eCommunications for global organisations

An eFluential is an online influential (or influencer) i.e. someone who matters online, someone people read and respect, and who can drive and influence an issue’s trajectory online.

For obvious reasons, communicators are often eager to identify eFluentials within their sector or issue. That’s all very well. Unfortunately, plenty of communicators then think it’s OK to pester them, assuming that of course they’ll be willing to spread a story and use their networks to promote anything from a take on an issue to a product launch. Think again. It barely works with traditional media, even less so online.

So as a communicator, what should you do? First, do identify these people. That’s not a crime. How? The basic tools work: look up keywords (brand, issue, legislation, organisation etc.) on Twitter search and Google blog search. Don’t forget blogrolls: finding bloggers via other bloggers works well. You can be even more sly. Look up your keywords on delicious, flickr, digg, reddit and check out if someone is tagging lots of good quality material. Google their names and see if they write blogs or where else they turn up (LinkedIn perhaps?)

OK so what do you now? DO NOT spam these people. Follow them, see what they have to say, learn from them, use them to gain an understanding of what’s driving your issue online. Then, if you’re really keen to build relationships with them, start engaging in their space e.g. go on Twitter or start blogging (or rather, advise your client to do so) and provide interesting and insightful material that they too will be interested in - and only then try to hook up with them. If they share your interests and you build a mutually beneficial relationship, they might, just might, refer to you at some point, follow you on Twitter or put you in their blogroll (but only because they really want to.) If at any point, however, it becomes clear that you’re trying to plug a product or promote a position, you’ll lose all credibility and you’ll need to start from scratch. Be warned.

As a side-note, I’d highlight that eInfluentials are not necessarily the people with most followers on Twitter or whose blogs are most read in your sector: “pitching social media creators who are influential but who are not really customer evangelists for a brand are the wrong people to target” (from a post by John Cass.) This is relevant for issues as well. If you’re engaging in online advocacy and want to, say, build relationships with bloggers in the hope that they might help you spread the word, focus on those who really share your interests and are most likely to join forces with you: if they have a huge following but only ever write about certain elements of your sector/issue which don’t involve you, that’ll remain the case no matter how many scoops you throw at them. Remember, online isn’t like traditional media. Getting an article in the FT will always be more valuable than getting a far better one into a small trade publication. Online, that’s not always the case. Via search, people can find anything that is relevant, while good quality content even on a low-profile site or blog can spread like wildfire if it captures the imagination.

This is a cross-post from Steffen’s blog.

I think I should start blogging. Twitter looks interesting. Think a Facebook fanpage will work wonders. Videos on YouTube are just up our alley. And so on. These are the kinds of things going through the minds of plenty of communicators at any sort of organisation in Brussels (and elsewhere for that matter) who work on issues and policy areas in which they want to exert some influence. And for good reason. The tools are cheap and cheerful, they’ve been proved to work, they fit an age of public relations in which engagement and humility are the order of the day, and what’s more, they’re fun.

However, as enticing as the tools may seem and as easy as you may think it will be to just try, test and see, I’d stress that rather than dive in and use the tools from the off, it’s imperative to have a long-term online engagement plan and to take a step-by-step approach that will help maximise the potential of your efforts.

Read more…

I’m always writing about aggreration and aggregators i.e. “a web application which aggregates syndicated web content such as news headlines, blogs, podcasts, and vlogs in a single location for easy viewing (Wikipedia)”

Aggregation can be extremely valuable in two respects in particular:

• As a learning tool: you’re being fed content from a wide array of sources - issue, market, sector or personal interest news - constantly and with little effort; great for keeping on top of developments
• As part of your content strategy: add third party content to your own sites, enriching your content without actually producing any yourself and increasing credibility via third-party association

At ZN, we’ve created what we call “issues dashboards” on energy, food and environment, bringing in feeds from a number of sources as well as via keywords from search engines. Here they are:

• Environment
• Food
• Energy

If you have other sources to recommend please let us know.

This is a cross-post from Steffen’s blog.

There’s too much fragmentation going on in Brussels. First there’s internal fragmentation of communications within organisations. Marketing are doing this, product guys doing that, issue specialists saying X, PR saying Y. Surely companies need to be better integrated. In particular, marketing and PA especially need to be telling the same story far more. Why? Because selling to consumers and legislators is a lot more similar than it was a few years ago. Marketing back then would have said: we’re cheaper and/or we’re better. PA would have said: we’re providing jobs and innovation. Now? They’re still saying that, but they’re both also saying “our company is a model citizen because of X, Y, and Z” and in this respect, there needs to be a lot more collaboration.

Beyond that, there’s what I’d call external fragmentation on issues, which is totally different, but is still about fragmentation, so I’ll put it in the same post. Call me lazy. What do I mean? That when looking at an issue for a client or prospect, everyone is always struck by the mess: multiple players at national level and pan-European level, public and private entities, associations and pressure groups, old media and bloggers. Even within the Commission say, DGs can have totally different priorities on an issue. People are talking about pharma this week: it’s now largely under DG Enterprise, but DG Sanco want it because surely Pharma is about health, they say. Whatever the outcome, fact of the matter is that their approach would be quite different.

In communications terms, what this fragmentation of players results is in turn a fragmentation of content and story which frankly makes an issue appear far more complex than you as an organisation want it to be. It’s hard to thrive within complexity because your story is one of a thousand; legislators might not have the time, the nous nor the willingness to really understand it well.

So what should you do about it? You create your own story that is tangible and relatively easy to digest of course. In addition, and more importantly, you should be the one player that makes sense of the fragmented landscape, and you can do it online. How? You become your issue’s portal by aggregating and hyperlinking content from all stakeholders in one online HQ available on your site - whether they’re private, public, competitors, pressure groups, media or bloggers.

What’s the point?

• You’re doing people a favour by making things easier. They’ll appreciate it.
• Making things easier will also enable people to understand your take on an issue more clearly, as well as understand it within the context of other stakeholders.
• The base assumption is that your argument is valid and that most of the content you bring in backs up your story. Assuming that’s the case, the outside content you bring in will give you the 3rd party credibility you crave.
• Becoming the focal point for web content will enable you to own the discussion online, naturally making you a key stakeholder rather than just one of many. Search comes into it too. By becoming an online hub, others will link to you and you’ll get better a search ranking on your key issues.
• You’ll showcase both sides of the argument (again, assuming your side is strong) and thus prove that you’re a fair and open player.
• You’ll have taken step one of the the four-step approach to online engagement. I’ll be building on this in the coming weeks, so watch this space.

This is a cross-post from Steffen’s blog.

After the event organised by IABC last week on Web2Eu, an exciting conversation started:  people shared ideas and content on the ning platform that was set-up by Hugh Barton Smith while several emails, tweets and other discussions took off.

Seeing as people clearly seem to want to continue the discussions that had started, we thought of a simple way to do it: let’s meet again!  In order to make this simple and cheerful we went round the corner from the ZN office to a place Le Break de l’Abbaye (they have a facebook group so you can even check pictures) and asked if we could use the room they had upstairs for people to get together to discuss how the internet was changing communication in Europe.  He said ok - as long as you pay for your drinks!

So there goes.  For those who want to continue the conversation or join it, pencil this date into your agenda:

Thursday 18th June at 16.30.  The address is rue saint Georges 2A (coin rue de l’Abbaye); 1050 Bruxelles (maps and satellite information will be provided shortly).

The format will be simple:

People can first introduce themselves and tell us what they are interested in.

3 or 4 speakers will make a five to ten minute speech (no powerpoint slides allowed) and share some thought provoking experiences with the others.  The rest will be an open discussion, followed by networking.  Nice and easy.

No charge to come, as long as you register (to make sure we know who is coming).  Casual, friendly, basically a social network but offline.

We will focus on how you as an association or communication professional can get your head round key concepts and tools, how you can address objections, what works and what doesn’t.

Helen Dunnett will be back by popular demand, followed by my colleague Steffen (aka blogger steffen78) and myself.

Any suggestions for the format and topics are welcome.  If you want to come or bring a friend register on the hyperthinker ning or on the IABC ning - feel free to invite guests, just keep us posted on the numbers.

See you there.

Phil

On May 28th, I will be speaking at an event organised by IABC (the international association of business communicators). Helen Dunnett, client and leading Brussels blogger will be joining us alongside a panel of experts.

Check out the info below (from the IABC site) and register here

A broad panel of social networking practitioners discuss how to weave your issues into the fabric of web 2.0 and gain influence through wider engagement.

* From Facebook via Linked In to Twitter, more and more people
are interacting professionally and politically online.
* Major news vehicles are adding their voices to the blogosphere.
* Companies and institutions are increasingly YouTubing.
* Even Queen Elizabeth II is now using email.

And for the moment all you’ve got is a web site.
Your presence on the net is a billboard in a side street.
This seminar is designed to explore how your messages can leap off that wall and mingle with the crowds where they congregate.

Panelists include:

* Charles Crouch, eBusiness Lecturer at Boston University,
* Helen Dunnett, a pioneer of Web 2 for the ECPA trade association,
* Philip Weiss, internet entrepreneur and HyperThinker from ZN,
* Mathew Lowry, the driving force behind the launch of Blogactiv,
* And over the web, the UK’s influential blogger and podcaster Neville Hobson.

Date: 2009-05-28

Event time: 14:30 - 17:30

Venue:
Boston University in Brussels
Boulevard du Triomphe 174

1160 Brussels
Join us for an intense afternoon of presentations and discussions on how to navigate today’s information stream.
Places are limited by the venue so get your registration in now!
Only €60 (€90 for non-members).

Register for this event

I just picked up this recent post from Helen Dunnett (disclaimer: she is a client of ZN and we think she is great) on some feedback she received from various audiences in political communication when approaching the internet as a core communication tool.  Over the past year she has been sharing her experience and enthusiam about the web and it’s power to transform communication with her rapidly growing network. 

Her comments will be very useful for those trying to find the best way to explore the web as a core strategic tool in getting the right message out to the right audience.  We have, in the course of our many meetings with a number of players in the Brussels political scene been confronted by many similar questions so it is great to see them put from a client perspective, from someone who has been able to make the case for this and seen the benefits for her own organisation follow.

After reading the objections she has faced my suggestions to the bold communicators interested in taking this further are the following:

1) Everyone now accepts that the internet is an important and powerful tool in shaping perception on critical issues.  The key problem is they don’t know how to act on this knowledge.

2) A personal and direct exposures to the tools and the social networks that are driving this change is key to enable communicators to form the correct strategy.  So like or not, you need to sign up to a number of online networks (linkedin.com - which most people do passively, facebook.com, and others that you find interesting) and actively use the tools (by posting on forums in linkedin for instance). 

3) The right tools for you and your organisaton keep on evolving so it is best to do some background reading of ebooks and follow some blogs (Helen’s own called learning curve or the one written by my colleague Steffen could be a good starting point). 

4) Meet regularly with people (agencies, consultants, colleagues) so you can learn about what works and gain insights from other people who have faced similar situations than you.

5) Get started.  Take some small, below the radar, steps with some online initiatives to get comfortable with the territory.  Start a blog, take it personally and see for yourself how it can help to get your message accross.

6) Get help.  Once you have decided to move forward in this space, surround yourself with a strong team with the right advice and experience as well as technology, create a plan and sell this to your management.  Then go forward and start learning.

Twitter spreading the “gfails” message faster than ever and seriously impacting the brand in just a minute…

Twitter search on Gfail

This is a serious challenge for communication as time to react is getting close to real time. Not only the speed to market but also the source of information is switching from key stakeholders to the online community, creating a buzz or destroying your corporate image while you just had time to organize… a meeting.

The rules are changing and so the communication consultant have to adapt.

More on the Gfail issue on TechCrunch

This is a cross-post from Steffen’s blog.

Microblogging. Think a platform where you can publish a sentence from your PC or mobile phone in a few seconds; or think Facebook with status updates and nothing else. The use of microblogging services like Twitter for professional purposes have not taken off in Europe and yet they’re all the rage across the pond - could it be that we’re just late adopters in Europe, and that this will change once millions of people have signed up to Twitter and the like, or is it that it simply couldn’t work here?

So how is it being used in the US? I’m not going to analyse in depth, but a few of the uses are:

• As with other forms of social media, simply to listen. Using, say, tweetscan, companies are taking note of what people are saying about them, as are politicians.
• After having listened, interaction may be next, following the adage of open, honest, one-to-one communications which customers now expect. If people are writing stuff about them, companies are actually writing back. Or they can ask questions, or generally express an interest and be seen to engage.
• Providing news, like updates on product releases, events, special offers, or just anything people might be interested in. JetBlue do this. As does the Obama campaign, regularly updating people on campaign events via Twitter.
• Customer service. Some companies are actually keeping track of what’s being said about them, and when someone complains or needs some information about a product or service, the company responds on Twitter. Comcast are at the forefront of using Twitter for customer care.

But why are companies (or campaigns, as in the case of Obama) using Twitter? What’s wrong with just using email or other channels? Again, not an in-depth analysis, but the main reasons are:

• It’s another place where people are having conversations, and knowing what people are saying may be valuable, as a company (or organisation, politician, whatever) may want to take note and even do something about it!
• The medium as a message matters i.e. the type of conversation one can have. Messages are short and informal, obviously written by a person without scores of senior communications type people wondering whether the message fits the corporate mantra, meaning you’re personalising the way you communicate. Result? If done well, showing people you’re a decent human-being rather than a corporate puppet, that you’ve got soul, and it’ll help to build relationships.
• It’s just handy: it being quick and easy simply means it’s suited for providing quick updates to people.

For more in-depth analyses of the uses of Twitter, I’d recommend these three posts from Ogilvy’s excellent 360° Digital Influence blog: Twitter for customer relations, Twitter for crisis communications, and Twitter for corporate reputation management.

As to the central question: will microblogging for business or other professional purposes remain limited in Europe because of inherent barriers, or is it just a question of time? Assuming Twitter and the like do take off and there’ll be millions of daily users in a couple of years, some barriers one could think of might be that the language factor makes it difficult to track conversations in multiple countries, so is it really worth it? Or that Europeans are more reserved and don’t regard their roles as consumers as seriously as Americans. Will they really complain about a product, or sing its praises, on Twitter?

I think both points can safely be dismissed. So what if a conversation is not pan-European? The quality or importance of an online conversation is not just defined by how many millions of people are following it, but by the nature of its content and engagement. A company can learn a lot from following online conversations even if there aren’t huge numbers of people involved. And engaging, or providing updates to valued customers or supporters, can be extremely precious in building relationships, even if the numbers are small. Similarly, so what if Europeans tend to be a bit more reserved when it comes to letting off steam in social media? Again, it’s not the number of people, or how vociferous they might be when discussing, say, a brand, but what they’re saying that matters. In addition, I’d say that Europeans’ obsession with mobile phones could play a part here. Being able to update ones own Twitter by mobile phone after having been to an interesting place or seeing something out of the ordinary, or simply to carry on following a conversation when away from the PC, would entice quite a few people.

Plus, moving away from marketing and into a Brussels context, I can see a viable use for a microblogging platform as a near-instant monitoring tool. Dedicated monitoring providers and consultancies are paid a fortune to follow legislative issues that impact their clients, but the monitoring reports are usually sent via email the next day. Basic updates at crucial times, say during a plenary debate at the European Parliament or a key event, can be given via a microblogging platform so that people are updated in near-real time. Via a plug-in, these updates could be made to appear on a website or blog as well as the relevant twitter page, so you would not even need to send people somewhere new, just say: “check out the live updates on our site”. Live-blogging is not far removed from this, but that implies slightly longer entries and requires a laptop, whereas microblogging/monitoring could even be done from a mobile phone.

And will any MEPs or MEP hopefuls take a leaf out of Obama’s book and try to Twitter their way into constituents’ hearts in the upcoming campaigns?! It’d probably be a waste of time to send regular updates given the low profile of European elections (no I’m not contradicting myself: updates don’t mean you’re engaging in a conversation and should only be provided with a significant number of followers). But I would advise them to follow what people are saying in social media in general, including Twitter, and the blogosphere in particular. There won’t be much, but some of it could make interesting reading. And if they really want to start an online conversation, I’d recommend they resort to traditional blogging, but I’ll save that for another post.

While their efforts to remain in the communications stone age and withstand the onslaught of digital have been valiant - MEPs don’t use the web, they’ve often claimed - Public Affairs professionals in Brussels are slowly coming around to the fact that digital can work for their clients too. Next up is the clients themselves and convincing them to invest in online activities, which is no mean task. First, although their ability to radiate expertise on topics they’ve first heard about over lunch an hour before a meeting should never be underestimated, with limited experience of digital themselves, PA professionals might struggle to explain its full scope. Second, old-school clients who barely use the web and think no one other than their teenage grandchild does either will really take some convincing.

Here’s a few things that might, combined, win them over.