A recent round of discussions on several blogs debating whether or not the PR or Advertising department should be the owner of corporate social media. To be frank, neither of these sits right with me. Social media requires a blend of PR, traditional marketing and old-fashioned relationship-building networking skills. Enter the Word of Mouth Marketing Association (WOMMA) and its growing claim that corporate social media is indeed WOMM.
I had a chat with local social media star John Bell about this very topic. He started talking about social media and WOMM as a separate discipline (the topic came up because he’s attending this week’s conference). It should be noted that John sits on the board of WOMMA, a relatively new trade association trying to build measurement, ethics and best practice standards.
My ears perked up. John’s onto something, because as Susan Getgood likes to say, “the lines are a-blurring.“ The reason why social media doesn’t fit into either box is because it requires a blend of all these skills and more. As such, neither PR or advertising is well suited to own social media. It might be a new animal all together.
My past experience involved several years business development for agencies like TMP Worldwide and Widmeyer. In those roles I had to know and understand more than PR. I learned the full gamut of marketing strategy and disciplines to represent my firms’ full offerings intelligently.
When I see excellent social media programs there’s more there. Intelligent brand strategy, compelling calls-to-action, and good salesmanship — which is the art of building long-term customer relationships (a la Dale Carnegie).
Why It’s Not PR or Advertising
By definition, PR means building goodwill between and organization and its community. As such, social media tools naturally fall under this umbrella. However, in general (outside of many friends  already engaging in social media), I don’t believe that the PR industry will ever get it.
The latest round of PR snafus (Andersen, etc.) nailed the coffin for me. And to be frank, anytime PR comes up the discussion always gets mired in blogger relations. Please Note for the Record: Blogger relations makes up a very small part of social media marketing.
But PR may never escape its entrenched media relations history. In fact, most companies see other forms of social media, community development, blogs, creation of applications and videos etc. as a new independent function. And they’re right, because PR types want to control the message and can’t function in this type of role.
Similarly advertising offers great tools, in particular brand management. Great social media communications demonstrate a clear value proposition to communities. In essence, communications understand that they are promising an experience to a community, and seek to back that up with valuable information that stakeholders actually care about. Also, consider the use of RSS subscriptions, etc. as calls to action.
But at the same time, advertising, direct mail and other marketing communication forms are one-way. They are meant to compel people to buy, and do not allow for a conversation. By its very nature, advertising flies in the face of conversational marketing.
I’m not sold on WOMM as the solution for this discipline conundrum. But, I’m listening now.
Tomorrow marks the start of the Word of Mouth Marketing Summit, WOMMA’s annual event. It’s the one show that I regret missing this fall as the agenda looks like advanced social media marketing versus the usual 101 discussion. We’ll see what reports come out of Vegas.
I agree with broadening the definitions, and even take it several steps further. Your pice is excellent on opening up how the customer relationships sector of business is looked at, but Social Media, done right, spills all over the place. It has a part to play in IT, HR, purchasing, project management, professional development and the executive suite. Pretty much all over the corporate map, once we get to figuring it out fo’real.
Kind of all over the “home front” too.
But blowing open the customer relationships side of it is a great and important site. It ain’t just telling & selling anymore. : )
Geoff, I think I’m going to be in the minority, but I do believe corporate social media should be in the realm of PR and certainly not with the traditional ad or marketing group. However I recognize the large caveat that PR needs to do a great deal of educating before people trust them to be the social media leaders.
I tied this into my post this morning (from an Utterz last night) as well.
/kff
Geoff, it is the same tune that has been doing the rounds of corporate communications depsrtments for year, just different words.
In truth I don’t think it is a situation that will ever be clarified in large companies because the restraints on organisational structure will always be there. In my time as an internal communications manager I have been part of the HR function, the communications and very neearly the marketing function.
As always it will be the department with the biggest budget that wins in the true corporate companies.
The picture is a little different in the smaller companies and I think it is these ones that will make the real advances by refusing to pigeonhole their work.
I think we can solve a lot of the problems by getting rid of the advertising departments that still proliferate under the marketing name.
Laura: Here, here. And,in general, that’s what neither department gets, the relationships. This is particularly disappointing from a PR perspective given the last word is relations…
Kyle: I respect your thoughts, brother. Keep up the good fight.
Andrew: Thanks for these experiences. Corporate cultures are under siege by the incredible changes social media has wrought. Much more will be played out, and from my point of view, the end lines are nowhere in sight. But I could be behind the eight ball on this one.
I can’t be unbiased about this, I know, as a PR professional. I think social media falls into Public Relations. The problem is that PR has become media relations, or media relations has slowly taken the position as the most important part of PR.
When done correctly, PR can be a wonderful tool to interact and promote an organization. We can’t think in terms of controlling the message, just trying to contribute to it.
However, I have trust issues. Before I give anyone a license to speak on behalf of our organization, to represent us “officially” I need to trust that they’re doing it correctly.
And in this case, what does “correct” mean?
Social media (or better yet, social media capabilities) is more theoretical and largely undefined at this point. In fact, when we debate what umbrella it should be under, I think we’re missing an unimportant point.
Social media is a capability first, and service second. It transcends advertising, PR, government affairs, etc. Social media can be used to introduce a product, to reach out to those that have complaints, to develop a grassroots network of supporters.
If we place it under a particular category – or if an agency that’s looking to provide social media capabilities/servies does so, then they are doing the discipline (and themselves) a disservice.
What strikes me about these debates is why we feel the need to compartmentalize social media. I was going to make the same point as Laura, social media has the potential to benefit all aspects of business, doesn’t it? Perhaps corporate america needs to stop playing tug of war with it and start concentrating on how to converse with their customers in the right way…
Sarah – I couldn’t have said it better myself.
If we shifted to integrated communication, it wouldn’t be a debate. Ha!
This post is worth reflecting on Geoff.
Best,
Rich
Sandra: Correct is a very subjective index, but I am aware how few people execute conversationally and intelligently simultaneously. At the same time, sooner or later you have to let people go learn the hard way.
Rich, John and Sarah: I understand the desire not to classify social media. But to be frank, any sizable marketing organization (five or greater) will need to assign someone or a team to this specific role. In fact, some of the best examples of corporate social media — GM, Dell and Southwest — have assigned role players.
Geoff; Yes, and taking Dell for an example, they have a team environment, which includes PR, IR and others. I think it is cross discipline. In fact, I think if one department owns it entirely it isn’t doing its job. Social media, when done well, not only makes consumer evangelists, it also changes the corporate culture.
Some excellent points. I think that rather than worry about what it falls under – it’s more important that social media tools are being utilized & it’s happening with exec. support. I’ve seen debates about who should drive things – IT or Marketing? I’m fortunate to be working in a situation where cross-discipline communication is encouraged.
One thing that I’ve noticed in my networking is that I don’t pay attention to whether the person is in PR, marketing, IT, UI, etc. Everyone has great insights & it’s the variety of their backgrounds that adds value.