A comment by Jeremy Fischer on yesterday’s post hit on something I’ve been contemplating, but haven’t yet articulated. He inspired me to explore this a bit further (thanks, Jeremy), so I’ll give it a shot.
With each growing and nascent concept (like social media) comes a set of vocabulary we settle into to define it. We collect a few words that we think illustrate the intentions, the ideas, and the undercurrents of the concept itself. For social media, one of those words is “relationships”. (Other ones are community, human, transparent, and authentic, all of which could spawn posts of their own).
Here’s where I think we need to take it a step further.
Your Relationship Isn’t Mine.
What constitutes a relationship to you might not be one to me. And we may have different aims for our relationship to and with one another. Especially in a business context.
You, as a business, may have all the best intentions to forge a relationship with me, meaning that you want to talk with me, interact with me, get to know me better, understand my motivations and my personality and demonstrate that you value me as a customer, and hopefully give me lots of reasons to adore you and express that adoration publicly.
I, however, may just want to get a discount, buy your thing because it suits my needs, and move on.
The intent for a relationship really doesn’t have much long term impact unless we have similar aims for what we’re looking for from each other, or at least a clear understanding of how we differ.
Define It.
If you say you’re using social media to “build relationships”, tell me what you mean by that. Rather, not me, but bake that into your plans and goals so you’re really defining the meat of what you’re after.
Is a relationship to you any or all of the following?
- Understanding my motivations for doing business with your company
- Getting to know my interests on a personal level, and to what depth
- Supporting my ongoing needs and questions, as needed, with a friendly, human touch
- Connecting with me individually, and actually having a one-to-one channel of contact between me and a member of your staff
- Having permission to contact me in some manner or form (or multiple) to promote your stuff
- Building trust with you so that I seek you out when I need information or knowledge aside from your product offering
- Giving me access and information enough so that I feel like I’m qualified (and willing) to recommend you
I’m asking these questions because we’re using the term “relationship” as a catch-all to represent the concept of “something bigger and deeper than merely a purchase or transaction”. But it’s not enough to stop there, because there are all sorts of shades and colors of relationships, and what motivates you to have or want one – especially with a business or a brand – is as different as your personality.
Relationships Aren’t the Only Value Constant
Social media can still be valuable outside of the notion of relationships. [Insert horrified gasp from the purist crowd here.]
Social media is lots of things. It’s a distribution network. It’s a communication framework. It’s sharing of information and intelligence. It can be a transaction conduit if dovetailed with other efforts (ask Dell). The common thread is really and making all of these touchpoints a bit more personal and relevant in the moment, and less scripted and contrived. But that doesn’t always constitute a long term commitment between customer and company, or some kind of emotional bond.
It has the potential for lots of things. But saying that it’s always about “building relationships” I think is making it dangerously generic, and potentially putting customers in the uncomfortable position of always being courted for something more than they might be after.
What Say You?
We’ve shot past the warm-and-fuzzy curve of social media, and it’s time to look at the hard reality behind the motivations and intents behind why people actually use this stuff, and what constitutes “value” for social media in a business sense.
You may think I’m saying that the human element doesn’t matter, but it’s quite the opposite. The human element and touch is everything, but in proportion. (Being human doesn’t always have to move mountains. It can be as simple as being friendly and responsive on a customer service call).
But it’s when we over inflate our sense of importance and intrinsic value as a business to people that we start trying to contrive relationships where perhaps they aren’t the driving factor. Relationships are very real, and their impact on business success is without question. But we’ve got to keep it in proper perspective, and know what we mean when we utter that word.
I’m thinking hard about this this year. To me, it’s one piece of the oh-so-popular measurement and value extraction (i.e. ROI) argument. I’m eager to hear your take.
image by Katie Tegtmeyer
Amber:
Crap. You busted me. I say “building relationships” all of the time. Your post has made me stop and think – one of the reasons you wrote it, I presume.
I totally agree w/ you about the notion that “relationships aren’t universal.” My wife is a classic example. As you know, I often interview/study/bother her about how she consumes email marketing. She could care less about “best practices” and brand relationships. She wants discounts. She wants to read emails from companies she likes … when they offer her stuff she wants/needs … at a discount. If I ask her what type of “relationship” she has with these brands, she’d look at me like I had 3 heads (she does that often enough as it is).
So, how do I use SM to build relationships? I just work my tail off to meet people where they are. For some this is simply acknowledging that I’m out there, that I care, that I’m listening. Other times, it’s meeting people face to face and sucking down a few pints of cold beer (Fat Tire?). Other times, it’s dropping a note in the mail or sending a quick email/tweet.
I’m not telling you anything you don’t already know. Just typing away…
Thanks again for a post that made me think.
DJ Waldow
Director of Community, Blue Sky Factory
@djwaldow
.-= DJ Waldow´s last blog ..Social Media Is Not Necessary =-.
Amber:
Crap. You busted me. I say “building relationships” all of the time. Your post has made me stop and think – one of the reasons you wrote it, I presume.
I totally agree w/ you about the notion that “relationships aren’t universal.” My wife is a classic example. As you know, I often interview/study/bother her about how she consumes email marketing. She could care less about “best practices” and brand relationships. She wants discounts. She wants to read emails from companies she likes … when they offer her stuff she wants/needs … at a discount. If I ask her what type of “relationship” she has with these brands, she’d look at me like I had 3 heads (she does that often enough as it is).
So, how do I use SM to build relationships? I just work my tail off to meet people where they are. For some this is simply acknowledging that I’m out there, that I care, that I’m listening. Other times, it’s meeting people face to face and sucking down a few pints of cold beer (Fat Tire?). Other times, it’s dropping a note in the mail or sending a quick email/tweet.
I’m not telling you anything you don’t already know. Just typing away…
Thanks again for a post that made me think.
DJ Waldow
Director of Community, Blue Sky Factory
@djwaldow
.-= DJ Waldow´s last blog ..Social Media Is Not Necessary =-.
I think that in the case of social media, the term “relationship” can be applied as a verb or a state of being. Just having the channel available to both businesses and consumers constitutes a plane through which they can communicate.
The degree to which that communication is explored is dependent upon all the factors you mentioned.
Creating a consistent social media voice is the indicator to…uh, I guess The World that you are open to being part of the conversation. Where that conversation leads hinges upon the need, the receptor and his/her skills.
Great post. It’s always a blast to flex the noodle. Best, M.
.-= mckra1g´s last blog ..mckra1g: RT @AmberCadabra: Social media is about relationships? Maybe, but relationships aren’t universal. http://bit.ly/5uRZDl #sm =-.
I think that in the case of social media, the term “relationship” can be applied as a verb or a state of being. Just having the channel available to both businesses and consumers constitutes a plane through which they can communicate.
The degree to which that communication is explored is dependent upon all the factors you mentioned.
Creating a consistent social media voice is the indicator to…uh, I guess The World that you are open to being part of the conversation. Where that conversation leads hinges upon the need, the receptor and his/her skills.
Great post. It’s always a blast to flex the noodle. Best, M.
.-= mckra1g´s last blog ..mckra1g: RT @AmberCadabra: Social media is about relationships? Maybe, but relationships aren’t universal. http://bit.ly/5uRZDl #sm =-.
“Developing relationships” has been bandied about so much … oft as an attempt to brand a person or their business. Thanks for putting this in perspective, Amber
“Developing relationships” has been bandied about so much … oft as an attempt to brand a person or their business. Thanks for putting this in perspective, Amber
exactamundo … although i got lost here:
“Social media is lots of things. It’s a distribution network. It’s a communication framework. It’s sharing of information and intelligence. It can be a transaction conduit if dovetailed with other efforts (ask Dell). The common thread is really and making all of these touchpoints a bit more personal and relevant in the moment, and less scripted and contrived. But that doesn’t always constitute a long term commitment between customer and company, or some kind of emotional bond.”
because i think you meant to write “the common thread is reality…”
i really really don’t like companies trying to build relationships with me… i have no interest in hearing from companies… especially after a sale…
6 years on from buying our first ipod, i can’t for the life of me get rid of apple e’mail spam… and it makes me angry… i’ll never buy anything from them ever again…
the only two places i’m more amenable to building relationships are facebook and seesmic…
@loic of @seesmic makes one feel one is part of the company… even though i’m just a sometimes clueless user… i remain loyal as i feel i’m helping him move forward in life… he’s a super positive guy who easily conveys his childlike wonder of the usefulness of technology…
at the other end of spectrum, i feel forced into building a relationship w/ @markzuckerberg & @randizuckerberg … just in order to set and defend privacy boundaries… i have so much invested in relationships on facebook…
if i closed my FB account, most of those folks would not transition back to plain old e’mail… the younger folks in the family are hooked on… and just don’t use e’mail… their not-on-facebook family members cease to exist… never to be spoken to again…
therefor i liken hopping on facebook to the joining of a wagon train headed west in the 1800’s… those family members who stayed back east were unadventurous, thus not perceived to be worth the time of contacting…
exactamundo … although i got lost here:
“Social media is lots of things. It’s a distribution network. It’s a communication framework. It’s sharing of information and intelligence. It can be a transaction conduit if dovetailed with other efforts (ask Dell). The common thread is really and making all of these touchpoints a bit more personal and relevant in the moment, and less scripted and contrived. But that doesn’t always constitute a long term commitment between customer and company, or some kind of emotional bond.”
because i think you meant to write “the common thread is reality…”
i really really don’t like companies trying to build relationships with me… i have no interest in hearing from companies… especially after a sale…
6 years on from buying our first ipod, i can’t for the life of me get rid of apple e’mail spam… and it makes me angry… i’ll never buy anything from them ever again…
the only two places i’m more amenable to building relationships are facebook and seesmic…
@loic of @seesmic makes one feel one is part of the company… even though i’m just a sometimes clueless user… i remain loyal as i feel i’m helping him move forward in life… he’s a super positive guy who easily conveys his childlike wonder of the usefulness of technology…
at the other end of spectrum, i feel forced into building a relationship w/ @markzuckerberg & @randizuckerberg … just in order to set and defend privacy boundaries… i have so much invested in relationships on facebook…
if i closed my FB account, most of those folks would not transition back to plain old e’mail… the younger folks in the family are hooked on… and just don’t use e’mail… their not-on-facebook family members cease to exist… never to be spoken to again…
therefor i liken hopping on facebook to the joining of a wagon train headed west in the 1800’s… those family members who stayed back east were unadventurous, thus not perceived to be worth the time of contacting…
Considering I just wrote the extreme cynic’s version of this exact same sentiment today — http://www.justinkownacki.com/2009/12/17/im-only-tolerating-you-so-youll-talk-about-me/ — I think you and I need to start coordinating our blog posts before we both end up at the same party wearing identical sweaters.
However, I do think you stumble on a key phrase above: “What constitutes a relationship to you might not be one to me.” Let’s not presume that everyone wants to *relate* to everyone else they’re connecting with via social media. For some people, actually *relating* has nothing to do with their use of the tools for fame and profit. They just want to be heard.
And that might not constitute a relationship in your (or my) opinion, but it’s an exchange of awareness, and for some people THAT’S what really matters.
.-= Justin Kownacki´s last blog ..I’m Only Tolerating You So You’ll Talk About Me =-.
Considering I just wrote the extreme cynic’s version of this exact same sentiment today — http://www.justinkownacki.com/2009/12/17/im-only-tolerating-you-so-youll-talk-about-me/ — I think you and I need to start coordinating our blog posts before we both end up at the same party wearing identical sweaters.
However, I do think you stumble on a key phrase above: “What constitutes a relationship to you might not be one to me.” Let’s not presume that everyone wants to *relate* to everyone else they’re connecting with via social media. For some people, actually *relating* has nothing to do with their use of the tools for fame and profit. They just want to be heard.
And that might not constitute a relationship in your (or my) opinion, but it’s an exchange of awareness, and for some people THAT’S what really matters.
.-= Justin Kownacki´s last blog ..I’m Only Tolerating You So You’ll Talk About Me =-.
As a person who manages social media for my company, this is something of a hot topic, and I think touches on a sore point too. Social media is a tough space for commerce, because it seems like a lot of people want to make money on social media, but no one fully embraces others who also want to make money on social media. The result is a sort of hyper-self consciousness when it comes time to interact. For people like me who manage content on social media platforms, it just means exercising a bit of patience and understanding of where others are at – which is no bad thing. Being wary of strangers, particularly ones that wear a badge, is natural enough.
Whether I’m talking about a personal social media presence, or one on behalf of a company, the way I think of social media is much the same as I think of going to a party Talking to someone at a party remains the same whether you’re there with a company badge on or not. And from here you do what you’d normally do in this situation; ask questions, listen, give information based on what you’ve listened to, and get a sense about where the person you’re talking to is at. Maybe they’re open to friendship. Maybe they’re just being friendly, and are looking to politely move onto the next conversation with someone else. What I get from your post is that going into these conversations with the attitude “I will make them love me!” isn’t the most realistic course of action for anyone, least of all from a company brand.
Thanks a lot for the post!
As a person who manages social media for my company, this is something of a hot topic, and I think touches on a sore point too. Social media is a tough space for commerce, because it seems like a lot of people want to make money on social media, but no one fully embraces others who also want to make money on social media. The result is a sort of hyper-self consciousness when it comes time to interact. For people like me who manage content on social media platforms, it just means exercising a bit of patience and understanding of where others are at – which is no bad thing. Being wary of strangers, particularly ones that wear a badge, is natural enough.
Whether I’m talking about a personal social media presence, or one on behalf of a company, the way I think of social media is much the same as I think of going to a party Talking to someone at a party remains the same whether you’re there with a company badge on or not. And from here you do what you’d normally do in this situation; ask questions, listen, give information based on what you’ve listened to, and get a sense about where the person you’re talking to is at. Maybe they’re open to friendship. Maybe they’re just being friendly, and are looking to politely move onto the next conversation with someone else. What I get from your post is that going into these conversations with the attitude “I will make them love me!” isn’t the most realistic course of action for anyone, least of all from a company brand.
Thanks a lot for the post!
Hey Amber –
This conversation on the value of relationships, and whether or not people are genuinely interested in forming a relationship with another person through social media has to be one of my favorite topics (crazy much). Your reasoning here has to be one of the best I’ve seen, but frankly there’s no good answer to this question.
Why? Because, at least in my view, we’ll never know for sure (unless we meet them in person obviously) whether or not the person on the other end of the transom is ACTUALLY interested in forming a relationship. If I’m Joe Q Consumer interacting with a company, and I’m only looking for discounts, it’s very easy for me to feign an interest just to get the free stuff. I think the same can be said for individuals interacting with other individuals as well.
How do we reconcile that beyond just an assumption that this person(s) will eventually be exposed by the community at-large?
Thanks again for your post. Enjoyed it!
.-= Chuck Hemann´s last blog ..Case Studies Shouldn’t Be The Basis Of Your Social Media Program =-.
Hey Amber –
This conversation on the value of relationships, and whether or not people are genuinely interested in forming a relationship with another person through social media has to be one of my favorite topics (crazy much). Your reasoning here has to be one of the best I’ve seen, but frankly there’s no good answer to this question.
Why? Because, at least in my view, we’ll never know for sure (unless we meet them in person obviously) whether or not the person on the other end of the transom is ACTUALLY interested in forming a relationship. If I’m Joe Q Consumer interacting with a company, and I’m only looking for discounts, it’s very easy for me to feign an interest just to get the free stuff. I think the same can be said for individuals interacting with other individuals as well.
How do we reconcile that beyond just an assumption that this person(s) will eventually be exposed by the community at-large?
Thanks again for your post. Enjoyed it!
.-= Chuck Hemann´s last blog ..Case Studies Shouldn’t Be The Basis Of Your Social Media Program =-.
I blogged about this not long ago — the idea that not only do some people not want to have relationships with police (as you said, “I, however, may just want to get a discount, buy your thing because it suits my needs, and move on”), but may in fact view “personal” police as a threat.
I think most people like the idea of seeing what’s going on behind the scenes of a police department (or business). They even like the customer service they get a la @comcastcares. But the moment they catch even a whiff of the human behind the desk? The boundary breaking down freaks them out. And we’re not even talking “real” TMI.
I’m not a huge fan of corporate accounts that are 100% “on message” all the time; I happen to like developing friendly relationships with others, even professionally, which may have a lot to do with staying home and working all the time. :^)
But I also have to remember that most people aren’t me. Good customer service is plenty for lots of people. The word “relationship,” rightly or wrongly, implies more intimacy than I think many are comfortable with, at least from a business or government agency.
.-= Christa M. Miller´s last blog ..Presenting to community groups? Share! =-.
I blogged about this not long ago — the idea that not only do some people not want to have relationships with police (as you said, “I, however, may just want to get a discount, buy your thing because it suits my needs, and move on”), but may in fact view “personal” police as a threat.
I think most people like the idea of seeing what’s going on behind the scenes of a police department (or business). They even like the customer service they get a la @comcastcares. But the moment they catch even a whiff of the human behind the desk? The boundary breaking down freaks them out. And we’re not even talking “real” TMI.
I’m not a huge fan of corporate accounts that are 100% “on message” all the time; I happen to like developing friendly relationships with others, even professionally, which may have a lot to do with staying home and working all the time. :^)
But I also have to remember that most people aren’t me. Good customer service is plenty for lots of people. The word “relationship,” rightly or wrongly, implies more intimacy than I think many are comfortable with, at least from a business or government agency.
.-= Christa M. Miller´s last blog ..Presenting to community groups? Share! =-.
What if we listened to the customer about what they want and personalise our response accordingly – there is no right or wrong answer only what the customer thinks.
.-= Richard Bosworth´s last blog ..What if…you boosted customer retention through the perfect sales process? =-.
What if we listened to the customer about what they want and personalise our response accordingly – there is no right or wrong answer only what the customer thinks.
.-= Richard Bosworth´s last blog ..What if…you boosted customer retention through the perfect sales process? =-.
“Building relationships” (whatever that ends up meaning) is just another way businesses are trying to measure ROI in social media. But there’s nothing less fun than knowing you’re talking to someone who’s trying to measure the cash value of your conversation!
There’s also not many real people who think they have a ‘relationship’ with a ‘brand’ or a ‘company.’ Most people have relationships with other people. So I think businesses should feel free to measure the heck out of the ROI on their ‘business’ profiles where they do more of the selling and where people know they are interacting with A Company (rather than a human), and so have different expectations (which are more transactional- they expect to be goaded into the sales funnel with discounts, promotions, etc). But I think businesses should have additional social profiles where they let their employees act as the real humans they are in social media – transparently on behalf of the company – but interacting as it is appropriate according to the situation. Provide customer service, give a discount, or have a friendly chat etc – whatever seems appropriate. Sure, track it and see what happens, but don’t breathe down their necks about ROI. Real people (i.e. potential customers) don’t want to be measured or have a value placed on their heads, so ironically, to get the best ROI in social media, businesses will have to actually care less about it than they currently do. I’m not saying they should participate aimlessly – certainly have goals etc but more human-centered ones where the value is placed on the quality of interaction rather than the monetary value derived from it. It’s a bit of a Zen koan, but I believe the companies that are least attached to the “ROI” will actually achieve the most.
.-= Lucy Beer´s last blog ..10 Tips For Integrating Social Media Into Your Marketing Mix =-.
“Building relationships” (whatever that ends up meaning) is just another way businesses are trying to measure ROI in social media. But there’s nothing less fun than knowing you’re talking to someone who’s trying to measure the cash value of your conversation!
There’s also not many real people who think they have a ‘relationship’ with a ‘brand’ or a ‘company.’ Most people have relationships with other people. So I think businesses should feel free to measure the heck out of the ROI on their ‘business’ profiles where they do more of the selling and where people know they are interacting with A Company (rather than a human), and so have different expectations (which are more transactional- they expect to be goaded into the sales funnel with discounts, promotions, etc). But I think businesses should have additional social profiles where they let their employees act as the real humans they are in social media – transparently on behalf of the company – but interacting as it is appropriate according to the situation. Provide customer service, give a discount, or have a friendly chat etc – whatever seems appropriate. Sure, track it and see what happens, but don’t breathe down their necks about ROI. Real people (i.e. potential customers) don’t want to be measured or have a value placed on their heads, so ironically, to get the best ROI in social media, businesses will have to actually care less about it than they currently do. I’m not saying they should participate aimlessly – certainly have goals etc but more human-centered ones where the value is placed on the quality of interaction rather than the monetary value derived from it. It’s a bit of a Zen koan, but I believe the companies that are least attached to the “ROI” will actually achieve the most.
.-= Lucy Beer´s last blog ..10 Tips For Integrating Social Media Into Your Marketing Mix =-.
Amber,
First, let me apologize for not commenting on this much, much sooner. As I was the one that (apparently) inspired the deeper thought, I really should have responded by now.
However, when you posted this in Dec. 2009, I was re-evaluating/converting my blog. The blog is still at the same URL, but now it’s a Daddy Blog. I have a 2-yr. old and a flip camera. So I decided to put those, plus my writing ability to good use.
I still write about SM when the mood strikes me, but the blog isn’t devoted solely to that any longer. Needless to say, I just realized they you linked to my blog.
Thank you so much for the link. I always appreciate it. I will still be reading/commenting here everyday. I just wanted to alert you, in case any of your readers clicked on the link to my blog and thought, “what the?”
You’re the best. Take care.
Jeremy
Amber,
First, let me apologize for not commenting on this much, much sooner. As I was the one that (apparently) inspired the deeper thought, I really should have responded by now.
However, when you posted this in Dec. 2009, I was re-evaluating/converting my blog. The blog is still at the same URL, but now it’s a Daddy Blog. I have a 2-yr. old and a flip camera. So I decided to put those, plus my writing ability to good use.
I still write about SM when the mood strikes me, but the blog isn’t devoted solely to that any longer. Needless to say, I just realized they you linked to my blog.
Thank you so much for the link. I always appreciate it. I will still be reading/commenting here everyday. I just wanted to alert you, in case any of your readers clicked on the link to my blog and thought, “what the?”
You’re the best. Take care.
Jeremy