On February 21, I wrote on Desirable Roasted Coffee, my blog, about the advice Dee Rambeau has given you. In posts here and on his own blog he told you:
Public Corporations: blogs are useless and irresponsible. No Corporate Communications person in their right mind would allow a C-level executive to blog. The Jonathan Schwartz’s of the World aside, it is not a sensible PR move to allow a top executive to share his thoughts in Cyberspace.
I called this “simply the most ridiculous advice I’ve ever heard.” Since then, a couple of you have asked me to explain my views in more detail.
Dee’s advice is ridiculous because it is based on several flawed assumptions:
1. that communicators control corporate communication
2. that C-level executives shouldn’t communicate on their own hook
3. that the communication needs of public and private companies are remarkably different
Let’s take each myth in turn, and then add them up.
Communicators control corporate communication. Wrong. Dee seems to think corporate communicators are in a position to “allow” or “not allow” senior executives to blog. They never are. Never have been. Never will be.
The good corporate communicator is, at best, a trusted adviser to the CEO. And that is a wonderful place to be, but the communicator who thinks she is going to “allow” or “not allow” the CEO to blog or speak at a convention, etc, is demented.
C-level executives shouldn’t be allowed to communicate on their own hook. Wrong. Many C-level managers are great spokespersons for their companies: they know the products and markets, and are enthusiastic. We all know that; that’s why we try to get managers interviewed in Fortune or onto a speaker’s list at a convention.
So why Dee thinks these same managers shoudn’t blog is beyond me. As Mark Cuban points out, why spend an hour a week in interviews that the journalist screws up, when you could just spend an hour a week blogging?
Maybe Dee thinks Fortune interviews and convention speeches are done by the PR department.
Communication needs of public and private companies are vastly different. Wrong.
Dee says executives of public (traded on the stockmarket) companies especially should stay away from blogs. That’s surely because he knows a blogger could affect investor sentiment.
Well, yes, a blogging executive could. Just as he or she could affect investor sentiment in a dozen other ways. Why blogging is singled out is beyond me.
But Dee misses a far bigger trend: investors increasingly matter less. Money is cheap; for most companies, it is instantly available. Especially for newer, growing public companies, stock market price is largely irrelevant.
The scarcest input today is, in fact, people: employees and customers. Employess gravitate to companies they feel an affinity for. Customers gravitate to companies they feel an affinity for. Who’s behind those companies? Invariably, it’s one or several senior managers who are good public communicators. Who can make employees, potential employees, prospects and customers feel welcome at the company.
Summing up:
When Dee says you wouldn’t be in your right mind to “let” your boss blog, he forgets you have no choice in the matter.
If he means “don’t advise your boss to blog,” he’s broad brushing. Many C-level managers are excellent communicators.
Finally, if he means “public company” managers shouldn’t blog… he’s living in the 80s. You can safely ignore him — the companies that count today are those who reach out to employees and customers, not the stock market.
19 comments
3/21/2007 at 6:08 pm
DeeRambeau
Allan, allow me to be the first to respond to your post.
First, the only advice I offered in my post is quoted here:
“My advice is this:
1. Blog with caution. What you say is out there. You might change…but it won’t.
2. Understand that every industry goes through remarkable change. Communications has been more affected by the Internet than any other. Know the tools. Know that the industry changes slowly…a large percentage of the practitioners in the industry that you hope to enter don’t even undertstand RSS yet. You might get hired by a forward-thinking agency or company but it’s not likely to be because you know about blogging. Your impact will come later as the industry’s strategy catches up with the technology. ”
Otherwise that, the rest of my post is simply my opinion. Just like what you have to say about the topic is…your opinion. Nothing more no matter how passionately you oppose how I feel. I did NOT frame my statements about corporate blogging as advice…merely as my opinion based on my experience of having personally interacted with the corporate communications professionals at several hundred Fortune 500 US corporations.
You’ve called me ridiculous. You’ve liken my rants as Faulkner-esque on your blog (which frankly I take as a compliment). You’ve suggested I am Benjy (one of Faulkner’s retarded characters from “Sound and the Fury”). You’ve said that the students here can “safely ignore me.” You’ve summarily dismissed me as “wrong” and that my assumptions are flawed.
I am not wrong and my “experience” is based on sound and thoughtful discussions at the C-level and the corp. comm level.
3/22/2007 at 9:56 am
Ted Shelton
There is one sense in which corporate communications should be a gatekeeper for a public company’s communications with the world and that has to do with compliance. Regulation FD (Fair Disclosure) specifies that a company’s communications about its business should be made in the broadest possible manner in order to avoid the hazard of “selective disclosure” which could in some cases provide certain market actors with an advantage over others in trading the company’s stock. The SEC rule is here:
http://www.sec.gov/rules/final/33-7881.htm
So it seems to me that the evaluation that a company should do when determining whether or not to allow anyone to blog as a representative of the company (and yes, this is something company’s can “allow” or “disallow”) is how confident they feel that the exec in question can conform to the SEC’s disclosure requirements when writing the blog — that is, not communicate material information about the company for the first time in a blog (which the SEC would be unlikely to view as a fair disclosure).
But this is exactly the same question that a company must answer when deciding whether or not to allow an executive to speak in public — at conferences or to customers. The answer to all of these questions (including whether or not to blog) is to make sure that executives get the training they need to understand where the lines are, what they can say and not say, and when saying too much could land the company in legal trouble (and the executive looking for a new job).
3/22/2007 at 1:32 pm
Allan Jenkins
Exactly, Ted. And when companies realize this — ok, we let Mary go speak to conferences — they will let execs blog.
Blogs are a new tool; they don’t replace what’s in the box.
3/22/2007 at 9:16 pm
Chris Clarke
Well said, Allan. The only example I can point to is the FastLane one, and it’s not quite an apt comparison, but the lesson is the same. Bob Lutz wanted to blog, and the lawyers told him it couldn’t be done. His reply was something to the effect of “I’m the Vice Chairman of the company - I think I know what I can and cannot say.”
It’s so true - Lutz’s job isn’t to act on the behalf of corporate comms team - it works the other way around. Their job is to serve him and the rest of the C-suite.
3/23/2007 at 11:19 am
Kristina Wilburn
It’s very important for c-suite execs to communicate directly with their customers. Consumers want direct contact with companies and open lines of communication. No, we can’t control what they’re saying; but sometimes it’s more beneficial to be candid than rehearsed.
3/23/2007 at 8:26 pm
Lauren N
Allan,
Thanks for the post. It is interesting to see both sides of this issue. While I enjoy Dee’s post, I also enjoyed seeing your side of the story. Obviously, this subject is a touchy one. There are many different opinions out there about how blogging fits into the corporate world. You and Dee both bring up the point that it can hurt or help a company. I think the bottom line is that there are no right or wrong answers. Every company is different. One company may have a wonderful experience with an executive blogging, another a terrible. Blogging is very situational. While it can be a valuable way to communicate with different publics, it can also divulge too much. I think the important thing to keep in mind is that if you’re going to blog in the corporate world, do it full heartedly. I think executives should be careful about what they say and pinpoint the exact messages they are trying to send. I think you and Dee both agree that the world is changing and with this change comes a greater need to reach out to employees and customers. Exactly how to do this will always be a subject of debate.
Thanks again for your input. You and Dee’s comments help students like me get a better grasp of these concepts.
3/31/2007 at 1:50 pm
Emily Anne
Allan,
In your previous post you mentioned that corporate communicators do not have the power to control a boss’s communication. What is your opinion when those below the boss are reprimanded for things on blogs they create? I ask because I know someone who was fired from her position at a hospital because of talking about her days at work on her myspace blog. After becoming for familiar with blogs and those who use them, I was curious of your take on whether that was fair. People can’t control whether someone puts their opinions out on the web, but should people be punished…lower/higher management alike?
3/31/2007 at 3:28 pm
Allan Jenkins
Hi Emily Anne,
Content should be what matters, not the medium of transmission.
Many businesses make clear, when you are hired, what information is confidential and not to be revealed (though common sense goes a long way here, too). Some have clauses in their Employee Manual addressing these things. And people in law, medicine, accounting and journalism, for example, have professional obligations that are even greater than the company they work for.
Breaking those rules, whether on a blog, letter to the editor, sky writing, or subway graffiti, is reasonable grounds for being sacked.
On the other hand, speaking of the trials and tribulations and joys of being a doctor, nurse, lawyer, mechanic, etc., would not, to my mind, be grounds for firing.
There have been a number of “I got fired for blogging!” stories over the last few years. I’ve never found one, when the full story came out, that wasn’t actually “I got fired for breaking contractual or corporate rules on my blog.” Big difference.
Should people be punished for the opinions they put out? I don’t think so, but I’m tolerant of debate.
As a former CEO, I certainly would have fired an employee who published confidential information on her/his blog. But if she had been complaining about the workplace, the hours, the way I managed things, I would have taken it as useful advice. I would have called her into my office — not to fire her, but to hear how I could do things better. But not all companies will be that forgiving, I am afraid. And it is their right not to be.
4/1/2007 at 6:11 pm
Tyler
I really am not sure how I feel about this debate. On Dee’s side, “blogging with caution” is something that was taught to my classmates and I from day one. You don’t know who will read what or how/when it could come back to bite you. I don’t agree that C-level executives shouldn’t be allowed to blog. If a contractual agreement is made and mandates what is to be confidential, I think it would be great to have as many people of the organization blogging about their experiences. Not only would it be a place for them to vent (granted they did it in a professional way), but it would also be a good venue to see how a company can improve it’s internal communications and/or problems that arise from employees. I fully agree that content is what matters and the medium taken to relay it should not matter. I may have some more opinions…give me time to think
4/1/2007 at 6:48 pm
Christopher
Clearly none of the students in my class are professionals, myself included, but we do have a view that other people do not. This was an interesting post because I did not think about this side of the debate. I however, agree with Dee. It may have been an executive who started a company, but it is the smart executive who hires people to accomplish all of the creative aspects. I just cant see any top executive being in a place to properly speak on any other part of their company aside from their single position.
4/2/2007 at 4:20 pm
Stephanie
I appreciate reading both sides of the story. After Dee’s post I thanked him for echoing many opinions that myself and my classmates’ had. Blogging with caution is good advice. With that said I also understand Allan’s point of view. Top executives aren’t going to ask for permission to blog, and hopefully, if they are top executives, they are good communicators. I think one of the main points of Dee’s post was that public image is essential. For individuals, small companies, and even larger ones, the way the public perceives your business is very important.
I believe that top execs. will write if they want. I also believe that it should be something that is looked over once, maybe twice before actually being published on the Web. We all have moments of weakness, and as we have seen before, they can come back to haunt us.
My main question from all of this is do you think there will be a huge difference in outcome, financially that is, if for instance Fortune 500 companies stop blogging?
4/2/2007 at 5:44 pm
Virginia
While reading this post, I remembered coming along Bill Marriott’s blog. Even though he might not address “the big issues” dealing with his company, he does make his blog fun and up-beat.
I don’t think it’s a bad idea for top or c-level execs to blog, but I do think it is important for a company’s PR people to go in and monitor what he or she is saying. Just to play it safe.
4/2/2007 at 11:06 pm
Ashley
I also, don’t think it’s a bad idea for top c-level executives to blog, especially if it it kept light-hearted and used to maybe inform other employees of business going on in the company they would not be aware of otherwise. It could also be a great way for the company to get further involved. I, too, agree that it’s the content that matters and the medium taken to share it should not matter.
4/3/2007 at 4:06 pm
Evyan M.
Looks like we have a bit of a debate going on here. Just like I told Dee before that I appreciated his input, I first want to thanks Allen for expressing his side as well. After reading Dee’s original post, I appreciated the advice and was unsure about how I felt in response. Now that I have read Allen’s post, sadly I am still unsure. I see both sides and I think I see them equally. However, I am moving to New York in less than two months to pursue a career in PR, so all advice is welcomed by me. Also, although there will likely be no agreement on this situation, it’s nice to see the reality that in this industry, people will not always agree, but it’s obvious from reading both people’s side that they both would want what’s best for whatever company they are working for.
4/4/2007 at 2:31 pm
Dana
I think it is fine for c-level execs to blog as long as there is someone in charge of making sure that what is written can not get taken out of context. It is good for many different employees to blog to be able to get a true understanding of the personality of the company. I think it is fine for a variety of employees to blog as long as they are trustworthy and represent the company in a professional manner.
4/6/2007 at 5:48 pm
Hayley
This is an interesting debate I must say. I am glad that you and Dee have shared this information with us, considering our class has not been propositioned with a scenario exactly like this one before. I do agree with Tyler that we have been taught to caution with blog, especially when it concerns ethical matters. I agree with you Allan that corporate communicators are not in a position to prohibit senior executives from blogging. It speaks highly of a corporation if a senior executive takes the time to write in a blog. Not only does this reach across to the consumers, but it also speaks to all the employees. This can be a source for the employees to become better informed with the company and reach a more personal level with senior executives who they may not have much contact or communication with. Blogging is an amazing tool to reach all audiences when the content is good and appropriate. Whether it be through blogging or another means, communication is vital for an company’s life, growth and success. Thanks for sharing this information with us. But I do have one question this is off the track from my comment- Exactly how are investors increasingly mattering less? Would you go into a little more detail for me? Thanks so much Allan!
5/4/2007 at 2:01 pm
Allan Jenkins
Hayley, I apologize for not responding sooner.. I simply didn’t see your reply.
I probably should have said “capital matters less.” In the old days, capital was a scarce resource: first, you needed lots of it to build a factory or railroad; second, capital moved sluggishly. Someone wanting to put up a textile mill in South Carolina in 1950 had access to local banks, but probably would never hear of the German bank with funds to lend. So the local banker would look over the business plan and pretty much give a “yes/no” answer.
Today, most companies require relatively little capital to get off the ground, and, thanks to securitization of debt and global financial markets, money is dead easy to get. If I go down to my bank and ask for a loan, they will give it to me. Yes, if they feel it’s risky, I will pay more in interest. But I will get the loan, because they can bundle, slice it, and sell it further.
Here’s an illustration: I am sure you and your classmates, not yet graduates, all have credit cards. Yet your parents — and certainly your grandparents — were probably first given credit, a loan, against substantial collateral: the first car or house. And then only if they had a steady income.
Moreover, your credit cards may well be issued by a bank in Iowa or Virginia… they don’t know you. But as recently as 1980, your only chance (as someone under 30) of a credit card was from a bank where you had been banking since you were about 10.
So gaining access to capital, whether debt or equity. is the easy part.
But just as money has become global, so has hiring. Today, you can decide what jobs to apply for in Seattle or Anchorage or San Diego… 20 years ago, you never would have heard of them. As an employer, I used to be able to count on the local university… now I have to compete with everyone.
Allan
9/30/2007 at 10:09 pm
Lauren
The other day in class, someone asked our teacher “why blogging is so important, we know that we should do it and we know hoe to do it, but what good does it really do?” Our teacher replied with a very simple answer. To sum it up, she basically said that many execs of companies try too hard to market their products in a way that says for example, “I want you to think that Extra is the longest lasting gum.” (random I know, I just saw a commercial…) When what they really need to do is make the public think ABOUT their product.
Creating talk about a product is what makes it popular, not the fact that they say that it is the longest lasting gum. Someone needs to make a blog and get outsiders to say, “Wow, you have to try the new Extra gum, it really is the longest lasting gum.”
I understand now the possibility for success through blogging. It is a cheap way to market a product or company. If it doesn’t do anything, bug deal, no real money or time was lost.
10/31/2007 at 11:02 pm
sara
Wow! This seems to be an issue that many are very passionate about. The one thing that bothers me in this situation is that it seems like all c-level execs are being grouped together. To me, this should be considered on a case by case basis. I think both sides of this argument are very legitimate, but you do not know the background of these managers nor the nature of the company they work for. If I was put in a position where an exec wanted to blog, I really do no think I would have the right to say no, can you really tell someone not to express their opinion? However, you better believe I would monitor that blog, I would check it before I checked my e-mail.