Know-How Exchange : Book Club

I work for an education nonprofit that deals with very sensitive political hot-button issues. We've not just been on the negative end of comments, we've been on the scary "hate" end of them, to the point where some have staff gotten personal threats. So we may be more of a target for negative spamming than other companies/orgs (or maybe it's our own perception?).

Secondly, what we say or don't say about these issues can have a significant impact on how our funders and potential partners perceive us. So we go through an intensive vetting process for almost every piece of content we publish, which is antithetical to the concept of a blog.

While I think it's a great idea to have an open forum to talk about these issues, and I desperately want to market the heck out of the great work we do, I just don't see how we, as an organization, will a) get past the fear of the threats (if we should) and b) how we can accept the idea that while something we say might cost us one funder or partner, it also might gain us five (i've failed to make this argument successfully).

The marketer should say no when the citizen marketing "campaign" is not aligned with the company's marketing strategy - which consumers have no idea of. This means if it is the wrong targets, the wrong positioning, the wrong channels, or lacking a business case, it shouldn't be done.

Too many people are using the terms "social media" and "marketing" as synonyms. They are not. Social media can be used as marketing, but only under the greatest care and handling.

The current NFL campaign is illustrative. Although there are hundreds of millions of fans across the globe, the NFL got about 2000 entries for its "make your own Super Bowl commercial" invitation. Another 200,000 or so voted. And the winning entry will reportedly be shot by a PROFESSIONAL DIRECTOR, one of the ad industry's most famous (Joe Pytka).

And the reported positioning? How awful it is to be without football during the off season. And the cure for that would be...?

I'm sure it will be funny, get a lot of press, and millions of people will see it. Then, about a day later, how many can we say will have embraced the NFL brand more than they did on, say February 3rd?

I think it boils down to fear and loss of control. It's one of those things where everyone nods their head and says, "yes, this is a good idea. You go first." Meaning that in theory, they love it. When asked to apply it to their world -- not so much.

This is not just a new tool it is a new way of thinking. That is going to require some evolution. Some early adopters will need to dip their toe in (or dive right in) the water first. And there are some organizations where it is going to take a generational shift of leadership before it happens.

The old guard who's used to pushing messages and not asking for or listening to feedback is going to be much slower to change.

On the flip side, we've been showing clients the upside to all of this. The power of listening. The power of feedback. And what happens to a consumer when they feel important enough to be asked/listened to.

Sometimes that works. But...just today I had a client who was all ready to dive in and implement some new CM strategies. He got it. Unfortunately, his boss did not and pulled the plug on everything. So now I have to try to re-create that same level of understanding with the owner of the company. I'm not sure I will get a hit this round. But I will keep going up to the plate.

The short answer to your question -- we keep talking, educating and waiting until in a few years, it is no longer an issue.

I've had experience in trying to push this ball uphill too. Many companies will NEVER get the idea of citizen marketing. They just don't have an open culture, even internally.

If a company is 'closed' internally it will be a cold day in hell when they open externally.

It's also a big challenge to talk to someone about tapping into the blogsphere if they don't already participate. It's just too hard to explain in a strategic sense.

I've found that starting with small tactics does help companies understand the idea of community marketers. For instance, I just started a blog for a medical device manufacturer, but it is built on the pretense of being able to easily make announcements in addition to their email list. It solves one small problem and they approved it -- but I haven't shared the big vision of what is possible through their new blog.

Better to let it unfold naturally and see where it takes us. Prototype and iterate is the quickest way to get big companies moving.

But that doesn't answer your question, does it Mack? I think it is not a companies should not use citizen marketing unless they are willing to be a participant first. Otherwise they will set themselves up for failure.

In the case of my client mentioned above, they have an asset in an employee who is deeply ingrained into their user base and trusted. She naturally networks and attends all of the events, but has not brought that participation to the web through a blog. It's a perfectly natural progression and it will yield market changing results if my guess is right.

Mack:

My replies to yours on my Super Bowl and marketing strategy comments.

You opened this post with a comment:
"...citizen marketers will reward their efforts..."

Your response to my Super Bowl example I would paraphrase as "well, it would be no worse than anyone else." Doesn't seem "rewarding," then, and hardly a rallying cry as far as I'm concerned ;-)

But I'm more taken by the Diet Coke/Mentos example in your response about marketing strategy. You said:
" I think when you can find customers that are passionate enough to create their own marketing for your brand, that they shouldn't be ignored."
I'm not sure two guys in lab coats spraying suds all around qualifies as "marketing." I think the folks at Coca-Cola will be happy when this whole thing blows over (pun sort-of intended).