When a social media guide has been developed, the next step is considering how to best implement it into an organization. As I was thinking more about your reply and your general “assistive” tone, it seemed that an “assistive”/guidelines approach would make it easier to implement social media standards within an organization. Instead of another “you have to do it this way” document, the “guidelines” approach (as a metaphor) implies that there are boundaries, but that reasonable flexibility also exists within those boundaries, wherein employees can be trusted to use their good judgment. I like that approach, and it squares nicely with how I think the internet in general is considered–there are boundaries around what is appropriate or not on the internet (e.g., hacking into bank accounts, mistreatment of minors), but you have a lot of flexibility within those boundaries.

As a result of your post, last week I proposed the idea of a social media guideline in my organization. I’ll be interested to see how it plays out. Thanks for bringing the topic up.

1. People are using social media
-> people will talk about work using social media
2. From a communications point of view this can be desirable.

Therefore: Let’s assist them in using social media in such a way that it benefits both the organization (competent people reflect positively on the organization) and the employees (by providing guidance that emphasizes that is ok for them to communicate and that they have no repercussions to fear).

I agree that you cannot *control* social media use. But I think you can *manage* it to a certain degree. If you see “management” as a form of “steering”.

At the same time I think organizations need guidelines and assist their staff exactly because the channel cannot be controlled. The fact that you can’t control the sea doesn’t mean you shouldn’t learn how to swim, either. And if your company is at sea then it’s probably a good idea to offer swimming lessons to all staff.

Before looking at how to make a Guide for Social Media use, I’m going to an issue that is one step back: Are Social Media Guidelines a good thing for an organization to have? If so, for whom, and why? If not, for whom, and why not? Qui bono? Why would you want to adopt them in your organization, or why would you NOT want to adopt them?

I can see why an organization would want guidelines for representatives of the company, but then I’m conflicted about how that would affect an employee who would like to use social media to discuss things that AREN’T going so well with the company. (Yes, the “fired over FB comments situations” are relevant here). Would guidelines somehow suppress potential organizational whistle-blowers who use social media as their whistle? (Is social media the appropriate place to blow the whistle?)

I suppose my main reason for asking these questions is to get at a curiosity I have about this topic: Do social media guidelines somehow compromise what social media is (or is supposed to be) all about? Is this an attempt to manage a communication channel that is (or should be) inherently unmanageable? I understand these questions rely on the definition of what social media is all about, and I understand that this very definition of social media–by virtue of involving active and dynamic human will–is always open to change. But, you’ve got me thinking…

Thanks, Timo, for sharing the guidelines! I think, as you said in your post of the guidelines, most organizations use examples from others to develop their own, so continued sharing seems appropriate.

Would love to see the social media toolkit once it’s approved for public dissemination 🙂