There was a lot of talk at the CIC conference on leveraging social media. In particular, how IT organizations can leverage social media to communicate with their constituents. I know I struggle with this when I'm representing my organization as opposed to myself in these venues and others are as well. Well, I had a moment of gestalt at the end of the conference that I think crystallized it for me.
It was during the final panel discussion featuring several CIOs from the CIC who were discussing shared leadership as a means to transform IT organizations. Toward the end the discussion migrated to social media and how IT organizations can use it. And as one panel member correctly pointed out, social media is really not about the tools used; it's about the connections that are made.
She even quoted Clay Shirkey which reminded me of another Shirky quote about Twitter. To paraphrase, Twitter is powerful not because of the mostly mundane content we put there; Twitter is powerful because we care about the people posting it. It's not the message but the messenger that matters in this instance. And it begs the questions, why should someone care about IT?
Traditionally, IT organizations are seen as utilities. We don't notice them until something goes wrong and the power goes out. This perception is true within IT organizations as well. That's how many working in IT view themselves. To quote one of the panel members when I asked the question, "How do you get people to care about IT?" He replied, "Turn it off."
That's the same attitude my power company has and I certainly do not feel a connection with them. I would block them if they followed me on Twitter and I certainly would not follow them. Especially if they took the approach that many of my IT colleagues are taking. They want to use social media to push information out or to direct you to their website. I was at a presentation where an IT group turned off the comments feature of their blog because they were worried about what comments others, read outsiders, would leave. In my opinion, that is not a recipe for success.
Personally, I do not care about my power company. I do not feel a connection to them. In fact, the only time I think about them is when I pay my bill each month and when the power goes out, and it will. Why would I connect with them via Twitter? Especially if they were only using it to point out they emailed the newsletter I never read.
Social media is all about discourse. And it's an all-in proposition. This means taking the good with the bad. Yes, it is a risk. And, if after the analysis you feel the risk it to great then I recommend not doing it. I'd be more apt to engage with my power company, or an IT department, in this medium if we were having a conversation. If I could ask questions. If they took the risk and let me in on some of what they were thinking and were interested in hearing what I was thinking.
If you want to be a utility, be a utility. At your own peril. Utilities being necessary evils breed discontent. People don't particularly care to deal with them more than what is necessary. Get them angry enough and they will find a way to work around them or even topple them. The same goes for wanting people to connect with you. Engage them through social media at your own peril. Be prepared for some unpleasantness. However, you may find it turns into an opportunity to connect with your constituents, helps you improve, and *gasp* they may even come to care about you.
It was during the final panel discussion featuring several CIOs from the CIC who were discussing shared leadership as a means to transform IT organizations. Toward the end the discussion migrated to social media and how IT organizations can use it. And as one panel member correctly pointed out, social media is really not about the tools used; it's about the connections that are made.
She even quoted Clay Shirkey which reminded me of another Shirky quote about Twitter. To paraphrase, Twitter is powerful not because of the mostly mundane content we put there; Twitter is powerful because we care about the people posting it. It's not the message but the messenger that matters in this instance. And it begs the questions, why should someone care about IT?
Traditionally, IT organizations are seen as utilities. We don't notice them until something goes wrong and the power goes out. This perception is true within IT organizations as well. That's how many working in IT view themselves. To quote one of the panel members when I asked the question, "How do you get people to care about IT?" He replied, "Turn it off."
That's the same attitude my power company has and I certainly do not feel a connection with them. I would block them if they followed me on Twitter and I certainly would not follow them. Especially if they took the approach that many of my IT colleagues are taking. They want to use social media to push information out or to direct you to their website. I was at a presentation where an IT group turned off the comments feature of their blog because they were worried about what comments others, read outsiders, would leave. In my opinion, that is not a recipe for success.
Personally, I do not care about my power company. I do not feel a connection to them. In fact, the only time I think about them is when I pay my bill each month and when the power goes out, and it will. Why would I connect with them via Twitter? Especially if they were only using it to point out they emailed the newsletter I never read.
Social media is all about discourse. And it's an all-in proposition. This means taking the good with the bad. Yes, it is a risk. And, if after the analysis you feel the risk it to great then I recommend not doing it. I'd be more apt to engage with my power company, or an IT department, in this medium if we were having a conversation. If I could ask questions. If they took the risk and let me in on some of what they were thinking and were interested in hearing what I was thinking.
If you want to be a utility, be a utility. At your own peril. Utilities being necessary evils breed discontent. People don't particularly care to deal with them more than what is necessary. Get them angry enough and they will find a way to work around them or even topple them. The same goes for wanting people to connect with you. Engage them through social media at your own peril. Be prepared for some unpleasantness. However, you may find it turns into an opportunity to connect with your constituents, helps you improve, and *gasp* they may even come to care about you.
I think this is a great question that many organizations struggle with in accepting Social Media, and your answer may actually be hidden in your previous post about the CIC.
You mentioned that the struggle between personal and organizational entity when posting through these public feeds and creating a separation between the two. Maybe merging them as Cole suggested fixes this current problem. By adding a more personal touch and creating a hybrid of information stream and community/user interactivity it makes me, as a user, more interested in following you.
Show me a human side to the stream, and I trust it, engage it, and value it more in my every day feed. Think of Comcast and their team of specialists, they are an official mouthpiece for the Organization, but also add their touches of daily life or respond to messages I've posted that they find humorous, and it makes me interested.
I guess it goes back to the adage of you get what you give.