I’m beginning a new experiment. In the past, I was following the usual advice to pick one or two platforms and concentrate on those. I fell [...]]]> Social media is like the mythical creature Medusa. Besides the fact that if you go in unprepared you’re likely to get stoned, social media has many slithery heads.

I’m beginning a new experiment. In the past, I was following the usual advice to pick one or two platforms and concentrate on those. I fell into that mode automatically because of my current time constraints.

Watch what happens when we take the higher intent of that platitude and balance it out with the higher intent of social media in general. The reason to pick a few is so that it is more convenient for us to stay on top of the communications and to interact fully on each platform. The reason social media is so popular is that it is about what is most convenient for each user as far as interacting with their circles of influence.

Here’s my new take: be regularly active on a few platforms, facebook and twitter in my case, and maintain a presence on as many other platforms as can be easily automated. I plan to make it clear on the other platforms that I’m checking in sporadically, or at least not daily, and will continue the conversation then. This allows people who do not happen to choose facebook or twitter as their primary platform to receive information from me in a timely manner on their preferred platform(s) while still maintaining my own time considerations by not having to keep up with dozens of platforms multiple times a day.

I’d been formulating this plan for a while but a wordpress plugin came across my radar today that helps to automate this plan to a great degree. It really caught my eye because the plugin is currently 80% off and the proceeds are going to fund asthma research. (I’m a sucker for a good deal and a bigger sucker for a charity!)

Go check out the WP-Syndicator plugin and see if it fits with your own social media plans.

Today has been an S.O.S. day (Shiny Object Syndrome). And just like the mariner in distress that SOS means I need help. (Because I feel rather stupid and addicted!)

I [...]]]> Ryan Healy recently wrote a couple articles that came to mind today:
Why People are Addicted to Info-Products
Is the Internet Making Us Stupid?

Today has been an S.O.S. day (Shiny Object Syndrome). And just like the mariner in distress that SOS means I need help. (Because I feel rather stupid and addicted!)

I realized I was looking for my “hit” by refreshing email, twitter, facebook, and not doing the things I wanted to get done today. So I focused that “nervous energy” into writing this blog post. This has a few positive results.

The first positive result is that I have now created more content, which is one of my tasks for every day. I just happened to get it done earlier today than I usually schedule my content creation.

Second positive result, I will have a legitimate reason to go on a social media site (to post a link to this blog post) and then get off. If I go with no specific outcome in mind, I end up idling on twitter following random links I tagged earlier for follow up.

Third positive, I’m getting a hit of my own personal mix of neurochemical “happy juice” from several aspects. I love creating, so I get a hit there. I am getting something done ahead of schedule, so I get a hit there. I have a small win to celebrate, so I get a hit there.

And the biggest positive result, as far as I’m concerned, is that I’ve just done something productive rather than succumbing to the Resistance (as Steven Pressfield calls it in The War of Art) and I’ve won a small battle against Avoidance (as T. Falcon Napier calls it).

All four of these men are good at all three (congruence, alliances, and customer focus) so when I emphasize one or another aspect for each it is only for example purposes. [...]]]> Yesterday’s post riffing on Mashable’s 6 Challenges brought to mind a few folks that are really good at congruence, alliances, and being customer-centric.

All four of these men are good at all three (congruence, alliances, and customer focus) so when I emphasize one or another aspect for each it is only for example purposes. Without further ado:

Dr.Mani is a heart surgeon in India who treats children with congenital heart defects. He funds the surgeries through donations as well as through his own information marketing efforts. I hold him up as an exemplar in congruence. He has a consistent message across platforms and across time. He demonstrates that congruence through what he says in his blog posts, what he tweets and retweets on twitter, what he interacts with on facebook. He has also started to segregate some of his different aspects by creating multiple twitter accounts: @DrMani for the gestalt and non-profit aspects, and @infoprofitz for the information marketing specifics.

Mark Joyner is called the “Godfather of the Internet” for his ability to make an “offer you can’t refuse” (he is even giving away the book on it: The Irresistible Offer). His world changing projects develop through his constructs. I hold him up as an exemplar in building strategic alliances. His social media is not promotion driven, in fact he rarely sends out links — even for his own products. This is partially because Mark is selective about who he accepts into his program to promote his Simple·ology programs and relies on those partnerships for the promotion, while he builds the relationships — with his partners and with his prospects.

Marlon Sanders is a marketer through and through. His online presence is focused on one thing: producing and promoting products. This is a great thing because he is an exemplar at being customer focused and consistently overdelivers on what he promises. As an example of that, he is starting a Quickstart call this evening for his 6 Week Round Table. This may not seem like a big deal, but he is charging less than a quarter of what the typical “guru” (with little to no experience) would charge. Rewarding those who purchase early and being humble enough to create a “round table” rather than lording it over others from the head of the table shows Marlon’s commitment to his clients.

Paul Myers is a great marketer with a minimal presence on the social web. Yes, he has facebook and twitter accounts, but is rarely active at either. I hold him up as an exemplar of managing his social web presence through minimalism. Paul has a ton of great marketing resources and his primary mode of communication is through his email newsletter (which is worth it’s weight in gold!). He shows a way to be present, but not active, on the social web.

Notice, that the four men I chose as exemplars are all “old timers” — they’ve each been doing their thing online for over a decade and are still going strong. The biggest lesson here: find what works for you (and your clients) and do it with consistency, through strategic alliances, and with a focus on what’s best for the customer.

Here is my response to Gary’s question “are there more you can think of?”:

I hope the first guy was misquoted. ”Be everything to everyone” means you’re anything but yourself. [...]]]> Today’s post is prompted by a Mashable post “6 Challenges to Managing a Brand on the Social Web” shared by my friend Gary Walter.

Here is my response to Gary’s question “are there more you can think of?”:

I hope the first guy was misquoted. ”Be everything to everyone” means you’re anything but yourself. I agree with the transparency, especially upon screwing up, and think he and/or the editor missed the mark.

Congruence is the key to what was said about making sure internal personnel know what external message to communicate. Same thing applies to individuals. And by being congruent you can *never* be everything to everyone.

It’s much more useful to polarize people and increase the gap between lovers and haters of your brand and to make sure you get as many people your brand touches out of ignorance and indifference as possible. The clearer you are on who the lovers of your brand are the less time/money/energy you’ll waste on the indifferent and the haters.

Another area they missed was choosing your allies. The alliances you make define your brand as much as the actions you take. As one mentor said ”we’re Jets and they’re Sharks.”

In many ways, this turns into an issue of congruence as well. Knowing who you are and what you stand for (and against) makes alliances easier to choose. If there is no way for me to serve your brand lovers, or vice versa, it is obviously not going to be a very good alliance.

Which leads to the last piece I think they may have skimmed, but didn’t clearly hit: being client centric. Yes, you must cultivate the relationships, but even then it needs to be based on a win-win-win situation, not just because you’ve mandated that ”we’re customer focused” or the horrible platitude that ”the customer is always right.”

By keeping the people you serve at the center of the planning and execution, you’ll not only have a clearer plan but you’ll develop stronger brand lovers, etc. “You cannot serve two masters” + “in order to get everything you want in life help others get what they want.”

And all of this applies equally well when applied on the personal level, as a small business, as a corporate entity, or as a church. Any time you’re serving others it becomes a marketing and sales situation. Marketing to let people know who you are, whom you serve, and in what capacities. Sales to get people to take action for their own benefits.

What do you think is missing from my additions to their list?