Social Media and Your Business

Over the last few days, I’ve seen some good, and some bad, uses of social media by businesses, and I thought that it might be a good idea to explore these concepts.

First of all let’s understand a couple of key points: social media is here, whether or not you like it. And whether or not you like it, if you own or run a business, you’re involved.

And whether or not you choose to become involved can determine how your business will be judged by others. And it’s that judgement (by others) that may, at some point further down the track, determine the ultimate success, or otherwise, of your business ventures.

I recently spoke with the owner of one small business who told me that he’s banned access to Facebook and Twitter for his employees. On the one hand, I understand his motivations: he wants his employees to, while they’re at work, be focused on the tasks and duties that he’s assigned them to perform and complete. Let’s face it: they’re at work to do their jobs, and not goof off chatting to their friends on Facebook all day.

Twitter

But what about the situation where somebody – somebody who’s external to his organisation, but a customer of his – says something that relates to his products or services? What was said may be good, or it may be bad, but by not being proactive in the management of this, he is running a very big risk of letting things get said that might not be accurate or complimentary, and eventually may lead to problems in his business.

Let’s look at a couple of examples that I saw this week …

During the week I had cause to visit a bank and deal with a teller. Yes, I know, that’s becoming an increasing rare event, which is partly why it was notable.

But what was even more notable was the professional attitude and helpfulness of the teller in question. He went well and truly over and above the level of service that I expected, and offered me a little advice and service that I found to be surprising and unique.

It’s sad that this level of service is so rare these days that when you do get it, it stands out so much, but that’s how it is. I think it’s also important to catch people being exceptional …

Upon leaving the bank, I issues a tweet, acknowledging the good service, mentioning the name of the teller, and the bank’s name. A little while later, I noticed that the bank had replied to my tweet, asking for details of which of their branches I was at, so that they could pass on my comments.

I thought that this was a great use of the medium: through the use of social media, the bank’s employee could have his exemplary behaviour acknowledged. This was a great outcome, and I applaud St George Bank for the manner in which this was handled.

At the same time as that good news story was happening, I’d tweeted about the very bad behaviour of Australia Post, who persist in delivering junk mail despite the very clear request of the recipient – me – to not deliver such unwanted, unrequested, rubbish.

Let’s understand the problem here first: my letterbox has a very clear and distinct label on it that says “NO JUNK MAIL”. If you don’t understand that message, then kindly leave the room.

But despite that very clear label, Australia Post persists in disrespecting my wishes, and delivering unsolicited advertising material. Yes, advertising material.

And I know that it’s Australia Post delivering this crap, because the advertisers have told me that (a) they contract with Australia Post to deliver their materials, and that (b) they’ve instructed Australia Post to respect the wishes of their prospect customers and not deliver these materials where such a “No junk mail” instruction exists.

But yet, Australia Post persists in disrespecting those who are paying for this particularly piss-poor service, as well as those to whom they deliver this unwanted crap, in spite of their clearly stated intentions.

So Australia Post responded to my tweet.

Did they ask for details of the problem? No.

Did they apologise? You’re kidding, right?

No, they went off on a tangent, totally defensive, and explained to me at great length that they can and will deliver certain articles of unsolicited material, in spite of a recipient’s stated desires.

Does the person who posted those tweets truly think that they’re actually helping the matter by making excuses?

Does this person truly believe that I care?

No, I do not.

The problem is that I’m getting crap delivered into my letter box. Crap that I have no desire to receive.

And no, I am not interested iun bullshit excuses, thank you very much.

The correct approach is not to make excuses. It’s not correct to try to justify your behaviour; that only exacerbates the problem.

Rather, ask about the problem, take control and ascertain the facts. Instead, they just made excuses, and made me even more angry. I have no interest in excuses. Find out the facts, and then fix the bloody problem!

To the person from AusPost who issued those tweets, here’s a message: people don’t care about how you think you can justify this shitty behaviour on your part. That you may be able to deliver some crap is wrong in any case, and should not be used to try to justify your already untenable position.

But more significantly, and to the point: you were arguing with me on Twitter. You were not paying attention to what I was saying, which was adding even more disrespect towards me on your part than had already occurred. Your job, on Twitter, is not to argue with me, but to listen, and then to try to manage the process.

You failed.

Miserably so.

You gave a wonderful example of how to mishandle social media interaction with your clients, and as such, you would have better off to just have shut up. That would have caused far less damage.