S.M.A.R.T. Blog

Social Media and Recruiting 101: Overview and Recommendations

There is a lot of confusion and concern over the growing practice of reviewing job candidates’ social media activity during recruitment and selection. Targeted to social recruiting rookies (both individuals and employers), this post provides an overview of how people’s digital activity can and should be considered during the hiring process. Questions and comments, especially from recruiting practitioners, are welcome.

====//====

Earlier this week I wrote a post entitled “Social Screening of Job Candidates: Focusing on the Facts,” which built on the ideas I first shared last fall in a white paper entitled “Social Screening: Candidates – and Employers – Beware.” Both pieces have generated a lot of interest and some really thoughtful comments in the various groups and communities where I shared them. Based on some of the feedback I’ve gotten, I decided to provide additional information that helps people put this practice in perspective within the context of the overall hiring process.

This post is the first cut at a primer of sorts. Targeting individuals and employers who don’t have a sophisticated understanding of how social media activity can be incorporated into recruitment and selection processes, it focuses on providing a high level overview and basic best practice recommendations for both hiring organizations and job candidates.  

I don’t purport to know how all employers and service providers (e.g., third-party recruiters, screening companies, software vendors) are conducting social searches, and I agree with the concerns shared by many about the unethical – and possibly illegal – practices that some engage in. What I can offer, however, are my thoughts on how social media activity can and should be incorporated into the recruitment and selection process. I invite others – especially recruiting and HR professionals – to join me in developing a set of guidelines for Digital Era recruitment processes that enable employers to hire the best possible candidates in the most appropriate ways.

 

How Recruiting Goes Social

Most people are familiar with the recruitment and selection “funnel.” I’ve created a version that illustrates how social media activity can be incorporated into the overall process:

 

In the sections that follow, for each stage in the process, I provide a brief overview as well as information about the types of jobs for which the activity is relevant, who typically engages in the practice, how the process is conducted, and recommendations for employers. In reviewing this information it’s important to remember that although cyberspace adds a new dimension to the recruitment and selection process, the rules are generally the same as before. It's incumbent upon the employer to ensure that the criteria they're using to select candidates are job relevant, non-discriminatory, and legally defensible. For more information on these responsibilities, please refer to the original social screening white paper and my previous post.

 

Social Recruitment

• Overview: Employers can use social networking platforms (e.g., LinkedIn, Twitter) and digital communities (e.g., talent communities) to share information about their organizations as well as career opportunities, specific jobs, etc.  Objectives include enhancing employer branding, offering realistic job and culture previews, sharing job postings, and developing a pipeline of potential candidates. Third-party recruiters can also use these networks to identify candidates for the positions they’re trying to help their clients fill.
• Job types: All. Different platforms may be used for different job types (e.g.,  retail, IT) and to target different groups (e.g., recent college grads, experienced candidates).
• Initiators: Internal HR/recruiting staff, hiring managers, third-party recruiters, and maybe external communicators like marketing.
• Process: Information sharing and interactions are usually handled individually, to reinforce the human element, but some aspects can be automated (e.g., announcing new jobs via Twitter using a tool like HootSuite).
• Recommendations for employers: Resist the urge to casually “check out” people who’ve connected with your organization on public social networks, especially if they’re likely to become candidates. Although managing their digital identities and privacy settings is their responsibility, the risk and responsibility shifts to the employer once representatives start to dig deeper into an individual’s activity. Employer representatives should also resist the urge to connect with candidates individually via personal social networks like Facebook or even Twitter. Professional connections via a network like LinkedIn are generally acceptable, but even those connections should be made with care, especially by internal recruiters.

 

Social Sourcing

• Overview: Employers and third-party recruiters can search the internet and/or social networking platforms (e.g., LinkedIn) using specific key words (e.g., accountant, CPA, joint venture, Brazil) to find individuals who meet pre-defined job criteria, regardless of whether they are currently on the job market.
• Job types: Generally hard-to-fill positions, or those for whom the candidate pool is fairly small.
• Initiators: Internal HR/recruiting staff, hiring managers, and third-party recruiters.
• Process: The searches are often conducted manually, but they can be automated or facilitated by software (e.g., a tool like eGrabber).
• Recommendations for employers: On any site that’s professionally oriented (e.g., a blog by an IT professional about cyber security), the content is likely to be fair game, but on sites that are likely to contain personal content (e.g., Facebook), sourcers should conduct searches only if they’re vital to filling the position and are focused on job relevant information. As with social recruiting generally, sourcers should limit their review of the digital activity they discover and should avoid connecting with candidates on personally-oriented networks.

 

Social Referrals

• Overview: Usually in conjunction with an employee referral program, current staff are encouraged and/or given incentives to share job opportunities with their social networks and refer potential candidates for specific jobs.
• Job types: Can be any.
• Initiators: Any current employee.
• Process: The referrals can be made using individual communication channels (e.g., email) or facilitated by software (e.g., tools like those offered by Jobvite and SelectMinds).
• Recommendations for employers: Make sure employees understand the practice is optional. If sharing is done manually, provide clear guidance regarding preferred channels, timing, presentation, etc. If a referral tool is used, employers should reinforce that using it doesn’t compromise any privacy settings they may have on their personal social networks, or the privacy of their connections.

 

Social Selection

• Overview: The quantity and quality of a candidate’s digital engagement are evaluated based on his/her public activity.
• Job types: Those for which digital engagement is relevant (e.g., marketing, communications, business development, some IT and HR positions).
• Initiators: Internal HR/recruiting staff, hiring managers, and third-party recruiters.
• Process: The searches are usually conducted manually, based on information and links provided by candidates.
• Recommendations for employers: As I discussed in the original white paper and reiterated above, job relevance is the critical factor in determining whether to engage in social selection. The nature of the engagement that is relevant to the position should be clearly defined in advance, and the review should be based on information provided by the candidates. Employers should resist the urge to conduct independent searches. Sound criteria for evaluating the engagement should be developed in advance and consistently applied across all candidates.

 

Social Screening

• Overview: Once the pool has been narrowed and the final candidates identified, a search of their public activity in cyberspace can be conducted to reveal any potential risks they may create for the employer.
• Job types: Can be any.
• Initiators: Internal staff who are not involved in the hiring decision, or a third-party service provider (which invokes the FCRA).
• Process: The searches can be conducted manually or via software algorithms (e.g., the proprietary method employed by Social Intelligence).
• Recommendations for employers: Generally speaking, this process should not be conducted by a hiring manager or someone involved in making the final decision. If an employer is going to do the searches in house, they should designate an independent group to conduct the searches and evaluate the results. The searches should focus ONLY on publicly available information. Employers should NOT ask candidates for their login credentials for their social networking accounts or ask them to log in during an interview and share their activity in person. For a host of reasons, which I articulated in my previous post, it may be better to use an FCRA-compliant third-party screening service and incorporate social screening into the regular background checking process. Even if a third party is not used, employers should provide candidates with advance notice and have them formally agree to the search. They should also consider creating a process for verifying negative results and giving candidates an opportunity to respond before adverse action is taken. 

 

Recommendations for Individuals

My basic recommendations for individuals are laid out in the original social screening white paper and in this post about the Digital Hall of Shame. To these I would add the following:

• Remember that you are always on the job market, even when you’re gainfully employed with no intention of leaving. Especially if you have a unique set of skills that are in high demand, you are always fair game as a passive candidate. And as many people can attest, you can involuntarily become an active candidate at any time.
• Do not provide a prospective employer your login credentials for any of your social networking sites. The only activity they should be concerned with is that which is publicly available. If they wouldn’t expect unfettered access to your home, photo albums, personal correspondence and diary, they don’t need to see your private digital activity.
• Similarly, you should respectfully decline to log in during an interview and share your activity in person. Even if you are willing to share your accounts with them, the people in your networks haven’t agreed to have you share information about them without their knowledge/consent. With your social networking activity, it’s not just your privacy that’s at stake.
• Don’t connect with people from prospective employers/recruiters on your personal social networks. For that matter, you should limit your personal connections with any people you only/primarily know professionally (e.g., bosses, colleagues, clients). It’s best to have a high threshold for allowing a professional connection to become a personal one.

 

Conclusion

I appreciate help from folks in fleshing out the details of how social media activity can and should be used in the recruitment and hiring process. Please let me know of any content I may have missed and/or any additional recommendations you may have. Questions are also welcome. Thanks!

-  Courtney Shelton Hunt, PhD

 

Disclaimer: I am neither an attorney nor a professional recruiter, and I have no connection to any of the companies mentioned in this post.

Social Screening of Job Candidates: Focusing on the Facts

There have been dozens of news stories and blog posts about the Federal Trade Commission's recent decision regarding a company called Social Intelligence and the practice of pre-employment screening of job applicants based on their digital activity. Many of these pieces are misleading, and most of them are misunderstood. This post strives to correct errors of both omission and commission and promotes a fuller understanding of this important Digital Era practice.

====//====

I first wrote about the topic of social screening last fall, in a white paper entitled “Social Screening: Candidates – and Employers – Beware.” The paper was inspired in part by Social Intelligence and a couple similar start-ups I learned about at the HR Technology Conference. If you're not familiar with the practice of social screening, the white paper will help put this post in context and will further enhance your ability to draw informed conclusions about its implications for both candidates and employers. I encourage you to read it first.

DID YOU HEAR...?

Have you heard that a company called Social Intelligence (SI) has received approval from the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) to dig into all your Facebook activity for last seven years to find dirt on you on behalf of a prospective employer? Or that SI is creating a database they can dip into whenever you apply for a job to look for past indiscretions? Or that employers are hiring SI to find reasons to reject candidates for all kinds of legally-indefensible and morally questionable reasons?

Yeah, it’s not true. None of it.

If you do a quick search on “federal trade commission social intelligence,” you’ll find dozens of news stories and blog posts published over the last couple of months, most of which stem from a letter the FTC wrote in May regarding their investigation of SI. Many of these pieces have dramatic headlines that may entice readers but do very little to inform or educate them. In fact, the headlines are often misleading, which – combined with poor and/or incomplete reporting of the facts and their implications – tends to promote fear mongering and rabble rousing rather than thoughtful reflection and discourse.

Here are five pieces that came across my desk in the past month, in the order in which I received them:

• How Embarrassing/Job-Threatening Facebook Photos Are Part Of Your Job Application (Forbes)
• Social Intelligence Corporation Can Keep Your Social Trail for 7 Years (Social Media Today)
• Background Check Companies Scrutinize Your Online Presence (Tech Republic)
• Social Media History Becomes a New Job Hurdle (New York Times)
• Your Employer Knows Everything (The Chronicle of Higher Education)

The accuracy of these pieces varies widely. The NYT article was well researched and is the most factual/least sensationalistic. The Forbes post was initially full of inaccuracies, but I give Kashmir Hill credit for going back and setting the record straight. The Chronicle post is the most egregiously wrong.

Errors and misrepresentations in pieces like these is more than a little bit disturbing, especially given that they’re in widely read and generally respected and trusted media outlets. On the presumption that the publishers have high content curation and/or editorial standards, most readers assume the writers have done their due diligence and take their words at face value. When those words – either through omission or commission – convey false impressions, the result is emotional, knee-jerk reactions, exaggerations, and the spread of misinformation that further fans the flames of hysteria.

Call me old fashioned, but I believe we should focus on facts and have reasoned discussions about important topics that have serious implications for both individuals and organizations. I don’t see much value in being provocative simply for the sake of provocation. And perhaps I’m naïve, but I’d like to think that bloggers and other thought leaders can hold themselves to higher standards and avoid tabloid journalism. If your goal is to initiate a public dialogue, I think you have a responsibility to make sure you lay a truthful and accurate foundation for that dialogue.

But perhaps I digress. Getting back to the topic at hand…

 

FOCUSING ON THE FACTS

Here is a summary of the key facts and their implications with respect to SI and the recent FTC decision. This summary is derived from my own knowledge of pre-employment background screening and the Fair Credit Reporting Act (FCRA), the FTC’s letter explaining their decision, and Social Intelligence’s website. I also exchanged emails with Geoff Andrews, the COO of Social Intelligence, to get clarification on a fact presented in the NYT piece I wasn't sure about. Some of these facts are accurately stated in various articles/posts, but they seem to get lost in the presentation and ensuing discussion. Others, though critical to a complete understanding, have generally been omitted.

As noted above, I've written a white paper entitled “Social Screening: Candidates – and Employers – Beware,” which provides additional information and recommendations for both individuals and organizations. I’ve also written several related blog posts about the relative rights and responsibilities of individuals and employers, which are listed at the end of this post.

 

Understanding the Risks

FACT 1: The practice of social screening is not new, and it’s certainly not limited to companies like Social Intelligence.  There are many studies indicating that employers and third-party recruiters have been “googling” candidates and checking out their digital activity for years.

FACT 2: The risks to individuals based on their digital identities and activities exist regardless of whether employers and companies like SI engage in social screening. Information about us is shared publicly in cyberspace all the time – both by ourselves and others. It is incumbent upon all of us to monitor our digital identities and take appropriate action to manage them (e.g., fixing our privacy settings, using strong passwords, deleting inappropriate content, abiding by the rules of civility).

FACT 3: For most job candidates, social screening is generally a later-stage activity, depending on the recruitment processes used. Because it is resource intensive, it usually occurs when the pool of candidates has been narrowed down significantly, and often just prior to an offer. By that point the candidates have already been screened on traditional criteria (e.g., skills, experience, cultural fit) and employers are focused on identifying factors that can create significant risks for them (e.g., engaging in illegal activity, disclosing confidential information). Minor indiscretions and lapses in judgment are unlikely to impact an offer decision.

 

Understanding the FCRA and the FTC’s Decision

FACT 4: With respect to pre-employment background checks, the FCRA only applies to companies who are hired to conduct these checks on behalf of employers. It does not apply to employers who do their own screening or (as far as I know) third-party recruiters.

FACT 5: There was no FTC “ruling,” and it hasn’t “approved” Social Intelligence or given it “permission” to do certain things. Although Social Intelligence has always declared itself to be in compliance with the FCRA, the FTC decided to launch an investigation to determine whether that was indeed the case. In the letter discussing the conclusion of their investigation, the FTC

• Indicated that SI does meet the definition of a “consumer reporting agency” and is therefore subject to the FCRA;
• Asserted that they found no evidence that SI was noncompliant with the FCRA; and
• Concluded that “no further action is warranted at this time” while reserving “the right to take further action as the public interest may require.”

Nothing in the letter should be construed as an endorsement or approval.

FACT 6: The FTC’s decision only relates to Social Intelligence’s pre-employment screening activities, not its employee monitoring activities (which are likely not subject to the FCRA).

FACT 7: Here are the main compliance elements of the FCRA from a hiring perspective (click here for a fuller explication, or read the statute itself):

• Job candidates must formally agree (i.e., in writing) to a background check in advance.
• If any negative information is found, the third party must undertake steps to ensure its accuracy.
• If an employer intends to take an adverse action against a candidate based on negative information that’s been discovered, it must provide the candidate with a copy of the third-party’s report, along with a statement of his/her FCRA rights, and allow the candidate to respond and/or dispute the decision.
• Any information that is determined to be false after the fact must be deleted from the search records and the report.

What does this mean for candidates?

• They’re given fair warning that a prospective employer is going to conduct a digital search, which gives them plenty of opportunity to conduct their own digital searches for publicly-available information to see what information/activity might be attached to them.
• If the official search produces negative information that they believe is false or misleading, they have the right and the opportunity to address those findings. There’s also a well-defined dispute resolution process they can follow if an employer decides to take an adverse action that they believe to be unfair.

 

Understanding Social Intelligence
(and similar companies that are FCRA compliant)

FACT 8: Social Intelligence’s searches are not indiscriminate, unfocused, and exhaustive; rather, they are specifically focused on criteria defined in advance by an employer, based on job-relevant and legally-defensible factors (click here for details):

• SI only searches for PUBLICLY available information. They do not access information that is private (e.g., password protected and/or not generally available on the internet).
• Information that doesn’t correspond with the pre-defined criteria are removed from the search results, as is information that is legally protected at both the federal (e.g., gender, age, religion) and state (e.g., sexual orientation) levels.
• Although initial sweeps are automated, negative results are carefully screened by human beings and verified to ensure their accuracy before being included in a report.
• In conducting their searches, SI can only go back 7 years, per the FCRA. Any information they find that's older than 7 years is not included in their results.

FACT 9: SI does not create a database of results that can be accessed for future searches. Each social screen is conducted independently, based on a specific employer’s criteria. To comply with the FCRA, SI does keep search results for 7 years, in case of disputes and/or legal action, but that data is not available for any other purpose.

FACT 10: Though it’s easy to vilify companies like SI, the risks for both individuals and employers may be much greater when social screenings are not conducted by an FCRA-regulated third party. When employers conduct background checks on their own, there are likely to be fewer checks and balances and a much greater risk of discrimination using legally-indefensible criteria and inaccurate/unverified information. Background screening companies offer disciplined, systematic processes that insulate employers and produce relevant, verified results. In addition, from the candidate’s perspective, the process is transparent, with built-in accountability and the ability to address negative results.

 

CONCLUSION

Regardless of how some individuals feel about it, the practice of social screening is more likely to increase than decline.  FCRA-compliant companies like SI may not offer perfect solutions, but they are a viable option for managing pre-hire employment risks, and may even provide more legally-defensible approaches that better balance the interests of both candidates and employers than employers conducting these checks on their own.

But we’re still in the early days of the Digital Era, and we’re still determining the proper balance between the rights and responsibilities of employers and individuals. It's incumbent upon all of us to evaluate the ramifications of digital technologies in reasoned and reasonable ways to determine where the lines should be drawn and the best ways to move forward.

Please let me know if I’ve missed or misrepresented something. I also welcome questions and encourage exploration of and reasoned debate on the subject of social screening. Thanks.

-  Courtney Shelton Hunt, PhD

NOTE: this post was updated to reflect the results of my email exchanges with Geoff Andrews, COO of Social Intelligence. It's also been revised to respond to some feedback I got from Chris Poirier about how the lead-in may have been a bit misleading (thanks Chris).

Disclaimer: I am not an attorney, and I have no connection to Social Intelligence.

 

RELATED RESOURCES

Social Screening

• Social Screening: Candidates – and Employers – Beware
• Social Screening: The Expanded Discussion
• Digital Era Employment Practices Under Fire – Again!

Social Media and the National Labor Relations Board

• Is the NLRB Turning up the “Social Media Heat” too High? No… Not Yet
• The NLRB “Facebook Settlement:” Let’s Focus on the Facts
• The NLRB's Recent Action: Separating Fact from Fiction - and Unfounded Fear)

Other resources

• Social Media Policies: Necessary but not Sufficient
• Social Media Data Ownership: Recommendations for Employers
• More Nominees for the Digital Hall of Shame – and How to Avoid Becoming One Yourself
• Social Media and Human Capital Management: Resources for HR and Other Leaders

Technology-Enriched Travel: 10 Take-Aways that Reveal Digital Era Truths

Using a personal case study, this post offers reflections on how life experiences like summer vacations are enriched by digital technologies, and reminds readers – especially technology hold outs – of Digital Era truths that individuals, organizations, and communities must accept and (eventually) embrace.

====//====

Like many active technology users, I take its integration into my life for granted. But I’m often reminded that most people do not embrace it the same way I do. In particular, many people still love to disparage social media, especially social networking sites like Facebook and Twitter. I regularly hear disdainful comments about what vast wastelands they are, full of vapid, narcissitic oversharing about what people had for lunch and other banalities. Like many prejudicial statements, the criticisms contain an element of truth, but that doesn’t mean they accurately reflect reality…

Targeted primarily to technology hold outs, this post highlights the vital role new technologies can – and probably should – play in our lives. Providing a personal case study on a topic virtually everyone can relate to, its focus is two-fold. First, I illustrate how digital technology factored into our summer vacation plans and how integral it was in enriching the adventure before, during and after the trip. Second, I share ten Digital Era truths that reflecting on the overall experience served to reinforce.

 

Tourism in the Digital Era: WWST 2.0

Each year my sister and I take a trip to explore someplace new. This year’s adventure – dubbed the Wild West Sister Trip (or WWST) – focused primarily on South Dakota and Wyoming. It was absolutely stunning, and we were very lucky to have some great weather and priceless experiences. Obviously, what made the trip such a success was our destination – a starkly beautiful, primitive and powerful land that is both awe-inspiring and humbling – but the trip was also greatly enriched by our social networks and our ability to leverage digital technologies before, during, and after the adventure.

This isn’t the first trip I’ve taken that was enhanced by digital technology. Like many people, I’ve been researching destinations and making travel arrangements on line for so long I can barely remember not doing it. I’ve also been sharing trip pictures via Flickr and Facebook for two or three years, and last year I was inspired to write my first blog post – a photo essay about building digital communities – based on a visit to Rome.

I have created an album on the Social Media in Organizations (SMinOrgs) Facebook page that offers a photo essay of sorts and provides examples of the ways in which digital technology enriched the WWST. If you’re not on Facebook, you should be able to access the album through this public link (please let me know if it doesn’t work).

I would love to hear how digital technology has enhanced your travel experiences too.

 

Ten Take-Aways

Reflecting on the overall WWST experience has reminded me of the following Digital Era truths, which extend beyond tourism and are important not just for individuals and organizations, but also the communities in which they’re embedded.

1. Interacting via social media and other digital technologies is not a substitute for “real life” interactions. In the Digital Era, it IS real life.


2. Digital communication should not be viewed as an adjunct to other communication forms; rather, it should be fully integrated into the ways in which we connect with others.  We should rely on ALL forms of media – both traditional and new – to achieve our goals and enhance our experiences.  


3. Time spent in cyberspace is no more a waste than time spent on any other activity that brings people pleasure and enriches their lives. The value of the time spent should be determined based on a person’s own goals and objectives – and not the judgments of others.


4. At a fundamental level, digital technology doesn’t dramatically alter what we do, but it does give us “new tools for doing old things” (the SMinOrgs tagline). The idea isn’t to use the new tools just because they’re shinier and everyone else seems to love them. We should use them because they allow us to accomplish things in better ways by enabling us to access a wider range of (more current) information, minimizing bulk, reducing paper production, etc.


5. Digital technology can increase both efficiency and effectiveness. Obviously we could have planned, executed, and shared this trip via more traditional means, but doing so would have taken much more time and would likely have reduced some of the immediacy and intimacy of the experience. We may also have missed some relatively hidden gems.


6. Its benefits notwithstanding, we shouldn’t become overly reliant on digital technology and lose our ability to rely on more traditional media - sometimes you gotta kick it old school. Flexibility and adaptability may be better markers of a Digital Era sophisticate than someone who voraciously consumes new technologies.


7. The more we all engage with digital technologies, the more we all benefit. Technology isn't a cure-all and there are certainly challenges, but the positives far outweigh the negatives. In addition to pursuing opportunities, we must also address challenges. Costs and risks are inevitable, but they shouldn't be used as an excuse to avoid progress.


8. The over-reliance on the distinction between “digital natives” and “digital immigrants” is counter-productive. Fluency is a state of mind not a factor of chronological age. Anyone can be as digitally sophisticated as they choose to be.


9. The idea that digital technology levels the playing field is not a myth. Individuals and organizations of all sizes and types can benefit from enhancing their digital profiles. The biggest barriers to entry are self imposed.


10. The ability to leverage new technologies both strategically and tactically is important for organizations of all types, not just for-profit or consumer-oriented enterprises. These technologies have powerful implications for economies and communities of all sizes throughout the world. In addition to direct beneficiaries (e.g., commercial enterprises), we have to remember the indirect beneficiaries (e.g., governments, citizens) as well. Leadership is critical, not just from individual organizations, but from Chambers of Commerce and government too. We need to remember the interconnectedness of our communities and look at opportunities from a holistic perspective.

What would you add to this list?

 

Conclusion

This is the first in a series of “What I learned from my summer vacation” posts.  Here are the working titles of the others, which are forthcoming:

• What is Social Media? The Answer may Surprise You
• How the Digital Frontier Is – and Is Not – Like the Wild West
• Social Media Resisters: Puritans or Luddites?

As always, I welcome your comments and questions.

-  Courtney Shelton Hunt, PhD

 

S.M.A.R.T. News: Customer Service 2.0

This SMinOrgs News Digest focuses on Digital Era customer service, particularly via social media. It provides a comprehensive overview of the topic, including the opportunities and challenges new digital technologies present for organizations that need/want to enhance their customer service function.

Given the recent brouhaha over Netflix’s pricing changes (over 77,000 comments on the Facebook announcement and over 12,000 comments on the blog post announcement, not to mention all the (negative) press coverage they’ve received), the timing of this post couldn’t be better. As I was reading Jerry Carducci’s thoughts, as well as the pieces he shared, I was reminded of several of my own related posts:

• Social Media Primer, Part 6: Human Capital Management Challenges
• Social Media Policies: Necessary but not Sufficient
• Social Media Data "Ownership": Recommendations for Employers
• You Can't Say That! ... Can You? Managing Comments in Online Communities

Jerry’s passion for this topic is pretty evident, and it’s led him to create a post that is far more than a News Digest. Its breadth and depth offer a great introduction for organizational leaders and others who are just starting to think about how to upgrade their own customer service function to better reflect Digital Era realities.

– Courtney Hunt

Please feel free to share your thoughts on the items in this News digest directly via the blog, or join the dialogue on LinkedIn. We especially welcome other examples of the impact of social media on customer service. We also appreciate your bringing items on other topics to our attention via LI, Twitter, or FB, or by emailing a link to news@sminorgs.net. Thanks!

Click here to learn more about the SMinOrgs News Digest feature and how you can leverage it to meet your goals and objectives.

If you'd like to receive a notice each time a new post is published, you can subscribe to the SMinOrgs S.M.A.R.T. Blog by clicking here or on the link on the right side of the website.

 

Introduction

The growth of social media continues to change the brand-to-consumer value proposition.  Customer service is about engaging customers and social media is all about conversation and engagement.  Prior to the growth of social media, failure in meeting customer expectations represented relatively low risk.  Social media increases the risk exponentially.  Among the emerging trends is social media’s use as a vehicle to engage customers, build community, strengthen brands and deliver added value….the focus of this News Digest.

Service is an intangible; it can’t be touched or felt prior to consumption.  However, there are perceptions that can be planted in consumers’ minds by others who have experienced it.  And perceptions represent reality in the mind of the beholder, creating an image of the organization, how it operates, and its commitment to customers.

While slogans, processes and mission statements are nice, they do not deliver service; people do. It is people who ultimately represent the “face” of the organization to its customers.  It is vital then to hire people with the proper attitude and skills, and to monitor their service delivery.  It is equally as vital that each understands how their role and performance interact with the bigger picture and what’s expected of them, and that they are empowered with the information, tools, authority and accountability necessary to meet customer needs.     

It is common knowledge that word of mouth is the best source of advertising.  Highly satisfied customers will recommend your product or service to others, but generally only when asked about their experience.  On the other hand, a dissatisfied customer will tell 10 or more people, who in turn will tell 10 or more, and so on – and without solicitation!!  As the “word” is passed on, distortions occur, increasing the drama. In the pre-social media world, it would take numerous complaints, generally over an extended period of time, before real damage was done.   

The volume of information sources available on the internet has made today’s consumers more knowledgeable.  And they are not afraid to share their experiences, good or bad.  A single service event can become a grand success or disaster.  Through social media, people can convey their satisfaction or dissatisfaction to tens of thousands instantaneously.  A poor service event can cause consumers to question, and possibly abandon, the loyalty they’ve built up over time, all in a matter of seconds. 

Organizations have used social media as a means to promote and market their products and services, and some have found it a powerful tool for internal communication and collaboration.  The most progressive organizations are now beginning to realize that marketing, public relations and customer service functions should be more tightly integrated, and social media represents the medium to foster this integration and provide the necessary bridge to the customer’s experience.

Several models of organizations using social media as a customer service tool were reviewed in preparing this post.  The most successful include the following characteristics:

• The goal is to engage consumers and manage their entire experience in real time, using social media as the underlying mechanism to accomplish this goal.
• Front-line representatives are not tied to antiquated processes and procedures without authority for problem resolution. Instead they possess the authority and tools to monitor and engage a conversation through social media and clarify and respond quickly to customer concerns, questions or problems with the first encounter.  And used as a collaborative communication tool, social media provides them instant access to the proper internal and external resources to quickly query, receive an answer and, in turn respond appropriately.
• Social media provides the opportunity for the most successful models to personalize the encounter.  Some include pictures and direct contact information of the responding representatives, preventing them from hiding under the anonymity of the internet.
• Instead of operating in “silos,” marketing, public relations and customer service functions work seamlessly, combining resources to better manage the customer experience and brand in real time.

As consumers I think we would agree that we all lead complex and time-sensitive lives and do not have time for long phone hold times, endless phone triages and loops or trial and error solutions to our service needs. 

Social media provides tremendous opportunity for differentiation and setting an organization apart from competitors through a higher level of service and communicating through media channels that more and more consumers use.  It enables product managers and others to monitor Twitter, Facebook, forums and direct inquiries, as discussions are taking place, to analyze trends and quickly identify and avoid potential disasters.  Combined, tremendous value is added to the brand and in the mind of the customer.

Countless articles are being written on this subject.  Those selected for this digest put the new world of social media as a customer service tool into perspective – from concept to the most innovative practices:

• Mickie Kennedy’s post discusses how social media is changing the face of customer service.
• David Foster’s blog suggests that 85% of consumers want problems resolved, information and/or their opinion solicited through social media.  He provides best practices to integrate customer service with social media marketing initiatives.
• Linda Dessau discusses the pressures businesses are under to get involved with social media and what will be required once you commit. 
• Lauren Fisher describes the benefits a company can gain, by fostering a loyal community around your brand.
• Doris Nhan discusses how Delta Airlines launched its Twitter handle to tap into real-time conversations and provide real-time responses.
Meghan Peters provides an overview of nominees for the 2010 Mashable Awards recognizing the best in social media customer service.  Nominees include Zappos, Pottery Barn and Boingo, all of which reflect a focus on providing exceptional customer service through social media and on building community rather than selling or promoting. 

Categories: applications, best practices, challenges, community, marketing/branding/sales, opportunities, strategy

For additional articles that address related issues, click on terms of interest in the category cloud on our website.

============================================================================= 

Title: How Social Media has Changed Customer Service Forever

Source: e-Releases

Author: Mickie Kennedy

Lead Paragraph:  Think your business can just run things like you used to? You’ve probably already found out the hard way, but social media and other online experiences have changed the face of customer service. The average consumer is much savvier than they were just a few years ago. Plus, even if they aren’t savvy, they have a wealth of information available to them at their fingertips.

Brief Commentary from Jerry Carducci:  Budget cuts and downsizing have caused organizations to scale back in many areas, particularly non-revenue generating areas, such as customer service.  Social media provides a direct link to customers, affords instant feedback on products and services, and is a great way to demonstrate commitment to consumers.  Because of the information and audience social media provides, today’s consumers are more savvy and vocal than ever. Handled properly, brand loyalty and consumer confidence are strengthened.  Improper handling, however, can cause public relations “nightmares” that can take months or years to overcome.

Customer service is a “must” in an organization’s social media marketing and public relations plans.  The critical components are personalized, timely and correct responses.  It is difficult to create the “human” side of an interaction via the internet.  Putting one’s face on the response (a picture) personalizes the message and creates ownership and accountability.  Another critical component involves developing employees in the areas of understanding how they fit into the “big picture.” Missions, values and goals are not merely words – they represent the ideals by which the organization aspires to live.  Everyone needs to understand and live by them as well.  Finally, skills such as problem solving and effective communications round out the equation.  The most well intentioned actions don’t go far if problems are not properly diagnosed and appropriate resolutions are not communicated professionally and in a way the customer understands.

=============================================================================

Title: Customer Service and Social Media

Source: blogHubze

Author: David Foster

Lead Paragraph:  Chances are, business owners are putting up a social media account for their business as a way to market their products and services and gain more brand recognition. Social media, however, is not going to be limited to that. Because of the two-way communication that happens on social media wherein customers could initiate, create and maintain communications with you, it is highly probable that your customers would soon use these channels to contact you.

Brief Commentary from Jerry Carducci:  See comments for “How Social Media has Changed Customer Service Forever” (above).

=============================================================================

Title: Is Anybody Out There? Providing Good Customer Service On Social Media

Source: Content Mastery Guide

Author: Linda Dessau

Lead Paragraph:  Social media is a great way to demonstrate your commitment to customer service. But once you attract a prospective client into your virtual storefront, will they find you behind the counter or are you nowhere to be seen?

Brief Commentary from Jerry Carducci:  Many organizations undertake new initiatives without the proper due diligence to know what they want to accomplish and make the necessary preparations to succeed.  Rather, they jump in and hope the water isn’t too deep and they can swim.  Customer service always has been about engaging rather than merely having a presence.  The difference with social media is that responses are now seen by the masses.  Responding in a timely, professional and meaningful manner is how engagement is achieved. 

============================================================================= 

Title: Social Media as Customer Service

Source: Simply Zesty

Author: Lauren Fisher

Lead Paragraph:  Social media as customer service is an area that is rapidly developing, throwing up as many complications as there are solutions and it often, understandably, leaves many people scratching their heads. Social media has come along and shaken up everything we know about customer service. It has, in effect, turned it completely on its head. The benefits of social media as a customer service channel are more and more apparent and steadily becoming a necessity for businesses rather than a ‘nice to have’. The fact is that businesses will always have to go where their customers are and right now, these customers are turning to social media.

Brief Commentary from Jerry Carducci:  Again, customer service is the most critical function in building and reinforcing brand loyalty, be it through social networks, on the phone or in person.  Other than the fundamentals discussed previously, the rules are company specific.  Knowing how and when to interject into an on-line discussion or situation represents a “moment of truth” from which there is no return.  The responses and comments are immediate and viewable by all in – and potentially outside – the forum.  To deliver to customer expectations, organizations must be receptive to changing their processes to fit their service delivery objectives.  Social media is a 24/7 culture as Fisher puts it, and if 24/7 customer access is the intent, then appropriately skilled resources must be available and committed. 

============================================================================= 

Title: How Delta Connected the Dots between Social Media and Customer Service

Source: SmartBlog on Social Media

Author: Doris Nhan

Lead Paragraph:  The rise of social media and the growing urgency of transparency made it inevitable for Delta Air Lines to create its own customer service Twitter handle, according to Allison Ausband, the vice president of reservation sales and customer care, who spoke at last week’s Realtime NY 11 conference. “We didn’t have an option but to jump in and participate,” Ausband said.

Brief Commentary from Jerry Carducci:   Delta’s Twitter initiative exemplifies all that has been discussed in this edition.  By embracing the notion that social media is not merely for marketing purposes, Delta combined all the elements and created an environment for success by empowering their representatives, giving them the authority and means to address and resolve customer issues and/or concerns and accountability for both on and off-line help.  In doing so Delta effectively built and strengthened its relationship between its brand and customers. 

=============================================================================

Title: 3 Examples of Stellar Social Media Customer Service [MASHABLE AWARDS]

Source: Mashable

Author: Meghan Peters

Lead Paragraph:  With the connectivity social networks provide, companies are engaging their communities with new tools, methods and attitudes. They’re able to gain a greater understanding of their customers while reacting to inquiries and feedback more quickly and efficiently. It’s a win for both sides. Social media customer service has become a combination of troubleshooting, engagement and building community. Like traditional methods of customer service, some companies are better at it than others. Here are a few companies that have nailed their social media customer service.

Brief Commentary from Jerry Carducci: The companies profiled in this article further illustrate the commitment to building meaningful, personalized relationships with customers, connecting marketing and customer service to strengthen their brand and empowering employees with the information, tools and authority to address problems and concerns via social media channels.

What’s Your SMQ (Social Media Quotient)? Updating the Quiz

The Social Media Quotient (SMQ) Quiz has been one of the most popular Social Media in Organizations (SMinOrgs) resources. Now almost two years old, it needs to be updated. This post provides an overview of recent changes and solicits feedback on the revised quiz. All input is welcome!

====//====

 

Almost two years ago, I created a “fast and fun” SMQ Quiz to capture people’s social media sophistication. I referred to the quiz when I started developing the SMinOrgs Social Media Primer, and after receiving a request for more information I decided to share it with others as well.

Click here if you’d like to see the original SMQ Quiz on SlideShare

 Scroll down or click here to access the revised SMQ Quiz on SlideShare

The SMQ Quiz has turned out to be fairly popular. Thousands of people have read about it on the SMinOrgs S.M.A.R.T. Blog and SlideShare, and hundreds of people of have downloaded it for their own use. Nicholas Lamphere of Harvard University references it in his own very popular presentations/workshops (e.g., this one), which has driven other folks to write about it as well.

As I discuss in Part 1a of the Social Media Primer, the SMQ Quiz was never intended to be a scientific measure, but it can still be a valuable tool. Based on my own experiences and feedback I’ve received from others, there are a number of ways in which it can be used:

• As an ice breaker for presentations and training sessions on social media (the original intent).
• To jump-start conversations about social media sites/tools and their value/usage.
• To guide the development of social media presentations/courses, by providing the quiz in advance and using the results to identify preliminary knowledge/engagement.
• As a way of assessing individual sophistication, in conjunction with training and college courses, or in terms of measuring readiness for organizational initiatives.
• As a preliminary means of testing and screening self-proclaimed social media experts (though be careful of legal risks if used as part of the employee hiring process).

Earlier this year I became increasingly aware of how out of date the SMQ Quiz was becoming – almost to the point of being useless. Since people still download it regularly, I thought I should replace the original with a version that not only incorporates newer social media sites and tools, but also corrects some of the recognized weaknesses in the first version (e.g., duplication of specific types of tools) and provides a more comprehensive sampling of diverse tools (as addressed in the update to Part 2 of the Social Media Primer). I also wanted to enhance its ability to provide a more objective assessment of people’s knowledge and usage. In these still-early days of the 2.0 Era, many people often over-estimate their sophistication because they “don’t know what they don’t know.” Given recent discussions about the existence of “social media experts” (which I address in this post), it’s more important than ever to create effective ways to gauge expertise.

 

Updating the SMQ Quiz

My original intent was to update the list of social media sites/tools, but once I got started I realized I could also improve the overall versatility and quality of the quiz without (I hope) making it too complex and/or burdensome.

Scroll down or click here to access the revised SMQ Quiz on SlideShare

Click here if you’d like to see the original SMQ Quiz and compare it to the revised version

My thoughts for deciding what sites/tools to include in the revised version were basically as follows:

• I wanted to stick with sites/tools that meet the definition of social media I provide in Part 1 of the Social Media Primer (updated here), which highlights:
  • The ability for individuals to be content producers, not just consumers
  • The promotion of social interaction via dialogues rather than monologues
  • Easy accessibility and the potential for widespread dissemination of content
• I excluded sites/tools individuals would use primarily/exclusively as part of their membership in groups/organizations (e.g., Chatter, Yammer, SharePoint, Huddle).
• Because they are less well known, I excluded Q&A/expert-based sites like Quora and Focus.
• Due to space constraints and because they are likely to be known only by people who are fairly sophisticated, I didn’t include news/blog aggregator sites like Technorati, Social Media Today, Social Media Examiner, Mashable, and Techcrunch. I’m still on the fence about this decision…
• Although knowing “who’s in the know” is an important aspect of social media sophistication, there was no easy way to include social media thought leaders (e.g., Brian Solis, Jeremiah Owyang, Rachel Happe) given how the quiz is structured. This level of knowledge is probably also limited to more sophisticated users and can easily be assessed through other means.

A few more comments on selected sites/tools:

• I tried to identify those that were the most well-known and/or biggest to represent a specific category (e.g., LinkedIn for professional networking rather than Plaxo; YouTube rather than Vimeo).
• To allow for the fact that people don’t necessarily use the biggest/most popular sites, I modified the usage questions to reflect the use of similar sites/tools (e.g., Google Plus as well as Facebook, Picasa as well as Flickr, Blogger as well as WordPress).
• Although unintentional, the selected sites may still reflect a US bias.

I added a column for row totals and added details about how to interpret both row and column totals. And since the total score is now 100, I came up with new break points for the results, as well as a new category. The scoring categories may be the weakest aspect of the revision, since they weren’t based on any direct data.

 

Requested Feedback

I welcome any and all feedback on the revised SMQ Quiz. Though folks can simply review/comment on it, ideally I’d love for people to actually take the quiz before sharing their thoughts about

• The instructions and scoring details
  • How clear are the quiz and scoring instructions?
  • Do the scoring ranges/labels make sense? Did your score match your sense of your own sophistication? Why or why not? What changes would you suggest?
• The selected sites/tools
  • Do you think there’s a better icon to represent a specific category of site/tool (e.g., StumbleUpon or Reddit rather than Digg?)
  • What strikes you as missing (see thoughts in previous section)?
  • Do any sites/tools seem too arcane/rarely used to include?
  • What sites, if any, have such a strong US bias that they limit the global value of the quiz?
• Validity and application
  • What limitations do you see in terms of validity and reliability? How can the quiz be improved as a (quasi-)scientific measure?
  • What other applications can you see for the quiz?

Please feel free to share this post/the quiz with others and solicit their feedback as well. Since to my knowledge there’s still no commonly-used way to create a preliminary assessment of social media sophistication, this quiz could prove quite valuable, so improving its quality is important. As I noted above, it’s not intended to be a perfectly scientific measure, but that doesn’t mean its validity and reliability shouldn’t be established. If anyone would like to work on research to test and improve the measure, please let me know.

Please provide your feedback in the blog post comments or send them to me privately via smq@sminorgs.net.

Next Steps

Once I’ve given folks enough time to provide feedback, I’ll refine the quiz and instructions, update the answer key , and share the final documents via SlideShare. If you want to be notified when the changes have been made, please join one of the SMinOrgs platforms, add yourself to the mailing list, and/or subscribe to the blog.

Thanks in advance for your help!

- Courtney Shelton Hunt, PhD

 

Social Media Quotient (SMQ) Quiz II

View more documents from Courtney Hunt