These grammatical slights are not creative. They are examples of lazy, uncreative people expressing themselves in lazy, uncreative ways. Like telling an old joke over and over again to the same person, what once was impactful for its uniqueness has become ineffectual by way of ubiquity.

As a brand – you stand for something. You have some concept that you are – or desire to be – tied to, and your messaging reflects it. Google is synonymous with search, in the common vernacular. Mercedes’ name evokes images of luxury, and quality. Harvard and Yale make you think of the best and brightest minds. Victoria’s Secret is sexy. One thing these brands share is a consistency in their messaging. They know their audience – broad or narrow – and they know how to talk to them, but not down to them.

You want to stand apart on Facebook? Stay true to your core message. Know who you are. Know who you want to be seen, as. Ensure that your status updates, wall posts, comments, and photo captions reflect this. Be true to the message you want to convey, and do it in a genuine manner. Own your voice.

I’m all for the creative use and application of language in order to communicate your point. In fact, without a certain irreverence and spontaneity, we’d be stuck with a decidedly restrictive set of words with which to conduct our affairs. Get creative; spread your word, and spread it your way. Toss out the rules that hold back the more artful aspects of your expression. Poetry pwns pedantry, every time.

Being an expert in Social Media is like being an expert at taking the bread out of the refrigerator.You might be the best bread-taker-outer in the world, but you know what? The goal is to make an amazing sandwich, and you can’t do that if all you’ve done in your life is taken the bread out of the fridge.

Peter Shankman, 20 May 2011

Ouch, Sir. Very ouch. I have never described myself as a “Social Media Expert”. Rather, I subscribe to the philosophy of Bill S. Preston, ESQ., who famously quoted an Ancient Greek of some renown when he said “The only true wisdom, consists in knowing that you know nothing.” and as Mr. Preston’s esteemed colleague Ted Theodore Logan affirmed: “That’s us, dude!” As I see it, the title of “expert” is one that is better given, rather than taken. It is a far, far, better thing to be called an expert, rather than call yourself one. And so on the issue of self-titled “experts”, Mr. Shankman and I are in accord.

Where I take issue with Mr. Shankman’s diatribe is in the misstep of lumping so-called “Social Media Experts” into one big pot. Bearing in mind that true social media expertise is easily identified, but difficult to quantify, when endeavoring to define an “Expert”, it serves to separate the wheat from the chaff. Social media demands a specific set of faculties: command of the written word, an understanding of who you’re addressing, and a zero BS modus operandi. You’ll forgive me, Mr. Shankman, but it is in fact about engagement. It’s about talking with someone, instead of at them. That’s what the arrow of social media has added to the quiver of marketing: a direct, potentially meaningful and easily mismanaged, tool with which to engage consumers.

And so with this squarely in mind, on several points, I’ll agree that Mr. Shankman is correct. Social media is absolutely about transparency, relevance, and brevity. Like Mr. Shankman, those tiny hairs on the back of my neck stand staunchly on-end whenever I encounter grammatical woes in professional correspondence. Just last week a prospective job candidate wrote to me, stating that she was “fluent in both Mandarin and England”. Good grief. But I’m a firm believer that those sensitive to issues like these recognize others of the same ilk. With very little effort, it’s easy to see who is an effective communicator, and who isn’t.

So Mr. Shankman, rather than drinking “the same damn ten-year-old Kool-Aid” (which you say is synonymous with repeating the ills of the dotcom era), take a step back and recognize that like you, there are those of us out here that get it. We understand the value that social media adds to an overall sales and marketing plan, and like you, we find it abhorrently distasteful when the Kool-Aid goes bad.  And as for making the whole sandwich – indeed, serve up a whole, amazing one (as long as you know not to serve a Double Down to the Judges of Top Chef).

When I look at the ways I filter my own information streams, it’s a combination of tools provided by the social networks on which I’ve chosen to be active, and some home-made tools that were born from those most organic drivers of innovation: circumstance and convenience.

I have over 1,000 Facebook “Friends”. Many of these are people I’ve had class with, worked with, or am related to. Others are casual acquaintances, the results of “networking”, or some other professional association (among other things, I’m a member of The Association of Certified Fraud Examiners, The Free Shakespeare Project, etc…). The final group of these Facebook contacts is comprised of the brands/companies/industry minds I’ve chosen to “Like” – it’s this group that is the cause of both much consternation, and doubly much enthusiasm.

My personal solution has been to use Facebook’s built-in “Friend List” mechanism to create news feeds populated with topically-grouped information. For example, I have an “A List”, which is made up of my closest friends and family. A list called “Locals” is made up of the people, places, and brands local to Boston that I’m interested in. Another is called “Brands”, which is where every brand/corporate page I “Like” gets placed. This is my irrigation system, and I’ve come to rely heavily upon it; needless to say I suffered feelings of acute distress when the latest iteration of Facebook for iOS lacked the ability to filter the news feed by Friend List – something supported in the previous version (for shame, Facebook).

On Twitter, I follow far more people than I am followed by. I use Twitter less as a soapbox, and avenue for the cataloging of errant thoughts, of which I have many during a given day. Just as on Facebook, I’ve used Twitter’s built-in “List” feature to organize the feeds I follow. I have lists titled “Friends”, “Locals”, “Shakespeare”, “Scotch”, “Dailies” etc… the constitution of which should be fairly self-explanatory, given their names. Again, I’ve effectively filtered out messages unrelated to what I’m curious about at the time. If I want to know what’s up with Shakespeare, I’m not going to the “Scotch” list; if I’m curious about what The Glenlivet is doing, I’m not going to “Friends”.

Ay, there’s the rub

From the marketer’s perspective what I’ve done is negate the ability for your message to reach me in the way that was intended. Instead, I’m a potential customer/client/evangelist who has decided that I only want to receive your message when I feel like receiving it. This is the painful realization that so many brands and businesses must grapple with when embarking upon their maiden voyage on the sea of social media. But that’s the point. As marketers, and as brands, it’s time to realize that our messaging, be it tweets, Facebook content, a Flickr stream, or anything else, has the capacity to engage with a more broad and more targeted audience than ever before. The flipside to this is that at no previous time has the audience been so able to actively – and rapidly – reject that messaging.

Shakespeare On The Common

Gone are the days when the savviest consumers are going to put up with interruption-based messaging. To refer to my previous example, though I am a passionate Shakespearean, I’m also an aficionado of single malt scotch. If I’m sitting at a performance of Shakespeare On The Common, I don’t care to receive messages about a tasting of The Macallan, happening next week. That said, when I go to my aforementioned “Scotch” list on Twitter, I’ll be thrilled to see that news. Getting that message to me at the right time, and in the right place, is critical. Facebook, Twitter, and their ilk are the right places – but getting the timing right means understanding that it’s out of your control. Marketers, though giddy about the prospect of connecting with a consumer on the same channel that consumer uses to interact with their friends and family, must understand that just like a phone call from my Mom, hitting “ignore” doesn’t mean “leave now and never come back”; rather, it means “I hear you, but I’m not ready to listen just yet.”

This is not to say that the voyage is hopeless – the waters are not so choppy that you are certain to sink. Rather, what’s crucial to realize is just how vital it is that the messaging being sent out is compelling. At Pandemic Labs, we hold fast to the axiom that “Content Is King”, and never has this been more apt a description of its nature. Unnerving though it is to suddenly have no guarantee that we’ll reach an audience exactly when and how we’d like, the shift must now be to understanding that the channels in which consumers are engaged simply don’t work that way. These channels offer multiple ways to filter content (as I’ve done with my Facebook and Twitter lists), and ensure only one thing: that when a consumer decides they want to receive your message, it had better be compelling, lest it be cast back into the stream as irrelevant to their needs.

So why is this post titled “Be Cool”? Is this some ill-advised reference to an even more ill-fated sequel? With all due respect to the former Vincent Vega – decidedly no. Nay, it’s as simple as this: too often, marketers misunderstand compelling to be defined as flashy, ornate, and aesthetically stimulating. Messaging developed with these ideas in mind doesn’t work in social media; it doesn’t work in a place where the veil of “marcom” is too easily torn asunder. The truest definition of the term – the explanation that breaks the word down to its core – is that it’s a way of describing that which is irresistible, demands attention, and commands respect. The savvy marketer’s practice is to ensure that each piece of content they put out is compelling, and understanding that the most valuable customer might be the one that never sees it until they decide to.

Image by Beverly & Pack

If I had a nickel for every time someone brought up “brand voice” in a marketing meeting over the past year, I honestly think I’d be a millionaire. “Brand voice” is one of those concepts that’s easy to say, but hard to correctly put into practice. Over the past few months, however, it has occurred to me that a discussion about “brand voice” isn’t even the right discussion to have. We need to be talking about “brand voices”

Oh…that’s right…plural!

There has been (and still is) entirely too much emphasis on creating a massive, omnipresent Voice with which a brand communicates to all consumers at all times; as if consumers would rebel and lose faith in the absence of this Arch-Voice to guide them along the dark paths of the modern world. This is absurd, and its silliness has become even more apparent as conversational mediums such as Facebook, Twitter, Quora, YouTube, and blogs increase in importance in a brand’s communication plan.

“Why is it absurd?” You ask. It is absurd because people do not speak with one Voice. I do not speak to my family the same way I speak to my coworkers. I do not speak to my clients the way I speak to either my family or coworkers. Furthermore, I speak to my close friends in an entirely different fashion than I do to any of the aforementioned groups. I am, of course, the same person with the same accent and same linguistic substrata regardless of who I speak to, but as I speak to different groups of people, I most certainly dress-up, or dress-down, or dress-sideways my Voice by altering my argot, rate of speech, use of idioms and/or profanity, and overall tone.

You all do the same thing. Everyone does. It’s not a linguistic accident, or evidence of underlying schizophrenic tendencies, but a necessity of human communication. As Stephen Fry says in his Language Podcast (which every person on this planet should listen to), “You slip into a suit for an interview, and you dress your language up too. You can wear what you like linguistically or sartorially when you’re at home or with friends, but most people accept the need to smarten up under some circumstances.”

At no point in my life has this shifting of my Voice been held against me as an indication that I am somehow insincere or of flimsy character. I very much doubt that a close friend even thinks about the very different way I communicate when hanging out with him versus when we are at a dinner with a larger group of people.

This shifting of one’s voice is not a new phenomenon. I’m talking about changing our styles based on our audience, but linguists often talk about a process referred to as “code-switching,” which is the concurrent use of more than one language or language variety in conversation. Not only do people change they way they speak depending on the situation, but sometimes may even change their register, tone, lexicon, and argot in the middle of a conversation.

I bring this to your attention because this type of voice-shifting is a common occurrence in human communication. It therefore stands to reason that a similar shifting would occur in a brand’s communication. Why would a brand speak the same way on Twitter that it does on the customer service section of its website? Why would a hotel feel the need to speak the same way on its Facebook Wall as its front desk manager speaks to a guest at check in? These are fundamentally different situations with different contextual requirements and expectations.

When a brand knows who they are, they don’t have to worry so much about an Arch-Voice. Instead, they should focus on developing contextually relevant brand voices for their various communications channels. You can dress down on Facebook. You can dress down even further on Twitter. Your voice can be more refined and polished on your website where it’s a publication mechanism, not a conversational one. The number and style of your brand voices (sort of like linguistic dress codes) will be up to you, and, most likely, based on your consumers, communication channels, and product/service offerings.

If you take this approach of situation-relevant brand voices, you will make better connections with your consumers on each communication channel, and, I would bet, you will run no risk of sounding fragmented or inconsistent.

The background to the question is simple. We all know that the social media landscape is changing faster than most can keep up with. For the most part, early-adopting consumers tend to be the first to jump cannon-ball style into any new technological pool. Once the waters are proven safe and comfortable, other consumers join in, all eventually followed by large, lumbering brands that want to join the party. We’ve seen this with Facebook, Twitter, mobile applications, etc.

The sheer size and labyrinthine organizational structure of most large brands has pretty much prevented them from being the first to splash into any new pool. Lately, however, I have noticed a distinct increase in the speed with which many brands are jumping on various new media bandwagons.

Foursquare is one of social media platforms where I have noticed this. It seems to me that there have been brands spending significant energy on Foursquare for many months now; even though Foursquare boasts a relatively small user base compared to many other social networks.

So, again, I pose my question: Can brands adopt a new platform too early? In our personal lives we don’t really need to run a cost-benefit analysis of messing about on Gowalla. We try it and we like it or we don’t. But when companies and brands begin to “mess about” on a new platform, it costs them money (either directly or in the opportunity costs of where else that time could have been spent).

For a few months now, I have been leaning back and watching some brands enter new social spaces with no apparent plan. I want to know if this strategy is working for them. Is there significant value to being one of the first kids in the pool? Or, are these brands suffering from premature adoption (is there a pill for that?)

So here are some questions to ponder (and please discuss in the comments):

• Does a brand’s early adoption of a new technology provide the same status bump (in certain circles) as a consumer’s early adoption?
• If brands enter a new social space and don’t know what they are doing, does it hurt them, help them, or not affect them at all?
• What is the next platform/technology/network that you think brands are going to start using?

The Cool Kids: Why Brand Personality Matters (An Overview)

The presentation was designed to:

• Explain the history of “identity marketing”
• Offer an equation to understand the importance of brand personality and how it equates to revenue
• Define brand personality
• Give advice for the creation of brand personality optimized for social media and revenue generation

History

Before the turn of the century advertising was very simple.  It made no attempt to connect with consumers’ emotions, aspirations, etc.  Marketers’ sole objective was to simply let consumers know that a product existed.  In the early 1900s marketers began to realize the potential of identity marketing.  Brands were imbued with a personality and advertisements became micro-narratives that consumers could identify with.

Soon an industry was built around the art of selling.  Madison Avenue was born and began to use sophisticated psychological research tools to give competitive advantage to agency clients.  The results were great, it was proven that brands with no personality had very little customer loyalty and very high price sensitivity.  Investing in “brand” soon became a prerequisite for sales success.

The industry grew and grew for many years.  The importance of personality was never challenged and brands continued to invest accordingly.  The industry was shaken every time a new medium created another opportunity for communicating commercial content: print ruled, then radio, then television.  The industry always managed to figure out what to do with new technologies pretty quickly.  Marketing monologues were simply retrofitted for a new medium.  In the early 2000s the Internet and social media came along and shocked long standing status quos of marketing.   The Internet made marketing a dialogue, not a monologue.  Brands were now required to be always-on.  There were so many different ways to engage consumers.  And, in the age of digital, personality became more important than ever.

The Equation

Personality = new customers + customer loyalty + customer evangelism = Money + Buzz = More money

The idea of this equation is simple:  Brands with a compelling personality will attract new customers.  The personality will keep those customers loyal and increase the likelihood that they’ll evangelize for the brand.   A happy, informed customer base is the world’s most powerful sales force.  Customers and buzz equates to revenues (and high ROI on marketing dollars).

The converse of this equation was well articulated by Bill Bernbach, Founder DDB, who said: “If you stand for something, you will always find some people for you and some against you. If you stand for nothing, you will find nobody against you and nobody for you.”   This quote so succinctly describes the need for brands to BE SOMETHING.  It means that brands can be too cautious in the creation of their personality.

What is a Brand Personality

C.G. Jung provides a great definition of personality:

“Personality is the supreme realization of the innate idiosyncrasy of a living being. It is an act of courage flung in the face of life, the absolute affirmation of all that constitutes the individual, the most successful adaptation to the universal conditions of existence, coupled with the greatest possible freedom of self-determination.” -C.G. Jung

Brand personalities are much the same, they:  reflect the collection of experiences that the public has with the brand.  It differentiates while creating a lasting impression in consumers’ minds.  Strong brands tie their narrative to consumers’ emotions and achieve a lasting connection.  Personality reflects the brand’s courage to stand for something.

Creating a Brand Personality Optimized for Social Media

Whether you’re an established brand or just starting out you should think about your brand and how it works for social media.  A good first step to consider your personality in terms of archetypes.  Here are some common archetypes and examples of brands who fit the mold:

• Sage – The New Yorker, The Macallan Scotch Whisky
• Lover – Hallmark, Downey
• Outlaw – Harley Davidson, Bacardi
• Master – American Express, Mercedes Benz
• Regular Joe – Budweiser, GMC
• Hero – Nike
• Explorer – The North Face
• Magician – OxyClean
• Jester – Miller
• Caregiver – Enterprise Rent a Car
• Creator – Lowes
• Innocent – Dove

Archetypes should stem logically from the value proposition of the product or service.  The brand of financial institution, for example, should not cast itself as an outlaw (even if that would be apt) when a reassuring archetype is what people want in an organization they’re entrusting with their money.  Brands shouldn’t limit themselves to just one archetype.  Often times a small collection of archetypes best describe a brand personality.  Human personalities are inherently complicated, while brand personalities needn’t be too complicated they should mimic human personalities to an extent and be complex enough for consumers to identify with.  This means a small collection of archetypes will often work best.

Once you understand the archetypal nature of the brand, you should fill out the picture with a keyword and key-image list.  This is a collection of the words and images that exemplify your personality.  This is a list that should include characterizations such as: playful, cerebral, youthful, sarcastic, etc.  Think about the visual cues that speak to the essence of the personality; the actor, the car, the work of art that shares identity with your brand.  This collection of words and images will be invaluable as you develop your brand voice and supporting design elements.

Developing keywords and key-images should be a collaborative process.  In fact, social media should be considered a collaborative process in every organization.  Brining multiple stakeholders into a social media marketing effort gives staff a sense of ownership over the brand and allows them to make their individual talent available to the public.  With that said it’s also important to have a consistent brand voice.  When choosing which of your staff to engage in this process take on the role of casting director: pick the staff you want to contribute as if you were choosing characters for a commercial.

At the end of the brand articulation process be sure to take a look around and make sure the brand personality is sufficiently differentiated from competitors.  If you’re wondering why this is not step one that’s because doing competitive research first can inform ideation in a negative way.  From a process perspective, it makes sense to figure out exactly who you are, if you’re honest the chances are low that your brand will have too much in common with any other.

There are a few rules for developing and advancing brand personality that should be written in stone.  Luckily they’re very simple and logical…

Rule Number 1: Be Transparent.  It’s simply the importance of being forthright and honest.  People are smart.  If you try to pull a fast one, you will likely be caught and the deleterious impacts to your brand AND to your bottom line could be significant.  For example, Motorola was recently caught astro-turfing (the act of commenting on blogs and forums under the auspices of a consumer).  Soon the ruse was uncovered by TechCrunch and other media.  The brand was lambasted and lost tremendous credibility especially among the early adopters to inhabit blogs like TechCrunch and tech forums.

Rule Number 2: Be Authentic.  The social media marketing ideal goes something like this: Our company is awesome.  Our consumers rule.  Together we’re magical, we make each other better.  We’re loyal.  We’re listening to each other, we are interested, and we are open to exchange. We are equals. In order to pull it off, you need a genuine personality.  When your personality is authentic people relate to you, when you’re a big fat phony, people don’t care.  This means that if every Facebook update is punctuated with an exclamation point your brand is unlikely to get the dialogue you want to achieve.

Rule Number 3: Be Consistent.  Many brands got into the social media marketing game without clear goals or a clearly defined personality.  This has resulted in fragmented, ill-defined, and ultimately failed attempts to connect with consumers.  It’s important to be consistent in brand voice and to make sure that efforts are consistently aligned with engagement goals.  However, it’s also important to note that consistency is important in the aggregate.  It’s ok to be a bit off topic from time to time if that means giving fans, followers, etc. content they will enjoy.

Rule Number 4: Be Relevant (And Platform Appropriate).  Brands should be active participants in the discussions around their industry and related topic areas.  It does not make sense for Budweiser, for example, to take part in a discussion on knitting.  It does however make sense them to talk about beachwood, the communities where they employ a lot of people, grilling, volleyball, etc.

Rule Number 5: Be Platform Specific.  It’s also important to consider the platform that conversation is happening on.  Twitter and Facebook are uniquely suited for different exchanges.  The most successful brands understand the nuances of the platforms and adapt conversations and brand voice accordingly.

Rule Number 6: Be Prepared to Change.  The social media ecosystem changes at a mind boggling pace.  Just think, three years ago MySpace was significantly larger than Facebook and Foursquare didn’t even exist.  Plan to make time to reconsider your brand personality and social media marketing strategy every six months or so.  Usage patterns change, standards and expectations change, and occasionally there are massive shifts in relevant technologies.  Adapting brand and strategy commensurately with consumer preference is not easy but certainly a strong harbinger of success.

From creepy to clean. The Brawny guy gets a new 'do

Creating a successful brand personality is not an easy thing to do.  You don’t win popularity contests without a certain amount of effort.  Best of luck, and remember, keep it real.

Changes to the micro behemoth will have a significant impact on the whole gamut of stakeholders: users, brands, developers, investors, zoologists, you name it, if you’re one the 160 million Twitter users these changes will affect your experience. Here at Pandemic Labs we’re mostly interested in the impact on brands (it’s how we make our monies after all). On the whole we welcome the changes, but there are a few gray areas and dangers to keep in mind. Here are the positives and negatives for brands as we see them at this early stage…

Yay!

Content is King:

The new Twitter will integrate dynamic media thanks to partnerships with the likes of Flikr, TwitPic, Ustream, Vimeo, YoutTube, and more. Instead of having to follow a link away from Twitter, users will be able to see the latest LATFH.com video without leaving the site. That’s cool. For brands it means users will be more likely to see their rich media, more likely to share it, and more likely buy stuff. Oh my!

Making dynamic content easier to view and share will likely change the standards of usage over time. We suspect the number of tweets featuring rich content will grow and the expectation for brands to have dynamic content to grow concurrently. This will mean that Twitter campaigns will need to become more thoughtful and potentially more expensive to execute. Lucky there are good agencies to help with that kind of thing. Ahem.

Content Contextualized:

Tweets will now be accompanied by biographic information, recent tweets, and other additional context surrounding the author and content of a tweet. This change will make tweets more meaningful and conversations more accessible. Ultimately we think this will enhance the dialogue with more @replies, #, and all that jazz.

Anything that improves the breadth and depth of Twitter conversations is something marketers welcome with open arms.

No More More:

The new Twitter has infinite scroll. This means people will be able to scroll through “old” content without hitting the ‘more’ button. The logical deduction is that people will read through more content. Again, we’re psyched, this is good news for brands.

Boo!

Apps & Automation:

Right now it’s unclear how much of the new Twitter’s API will be opened. This means desktop applications might not be able to offer the new features. While this is a great way for Twitter to support their monetization efforts it may render apps like, Seesmic, TweetDeck, etc. obsolete. For brands who use desktop solutions to track and automate their Twitter accounts they may need to go back to good ‘ole Twitter dot com.

Mobile:

Also unclear at the moment is how changes in the desktop experience will manifest in users’ pockets. What will future mobile clients look like? At Pandemic we’re also wondering if this will motivate usage differences between mobile and desktop. While this is not a danger to brands per se, change can always be scary.

The $160,000,000 Question?

Investors have pumped $160M into Twitter. That’s a lot. But Twitter has seriously lagged on monetizing the site and investors are still waiting to see their investments pay off. Changes to the site were certainly motivated, at least in part, by a larger monetization strategy. We want Twitter to make money, we’re not opposed to monetization. The only thing we’re worried about is how that process plays out. There are two distinct dangers.

1. Monetization schemes alienate users and they leave.
2. Twitter charges brands for interactions, or the ability to post rich media.

These are unsettling scenarios to Pandemic. But hey, at least we’re not working in a dying medium.

That Twitter continues to be daring, make changes to their product offering, and improve the experience is a good thing. Change may be scary but inaction is lethal. We think Twitter’s move will help ensure the vibrancy of the platform for a long time to come. Brand’s investments in the platform are safe. Twitter is here to stay.

If you want to see the new Twitter in action, and you like absurdly hyperbolic videos, check out this indie promo from the friendly folks at Twitter: http://twitter.com/newtwitter

Like all social organizations, companies are full of members (departments) that take great care in marking their territory and making sure everyone knows what is their (and sometimes more importantly, not their) responsibility.

• PR departments handle the PR agency
• Marketing departments handle the Ad Agency
• E-commerce departments handle SEO/SEM

A few years ago, it was (relatively) nice and peaceful in the jungle. Then, along came this disruptive thing called social media. Social media didn’t neatly fall into anyone’s preconceived buckets, and whats more, no one had any idea whose responsibility it was to figure out if these new tools could be used for marketing.

I know firsthand that some very large companies grabbed the youngest person in their marketing department and said, “Get us on Facebook.” Think that is a tenable position in the ever-increasing field of the social web?

Now that social media marketing has settled in a little bit, a lot of the stories are coming to the surface about how social media was (and in many case still is) handled within companies. I have seen two distinct approaches:

1. New thing = scary: This approach has been the more common among larger companies. No one wants to even figure out what social media is, much less be burdened with responsibility to figure out how to make it work for marketing. Responsibility gets tossed around like a hand grenade. A few people do one thing over here, then some other people do something else over there. There is no plan, cohesion or vision of any kind. Then the company whines about how social media marketing is a bunch of fluff because they tried it and it failed.
2. Ooooooo shiny….It’s mine: In some companies, the exact opposite is true. Every department fights over who gets to “claim” social media. Everyone wants to this powerful new tool to be theirs so they can take credit for it when it works. Since no department will hand it over, a few people do one thing over here, then some other people do something else over there. There is no plan, cohesion or vision of any kind. Then the company whines about how social media marketing is a bunch of fluff because they tried it and it failed.

Did you notice that the ends of both situations were EXACTLY the same?

The fact of the matter is this. Social Media Marketing is an increasingly important component of any marketing strategy, and, just like all your other marketing elements, it needs to have a vision and strategy behind it for it to work.

Someone in your company needs to be responsible, and more likely than not, you need to hire an agency to develop the strategy that’s right for you and execute on that strategy based on trackable goals.

Without that, how can you expect to succeed?

Currently available for the iPhone, the Geico GloveBox allows customers to access a multi-functional, extremely useful application. Equipped with a handful of tools, this product is single-handedly transforming smartphone apps for the entire insurance industry. Before going any further, allow me to share just why this application is built to succeed.

Once it’s loaded, individuals have access to a wealth of useful and handy tools. First, is an accident helper that allows someone to quickly contact emergency services. It also gives you a place to organize photos from an accident, to help you prove that it was the other guy’s fault.

Next, it has a “Roadside Service” tool that allows you to find gas stations and tow services if you are ever misfortunate enough to need either one. There’s also a taxi/rental car function that utilizes the phone’s GPS, to help you find other ways to get home. Lastly, the application is equipped with do-it-yourself and how-to videos, covering everything from jump starting a car, to changing a flat tire.

Aside from these excellent services, what makes this app so groundbreaking is just how much stock Geico has invested in a product that doesn’t actively recruit new customers. While there are portions of this app that are dedicated to Geico customers – such as retrieving your insurance ID – no elements of this app are superfluous. Each service has a dedicated need, with a few videos along the way of the Geico Gecko to provide comic relief.

Furthermore, the GloveBox proves that Geico has resisted the current fad to bring something – regardless of usability – to the smartphone market.  You can also tell that this app wasn’t thought up in a back room by devious marketing executives attempting to use all of their allotted spend. Instead, this is a well planned, well thought out application, with the sole purpose of creating a positive brand experience.

It may be tough for Geico to measure the influence of this app on gross sales, but thus is the Catch-22 of social media.  However, if you look at this app through a different lens, it transforms traditional marketing. While you may not remember a whole lot about the next fender bender you’re in, you will remember using the GloveBox app, and the fact that Geico was there to help.

The branch has embraced social media with open arms by maintaining accounts on Facebook, Twitter, YouTube, Flickr, and iTunes (featuring news in the form of podcasts and video podcasts). As of 1/15/10, the NAVY listed over 200 official social media sites . Additionally the NAVY sponsors their own social network for Moms on Ning. This allows those serving to connect and stay up-to-date, utilizing any of the available social media platforms. The NAVY’s CIO acknowledged that social media can be used to “build trust and collaboration, both within and outside the organization.”. On Twitter, there are several Navy-related accounts including: @NavyNews, @flynavy, and @PacificFleet (a comprehensive list is available on GovTwit, the Government Twitter directory). The NAVY Twitter accounts serve as a great source for military information (and a sense of everyday life), especially since, unlike the official traditional military media outlets, tweets are informal and written in “civilian-speak.” The NAVY is fully-aware of who its audience is, and tweets accordingly.

The NAVY has reached a niche market by providing parents (and relatives) the opportunity to unite with others in similar situations and get support through the social networking site NavyForMoms (NFM). As seen in other markets, the “mommy bloggers” are an influential group and the military branch tapped into an older version of this consumer. These moms don’t have infants – they have full-grown children. The NAVY specifically targeted mothers due to the impact of their opinion on those interested in joining the branch. They realized that if they could reassure Mom,  it could result in higher recruitment rates. The NAVY created a marketing campaign focused entirely on this target market and launched the NFM website as a social media test in March 2008.  There are currently 27,481 enthusiastic NAVY family members (predominately mothers) who are very proud and supportive of their sailors, and are advocates of the NAVY.  The NFM site concisely states their goals:

“NAVYForMoms.com was created for the mothers (and loved ones) of those who are currently serving or considering serving in the U.S. Navy. The site gives members a place to discuss issues with others who share common concerns. Here, content is member-driven. Questions are asked and answered. Moms share with fellow moms their fears, dreams and personal experiences. The ultimate goal is to provide an environment of understanding, comfort and belonging to all involved.”

Discussions include how to best handle emotions when a sailor leaves home for the first time, advice on attending a sailor’s PIR (’Pass in Review’ aka boot camp graduation), and brainstorming ways to support those who serve when they are away from home, including “Adopting-A-Sailor” during the holidays. Members share and respond to each other through personal blog postings, forums, photos, videos and local events. They customize their experience by writing posts and comments, configuring the look and feel of their avatar and profile and by choosing groups to be involved with. I am a member of NFM, and I belong to the “Proud NAVY siblings” group. It was through this network that I learned about the NAVY tradition called “blue candle lightings,” which is done when a sailor can’t make it home for the holidays – a candle is lit in their honor. I was upset that my brother couldn’t make it home that year, but I felt a sense of connection when I set-up his blue light, knowing that I wasn’t the only family member in the U.S. going through those emotions on Christmas Day. I was one of thousands that day, and since my family doesn’t live close a naval base, I don’t have a chance to physically interact with other military families. Social media has allowed for people similar to me to connect on a virtual naval base, when support is otherwise unavailable.

The NAVY integrated NFM into their overall PR and marketing communications strategy for the branch. OOH environmental ads were created through “Blue lightings” of historic landmarks (a nod to blue candle lightings) and by completely transforming the look of subway stations and sporting venues. Print ads and 30-second spots promoted the site by introducing actual active members, including Karen Gallagher, a proud NAVY mom (Yes, she is a real person who lives in NH, and her sons are NUKES, just like my brother. She is a rather nice lady.). The efforts did not go unrecognized by the community as NavyForMoms campaign won Silver in the AMA’s 2009 Effie Awards in the Government, Institutional and Recruitment category.

We've come quite a long way, haven't we?

The U.S. NAVY has made it a priority to utilize social media. By doing so, they have created a virtual version of the tight-knit military community that has previously only existed for our sailors and their familes on physical bases and naval yards. In other words, NFMs is a great example of how to utilize the power of social media.