Who “Owns” Social Media?
This morning I posed a question on Twitter asking people to suggest which corporate division- marketing, PR, Brand, HR, Customer Services or IT - they thought “owned” social media.
Of the responses, some stood out. Melissa Attree suggested that it cannot be defined to just one of these departments and that it should perhaps sit as a separate unit in possession of the correct skill set (via Walter). Matt said that social media sits in some or all of the aforementioned divisions and pointed me to his own post on the matter inspired by Jim Tobin of Ignite.
In my opinion while internally everyone can take responsibility for it, social media should be “owned” by corporate communications and should operate as a strategic online communications unit (either internally or externally) that functions alongside brand, marketing, public relations and internal comms - the custodians of the brand - specifically because of, as Mandy de Waal points out, social media’s direct and indirect reputation and brand implications.
I say this not because most of my clients, past and present, are in this corporate division but rather because social media, like any other online channel is a communications-focused activity and requires an understanding on not only how to use social media (and online) as part of the communications mix but also how to produce, market and measure it effectively.
This said, different companies operate differently based on a wide variety of factors. So, with this in mind, what do you think? Where should social media sit?
If you enjoyed this post, please consider to leave a comment or subscribe to the feed and get future articles delivered to your feed reader.
Comments
Thanks for including the debate from the adgabber question I asked.
I think that we are trying to fit social media into the existing paradigm and organizational structures but actually its pretty different and requires different skills and dare I say it needs some fundamental changing in thinking.
Maybe this is why the fastest adoption is with the fastest growing companies Rapid Adoption, fresh thinking - looking for competitive difference. The big brands see it as merely a media choice.
Hi Mandy and Walter.
Thanks for your valuable comments, which i I agree with.
Essentially I think that the debate is more about who is responsible internally for emerging communications such as social media, online marketing, et al, and while outsourcing to specialist consultants and agencies is one option, it must still be owned internally. Sadly, as you are aware, the local skill set in the industry doesn’t afford all corporates the opportunity to recruit online “experts”.
One thing is for certain; before decisions such as these are made, corporate South Africa needs to commence the first and probably most important part of the entire process - understanding what social media is and if it can be used effectively as a viable, integrated business strategy
Hi Gino - my view is that social media is just another media form and therefor from a logical (corporate) perspective should be “owned” by those who own the general media (traditional and other media).
However I think the debate is whether corporates understand social media, and if so whether it is worthwhile placing this function in traditional constructs.
My view is that largely corporates don’t know how to deal with social and other emerging media. That said it is best managed by specialists who understand the form and intuitively know how brands should respond in the emerging form.
Without this expert help I think big brands could be a bit like bulls in a china shop. Doing more harm than good.
I also think the drive by social and other emerging media will put great strain on traditional advertising agencies and force them into an ‘adapt or die’ situation. That the relevant agencies of tomorrow will be brand technology agencies or technology/emerging media agencies or experts with brand and marketing specialisations.