Archive for the ‘Social Innovation’ Category
Social Media Is Not Scary: 5 Tips for Corporate Social Responsibility and Philanthropy Teams
Filed under: Corporate Social Responsibility, Social Innovation | Tags: ACCP, campaign, corporate philanthropy, CSR, Facebook, marketing, social media, Toyota, twitter
Leave a Comment My colleague, social media guru Jason Moriber, and I helped facilitate a recent training session for the Association of Corporate Contribution Professionals. While I am unable to repeat the really juicy tidbits that emerged during the day due to the application of “Vegas Rules,” I can share the highlights of our counsel. You can also click through the “Cows and Chickens” deck we presented (you know you’re curious.)
- Dive in. Many corporate philanthropy and community relations professionals worry they are falling behind on social media, but they shouldn’t let that stop them from trying. Because it is still a relatively new communications channel, social media is actually a great space to experiment.
- Start small. When you work for a large corporation, you tend to orient around BIG. But, by starting out with more targeted efforts on social media, you can develop specific, valuable insights about your audience at a lower cost and lower risk. For example, try a campaign out on a specific geographical audience (e.g., Prius owners in Nevada or dog owners in San Francisco) to test out what works before going national. Some companies use social media campaigns less to market to their audience in that moment and more to learn certain things about their audience that will be helpful for future campaigns, and CSR professionals can do this, too.
- Define success. Here’s a secret: many executives are similarly intimidated by social media, and they don’t have a clear sense of what success looks like. This creates both an opportunity and an obligation for program managers to set expectations and declare metrics before the campaign launches.
- Step away from the press release. There is still a lot of press release love, particularly in highly regulated industries like pharmaceuticals and defense, but they simply aren’t appropriate for this medium. These companies are really struggling with how to adapt to the casual, fast-paced, and conversational nature of social media. There are creative ways to keep the lawyers calm without having them review every word. More on that in a later post. But, if you haven’t yet achieved that equilibrium, you can start by pulling interesting quotes, facts or statistics out of an approved release to share on Facebook or Twitter.
- Make friends with marketing. Effective internal integration and communication unlocks the opportunity to launch flashier campaigns for smaller budget orgs like those found in CSR teams and corporate foundations. Toyota’s 100 Cars for Good campaign is a great example of this kind of collaboration in action.
Note: Post originally appeared at http://waggeneredstrom.com/blog/2012/08/09/social-media-is-not-scary-5-tips-for-corporate-social-responsibility-and-philanthropy-teams/.
Ed Tech’s Reputation Recovery: Reflections on ISTE 2012
Filed under: Education, Social Innovation, Technology | Tags: Bill Gates, broadband, communications strategy, digital divide, education technology, iPad, Matt Richtel, reputation management, Steve Jobs
Leave a Comment Last fall, education technology was under siege in The New York Times. Pulitzer Prize-winning reporter Matt Richtel was in the midst of his series criticizing ed tech for over-promising and under-delivering. Walter Isaacson’s biography of Steve Jobs highlighted the following conversation between Jobs and Bill Gates:
Jobs asked some questions about education and Gates sketched out his vision of what schools in the future would be like, with students watching lectures and video lessons on their own while using the classroom time for discussions and problem solving. They agreed that computers had, so far, made surprisingly little impact on schools—far less than on other realms of society such as media and medicine and law.
Today, questions linger about the ROI associated with education technology, but the tone of the debate in the media seems to be softening. What’s changed and can we expect sentiments toward ed tech to continue to improve?
Now: Cool Gadgets
We love fun gadgets, and some iconic consumer tech products are making their way into the classroom. Too often we forget that teachers, administrators and policy makers (and reporters) are people. They are attracted to sleek, portable, multi-purpose devices the way we all are. And, when students can take their ed tech solution home with them, the whole family buys in.
Mobile was the hot topic at this week’s annual conference of the International Society for Technology in Education (ISTE.) How do you integrate mobile devices; should you allow/encourage students to BYOD (bring your own device); what about students who don’t have Internet access at home? I heard from one major publishing executive that when he meets with superintendents, they often pull out their iPad not to use, but to signal that they are tech savvy. School boards are embracing tablet initiatives to send the message to parents that they are innovative leaders. Tablets are replacing the SMART Board as the device that signals tech savvy. And, unlike SMART Boards, tablets are consumer technology that the general public is familiar with, and with Microsoft, Google and others entering the market, there will be no shortage of devices to choose from.
In the Works: Divorcing the What from the How
Tablets and e-readers are also changing the way the industry thinks about content. Publishers will either have to make their texts and lesson plans accessible across multiple platforms or devices, or they will need to demonstrate that their package deal enterprise solutions are truly superior. Rumor has it that some of the biggest players have quietly negotiated pay-for-performance contracts with districts based on student test scores. Meanwhile, content-agnostic startups were everywhere at ISTE. Any measure that helps identify high v. low quality content and gets it in front of students will be good for the ed tech industry’s reputation.
Coming Soon: Long Overdue Solutions to Underlying Problems
What educators value most is technology that solves their problems. Some of the underlying challenges plaguing ed tech like outdated networks, products that cannot communicate information with each other automatically (interoperability), or the inability for teachers to navigate the curriculum resources that exist to find what they are looking for are being tackled in a serious way.
Assessment 2014–a national move to computer-based testing–could lead to dramatic improvements in broadband support for schools. Several for-profit and non-profit (client) startups are building solutions to provide interoperability. The Learning Registry Management Initiative (LRMI) is working on a tagging system to help teachers find the ingredients they need to teach students as quickly and accurately as they would searching for a recipe they need to make dinner. (At ISTE, a representative from Intel as well as Karen Cator of the US Department of Education told me LRMI was key to revolutionizing technology in the classroom.)
Future Forecast
Tablets will continue to be a popular, disruptive force in the education technology marketplace. Proven results for students will ultimately win the day, and some of the most significant barriers to impact are in the process of being whittled down. Ed tech seems to be headed toward a more positive narrative, but it will require a combination of easy-to-use, enticing, effective products and compelling stories about the students they benefit.
Post originally appeared at http://waggeneredstrom.com/blog/2012/06/29/ed-techs-reputation-recovery-reflections-on-iste-2012/
Cause Marketing v. Corporate Philanthropy
Filed under: Cause Marketing, Corporate Social Responsibility, Social Innovation | Tags: Arctic Home, cause marketing, changing media landscape, corporate philanthropy, corporate social responsibility, CSR, social media
Comments (1) Reflecting back on last week’s Cause Marketing Forum and Social Innovation (SI) Summit – which discussed cause marketing and corporate philanthropy, respectively – can we predict that one of these approaches will eclipse the other? I’ll discuss this question by comparing these tactics on three central business goals: customer engagement, benefits to bottom line, and reputation.
Customer Engagement
Perhaps because it was born of marketers, cause marketing wins this one hands down. As Melanie Healey, Procter & Gamble Group President for North America noted in her CMF keynote, “Consumers want to be involved in solving problems, not just watch companies do it.” For example, leveraging social media channels to not just inform, but engage audiences in a cause was central to every campaign referenced at Cause Marketing Forum. Meanwhile, one of my colleague’s key takeaways from SI Summit is that traditional CSR practitioners are still struggling with how to evolve their use of social media beyond a channel just for news sharing.
Bottom Line Benefits
Cause marketers have an easier time demonstrating these benefits, particularly when the campaign is focused on a particular product.
- Arctic Home results shared at Cause Marketing Forum 2012
However, done right, corporate giving or CSR programs can yield huge benefits to the organization. For example, Microsoft’s* generous employee match supported by an innovative and well-resourced annual giving campaign engenders corporate pride and loyalty. Starbucks’ multi-faceted approach to sustainability helps them attract customers who might otherwise be turned off by their size or corporate environmental impact.
Reputation
This one breaks down by audience – customers and government. Customers are more likely to be aware of–and therefore, impressed by–cause marketing efforts than corporate philanthropy due to the inherent nature of the approach. However, government officials–a top priority audience for most CSR programs–have historically been more impressed by corporate giving and skeptical of activities that directly drive product sales.
Public relations is an essential vehicle for building reputation, and media coverage is increasingly challenging for both camps. Most media outlets have cut philanthropy coverage and redeployed those beat reporters. Just this week, GOOD Magazine announced significant layoffs. Traditional corporate philanthropy is becoming fodder for the blogosphere except when it achieves the magic combination of high dollar value (think $Bs, not $Ms) and demonstrable impact. News outlets will report about cause campaigns in a business context or cover a particular stunt, but their primary concern in the realm of public good is government, so they are most interested in efforts that lead to government action. Public-private partnerships are the purview of the type of CSR programs represented at SI Summit, which would explain, in part, the high media turnout there compared to the lack of traditional news outlet representation at CMF.
The Winner Is…
Rather than one replacing the other, I believe we’ll see more companies blending the two. Changes in the traditional media landscape and the rise of social media are causing corporations to reconsider their tried and true approaches to CSR. Because it is becoming increasingly difficult for companies to generate the kind of earned media interest in their programs that could lead to reputation benefits which translate into increased sales, program marketing investments will need to grow.
For a cost center, big marketing dollars can be hard to come by, so linking to specific products or services via cause marketing is likely to become increasingly attractive for CSR executives. At the same time, aligning to existing corporate philanthropy causes will make it easier for cause marketers to build a coherent narrative around their brand. The internal organizational challenges to this alignment are not insignificant within large companies, but when the right thing to do also yields the most bang for your buck, change becomes more likely.
*client
Also posted at http://waggeneredstrom.com/blog/2012/06/07/cause-marketing-v-corporate-philanthropy/.
