This began as a comment on Scott Hepburn’s post Social Media Graduates to the “How?”, but given how quickly my comment was growing, the fact that I was shifting the topic a bit and my inconsistent posting, I decided to flesh out my thoughts in a post of my own.
So here we go.
One key indicator of a shift from the “Why” to the “How” within professional social media circles is the stratification of its practitioners. As Scott, there are the charlatans and the under-informed claiming expertise, and there are the experienced teaching where they can and leading the way, but there are a few more slices in between that I’ve noticed of late:
- Those who can explain the strategic and tactical methods for small efforts, those who can explain them for large efforts and those who understand both and know how to manage the differences between them.
- Those who are married to one or a small set of key tools compared to those who stay on top of the industry as a whole. Niche expertise versus generalization.
- Those who embody community and social interactions on and off line versus those who treat it as a job, turning off when they go home.
- Those who are passionate about the opportunities social media provides, but don’t understand how to balance it against business goals.
And of course there are the shades of gray between all of these levels.
Let’s leave the conversations around “why [ insert latest tool here ] will change everything” to those discovering the possibilities social media affords. Tools are tools. We need to focus on the strategy behind the use of those tools when integrated with business needs and it is time for the experts and “social Media Mentors” as Scott phrases it, to demonstrate that the dominating force going forward is the balance between “why we use social media tools and strategies”, “how we employ those strategies” and “when we use a particular strategy”.
Alex,
You are hitting on one of my pet peeves about social media and its practitioners. Social media will become truly valuable when people stop talking about it and just do it. Move away from early adopters to regular people use it as a tool in their every day lives because it is useful not because it is the latest greatest thing out there.
I agree David. While there’s always a certain level of introduction required for those new to the concepts or tools, we’re spending a very long time in the “why” phases that Scott pointed out when it is time for us to move forward.
I completely agree with both Alex and David. Those of us who actually use these tools to interact with customers and other relevant stakeholders don’t spend much time talking about why we are doing this. We’re too busy actually doing it.
I particularly like the third bullet. To be effective with social media, you can’t just log into Twitter at 9 in the morning and log back out at 5 in the afternoon. It requires an always-on mentality and the understanding that the relationships you form online are related to the ones you form offline.
Nicely put Jenn. What I’ve found personally is that the most effective, and frankly the most interesting social media pros are the ones who are almost always “on”. Two-way communication a part of their personality. Please note the two-way aspect, those who blather about their lives without providing insight or participating in the larger community are worse than worthless – they are noise drowning out the conversation.
Love the direction you’re taking with this, Alex. The emergence of strata within each social media class — practitioners, observers, teachers, users, consumers and hucksters — is proof that the social media society is coming into maturity.
Identity is still tricky, even for the pros. Is Aaron Strout, for example, a strategist or a teacher? Is Bryan Person a thinker who shapes the industry, or a creator who gives the industry life? Each answer is valid, each is commendable, and each has a little bit of truth.
I love Jenn’s point that the real “doers” of social media don’t have time to pontificate. It would be fun to play devil’s advocate (maybe another day), but she’s right: If you spend all day blogging about social media and Tweeting about social media, you must not have enough clients.
Which means I better go knock on some doors ;)
Thanks for jumping in and extending the conversation into a great direction after I hijacked your thread Scott. :)
You bring up a great point – identity is a key part of these discussions and my gut reaction is that the leaders – those worth listening to – are guaranteed to fall into more than one world. We need the Strategist-Teacher, Thinker-Creators and Strategist-Creators etc.
The most effective teachers and thinkers are those steeped in real world practice.
One of the most interesting aspects for me is the multitude of backgrounds of those who are laying this groundwork. There are professionals who come from marketing heavy backgrounds, academics who have studied social patterns, designers and developers building the tools, community organizers and so many more. The tools of social media are used to strengthen and improve social media. We’re communicating our unique viewpoints in order to learn from one another and improve our piece of the universe.
<tangential thought>
Identity is further complicated by the fact that there are two definitions – self-identity and the subtle anointing of the crowd. I’m curious if Aaron and Bryan would identify themselves in the same manner as you did or I would. How does that affect others perception now that they have read these comments, though they may not know of either of them. I have to think that one through a bit.
</tangential thought>