Pardon the Interruption

Join the Conversation.
Global Conversation.
Naked Conversations.

One of the central (and most deeply held) themes of what we call Social Media and Social Networking is the notion of a Conversation.  Speaking for myself, I’m not so sure this is the right metaphor – not without a little more tweaking.

To this point, we have a growing movement of marketers and communicators who go back to the roots of The Cluetrain Manifesto, and hanging on the tenet that “markets are conversations.” This is an important step in understanding how commerce can evolve in a new environment of technology and communication. But I don’t think it is yet refined enough.

Off Track

The opponents of this central piece of Cluetrain are said to belong to an old mindset of “Command and Control.” They are accused of wanting to enforce a top-down model where the consumers are meant to just swallow the spoon-fed messages of mass-distribution models. Marketing is about getting “the last word.” This is flawed as well.

I’m likely going to take heat from both sides, but there is a middle ground to define – one that is more palatable and accessible to those who are brand new to pondering these changes.

What marketers and companies need to acquire first is the goodwill necessary to interrupt. With millions of conversations going on simultaneously, it is crazy to think that a company will want to engage in a dialogue with everyone – and just as crazy to believe that consumers want to be bothered all the time. While much attention has been given to the technology what empowers consumers to create their own content, the more important shift has been their empowerment to consume what they want, where they want, and when they want. As marketers and communicators, consumers aren’t listening to us – they are listening for us.

If our clients and customers know where they can go to be heard – and get reasonable feedback – that goes a long way toward building the goodwill we need to interrupt.

On Patrol

As communicators, it’s our job to patrol the global market as best we can, listening out for those snippets of conversation that deserve or require a correction. Maybe it is a complaint that is not grounded in truth. Maybe it is a budding problem that we can correct quickly. Maybe it’s a key piece of information being brought to our attention, or a suggestion that can save us millions. The point is not just to hear these things being said, but being able to politely interrupt.

“Excuse me – I just happened to overhear your complaint about X…” Coming from a complete stranger, it can be jarring or scary or just outright rude. But those companies that have worked their way through the protocols and etiquette of Social Media will know how and when to ring the bell – and how to gracefully exit. You can still have “the last word” in a conversation if you are polite about it.

Changing the Debate

Sadly, these two camps are so thoroughly entrenched in this debate, many companies and organizations have frozen themselves out of participating because they don’t know who or what to believe.  There are some very public faux pas’ and missteps on the record – and for executives tasked with a fiduciary responsibility, that can be daunting.

The debate about Social Media has been locked into defining the word “Conversation,” deriving everything that model entails, and determining if the end result of a Social Media effort is aligned with the corporate goals.  I believe that as we move forward, we need to tweak that metaphor, and look for “interruption without intrusion.”  Ring the bell, knock on the door – and if you do a really good job, they’ll leave the back door open or even give you a key!  It’s all about posture, protocol, and participation.