
Use tools such as KloutDo a Google search on
the commentator/siteManually see who connects to
them, track comments etcNothing/I don't know how to
validate their influence
0%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
80%
90%
100%
70%
10%
33.3%
6.7%
20%
46.7%
40%
Q. What do you do to validate the influence of online commentators discussion on you or your brand?
Similarly, the activities, perceptions and attitudes to key events, issues and topics that relate to your business can by association impact your reputation. Monitoring online conversations about
issues that matter is crucial if you are to be in a position to react
when an opportunity or a threat emerges. For example, privacy is
a topic of ongoing hot debate online. It is a virtual certainty that any business that collects customer data – especially online – will at some point be asked about its views, procedures and protections around data. Monitoring and participating in this debate before you have to can lead to you benefiting from this scrutiny rather than suffering from it.
Our question on current reputation in social media was designed to dig into this a little further. Although brands are often justifiably proud of the level to which they are in control of what is said about them online, we believe this can also be a weakness. A third (33%) of our respondents felt that they drove most of the social media conversation about themselves. They used a variety of channels including Facebook, Twitter and their own websites to lead and maintain social media presence about themselves.
A further 13 per cent saw a wider role and actively participated in conversations in which they were referenced. This switch from control to influence is a key step in using social media to shape and manage reputation beyond the channels you directly control. Fortunately, only 7 per cent of respondents knew there were social media conversations about them that they were not involved in. Ceding the field to others, without endeavouring to engage or influence the discussion puts your reputation entirely in the hands of others.
12
Q. How would you describe your current visibility and reputation in social media?
We are well discussed and referenced in ongoing social media conversations and we are actively involved in these discussions
We drive most of the social media conversation about us - it is largely centred on owned media (eg. our own website, Facebook and Twitter pages)
There is ongoing dicussion about us, but we are not actively involved
There is active discussion of issues that are relevant to us, but we are not engaged with them
There is little conversation in social media about us or about issues of relevance to us
Don't know - we do not monitor social media discussions
33.3%
13.3%
6.7%
20%
20%
6.7%
Blind spots
We also asked what terms people used in their monitoring and found that whilst significant majorities searched on company name (93%), competitor names (86%) and their own product names (79%), just over half searched on key executive names (53%) and even fewer monitored key industry issues or topics (47%). Our view is that this could lead to potential ‘blind-spots’ in managing reputations; blind spots that could lead to reputational damage or missed opportunity.
In today’s world of contested communications well connected ‘fanatics’ of whatever hue can quickly gain a share of opinion that massively outweighs their actual importance. Seemingly small and irrelevant issues can quickly become major reputational risks. Keeping an eye on what people are saying about your key people, as well as your brand is important – even if rumours are untrue, unconnected to your business, or even concerning a similarly named different individual with no connection to you. Just as the worlds of business and personal social media are blurring so the impact of personal reputations on corporate reputation is increasing. And it need not be just the senior people – although there may need to be an explicit link made to the organisation, the social and business exploits of any staff member could impact your reputation.
Company/brand name
Product names
Competitor company
or product names
Key executives' names
YesNoDon’t know
Industry issues
or topics
0%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
80%
90%
100%
70%
10%
93.3%
78.6%
14.3%
6.7% 6.7% 6.7%7.1% 7.1% 7.1%
53.3%
40%
46.7% 46.7%
85.7%
33.3%
13.3%
6.7%
20%
20%
6.7%
Q. What terms do you use to monitor online conversations?
About a fifth of respondents felt that there were ongoing social media conversations that although did not mention them, but were nonetheless relevant, and with which they did not engage. These conversations represent clear opportunities to create reputation by providing informed and insightful commentary to discussions whilst at the same time building awareness with audiences already engaged in key topics. The flip side of this opportunity is that by not engaging you leave the door open to competitors, or create an impression that you either cannot or do not want to comment on these issues. In an age of transparency, non-engagement can be seen as evidence of wishing to hide something.Finally, the remaining quarter of respondents felt that currently there was little conversation about them or about issues that mattered to them, or didn’t know. We would urge at minimum a watching brief here to establish when and how to engage as a conversation develops. If you want to be more proactive we’d also suggest this is a good opportunity to stimulate or channel an
existing conversation and establish yourselves and thought leaders.
The Google space
One further aspect of digital reputation that we were keen to investigate was the brands’ influence over the first page of search results. Often seen as the most valuable ‘real-estate’ online, Google search results are hotly contested and an entire industry of search engine optimisation (SEO) has grown up to help brands place well here. However, whilst just over half of our respondents regularly checked where their brands turn up in relevant searches, fewer than a quarter checked any of the other sites around them. We believe that this could represent a further blind spot. Looking at these other entries can highlight what competitors, customers, partners and other influencers could be seeing instead of your messages.
Of course today’s search results contain more than corporate websites; blog posts, Flickr streams, YouTube videos, Twitter posts and Facebook pages can all end up on that first page of results - as well as, of course, news items from a wide range of publications. Each of these entries has the potential to enhance or damage your reputation. Although blog posts and Twitter updates tend to be quite ephemeral and only feature in search results for a few days, other things like media interviews can persist for much longer. When they are positive this can significantly enhance your reputation by providing a halo of influence surrounding your ‘official’ online presence. But when they are negative you can imagine where most traffic is going to go!
Just under half of our panel felt that they only have control over one entry in the first page of search results – their own website (43%). However, some are extending their influence by maintaining a wider range of digital and social channels to increase their population in the Google space. Forty-three per cent claimed that they managed two or three of these entries by actively managing and frequently updating Facebook pages, YouTube video channels, blogs and official Twitter feeds and the like to ensure they rated highly in search.
A smaller number have gone even further by actively engaging with a range of third-party advocates, media and social media influencers to ensure that their output is positive towards the company. Providing compelling content to third parties is a great way of creating more reputation-enhancing results. Not every listing has to promote the company line – there is benefit in just ensuring that competitor messages and sites are pushed off the first page by more interesting content – even if it is just neutral towards your brand. Content should not be corporate-speak, heavily messaged and refined, but rather interesting stories that subtly present you as an expert, provide insight or information that supports a point of view in a natural way.
13
Q. Of the top ten results from a web search - how many do you have influence over? NB - this excludes paid for search advertising results.
Two or three - we manage a range of social and digital media (website, blogs, Facebook pages, Twitter pages etc) that regularly feature in top search results
One - just our own website
More - we engage with a range of third-party advocates, media and other influencers whose pages also feature in top results to ensure that our messages reach a wide audience
42.9%
14.3%
42.9%
Our short survey of some of the leading exponents of digital media has illuminated some of the key areas in which they are using social media to manage their reputations. It has also show those areas where even these leaders are still feeling their way and identified some potential blind spots for all. There are no right or wrong approaches, but it does seem that, although some of our commentators encourage those still unsure of social media to ‘experiment’, the era of dabbling is coming to an end. Social media increasingly is not an option or even a choice. It is a fact of doing business and increasingly for some a ‘hygiene factor’ –
“Don’t approach social media activity as a choice but rather a given - a hygiene factor. So, senior executives need to get to know and develop the right channels by become users themselves and not just delegating it all to ‘experts” - Marco Veremis
Conclusions
The vanguard is now making strategic and proactive choices on how, when and why they use social media and putting it at the heart of not only communications but their whole business. For many, some social media tools are already essential, and all agree that more will become so over a relatively short space of time. What this does not mean is headlong and mindless adoption of all aspects of social media. Our leaders are well aware of some of the shortcomings and risks associated with social media and the content it delivers. Organisations need to be clear on the difference in using social media as a channel to engage, and as a source of information. Both are valid and important, but need different levels of proof. How you respond, rate and react to information and conversation in social media must be predicated on a knowledge of the relative influence and credibility of the source and the forum. As noted above, finding this out, in a timely fashion is one of the great challenges of reputation management in the era of social media. Auditing and monitoring topics issues and conversations is essential if you are to have the information ready to make these decisions.
14
Top Tips
• Establish clear goals• Consider the multiple facets affecting your reputation – it’s more than your Google rank or Twitter mentions!• Know the different social media tools and try them out• Be as transparent as possible • Make sure there is a social media policy to ensure consistency and clarity• Get to know and engage with the people who have an influence on your business• Monitor the issues surrounding your business• Listen to conversations and intervene where necessary
Digital leaders are also wise enough to recognise and acknowledge where traditional approaches are still more influential. As Will Neale of Orca Digital put it
“[Social Media is] Quite important - we’re a B2B play so ‘real’ personal relationships are [also still] important.”
The value of getting out and meeting customers face to face was still an important way to influence them. The role of traditional media in not only driving reputation directly, but also in stimulating social media buzz, conversation and opinion formation was also recognised in the research. Getting the right balance is about understanding who you want to reach and who influences them. Social media must therefore be managed as a part of a greater whole – be it the wider communications and reputation management strategy, or as part of a customer service or even sales approach.
Lastly, we all have blind spots. These are often an unavoidable consequence of focus elsewhere, or of simple lack of resources and funds (no one can monitor and engage with everyone everywhere). They could be the result of the rapid evolution of the space and the relative inexperience of everyone in it. However, knowing that you could have blind spots, and even better identifying where some of them could be, can be a significant step towards avoiding being blindsided by events. Organisations should get into the habit of listening to the conversations in social media that they should be a part of, even if they don’t want to engage just yet.
Our research has revealed a group of individuals and organisations that are leading the way on the real use of social media. They can certainly provide the rest of us with some important insights into best practice and effective use of social media for reputation management.
15
MHP Communications, 60 Great Portland St,
London W1W 7RT
tel: 020 3128 8100 www.mhpc.com
