Presentation from #Assembled17 on Jan 26th, 2017 and based on the ebook "Tap Into Social Capital to Build Your Brand" that provides guidance on building personal and company "social capital" to build or extend your brand. You can find the ebook at http://bit.ly/TapIntoSocial
1. Capitalizing on
Your Social Capital
Christian Buckley
Founder & CEO of CollabTalk LLC
Office Servers & Services MVP
2. Christian Buckley
Founder & CEO of CollabTalk LLC
Office Servers & Services MVP
cbuck@collabtalk.com
www.buckleyplanet.com
@buckleyplanet
3. CollabTalk.com
CollabTalk provides research and technical marketing services,
focusing primarily on tools and trends in the enterprise collaboration,
social, and business intelligence ecosystem, allowing you to stay on
top of these changes -- and ahead of the game.
Our latest research project:
The State of Hybrid SharePoint
http://hybrid-sp.collabtalk.com/
5. "If your brand walked into a bar,
what would it start talking about?"
Lisa Moretti, Gartner
6. Social Influence ≠ Popularity
Social influence and popularity are very different things
The technical SME is rarely the loudest voice
There are different “tiers” of influence
Patterns of influence can shift and change
8. A common mistake is thinking that your
corporate branding – your logo, tagline, and
chosen color palette – constitutes your brand.
More than any design elements, it is you, your
company culture, and the reputation of your
front-line employees that define your brand
and level of influence.
Your
Logo
9. Most companies do not understand who the influencers
are within their customer communities, and how to
tailor their messages to those influencers.
Even more elusive than a strategy for external
influencers is a plan for internal influencers, and yet
these people are often the eyes and the hands for an
organization.
Just because something is difficult to measure does not
mean that it does not have value.
Whether you have someone dedicated to building out
your corporate brand, like an evangelist, or you take the
time to ensure each customer interaction provides the
right branding message, the secret is to at least try to
measure the outcomes of influence.
10. Influence can gain early attention, but long-term success can
also be gained through consistency of message and activity
https://hbr.org/2013/05/what-would-ashton-do-and-does-it-matter
11. “Because the purpose of business
is to create and keep a customer, the
business enterprise has two—and only
two—basic functions: marketing and
innovation. Marketing and innovation
produce results; all the rest are costs.
Marketing is the distinguishing, unique
function of the business.”
Peter Drucker
15. “We have a deep-seated
desire to quantify the world
around us so that we can
understand it and control it.
But the world isn’t behaving.
We must consider the
possibility that if we can’t
measure something, it might
be the very most important
aspect of the problem.”
It is compellingly seductive to
try to predict the future as
though it were a quantifiable
extrapolation of the past. Doing
otherwise lays us open to
critique and ridicule. People are
far more likely to subscribe to
our view of the future (next
quarter’s sales) if we can
quantify what we are saying.
Hence the need for more data
and information. But this can be
an addictive toxin: More
information merely creates the
demand for more information.”
“The notion that ‘if you can’t
measure it, it doesn’t count’ is
flatly false. You can manage
through fear and intimidation,
role modeling, love, random
eccentricities, or mantras.
None of those require
measurement. We’re so in love
with quantitative ideology that
we’ve quite forgotten what it
was supposed to measure in
the first place.”
16. “Many executives have a love affair with
spreadsheets. I am not one of them. In
fact, I encourage my team to approach
spreadsheets with a healthy dose of
skepticism, and I caution everyone else to
do the same. Spreadsheets are no doubt
very useful tools, but too many executives
view them as the be-all and end-all for
their planning. They manage from the
spreadsheet, viewing it as an oracle,
rather than as the map that it actually is.
Ron Shaich, Panera Bread
18. Minimum Viable Product (MVP) is a
product with just enough features to
gather validated learning about the
product and its continued development.
Modern organizations are (or try to be)
agile, opting for iterative development
and “scrums”, with increasing emphasis
put on change management and
governance best practices
27. Consider & Buy
Companies overemphasize
this phase, allocating more
resources to awareness
through traditional
advertising and encouraging
purchase with “retail”
promotions
Evaluate & Advocate
This phase has increasingly
become relevant. Marketing
investments that help
consumers navigate the
evaluation process and then
spread positive word of
mouth are as important as
building awareness and
driving purchase
Trust
If a consumer’s bond with
a brand is strong enough,
they may repurchase without
cycling through the earlier
decision-journey stages, and
influence others in this same
decision
The Consumer Decision-Journey
36. In an article by Forbes contributor Michael Simmons
(Why Being the Most Connected is a Vanity Metric),
he shares some further insights from Ron Burt:
A key insight from network science is the power of brokering, the act of moving
information from one group to another. Burt explains, “What a broker does is make
a sticky information market more fluid. Great ideas will never move if we wait for
them to be spoken in the same language.”
Network brokers (i.e. – connectors) have three advantages:
• Breadth. They pull their information from diverse clusters.
• Timing. While they may not be the first to hear information, they are first to
introduce information to another cluster.
• Translation. They develop skills in translating one group’s knowledge into
another’s insight.
Combined these three advantages give an individual an overall vision advantage to
see, create, and take advantage of opportunities.
43. Building a Social Capital “Engine”
1. Love what you do
2. Give your time
3. Be honest about what you know and don’t know
4. Create great content
5. Become an advocate for your local community
6. Provide product and platform feedback
7. Keep competition in check
8. Get creative
9. Recognize others
10. Constantly expand your knowledge
45. Building a brand is hard.
You need to be authentic. You need
to be consistent. You need to be have
a message and be passionate about
what you’re doing. And you need to
be there, week after week, month
after month, year after year.
That’s how you build the trust.
Showing up is 95% of it.
Brand has tremendous potential to influence. However, I would argue that most brands go about it the wrong way. Not that there is a clear science behind brand – your level of success in building your personal or company brand depends on many different factors. But what I will share today are some of the themes or ideas that I found to be successful in building out my personal brand, and as a technology evangelist and entrepreneur, the brands of some very successful companies (within the Microsoft partner ecosystem).
I often use the example of the highly-technical subject matter expert (SME) within your organization who keeps to his/herself most of the time, but when a problem needs solving or a question arises, this person is where everyone turns for the answers. Here is someone who may not be popular (someone who is socially active, generally extroverted, and liked by many) but is influential within the organization. Popularity can be easy to spot in comparison to influential. That schoolyard definition may not be all-inclusive, but I think we can all agree that we’ve had personal experiences with those who are popular, and with those who are influencers in one topic or another.
To determine how much you may have influenced my purchase decision, we need to know the effect of your behavior or recommendation over and above my prior probability of purchasing. In practice, that can be extremely hard.
In a Harvard Business Review study, researchers found that traditional models overestimated the power of influence by a factor of seven, and that half of perceived influence was really just individual preference to associate with similar individuals. They also learned that overestimates of influence were particularly extreme early in the product’s life cycle. That’s because early adopters are more likely to be similar to one another than late adopters are.
The debate between influence and popularity is not new. Many believe that one must have earned popularity in order to wield influence. However, influence and popularity can live in isolation from one another. According to participants of the HBR study, 90% believed that influence is indeed different than popularity.
Social capital is yet another tool within the “marketing mix” and “influence” has become one of the key elements within our marketing strategies. Whether building an individual brand, or launching a new product or service, building influence -- and the social capital that powers it -- is essential.
Conventional wisdom says building a strong brand entails creating a cool brand name, advertising that brand to potential buyers, and enforcing brand message consistency in all customer interactions. However, conventional wisdom is wrong. Brand marketing can neither create nor build nor strengthen a brand. Brand is always a reflection of the quality of the product. There are no exceptions to this rule.
Your brand is like a bank account. When you impress your customers, it adds value to the brand. If you have a string of great products, customers will forget the occasional flop. Think about Apple. Few people remember their failures.
Similarly, when you fail your customers, it extracts value from the brand, and eventually you end up overdrawn and even if you change your ways and come out with some great products, it may take years, if ever, for customers to forget the taint.
all from HBR comments on the rise of dashboards in place of management decisions
Great article on LinkedIn by Ron Shaich, founder and chairman of Panera Bread
https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/big-idea-2016-stop-managing-from-spreadsheet-ron-shaich
Ron goes on to say
“They collect the data and project into the future, grasping for concrete answers about what tomorrow holds. They make decisions believing the numbers of the past loaded into the spreadsheet foretell future outcomes, when in reality their trust is completely misplaced.
I understand why they do this: The future is filled with uncertainty and no one likes uncertainty. Uncertainty implies risk, and we all seek ways to minimize risk. The hard numbers of the spreadsheet make the future seem more certain. However, a spreadsheet is only one possibility of the answer, not the answer itself. A spreadsheet is merely a way to organize data. Its numbers generally capture trends of the past, but it is in no way predictive of what’s to come.”
So much about this topic of building social capital needs to be personalized for your role, for your product or service category, and for your industry. Within my role, I talk extensively about the importance of culture in successfully building and extending collaboration platforms within organizations – but the same it true for building social capital: how you tailor your strategy also depends on the culture of your organization or the communities in which you participate.
However, there are some themes or tips that I believe are true regardless of role or industry or cultural state:
There is no single definition for what these means to individuals or to your business. But the market sure does respond when it determines a brand is being authentic – or not being authentic.
Sometime in early 2002, I was working for a very well-funded software startup in Redwood City, California (E2open), and was approached by some folks I had met at one of many community events in the Bay Area about the creation of a non-profit to extend the technology and entrepreneurship experiences so common on the peninsula and south bay over to the east bay. After a couple planning discussions, the East Bay IT Group (eBIG.org) was born. We had a little bit of funding, some part-time technical resources to build a site, and a grand vision of bringing user groups, networking events, and top-tier speakers to the east bay. We were tired of driving into the city or down to San Jose to attend interesting events. We wanted something close by. But the established groups, at the time, had no interest in hosting activities so far from their safety zones. So we did it ourselves.
Months later we had our 501c3 status, a website, and a plan. I went door-to-door in Pleasanton, Livermore, Dublin, San Ramon, Danville, and Walnut Creek on weekends and available afternoons to pass out information, meet local business owners, and build the brand. We faxed, emailed, and called people. We attended regional events, had lunch with bankers and lawyers and venture capitalists. And we reached out to established user groups and sold them on the benefits of folding their brands into a centralized organization.
By 2004, our membership was over 4,000 and I was running a collaboration user group at Hurricane Electric in Fremont, and a software-as-a-service user group at a Hewlett-Packard location in Pleasanton. I was co-hosting networking events almost monthly, special topic events with guest speakers on a regular basis, and was doing my best to connect members with investors, bankers, and technologists from my rapidly expanding professional network. By 2007, we had over 10,000 members, and soon after merged our non-profit with another (the group has since been shut down, but what a run we had!).
No matter what our role, to some degree we work as an individual contributor. We’re creating content in many different formats, lists, tasks, and so forth. And we’re saving all of that content somewhere. It’s on our desktops, its in various applications, it’s increasing in cloud-based systems. And we’re still keeping a lot of our intellectual property on good old fashioned paper.
With all of this going on, we also work with other people. We have a peer with whom we are working on a project, or a joint presentation. We might have a direct report who contributes to our work, or someone outside of our team who regularly reviews and provides input on our work. And we all have a manager who may review, provide input, or leverage our content.
Leveraging the shared knowledge of this small network is fairly simple, regardless of the tools we use – or that they use. Because with a small network, we have a fairly good idea of the value each team member provides – and where to go for help with certain tasks, to find content, and so forth. But what if you need knowledge beyond your simple network?
Increasingly, we are all part of massive social networks – not speaking of any specific website or platform (such as LinkedIn, which this is pulled from). One way to develop our social capital is to help others find and connect with each other.
The idea of a single network, with all nodes connected to all other nodes, is a small-team concept – and simply does not translate to large organizations. And yet that is how we handicap ourselves in enterprise collaboration, assuming that as the network grows, with every node (person, document, artifact) connected to every other node, search will “just work” and social collaboration across this flattened, two-dimensional organizational concept will somehow make people more….well, collaborative.
According to Ron Burt at the University of Chicago Booth School of Business, your network is actually a set of clusters – not one giant network. Burt talks about clustering being one of the basic patterns within network science, and how we all naturally participate in cluster. Some clusters come from our roles and professional circles – communities of practice, like being a business analyst or a project manager, for example. Other clusters form around age, musical tastes, educational backgrounds, sports, and so forth. Information is created and travels around within the cluster, but much of that data never leaves the cluster.
But there are some individuals within each cluster who act as brokers between clusters. These are people who see value in sharing information outside of a cluster, and who bring new ideas into the cluster, or group, from other groups. There’s a great article by Forbes contributor Michael Simmons (Why Being the Most Connected is a Vanity Metric) in which he interviews Ron Burt, and provides some additional insights into how networks work.
So understanding the nature of brokering, and how the power of networks is not so much about the strength of any single network – but in how we connect into and leverage our multiple networks, you begin to understand the importance of social networking.
Working like a network leverages the people we know, the processes and business systems that we participate in, and the technology at our fingertips to give us access to more data, more content, more of the collective capabilities of everyone that is connected within these networks – than we could ever hope to achieve in the old peer-to-peer model of collaboration.
To work like a network means that each of us acts like a broker, adding value to the clusters in which we participate – and then connecting data and people and ideas across clusters, translating each body of knowledge for those other networks.
Working like a network is not an empty platitude or marketing slogan. Working like a network is a collaboration .
Identify the value you want / need out of your activities, make it part of your planning. But keep it balanced.
Mirrors the model for successful social communications