How does an organization implement social media? A better question: How do you implement social media with resources at your disposal or do you go outside for help? The answer lies in who owns social media in an organization.
Ownership of social media can cross several organizational lines, at the same time it may require specialization in new sets of skills and disciplines. The line of responsibility is fuzzy at best and confusing at worst. As Jason Baer writes over at the MarketingProfs in an article called “Who Wins the Struggle for Social Media Control?” there are four combatants who may rightfully claim social media ownership. Although the article looks at the struggle between outside agencies or specialists rather than that within a company, I think the struggle is just as valid for internal departments. The 4 combatants are, in Mr. Baer’s words:
- Advertising. Because social media often requires making stuff, and can impact overall brand perception, advertising should be in charge of social media. The rising importance of video within social media also favors advertising types.
- Digital. Because social media is (at least for now) an online construct, the Internet marketing agencies should be in the driver’s seat. Plus, social media has major SEO implications in some cases, and most SEO is still handled by digital specialists.
- Public Relations. Because social media is ultimately about conversations, and is non-linear, public relations is best equipped to manage social media efforts. Especially so given the demise of traditional journalism, the importance of blogger relations, and the blurring of the lines between customer and reporter.
- Client. Because social media is ideally an extension and manifestation of the brand’s operations and culture, and requires near-constant vigilance and engagement, the client is best able to oversee social media. Comcast is a good example of this philosophy.
In closing the article, Mr. Baer advocates that public relations should be the gatekeeper for social media, but admits that PR still has a long way to go. To me this is a valid conclusion, but I would go a few steps further to clarify the issues and offer more realistic solutions that enable successful corporate social media thrusts.
Social media itself can have variations in definition depending whom you talk to. As Wikipedia defines it,
Social media are primarily Internet- and mobile-based tools for sharing and discussing information among human beings. The term most often refers to activities that integrate technology, telecommunications and social interaction, and the construction of words, pictures, videos and audio. This interaction, and the manner in which information is presented, depends on the varied perspectives and “building” of shared meaning among communities, as people share their stories and experiences. Businesses also refer to social media as user-generated content (UGC) or consumer-generated media (CGM).
The key words to take away here are: sharing, discussing, communications, social, human beings, interaction, Internet and mobile-based, communities. Social media was clearly embraced by the public/consumer. Millions are already participating in “social media” activities as a way of life. All this while corporations are still trying to figure out how to get involved.
The answer is to keep it simple. From a corporation’s viewpoint, social media should really be part of marketing and PR, but the rules are really set by the consumers or the audiences. So you’ll need to get in the game, provide the resources to do so, and make sure you follow established rules of the game and not insist on pushing your own rules. If you’re talking about a specialty agency, then I think it’s still about marketing and PR, and the rules are still set by the consumers or the audiences. The only difference is what you want your agency to specialize in, in the same way that advertising agencies decide to specialize in print, radio, TV, Internet or a combination of these.
Either way, there is a final critical element to the answer of who owns social media in corporations: leadership. Corporate leaders must understand what social media is, what it’s for, why it can be a powerful tool, and how it can help. Alternatively, entrust it to and empower someone who understands it. This is important because only with informed knowledge comes informed decisions; deciding not to pursue social media because you don’t understand it is really an uninformed decision. Social media is already an important communication tool chosen by the consumers. Therefore it must be a part of corporate marketing and PR tools used to reach those consumers. There just is no other way.
There are still a few outstanding questions. Companies, by competitive nature, have been very aggressive in bringing messages to the consumers using whatever new communication tools to get an edge on the competition. And marketing and PR, by definition, are very creative groups of people. So why is social media, as a communication tool, not being looked at as another important tool for marketing and PR? Are we sleeping at the wheel, or what’s really holding us back? Is the social media concept so difficult to grasp that we’re still scared of it? Share your opinions and comments.
Related posts
Tags: Marketing, Public Relations, Social Media
Subscribe by Email
Great post.
Thanks very much for the link. I agree with your extension on my post, most especially with your sentiment that social media only works if there is leadership. It’s has to be an organization-wide commitment to dealing with customers as equals, and that doesn’t come from the trenches.
Cheers,
Jason
[...] Social Media: Who in Your Organization Should Own It? [...]