Friendship aside, I know how difficult it is to write a book (especially without a co-author) and you can tell the passion, and heart and soul that fills the pages of Engage!  When you read this book, take your time and absorb the information, because there is a lot. Engage! is a complete guide; a resource that many different readers will find valuable.  When I first picked up my copy, I wondered if the book was going to satisfy a widespread audience. Writing this book must not have been an easy task.  In my opinion, Brian has achieved what he’s set out to do.  Within the pages of Engage! is social and business insight for the beginner, novice, intermediate and advanced professional.

A few words of advice, if you are a beginner/novice to social media then go slowly and study the first half of the book.  Try to master the concepts, and research the platforms further, before moving ahead to conquer the second half of the book.  If you are intermediate or advanced social media professional or enthusiast, the first half of the book will provide some good background and interesting information.  It may also validate your current thoughts and practices. However, the second half of the book is where you will find incredible gems of information.

Although I could probably write a 20-page review on the book, I will try to give the abridged version and focus on three areas that were particularly interesting for me.  They include:

• Chapter 17, “Defining the Rules of Engagement”
• Chapter 21, “The Social Marketing Compass”
• Chapter 25, “The New Media Scorecard”

I’ve mentioned before, the social media communications process begins with a policy or guidelines for the organization.  In Chapter 17, “Defining the Rules of Engagement,” Brian does a fantastic job with policy development.  He uses several great examples, but his first is the the U.S. Marine Corp. and U.S. Army. Moving through these examples, he reminds us that our armed forces face the issue of OPSEC (Operational Security) and COMSEC (Communication Security), which put our forces at an elevated risk of compromise.  Moving through the examples he shows how the U.S. military is seeking guidelines, “defining, regulating, and promoting the use of social media…”  One of the best lines in the chapter is, “If the U.S. military is actively seeking guidelines …then it’s safe to assume that your organization should follow suite.”

The chapter also has great information on policies including Intel’s Social Media Guidelines, Tod Defren’s Top 10 Guidelines for Social Media Participation (offered for public dissemination) and a great case study on Brian’s work with Intel and the organization’s Digital IQ Program.

Another extremely helpful chapter is Chapter 21, “The Social Marketing Compass.”  I include the Social Marketing Compass in many of my presentations because it is such a vivid and useful tool.  According to Brian, the Social Marketing Compass “serves as our value system when defining program activities.”  This tool is meant to point an organization in a physical or experiential direction to make the right connections with customers and other stakeholders where they congregate and seek information or guidance.  Brian goes through every part of the compass, with full descriptions from the players and the platforms to the channels and the emotions.

Another very helpful part of Chapter 21 is the Social Media Plan Outline, which is a great outline to follow, as you are charting your course of action.

The final chapter in my review is Chapter 25, “The New Media Scorecard,” because what is a complete guide to social media without the measurement part.  This chapter is packed with measurement guidelines.  I especially found the Measurement Program Checklist by K.D. Paine to be extremely helpful.  K.D. offers a five step process from Step 1, What are Your Objectives, through to Step 5, Select the Right Measurement Tool. I also thought Brian did a great job with his discussion of the Cs of Measuring Action Through Cost, thoroughly  outlining and defining everything from Cost Per Impression (CPM) and Cost Per Click (CPC) to Cost Per Action (CPA) and Cost Per Engagement (CPE).  Other helpful ways to measure influence include the Razorfish Social Influence Score, as well as how to capture share of voice, which is “the total conversations in the social web compared to brand/competitor share.”

Engage! is truly a complete guide for brands and businesses.  True to the title, reading this book will either be the impetus to get you started, or the the means to have you dig in deeper to achieve social media success.  Thank you Brian for offering incredible insight, and moving us further along on our path to engage.

I remember reading a post a year ago by Jeremiah Owyang that I thought was excellent.  He outlined five ways that companies allowed their employees to participate in social media.  I took the liberty of taking those five examples and tacking on my own perspective to illustrate how a few of the groups within an organization can try to own social media (as the company moves from stage one “no rules” through to stage five, which “empowers” the workforce).

Here are the five ways that Jeremiah outlined originally, with my added comments in bold regarding “ownership” in the organization:

1. Employees have no rules, no guidelines and no policies.  Just go out there and do it! Translation: No one wants to own social media and frankly this can be dangerous for the brand.
2. Shut it Down: Protect the brand and protect the employees from any liabilities that may occur from “losing control” as a result of social networking.  Translation:  Legal and IT are trying to own social media. Regardless of this type of ownership, conversation will continue. Employees will talk after hours, on their Facebook or via Twitter feeds.
3. The media trained spokesperson will be the only person who can blog and be involved in social media.  This person already has the training and can represent the company.  Translation:  Corporate Communications is trying to own social media.  This won’t work because social media is about open, human and transparent conversations.  The trained media spokesperson doesn’t necessarily allow customers to interact with the people behind the brand and tends to speak with prepared statements.
4. The corporate employees blessed for social media. A few select individuals will receive social media training and best practices Translation:  Executive/Leadership, Corporate Communications and/or Human Resources are trying to own social media.  Although the organization is willing to train certain “lucky” individuals, there are many other internal brand champions who want to engage and be trained the right way.  There will be dissent in the ranks, if only a chosen few are able to participate, and other employees are banned from social communications.
5. Empower the employees…the “all in” approach.  Translation:  This is the best way to handle social media within an organization. To empower, educate and have guidelines for the employees to participate; where there is buy in and trust from the top, and there is the willingness to participate and the right tools to engage on the bottom.  Both ends meet in the middle with a great social media policy that frames out participation.  In this scenario, many departments own social media and together, the organization finds value.

So, there you have it, five ways that clearly illustrate how some types of ownership are not beneficial.   The last scenario, having everyone work together, is the best way to approach social media across the organization, with good guidelines, for a successful program.

Working through a competitive intelligence exercise means getting past the obvious and digging into an audit with your eyes wide open.  Of course, you’ll immediately check out how many followers your competitors have and the lists where they appear. And, yes, you should review their tweet stream to figure out their approach. You can also scour through their followers to see the influencers they’ve connected with and the level of engagement.

However, here are a few less obvious ways that you can figure out if your competitors are just getting their feet wet or if they are well on their way to a successful social media strategy.  With your eyes wide open you should ask these questions about each competitor:

• Do they have a standard Twitter profile or a customized background? You can tell if a competitor is a beginner or more advanced just by their Twitter background.
• Do they use images in their profile that relate to the brand (logo, product, people)?  Images tell you if they are branding their profile(s).
• Does the URL in the profile lead to a dedicated landing page vs. a home page? This is the difference between the competitor that may or may not be closely paying attention to website analytics and driving traffic to specific area of a website.
• When you look at their profiles can you immediately identify what they want to talk about?
• What’s the percentage of their tweets, retweets, and actual conversations (@replies) over a specified time frame?
• What platform(s) are they using?  Are they just starting out on Twitter.com or have they advanced to TweetDeck or HootSuite? Using more advanced platforms may translate into filtering information, managing multiple handles and timing daily tweets.
• Are they shortening links yet?  Do you they use Tiny URL or have they advanced to Bit.ly links (which means they are tracking/measuring links)?
• Are they timing tweets? You can tell by analyzing patterns of tweets over a period of time.
• Do they have one Twitter feed or many feeds?  If there are different feeds then you should ask the same questions above about each profile.
• Do they have an employee retweet strategy? In other words, you need to analyze who is retweeting and determine if other members of the company (their internal brand champions) are involved in the social media strategy.
• How often are competitors tweeting per day, per week, per month? Is there a consistent flow of tweets?
• Who tweets about your competitors on Twitter the most (media, bloggers, industry partners, employees, customers, etc.)?

There are so many questions that need to be asked, more than what’s listed above. What questions do you ask? Do you evaluate your competitors on Twitter with you eyes wide open?

Here’s my quick take on a name.  Years ago, my mother told me that she had a couple of names in mind for me before I was born.  When she went over her top picks with me, I turned my nose up at her alternative choices.  Each one came with an image attached to it.  When she unveiled the first one, I immediately thought, “Well that would have made me sound old before my time and from the 1940s.” The second name she considered would have been tough for a little kid.  I would have been teased for my entire childhood.  It was one of those rhyming names.  I’m happy that she and my dad selected the name I have today.

Do certain names give you a mental, predisposed image of what something should be based on your perceptions? After all, companies spend millions of dollars on building their brands (names, experiences and brand promises). So, when we introduce social media for the first time to the higher ups in our organizations, and they hear the word “social” do they resist because they think it is “one big cocktail party.”  I don’t have the answer but it would be an extremely interesting study.  However, I do know that a name can sound fun, social, serious, smart, etc.  So, what would happen if we went to all of our executives before they heard of this phenomenon called social media and said, “We need you to consider a program in Strategic Digital Media because it has a tremendous impact on our business and our competitors are increasing their market share and chipping away at our profits?

I’ll answer my own question.  They would have said, what is this Strategic Digital Media, how does it affect my bottom line and how does this make our shareholders happy?  They would not have said, “Is this going to cut down on employee productivity and does this mean employees are going to be checking their personal Facebook pages all day?”  Of course, regardless of the name, you definitely need to do your homework and educate your executives. But, is the negative reaction and hesitation that many communications professionals face, due to a misperception of the name? Could it be the way “social” is perceived?

Another quick example I can share. When recently working with a client, we were tossing around hashtag names for a Twitter discussion. One suggestion was the initials of the organization and the word “social” attached to it.  So for instance it would be something like #XYZSocial.  The response to the team was…this makes it seem like it’s one big party. And, you know what…in a way it does.

Maybe we have spent past years viewing “social” as personal and party conversations.  But today, social media is so much more than your party talk; it’s moving markets, creating business and generating ROI.  So the question is:  Do we keep educating on Social Media or is there another name?  Would Strategic Digital Media have been a better choice? What do you think? Can we get past a name?

Jason Kintzler, who is the founder and CEO of PitchEngine, was kind enough to answer a few of my questions regarding how PitchEngine and Pitch^TM are helping communications professionals.  Here’s my interview with Jason:

Q. Tell me about the new PitchEngine platform and how it helps businesses and PR professionals to tell their stories?

At a basic level, it enables anyone to package their story content – text, multimedia and more – into a nice little package we call a “Pitch.” From there, your pitch starts connecting with your contacts, followers and fans. It plants its feet in major search engines so that people looking for you can find out what your story is, not just your address and phone number. It’s like the old Yellow Pages ad, but interactive and mobile.

Q. Why is search engine optimization so important today for companies as they share content?

As Brian Solis puts it, “Everything starts with search.” He’s right. SEO has been important for several years and many of the bigger brands have been able to leverage it. Our platform has really opened that process up to businesses and PR firms of all sizes. Think of it this way – everyone who comes to PitchEngine and creates a pitch has the same goal – to get the word out. Because of this, our authority in search has risen which can be leveraged by the crowd. We call this, “co-op seo.”

We were fortunate enough to partner with Jeff Herzog, one of the pioneers of the SEO industry for our new platform. I’ve learned more than I could’ve imagined in the last 18 months. It’s not just about having your story found, it’s about providing backlinks from an authoritative site like PitchEngine to your own corporate site. That’s why you can’t just do this stuff on a blog, for example. The real story here is that SEO used to be limited to big businesses and computer ninjas. Now, we’re providing it in a unique way to the weekend garage band or coffee shop.

Q. What are some of the greatest features and functions for professionals on the new platform?

Understanding the need is a big deal. This is a new kind of publishing mechanism. Unlike a blog or your website, which is on an island, a pitch is mobile – interacting with your site, social networks and search engines. We’ve had a year to hear what our users were looking for. We’ve spent months thinking through all of it on many levels. For the PR Pros, we’ve cooked-in new distribution methods like our media database partnership with MyMediaInfo and Technorati blogger outreach. We’ve also put a focus on more analytics for each pitch as well as the Supercharged SEO offering, which is really amazing. We’ve also tried to accommodate the PR agency by making it possible for agencies to have multiple users, all logged-in at the same time, working on various accounts. Agencies will even be able to resell or pass through the costs to their clients directly. We’ve tried to live by a few rules. Most importantly – simplicity is key.

Q. How has PitchEngine and the Pitch changed traditional PR, in terms of news release distribution and pitching story angles to journalists?

The best thing I ever did was create PitchEngine from scratch to serve the needs of PR pros and media – of all levels of experience and understanding. We didn’t build a “me too” kind of product, which has resulted in competitors trying to insert “social” into their traditional PR methods to keep pace. As you well know, it doesn’t quite work that way. You cannot make a press release “social” by adding a few share buttons. It’s a new ball game, and it doesn’t start with a traditional press release. As brands and businesses, we have to stop trying to get published and start publishing ourselves. If you wanted to see a great article about your client’s product or event, then write it, because it’s never going to be published the way you want it if you’re relying on a third-party to do it. If a journalist and/or news outlet finds your news compelling (which may be a result of 1,000+ people already finding it compelling on Facebook or Twitter), then they will cover it. Journalists and bloggers are news consumers, just like the rest of us. If they find something interesting, they’ll tell they’re readers. (Ex. David Pogue Tweets Release to 1.3 Million.)

Q. How often is too often to tell a story to bloggers, the media, customers, and other stakeholders?  Should there ever be a limit to your Pitch?

I think it varies by the subject matter. Most companies don’t share frequently enough. We’ve been able to help large public companies share their feel-good stories with their customers and investors. Before, they’d never take the time to draft a press release and pay for it to be distributed through a newswire. Plus, no media cared to write about the “fluff” that might actually be important to your brand. In this new media age, we have to build a bond with our customers or readers and sharing is a great way to do this. Be concise. Write well. But, write often.

Q. What’s next for PitchEngine with respect to social media tools and technology?

I get a little choked up thinking about it. Our vision for where to take things is grand and I believe in my toes that we can accomplish massive change. Instead of trying to push content at people, we’re going to make it findable. We can’t predict all of the technologies that will arise, but I guarantee we’ll be a driving force. We’ve been open to new partnerships with other emerging technologies that share our vision, and you’ll see the results throughout the next few months. If the old traditional services out there can keep pace, we’ll all be better served. That’s what makes it fun.

Here are a few of the questions that we will be posing that night:

1. How do professionals who represent a brand participate on Wikipedia?

2. As a source, where does Wikipedia fall on the trust barometer?

3. What do you do if you see negative and/or incorrect information on Wikipedia?

4. Do you think social media blurs the lines for students in the Digital Age? See NYT article:  bit.ly/asLtCN

5.  What advice do you have for today’s students on how to make the most of social media?

6. As an entrepreneur and social innovator, what is the biggest obstacle in turning vision into reality?

Of course, you may have questions that you would like to ask. We welcome your suggestions and ask that you post these questions in the #PRStudChat LinkedIn group.  Valerie and I are very excited about our one year anniversary and want to thank everyone for helping to build and grow the #PRStudChat community. We could not have done it without you!

We look forward to chatting with you on the 25^th.

The woman instructing the teens asked them to form groups and to move close together so that their knees were touching in a circle. Before she walked away she said, “If you really knew me you’d know that my young daughter struggles between two parents that are separated.  She has two different lives and it’s so hard for me to watch this….”

One group of teens began the discussion with a young girl who began by saying, “If you really knew me….” She started talking about how even though she’s a cheerleader, it doesn’t stop her from always worrying about the way she looks (and, if you only knew how insecure she really is).  The teen also admitted that she just does things to “fit in” with her friends.  Tears streamed down her face as she explained to the other teens what she really felt on the inside.  A young man began his discussion the same way, “If you really knew me,” and then talked about being teased about his weight….

For me, it’s one of those shows that I can’t watch without a box of tissues nearby.  What I found especially interesting is that before the groups convened, the instructor talked to the teens, offering what I thought was a clear message in the form of a hand drawn diagram. She sketched on a large piece of paper an iceberg with a line drawn through it to represent how the ocean water covers the iceberg. The instructor explained when you approach an iceberg on the high seas you only see a portion of what’s really there.  What’s underneath the water is the bulk of the iceberg and we don’t even know what it really looks like or how big it is.

It’s the same thing with people.  Her comparison then revealed that we show an image on the surface and it’s approximately 10% of what we show the world, as opposed to who we really are.  Can you imagine…only 10%?  It’s that other 90% that we keep fairly hidden because the 10% is, as she explained, “the fake part.” Now, I ask you to think about PR 2.0 and social media.  Do you think that social media allows us to give away more than 10%, to expose more of our personal brands or our company brands, so that people really know what’s beneath the surface?  Do you think it’s 20%, 30%, 50% more or is it the entire iceberg? And, is the percentage we show still considered fake? Is it just an image?  Or, is what you see what you get?

I believe that social media exposes more of what’s underneath the ocean water.  It levels the playing field and shows a human side to those who connect and share.  Passion comes out in conversations, whether they are in blog posts, on a Facebook wall, or tweets on Twitter.  I can actually tell the mood of my own family just by looking at their Facebook statuses.  What do you think, is social media exposing the iceberg and do you think that anyone or any company will ever expose a much higher percentage?  I don’t have the answer because everyone is different and so is every organization, but it’s a good question.  What do you think?

The very first #PRstudChat took place on August 19^th 2009. With our one-year anniversary quickly approaching, we wanted to do something really special by inviting a guest that everyone would know; someone who has made an incredible contribution to learning and collaboration. We’re honored to have this extremely busy social media professional and Internet entrepreneur join us on August 25^th at 8:30 p.m.  Our special guest is Jimmy Wales (@jimmy_wales), founder of Wikipedia!!

I met Jimmy a couple of years ago when he interviewed with me for my book, PR 2.0 New Media, New Tools, New Audiences. I was so impressed with his contribution to communications and the story of Wikipedia.  Jimmy joins us to answer questions about social media, collaboration and how PR professionals can participate in Wikipedia (the right way).

We’ll have more information shortly on the details of the session and more about the questions we will be asking.  For now, please help us spread the word that Jimmy Wales will be our #PRStudChat special guest for a super special one-year anniversary celebration!