Sunday, February 16, 2014 are you a social media blocker?
Blockers, Every organisation has them. But in communications teams, really?
A couple of weeks ago, I went to the rather brilliant, interesting and super helpful LG Communications Social Media session, organised by Darren Caveney, that was held at the hugely creative Antennae Centre in Nottingham.
Billed as ‘Everything you wanted to know about social media but were too afraid to ask’, it combined an immense list of speakers including David Banks [Media Law Specialist], Dan Slee, Paul Taylor, Sarah Lay and Richard Clarke from O2 with an equally inspiring un-conference session led by the Wikipedia legend Andy Mabbett.
While there, I pitched a session on ‘how do we move the unmovable?’ Or in other words, how do you bring around those people who have really entrenched views completely opposed to the good things about social media?
For me social media has many good things: it’s social, brings about conversations, brings ideas, chance to create and share ideas and information virtually no matter where you are geographically or organisationally and most importantly it connects people.
The session started off well with useful stories and tips shared. Unfortunately there were also a few points raised that made me sad and in fact if I’m honest quite frustrated.
We were discussing who should have access to social media in organisations and this is where my sadness set in. Examples were given about practices that had been adopted to make sure the ‘right people’ were doing social media in organisations. They included: 1) asking for business cases from individuals to set out why they should be given accounts, 2) testing staff for 12 weeks to see if they have enough commitment first before giving access and for me probably most frustratingly 3) using a pre-determined criteria [including ‘Had they shown they were good at communications previously?’ and ‘Did they show the skills needed to be good at SM?’] to decide if someone should be given a social media account.
Don’t get me wrong, I truly believe that the people who raised the points at the session felt they were doing the right thing but for me it went too far.
For a start, if I’d have had to jump through these hoops to get a social media account where I work, I’d have said get stuffed. And based on the skills test, I probably wouldn’t have been given an account anyway. Secondly, since when did being good at communications become a pre-requisite for having a social media account? What about the role of customer service skills or being a people person? And fundamentally for me having criteria type measures in place essentially stopped people from doing social media, rather than encouraged them.
I could go on….but I won’t. Many far superior minds than mine have debated this issue previously. Catherine Howe here after Comms Camp [the comments by Tom Philips, Dan Slee and Andrew Fisher are also well worth a read], Comms2point0 talking about barrier vaulting in Best by WM here and Puffles talking about comms being social media blockers here
What it did say to me though is that communication experts in local government are still not fully buying into the benefits that social media can bring, never mind being advocates for a digital culture where 'digitalvalues' are a way of being within an organisation.
I’m not sure exactly why that is, probably a number of reasons; resources, complexity, lack of leadership, confidence or not having the chance or trust to really try out new ideas. It’s also easy for me to say as I currently work in an organisation that gave staff social media access years ago and I would maybe think and act if I didn’t - but it definitely made me think about my role and what I can do.
Here are my observations on the facts as I see them:
- This is going to happen. And it will happen without, and in spite of, communications teams.
- Social media is bigger than just one team. Last year in Staffordshire we had over 100,000 less calls to our contact centre – that’s because residents were using social media, email and the internet instead. In fact contacts in this way increased by pretty much the exact same number. It’s only going to get bigger and residents are only going to want more choice and convenience in how to speak to organisations, not less.
- Social media can’t be controlled and it almost certainly and definitely can’t be controlled by just one team.
- If we can’t encourage staff to be advocates for our organisations and the changing role of public services, where does that leave our communities?
- How can we move on to tackling the wicked issues and using technology to re-design public services that are fit for 21st Century if we’re still dealing with the small stuff?
So now that I’ve put that out there, I’m finishing with an appeal. If you’re in communications and are responsible for social media in your organisation, think about what you do and reflect. Ask yourself are you a social media blocker or are you someone who makes it happen and supports others to make it happen too?
If after soul searching you realise you’re the latter, it’s never too late. As Michael Jackson said “I’m going to make a change”. And you can too.
Emma Rodgers is Senior Campaigns Officer at Staffordshire County Council
Reader Comments (10)
Brilliant synopsis. Still too many blockers.
Michael Jackson also said, "Let us dream of tomorrow where we can truly love from the soul, and know social media as the ultimate truth at the heart of all creation."
Or was it love as the ultimate truth? I get confused sometimes. Either way, I do know I love social media and that's the truth.
While much of what you share certainly resonates with me Emma, I'd say that in my experience comms pros can also be enablers, though I too sometimes cringe at some of the anecdotes.
I see no lack of appetite from Comms to lift firewalls for example, which would open up access to social media for staff. Yet those barriers, often beyond the control of Comms, remain for many.
So in my opinion there are far bigger blockers than Comms. What you describe is simply a reflection of where some are on their social journey. Shamone!
Take it easy
Kenny
Hi Kenny
Thanks for the comments. Agreed there are far bigger blockers than comms. I honestly don't think this post doubts that. I also wasn't doubting that many comms people are working hard to push forward social media and the benefits it brings.
For me, it is about comms teams regularly challenging what we do and being confident that we are not inadvertently becoming blockers.
This is particularly important when it is something we can influence & change. Because in my book if comms teams are blocking (even inadvertently) then the pace of change & digital culture change that we need in local government is going to be undoubtedly thwarted.
Thanks for the feedback. I was hopeful it would prompt debate so pleased to get such useful views.
Thanks also Ken for your positive feedback.
Oh dearie me yes. Comms in my place instigated a strong control system as you set out above, as a result everybody ignored them, went off and did their own thing, successfully. Comms then used this as an excuse to say 'see, they need strong guidance, they'll just run off and do their own thing otherwise'. The experts on social media are people who use social media. Old fashioned Comms people are wannabe PR and journalists, the very things rendered redundant by social media. No wonder they fear it
Well that disruptive approach seems summed up by another Michael Jackson quote, "Just because it's in print doesn't mean it's the gospel."
For me, though, the issue of access lies far, far deeper in organisations' structure, culture and vision than at the door of Comms teams.
Organisations need to better collaborate and work together - including Comms - to prime the pump in the first place. I don't see that happening often enough. Too often, Comms are left downstream facing the flood, left carrying the watering can.
Hi Emma, great post covering some interesting points. I've also read the links to similar posts and agree with most comments and sentiments. I think there is perhaps a middle ground to consider which may be relevant to some organisations, maybe not all, but which I thought it might be helpful to share.
I agree that communication teams should not be the arbiter, or as Dan suggests, the mean sweetie shop owner. When using the c word I'd suggest it is about coordination rather than control. Communication teams are facilitators and enablers to advise and support others. That actually makes it more effective as it is in effect putting experts on social media rather than creating social media experts as I think Helen Reynolds rightly calls it.
In Leeds we have ‘digital champions’ for want of a better title. Not their main role, but folks representing their wider service areas who are responsible for coordinating anything digital and who have an oversight of service area strategy. That's e-comms, web content and social media. They are not our communication managers but they will work closely with them to provide support for their service areas in use of social media.
We have recently introduced a new social media account approval process. That may initially sound draconian but is really more about coordination and so that people who want to use social media understand what it takes to set up and maintain the expectations of use before they start an account as an egg. As a large organisation we really should know ‘what we are doing’ so that we can then list our account managers on our intranet for others to get in contact with. Also so we can list the accounts on our website to help promote them. We have found that this is helpful in working out where the sweet shop keys need to be loaned to. And actually this probably applies to most organisations.
The digital champion, who knows their service areas and wider business strategy best, is most appropriately placed to ensure that service accounts are properly set up and resourced with access to training and are linked to what else is going on in that service area. We came to this arrangement after running a ‘voice context and digital identity’ pilot with various staff across our organisation. That showed us that it was easy to set up social media accounts, not too hard to ‘broadcast’ rather than really interact, but most telling, it was difficult to make it work if there is little context or understanding of what it is to be used for.
So, yes we have an approval process before people can set up service accounts. That might appear restrictive, but actually for an organisation with nearly 30,000 staff and many services, something that really helps with coordination rather than control. It helps us with our sweet shop window display.
We also run sessions on awareness of the benefits, opportunities and how to reduce the risks in using social media. This is to encourage greater take up of social media, but with an understanding of what it really takes.
We have been sharing our introduction of social media on our Sociable Organisation blog here http://trulysocial.wordpress.com/
I think it's a shame that people's opinions and experiences shared in an LGComms forum with comms peers are being used against them in such a derogatory and fairly bullish way to be honest... unless of course Emma shared her disdain with the group face to face that is.
I wonder whether people will be so willing to share their views for the benefit of their peers at future events if they know there's a chance of being pilloried for it.
Thanks Thinkpurpose, Kenny, Phil & Mike for all your comments.
Kenny - I am in absolute agreement about digital culture and that it lies far wider than comms team. In my experience many comms teams are also enablers and this combined with quality advice and support is where I believe most value can be added by communications.
I also don't think Phil that it should be a free for all. There definitely needs to be a 'co-ordination' of approach and I really like many of the ideas you have adopted at Leeds. Definitely one I'm going to watch and learn from.
In my view it's about not creating extra hoops for people to jump through or gatekeeping based on communications led criteria or skills as digital is so much wider than this.
Mike - I did raise my views at the session and my post was in no way intended to be derogatory or disdainful. Merely this is my opinion and one that aimed to prompt debate and garner views on whether we can be doing more. And I believe if something makes you think about what you're doing then it's a good thing and this session definitely did that.
I really hope people will continue to share their approaches in LG Comms forums and elsewhere. I for one will be disappointed if they don't as I think it is only through debate, challenging what we do and evolving that we will move on to begin to meet the digital, and wider, challenges facing the public sector [and wider] in the 21st Century.
I like it Phil. Posts such as this ought to share learning, and serve to increase people's resilience to challenge rather than inhibit it.
Digital champions sounds a great idea. That sense of empowerment, leadership and learning also resonates with the social media surgeries we've just set up in Dundee.
Challenge and learning is, for me, part of what getting social is all about. I won't always get it right so it's good to listen to and read others thoughts, it's how I learn. I may disagree and at times might not like it, but I believe people holding a mirror to my face can lead me to a healthy place. Plukes* an' all.
*Scottish translation available on request
Agreed Kenny. That is so what getting social is all about.
So go on then what is the Scottish translation? I'm intrigued.