Social Media Strategy Development

We have recently completed several social media strategy development workshops. A few hours or a day is not enough to complete the work, but it is usually enough to make a start, show how the work can be completed and give confidence to those who will complete the work.

We have 4 main approaches to strategy development and often mix and match a combination of these depending on the organisation concerned.  Two are "top down" and two "bottom up".  Usually the session starts with some clarification of what social media is and the generic benefits and risks.  

Image by Matt Benton The primary top down approach involves reviewing the business objectives of the organisation; then using a structured brainstorming approach to identify social media activities that support the business objectives; and then grouping the social media activities into a reasonable order taking account of the need to do groundwork and the need to have some short term benefits to point to.  This approach has the advantage of enabling the contribution of social media activities to the overall business objectives to be easily identified.

The second top down approach is for organisations who intuitively understand what social media is about; that is: enabling transparent, open conversations.  Here the approach is to focus on the conversations.  "What conversations do you have now that are repeated?"  "What transparent, open conversations would you like to have?" "Who would you like to have the conversations with"  "Where in the social media domain can you find these people?" these questions usually lead quickly to a review of the risks of transparent open conversations and the need for leaders of the organisation to buy into the approach.

A bottom up approach that complements both top down approaches is based on pain points and the primary change equation*.  The idea is simple, look at significant business issues; find some that would benefit from one or other aspect of social media, e.g. the use of social media as an open communication channel; then find a specific business unit that is a) feeling the pain intensely, b) has a leader that is, at least, willing to try a new approach, c) not overloaded with other initiatives; finally put all of your effort into supporting this group.  If it works other business units feeling the same pain will hear of it, and instead of forcing a corporate wide initiative down unwilling throats, you have groups queueing up to be next.

The final bottom up approach does not sound like strategy. I have heard the term "tactical strategy" applied to it. It involves a very broad statement of direction and then "just doing it" and reviewing it.  Most organisations who are looking at engaging via social media are making decisions about it without having experienced it, either corporately, or, the decision makers getting involved at a personal level. This means that important messages - such as "this is about conversations not monologues" are not really taken onboard. It takes courage to jump in and get involved in something new, and usually requires support, encouragement and paradoxically some very clear do's and don'ts (guidelines and policies) to ensure that newcomers do not damage or embarrass their personal reputation or their companies brand.

There are refinements of these e.g. "build on what you have got", but the four approaches outlined above are our main strategy development tools.

How do you develop your social media strategy?

*Change equation: Change happens if D + V + K > R where Dissatisfaction with how things are (pain), and clarity of Vision of how things could be, and Knowledge of the first steps to take to achieve the vision are greater than Resistance to change.  Resistance usually has two main elements: Economic = cost or scarcity of key resources and Emotional

Comments

[Cormac Heron]

Nice post. Though that bit at the end was a bit poncey. One of the best things about blogging is that it's difficult to hide one's personality. You're a mathematician and it shows. Though the end bit may remind me of my Economics A-Level (where satisfaction of one good divided by price equals that of another good divided by its price) I am sure it appeals to others :-)