Who Owns Social Media? No-one Does

Totally agree with everything you are saying, but I think Rachel makes an essential point that while everyone needs to be involved and have ownership. Someone or a small team to coordinate the efforts.The other problem is smaller organizations where those departments don't even want to be a part of the SM efforts, none the less own it.

Totally agree with everything you are saying, but I think Rachel makes an essential point that while everyone needs to be involved and have ownership. Someone or a small team to coordinate the efforts.

The other problem is smaller organizations where those departments don't even want to be a part of the SM efforts, none the less own it.

Totally agree with everything you are saying, but I think Rachel makes an essential point that while everyone needs to be involved and have ownership. Someone or a small team to coordinate the efforts.The other problem is smaller organizations where those departments don't even want to be a part of the SM efforts, none the less own it.

RE: @DannyBrown Totally agree with everything you are saying, but I think Rachel makes an essential point that while e… http://disq.us/29yyk
via uberVU

Who Owns Social Media? No-one Does http://tinyurl.com/ykj9le4 (@dannybrown nails it)
via uberVU

Who Owns Social Media? No-one Does by @dannybrown http://ow.ly/wbdv [So true!]
via uberVU

Got it.

Who Owns Social Media? No-one Does http://bit.ly/1B9fkF
via uberVU

Possibly. It will depend on how the company is run. When I worked at Kraft,Sales and Customer Service basically had a dotted line into Marketing, asMarketing was considered the brand owner. Not every company is like thatthough.

Possibly. It will depend on how the company is run. When I worked at Kraft,
Sales and Customer Service basically had a dotted line into Marketing, as
Marketing was considered the brand owner. Not every company is like that
though.

Definitely John, and that's one of the first things to make sure you get right - be a people strategist company first and foremost and then start from there.

Definitely John, and that's one of the first things to make sure you get right - be a people strategist company first and foremost and then start from there.

For sure, Rachel - there definitely needs to be some form of guidance otherwise it could soon fall into the crazy pit! ;-)Having said that, if it's down to the "outward facing reputation of the company", you could point at external sales, or customer service, who're both visible to the incoming consumer. Marketing and PR are strong contenders, but I'm not sure either should be leading the process - an amalgamation of core reputation faces/sectors instead, perhaps?

For sure, Rachel - there definitely needs to be some form of guidance otherwise it could soon fall into the crazy pit! ;-)

Having said that, if it's down to the "outward facing reputation of the company", you could point at external sales, or customer service, who're both visible to the incoming consumer. Marketing and PR are strong contenders, but I'm not sure either should be leading the process - an amalgamation of core reputation faces/sectors instead, perhaps?

I agree completely. As long as we don't confuse "own" with "lead." I do think someone has to LEAD social media. And, being that it concerns the outward facing reputation of the company, I do think the Marketing or PR would be best to lead the process. You?

I agree completely. As long as we don't confuse "own" with "lead." I do think someone has to LEAD social media. And, being that it concerns the outward facing reputation of the company, I do think the Marketing or PR would be best to lead the process. You?

I agree completely. As long as we don't confuse "own" with "lead." I do think someone has to LEAD social media. And, being that it concerns the outward facing reputation of the company, I do think the Marketing or PR would be best to lead the process. You?

Got it.
via uberVU

Possibly. It will depend on how the company is run. When I worked at Kraft,
Sales and Customer Service basically had a dotted line into Marketing, as
Marketing was considered the brand owner. Not every company is like that
though.
via uberVU

Who owns social media? No one, says @dannybrown. But, someone DOES need to lead it. http://bit.ly/1u0eKw
via uberVU

Danny - Human Resources owns a part of social media as well. If create an environment that produces happy, empowered employees (like at Zappos or Netflix), they'll be saying good things about the company on Facebook, Twitter and LinkedIn.

Danny - Human Resources owns a part of social media as well. If create an environment that produces happy, empowered employees (like at Zappos or Netflix), they'll be saying good things about the company on Facebook, Twitter and LinkedIn.

Danny - Human Resources owns a part of social media as well. If create an environment that produces happy, empowered employees (like at Zappos or Netflix), they'll be saying good things about the company on Facebook, Twitter and LinkedIn.

Hey there Joe,Nice analogy between politics and social media - I guess when any platform becomes "mainstream" there are going to be those who feel it's "their baby". Which seems to go against the whole "being social" mantra... ;-)Initializing a social policy is one of the key areas that so many businesses fail on (and, to be fair, a few consultants seem to skip over...). Sure, the platform is ope (and don't try and restrict it), but there still needs to be a proactive uniformed message along with the open one.

Hey there Joe,

Nice analogy between politics and social media - I guess when any platform becomes "mainstream" there are going to be those who feel it's "their baby". Which seems to go against the whole "being social" mantra... ;-)

Initializing a social policy is one of the key areas that so many businesses fail on (and, to be fair, a few consultants seem to skip over...). Sure, the platform is ope (and don't try and restrict it), but there still needs to be a proactive uniformed message along with the open one.

Hey Danny - good post and an interesting discussion.Your post headline caught my attention from a different angle. It seems like there has been an increase in the whining from social media elitists about how the social space is developing. Some very well respected social media practitioners seem to be getting overly worked up about the snake-oil peddlers attracted to the "social media guru" title. To me, that is akin to whining about corruption in politics.More on topic with your post, I believe that governance is key to un-owning the message. Companies should provide employees with fences around the use of social tools. This allows each silo or dept to interact with the messaging as appropriate for their specific discipline. This is the approach that one of my clients is currently taking and it seems to be working. There are tweeks along the way, but to date it is coming together nicely.

Hey Danny - good post and an interesting discussion.Your post headline caught my attention from a different angle. It seems like there has been an increase in the whining from social media elitists about how the social space is developing. Some very well respected social media practitioners seem to be getting overly worked up about the snake-oil peddlers attracted to the "social media guru" title. To me, that is akin to whining about corruption in politics.More on topic with your post, I believe that governance is key to un-owning the message. Companies should provide employees with fences around the use of social tools. This allows each silo or dept to interact with the messaging as appropriate for their specific discipline. This is the approach that one of my clients is currently taking and it seems to be working. There are tweeks along the way, but to date it is coming together nicely.

Hey Danny - good post and an interesting discussion.

Your post headline caught my attention from a different angle. It seems like there has been an increase in the whining from social media elitists about how the social space is developing. Some very well respected social media practitioners seem to be getting overly worked up about the snake-oil peddlers attracted to the "social media guru" title. To me, that is akin to whining about corruption in politics.

More on topic with your post, I believe that governance is key to un-owning the message. Companies should provide employees with fences around the use of social tools. This allows each silo or dept to interact with the messaging as appropriate for their specific discipline. This is the approach that one of my clients is currently taking and it seems to be working. There are tweeks along the way, but to date it is coming together nicely.

Who Owns Social Media? No-one Does http://ff.im/-afaaI
via uberVU

RT @DannyBrown Who Owns Social Media? No-one Does | danny brown http://bit.ly/32CgLJ
via uberVU

I have to agree. Social Media goes over multiple platforms and some should have the part they are best at doing.

I have to agree. Social Media goes over multiple platforms and some should have the part they are best at doing.

I have to agree. Social Media goes over multiple platforms and some should have the part they are best at doing.

Ah, now this is why I love blog comments over a Twitter convo - you can really open up on some great views and let it roll :)Possibly a misnomer, and I agree where you're coming from (though if something is owned, you control how it's presented so maybe a mix of both?). I've often wondered about the single department - or, more specifically, single team. But it needs a key person from each sector - so, customer service, finance, legal, PR, marketing, creative, advertising, HR, etc. Each person would be a senior employee from that sector and know all the ins and outs of how that department works, so can make judgment calls on social media feasibility per project. Then, go back to their respective departments, crack out the strategy, and regroup and move on from there.But is that too simple or in danger of becoming convoluted then?

Ah, now this is why I love blog comments over a Twitter convo - you can really open up on some great views and let it roll :)

Possibly a misnomer, and I agree where you're coming from (though if something is owned, you control how it's presented so maybe a mix of both?).

I've often wondered about the single department - or, more specifically, single team. But it needs a key person from each sector - so, customer service, finance, legal, PR, marketing, creative, advertising, HR, etc. Each person would be a senior employee from that sector and know all the ins and outs of how that department works, so can make judgment calls on social media feasibility per project. Then, go back to their respective departments, crack out the strategy, and regroup and move on from there.

But is that too simple or in danger of becoming convoluted then?

Great question Matt. At Maritz Canada, part of my role in socializing the company is "educating" the VP's, the ELT's and other executives as to the true benefits and metrics of social. Showing where it's needed, where it can be more effective, how it can work with existing business plans, how to "re-sell" to clients, etc.To spread the message more, we need to involve the company story and its employees - we'll only get the sea change if the mindset changes, and to do that it all needs to relate. Real-life examples, how the company can offer the same but on their "terms", achievable goals and time-scales. I believe companies genuinely want to get into this space - we just need to make sure we're holding their hands properly and showing them how the path is tread, not why it needs to be journeyed.

Great question Matt. At Maritz Canada, part of my role in socializing the company is "educating" the VP's, the ELT's and other executives as to the true benefits and metrics of social. Showing where it's needed, where it can be more effective, how it can work with existing business plans, how to "re-sell" to clients, etc.

To spread the message more, we need to involve the company story and its employees - we'll only get the sea change if the mindset changes, and to do that it all needs to relate. Real-life examples, how the company can offer the same but on their "terms", achievable goals and time-scales.

I believe companies genuinely want to get into this space - we just need to make sure we're holding their hands properly and showing them how the path is tread, not why it needs to be journeyed.

Hey there Steve,Ha, I was going to use a similar image for my post - spooky ;-)Agreed - wherever the organization needs to be is who ultimately has "control" of social media. Work alongside a robust social policy and you're pretty much good to go and leading the way - just don't get caught up in politics about who owns cross-culture social media. Instead, make it happen and make it collaborative.I'm not sure if I'd agree on the "PR have the edge on others" thought - I come across plenty PR owners and agencies where that's anything but the case. There are obviously exceptions to the rule, but I often find that much of PR is reactionary as opposed to pro-action. It is changing, mind you, so maybe in six months time I'll be looking at it differently. :) Cheers!

Hey there Steve,

Ha, I was going to use a similar image for my post - spooky ;-)

Agreed - wherever the organization needs to be is who ultimately has "control" of social media. Work alongside a robust social policy and you're pretty much good to go and leading the way - just don't get caught up in politics about who owns cross-culture social media. Instead, make it happen and make it collaborative.

I'm not sure if I'd agree on the "PR have the edge on others" thought - I come across plenty PR owners and agencies where that's anything but the case. There are obviously exceptions to the rule, but I often find that much of PR is reactionary as opposed to pro-action. It is changing, mind you, so maybe in six months time I'll be looking at it differently. :)

Cheers!

RT @tweetmeme Who Owns Social Media? No-one Does | danny brown http://retwt.me/1dd5H
via uberVU

"The way you use the channel (to achieve what business goals) should determine 'ownership'. Social media channels shouldn't float in a company without direction. Someone proactively needs to take responsibility."

I'd say the ultimate goal would be to educate management enough on SM issues to make them capable of taking responsibility -- delegating appropriate tasks and uses of social media channels to appropriate departments throughout an organization.

"The way you use the channel (to achieve what business goals) should determine 'ownership'. Social media channels shouldn't float in a company without direction. Someone proactively needs to take responsibility."I'd say the ultimate goal would be to educate management enough on SM issues to make them capable of taking responsibility -- delegating appropriate tasks and uses of social media channels to appropriate departments throughout an organization.

Ha, great minds indeed Tac ;-)

Spot-on post and if anyone does "own/control" social media for businesses, it's the consumers that define how you act in the space.