Posts
Recently, I have been following a discussion on LinkedIn titled “Company Website vs. Social Networking Sites: What do you think of companies promoting their FaceBook and Twitter pages vs. their company websites?”
It’s an interesting discussion. A comment that I particularly liked came from a fellow named George Harben. George is CEO at the Clarksville, Tennessee-area company Harben and Associates, which is an economic development consulting firm specializing in research, project management, and marketing.
Here’s what George had to say on the topic:
[Companies promoting their Facebook and Twitter pages vs. their company websites] makes a lot of sense. Social networks and websites are both important components to a company's promotions efforts. Websites are like a company library. You can find historical and current data on a company. An example would be past annual reports, press releases and financial data. Social networks are more like conversations. A post can be handled immediately. One unique attribute of a social network is the ability to customize the network site to group. I have noticed Ford Motors has several network sites. Examples are Mustangs, trucks, green, etc.And, here is my comment:
The coordinated efforts mentioned above do make a lot of sense. The corporate website as the "library," supported by the "periodicals" of the Facebook pages is a particularly good insight, I think.
However, the aligned social media component cries out for an "affinity" aspect -- the Mustang fan page, in Ford's case, is a great opportunity to develop an interactive relationship with many good customers, simultaneously. And, those "good customers" can supply much of the content.
And, a company like Toyota ia presented with the opportunity to mitigate the bad press of the recall.
The "affinity factor" is key, though. It seems to me that Facebook presence for Proctor & Gamble or Walmart might be more just an online advertising circular, unless it was tied to some particular community outreach (which, by the way, both entities are very good at.)
Which brings me to my own area of expertise: Charities and other non-profits can benefit greatly from Facebook and LinkedIn. The problem non-profits have is setting aside the resources, both material and human, to create and execute a well-planned strategy...which is where CauseWare enters the conversation.
My opinion is that charities and non-profits should use Facebook and Twitter as extensively as is practicable – but only as a “friend-raising” tool. Neither Facebook nor Twitter have been proven to be effective fund-raising tools, yet.
Companies can use Facebook and Twitter, too – beyond the affinity groups of Mustang owners and fan groups. Companies should use Facebook as a moderated channel to allow employees to express thoughts, feelings, and opinions about the corporate social responsibility, about needs within their own communities, and about how the company is doing in the public eye, generally. A company that can do this fearlessly can benefit immensely. This sort of open – but refereed – discussion can tell a company a lot about itself, even as it learns about employee and community needs.
