Monday, July 20, 2009
The cat is out of the bag
Friday, July 17, 2009
If he/she doesn't control the digital self, does the CEO really exist?
Just had the opportunity to read a really insightful article on socially networked CEO's (or lack thereof). The article comes out of my local market, but it really has broader implications. Our own locally-based Best Buy CEO Brian Dunn appears to be one of, if not the most, web networked CEO out there.
Social is good way to communicate with employees, customers, and other constituents. But so little adoption by corporate CEO's begs the question, "Why have they dismissed the graph as a communications channel?" Here are my thoughts:
- For large companies there is tremendous accountability, SOX compliance issues, and potential legal exposure.
- CEO's are busy guys. Using Twitter is a recent phenomenon and I think many are waiting to see the hard and soft ROI from investing the time to use such media.
- Large companies have large marketing/communications department. Every statement (historically speaking) is controlled and polished before flying out the door.
- Most large corporate CEO's (IMHO) are entirely oblivious to how the line between authentic and virtual reputation management has blurred.
- I suspect that many of these CEO's are aware of LinkedIn, Facebook, Twitter, et al. My guess is that they see these platforms as a fad. They will only adopt when they see critical mass. I don't think this will happen anytime soon. Heck, most of these CEO's never created a blog, even when that was so terribly fashionable in 2005.
- There are likely unperceived consequences to appearing so approachable by communicating within the social graph. One that I could anticipate is that people feel spite or neglect if they comment to a communique tag and the CEO doesn't respond. [A happy customer/employee tells three people, a pissed off customer/employee tell 30 people.]
Tuesday, July 14, 2009
Seeking Alpha Testers
Wednesday, July 1, 2009
Unsecured Social Indexing
With BusinessCard2.com, we automatically submit our customer's unique domain link to major search engines for indexing. Not to toot our own horn, but we're really good at it. Over 90% of our users climb up into top search results for their name in about two weeks. Someone might say that since we do this automatically that we're not doing a good job of providing options. But, I'd say our customers call this FREE SEO. In the history of our company I can only think of two instances where people emailed us because the explicitly did not want to show up in search any longer.
What I've found and heard through my many discussions with our users/customers is that they want to have control over the way they appear in search engine results, and we're part of a mix of ways to make that happen. Although I find the data from Webroot interesting, I find it a little suspect that they didn't fully identify WHY people don't use a heightened level of privacy setting. My guess is that most don't care, so long as they have control over what presence they have via the particular social network.