Social Media Case Study - Twitter customer service

 

The conversation above started when I recieved an email from the trainline about thier new 'print-your-own-ticket' system. Not entirely convinced by the practicalities, I took to Twitter to see what others thought.

As I had used @thetrainline handle out of courtesy I knew they could see my tweet, but as it was not wholly positive - or directly addressed to them as a question or complaint - they had the option not to reply. Many companies wouldn't have done, shying away from negative publicity or thinking an interaction with me wouldn't be productive. 

Trainline however saw an opportunity to try and convert me and did so in a very friendly professional manner. A great example of how social media can be used to intercept negative public sentiment and win the individual around. They cited others using the system successfully (but without coming accross as provocative) and hashtagged the word 'convenience' (the aspect I had thought would cause issues) to reaffirm just how easy it is.

They also used lots of smiley faces to show that even if they were disagreeing with me, they were being helpful not confrontational and this kept the tone personable the whole way through. Angus identifying himself at the beginning meant that a level of trust was built up as I was now tweeting with an individual rather thn a faceless entity.

It really is a good example of company tweeting and I'm sure they actually wouldn't have thought in this level of detail about the language used (once tone of voice and editorial style is established, responding on social media in this manner begins to come naturally) but I hope it is useful to dissect the elements that make it successful here. 

Let me know if you've seen (or had) any other great customer service responses on social media.

Stop. Yammer time!

What is Yammer?

Yammer is an "enterprise social network" which was acquired by Microsoft in summer 2012 and now forms part of thier Office 365 offering. It's an internal social network for businesses - similar in audience and tone to LinkedIn, as a communications platform for professionals - but with the added security of being limited solely to members of staff.

A 'company social media network' would never take off, would it?

A few years ago I wouldn't have been convinced by the need for a company social media platform. On a personal level, the social media sphere was somewhere I interacted with friends and was ocaisionally (and hopefully not intrusively) marketed to by businesses. It definitely wasn't somewhere I would interact with senior colleagues and nor did it need to be - emails and the company intranet would suffice. Companies' awkward failed attemps to set up company Facebook groups were a thing of ridicule not lauded as a great example of internal comms.

What has changed then? Well, on a personal level I think social media has become more pervasive in our lives, and the line between social networking and professional activity has become less well defined. What used to be a flat-out ban on social media usage in the workplace has in some companies become more relaxed and in others even encouraged.

Ok, how can Yammer be used by businesses?

Yammer's website claims it is used by more than 200 companies worldwide, including Shell, Xerox, CapGemini and Westfield. Employees use it for:

• Posting what they’re working on into the social space, to see if others they don't know are working on it too, or working towards similar goals.
• Crowd sourcing answers to problems or issues by asking questions and posting polls
• Sharing insights they’ve come across elsewhere to act as inspiration.
• Share successes in the hope they make work well for others.

If you still can't quite picture this, it might help to think of a practical example. Take the Food Standards Authority - they have a central organisation with many, many field inspectors, who will need to keep in touch with central management on a regular basis. It would also be beneficial to share their experiences with other field workers. Using Yammer, they could all post any difficulties they may come across in certain areas, photographs of situations and advice on how to avoid them etc. alongside recieving updates from central office on the latest regulations.

It does sound quite useful, and also fun, but then obviously I'm quite a fan of social networks. Stop me before I start to Yammer on...(sorry!).

Social Media Case Study: Shell

EDIT: It turns out (thankfully) that this campaign is a hoax orchestrated by Yes Men. Very clever!

It's at times like these you might hear me say that social media just isn't for everyone. A company whose actions are generally quite contentious, would do well not to draw attention to them, no?

Not so for Shell, who thought it wise to open up one of their least popular ideas to the social sphere. 

They asked members of the public to design an advert for Arctic energy production, using beautiful pictures of Artic scenery and overlaying their own text. Here's what happened:

"Turn the power on, it's time to melt some ice"

"You can't run your SUV on 'cute'"

"Some say catastrophe, we say opportunity"

People wrote what they really thought on the posters. In an ironic twist the social voting system (usually employed to encourage users to filter out inappropriate content by voting it down) has meant that those who don't want to destroy the environment, are able to keep their views in the spotlight by others affirming their messages.  

It really couldn't have worked less in Shell's favour if Greenpeace had orchestrated the campaign.

I honestly don't know what Shell were thinking, and the PR department must be panicking now as the site is still currently showing these messages at the time of posting.

Where to go from here? I honestly don't know. They have a few options:

• Remove the website entirely - Not a very 'social' response and would lead to ridicule online and possibly from the press, but would blow over (relatively) quickly.

• Engage with the public, asking them to stick to the advert's intended messaging - although asking people politely to stop is the usual first response to trolling (and a good one) it doesn't really work here because what is being said isn't offensive, and the public have the moral highground.

• Remove the page and replace with a conciliatory message saying something like "we have listened to your concerns and are taking them on board. Please bear with us while we evaluate the best course of action" - Ha! Yeah right. Again, other companies may be able to make this approach fly, but when you're an oil company trying to drill the arctic we're not going to fall for it... 

Moral of the story? If your proposal is going to upset the majority of the general public then don't put it to them publicly via social media. Definitely don't give them a chance to respond. Oh and don't ever, ever, try to con them into creating an ad campaign for you and your morally dubious campaign! 

Social Media Tips 1 - Some LinkedIn Pros and Cons

Pros Professional information. Of all the social networks, LinkedIn is the most focussed on professional interests.	Cons Smaller Audience. Although LinkedIn has a huge user base, it is still not as popular as Facebook or Twitter.
Aids offline networking. After a networking events you can add people you've met on LinkedIn, reinforcing the relationship. Some people even have LinkedIn details on their business cards.	Lacks a personal touch. Online 'introductions' lack the depth of a personal meeting, and some people may prefer not to be put in touch without having met first.
Creates a forum for expertise. Taking part in LinkedIn discussions is a good way to demonstrate individual expertise.	Not as suitable for B2C/leisure&lifestyle As a more formal/professional environment, users are less susceptible to marketing and advertising concerning leisure time products and services.
Highly targeted professional advertising. People on LinkedIn are already in work mode so it's more acceptable to advertise B2B products. Adverts can be targeted by age, gender, seniority, job title and even company.	Not as fun! No farmville to see here people...move along now. As the most professional of the networks, LinkedIn lacks appeal for those who want  entertainment.
Competitor Intelligence Despite a general tightening of employee social media policies sensitive information can sometimes be gathered from CV's on LinkedIn.	Charge for some services  Some 'extra' services such as Jobseeker Premium, ask for a subscription fee.
Analytics Company page admins get data on visitors by industry, title, function and company, page views over time, clicks on jobs, clicks on employee Profiles, and clicks on job "Apply" buttons.

When to tweet and post - are you missing your market?

Social media marketing is still a dark art. Some do it well, some do it badly, and some are opposed to the very idea. For those trying to hone their social media marketing technique, there is a lot of guidance out there on what to tweet and post. What there hasn't been much focus on is when to do so.

The infographic below from Argyle Social got me thinking...

According to their research, B2C Facebook campaigns get better engagement at the weekends. When you think about it, that's not surprising - the majority of consumers are at work themselves during the week, no?

Does this mean Facebook marketing needs to embrace the weekends? Just as retail has seen the opportunities in staying open at the weekend, should marketers be tweeting and facebooking their way into a Tuesday-Sunday working week? If that's when the audience is most receptive, then perhaps they should.

But we need to be careful abut generalising. Does this apply to all sectors, not just retail? Should recruiters, for example, try to market new positions online at the weekend? This strategy might not apply here, as people are perhaps not thinking in a work mindset and would show less interest. Also, from a recruiting perspective, is it a case of quality over quantity? The people who are responding at the weekend are perhaps more conscientious workers. Would you put someone forward for a job if they were on Facebook replying to an advert at 10am on a workday? 

Additionally, the B2B data shown above may not be as straightforward as it seems. Many people have different work and personal accounts, and who is to say that the same individual that B2B's are trying to sell to during the working week, isn't more receptive from a personal account at the weekend?

Analysing when to post is great, but only if you're very clear on your target market and what they will be doing at that time. You need to ensure the audience is there, willing to engage, and engaging in the right capacity. This may mean not only adopting weekend and evening posting, but also adopting a different strategy for posts and tweets published at this time, compared to those posted during the working week.

Rowse Honey Facebook Campaign

At first I was skeptical. To be honest, any time someone on my television screen directs me to their Facebook page I'm somewhat sceptical. It seems a little convoluted for businesses to advertise social campaigns  - paying money to direct people to another promotion.

In this case, however, I was pleasantly surprised, both by the quality of the campaign, and the amount of interaction.

The concept is that staff have made their own adverts and the public vote for a winner to be aired on national tv. Not an entirely original premise (I'm pretty sure I remember a few campaigns like this using YouTube as a platform) however it is well executed and with a couple of nice extra touches.

The videos are good - bit arty but still with a homemade feel so not pretentious - and have sparked a few hundred comments on each one. There are also nearly a thousand votes or 'likes' for each video too.

An appealing feature of the page is the box on the right hand side - people will be more inclined to do something if they know their actions will cause some good, however small. And everyone likes fluffy little bees! 

The next appealing feature is an offer of a free pot of honey. Freebies are always welcome. The only slight hitch is that it's not very obvious where on the page you can sign up for a free pot, unless you spot this bit in the menu under the 'save the bees' feature:

They may not want to give honey away to all and sundry (in fact, the page now says they have run out), but making it less obvious will frustrate the user, and may lead to comments like this:

However although Rowse haven't dealt with the comment above yet, there are some good official responses on the discussion pages. The first one is a nice example of how companies can emphasise their social goals and allay claims of pure commercialism:

And this one below is a good demonstration of how brands can instil trust by being truly knowledgeable  about their product and issues surrounding it, in this case nature:

In conclusion, the Rowse Facebook campaign is a good example of how to use social media to encourage interaction from the consumer, asking for their input on a decision, offering them freebies, and adding an element of charity. It does have usability flaws, yet the friendly transparent nature of the company communications goes some way to mitigate any frustrations.

Overall 7/10   

Digital Recruitment Confusions

Confession: I am a jobseeker. Otherwise known in recruitment as 'talent'.

Since leaving my previous job (end of 2010) it's been an interesting experience to say the least. The digital landscape is so new, and changes so rapidly, that it seems to be a confusing time for both the jobseeker and sometimes even the recruiter!

I'll give a couple of personal examples here and then a few thoughts on what could be causing all the confusion. The first example is a real conversation I had with a recruiter, X who rang me up after finding my CV on Monster.com :

X:   So, I see from your CV that you have worked in social media?

me: Yep, most of my roles have involved social media work, and it is definitely something that interests me.

X:   Great, so in these previous roles were you involved in structuring social media?

me: Uh, I was involved in developing the social media strategy, for the companies I worked for, yes.

X:   Yes but what about the structure? 

me: I implemented staff social media training, so I had a positive influence on the communications structure...

X: [long pause]

Me: Or do you mean the structure of the platforms? I'm not a developer so unfortunately I can't claim to have built or altered the structure of a social media platform...

At which point I was cut off. I'd be really interested to see what the brief for that job actually was! Was he talking about being a thought-leader, how I had shaped  and structured the social sphere itself? Was he trying to get me to describe myself as a social media 'guru' (I wouldn't, I hate the term)? Or had he just got the wrong end of the stick when my CV said I developed a strategy and thought I built a new Twitter? I guess i'll never know. He had called from an unknown number, and I didn't catch his name.  

Experience number two was with a recruitment company I sourced myself. I found their website (a bit flash heavy, but creative and professional) and sent them my CV. They called back for a chat and told me they'd email over a job description that suited what I was looking for. Less than 10 minutes later, someone else called from the same company, to ask if i'd be interested in a job 6k under my expected salary and for a fluent French speaker. He said he saw I had a French A-level and wondered if I'd be happy doing SEO in French??

I realise these two examples won't be indicative of digital recruitment as a whole, and I am also (of course) grateful that my CV is attracting calls at all, but it does seem a bit concerning. I think I may also know one of the problems: terminology. As I said at the beginning this is a very rapidly changing environment, and the English language is slow moving. Unsurprisingly there is a bit of disagreement about we call these people that do all these newfangled things! For example:

Content Manager - this is not necessarily a managerial level role. It could be executive or even entry level. What matters is that the individual is managing content i.e curating what copy and images are on the website. They could be writing the copy themselves or just co-ordinating and sub-editing it.

Web Editor - pre web 2.0 this used to mean the guy/girl that had built the website. This now more commonly means someone who edits the copy on the website, so needs much less technical experience. Of course the web editor should preferably know some HTML, and the principles of SEO but will nowadays be more likely to be editing text via a content management system (not to be confused with the content manager, above) than coding anything.

Q: What do you call the person hired to run the company Twitter, Facebook and Youtube presences? 

A: Social media Executive/Assistant,  Social Media Marketer,  Digital Marketer,  Online Marketer, Social Community Manager (again not managerial level), Community Moderator and many many more. If they also run the blog, this can extend to job titles including the aforementioned 'content' and 'editor' keywords as well.

I have held (and also applied for) many of these roles, but that doesn't necessarily mean I have a skillset to put a swiss army knife to shame! What it does mean is I have looked past the sometimes arbitrary titles, to what the role will actually involve on a day to day level, and seen whether my experience matches this. 

For the moment, until there is an established nomenclature for positions within digital, perhaps this is the best we - as individuals - can do. Recruiters can try to gain deeper knowledge of the digital sector, listening to their clients, and listening to the jobseekers and really trying to get what the person will be doing. This is no longer as simple as "agency side (check) , account manager (check), digital experience (check)" as that last term could me a whole lot of things, in a whole lot of contexts, with a bunch of different names! 

Of course I wouldn't tar all recruiters with the same brush. Some agencies specialise in digital, and others are just genuinely very good and take the time to get to know the client and the jobseeker. I have had the pleasure of meeting and dealing with both these types. I am just interested in the way recruitment has been affected by the myriad of changes in this developing sector, and what might be causing the communication difficulties which appear to be faced by jobseeker and recruiter alike. I'm interested, as always, to hear your thoughts.

Social Media and the Law

Everyone's heard a story about an employee who got sacked because of an ill-judged Facebook status. If you haven't, check this out:

Image from mashable.com

Although 'Facebook firing' is another branch of the personal vs. work profile debate (what is really private? when are you the face of the brand?) it does raise another question - the stance of the law.

Legal precedents are being set left right and centre in the digital sphere, but is there a consistency, or a guiding principle? Privacy law, intellectual property law, libel law all these can easily be applied to a virtual space where people voice their opinions and engage with others. Or can they?


Where are people saying these things, for example? If I tweet something, is that tweet subject to the law of my country or the law of the country where Twitter is hosted?

And what about advertising laws, and the laws that govern fair trading? In the U.K the Advertising Standards Agency are clamping down on social media marketing, but this is considerably behind the times. We needed regulation on how companies promote themselves on social media years ago, as companies saw these mediums as a way to circumvent existing offline rules, creating misleading campaigns and unfair competitions.

Can the law keep up with social media, or will it always be one step behind? I have a feeling this won't be the last blog I do on this topic, and i'd love to hear your thoughts!

The Great Cull - 'Unfollowing' on Twitter and 'Defriending' on Facebook.

The other day I was in an office at lunchtime and a colleague was checking his personal Facebook. Work usage aside (check the corporate social media policy post), it was his exclamation which interested me:

"Dammit Megan, I don't care whether i've survived another friend cull. Who does that?"

I've noticed that many of my Facebook contacts have started 'culling' their Facebook friends. Statuses like this are appearing regularly on my feed:

Announcing that you've de-friended people on Facebook can alienate some people (like my colleague) but judging from the number of 'likes' the post above got, it also has the effect of reinforcing the relationships you value.

But, why delete contacts?

These are two very different questions from a business and a personal perspective. On a personal level when I first join any social network I add almost everyone I know, a few people I almost know and a whole bunch of people of people i've just met (this isn't necessarily best practice, but it's very tempting!) A few weeks, months, years later and i'm left wondering who on earth that person is that has just posted a status about their cat on my feed, but leaving them be in case they get more interesting.

Yesterday I attempted my first personal Facebook and Twitter cull, and discovered it's not easy. I tried to be ruthless, and reasons for de-friending included:

• Irritating/immature statuses
• No statuses
• Couldn't remember who they were! 

To my shame also, a few people were saved from the cull because their work info included something interesting like Google, or UK Parliament. They may just come in handy one day...

Twitter was even more difficult as I tend to follow quite a lot of people and their statuses are generally interesting and informative. I do tend to keep my 'following' count under my 'follower' count as a rule of thumb however. Eventually I only ended up 'unfollowing' the accounts that I don't remember seeing a tweet from, and only then if any tweets on their feed are dull or spammy.

Should I ever delete, block or 'unfollow' people from a business account?


99% of the time, no. If you have a business Facebook persona that has friends (not adviseable anyway) then anyone agreeing to be your friend, knowing that you are a business, must really like your brand. De-friending them would be a complete faux pas. Even if people are posting criticisms or complaints, a complaint that you can resolve, will mean that a customer is 70% likely to do business with you again.

Unfollowing on Twitter is a different matter. Although websites such as TweetEffect can tell you which Tweets gained/lost you followers, it's very hard to find which individual has unfollowed. This means that on a corporate level you can unfollow without causing offence.

Important things:

• Don't be offended. If you are unfollowed learn from it and think what you can do to make your tweets/statuses more interesting.
• Some platforms (especially Twitter) can have 'bugs'. My 'following' count sometimes fluctuates of it's own accord, but is usually rectified.
• People can be useful. You never know when you might need to get in touch with the Ukelele society (well, ok, but you know...). Without sounding too cynical, maybe only remove people who you no longer know well enough to ask a favour!

I don't mean to sound ungrateful in this post. I have a great many people who I am friends with on social media platforms who I go back a long way with, and I truly value their online and offline friendship. Some people, however, I met once, possibly with drink in hand, and added them the next day because they made an impression. I doubt they remember me either by now!

What does anyone else think? Feel free to post your 'culling' experiences in the comments.

Social Media Policy (or "how, when, where and what to tweet. Love from, your employer")

Social Media Guidelines, Social Media Rules, call them what you will, now large companies have wised up to social media, they have started making policies.

For any company with staff tweeting and blogging their way into public consciousness, what these staff are saying will be a concern. Even on their own time, an employee that comments on a competitors blog, or tweets a company secret is a huge liability. There are two camps on this one. Some people leave employees (within reason) to their own creative juices, in their own time and ask that they provide a "these opinions are my own" disclaimer. Other companies actively encourage employee social media activity on behalf of the company and set out regulations to guide their posts.

It's a tricky path that companies tread, between stifling micromanagement and potential PR disasters, and I personally don't think the balance has been found in a lot of cases. Social Media is about openness and sharing, and the more you restrict that, the less value it has to the individual. Who wants to speak when they're being told what to say? More importantly, who really wants to listen to someone who can't speak freely? It's a very hard task juggling transparency and professionalism on such new channels and it often requires whole new outlook.

Some businesses have decided to go public with their corporate social media policies which is great news for us as studying the social media strategies of the giants can be interesting reading.

I'll leave you with a positive example taken from IBM

BM Social Computing Guidelines

1. Know and follow IBM's Business Conduct Guidelines.
2. IBMers are personally responsible for the content they publish on-line, whether in a blog, social computing site or any other form of user-generated media. Be mindful that what you publish will be public for a long time—protect your privacy and take care to understand a site's terms of service.
3. Identify yourself—name and, when relevant, role at IBM—when you discuss IBM or IBM-related matters, such as IBM products or services. You must make it clear that you are speaking for yourself and not on behalf of IBM.
4. If you publish content online relevant to IBM in your personal capacity use a disclaimer such as this: "The postings on this site are my own and don't necessarily represent IBM's positions, strategies or opinions."
5. Respect copyright, fair use and financial disclosure laws.
6. Don't provide IBM's or another's confidential or other proprietary information and never discuss IBM business performance or other sensitive matters publicly.
7. Don't cite or reference clients, partners or suppliers without their approval. When you do make a reference, link back to the source. Don't publish anything that might allow inferences to be drawn which could embarrass or damage a client.
8. Respect your audience. Don't use ethnic slurs, personal insults, obscenity, or engage in any conduct that would not be acceptable in IBM's workplace. You should also show proper consideration for others' privacy and for topics that may be considered objectionable or inflammatory—such as politics and religion.
9. Be aware of your association with IBM in online social networks. If you identify yourself as an IBMer, ensure your profile and related content is consistent with how you wish to present yourself with colleagues and clients.
10. Don't pick fights, be the first to correct your own mistakes.
11. Try to add value. Provide worthwhile information and perspective. IBM's brand is best represented by its people and what you publish may reflect on IBM's brand.
12. Don't use use IBM logos or trademarks unless approved to do so.

This is only a small part of the full policy, although somehow the guidelines manage not to seem to restrictive, just professional. Maybe it's because i've already read this lovely paragraph:

BM is increasingly exploring how online discourse through social computing can empower IBMers as global professionals, innovators and citizens. These individual interactions represent a new model: not mass communications, but masses of communicators. Through these interactions, IBM's greatest asset--the expertise of its employees--can be shared with clients, shareholders, and the communities in which it operates.

It's got a nice feel to it, no? The final two lines are my favourite though:

Don't forget your day job. You should make sure that your online activities do not interfere with your job or commitments to customers.

Right, back to work then! ;)