Should you use a volunteer or intern to do your social media?
Lately I have been doing some research about options for communications for Idealware and its become apparent that most organizations are hedging their bets with social media and cautiously dipping toes (sometimes more) into outreach on sites like My Space and Facebook. Everyone seems to agree on the potential of this area but its tricky to devote resources into getting involved in new arenas when resources are stretched tight as it is and desperately needed elsewhere.
One of the recurrent suggestions I keep hearing is to get a youngster (from teen to 30) that has a native understanding of MySpace, Facebook and Twitter to help you out - like an intern or volunteer. Seems like a good idea to me, that keeps the organization up to date, open to new opportunities and avoids a painful (and expensive) learning curve for staff that are already a bit overwhelmed managing "older" technologies like the Web site CMS and CRM software.
So on the one hand, it seems like a great way to explore social media without a big investment in fledgling area that is not yet proven to really be effective. But on the other, something about hearing it over and over made me slightly queasy. Indulging in a little navel gazing I realized that it sounded an awful lot like what organizations were saying and doing about getting on the Web in the first place. "Our board member's son is a whiz with that internet stuff and he can make us a Web site for free!"
Don't get me wrong - a lot of talented and generous folks created Web sites for organizations that otherwise would not have been able to get online. And it was a good thing. But look at how we are now - most organizations would not dream of leaving such an important piece of their communications solely in the hands of an intern or volunteer based on their youth and tech skills.
Of course the land of social media is also a horse of an entirely different color. In general, it's much more modular and less rigid, so it can evolve more gracefully than Web sites did in the past, reducing the risk involved. And organizations seem to consider it a supplemental outreach channel at best - but then weren't Web sites once seen that way too?
So I still think enlisting young supporters is always a good idea and that playing to their strengths and knowledge of the new outreach channels just makes sense. And that this type of communication is much more modular and can evolve more gracefully than Web sites did in the past - so the risk is not that great either.
But all of this just has me wondering if organizations will be saying something like "Oh, our [insert social media tool here] is so bad - it was done by a volunteer kid for us years ago - can you fix it?" at some point in the future. Will social media become so important that current experimental forays will come to haunt their organizations? I really don't know.
What do you think? Will organizations regret not making a serious investment in this part of their communications now or will they be glad that they were smart enough to take advantage of the skills and smarts of low budget resources while getting under way? What started as a little brain tickle has piqued my curiosity and I would love to hear your thoughts and ideas on the subject.
One of the recurrent suggestions I keep hearing is to get a youngster (from teen to 30) that has a native understanding of MySpace, Facebook and Twitter to help you out - like an intern or volunteer. Seems like a good idea to me, that keeps the organization up to date, open to new opportunities and avoids a painful (and expensive) learning curve for staff that are already a bit overwhelmed managing "older" technologies like the Web site CMS and CRM software.
So on the one hand, it seems like a great way to explore social media without a big investment in fledgling area that is not yet proven to really be effective. But on the other, something about hearing it over and over made me slightly queasy. Indulging in a little navel gazing I realized that it sounded an awful lot like what organizations were saying and doing about getting on the Web in the first place. "Our board member's son is a whiz with that internet stuff and he can make us a Web site for free!"
Don't get me wrong - a lot of talented and generous folks created Web sites for organizations that otherwise would not have been able to get online. And it was a good thing. But look at how we are now - most organizations would not dream of leaving such an important piece of their communications solely in the hands of an intern or volunteer based on their youth and tech skills.
Of course the land of social media is also a horse of an entirely different color. In general, it's much more modular and less rigid, so it can evolve more gracefully than Web sites did in the past, reducing the risk involved. And organizations seem to consider it a supplemental outreach channel at best - but then weren't Web sites once seen that way too?
So I still think enlisting young supporters is always a good idea and that playing to their strengths and knowledge of the new outreach channels just makes sense. And that this type of communication is much more modular and can evolve more gracefully than Web sites did in the past - so the risk is not that great either.
But all of this just has me wondering if organizations will be saying something like "Oh, our [insert social media tool here] is so bad - it was done by a volunteer kid for us years ago - can you fix it?" at some point in the future. Will social media become so important that current experimental forays will come to haunt their organizations? I really don't know.
What do you think? Will organizations regret not making a serious investment in this part of their communications now or will they be glad that they were smart enough to take advantage of the skills and smarts of low budget resources while getting under way? What started as a little brain tickle has piqued my curiosity and I would love to hear your thoughts and ideas on the subject.


Comments
I think a distinction needs
I think a distinction needs to be made between who coordinates the tool itself and who provides content/monitors trends. The tool should be developed by staff. It seems like you want volunteers to help with the rest of it.
Leveraging volunteers with
Leveraging volunteers with expertise like this is a great idea. If the organization has someone who really knows the mission and values of the organization, I can't see a problem with having them "run" the social networking of the organization. Most organizations probably don't have this person at hand.
Instead, most organizations could find a young, knowledgeable volunteer to "teach" the staff how they use the tools. They could also work with someone on the staff to set up profiles, events, etc., but then have the staff person maintain it going forward.
No matter who you choose to
No matter who you choose to put in charge of your social media, you should require that they 1) actively use the social media network for six months or more before beginning to use it for the company, 2) believe in the brand and vision and 3) have a clear understanding of what the company wants to communicate, do or who to reach out to in the social network. If that person happens to be younger, it's not necessarily a bad thing, but no one should put someone who is not clear on all three of these points in charge of their messaging online. The more involved the person can be with the day-to-day of the company, the better.
I think that the more you can
I think that the more you can get the real "players" in the organisation to engage on social media the better. Most people would rather read a post/thought/comment from someone who is getting their hands dirty (so to speak) rather than the communications manager and especially rather than an intern or volunteer. The relationships in social media networks need to have substance and I think this works best when the voices are from those staff members who are doing the work that organisation is known for. So a Twitter post from a field worker working for a humanitarian organisation in Africa is so much more engaging than a Twitter post from someone based at the head office in a city. I agree with Peter Campbell that internal education is very important and the comms manager should be working on getting staff to use and understand the tools so they can really use (and hopefully enjoying using them) them as part of their job.
Heather, yes, I found it only
Heather, yes, I found it only minutely believable that Obama was pulling out his Blackberry and sending me messages while McCain was hogging the cameras during the debates. ;-) But I have a reasonable assumption that the content of those messages was vetted by the people whose names they went out under (well before the debate - I can schedule sends on my CRM, too). So my example, I think, stands up. :)
Glad to get this input from
Glad to get this input from everyone and in thinking on this further I do agree that the whole point of the social media thing is to create a more authentic personal connection between participants. And that the mentality of respecting and trusting supporters to contribute independently works best with full scale buy in on all levels. So organizations should really only go there when they are willing to do so heart and soul (with a real investment) so to speak.
I do think though that a young volunteer or intern *can* understand the organization's mission, message and personality well enough and possess the savvy to represent them truthfully and productively. I just don't know how common that is in practice. And of course some understanding of this type of outreach and guidance from a more senior staffer would be smart, even if they don't hands on know how to post a widget on Facebook.
Peter - just have to say I never considered Obama messages as having come from the person they claimed to be for a second. Seriously doubt Barrack, Michelle, Jill or Joe actually wrote any of that. Not that there is much chance they were written by an intern either.
Well said Peter. I beleive
Well said Peter. I beleive that if you're going to do the soical media thing you need to have a plan and have mature (not that age has anything to do with that ;)) person monitor and handle it.
In this economy, I think the
In this economy, I think the opportunity is mutually beneficial. The "Online Community Manager" or similar position is going to be commonplace soon, so younger people would be smart to build their experience and resume in this area now to be well positioned for great jobs when the economy rebounds. I know several orgs that have done this with great success. What we often don't have are clear job descriptions and enough knowledge to interview carefully to find a great person. Free labor isn't always cheap. I'd welcome links to examples of such descriptions or wisdom from experience.
http://www.jewpoint0.org
@darimonline on Twitter
My take on this is somewhat
My take on this is somewhat blunt: if the organization isn't willing to invest in social media, they shouldn't go near it. Instead, they should invest in internal education. There's far less of a need for every nonprofit to have their own Facebook page than there is for every nonprofit executive to have a working understanding of what the internet has become in the last few years. What we need right now are social media consultants in the industry, not social media volunteers.
My point is really that any NPO that's going to trust the VP of Marketing's 20 year old nephew to represent them on Facebook has already blown the first test of transparent communication and web engagement. The CEO needs to be there. If you subscribed to the Obama emails, you didn't get messages from John Podesta's cousin saying "Vote for Obama" - you got messages from Barack, Michelle, Joe, John and the whole operation, telling you directly (or, so it felt like) about what they were doing and how you could help.
Social media is about changing the way that you communicate with your constituents, making it two way, being transparent. Assigning that critical, face-to-face transparency to a third party is not the way to go.
I think this is a great post,
I think this is a great post, and I'm glad to see it being discussed. I currently coordinate trainings and teach a leadership institute for nonprofits in Minnesota (you can find me @nonprofitnicole on Twitter). While we definitely keep hearing the same things here - "Maybe the intern can do that," - I think the biggest loss for organizations is that they don't allow themselves, or their staff, opportunity to grow with social media if it is outsourced to the (often) least powerful person with (often) the least amount of social capital and (often) the least ability to change and influence the organization.
I think that the adoption of new platforms - Web sites, email marketing, blogging, social media - often comes with the opportunity to transform work, organizational culture, and organizational processes. Since social media is all about listening, engaging, and connecting, I would personally love to see nonprofits open to a deeper understanding of social media. And it's awfully hard to be open to social media if it's run by an intern - amazing as interns are.
Perhaps an alternative to the intern is the mid-level person; maybe not the 18-year-old fresh out of college, but someone who is already savvy but maybe not the top dog. In nonprofits, I think dedicated program staff are often able to take this on - after all, they're often in the field, have a good sense of what things are like on the front lines, and can often tell the stories of the organization in a more direct way.
Thanks again for the post! I'm also interested in what others think on this topic.
@nonprofitnicole
I'm no expert, but my
I'm no expert, but my wonderful organization has invested in someone to know their way around these social media tools - me, the online community builder.
I have been able to utilize volunteers to help me promote and build our online community by using facebook, flickr, twitter, etc...while I am focused on making our website as useful and participatory as possible.
It's been a great combination, so far, and volunteers love the work!
www.newtactics.org