Category: Social Media

Loving the blog

Yes I love it, but not because it can give a face to a stand-offish organisation, humanise it, make it more approachable and the rest of them ol’ chestnuts. These are the very positive byproducts, but the real root of why blogging is brilliant lies in the flexibility it offers.

Length: Five lines or a hundred? Doesn’t matter: in a blog you can do either and not cause a stir.

Frequency: Every day or once a month? Doesn’t matter. You’re not pushing your content – your readers choose whether they want to receive it, so you can publish as often as you like. In fact, the more the better (within reason.)

Type: Short post leading to content somewhere else or a fairly long analytical piece? Both are fine.

Am I stating the bleeding obvious? Yes, but the bleeding obvious often isn’t apparent to most organisations’ communications teams, who are in the business of winning over hearts and minds. And it’s a real loss. As they fritter away valuable resources on conferences and white papers, little do they know that a steady stream of all sorts of content in a blog is both easier to produce than the rigid and linear articles or press releases they’re allowed to publish once in a while – and often more effective.

A simple post mentioning the eminent professor who backs their position and leading to his white paper which they didn’t spend a penny on? Five morose paragraphs written on a rainy day which really cut to the core of the author’s passion for his/her sector? A full-on analytical piece? All are allowed in a blog – nowhere else is that the case.

Image source

Hypocrite? Almost but not quite

Before this post, I hadn’t blogged for two weeks; and looking at my output over the last few months, it’s been pretty infrequent and not especially inspiring stuff by and large (not that I’m by any means claiming to have written super inspirational stuff on a regular basis before then, but you get the gist.) Why is that? 60 hour weeks and plenty of travel, in short. Problem is, I HATE that excuse. So f’ing what if I’m working hard? A post can be ten lines long. I could blog while I travel, I could get up 2o minutes earlier in the morning and write a post or likewise go to bed 20 minutes later. That’s where I’m a hypocrite. I frequently tell clients who claim that they just don’t have the time and resources to engage online that they DO have the time: if they value its importance and what it can do for them, surely they can add a half hour here or there into their oh so busy schedules. And if they really can’t, sleep a little less, cancel the game of golf, or – heaven forbid – cut a meeting short.

That’s where I’m not quite a hypocrite: I don’t have as much control of my agenda as most clients do as it’s they who populate it (and I don’t play golf!) so I can’t as easily give myself a slot to write a post. Although I could sleep a little less and not read while travelling… Guess it’s not just about time: the long hours make you value the spare time you do manage to muster and the last thing you want to do when you have a moment to yourself is to draft a blog post.

Image source

Your ultimate web objective? Being ubiquitous

If there’s an issue that’s impacting your organisation around which you want to orchestrate a shift in opinion or behavioural change amongst a set of people large or small, it’s not enough to do the right thing and explain it effectively. Two factors play a part here:

  1. People don’t trust you. Trust in pretty much every sort of organisation is at rock bottom and falling, so people will need to hear it from others to buy into what you do and say.
  2. With regards to the web in particular, search. You can’t push your content, people will find what they want; such is the nature of the web – meaning that it’s quite likely that they’ll pick another site out of the thousands that show up in Google.

So what do you do about it? Beyond doing and saying “the right thing” (not so easy in itself) and a solid media relations set-up, you’ll need to become ubiquitous online. What does that mean? That your web tentacles reach far beyond your own web presence. Others communicating around your issue should be talking about you so that when people are on the aforementioned ‘other’ site on your issue that they’ve found on Google, you’re present too.

How do you make it happen? You’ll need to know who all the other players are on your issue and communicate with them in mind rather than hollering in a void. Reference their content or even feature them in person, comment on their content in your own output, and make sure you’re giving your input wherever you can on other platforms. Assuming – again – that your message is solid, people will take notice and will soon start talking about you, giving you the third-party credibility you crave (assuming they’re being nice!) and giving you airtime in other places where people might land.

Will it come easy? No, Rome wasn’t built in a day – it’ll be a slog, but you won’t regret it.

Letting people other than senior-president-director-chairman So&So represent your company

In my last post I wrote about having experts represent your company. Another thing worth mentioning along those same lines is having lesser mortals represent your company to the outside world. Many a client has recoiled in horror when I’ve suggested that someone other than really senior spokespeople could possibly be the face of the organisation.

I think that’s wrong on a lot of levels.

Sure, if you’re talking about hardcore regulatory stuff you’re embroiled in or apologising for something awful you’ve done, the more senior the better. It shows you care at the highest level of your organisation. But if it’s more fluffy stuff you’re talking about, why on earth not let the people who are responsible, know lots about it, or are really into it write or talk, whatever their position in the organisation? What’ll happen?!

Plus there are tangible benefits:

  • The old social media cliche: it gives a face to the organisation that goes beyond the CEO, and that makes the organisation appear more “real” and likeable – and even trustworthy. Would you trust someone closer to your age who is still making the grade and is telling you something interesting more than a slick spokesperson who has been around the block a thousand times? Quite possibly.
  • It shows the outside world that the company trusts its people. That in itself is a benefit: the organisation trusts its more junior people so much that it’s willing to let them front the company?! Impressive, they must be good.
  • The internal trust issue: show your more junior people that you think they’re important enough to be a face of the organisation and you’ll more likely keep them happy, motivated and loyal.

Use your experts

You’ve got a budget and you’re an ace, silver-tongued communicator. What’s the temptation? To tell the story yourself every time, with clever messaging and soundbites containing all your keywords oozing out of every pore.

It’s all very well, and there’s a place for this sort of output. However, I’d urge communicators to not lose sight of their best asset: internal experts. Unless it’s a purveyor of a basic good which is also utterly uncontroversial, your organisation will no doubt work on some pretty complex stuff. Within this realm of complexity, you’ll usually want to position yourself as a thought-leader; as an expert within your field.

It’s a shame then that the experts – the engineers, the scientists, the analysts, the designers et al. – are usually kept out of sight, while the comms people get to call the shots to the outside world. Instead, I’d really urge all communicators to harness this expertise by producing output that showcases experts (and not make it look too staged…) Not only will they know their stuff, they’ll often be more enthusiastic about the subject matter than you ever could be. Do so, and you’ll no doubt help your organisation come across as a more credible player.

Avoiding the temptation to do it all

The web offers infinite publication space on multiple platforms at zero cost other than time. Result? Busy organisations communicating everything anyone does a thousand times, just because they can.

Most of the time it’s a mistake caused by two instincts:

  1. The belief that – surely – plenty of people, somewhere, will pick up your material and be interested, given that there are millions of people surfing all the time.
  2. Thinking that because Mr. Hotshot X is considered very clever indeed in your organisation or HQ spent a lot of time and effort on a great launch, obviously everyone else will love them/it too.

The truth? The fact that it’s easy to surf will make it harder to push your material, not easier, because there’s a hell of a lot of competition and consequently, people will find something else which they like better unless you have a good story and communicate it well. Remember, the web is SEARCH – not headline – based.

Meaning that you MUST put yourself in your target’s shoes. Imagine you’re them and think: “what do I like, what will make me laugh, what do I want to learn today, what will engage me, what are my values, how finely honed is my bullshit metre?”

Do that well, and you’ll realise that when your target goes online, he/she probably won’t be interested in finding your highly-polished CTO talking about the launch party and what your product will mean for 6 million eager customers. What he/she will really want is material – whether produced by you or someone else – that has real people (maybe your CTO, probably someone else) giving clear, engaging and honest answers to questions that concern them or others in their community directly.

Good communications? Ask yourself what you’d think

I get “helpful” suggestions on the job every day: make the interviewee stand in front of our logo, let’s get the CEO to say a word – that’ll impress them, make sure you add key message X to everything, that doesn’t follow our colour guidelines, we need a better jingle, can you think of a good soundbite? And so on.

Will this sort of thing make a difference? Will it make your communication more effective? Will it make people like you more? Will it mean you sell more? Will it lead to behavioural change that will shift your issue the way you want it to over time?  Probably not.

So what should be your first litmus test? Simply – how would I react..? Or – what would I think..?

Don’t even put yourself in the shoes of a member of the general public, a civil servant, a journalist or whoever it is you’re trying to convince. Just imagine – if I had nothing to do with these people – what would I think? Would I be more impressed if there was a giant logo in the background? (Answer will probably be: Nope, I’d probably be less impressed.) Would I be impressed if I was hearing the CEO? (Does that not just depend on what they say and how they say it?) Would I care if the colour on the blog doesn’t match the brochure? (Couldn’t care less.)

Is this not just common sense? Yes, but common sense is often in short supply when it comes to communications. First, people within organisations live that organisation every day and inevitably end up reflecting internal thinking in their outgoing comms. It’s only natural. You’re impressed by the CEO but sometimes it’s hard to remember that others often couldn’t care less. Second, it’s old-school comms still ruling the roost. Very structured, hierarchical, controlled, rule-based communications shaped by conventions that have been proven not to matter or to even be detrimental, like the convention that states that showing your logo everywhere will mean people will remember that it’s you or that the CEO carries more clout than a lowly engineer (even if the latter is much more interesting.) Yeah, whatever. People are looking for openness, honesty and quality, so the less you stage things and follow outdated rules, the more likely you’ll be able to offer them that.

Don't bother with a big online launch: build a story instead

celebration_festivals_lollaI was recently asked to come up with some ideas to attract attendees and to generally “raise awareness” of an event using just online channels. My recommendation? If you’ve only got three months to make sure the right people know about your event, use other channels.

Big splash launches usually don’t work well online: if you’re hosting an event (or have just published something groundbreaking or are or launching a campaign for that matter) and you pretty much know who your stakeholders are (always the case if it’s a niche policy area, as in my example) just use old-school methods like phone-calls, emails and leveraging your networks. If you’re trying to attract a slightly longer list of stakeholders, by all means, advertise a bit too, but don’t expect too much from the web. Sure, promote it on your site, blog and whatever else, but don’t think that a web campaign will do wonders in the short-term.

So what could you do online instead?

First, do use your website as a reference for the event in the run-up to build some momentum e.g. create some hype about speakers by showcasing video footage of previous speeches or incorporate some interactive feature like, say, post your own question for one of the panels at the event. The scope here however is not attract to attendees who don’t know about your event, but rather, to convince people who aren’t sure it’ll be worth it.

Second, and more importantly, build a story around your issue in the long-term, not just in the run-up to an event: instead, make the event one part of your online story, and try to make your web presence the focal point of your issue online. If you manage to make your issue and your web activity one and the same online – i.e. anyone looking up your issue online will in some way find your content – it’ll be a more powerful tool in the long-run than any event could ever be.

What does that mean in practice though? In short (very short), I’d say you need to:

  1. Produce a stream of top-notch content which is a) based on a storyline you know will resonate with your target audiences (if you’re not sure what that is, conduct a poll, but don’t just use key messages the CEO likes); and b) which aims to clarify and simplify a complex landscape for people who might not be totally clued up on the issue.
  2. Don’t pretend you’re the only one out there – harness other people’s content and bring it together on your site – it’ll be their stuff, but you’ll be the one who has brought it together and created a one-stop shop on your issue.
  3. Creative campaigning. Content is king, but do something (online or offline) once in a while that’s a little out of the ordinary – provoke, shock, raise your voice, tell a personal story, involve your community in an unusual way. If done well, it’ll make people take notice of your excellent content a little more and help spread the word.
  4. Don’t forget the boring stuff which makes up some of the basics of eMarketing, in particular search engine optimisation and search engine advertising (i.e. Google AdWords) to help people find your content.

Image source.

Explaining an issue from a target's perspective, not yours

scratching_headA problem that often arises when an expert needs to explain an issue to their target – be it a policy-maker, influencer or a member of the general public – is that the expert develops their approach from their own perspective, rather than that of the target. Policy-makers are asked to make decisions based on a ten-minute minute meeting, or more likely, ten-minute briefings based on research conducted in twenty minutes by their assistants, and yet experts come at them with key messages and the like thought up by a room-full of know-it-alls.

It’s far more effective to work backwards and start from the target’s perspective. Ask yourself, first, what are the basics that my target doesn’t understand, and second, what questions are they most likely to have. If you don’t know, conduct a poll amongst friends and colleagues who don’t know your issue and ask them what their layman’s perspective is. Only once you’ve dealt with that, start imparting your expertise.

Unfortunately, this doesn’t often happen in Brussels: it’s where the policy-buff and communicator conflict I often write about comes into play. At company, association and especially agency level, most of the people tasked with communicating an issue are into the policy bit – which is fine (and necessary) – but they’re not really into the communications bit. Result? In the end, output that is probably very good, but doesn’t do a jot to win over the target of their communications because it hasn’t explained the basics before veering into high-brow.

Image source.

Picking an agency

Parallel universe. I work for an organisation and I’m eager to enlist the help of an agency to help me communicate around the issues that matter to me in Brussels. I know that picking the right agency might help to ensure that the public, regulatory and media playing fields treat me fairly, but I want to make absolutely sure that I pick the agency that’s right for me.

What would I look out for?

  • An agency whose starting points are my business and/or communications objectives, not the size of its address book. 20 former Commission officials or MEP assistants on your staff? I don’t care. I’d rather you understand what I’m trying to achieve and set that as your starting point.
  • Is the agency committed to Key Performance Indicators (KPIs?) It must be, even though I wouldn’t expect them to be defined by the first meeting. The commitment matters though, because in an unconventional and unpredictable place like public-policy land it’s too easy just say “oh well, it was out of our control, what could we have done?” With a commitment to KPIs you show that you’re really keen to win campaigns, not just make money from them.
  • I’d want the people who I meet to be intellectually curious, and passionate about communications and politics. They have to be if they need to learn a new sector and a new organisation from scratch and do their job well. Plus they’d be more interesting to work with and more likely to pursue my account as an intellectual challenge rather than simply looking to tick boxes and send invoices.
  • Must be firm believers in integration: an agency should consider all tactics – be it advocacy, media work, online campaigning – equally important parts of the same parcel i.e. my organisation achieving its goals. It might be an expert in one area, but it should never think that area is more important than all others.
  • Sounds obvious, but I’d really want an agency to make an effort when I meet them. If it’s using regurgitated material, only tells me about existing client work or thinks it’s a shoe-in because of its reputation, I’d not be impressed.

Some questions I’d ask:

  • What are my key issues?
  • How would you approach them?
  • What would you do to really understand my issues?
  • What’s the work you’re most proud of?
  • Who would work on the account?