Social Media: Why Bother? The Debate.
Gareth Sear
Business Engagement, Economic Development, Programme Manager, Stakeholder Management, Project Manager, Leader with a passion for Innovation, Micro, Small & Medium Businesses, start-ups and life long learning.
Social Media: Why Bother?
The hot topic for the first Opinions Debate delivered with our partners MDHUB.
The scene was set. The head table for the pro and anti arguments was laid. The live twitter feed waited incongruently on the projector screen. Tea and cake for 60 awaited consumption.
Then they arrived. The 60 local business people to drink tea, devour cake and debate the relative merits or non-merits of using Social Media to grow your business. The initial vote was taken. 28 of 58 in the room thought that Social Media was a great way to grow your business.
Opening and facilitating the Opinions Debate was Kerry Kyriacou from MDHUB and on the head table was Jen Smith from Jen Smith Social Media (pro stance), Louise Hopkins from Recenseo (on the fence) and John Thacker from Clark Brownscombe (anti stance).
Then the debate began in earnest. Each debater put forward their argument. Jen Smith arguing that people are scared of social media, but with the right support and training they will put it to excellent use, demonstrating this with some powerful example and statistics.
Countered by John Thacker with arguments focussing on the associated problems of information overload, people not listening and it contravening the 8 qualities of being human in marketing – iterating that businesses need to take note of Corporate Neurological Responsibility (CNR), relating directly to the wellbeing of employees. John demonstrated the power of interruptions by social media and the noise, by getting everyone to put on the sound on their phones. Soon to be muted by the delegates as the pings and buzzing soon too over the room.
Sitting on the fence, Louise Hopkins states that social media is about information. One size does not fit all. It is not about selling it is about influence and integrity. There are new tools, but we need to play by the old rules.
The arguments given; it was time to turn the debate over to the delegates. Soon in the throes of discussion; does it really generates sales? Countered with an argument that it generates brand awareness – which ultimately will create sales or prevent loss of sales.
Some delegates pushed on the argument that social media is just a platform for unsatisfied customers to complain and the debate demonstrated that not only complaints went viral, but so did good news stories; Jen Smith citing the Sainsbury’s Tiger / Giraffe bread branding as an excellent example of this. Louise Hopkins added that a complaint should always be seen as an opportunity.
Statistics were given by Kerry Kyriacou that LinkedIn was the best business social media platform, countered by a number of delegates stating they receive the most leads from Twitter.
The debate raged on, and questions were asked: “As a sole trader, that is extremely busy, what do I give up to ‘do’ social media?”, statements made “Social media is a great leveller for SME’s to compete against the corporations in their marketing”, that were opposed with comments that SME’s do not have the budget, knowledge or skills to use social media effectively, therefore it is not a level playing field.
Time was soon up on the powerful arguments and debating. Closing statements from the head table and a recount to see if anyone had changed their mind. 2 delegates had. There was a swing from 28 to 30 business people who thought that Social Media was a great way to grow your business.
And so the MDHUB and University of Chichester Opinions Debate drew to a close. A fascinating and eye opening and frank debate on the relative merits and detriments of using social media to grow your business.
Search on the Twitter hashtags of #socialmedia #whybother to see the live tweets from the debate.
What do you think?
Business Engagement, Economic Development, Programme Manager, Stakeholder Management, Project Manager, Leader with a passion for Innovation, Micro, Small & Medium Businesses, start-ups and life long learning.
10 年Totally agree with you Ben. It is a case of leveraging it in all ways possible and linking old style with new. Social Media really does make things transparent - so you need to be careful and it needs to be monitored.
Providing "best in breed" reusable digital identity solutions. Reducing fraud and corruption through Digital Verification
10 年I think "playing by the old rules" could be detrimental to successfully using these new technologies. Though bare in mind these "quotes" are all open to interpretation. For instance from a marketing perspective the old way was to talk at someone, from a person/organisation in power to an audience of the relatively powerless. Supposedly the "new way" is to talk with someone and build on the power of persuasion, a key factor in human communication and a type of influence we all engage in. What’s different now is that more people have the ability to be influencers by creating and distributing content, and that the technology increases transparency and accountability for those who attempt to persuade. Even when the “persuaders” don’t provide a direct means for people to respond to their messages, there are plenty of channels through which message recipients can communicate their own perspective. Recognizing that any size organisation and their leaders can monitor how their brand or employees are being discussed online, thereby leveraging social technologies not just to talk, but to listen – not just to persuade, but to be persuaded. That, ultimately, may be the best old use of these new tools.