Social media is almost always a long-term proposition. That’s what makes it so tough to explain to executives who spend their days looking at P&Ls and trying to answer the question: “How can we sell more stuff today than we sold yesterday?”
Communicators like analogies. At least I do. I always did halfway decent on that section of the SAT. Now the math section? Well, I pretty much screwed the pooch on that part. But analogies, I got. I tell you this because the questions we ask ourselves when selling social media to execs are not unlike the questions we ask when trying to decide whether the agency or corp comms team should manage the brand’s social media channels. It’s a short term vs long term debate. So let’s dig a little deeper.
The short-term view
Generally, agencies are in a better position to manage a brand’s of social media platforms than corp comms teams. Now, I don’t want to generalize. That is not always the case. But more often than not, the agency:
- Has the time
- Has more resources
- Has done similar work for other clients
- Is more invested in making it happen because it’s a project they can manage, which means more money (just being honest)
There is a point of view that by managing a client’s social media presences, the agency can lay the groundwork, create traction, show the value social media can provide and not get stuck in the mud. And there’s ome validity to that statement. The best agencies look at it as a partnership — they are always discussing approach with the client even though they’re the ones doing the posting.
This short-term approach guarantees the account will get up and running and that customer engagement will happen sooner than later. But…
Long-term approach
Frustrating. Slow. Painful. Those are all words an agency rep might share if you counseled them to provide strategy on how their clients use social media and allow the clients to manage their own presences. But let me throw out another word that needs to be considered in the conversation. Culture.
See, Todd Defren wrote a post a while back highlighting five important social media tips for newbies. But really, the post would have been complete with just the first tip alone — Social media cannot be taught; it must be experienced.
Therein lies the value in teaching and not doing for clients when it comes to social media. Because only by doing can they completely understand what you’re asking them to do via Twitter, Facebook and all their social media neighbors. And more importantly, why you’re asking them to do it. How it aligns with their current strategy.
Which brings us back to that word…culture. Because in reality, social media is just a tool that we use to help our clients achieve the real goal for which we want them to strive. A culture focused first and foremost on the customer experience.
So where do you fall on this issue? Are you a fan of the short-term or long-term approach? Or is there another approach entirely that you’re a fan of?
Justin
I think you have a point about culture. That's one of the factor that makes a brand unique and has a huge influence on how it's perceived outside. It's in every bit of communication from the brand to its market. It can't be outsourced. You have to be born into it (as an employee) and a consultant will fall short on that.
I think if the brand has a 'they come to me attitude' (i.e: they have sm channels but don't actively go out there and mingle with likeminded people in social media), then the agency will do a better job probably. The challenge is mostly about content and communication in a traditional sense.
If they have the "go to them attitude' (i.e: they have 200-300 bloggers who are supposed to engage/network with relevant folks out there), then it can't be done by an agency.The agency can provide as you said the framework, the tools, the guidance to do it.
In my mind, the later is really social media is all about.
Laurent