Five Organizations That Should Not Blog

I find myself recommending blogs on a regular basis. I think it's a great idea for almost every organization but I have also realized there are organizational characteristics that would lead me to say they shouldn't blog. Here's my list of those who should not blog (or use other social media for that matter):

Organizations that don't trust their employees.
If your organization doesn't trust employees then a blog strategy will constantly be plagued by the legal department's involvement or management trying to control the message. If the organization doesn't trust the employees to represent them well without micromanagement, don't start blogging.

Organizations that don't want to hear bad news.
Blogging and other forms of social media are inherently interactive and conversational. Once you decide to jump in you should prepare to respond as needed. If a corporate blogger gets negative feedback or criticism on a service, product, strategy, etc. the right thing to do is respond truthfully and candidly. That doesn't necessarily mean a concession either. The organization's blogger can totally disagree with the the feedback without being disagreeable. What this interaction shows is that the organization isn't afraid to hear and engage people even when it can be negative. If you're not ready for this, don't start blogging.

Organizations that want absolute control over their message and reputation.
Organizations can't, and never have, been able to control what people say about them. To think otherwise is foolish. New media tools allow those conversations that may have previously been private to be more widespread and more easily discovered. If your organization is determined to control every message about it and is under the delusion that it can also control what other people say about it, don't start blogging, it will only create frustration when the facade of control begins to crumble.

Organizations that create by committee.
I have been a part of numerous "writing by committee" situations and almost every single time the final message is so diluted from the original intent it becomes a shell of what it could have been. Blogging by committee is not good for at least two reasons. First, it will take forever to get a post done by the time you get everyone involved and consider their revisions and debate what should stay and what should go. Second, it will very likely not be a candid, fully engaging post, but rather something diluted. Contributors to a blog are good, committees are not. It's not a bad thing to have multiple bloggers for a single blog as long as it's clear to all that the blog was set up that way. If your organizations writes by committee, however, don't start blogging.

Organizations that are slow. One of the true benefits to blogging is that you can create a post in a matter of minutes so there is a wonderful opportunity to respond quickly to a situation in the event that it's necessary. Depending on the industry, response time can make or break how a something is perceived. For instance, if an company had some negative press they could use the blog to respond quickly and provide their perspective. By doing so, the blog post will be part of the news and balance the original negative story. Without the blog the organization will issue a less timely press release if they respond at all and possibly miss a window of opportunity. If the organization isn't prepared or comfortable with a quick response then they will not be fully utilizing the blog. If your organization is stuck on slow, don't start blogging.

1 comment:

Anonymous said...

So this pretty well rules out 90% of churches out there.