by Amanda Vega on February 2, 2010
Post written by: Cassandra Luppens, Controls & Risk Compliance Expert
Here we are in the 21st century. We monitor our trading, we monitor our friends, we get real time information (or as real time as we can), yet big brother is still trying to hold us back. Why is it that so many of corporate america can’t seem to catch up to the trends? Are they going to miss out on the best and brightest because of their hesitation? Seems to me that every time a new technology starts to take roots the people who should be embracing it tend to dismiss or defend against why we shouldn’t have or use the new technology. I know information directors that don’t have computers at home and believe it or not there are still executives that have all their email correspondence printed for them and they dictate or write the responses for their administrative assistance (I know, seems like a cliché from 9 to 5 with Dolly Parton). Ok, so lets get down to brass knuckles, why is it that adaptation comes so easy to some and so hard to others? It’s a risk perception whether it be personally or professionally. People innately evaluate the cost benefit to themselves and or their company.
On a personal level the risks are minimal to the population. If I were to get hacked my identity might get stolen and I would be in a world of hurt, and may even face some public retribution, but overall the impact would be isolated. Even so, some people choose not to assume this risk and choose not to participate in social media which is an individual preference. Now let’s talk about corporate risk. Many people would argue that the number one risk associated to social media is reputation. The thought is that if you allow your employees to access these sites, it could pose a reputational risk that you are unable to address. Funny, when I write reviews about a company or service I receive it isn’t as though I work for that company, rather I received their service. I would say that the inability to receive or view that feedback could lead to more negative connotations vs. the ability to receive that information and prepare an appropriate response. Another difficulty to companies limiting their employees is the lack of control of those employees when away from the office. This is why I argue that the number one risk associated to social media is ignoring it. The lack of accepting social media as a successful form of communication could really hurt your company through lack of your participation in the conversation. And believe me, the conversation is already going.
Another interesting standpoint to social media is the freedom of the information. When people post public information, it is very difficult to remove it from every source possible on the internet. This allows people and companies to view their information without any risk of invasion of privacy because most the sites with the exception of Facebook are open communities. There are all sorts of tools that you can use to monitor traffic as it pertains to your company, brand, and even industry. If you haven’t already started, just set up some google alerts to see what is being circulated about your company.
Other risks associated to social media are the liability risks and enterprise security risk which each have their own subcategories such as personal information, financial information, legal liabilities, network risk etc. These are the risks that any company has regardless of their stated participation level or acceptance of social media. Someone somewhere in your employee population is participating, therefore your company is as well. Guilty by association. The best way to address these risks is to address the population with training and policy. Note that training was first on my list because of the trust factor that seems to be imbedded with all users of the internet, people need to understand the risks associated — how many times have you clicked a link that you didn’t really know where it was going to send you? Most employees don’t understand that clicking that link is risky business.
by Amanda Vega on December 18, 2009
A lot of businesses are turning to outsourcing
social media due to either budgetary restraints or lack of knowledge or expertise in this area. However, a lot of “insiders” are questioning this move, especially around message and conversation and how this impacts the authentic voice of an organization. But, business people argue it’s better to be in social media than not and outsourcing allows them the flexibility to be a part of the conversation without putting in all the resources internally.
With authenticity and dialogue being the key to success in social media, this throwdown begs the question:
Outsourcing social media: good business move or fake dialogue?
To kick things off, I have invited
Cindy Kim and newcomer
Milee Karre to this throwdown. Join the conversation and let us know if you agree or disagree. Is outsourcing the next big thing? And does outsourcing dilute the brand experience and authenticity of the corporate voice?
Following is my take.
It’s one of the most daunting questions today – whether or not a corporation should bring social media management in-house, or outsource to specialists. Concerns arise about costs, control, and brand protection. So who is best to manage that voice?
We vote outsourcing. (Of course we do!) While we can see the argument that an in-house team is best suited to protect and represent the global brand of a company in the truest voice, we do not think that most companies have the budget, time, flexibility, or understanding of this ever changing landscape to successfully manage their whole social media interaction at home base. While every company should have an internal person (or two) assigned to this task, they should be working with an outsourced team in order to get the depth and breadth of knowledge. You have to remember – most social zealots are like web nerds – they don’t play well inside of companies with policies and cubicles. By nature, the best of the breed would never go in-house at a company, unless…you pay them WELL above what most companies find reasonable.
Additionally, let’s talk about the landscape of social media. While most companies are really good a PUSHING messages, they aren’t very good at receiving them, or interacting in conversations that fall outside of the “whats in it for me” mentality. That’s another reason to assign this part of your marketing to the outside. We could also go into discussion about the number of people needed to truly interact for a brand, in REAL conversations, on REAL topics that fall outside of the core competency. I can assign 45 people to one account, in say 4 countries and 3 languages – and they can all follow a master content document and branding standards that is created through a good listening campaign. An internal solution cannot provide that for you.
Most companies haven’t even gone down this road yet, but we are working with corporations that realize social media is way more than marketing – it’s about risk and risk aversion. At this point, most companies that have to consider internal audit, risk management, database permeation prevention, and the associated reporting and fines that the government and other entities can enforce, use the IT manager and a Big 4 internal auditor consultant. What they miss in this – social media risk isn’t the same as other electronic risks. While it’s still worms and spiders, and other firewall attackers trying to get at your customer data through hacking methods – the openings and risk points are different in many cases, and change daily. Why? Because the players and tools change daily. Your company can create a policy and lock down the access to Facebook or Twitter at the counsel of the auditor, HR director, and executive team, but that isn’t enough. What about the 10-15 twitter interface access tools? What about the new ones that change and move daily? Only the social media expert will know that – and like that Big 4 auditor – they will never work in-house.
So, I believe that outsourcing social media is the way to go – coupled with a strong internal marketing and IT/security person working alongside them as partners – not as another of 100 tasks you throw on the marketing kings plate and expect miracles.
Amanda Vega