Readers of my previous articles know that I am cautious about social media within organizations. That does not mean that I do not see any value in it, but it is good to weigh experiences and findings against each other. I call that waiting to see what happens, being careful not to fall into the traps that people have fallen into before. That too is knowledge management, learning from other people's pioneering. That caution concerns both forms of business social media that are mentioned most in the Frankwatching discussions, namely marketing, and that which largely takes place within the walls of the organization, or ESM.
Taking some objective distance is not easy, because the internet is now dripping with social media on all sides. All sorts of things are being said about it, so it must be something really great. That mass on the internet can work like a spotlight on the retina. After all, we humans like to rely on the judgment of others. So maybe you shouldn't Google the effect of social media from point blank , but it is wiser to search for what (scientific) testing has yielded so far. Such testing certainly gives me reason to be curious, but also to be cautious.
The aforementioned group of marketers sees social media primarily as a means to malta phone number list recruit and retain customers, and to see what those customers think about them. It is part of their image. Gerlach van Velthoven 's research indicates that it is questionable how effective that is. In any case, there must be sufficient support for the message. After all, there are hundreds of other messages, most of which are never noticed, and which were forgotten yesterday. Coincidence also plays a role. The number of articles responding to this group about learning to listen better, instead of just sending, is telling. You can rightly ask yourself whether this is still social media or rather 'advertising with the possibility of response'.