About the time you’re getting the chicken and roasties out the oven this Sunday I’ll probably be starting to jam your Twitter timelines with talk of Gen Y mythbusters, HR improv, hickeys and employer brand (not at the same time I hope), not to mention passion and great places to work.
Yep, that means I’ll be hanging out with some of my US HR friends at HRevolution. (#HRevolution)
And by the time Coronation Street starts on Monday I’ll be immersed in radical openness and workforce analytics. I’ll be at the HR Technology Conference too. (#HRTechConf)
So apologies in advance if I get a bit carried away with this stuff.
I’ll be joining an awesome blogging team and don’t want to let the side down so I’ll do my best to make sense of it all and write about it here.
According to Blogging4Jobs I’m in for 3 days of conference sessions, expo hall madness, and parties galore – sounds like it might be a tough gig, but someone’s gotta try and do it 😉 And this time there’s also a wedding (#ZuCoWedding)
Maybe that’s what Elvis meant with how I wish that there were more than the twenty-four hours in the day, cause even if there were forty more I wouldn’t sleep a minute away
I’ve been to Chicago and Atlanta for HRevolution in the past so I sort of know what to expect, but this is my first time at HRTech – can’t wait to experience it.
If you’re reading this and planning to be there – then let’s make sure we meet up.
And if you’re in the UK I hope I give you some insight into what’s going on through Twitter and this blog.
I promise that what happens in Vegas will stay on the blog…well, the bits you need to know about anyway 😉
As long as I’ve been around the HR profession there have been regular bouts of navel gazing. You only have to look at some of the most-shared HR blogs and join in the usual conference chats about seats at the table, making a difference and the need to change. I’ve facilitated discussions about the purpose and value of HR, whether we should do away with it and how to demonstrate the value.
I’ve often said that I know of no other business function that beats itself up so. I know of few sales people who responded to the PPI mis-selling scandal with a long hard look into their soul to question the job and personal values, and neither did I see a wave of accountants post-Enron self-flagellating over whether the finance function had lost credibility and could no longer be taken seriously as a business function.
Any who did have self-doubt would doubtless strive to show how the profession could improve to stop a repeat, with those guilty of wrong doing not just being wrong, but also rogue outliers and not indicative of the overall standards of most of the profession.
In my experience though the HR function never quite seems to have the same self-belief, which may be why it can sometimes be seen to overreact to perceived attacks on its credibility and value.
There are plenty of blogs and responses from both the online community and the online HR media on Peacockgate* and I don’t particularly want to add to the she was wrong/no she wasn’t/yes she was debate, however much of the immediate response seemed to me typical of a group who maybe lack the necessary self-confidence needed to brush this kind of thing off and hence end up taking offence at what they see as an attack.
What’s often missing from this kind of debate is perspective and context, so here are a few observations:
The piece did not appear in the business or finance section but in the Women’s section. It queried the career suitability of a profession which is 70% female and was portrayed as a women’s issue and not necessarily a business issue.
Although it was written by the Deputy Editor of the women’s section, part of the problem for the HR profession may have been that is it was written by someone seen as one of their own. Someone who learned her trade in the HR media, has covered CIPD conferences and interviewed many leading HR practitioners.
It appeared in the online edition of a staunchly right of centre broadsheet newspaper. One who editorially challenge wastage of public funds and the BBC in general, who broadly support Beecroft and the stripping away of red tape around business, are seen as business friendly and often publish opinion writers (Jeremy Warner, Allister Heath) who ideologically appear to favour much looser employment rights. An HR function being profligate with public money would be in the firing line from an editorial viewpoint.
It was an opinion piece. Not quite a Littlejohn or Clarkson, but as with many such pieces it is there primarily to provoke debate, promote sharing, create a noise, get traffic to the site. Some criticism has been levelled around the lack of supporting evidence – but this is fairly common with such pieces. Take something that’s happened, frame it slightly out of context and then use it to prove a different point is a modus operandi for many opinion pieces in the media (and some blogs for that matter). Whether it is the journalist or the sub-editor driving the narrative is unclear and hence I wouldn’t necessarily draw conclusions. **
Before I fall too far into the trap of over intellectualising, the reaction to all this displayed a siege mentality, but not necessarily one with the passion and belief that would indicate success…hence the name calling and umbrage.
I think the CIPD missed an opportunity to take the passion and desire to debate that was displayed by its members as a platform to open a wider conversation. After all, the main thrust of the piece was over career choices for young women so here was an opportunity to use it as a springboard to positively showcase the HR profession.
They could have produced a blog almost immediately, not criticising but summarising and showing an understanding of whatever points were being made. Reference the fact that any profession will have its rogue elements and that bad (or less than best) practice won’t be defended or tolerated, but also isn’t necessarily indicative of the rest of the profession.
Then let members debate, adding their views on the CIPD blog platform. No profession is one spokesperson but is the cumulative views of its members and hence they were in pole position to reflect the views of their members on this. Hell, why not look for a right of reply, a follow up post on the Telegraph site espousing the positives of a career in HR, why and how CIPD members make a difference to working lives.
…as a profession we should showcase good performance and role models AND we should hold bad practise to account. It isn’t a weakness to admit that HR is a profession in need of improvement, it’s a strength. And when we do, when we show the critical skills of self-analysis, you know what? We make people take us a whole lot more seriously
It’s often said that people rarely talk about good customer service but will always talk about bad customer service, and the same is probably true with HR. There’s plenty of good stuff out there – it doesn’t mean that the bad stuff doesn’t happen, but that you need to work a bit harder to get the good stuff out in the open.
And a healthy dose of context and perspective is a good starting point…
(* If you read this Louisa, I am joshing, treat it as a badge of honour 🙂 )
(** Later that evening I was at an event where the editor of the FT gave a short talk around the journalism profession and how it was reacting to the digital challenges. Listening to some stories from earlier in his career reminded me that not every piece that gets published is necessarily as the journalist originally intended)
Much as the ‘War for Talent’ supporters may encourage us to believe it, there is little correlation between the football transfer window and the day to day hiring processes of most businesses. There is one similarity though, in that it focuses the mind of an owner/manager on the teams that they have and how they can be improved.
Whilst football people only get to do this twice a year now, companies do it all year round. Even so, it often pays to take time out to think about what you really need for your team, what special ingredient (ie talent) could make a real change and take you on to the next level.
For some it may be that you just need more of the same – more bodies at the coalface to deal with workflows and production efficiencies. Possibly not an on-going need so some loan signings (that flexible workforce thing) may suffice.
Other companies may need to ship in specific skills and expertise to cover areas where they are weak or may lack the edge over their competition.
Most football clubs will have been addressing these two hiring areas over the last few weeks.
But then there is another type of hire – the Transformational Hire.
I’m guessing that most followers of this blog, and of my social profiles, will know that I’m an Arsenal fan – and it’s their piece of recruitment that has intrigued many over the last few days. Despite having a lack of cover in some of their specialist areas, and a definite lack of bodies in their overall first team squad, they’ve gone and hired a major global talent who will transform them in many ways but doesn’t necessary address some of the key and immediate deficiencies in the team. And I, for one, am really excited about it.
Now I’m not a fan of the ‘5 things recruitment can learn from the transfer window’ type of blog so I’m desperately trying not to write one! But one thing that has got me thinking more is how many commentators and players see this one transformational hire as somehow changing their perception of the club.
So focusing on the hire and not the football – what could a transformational hire do for your business?
Statement of Intent
Nothing tells the market, and your employees and customers, that you’re ambitious more than hiring one of the big guns, someone with a successful track record who is at the top of their game. Acquiring an undisputed talent from your field who shares your vision and wants to be part of it can make others sit up and think ‘Hey, they’ve got their act together. They’ve got a plan’
Sending a message to the competition
The chances are that you’ll be hiring someone that the competition wanted. It may well be someone from the competition. It can make others look at you differently. In Arsenal’s case the inference behind Chelsea’s refusal to loan them a player was that after this hire they were seen more as rivals.
Inspiration to existing employees
Undoubtedly many of the younger and emerging players at Arsenal will be able to learn from their new player, but the existing team will also benefit. Most people like working with the best talent, provided the best is someone who has the humility and character to still be part of the team. Whilst some may feel that they will look poorer by comparison, the upside is that others will raise their game, learn and take inspiration from someone new. A new face, particularly one that brings experience, class and a strong work ethic, can galvanise a group of employees, give them belief and help them achieve results they haven’t before.
Talent follows talent
It’s not just the existing employees that are galvanised. Other people in the market will see your business in a new light, as a place where talent can thrive, which enables you to be more bold in team building. Someone who people respect has endorsed your vision. It’s not a coincidence that the last two occasions on which Arsenal ignored pressing needs, confounded expectations and broke their transfer record to buy a fully formed major talent saw the start of the two most successful 10 year periods in their history.
Re-invigoration of consumers
For Arsenal, the signing of Ozil makes commercial sense. He’ll sell shirts and sponsorship deals and put bums on seats. He’ll give supporters who were losing faith something to believe in, handily papering over one or two of the areas that haven’t been addressed. Aside from the legalities of someone taking clients and contacts with them to a new business there’s little doubt that in a competitive business sector, customers and clients often look to where the momentum is, the ideas and creativity, and a transformational hire can certainly bring this momentum.
But, a word of caution
Not every transformational hire works out. During my years as a recruiter, particularly in the recruitment to recruitment sector, I saw many ‘top billers’ and outstanding performers join a new business and flounder.
The infrastructure and support at one company may help some achieve great things, but then they can move to a different one and the same may not happen. The culture and values need to be right, and the reason for the hire must be one that builds on and enhances what is already there. It can’t be relied upon to paper over the cracks and keep an underperforming team afloat.
And these hires take time. The person who could transform your team almost certainly needs to be identified, courted and nurtured. You can’t rely on their CV being emailed your way.
And finally, whilst my enthusiasm for Mesut Ozil is getting me carried away here, let’s not forget that transformational hires need not necessarily always be about the most high profile talent. The Arsenal team that had much success between 1987 and 1994 did not need a big name for a spark…careful hiring of the right catalysts inspired a primarily young group of players to reach great heights.
So go find the transformational catalyst for your business…
A few weeks ago I had the pleasure of seeing Brian Solis speak. He’s passionate and insightful, gives good soundbite, and is able to convey some of the intricacies around social business in a way that makes them natural and easy to understand.
Sadly I wasn’t signed up to the webinar but was able to follow the conversation it created through Twitter and the hashtag #7socialfactors – here are five main takeaways from the thread that seemed to be most popular…
“Outcomes are not Likes, not RT’s…outcomes are business benefits”
“People don’t remember words, but they do remember stories”
“Social media is too important to be left to the marketing department”
“Don’t just do something because you read it on Mashable”
“Social Media success lies in focus on engagement, experiences, relationships and outcomes – not channels”
A lot of the wisdom and thinking around ‘social business’ is usually good business practice requiring a mind-set that doesn’t see using social media for business as complex and uncharted just because the technology is new and emerging. As Brian wrote recently:
Social media = technology Social business = thinking or convictions
We used to talk about internet commerce and internet recruiting, then e-commerce and e-recruiting and now it’s just commerce and recruiting, and the same will go for social over the next couple of years as social business becomes business as usual.
What we really need to make a lot of this happen is common sense and judgement …and as some of the commenters on last night’s thread noted – common sense isn’t always common and judgement isn’t something you can train. As one tweeted:
“Social Media training = what you should do and what you shouldn’t. Judgement is needed in-between. You can’t train judgement”
Maybe common sense and judgement are two things we need to look for a lot more in the hiring process, and also seek to create a social media ‘knowledge hub’ in the business.
After all, social engagement in a business isn’t owned by one person or one department – it’s owned by everyone.
Over the 4 years I’ve been a regular user of social networking platforms for business I’ve heard, and been asked for, plenty of pearls of wisdom to help newcomers, or those looking to get more involved.
Clearly there are far too many to include in one blog post, but here are 10 of my favourites for a start.
Remember, no saying, slogan or cliché (nor speaker or blogger for that matter) can tell you everything you need to know…only by jumping in, experimenting and trying different things can you ever really experience the joys of social media and find out what works for you…
Your brand is what others say about you, not what you say about yourself
You’d think that everyone would know this by now but sadly not. There’s no point broadcasting air brushed messages about how wonderful you are. Over 80% of your potential, lapsed and current customers and employees will trust the experience of a peer over anything you say about yourself so embrace your satisfied customers and employees, make them your advocates, and let them tell your story.
Brands don’t tweet, people do
I won’t try and take credit for paraphrasing Euan Semple’s must-read book but changing ‘organisations’ to ‘brands’ reminds those using social platforms for business that behind every corporate update, every piece of content, is a person…talking to a person. It may also be worth remembering the words of Adobe’s Head of Social Jeremy Waite ‘It’s no longer about B2B or B2C, it’s now P2P’
If you make people use social media they’ll use it badly
Once a business embraces social platforms there’s often a sudden desire to get everyone in the business using them. As someone who has had to encourage employee participation in a business I say Don’t! Identify your internal advocates and influencers who are comfortable using the tools and start with them. Then encourage, empower and enable all who want to use them. As Content Marketing author Jay Baer says “if you don’t love social media you will suck at social media” so go find the passion in your business.
Social Media – It’s Evolution not Revolution
From carrier pigeon and letter, through post, telephone, telegram, telex, fax, computers, email and mobile to social platforms… business always adapts to the way their customers, partners and collaborators communicate. Social platforms are another stage along the business communication evolutionary cycle.
I don’t think you should have a social media policy – what you are saying is ‘we don’t trust you’
This is one of Neil Morrison’s sayings, and is usually likely to cause apoplexy amongst the lawyers. It’s harsh but it’s true. If you can’t trust someone to use a communication platform properly then what are you doing employing them.
Remember who you are, what you are, and who you represent
This is one of my favourite one sentence social media guidelines. When you take to the platforms it’s often easy to try and entertain and challenge, but if you’re doing it as part of your business role then remember your duty to that role, to peers and colleagues, your profession…and your friends and family.
Get as good as you can be at the platforms you’re already using before you go looking for new ones to try
At every conference, exhibition or event I attend there are always people wanting to know what’s next. Which up and coming platforms are the ones to try out, and what new ways of creating and presenting content can be embraced. My advice is always to get really good on the wagon you’re driving before jumping to a new one. The principles of engagement and reach, content and community, will be the same on whichever platform you try – if you’re not yet good at one then you quite possibly won’t be good at another.
You don’t need to be big to make a big noise
Social media is a great leveller. The big companies may have big budgets but in the land of connect, engage, share and learn it’s the quality of conversation that usually counts. If you’re going to run a twitter campaign for recruitment you’ve got to have good content to put out there, irrespective of size. Check out my coverage of Bromford Group’s #gottalovecake campaign to find out more.
You don’t need 1,000,000 likes. You need 1,000 new customers
This is one of Jeremy Waite’s 80 Rules of Social Media, and one that should never be forgotten. At the heart of your business you need an outcome from social interactions, and producing content that gets liked is only one small part. You need to make sure that what you do on social channels also supports the business objectives. And you should check out Jeremy’s other 79 rules too!
The conversation that never sleeps
Unashamedly this is one of my own sayings and also the title of one of my earliest blogs! Social media, especially twitter, literally is a 24/7 365 days a year conversation and if you’re a global brand, or have an interest in global business or global HR issues, then every minute of every day there will probably be someone saying something that’s deserving of your attention.
Had enough of debating about social media checking and whether we should use it when making hiring or promotion decisions? In the HR and Recruitment online networks we do seem to spend a lot of time talking about judging others by what they say on social media platforms. Whether it’s hiring managers looking to check out candidates as part of the recruitment process, or job seekers researching companies (and individuals) who they may wish to work for, there is always a healthy debate about how we interpret what others say.
Well maybe Air New Zealand have found a whole new use for it in dealing with ER issues.
They fired one of their flight attendants after she took sick leave to look after her sister. She took them to the Employment Relations Authority for unfair dismissal and AirNZ asked to see her bank accounts and have access to her Facebook page for the days concerned. She resisted as the company didn’t have these when they sacked her, and she felt they were private, but the ERA agreed with the company that she should hand them over to support her claim saying they would provide ‘substantially helpful advice’. As yet we don’t know the outcome.
Employment lawyers and employment commentators in New Zealand have been having their say:
“At a time when we think we are behaving privately or at least within a restricted circle of friends, we are actually effectively on trial”
“And the courts see Facebook as a wonderful asset because all of a sudden not only do we have the potential for pictures and so forth but . . . we can see what time statements were made and pictures were taken”
“Because while this is best evidence . . . doesn’t it creep you out a bit? It feels intrusive and just, frankly, wrong”
“Not only can often a picture tell a thousand words, but in disputes about when things happened Facebook quite often has a time stamp”
Social media updates may land you in trouble with your employers but may also be able to either corroborate or disprove whether you’re guilty of misconduct.
Are they ever really private?
And if not then can they be interpreted and used as an integral part of employee relations?
If so who judges context, syntax, intent or meaning?
More list envy on the social timelines last week. The Huffington Post Social 100 created much the same (though less localised and more amplified) shitstorm as the People Management HR Power Tweeters list a few months ago.
These types of lists will continue to be produced – after all it’s the way we create and consume so much content these days – and they do provide a service. To some they’re indispensable.
I’ve written at length before on why they don’t annoy me the way they do others, and the rights and wrongs of producing them, so without wishing to repeat myself, here are the main points…
Lists are usually prepared for people who know no better. They point the curious and those seeking more information and insight in the right direction, leaving room to investigate.
Lists are shared and critiqued by those who think they know a lot better. These are either included in the list (full of humility) or not included (full of indignation at those included who shouldn’t be there, and those not included who should).
A list will only be a snapshot, a guide to encourage the curious to investigate further. Anybody not included on the list will undoubtedly come across the radar of the curious as they begin to interact with those who are included on the list.
A list will be subjective; it will be in the eyes of the compiler. They will have their own rationale, it is their opinion. Someone has either asked them, or commissioned them, to compile it, or they have done so as part of their own content.
There is a difference between HR/Recruitment practitioners who tweet and people who tweet (and share) content about HR/Recruitment. The former do not necessarily do the latter and the latter are not necessarily practitioners of the former.
Yes, I’m on some of these lists. It’s my job to be on these lists. As content and social media manager for a large digital recruitment brand, that is part of a top 5 global digital recruitment brand, I’d be doing something wrong if I’m not on the radar of people who compile these types of lists around my sector.
I’ve often observed that influence score deniers are usually people whose score doesn’t reflect how influential they think they really are, and so the list deniers are usually those who think their influence and reach should be recognised without them having to do much to bring it to wider attention.
I’m just back from a week’s holiday during which time I’ve listened to a lot of music. With the next HR Carnival being hosted by Matt Stollack, a man who once named a series of blogs after New Order songs, it seems like a good opportunity to take the old #HRMusicShare hashtag into the blogosphere. After all, he’s left the theme open 🙂
I’ve always been an album person. One of my biggest interview gaffes was to tell the interviewer that iPods were for people who didn’t like music. (Turns out she was very keen on her iPod). My rationale was that they mostly seemed to be used for playlists and shuffle songs…an anathema to an album ‘purist’ such as myself 😉 Times change and I have my own iPod now.
The album format has always appealed to me more for solo listening than random songs as I find them a more complete work – the collection may or may not have a theme, there is almost certainly a reason why the songs have been sequenced in a certain way, there is often a range of styles and playing – are just some of the reasons. And unlike an individual track, an album usually has to be listened to many times to make sense…an investment of time that can bring its own rewards.
So here are my favourite 6 from the first half of 2013…in no particular order. The tracks I’ve used for each one aren’t necessarily my favourites from that album but are illustrative of the type of music therein…
Not really an orchestra, but 3 US/NZ chilled, psychedelic troubadours. Lovely guitars, simple themes with fuzzy, melodic twists give this a laid back, blissful feel. There’s space, and there are beats, some good 60s vibes, even a Sly Stone feel on a couple of tracks.
Probably the name on this list that most readers would never have heard of, so I’ll describe them a bit. They are a labour of love for two 25 year old maverick twin brothers from Southend and almost impossible to characterise as their music is often more soundscape than recognisable songs. (Think Talk Talk’s final two albums, some spacier Miles Davies moments, a touch of Steve Reich and Aphex Twin). On stage they comprise bass, keyboards, synthesiser, trumpet, trombone, 2 drummers and either a fado or jazz singer – on record they are supplemented with orchestral strings and woodwind (particularly bassoon). Vocals are part spoken, part mumbled and part sung atonally…somehow combining with the (often dissonant) music to create eerie, evocative melodies.
Their previous album (Hidden) was more accessible, with the songs usually driven along by militaristic drum patterns. This album is more complex to fully appreciate.
Incredibly accomplished and mature fourth album from a rapidly developing folk artist, who is still only 23! The opening 16 minutes, in which the first 4 songs fit seamlessly together as one magical piece, are her best moments to date…with a further 12 songs showing a lyrical depth (there’s a lot of soul baring here) and musical diversity from which it’s easy to believe that she may yet develop in to her generation’s Joni.
An uplifting country/soul/gospel mix from a new, breakthrough artist (although he’s 30 and has already founded a record label and worked with a number of musicians), combining powerful yet understated (at times almost whispered) vocals with a strong emotional and spiritual punch. The album uses over 30 musicians, including a horn section, string section and 10 person choir. I love this warm, powerful and intoxicating mix.
I wasn’t sure about this band at first. Maybe I got influenced by the online commentary about their Ivy League, preppy origins, but I’ll own up to finding their knowing riff pilfering and name checking more than a little contrived both on record and the one time I saw them live. A kind of Strokes gone afrobeat.
Not so on this third album though. It’s mature, intelligent, literate, exuberant, fun pop music that’s a lot more about modern living than having a hip record collection. More varied influences too – with track 3 owing more than a little to Whiter Shade of Pale.
I was a big fan in the early days, with Josh Homme’s effortless cool particularly alluring when I saw them live. Recent years have seen me less enamoured, though something about this album reeled me in. Maybe it was having Dave Grohl back on drumming duties, with a diverse range of collaborators including Alex Turner, Trent Reznor, Jake Shears and Elton John (about time the queens had a real queen he’s alleged to have said). And maybe it was the early reviews alluding to a Bowie influence – with Mojo magazine even re-creating the Hunkydory album cover using Homme’s face instead of Bowie’s. Can’t really see it myself…though I acknowledge that Kalopsia’s stand out chorus is quite a close relative of Bewlay Brothers.
I’m glad I did investigate though. It’s a sexy, glammy, sleazy, funk and grind of a hard rock album with sharp guitars, sharp hooks and a real sense of fun…not to mention a title track ballad that’s crying out to be the next Bond film theme!
So there you have my fave albums of the year so far – why not share yours in the comments…or maybe blog about them…
Today started with a business leader on breakfast TV talking of how they had ‘tidied up’ a subsidiary that had made losses. There was something almost Hitlerian about this – part of this tidying up would have been restructuring and redundancies. That’s people – their expectations and ambitions, their commitments and responsibilities – being cleared away in the tidying up.
Then there were a couple of recruitment commentators in my timeline promoting the fact that more businesses were talking about increasing their use of flexible resources in the next 3 months. That’s people they’re talking about, now a flexible resource. People with dependants and responsibilities, plans and hopes, expectations and ambitions, people with full time commitments but now getting part time, flexible income.
A ray of sunshine appeared when Tim Oldman of Leesman Index talked of workplace design being a people business not a buildings business.
The language of business seems seriously skewed at the moment. It’s depersonalising and dehumanising jobs, driving a race to the bottom for the value and self-worth of those who do the work. And it’s self-defeating as those with precarious incomes live precarious lives, which benefits no-one in the long run.
Tomorrow I’ll be joining a bunch of fine HR folk in London for the 5th ConnectingHR unconference. The topic is Brave HR.
Maybe re-humanising and re-personalising the language of business would be a brave start.
Following my recent blog on the barriers to embedding social media within an organisation, I made the offer that anyone who wanted to share their story, and maybe give a different view, could do so anonymously on this blog.
Here’s a guest post from an HR professional telling a slightly different story to the one that I did…
********************
‘It’s just so superficial’. Said the MD to the HR type. ‘I don’t see how it is relevant to us’.
Yes, you’ve got it; this conversation was about social media. I’m writing this blog anonymously, mainly to avoid being fired. I have a big mortgage you see.
This is the story of my so far futile attempts to convince our C Suite of the benefits of social media to them as leaders, to them as individuals, to our business. So far, I have heard every dumb reason why we don’t need or want social. (Klaxon alert).
It’s only going to interest younger employers.
I haven’t got time for it.
It’s intrusive.
I don’t see it as a main part of our internal communications. Newsletters and roadshows are better for our sort of employees.
Yammer is a security risk.
If we give people access to social media sites then they will time waste.
Social networking is for personal not work. If it is social that is what it means.
I wrote a blog once before and it didn’t work.
If we give people access to twitter then they may tweet inappropriate material about our company. Said by our IT DIRECTOR.
And here is my current personal fave:
It’s irritating.
So I think that is pretty much the complete list, don’t you?
I’m guessing that the readers of Meryvn’s blog won’t need to have the benefits of social media explained to them. If you’re reading blogs and tweets you get it already. But how do we get other people to see it? Right now I am taking some inspiration from Doug Shaw. I am proceeding until apprehended.
We got Yammer up and running by just launching it, although the IT department aren’t speaking to me because we didn’t ask their permission. Everyone now has access to Twitter and LinkedIn, although Facebook is a battle for another day. And yes, I did have to throw my teddy out of my pram to get this. I had to point out the absolute obvious. If you want to tweet something rude about your employer, you can do it on your smartphone. If you want to go on Facebook you can do it from your smartphone. If you want to time waste you can do it on your smartphone. At your desk, in the canteen…even in the toilet if you want to. Deal with it. Or deal with the individual. You think your employees don’t want it? So why did we get 200 of our employees joining Yammer in a matter of days? Perhaps you should go over and take a look at what they are talking about.
We now have a blog too, and a Pinterest page, and a twitter account. No one has actually contributed to the blog yet, and the twitter account only has 63 followers. But we are getting there, we will get there, one new Yammer comment at a time. As Mervyn himself said in a recent blog, it’s evolution not revolution.
So here is the rest of my rant to the C Suite. You don’t have time not to do it. You are missing a massive opportunity to talk directly to the people that work for you. Turning up twice a year with a PowerPoint presentation with the great strategy from on high isn’t internal communications. It is talking at people. Communication implies dialogue. You want to know what your people think? Get on twitter, write a blog, post on Yammer. It will give you a little bit more real time information than that annual survey you get your wallet out for every year. If none of those interest you? What about staying in touch with your industry, making contacts, your personal brand, improving your job prospects?
Or maybe I’ll just do what Perry Timms does when they say they don’t have the time for it. Just wish people well in keeping up to date in their careers without it.
********************
…Is this similar to your experience?? Share in the comments…or offer your own guest post, either named or anonymously…
Here are some comments from Twitter…
..and try this excellent graphic about Alexander Graham Bell from Jane Bozarth, author of Social Media for Trainers, if they still need convincing…
Talent Trends & Insights 