Blog-cation

I was going to try to be crafty and set up a bunch of posts to auto-post while I'm on vacation for a week...then I realized I need to get over myself because blogging is my HOBBY not my JOB and I don't need to stress about it that much. So instead, I'm just going to say I'm taking a blog-cation and I'll see you when I get back.

In case you're thinking of robbing my house while I'm gone (Patrick's mortal fear about me blogging that we're out of town), the neighbors are cat-sitting so you might want to think twice before breaking in. They have three tiny girls, all of whom talk A LOT and at the same time, and you will undoubtedly wish you had stayed home if you choose to try to break in and find yourself faced with these girls. I'm not just saying that, either. Seriously. (Actually, these girls are adorable but I swear they do talk a LOT. They are training for getting their own cat so our litter boxes will be cleaner than they ever have been when we get back.)

If you just miss me so much you can't take it, feel free to go hang out on my other blog...the one I write about stuff other than social media in. But not if the "F" word offends you. Just kidding. Ok, actually, not kidding.

If that's not how you roll and you're all about associations and/or social media, you would do well to check out these blogs:

• Reid All About It


• Conor McNulty's still-to-be named blog. While you're there vote on the name! I like Named This Blog #Fail.


• Maddie Grant's Socialfishing She has an amazing post up now about aligning social media strategy with your association focus.

Ok, I could come up with tons of others but need to get packing so I'll leave it at those--please feel free to chime in in the comment section with other suggestions.

Can you tell I'm not good at vacations?

Sometimes It's Ok To Do It Wrong

There are plenty of things you have to do in life. Pay your bills. Take care of your kids (if you have kids). Drive at the correct speed limit. Show up to work on time. You know, the basics.

I have a lot of "have tos" in my life because I'm a parent, a wife and a homeowner. Blogging, for me, is one of the few things in life that I do because I want to, not because I have to. If I never wrote another blog post in this lifetime, very few people would notice and it would be of very little consequence.

People blog for many different reasons--money, recognition, creative outlet. I've blogged several times about why I blog...in short, not for money or recognition, but for the creative outlet. Sometimes I start stressing because I know there are things I should/could be doing to increase my readership: use more photos, re-design my blog template to make it more visually appealing, etc. etc.

I read two great posts lately that serve as good reminders to not stress about doing it "right" when it comes to blogging:

• Danny Brown about the PR Blackout



• Penelope Trunk with the most TMI/off topic blog post I've ever read.

Granted, most of us couldn't parlay recollections about being molested as a child into a relatively on-topic post on a career advice blog--but the point is, that's the beauty of blogging. You can make up your own rules.

Still need more inspiration? How about Dooce being number 26 on Forbes' list of the 30 most influential women in the media world? Not bad for someone who once got fired for blogging at work.

Forrester Says Advertising Is Changing Forever. What Are Associations Doing to Keep Up?

I was in a meeting this morning about how the reason non-dues revenue is down is because members are posting jobs on Linkedin and Facebook. The answer, naturally, is forbidding "free" advertising on Facebook and Linkedin. If they can't post it for free then they will pay us to post it. Right?

Don't we all wish.

The reality is that the world as associations have always known it has changed and is not going to change back. Job boards and print ads in publications used to be a slam-dunk; now they're not. End of story. Instead of spending time spinning wheels talking about what we can forbid people from doing for free, we need to be spending time thinking of the next generation of things companies will pay for.

Forrester Research just published their five-year interactive marketing forecast and their findings echo my sentiments:

"...media is in trouble, or at least in the middle of a transformation."

Highlights of the report include:

• Digital marketing, which will be about 12% of overall advertising spend in 2009, is likely to grow to about 21% in five years


• Social "media," which will account for $716 million this year between social network campaigns and agency fees, will generate $3 billion in five years.


• Of all the parts of digital marketing, social network marketing one is poised for the most explosive growth.

The upshot? In Josh Bernoff's own words:

"If you're in advertising, you'd better learn to speak digital, because that's the way the world is going."

And if that's the way the world is going, it's also the way your corporate partners, recruiters and sponsors are going. What is your association doing to prepare?

State of the Association Social Media Job-o-sphere

There was a great post on cnbc.com the other day about social media jobs--how they are cropping up, but slowly. The article reveals that Forrester Research recently estimated social media marketing budgets will increase by more than 30 percent each year for the next five years, putting spending on pace to reach $3 billion by 2014. Right now, apparently most money is being spent on "administrative and consulting costs" rather than on new hires, and that existing employees are being asked to add social media to their regular job duties.

However, it seems that a handful of associations are beginning to show signs of biting the bullet, despite the recession, and seeking to hire dedicated social media staffers. In just the past week I've seen three new association social media job openings: the Packaging Machinery Manufacturers Institute is hiring a Social Media Specialist; the The American Institute of Certified Public Accountants is seeking someone for that same role; and the American Diabetes Association is hiring an Associate Director--Communications & Social Media.

And those are just the new jobs devoted specifically to social media; as of tonight there are a total of 16 jobs on associationjobs.org that include some form of social media either in the job duties or the qualificiations for the position. These are positions ranging from Grassroots Coordinator to Vice President, Industry Relations to Web Technology and Content Coordinator.

Additionally, also during this past week, I was sent links to not one, not two, but THREE separate surveys seeking information about how various associations are handling social media staffing. Which means that there are at least three more who are in the process of seriously examining how to staff their social media activities.

Bottom line? If you're looking for a job in social media, associations are definitely worth keeping an eye on. And even if you're not looking for a social media job, you'd be smart to realize how many different types of jobs are being touched by social media and making sure you aren't making yourself obsolete by keeping your head in the sand. Is it BS that some companies are now making number of followers on Twitter a qualifier for certain positions? Of course. But the fact remains that they are doing it anyway, so if you're not already on Twitter, you may want to re-think that decision.

Next Social Media Tool: Mind-Melding

"Hearing the blogger’s voice is no longer enough. We now want to read, see, and understand the blogger."

--From a blog post on Scribnia, Blogging is About the Blogger.


What is it with us and this new breed of celebrity--the social media guru? We expect 24/7 real-time interaction with them. We can't get enough just from reading their blog posts and tweets--we also want to swim in their lifestreams. What's next: mind-melding, where their thoughts can stream directly into our brains?

The whole thing is starting to remind me of some kind of sci-fi plot where people want to become one with internet celebrities. It's like we are the nano-particles that make up their personae. If you go by some recent job descriptions, actually, they need us to be who they are: after all, everyone knows anyone with fewer than 500 Twitter followers isn't worth the blog page s/he's typing on.

Why are we so fascinated? What do we get out of it? Sure, their wisdom, their knowledge...but also the shrapnel of their fame? The feeling that it's our turn next?

Social Ads Eye Tracking Study

In honor of Embrace Your Inner Geek Day, I'm doing an extra-nerdy post--so enjoy!

I find it ironic that the results of this study claiming ads on social networks actually do well in eye tracking studies are published on a page that is such a usability nightmare...and I also am skeptical about the study's findings.

"We found that not only do users spend time viewing paid ads on social networking sites, they often look at these ads before actual search results. And that's not all. Oneupweb's social media eye tracking study revealed some other surprising statistics about searches conducted on social media sites, including: A whopping 65% of participants engaged with sponsored ads within the first 10 seconds of their search."

I'm sorry but I have a hard time believing either of those things for three reasons:

1) Jakob Nielsen--internet usability deity--would almost certainly disagree with the idea that users look at ads before actual search results because users almost never look at anything that looks like an advertisement, whether or not it's actually an ad. I find it hard to believe that the horrible ads on Facebook have managed to trump banner blindness.

2) I've read too many other things that point out that social ads are a failure to believe that it's not true.

3) Look at the study--it included only 25 participants and the task the participants were given was basically to search for ads! It wasn't to just look at pages and track what their eyes were or weren't drawn to--it was to look up a brand and check out the ads. OBVIOUSLY they looked at the ads. But even looking at the screenshots in the study proves Nielsen is right--notice how few--if any--hot spots are anywhere near any of the images and/or ad blocks.

Ok, I'm climbing down off my nerd platform now...but in parting I offer you the gift of nerd knowledge that is Jakob Nielsen's blog, Alertbox.

Eff it Off Friday Post

You thought I forgot, didn't you?

Ok, I did...but it's still Friday so here some links for you in lieu of a real post.

• More data about how Facebook is officially becoming an oldsters club--over a third of users are 35+ and the 55+ age group is the fastest-growing group.


• Great, thorough notes from yesterday's awesome Buzz2009 Association Social Media conferfence by Lynn Morton.


• Great example of engagmement on an association Facebook page--ASHA's. This evening I posted a link to a press release on ASHA's website and within an hour 30 people had "liked" it and 16 people had commented. I love it that out members are so passionate about the issues surrounding their professions, and how eager they are to share their thoughts. Would they be hanging around the ASHA website on a Friday night, though? Maybe not...which just proves the addage that associations need to meet their members where they are--even if that means Facebook.

Association Chat Fail--or Thing #4 I Hate About Twitter

Ironic that yesterday's association chat (#assnchat; takes place every Tuesday at 2 pm thanks to Jeff De Cagna) was supposed to be about virtual attendee experience...but because the world felt compelled to live-tweet Michael Jackson's funeral, Twitter was so slow that we had to postpone #assnchat.

I know I'm not supposed to admit this, but when stuff like this happens--the free tools some of us are staking our careers on fail miserably--it makes me wonder if it's wise to even try to incorporate tools like Twitter into an organization's social media strategy. All I know is that if instead of #assnchat, what I'd been trying to do was show the BOD how great Twitter was and how useful it could be for our members, I'd have been looking mighty stupid.

Last week I wrote a post about 3 things I hate about Twitter; now I'm adding a 4th:

4)Reliability--almost a year ago I blogged about an article in Business Week that questioned Twitter's long-term financial viability. Since that time, Twitter's growth has exploded...yet, it still appears to be without a business model. Will it be e-commerce? Search, carriers and content? Aggregating tweets by topic? I don't care what it is--can they please just settle on something so they can get some more servers or whatever so the whole thing doesn't feel like it's built on a house of freakin' cards all the time?

Does Forrester's "Hub and Spoke" Model Work For Association Social Media?

Forrester Research recently released a report on how companies should organize for social media. In the report, they detail three basic organizational models:

1. The Tire (Distributed): Where each business unit or group may create its own social media programs without a centralized approach. Forrester calls this approach the “tire,” as it originates at the edges of the company.


2. The Tower (Centralized): A standalone group within a company that’s responsible for social media programs. Forrester points out that the "tower" is often located in corporate marketing or communications departments.


3. The Hub and Spoke (Cross Functional): Forrester likens this model to the hub on a bicycle wheel: a cross-functional group representing multiple stakeholders across the company assembled in the middle of an organization. The hub facilitates resource sharing and cross-functional communications (via the “spokes” in the wheel) to those at the edge of the organization (or the “tire”)

Forrester suggests that the most effective organizational model is #3, the "Hub and Spoke" model. Makes sense, right?

Enter silos.

A while ago I read an outstanding post by Beth Kanter about silos and social media, and it's stuck with me ever since. I think the impact of silo culture on social media has yet to really be brought to the forefront, mainly because most associations have yet to formalize their social media strategies and therefore have yet to deal with staffing those initiatives.

Here's the thing: close your eyes and think "hub and spoke" and what comes to mind? Probably a picture of a bike wheel, or something like that. Now think "silos"--and what comes to mind? Probably something like this. Now try to do an overlay of the hub and spoke visual over the silo one. Doesn't really work, does it?

As Geoff Livingston says in his post The Cultural Challenge to Integration "Publishing a Twitter feed, a blog, a Facebook group, a “viral” video is not the answer. Instead change the way relational communications are approached throughout the organization."

I suspect that, as time-consuming and challenging as it is to convince some association execs that engaging in social media is not only worthwhile but necessary, the real battle will lie with convincing them they'll need to totally overhaul the organization's structure first.

Twitter Isn't a Numbers Game My A$$

Yesterday an exchange on Twitter got me thinking about the whole concept of "followers" and "following" and how crazy the whole thing is.

I saw Chris Brogan tweet this:



I asked:



He replied:



I have to say I'm surprised and weirdly offended. I'm so tired of hearing (ok, reading) all the talk in social media world about authenticity and transparency and it's all about personal interaction...when it reality, it's clearly all about numbers. Not to bash Chris Brogan but, sorry, in this case I can't help it: the whole notion of "Truth Agent" is kind of dinged when I realize his warm fuzzy feelings for people--his "it's all about you-ness" comes with the caveat that they have to be following him in order to count. Otherwise they're just "dead weight."

I use Twitter to actually USE it--I read every single tweet in my stream (much to the chagrin of my husband and kids) and follow only those people or brands I'm genuinely interested in. I have no idea how many people I follow don't follow me back; the value of the stuff they tweet is not contingent upon whether or not they follow me.

From a pure social media strategy point of view I'm definitely doing it wrong--I only follow 181 people and have 409 followers (as of this writing). Not the way you're supposed to do it if you're a business or a brand, I know--but guess what? I'm not a brand, I'm a person. I'm a person who has a full-time job, a husband and two kids and a life to balance. Should I do the "right" thing and follow back everyone who's following me? If I had something to sell or stood somehow to gain from sheer number of followers, probably yes.

Here's the thing: the rationale behind following everyone back who follows you-- according to Guy Kawasaki--is about reciprocating. Not reciprocating means you don't care about your followers. I think he has it backwards, though; I think that only following people/brands you genuinely are interested in shows you DO actually care about them, as opposed to just autofollowing them because they were following you.

I used to think that celebs like the King of Twitter--Ashton Kutcher--were doing it "wrong"--I thought it was just arrogant to have a million followers yet only follow 179 yourself. But you know what? If you think about it, that's actually a lot more genuine than if he followed back all million people. If he did that, you'd know he was just doing it to be able to say that he follows back everyone who follows him--and is therefore more genuine and authentic and all the kinds of things internet celebs claim they are. In reality, isn't it more geniune to be a person who doesn't have to make excuses for why he just isn't interested in following back everyone who follows him? Granted, we might be talking about genuine arrogance...but at least it's not arrogance disguised as authenticity (or would that be the other way around?).

Ok, I'm backing away from the keyboard now...