Debunking the Debunkers: The Three Big Myths of Social Media The GALLUP Management Journal published an article in Sept titled: "Social Media: The Three Big Myths". I think a big part of their article could be summarized in one short word: DUH!They begin with a description of the size of the audiences in facebook and twitter and how much (a lot) some spend on social network marketing and then ask the question "But does that approach actually work?" The question seems to be asked from a viewpoint that the answer would be "obviously it work well, " when common sense would tell most anyone that in that form it probably doesn't work at all. The three myths they came up with and are debunking are: - "that it effectively drives customer acquisition" - "that social networkers are all the same" - "that social networking is an online-only phenomenon" The first two "myths" get that big, Duh! response. The third "myth", haven't they ever attended a trade show, a group of people with a common interest coming together to share ideas and information; ie: a focused social network? Apparently, not, and that is also where the first two fail online. It is all about FOCUS! A social network (online, or in real life) without focus, ie: facebook, twitter isn't likely to help anyone accomplish any particular goal (I don't include wasting time as a goal). Now, GALLUP comes up with "Fact: Engagement with a brand drives social engagement." There are a couple of issues with their pronouncement, apparently GALLUP would consider someone liking a facebook page or following someone on twitter to be some kind of "engagement". I can't remember remember who I've liked or followed. It is completely irrelevant and in my mind isn't any kind of engagement. So, one wonder when asking people their likelihood to rely on various sources of information when deciding on a company, brand, product or services to use, company sponsored twitter and facebook pages are at the bottom of the list with an impact of close to zero percent. The top being spouse at nearly 50% and children, parents, friends and experts all a bit over 10%. That of course is a beginning to the key of effective social engagement. The more you are viewed as a friend and/or, expert, the more influence you will have. I believe that means if you made use of real SOCIAL engagement, then you can develop yourself into that role of a "friend" and start to develop familiarity, trust and knowledge (expert). That is what they miss entirely about social media. It is SOCIAL. It is not a new place to cram advertising and coupon offers. Think of it more like a trade show. A place you can meet people with a common interest (FOCUS) and after you become friends, by socializing, the door opens to much more business than is possible by other means. Next GALLUP gets into Confidence, Integrity, Price and Passion being the 4 key elements of customer engagement hierarchy. Now, we suddenly changed from social media or social engagement to customer engagement. They claim you must create customer engagement before you can credit social engagement. I think they got it 100% backwards. You want to turn customers into friends! I think it is much easier to develop familiarity and trust through socialization, ie: social engagement, and your social circle then becomes a pool of ready customers. Going the other way is simply nonsense and ineffective. Social media should be all about before someone is your customer. Of course the key element is doing it in a focus environment where the social activity will have some bearing on the product or service you have to offer. Of course, many companies need to do some serious work on their customer service departments because otherwise your customers will turn the social media into your customer service portal! Expert Page: What is social engagement? | 
