Did web 2.0 kill communities ?

Summary : communities are a very trendy topic for enterprises. And yet it’s not a new matter at all. Communities form and live so easily on the net that enterprises thought they could do the same with their employees and clients…with mixed sucess. The purposely sustained impression that tools create communities while they only create the conditions to host them and marketing discourses according to which everything should be community got the better of years of work and researches on communities, leading organizations to many dead-ends. It’s high time to call these groups or spaces differently and manage them accordingly before the “2.0 madness” turn this powerful concept into a deprecated buzzword.

When I’m asked “how to create, manage and energize communities inside and outside my company” I often feel like answering this :

“There are communities that exist and don’t need you and those that don’t exist and aren’t worth wasting your time to make them live”

I have to admit that it’s simplistic and, in some ways, wrong.

• Communities need a shared interest, a shared goal and the will to interact together. At first sight, it only need the rigght people to be identified and provided with the means to exist and exchange as a community. Let’s admit that sometimes it works (as soon as means and tools that will help the community to live, exchange and exist as such are available, members find one another and the communty forms and structures itself), but sometimes not (the community exists in people minds but don’t form in a tangible way). That’s often caused by two factors : lack of trust towards the organization (sometimes these communities live outside or the organization, under the radar but refuse to become official and institutional) or management issues (is participation a part of people’s job or wasted time, even stolen information ?).

• Communities can be created ex-nihilo but awareness has to be raised before in order that the willingness to “do together’ emerge. Only then it will be time to tools things. Here again, before creating and managing a community, the first step is to creat the conditions that will make it exist.

In fact, in my opinion, communities can’t be created. But its success factor do. Then it can be managed, moderated, facilitated but it will always be impossible to make a community do what it doesn’t want to.

You’ll tell me that all that is obvious and you’ll be true. Communities are not a recent concern. We always knew that they would be very hard to build, that there must be barriers at the entry, that they need a lot of time etc… A tough work which principles have been clearly established by Etienne Wenger.So things were clear. But it seems to me that, these last years, the ‘community thing” become more and more confused and confusing for enterprises, what was recently confirmed by some researchers I talked with.

In one word : while organizations used to know where to head to even if it was difficult, now they’re totally lost. Consequence : they invest a lot a time and money and are often deceived. One reason to that : no one knows what a community is anymore.

[Read more...]

Is Facebook the future of call-centers ? The Air France KLM Switzerland case

Summary : Facebook is usually considered as a communication and marketing tool. But it’s becoming more and more obvious that it’s becoming a customer relationship tool what has an important impact on the design of the community management system and the role of the community manager that’s becoming the central point of a service and internal networking system. Facebook is becoming a call center and the community manager a problem solver and a connector like the Air France – KLM Switzerland case shows.

I recently found this long and interesting video in which  Alain Pezzoni from Air France KLM Switzerland talks about their social media strategy. The video is in french but here are some points I’d like to highlight from this case.

1°) Favor local initiatives

This is Air France KLM Switzerland, not Air France KLM global and this fact is important. In large international organizations, linguistic and cultoral factors make that, both at the customer and organization level, having a global strategy is very complex. Depending on the countries, what can be done and the way to do it may be radically different and building a strategy may be hard and take a lot of time. Since it’s a new field where businesses are starting from scratch, having local initiatives from which the whole organization will learn what can be reused elsewhere and what will stay local may be a good option.

Talking about Air France KLM Switzerland, it’s about 2 brands and three languages what makes 6 communities to address…and as many fan pages. So a local anchorage is essential.

2°) Communication is service

Even if, at the beginning, pages have to be filled with content to feed the fans and get their attention, the flow slowly reverses and the organization starts answering to customers’ requests. As I’ve previously mentioned, the scalabity of the model allows, as Alain Pezzoni says, to deal with call-centers overload. The social channel, even if owned by the communication department, is shared by many processus (customer service, quality…) this department does not own but facilitate. What implies to prepare things beforehand. The community manager is only the front of the system and has to work with many people from many departments across the organization and mobilize them. So he or she has to have the required legitimacy. Moreover, that’s not a job for an intern or a junior, rather a senior who knows the organization quite well. According to Pezzoni, this person must know whom to ask questions and have a strong internal network.

That’s a frequent observation. Many organizations that are good at external communitu management face, one day, the difficulty of identifying the right internal expertises. The limiting factor of external networking is often, once a critical mass and complexity is reached, the lack of internal networking.

3°) The value of transparency

Being good at customer relationship management is key for any business. But when it’s delivered through social media, the work is done “in public” what makes things visible. Being exemplary on twitter or facebook is like having a free communication campaign while serving customers.

4°) Community managers are not here to attract fans

As noticed by one of the participants, the role of the community manager is not to attract more fans or followers but improve the quality of customer relationship. I remember a good friend of mine who was asked to attract a given number of followers (number scientifically explainable regarding to the organization’s capacity in terms of delivery). He refused the job and, in my opinion, was right. In my opinion, the best way to measure a community manager is through the indicators of the processes he facilitates (quality, service, innovation), the measured image of the company but not by counting followers or fans. The numbebr of fans is the consequence of a good service, not its cause.

In fact, it’s interesting to see that the discussion that was about e-acquisition quickly moved to customer e-services.

[Read more...]

My takes on the Enterprise 2.0 Summit

As you may certainly know, I was I Franckfurt last week to attend the Enterprise 2.0 Summit. Like last year I found this edition very dense and highmy qualitative. Many things have already been written since thursday so I’ll only highlight a few points a found essential.

1°) It’s all about the format

Even when you have very interesting cases, it all depends in the way they’re presented. The format that forces the speaker to be very factual in 20 minutes before answering the audience during the next 20 minutes makes things very operational. Enterprise 2.0 has been around for a couple of years now and, in my opinion, the time of inspirational discourses saying “believe of die”, “have the faith” is over. Attendees are expecting facts, numbers and the ability to discuss with the speaker in order to raise the points that really interest them and don’t want show homes and fireworks. Since nearly all the attendees were practitionners, we had the opportunity to  listen to very valuable conversations, much more than when speakers at talking to the echochamber.

There were also expert sessions that were more about stragegy but, once again, no soliloquies. Each keynoted ended with a panel and a discussion with the audience. The best way to make sure tha expert talks benefit to the audience.

2°) Europe loosings its hand-ups and finding its way

We often consider that european businesses are more cautious than others when it comes to experimenting new things and more shy when it comes to talk about their initiatives. It seems that times are changing. With Océ, Renault, BMW, Deutshe Telecom, BASF among others, I saw the best case gathering I’ve ever seen. Most of all we we told all the mechanisms of their projects, had insider views and avoided the syndrom of many presentations when, at the end, we tell ourselves “What a great case ! But…in fact,  what did they do, how, and what were the results ?”. During the discussion that followed my session on cultural boundaries, Lee Bryant said that it was high time that european businesses use their difference as a lever and forget the usual reflex that consists in saying “it works in the US so it won’t work here”. I think that it’s the way things are going, considering the way the cases were presented : technical, explaining the whys and the hows. Much more rational than inspirational what is also a demonstration of how they were conceived and implemented with a focus on sense and value rather than engagement and passion.

Still in my session discussion, Lee said that european organization must stop having a defensive attitude toward “imported” concepts. That’s what’s happening. I say enterprises happy to have met their european peers and saying “finally we’re on the right way and, unlike what we could think, we’re not left behind at all”.

Toujours dans la discussion qui a suivi ma session, Lee Bryant disait qu’il fallait cesser d’être sur la défensive systématique face à des concepts “importés”. C’est ce qui est en train de se passer je pense. J’ai vu des entreprises heureuses d’avoir du rencontrer leurs pairs européens et repartir en se disant “finalement on est sur la bonne voie, et on est loin d’être en retard comme on le pensait”.

3°) More processes, less community management

It confirms what I wrote after the last Enterprise 2.0 conference in Boston and even reinforces it. In Boston some raised the question of tackling business processes but there were still some doubts about how relevant it was to enterprise 2.0. In Franckfurt it was a no-brainer. The need for tying any project to business processes was obvious for anybody. And the workshop I conducted on business processes and enterprise 2.0 was full in a few minutes so I had to refuse people. Does it mean that community management is not seen as being outdated ?

Not at all. It was mentionned in every case and in many keynotes but as a part of a global system, not less, not more. But one thing is sure : it was not the first concern of conference attendees who were more intereted in project design, its mechanisms, the way to deliver concrete and measurable benefits. I can’t remember having heard many questions on this subject and Bjorn Negelmann,  recognized after the conference that attendees did not even consider it a a future skill set.

In my opinions, both have to articulate. But there’s been an historical focus on community management that made people forgot about the other part of the issue and, most of all, employees need to start from what they know to move toward new models.

I’ll elaborate more on my workshop in a future post but you can already refer to this old post and read Samuel Driessen’s notes.

[Read more...]

Engage with customers. And then ?

Summary : It’s obvious that the use of social media within companies and between companies and customers are not compartmentalized but complementary disciplines. If the “internal” company is more and more trying to get in touch with customers, the world of marketing struggles to make his way toward internal departments. As communication is becoming service, initiatives that target customers can’t be separated from those that aim at reversing communication flows inside the organization, redefining roles  and realigning the whole organization with the needs of employees who are directrly in touch with customers. To demonstrate its value, social and community makerting will have to replace “push” with “pull” not only in its interactions withn customoers but also in the way the whole organization works.

Even if the external/marketing/communication part has never been my prefered one, it has become obvious that it’s impossible to dissociate the evolution of work from what’s happening outside the corporate walls. First, because no company creates value on its own et a high level of internal performance is useless when a business is not as efficient with its external partners and clients that it is internally (theory of the limiting factor or bottlneck…as you prefer), second because the internal shift from push to pull logically leads to consider customers.

The time when 2.0 was either about marketing or collaboration but not both at the same time is over. Yet, the concept of enterprise 2.0 evolved overtime and everybdoy finds logical to include all external stakeholders into it, what is confirmed by the rise of social crm. But even if enterprise 2.0 is heading down toward customers, marketing struggles to head up toward internal activities.

I recently found this interesting deck about the failure of social media initiatives. It tells us that

- there’s a lack of strategy (81%) and most marketers don’t undestand the value of interactions…and how all these things work.

- consequently, businesses invest more on technology than on people and relationships.

I’d like to go a little bit further and sum it up in one sentence : when marketing and communication people use social media to communicate better and differently, there are two possibilities:

- either they (or their company) don’t get it and that doesn’t work.

- Or they understand how to make a good use of social media and…they deceive their customers.

[Read more...]

Community management and processes by the example

Some weeks ago I promised to illustrate my “community management and processus” post with a fictitious but credible example. So, here it comes…

Jack and John are community managers (or, at least, in charge on figuring things out on social media on behalf of their employer). Both are working for an airline (what was a trendy and volcanic topic at the time I thought about the case). Jack is working at AirShy and Paul at AirSocial.

AirShy knows things have to be done one on Twitter, Facebook and all these new medias but is not comfortable with that. The company is used to keeping everything under control, to avoid any kind of risk. On the other hand, people at AirSocial think that if they don’t dive into the pool they have no chance to learn how to swim.

So AirShy decided to occupy the field in the only purpose to have a presence. They asked to someone who likes these new media to deal with this work : Jack. he reports to the communication department but could have reported to any department that would have taken the leadership on this subject.

At AirSocial, people wondered what these medias could be used for. Half of the answer was in que question : things are worth when they allow to serve the customer in a better way. So how could they serve their customers better with new medias ? Deliver information to eveyone, but also to people with individual concerns. That means the company should engage in conversations…about what, with what tone, to what extent ? And what should not be tackled ? Confidential issues of course ! But also what people don’t want to read in such channels. The communication department is in charge but they quickly realized that they had in their hands a pipe that can be used by anyone in the company. Even if it’s still quite vague they decided to start and learn from their own experience. John is told to deal with these media, on the operational side.

At first sight, Jack has less constraints than John. There’s no doubt he’ll achieve better results. Not that sure…

[Read more...]

Community Management is a “processus in processum”

Even if community management is still an unclear concept with changing boundaries, many senseful and insightful things are slowly emerging about it. A few weeks ago, I came across a very interesting web tv show about it (sorry…it’s in french). While watching the video, a sentence grabbed my attention. You know, the kind of thing that makes you think “yes…that’s it…he/she gets it all right”. The sentence was “community management is a processus” (and the author Sandrine Plasseraud from We are Social).

It’s possible that I’ll go a little bit far from what they said and meant on the video in the following lines but I’d like to go further in this discussion that I find senseful. As just once won’t hurt, I’ll mainly address external community management issues even if, as we’ll see, they have very little value if not connected to the inside.

Community Management is a processus

I’d like to apologize to those who like the pretended “freestyle” and “village fest” side of community community management, but not only it’s a processus but a processus that has to be tightly managed. Whatever are the autonomy and the seniority of the person in charge (and most of all when both are low), it’s about:

• defining the goals of the activity

• defining its scope, the issues to address and not address, what to talk about and what to never talk about.

• defining how information will be processed : what kind of information has to be pushed, what kind of information has to be pulled to internal business people and what to do with it, how follow-up will be managed, what kind of reporting, what actions ?

• Autonomy level : how far community managers can do, what kind of initiative can he take, to what extent can he speak in the name of the company.

• Organizing subsidiarity : when out of the autonomy scope, to whom must he refers, ask an anwer, a permssion, an action.

• Setting-up support for community managers : in the above-mentioned case, be sure that the person who’ll be asked something by the community manager know that answering and taking any necessary action is not facultative and that it should be done in a time limit that’s compatible with customer or audience’s expectations.

• Define the “online style” : what tone to adopt, how close and friendly can the community manager be.

I agree it’s a little bit constraining but that’s the price to pay to make community managers feel comfortable, make them sure they won’t be any mistake. It will also help the company to be comfortable with its communitu manager, trust him. Community managers need to know what they can and can’t do, that they’ll be supported in their initiatives and get the needed help in the same way that organizations need to be sure their CM won’t put them at risk. It’s a matter of reciprocal trust : guidelines are the best way to carry on while waiting for trust to emerge and each player to deserve it.

But that’s not all. The above statements make it clear that community managers are not isolated protuberances on the web isolated from the rest of the company but their actions have to take place within clearly definined and known business areas. If community management is a processus in itself, it has to take place within more traditional processus. [Read more...]

33 things to know about those who make your online social spaces live

I wrote a lot about community management these last month for a simple reason: there’s so much confusion about a topic that’s said being strategic that heading for disaster and throwing the baby with the bathwater is a really actual risk. But by dint of thinking about it again and again, it seems to me that some guidelines are slowly emerging.

• That’s not because there are social medias in the workplace and that employees use them to do their work that the person in charge of managing their use is a community manager.

• A group of people doing things and interacting through social is not necessarily a community or a social network.

• A corporate social media strategy has to be driven at several levels which are often embodied by different people who have specific roles, responsabilities and objectives. These individual works has to be coordinated and articulated.

• Ca n’est pas parce qu’il y a échange entre des individus en utilisant les médias sociaux qu’on à affaire à des communautés. Ni à des réseaux sociaux d’ailleurs.

So, here’s a few things to know about all these players…

[Read more...]

Community management in France : a rocket, an engine but no cockpit

I’d like to sum up some lessons learned thourgh the discussions that followed by post about “the Community Management Bible“. As a matter of fact we can endlessly discuss about community managers, their role, worry about possible excesses and irrelevant uses, but it’s useless if we don’t talk about the same thing. We are forced to admit that beyond technical points, the concept of community manager varies depending on the local context.

What I can see is a dual and localized understanding of what community management is.

• USA (and maybe somewhere else) : the community manager is a business relay, he drives a strategic system that serves the enterprise and its goals.

• France (and maybe somewhere else) : it’s the person in charge of the day to day life of a community.

In the first case it’s a manager that drives a system, in the other its a cool activity leader who “likes to speak in the mike”. The difference is obvious when you look at the job description and the attributes of the people that are hired to do these jobs.

Of course, both are needed in a global approach, one being the ground relay of the other. But reality is often different, the strategic dimension often lacks here, systems are poorly consolidated and animation is often the only focus to the detriment of grobal steering.

Is the the proof that French businesses actually pay less attention to this issue that they say ? That it’s considered as a bulge of internal or external communication that doesn’t deserve a dedicated high level manager ?

In fact we’re making a big mistake by calling everything “community management” while others get the difference and think about the respective roles of community managers and social media managersx positionnements The fact is in many French companies (I’m talking of what I know…I’m sure it’s the same in many other countries), people think of social media management and overlook the true community management.

The question is still open but I’m convinced that the rocket still lacks one stage. Unefortunately, that’s the cockpit one.

Communautés, community management, community manager,social media manager,social media management

The community management bible is now online

State of Community ManagementYou may have noticed that I’m often skeptical when talking about community management. Not because I don’t believe in it but because its importance and role are so impressive that it must not be led astray or neglected.

When talking about community management, internal and external, there are risks and constraints to take into consideration not to waste its potential. Many things (and sometimes rubbish) can be read about it and think there is a real risk for the concept to be thrown away because of too much charlatanism.

In my opinion, some things have to be kept in mind :

- Community management is not the answer to every organization problem, either with employees or with a wider ecosystem. But it’s a way to make new things or to do in a new and more effective way things that used to be made in an unappropriate fashion. In short it allows to explore new fields of value which we’re not aware of the extent. It’s also something that has to articulate with the rest of the organization.

- it’s a more serious business than a “noise-maker” or “energizer” job. Those who’ll read the excellent Social Networking for business will discover an great mindmap of the responsabilities that belong to the role that should make the awae of the complexity and the richness of the role.

I don’t know how things are doing in other countries (in fact I do…and that what’s scares me) but the fact that, in France, the fact that community management is often a job for young employees or even interns is really worrying. My opinion made one of my readers angry once (on the french version of this post I almost was insulted by someone telling me that youngs were better community managers than experimented peple, that they had the mindset, the 2.0 attitude and knew the tools but posts like this one  [fr] makes me think I’m right (for non french speaking people, in this post the author was discussing the fact community management positions often were junior ones and often poorly paid while it’s said being so strategic…).

The good news is that lots of people are taking it very seriously and share enough things in an ongoing improvement approach that they could build a corpus of knowledge and best practices related to community management. The second good news is that they decided to share it with us in a report than can be downloaded for free : “The State of Community management report“.

In such a technical and human matter, there can’t be any magical recipe. On the other hand there are things that have to be taken into account to work one’s strategy and operating model out. Then, it has to be turned into faction, what need adaptation to each particular context. At this point, feedbacks from those who faced similar situations are key. That’s what the Community Roundtable offers in its report :

- know what we’re talking about

- know the challenges that have to be faced

- have “food for thought” to face them and be successful in one’s context.

This may be seem quite simple but the value is impressive for both community managers (even experienced) and organization who want to define their strategy, hire the right person and need insights to carry on. When tackling such a challenge, better try to understand its complexity first instead of trying anything and say “if only I had known…..”

Enjoy your reading !

From community management to customer management

I’d like to go back on this  interesting article published in the January-February issue of the Harvard Business Review about the need to reinvent marketing.

The postulate is now well known. Companies have more tools to interact with customers than they ever had and customers want more than ever to tell businesses what they think about their products. To stay competitive is such a context, the focus has to be set on quickly bringing customers to a transaction but to build a long term relationship that may generate less value at the beginnig but more in the future. (On this point, I highly recommend you to read my takes on social CRM here and this HBR paper on consumer capitalism).

One of the interesting things that emerges from the article is the “Customer manager” with a clear definition : someone with a deep knowledge of the products, knows how to analyze both structured and unstructured informations (blogs, forums…), who is more interested in brand perception than in audience numbers. They need good skills in social science (psychology, sociology), in economics and may have some knowledge in marketing.

http://www.duperrin.com/english/wp-admin/post-new.phpSo the idea is to stop pushing the product to the client but consider this latter as a stakeholder in the enterprise develpment and co-build the offer with him.

Obviously, it questions the role of this customer manager compared to a trendy one : the community manager. Is it the same thing ? Are they complementary ?

I already exposed my fear to see the role of community manager lead astray and become nothing more than the good old push marketing with a facelift. In my opinion, a good community manager (or a community manager which employer really gets the purpose of the approach) is a customer manager. In the other case, the difference between both is at the same time slight and essential : the one is here to generate conversation and attract attention, the other is here to create value. Creating value means : turning conversations into action and make the organization determine itselft according to its customer relationship, what implies to question many processes and certainties. This also implies some seniority for the customer manager who has to deal with an heavy responsability.

Anyway, it’s already an ongoing change. As said in the articile, B2B businessses are more advanced but B2C are jumping on the bandwagon. That’s true that many organizations have already started to learn how to co-operate with their customers and suppliers to improve the efficiency of their supply chain while, because of their weak individual economical wieght regarding to the market sizez, individual customers have often been neglecting and asked to buy and shut up.

Times change.

NB : in this post I considered the community manager in a customer relationship approach. Internal community managers have their own specificities.