I heard recently about a local private sector leader who is very skeptical of hiring public sector folks.  Many public sector employees are looking for work right now nationwide due to the recent election and various changes of administration.  This prejudice seems so unfounded to me, as I know many public sector employees who are exactly the kind of people I’d want to hire.  I hope that this person and others like her will reconsider their misconceptions and interview some of these potential candidates.

Here’s five reasons why public sector employees are great hires:

1. Loyalty - Public sector employees are trained to protect their agency or organization.  Especially at the senior staff level, you will find employees who know how to give 100% support to leadership regardless of their personal opinions.
2. Management Skills - Many public sector employees have the opportunity to manage people.  This often means they have extensive experience with hiring and firing, disciplining staff, working with unions, and keeping up on HR rules and laws.  These employees are not scared of managing and generally know how to work with levels above and below them to keep the peace and move things forward.
3. Crisis Control - Whether it’s handling a crisis communications situation or preparing a pandemic flu plan, public sector employees are experienced in preparedness.  These employees can help you navigate through unexpected challenges, keeping your business running smoothly and your reputation intact.  I’ve never met a group of communications professionals who were more adept at handling investigative reporters than those in the public sector.  Any normal business would be astounded by the number of media calls and records requests we receive monthly (hundreds.)
4. Big Picture Perspective - Public sector employees know that they are employed to serve their constituency, whether that means a nation, state, city, etc.  We are constantly reminded of the true purpose of our work.  These employees also have to regularly balance the wants and needs of stakeholders, legislators, and partners in with those of citizens.  Public sector employees will understand that you have multiple reporting lines, a board, stakeholders, lawyers, employees, and customers all in the mix and it won’t faze them.
5. Commitment - Employees in the public sector generally don’t job hop every year.  They look for stable job opportunities where they can do good work and be treated fairly for a competitive wage.  They value good benefits and reasonable work hours.  This is not to say they won’t work more than a 40 hour work week—public sector employees have the same challenges as private sector.  We have outreach events, projects, or crises that keep us late into the evening.  All we generally want is recognition for our commitment and praise for a job well done.  Not so much to ask to gain a stable, loyal, committed employee.

These five reasons are based on my personal experience.  What else would you add?  I know there are even more reasons why public sector employees can be tremendous assets in other sectors.

While candidates may understand the purpose of using social media for campaigning, if they haven’t been in office the past two years, they may not know a thing about Gov 2.0.  I blogged the other day about how candidates used social media in the mid-term elections, but actually transitioning that use into administrative use is a whole other thing.

For those politicians that aren’t aware, there’s been a big movement to actually use social media in daily government to engage with citizens.  This means that citizens can have an online relationship with programs and initiatives that matter to them: state parks, veterans services, travel and tourism, education, etc.  We’ve also worked to improve transparency and efficiency: providing information online, creating web forms, and more.

So when you walk in and take over the office in January, I suggest you consider the following:

• Is there an existing social media policy or guidelines for your state, city, agency, division, etc.?
• Who developed this policy and is anyone still around that knows anything about it? (you might ask this question before you clean house, otherwise your social media expertise will probably need to be replaced.)
• Who is empowered with the ability to use social media for business purposes? If these people are now no longer there, is someone going to take the reigns of maintaining online outposts and relationships?  (Interns do not count here. You need people who actually understand what you do and can adequately engage with the public on your behalf.)
• If there is no policy in place, or social media is not currently used, are you going develop this as part of your administration?  This is a priority you should discuss up front with your IT, communications, and program staff.

From my standpoint, using social media as part of government is becoming far less a value-added feature and far more an expectation.  Check out GovTwit and you’ll see there are over 3,100 people or entities at all levels of government that are already active.  Check Twitter and search for #gov20 and see what’s going on out there…the level of involvement and discussion may surprise you.

I guess my point is, you’re not the first administration or individual to grapple with the idea of using social media in government.  While you may not even realize the opportunity of using it within your administration or organization at this time, it benefits you to consider this sooner rather than later.  Find out what’s already been done.  See how you can actually build upon this to make government better and help serve citizens more efficiently.  Create more transparency. 

Because, in the end, wasn’t the point of running for office to actually create positive changes and make things better?  I hope you’ll consider how Gov 2.0 will be part of that equation.

The mid-term elections have been exhausting for most of us for a variety of reasons.  Whether you’re sick of emails or robo calls, or your job was on the line, chances are you are ready to take a well deserved breather.  I’m not going to talk about any specifics today…I’ll leave that to the pundits who want to dissect what went wrong or right for each candidate.  What I want to talk about is the social media echo chamber many of us witnessed this political season.

I have been one of the more active voices in Ohio advocating for the value of social media in government and, by relation, in politics.  But I must say I’m disappointed in how social media was used by all sides.  Somewhere along the line I think people got the impression that the Obama campaign used social media only to push messages.  To be fair, that may be somewhat true, but they also inspired people to share and push messages to their friends.  Even this week, did you notice how many people encouraged each other to vote on Facebook and Twitter?  The Obama campaign made things like this cool and exciting to participate in.

But what was lost on certain political staffers and advisors is how social media works best.  Things have changed in the past two years.  Social media participants generally expect more than one way communications these days.  They may follow your political tweet stream because they support you…but if you already have these votes, what are you gaining?  At most, perhaps a retweet here and there.  And your staff, who enjoy sharing every flaw of the opposing team, are surely quite vocal.  But they have hardly any followers, fans, etc.  And all of the ones they have are also the already converted.  So they spend most of the time talking to each other and getting each other hyped up.  This is the social media political echo chamber, and it’s not particularly useful for advancing your campaign.

Some politicians will wake up this morning and begin making the transition from campaigning via social media to the world of government 2.0.  Many more politicians are waking up this morning and know they have a few years before they make another go at any type of office.  Social media will continue to be a huge part of people’s lives, and campaigns should keep it central to their communications and outreach strategy.  But here are a few tips for building value through social media in the political world:

• Learn the space you want to participate in.  This does not just mean 6 months or 6 weeks before an election.  How do people communicate and what types of communications provide the most value to users?
• Figure out who to follow and how to target potential followers/converts.  Imagine instead of just tweeting to each other if you found people with actual concerns or questions in the social media space and reached out to them and answered them or engaged them in conversation.  Think how much more likely they are to go tell their friends about their experience.  This is similar to the idea of having a candidate knock on doors—but they don’t even have to leave their desk.
• Be real.  I understand that candidates or leaders cannot always participate on social media as themselves.  However, many other politicians do it.  Really.  Consider participating as yourself on a regular basis (even once or twice a week is a start!)  And learn to use a smart phone to update Facebook and Twitter.  It’s not that hard and people will think you’re more ”with it.”
• Social media is not just for the campaign trail.  If you want to build a lasting presence and relationship with people, make social media a part of your professional life, your campaign strategy, and your official use once in office.  Citizens are present on these channels 365 days a year and you will learn alot about yourself, the way you present your issues, and the way you govern.  It may spur positive changes on all fronts.

What have I missed?  I’m sure there are things you’ve noticed this season.  Please add your comments.

Let’s be clear up front, you’re brand is probably not Coca Cola or Apple.  Unless of course you are Coca Cola and Apple, then welcome.  But, more than likely, the group of people that relate to your organization as a brand is different than your potential customer group.  This is especially true in government and higher education.

While you might have your NASA or your Harvard, where people would proudly where shirts emblazoned with logos prior to building a relationship with you, chances are this is not the case.  Your regular government agency or university is not “sexy.”  And there are so many other agencies or universities that your constituents or potential students probably don’t even know for sure the immense variety of what you do or offer.

It is easier to spend marketing dollars on name recognition, however if no one knows what you offer them, what are you hoping to get in return for this investment?  The same goes for social media, it is harder to build a community with a group of people who do not already know and understand your core brand.

In order to get the most bang for your buck, take a look at the programs and services you offer.  Do you have a top notch state park system?  Do you have a PR program that is resonating with a whole new demographic?  These are the things that will resonate with specific groups of constituents.  If you identify areas to strategically market towards or build communities around, chances are you will be more successful and develop more engaged long-term relationships.

Remember, people care about what your brand/organization means to them…not necessarily what you want them to care about.

Some questions or revelations about social media come out of how you personally relate to businesses and companies.  As I was driving in a small Columbus, Ohio suburb passed several resale shops, I thought to myself about a local shop that I have a relationship with.  I have bought items there and even sold items there.  Several times, the owner has encouraged me to send them pictures of the furniture in our house or to join their Facebook group to share.  Still, I have yet to make the effort.  It doesn’t mean I don’t like the shop or wouldn’t recommend them to someone.  I have just not found any personal reason or benefit to build an online relationship with this business at this time.

I then thought to myself that while I have not friended or liked this business, if they sent me a friend or fan request, I would probably approve it.  Should I expect this business to be proactive?  No, but it might be beneficial to them.

• Let’s suppose the company takes the time to invite new customers to like them on Facebook;
• The new customer, having had a hopefully positive experience, may be more likely to accept the request and potentially build on the relationship.
• The customer may find out more about the business that would increase their patronage, or they may share information about the business with other friends.
• This step happens far more quickly than relying on the customer to take the initiative to search and “like” the business on their own.

Sure, this is an ok idea for a small business, but how would you feel about a large corporation doing this?  Would it annoy you if Apple immediately asked you to like them after you bought your iPad? Or if Travelocity wants you to like their travel gnome after you book that flight to Vegas?

What about Government?  Would it creep you out if a state park asked you to like them after you stayed over night at a park lodge?  What about after you renewed your plates at the BMV (you bought the new license plate, so know they ask you to like it.)  What about the IRS after you pay your taxes?  Ok, perhaps that goes a little too far…

I do see the potential benefit for Higher Ed.  A student comes for a college visit or enrolls for the first time, and they receive a Twitter follow or a Facebook request.  Somehow that doesn’t seem as threatening.  Now the student is able to build a relationship with the University and other students.

So what do you think?  Is it more authentic and more valuable to let the customers come to you?  Or, does it make sense for companies and organizations to be proactive and find their potential friends/fans online first?

Some higher ed institutions obviously got the memo on social media.  For instance, my alma mater Carnegie Mellon University is very active in social media and even has two students who will be doing fellowships with Facebook.  Another Twitter friend, Shannon Paul, brought up her alma mater Madonna University’s engagement in social media just last week.  But there are other institutions (and specifically the academic side) who either haven’t looked at the potential or have been shut down by the administrative side.

Many of you know that I work in both government and higher education.  Higher ed did not have the same call to action as the government sphere through the Obama campaign and the change of administration.  When the President took office, the White House got it’s own New Media director and agencies followed suit.  Universities that were not technologically proactive are now feeling the push to figure out what to do with social media.  Just like in Gov 2.0 or the business realm, administrators fear losing control of the messaging.  They worry that folks engaging in social media will be off message or off brand, embarrass the institution, and cause more harm than good.

Fearing social media is healthy to a certain degree (we should respect the potential dangers) but this fear can also be short-sighted and it postpones the inevitable discussion.  The reality is, students already expect and consume information digitally.  If we expect to recruit, retain, and engage with students, we must consider how social media effects our strategic plans. I have found that the adoption of social media in an institution generally relies on internal champions who speak up with conviction.  Who will rise up and speak on behalf of your faculty? Of your admissions office or your development office or your alumni office?  So many areas of higher education can be impacted by social media, which leads me to…

My Challenges to Those of You in Higher Education

Lead by Example

Know the space. Get your feet wet in social media personally.  Listen first.  If you feel comfortable and confident in your knowledge, contemplate how social media may integrate into higher education.  Knowing you can’t necessarily change the institution’s policies overnight, focus on what you can change.  Speak with conviction about what you know well.  Find advocates who believe in you and the potential improvements.  Mentor others so that more faculty and administrators begin to consider the impact of social media on higher education.

Utilize Social Media Resources in Research

The Library of Congress will be home to Twitter’s 50 million plus tweets since 2006.  How might this impact your research?  The Pew Research Center is already talking about it in a recent Washington Post article.  I challenge you to consider how these types of resources can be used professionally.

Connect with Thought Leaders

When Gary Vaynerchuk launched Crush It! we talked about how he might get it into college classrooms.  I checked back with him recently and the list of colleges using the book include Champlain College, UC San Diego, NYU, Grand Valley State University,Emerson College, and several others.  Knowing the impact Gary’s book has had on social media and business communities, I was surprised by who’s not on this list.  What this tells me is that professors and instructional designers don’t know enough about social media, who the thought leaders are, and how they might integrate this type of resource into their classroom or online course.

New books by social media thought leaders are released frequently, and some have even made the New York Times Best Seller list.  I encourage you to check out Trust Agents or Engage, just to name a few more. If this literature is shaping the current business world, your students should at least be aware of it.  And the great thing about these thought leaders is that they are generally accessible and even excited to provide information to students and academics alike.

Integrate Social Media into Classes

Something I try to do with my classes is consider how social media might impact the discipline.  For instance, with my media relations and crisis communication class, what might my students need to know about the role of social media?  This isn’t limited to communications or technology disciplines.  Consider how social media might impact political science, music, history, or psychology.  I encourage you to expand your assignments by asking students to read or comment on blogs, subscribe to RSS feeds, search twitter regarding current affairs, or listen to a webinar or podcast.  This will enrich their experience and provide a contrast to their scholarly research.

Recently, my friend Chris Brogan said that talking about social media is boring, but doing social media is not.  This post is a little bit of both.  While many feel that they have this social media thing figured out, there are still those organizations who are just getting started.  I want to make sure that you don’t feel stupid or like a fish out of water…I want to encourage you to take it slow and really get to know the social media environment.  Many schools are rushing to add classes specifically on social media, digital marketing, etc.  My question is, how can we teach social media if we don’t use it or understand it? 

Let me know how you are working to integrate social media into higher education.  What else needs to be done?  Where does social media fit into the university’s strategic plans?

We all know them: people who have Twitter (or some other kind of social media) accounts but probably couldn’t tell you how to log in let alone post something. And I don’t mean dormant accounts.  Many of these people have hundreds, thousands, and even millions of followers.

These accounts are put up by well-meaning folks who want their leaders to engage with their customers, constituents, or citizens.  We can assume that the leader in question may know the basic content of the messages and hopefully they know that they are posted online.  But I’m sure some do not.  Instead, a lucky PR pro or staffer gets the job of representing the leader online.

The Good

Using this method, the leader in question and their C-suite staff have a level of security with a social media filter in place.  They are confident that the leader won’t screw up and cause a big PR problem, because it is the filter’s job to keep on message.  So, in the best of all possible worlds, the organization gets an online presence without the headaches.  (And they also have a potential fall-person should something go wrong.)

The Bad

Some people are realists and don’t expect famous or important people to do things like tweet for themselves.  Then there are others, like my friend Kevin, who refuse to follow them if he finds out it’s not authentically them.  For those that don’t remember, Barack Obama admitted this fall to not using Twitter while having over 2.5 million friends.  One of the fears might be that when followers find out that the person in question is not really representing themself, it makes social media into just one more broadcast channel.  And this is something many of us have tried to avoid.

From a Gov 2.0 perspective, I worry about social media being seen as just another campaign tactic rather than something that can be beneficial to many different aspects of an administration.  I’d like to see leaders value the interaction with constitutents 365 days per year, every year of their term.  When social media becomes a campaign tool, then the campaign consultants are engaging with constituents rather than those of us working directly for the people.  (And I don’t mean this as a slam at campaign consultants, I promise…you all do a lot of valuable work…I just want to see it continue throughout the regular course of business.)

The Middle Ground

Some accounts that are managed by multiple people and not necessarily one leader have found the middle ground of adding a ^ and initials.  This at least makes it transparent that there is someone else speaking…for instance, a staffer on behalf of a politician.  Others don’t feel the need to identify themselves until Mashable asks who’s behind the account.

The Future Norm

One thing that is certain is that social media and our usage of social media will continue to change.

What do you think—does it hurt social media to have a PR person, staffer, or other type of social media filter behind an account?  Or do you not expect to connect with the actual person when you follow or friend them?

What will the norm be down the road and is it different for government/education/non-profits vs. business?

EAVB_ZRZACYBFAU