photo by esparta

Ah, the power of communication. A new Stanford study of consumer behavior at Starbucks shows that posting calories on the chain’s menu boards lowers customers’ calorie counts without substantially affecting revenue. Sounds like a win-win to me.

Based on transaction data from Starbucks locations in New York, Boston and Philadelphia, the study found that calorie postings led to a six percent reduction in calories per transaction. Interestingly, almost all of the change related to food purchases; average beverage calories remained pretty much unchanged. Hard to break that Grande Caffè Vanilla Frappuccino®  habit, I guess (430 calories with whipped cream, by the way).

Since changing behavior is a huge part of marketing, you might ask yourself what simple communication steps you might take to move the needle. It doesn’t have to cost much, and even modest results could have a dramatic impact on your organization.

photo by moonlightbulb

If you’re interested in effective communication, I’m sure by now you’ve read Chip and Dan Heath’s Made to Stick: Why Some Ideas Survive and Others Die. One of the most compelling concepts explored in this fascinating book is the Curse of Knowledge. Here’s what the Heaths have to say about it:

People tend to think that having a great idea is enough, and they think the communication part will come naturally. We are in deep denial about the difficulty of getting a thought out of our own heads and into the heads of others. It’s just not true that, “If you think it, it will stick.”

And that brings us to the villain of our book: The Curse of Knowledge. Lots of research in economics and psychology shows that when we know something, it becomes hard for us to imagine not knowing it. As a result, we become lousy communicators. Think of a lawyer who can’t give you a straight, comprehensible answer to a legal question. His vast knowledge and experience renders him unable to fathom how little you know. So when he talks to you, he talks in abstractions that you can’t follow. And we’re all like the lawyer in our own domain of expertise.

Here’s the great cruelty of the Curse of Knowledge: The better we get at generating great ideas—new insights and novel solutions—in our field of expertise, the more unnatural it becomes for us to communicate those ideas clearly. That’s why knowledge is a curse. But notice we said “unnatural,” not “impossible.” Experts just need to devote a little time to applying the basic principles of stickiness.

JFK dodged the Curse [with “put a man on the moon in a decade”]. If he’d been a modern-day politician or CEO, he’d probably have said, “Our mission is to become the international leader in the space industry, using our capacity for technological innovation to build a bridge towards humanity’s future.” That might have set a moon walk back fifteen years.

Every industry, every field and every endeavor has its secret language: the jargon, the technical terms, the acronyms and shorthand that enable us to communicate quickly among our peers and colleagues. But what about the poor schmuck who has no clue what the hell you’re talking about? That poor schmuck may be a customer, prospective donor or other would-be stakeholder you’ve made feel inadequate, confused and slightly stupid.

If you want to communicate with the outside world, the first step is not assuming anyone knows what you’re talking about. If I don’t live in your world, you’d better make it simple for me. Lose the jargon. Break down the technical language into something anyone can grasp. If you’re not ruthless in identifying and eradicating everything that stands in the way of my understanding you, then your “communication” may be a wasted effort.

photo by lepiaf.geo

I have a confession to make.

When I first decided to start blogging nearly nine months ago, I dreaded it just a little. Any writer can tell you about the slightly nauseous feeling they get when faced with a looming deadline, and the thought of a regular schedule of self-inflicted blog post deadlines (something no one was asking me to meet) was a bit intimidating.

What if I don’t have anything to say on a given day? What happens when inspiration fails me? What if I just don’t want to?

I got over it. And the way I got over it, to paraphrase Nike, is by just doing it. My first post was no deathless piece of prose, just a simple welcome and explanation of what the hell I hoped to do here.

As I try to add a little something of value to the vast, dark reaches of the web, I’ve come to one simple conclusion: Every professional communicator should be doing this. No excuses. No B.S. Just do it.

Why? What I get out of it is as good a place to start as any.

It’s good for my writing. What does it take to become a better writer? Uh, writing. A lot. And rewriting. And editing. Then writing a lot more. Improvement comes through constant, consistent effort. Practice really does make perfect … or at least pretty good.

“Gimme a break,” you say. “Bad enough I do it every day at work, now you want me to do it in my free time, too?” Oh, quit your whining. You wouldn’t be in the communications business if you didn’t (on some level) enjoy writing.

And here’s the good news: You can blog about anything your little heart desires. I write mostly about communications and social media because that’s what really fascinates me. Someday I’ll start another blog on horror fiction because that really fascinates me, too. But for you it might be the daily drama of parenting. Or gardening. Or Death Metal. Or how vaccinations are part of a government conspiracy to track our every movement using alien technology. If so, I probably won’t be reading you, but go with God.

It’s good for my brain. Even the laziest, most ill-conceived and poorly structured post will generally force you to think and maybe do a little research. I’ve found myself with the germ of a half-assed idea that has dragged me deep into the web, reading all kinds of fascinating stuff that, admittedly, has little to do with my original thought but stretches my brain in new directions.

It’ s good for my employer. Blogging was my first real step into the social media arena. It and Twitter have helped me build a fairly robust network of fellow professionals that I can tap when facing issues outside my areas of expertise. Anything that makes me better at my job is good for the people who employ me.

It’s good for my career. The organization I work for isn’t ready to delve deeply into social media. I can’t wait. My current and future value as a communications pro requires building experience in crafting social media strategies and comfort in using the tools. Poke the Beehive is as much about building my skills as it is sharing my knowledge and expertise with others.

It’s good for my soul. Let’s face it. If you’re in marketing or communications, you produce work on a regular basis that makes you hate yourself just a little. Maybe others tell you it’s great, it’s brilliant, it’s just what’s needed. And you look at it and think, “This kinda sucks.” Because you don’t create in a vacuum. You have people you report to, committees that review and weigh in on your projects, politics to contend with, compromises that must be made. And the result is work that may meet or even exceed the standards of others, but not your own.

(An aside: If this isn’t the case for you, if you work where you never have to compromise or settle for anything less than your personal best, then give me a call. I’d like your job.)

My blog, on the other hand, is me for better or worse. Sure, there’s a certain degree of self-editing that goes on (because I enjoy having a job, and friends, and family), but what I write here is for me, and you to the extent that I want to create something others find valuable. The limitations you find here are my own, not the result of editing by committee or business realities or any other external influences.

So when someone says, “Hey, that was a great post!” I feel pretty good about myself. Actually, I feel pretty good when someone says “Hey, that didn’t totally stink up the internet!” But that’s because I’m easy to please.

photo by tim and selena middleton

Communication isn’t rocket science. Most of us have been doing it since the moment of birth. Sometimes it takes a slap on the ass to get us started, but that’s just because some people are more obstinate than others.

If you’re not a communications professional (years of experience with the right job title and responsibilities) you may feel a bit intimidated when someone like me says you need to do a better job of communicating with your stakeholders or customers. I’d like to make this really simple and non-intimidating.

I believe that roughly eight out of every 10 people are basically good, decent folk looking to do the right thing in their lives, both at work and at home. The ninth guy is a clueless idiot beyond help. The 10th is an evil sociopath. These are the people who either get talk shows on FOX or end up running major movie studios.

For the rest of us, my guiding rule for communication is simple: Communicate with others as you wish they would communicate with you.

Do you want to be lied to, misled, confused, dazzled with bullshit, talked down to, starved for useful information, taken advantage of or left feeling slightly dirty? Me neither.

If you communicated with clarity, honesty and sincerity, focused on helping others with their issues and eager to share what you’ve learned, I guarantee you would be ahead of two-thirds of the yowling pack out there.

Yes, I’m a stickler for things like grammar and punctuation, spelling, correct word usage and all the other things that good writers fixate on. But I also appreciate sincere effort and a willingness to learn. You can master this stuff even if you never passed an English test. And one of the great things about social media is that there are legions out there who want to help you get better at it. You just have to ask.

For every email, memo, marketing piece, ad, press release, blog posting, etc., consider what you would think if you were on the receiving end. If the answer doesn’t make you happy, take another shot at it.

You’d expect a slide presentation on visual and creative thinking to be, well, visual, and Kelsey Ruger doesn’t disappoint. But the pictures are in service to some pretty rich content. If you’re wondering why we continue to be plagued by godawful PowerPoint presentations with lots of text, bullets and cheesy graphics, the answers can be found here. And the solutions as well.

I may be a writer, but I’ve always loved strong visual communication. Must be all those comic books I read growing up.

I started this blog about six months ago with the idea that I would share what I know about marketing and communications for nonprofit organizations and small businesses, two areas in which I have some degree of expertise. (You may be asking yourself, “Shouldn’t he be done by now?” Sorry, I’m long-winded. It’s going to take awhile longer.)

And while I have written some on communications strategy and planning, copywriting, visual communication and other fairly traditional issues, what really draws me to the keyboard is the subject of social media and how best to integrate these new tools and technologies into our communication efforts.

On this subject I don’t claim to be an expert, guru, idiot savant or anything else; I’m learning as I go, just like the other 99 percent out there who are figuring it out. That’s the great thing about being around at the birth of something … we all get to make mistakes together and maybe stumble onto something amazing.

I will say that as someone who has spent many years working in communications and who (I hope) has a pretty good handle on it, I think I’ve got a pretty good foundation for developing a certain level of expertise in social media. This blog has in fact been my greatest teacher, and as I’ve added my involvement in Twitter, LinkedIn and other social networks, I think I’m getting the hang of it.

There are many individuals out there who are light years ahead of me, and I thank them for their unending generosity in sharing what they’ve learned. You’ll find many of them in my Twitter stream. I’m not stupid; if you have an opportunity to shadow the best at something, do it.

And then there are those who, for all their self-proclaimed “expertise” in social media, seem to have built it on shaky ground. Knowing how to game Twitter or work Facebook doesn’t make you expert in crafting a communications strategy that helps to achieve mission objectives. Trust me, anyone who’s spent any time doing it can spot the fake.

So where am I going with this? As I said earlier, I find myself most drawn to social media, its implications for nonprofits and small businesses, and how we might put it to work in achieving mission or business objectives. Is this where I should focus my writing, or should I continue to share what I’ve learned through my experience with traditional marketing tools and tactics?

If a review of what I’ve done thus far is any indication, it seems like I’m already headed in the former direction. I discovered this by playing with Wordle.

Wordle is a neat little website where you can generate a word “cloud” from a list of words. Better yet, you can plug in the RSS feed from your blog and generate a cloud from your deathless prose there. Words that appear more frequently are given greater prominence in the cloud.

The image you see above is the result of plugging Poke the Beehive into Wordle. Seems to me I’m already writing pretty extensively about social media. Again, my question to you: What would you like to see more of, social media or a broader look at communications and writing strategies? If I don’t get any feedback, I’ll assume that the 10 or 20 people who don’t have anything better to do than to come to this blog have finally found something better to do and I’m just having a conversation with myself.

That’s OK. I don’t mind talking to myself. But if you’re reading this, a little feedback please. How can I be of service to you as my reader?

photo by d. sharon pruitt

As more people crowd into the social media space, knowing who’s worth your relationship-building time and who’s a waste of effort becomes more imperative.

I don’t know what your criteria are, but for me making the first cut is pretty simple: Is the person in question social or antisocial?

My definition of sociability is pretty straightforward. Are you open about your identity and transparent in your motives? Do you engage in conversation, share your thoughts and opinions, pass along what you’re finding online and share your knowledge and expertise? Or do you see this as just another opportunity for endless self-promotion and selling?

If it’s the latter, don’t bother me. When I’m interested in what you’re selling I’ll find you. Better still, be of value to me before the sales opportunity and I’ll probably put you on my short list of potential vendors.

Keep in mind that sales and marketing are two distinctly different activities. The American Marketing Association defines marketing as “the activity, set of institutions, and processes for creating, communicating, delivering, and exchanging offerings that have value for customers, clients, partners, and society at large.” Social media is very much a marketing opportunity; the key is in how you approach it.

There are those who don’t share my opinion re blatant self-promotion. They see nothing wrong with using social media the same way they use traditional media. I’m not going to go into all the ways in which I think that’s just plain shortsighted and stupid. I’ll save that for another post.

For me, being a true creature of social media boils down to the following:

You are identifiable. Your Twitter profile includes your real name, photo and a profile that tells me something about your background and interests. Tweeting on behalf of an organization is fine, but tell me who’s doing the tweeting and what your connection is to the organization. You have a blog where I can learn more about you and what you think. Your LinkedIn profile is rich with details of your background and experience. The same with Facebook and other networking sites.

You are present. By present I mean I can easily find your web site, blog, social media outposts, Google profile, etc. I’m always skeptical about a Twitter user who doesn’t provide a link to a web site, whether it’s a blog, company site or even a LinkedIn profile. Point me to where I can learn more about you or your organization. Point me to some MLM scheme or a site that teaches me how to generate 10,000 Twitter followers in a few days and you’re gone.

You are sociable. You don’t have to be a great conversationalist. Use the tools to make contributions to the conversation, whatever it may be. Share your opinions, point us to resources we might not know about, ask questions, reach out to others who share your interests.

You are honest. If your end game is to sell me something, don’t try to hide it. If you’re making money off links in your posts, don’t hide that, either. We all have to make a living. Deception is a poor foundation for a social network and will ultimately bite you in the end, figuratively and literally.

These are just the basics as far as I’m concerned. Anything less is antisocial media. What do you think?

Who says statistics have to be boring? Combining the right images with the right facts can pack an emotional punch every bit as powerful as the most compellingly crafted story.

Unfortunately, most of us think that people will respond to “the facts” when presented in a clear, straightforward manner. Forgot you’re dealing with human beings, didja? As overly rational and unemotional as I am, I still respond when you push the right buttons … just as we all do.

Jeff Brooks posted recently on how emotional messaging in fundraising appeals beats rational messaging every time. The study he cited found that emotional content in advertising outperformed both purely rational and a rational/emotional mix (significantly so compared to rational-only).

There’s a reason we respond to the emotional appeal … it’s because we’re wired that way. As much as you’d like to dazzle people with your brilliant logic, logic alone won’t do the trick. You need to make an emotional connection. I’m more likely to stop and think if you do.

The video above does a pretty good job of this. It contains a number of facts that would probably elicit a “hmmn, interesting” response if presented in a whitepaper or typical PowerPoint presentation. This approach grabs your attention and forces you to consider the ultimate question: “What does it all mean?”

Watch and then tell me it doesn’t make your spine tingle just a little.

art by wiselywoven

Facebook may have the numbers and LinkedIn may be a more effective business networking tool, but Twitter is by far the most provocative and interesting of the social networks. That has become very obvious to me.

Last week I started a discussion regarding my thoughts on Twitter’s shortcomings in several of the groups to which I belong. They include MarketingProfs, Nonprofit Professionals, Web 2.0 for Nonprofit Professionals, Tweeple and Twittering. I simply asked members of these groups to read my post Time for a Twitter Reality Check and then return to the discussion to share their thoughts. And share they did.

(An aside: If you ever needed a reason to join LinkedIn or increase your participation in it, the group discussions more than justify the time investment.)

The drawback to this conversation was that it took place across several different groups of people. I wanted to get them together in the same room.

Rather than synopsize the group’s thinking or simply write another response to the many comments my original post generated, I thought I’d bring the discussion here to continue the conversation. I think it illustrates quite well that (1) Twitter means different things to different people, and (2) we’ve only begun to scratch the surface in terms of our potential use of it.

And away we go …

I think the main issue … is the numbers approach. True, it doesn’t have the reach of Facebook’s 250 million+ users, but it’s a completely different beast.

Much of the slow uptake can be leveraged at the Twitter creators themselves – there have never been a really good introduction to new users since its inception. That’s improving now (the new Welcomepage, the Twitter 101 for Business) but it can still be improved on for sure.

Yet where Twitter really shines is in building relationships (much like LinkedIn for business networking). I’ve met some of the smartest minds around on Twitter and they continuously help me to improve on a daily basis.

It’s also incredibly useful for reacting instantly to a crisis for PR companies; or raising awareness or funds for nonprofits; or just making new friends. It’s a tired old cliche but you do get out of it what you want to get out of it. – @dannybrown

I agree with your general premise that Twitter is ‘not all that’. But it definitely is ‘some of that’, if you will. My opinion is that the key to Twitter is learning how to filter out the useless from the very useful. Twitter is a powerful tool that can introduce you to a world of intelligence and intelligent minds on any given subject if you are selective and targeted in people you follow and those that you choose not to block. It can absolutely be a time waster if you let it, but by spending your time wisely on Twitter you can expand your horizons tremendously. And by adding to the knowledge pool with useful information on any given subject, you’re helping yourself and others. It will be interesting to see where it goes from here.- @kurtmalueg

I agree with Kurt. I set up a Twitter account, reluctantly, because unlike FB you can’t explore it first.

Within days I was getting an endless stream of follow requests – since I hadn’t completed my profile I wondered who all of those weirdos were. I got so many, in fact, that I finally closed the account until I could find a good reason to start up again.

Twitter is not friendly to beginners, and as Dan mentioned, nobody I know is on it, at least not yet.

I much prefer Linkedin for business and FB for fun. FB’s format permits more expansive communication and now, apparently, you can use it on your cell (something I have no interest in doing). – Sarah Thurston

Becoming conversant in Twitter has been a winding road. Lots of the experience has come through trial and error, or example set by other businesses that are doing an admirable job. Yet, when I recall learning the internet or email, that was largely self-taught as well. And I think that’s part of the coolness of the experience. (A new frontier!)

I agree that the apps that support Twitter, as independent businesses, are scattered. Ironically I have found most (tweetlater, twitpic, tweetdeck are my faves) via third-party searches rather than from Twitter. Yet, I now get why that is and now that the relationships of Twitter are blossoming, it doesn’t matter so much. What matters is the sharing. The great word-of-mouth. And reaching a new generation of potential alliances locally as well as nationwide. – @DesignCtr

Seeing your discussion post and comments, I read quite a bit of your blog added it to my Reader feed; clicked through to read many links that you’ve passed on; followed you; retweeted the slideshare deck (that’s now quite a chain of RTs) and returned here thinking,: “the other 95%+ aren’t relevant at the moment-some.. maybe later.” Connecting with people with common fields of interest and diverse perspectives, “who enjoy helping others communicate more effectively” defines the value of my Twitter experience, an exploration I can’t imagine elsewhere.

To reference Emily Dickinson, “I’m nobody…” and had you not started this discussion I wouldn’t have found your blog nor your Twitter stream and the wealth of references you have already shared.

I don’t see that as a Twitter downfall. Twitter, Facebook, LinkedIn-they complement each other as resources and loci of conversations, sharing platforms. And I agree with Danny here: the power of Twitter is that it IS user-defined & exactly what you want to make of it: from a news and information resource/feed to knowledge & research sharing and relationship building.

Regarding reducing noise and increasing usability, have you tried an interface like Tweetdeck or Seesmic to sort, group, focus on a specific interest, a scheduled chat or other hashtag thread? I’ve only half your twitter-time, and follow half as many yet… I would be lost without one of these tools.

Another thought: have you sought out scheduled chats in fields of interest?
The first that come to mind are #pr20chat (Wednesday’s 8-9 PM ET) moderated by @BethHarte, #socialmedia chat (Tuesday’s 12pm ET) organized by @MackCollier and @JasonBreed who have also put this site together around it- http://hashtagsocialmedia.com. Next Tuesday’s discussion will be moderated by Ann Handley (@MarketingProfs). There are several blog-related chats, #kaizenchat from @conversationage, Valeria Maltoni, and #blogchat. Are there any np chats already organized where you could potentially contribute and find new insights and connections? Perhaps you could start one You’re already following all the np-engaged folks I know. Then there are the best of company-sponsored webcasts w/twitter Q&A (e.g. Radian6′s conversation with Brad Dancer of National Geograpic Channel) non-promotional and, if in your sphere, engaging-in every sense.

In the end, we do have to assess and measure (or its just a time-sink), and the ROI is different for each of us whether we are here as individuals, representing a company/organization, or both. (You’ve probably read Beth Kanter’s post from last week; I’ll share it here for others grappling with this: http://beth.typepad.com/beths_blog/2009/07/bridge-conference-social-media-roi-mapping-metrics-to-strategy.html ). To date on twitter, I’m a long way from meeting my personal maxim, “Create more value than you capture” – I’ll have to stay on to make up for it. Meanwhile, I’m looking forward to more of your tweets and blog & in return hopeful some of the way-over-140-characters above suggest ideas that enrich experience richer. - @dc2fla

Look at it this way: Twitter is a cocktail party, Facebook is a barbecue, and LinkedIn is a trade show. How much you get out of a cocktail party in real life depends on how you work the room. Some are great at it and others see it as a complete waste of time. Also, a very small percentage of the world will attend that cocktail party (same with twitter).

Some of what’s on twitter you can use, most of it you can’t. The people following the spam bots and other undesireables are likely using an autofollow tool that follows anyone back who follows them first. Personally, I wouldn’t want that but some people have a good reason for using them and the having riffraff in their userbase is the price they pay for not missing out on real followers.

As Diane mentioned, there are chats related to particular interests that are an online conversation. She didn’t tell you how to participate, though, and it is tricky to do. The easiest way to follow one of these chats is to go to http://tweetgrid.com/party and type in the username of the host, the “hashtag” (topic) and your own username. You can follow the discussion and tweet right from tweetgrid.

For example, every Wednesday I host #wahmwednesday (Work At Home Moms Wednesday). I post details on http://wahmwednesday.com and to follow the chat you would go to http://tweetgrid.com/party and enter @wahmwednesday #wahmwednesday and then your username.

It’s true the amount of spammers is obnoxious. Hootsuite http://hootsuite.com has just introduced a new feature where you can report spammers right from your user control panel. I always block spammers and I recommend you do the same.

If you have a brand that is discussed on social media, you really do need to be on twitter. Recently, Motrin, Amazon.com and CNN did some things that angered their customer base, and in two of the cases it happened on a weekend and their reputations were tarnished in a short amount of time. Fortunately they all recovered, but had they not been on twitter, it could have created larger problems for them.

For a great list of twitter applications, you can go to http://microblogging.com and there is another owned by @searchguru but I forgot what it is called.

I think it is a mistake to dismiss twitter, because your customers and prospects might not agree with you, and it’s important to meet them where they are. – @mobienthusiast

While I can nod my head at the factual points you make about Twitter user counts, etc., in your blog post, I believe the tool is what you make of it. As users it’s our responsibility to patrol the Twittersphere and keep it as clean as possible. I know people are often afraid to block others for fear of some sort of repercussion, but the reality is the more you block the “Get 1,000 Followers a Day!” Twitterers, the more likely it is their accounts will get reviewed and booted.

We can’t put the responsibility of keeping the community useful completely on the shoulders of the Twitter crew. As has been noted, the creators and managers of Twitter are fairly hands off so it’s up to us to filter when we can. Send those names of spam accts to @spam, block when you don’t like what you see, and keep your stream clean.

I block liberally, and without guilt. My criteria for blocking are pretty simple:

1. If anything in the user’s stream talks about making big money fast on the Internet, blocked.
2. If they’ve got anything posted about looking at their private profile somewhere else, blocked.
3. If more than three languages are tweeted at any point in time at complete random, blocked.
4. If the user is following a ton of people and hasn’t tweeted a thing, blocked.
5. If the user’s avatar is racy, blocked.
6. If all the user’s followers are almost all women or all men, blocked.

Just as it’s our responsibility in life to keep our streets, local parks, and neighborhoods clean and safe, so is it our responsibility to do the same in our online communities. Maybe the next part of the responsibility equation is petitioning to Twitter to come up with expanded rules of use and a way of enforcing them?

And as far as finding quality people to follow goes, that’s just a matter of time and research. What you put in is what you get out.

Yes, technology should be user friendly and all that jazz, but there are times when it won’t be as friendly as we’d like. Twitter can definitely do better in helping new users get acquainted with the site, but…as far the rest goes, i.e., facilitating new relationships, can we really ask for that? Does Facebook do a great job introducing us to new or useful contacts? No, it doesn’t. It’s just a platform with more to it than status updates. And it’s just as easy to waste time there as it is on Twitter. – @TransitionalTee

Twitter seems to me to be useless. I’m a late comer but upwards of 99% of what I’ve seen on it has been spam. I have even less optimism about it than you do though. I think it is a passing fad that will go the way of altavista, aol, and myspace. – @PASociety

I am sadly in the 93.6% of users with less than 100 followers, however the followers I do have are translating into visits on my website and, in-turn, this is leading to increased numbers of professional membership organisation subscribers. There is a direct link between new followers and my list of subscribers, so I cant say it is entirely useless.

Feedback from my subscribers indicates that Twitter enables followers to receive ‘sound-bites’ without having to get ‘down and dirty’ with irrelevant content on my site. You may argue that this may indicate a lack of engagement, but it seems to be working for me and the content on my site is quite diverse.

Here is a list of other organisations successfully using Twitter in the UK – Department for Children, Schools & Families, Scouting UK, Womens’ Institute, Institute for Physics, CPD Institute, and the Chartered Institute of Personnel Development.

The bulk of the above orgs use Twitter to increase recruitment, retention and improve engagement. If they are experiencing my small-scale achievements it aint that bad.

It would be interesting to hear what others have to say in different areas of the not-for-profit sector. – @memberwise

Your timing is funny, because I joined Twitter one week ago, and today I posted a Tweet that I was massively unimpressed. Am I the only person who minds that their web server is very slow and their site lacks simple useful features?

I run an NPO dedicated to awareness and education about banking the stem cells in umbilical cord blood. My website “Parent’s Guide to Cord Blood” has one of the highest Google ranks in this field (highest for an NPO), where I get a half million “hits” per month, from 25-30 thousand unique readers.

A few dozen companies and NPOs in the #cordblood arena have set up a Twitter presence. They keep sending out Tweets which amount to “buy a contract with our bank” or “join and donate (blood or money) to our charity”. One charity in particular is using a PR firm to broadcast a news story every two hours. Its like getting today’s news digest, which all of us in the field have already seen, blasted at you every two hours. It is not clear to me that anybody is reaching the general public… even the national network of cord blood banks @BeTheMatch only has a few hundred followers.

It seems to me that people who follow you are either your friends or competitors or spammers. Aren’t Tweets to this audience just broadcasting to the already converted? The working concept of social media is to draw in friends of friends, but if you are not seeing steady growth in your followers then you are not drawing in new people. You do not get the same ROI as having a website which can always reach new people running a Google search. When I compare reaching thousands of new readers per month on the internet to having a hundred some odd followers, its not worth the effort. – @fverter

Does Twitter have problems? Yes. Will it eventually run its course while something else takes its place? Yes.

BUT Twitter is now. Landlines have run their course. I don’t know anyone under 30 that even bothers to have one. Landlines have been replaced with cell phones. That doesn’t mean phonathons were a waste of time.

Then there are the statistics on how many appeal mailings go directly into the garbage without ever being opened. Traditional Annual Giving has low low conversion rates – why should social media be any different? It’s not a better from of Annual Giving and outreach. It’s just the newer form of it. – Amanda Dunkin

From my side of the table I am seeing a few charities using twitter remarkably well, furthering relationships with donors, and reaching out in a way and engaging that was never possible before… I hope that as time passes some of these charities will be better at explaining how they did it – and while there is no golden key here – twitter – and most social media is all about relationship building. It’s out giving the people who support you and follow you what they need and what they want. Notice I didn’t say anything about YOU the charity. Once you get it through your head that you need to focus on what your donor needs instead of what you need – you will find yourself holding the gold key.

Donor centered fundraising isn’t rocket science folks. But I’m surprised at how many get it wrong.

I did a post about how one charity is using twitter – you can read it if you are interested: http://www.ideadesign.ca/the-naked-idea/everyones-atwitter-over-twitter/ – John Lepp

If you’re treating Twitter like Direct Response, you’re not “getting it”. We’ve been using it on @alscanada and enjoying great conversations with people.

We’ve nudged some of those conversations along into real time relationships with people by visiting them in person. People on twitter have held 3rd party events for us, advertised for us, sent us items for an online auction, we’ve been interviewed by the Toronto Star (largest circulation in Toronto) as a result of Twitter… and more.

The ways in which Twitter can benefit a charity are numerous, but it’s not an “ask for money & receive money” platform. It’s an engagement tool.

If you’re looking to immediately have thousands of followers who give you money, you are looking in the wrong direction. Nobody wants to be seen as a dollar sign. They do want to be seen to be making a difference.

Use twitter to converse and build your champions and you’ll find it to be a very worthwhile investment… and you’ll learn a lot about what your supporters think about you. – @Laurie_Pringle

If it wasn’t a certainty before, the internal Twitter documents that were leaked without Twitter’s permission a few days ago make it clear. What Twitter wants all those posts to be is not an ad platform, but rather a pulse. “The pulse of the planet” were their exact words.

As Laurie said, if you think joining Twitter is somehow just going to turn around your business or non-profit, you have your head in the clouds. And that’s also the best that can be said of any “social web marketer” who tells you Twitter is the answer to all your troubles, and that you can’t live without it.

Twitter’s creators did not build Twitter to be a marketing engine or mass-communication device for professional entities. That’s not what Twitter is, fundamentally. As one might guess (although many have not), just by the name and the basic functionality, Twitter was built so that any old whoever could just put in their 2-cents about anything, and that those cents could collectively mean things, or indicate things, or perhaps even do things.

If you’re using Twitter as its founders imagined, it’s actually plenty useful even if you don’t have a single follower. That’s part of what hash tags are for e.g., #ALS). Go ahead and search for a topic that interests you, using the hash tag. You can get idewas, see interesting users, contribute your 2-cents, and maybe have a conversation, even without followers/following. – @hendrey

I agree that most people are misusing twitter. Now assume that everyone used twitter correctly… used hash tags so their tweets were correctly categorized, etc… Used searches and saved searches, etc… I still contend that the amount of time spent tweeting would need to be massive for the average non-profit or business to stand out in the vast wine dark see of conversations that twitter can be.

Am I exposed to content I would not normally see because of twitter? Yes. Is it better than what I can get on my own? Debatable.

Where twitter wins, and facebook to a greater degree, is in the “warming” of the internet. Search is cold and scientific. You get a list of results from google… a faceless entity. With twitter you can get recommendation directly from people. (Again quality of the recommendation is debatable). I think most humans prefer this. I know I do. I’d rather go to a recommended mechanic than one I found in the yellow pages or on google.

So there is the secret to twitter. it’s word of mouth with a blow horn. – @LuisDeAvila

I’ve been thinking about combing through the people I’m following and narrowing it down to about 20 to make my homepage stream comprehensible.

Most of what I see – and these are all people or organizations I have genuine interest in – are simply links to articles I’m getting already in my RSS feed from them. Twitter is exactly like you said: “an incredibly powerful communication and social engagement tool” and to use it only to promote your [fill in blank] is a huge, redundant waste.

Most organizations – especially established corporations – are still seeing social media as just another ad placement. And that’s why their social media efforts are ineffective. It’s *social*. You need to use social skills to make it work for you. You can’t pick your nose and you can’t just talk about yourself. - @theakinyon

Where I have found Twitter to be very effective is in trading ideas with a modest number of great people in and out of my profession (Product Management). Some of the exchanges have been just fun, some have been very thought provoking. Am I exploiting it as some kind of mass media outlet. No, and I never wanted to. Am I finding value in it? Yes, but only by focusing, pruning, and being very selective, while at the same time being authentic and helpful. I suppose you could call my use of Twitter akin to a publicly visible but very concise discussion group. - @trevorrotzien

Like anything else, Twitter will become a more effective communication tool as more people use it effectively. So early people who are using it correctly, need to continue to spread the word on how to do so. Some of that will be online, but much will need to be offline. – @timjpriebe

I look at Twitter as a startup with huge potential, like Google or Facebook were a few years ago. Personally I use Twitter as a marketing channel to bring people to my website and blog. Some make direct money of this by generating enough traffic to their blogs to be attractive for AdSense to place ads. Others are looking for jobs and find offerings, or they can attract recruiters to their CV / LinkedIn / Xing / Viadeo / Hi5 webpage. Still others get user feedback and support requests (like Dell). Or they distribute coupons, ‘secret passwords’, promotions like Starbucks and generate massive physical traffic to their outlets. Some use it to attract people to their Craigslist ad extending reach. CNN and many other media bring traffic to their websites and news channels. The British and Swiss Government use it to distribute information about events, politics and legislation. Churches distribute bible verses. etc. etc. So there are many faces and uses of Twitter.

You can’t really say that users are only interesting if they’re active. It is the normal business model for broadcasters to have passive users and still they make money out of the business model (news or entertainment against suffering commercials). Similar for ‘gurus’ and celebrities who give some little stuff or nice words to their fans. The user activity lies in consuming the information, justlike reading a newspaper. Listening to the global chat. And sometimes this becomes very active like during the Iran elections, where even the White House asked Twitter not to interrupt the service, as it gave voice to the Iranian opposition (and channels to CIA and NSA, probably).

Is no one ‘using’ (what do you mean by ‘using’) it? Have a look at Alexa stats: yesterday 3.45% of Internet visitors (most from US) used Twitter (Google: 34.35%; MSN: 11.69% sinking; Facebook: 21.93%; AOL: 2.34%). With this Twitter is on rank 15 of the top sites accoring to Alexa. Not bad. No one??

‘Using’ for evil? NO. Most ‘users’ are listeners, spectators, consumers. Personally I’ve found huge value and insights from using Twitter. I found stuff and made connections with interesting people I didn’t know about 5 months ago, and I’m a rather senior guy.

Numbers lie? You trust Nielsen? Have a look here http://en-us.nielsen.com/main/news/news_releases/2009/june/time_on_facebook . 3712 pc year on year growth in the top 10 social networking and blog sites list.

And just thin of the combination potential if Twitter did join forces with Amazon, Goole, CNN, Facebook or whatever. Does Twitter as a company have a value? Yes? Well, the founders already founded Blogger and sold it to Google. Why would anyone want to buy it? Think.

Ok, nuf 4 now. Sure, I do agree with some of what you say, BUT, I’d advise not to underestimate the power of Twitter. I think it will become or already is a major force on the web. And the potential is by far not exploited. Creative firms and users have found and will find ways to build new businesses, marketing approaches, distribution models based on Twitter. - @top007

Wow. Martin said most of what I was going to say, and better than I could ever say it. To review: Twitter may not be for everyone, and that doesn’t have to be a bad thing. It’s basically the difference between real and virtual connections.

Just a comment on the porn reference, that I don’t think has been thought of yet, or if it has, everyone is keeping it to themselves: Pornography has been the major driving force for every technology breakthrough we’ve made.

The key with Twitter is, you’re not obligated to follow back. I follow people I find interesting, and to date, that’s a little over 2600, although, as part of The Experiment, that number will decrease. I have as of this writing almost 3300 followers, and I would hope that those that are following me find me interesting or fascinating as well.

Twitter is a tool. Just don’t act like a tool when you use Twitter…. - @MatchesMalone

I read your piece about Twitter and my response is that you get out of Twitter exactly what you put in to it. I have been involved with Twitter for less than a year as @togetherwf. I have met many wonderful people all over the world. We tweet with each other often, sometimes share e-mails and phone calls, and yes, on a number of occasions have met in person. I have connected with many nonprofit organizations, some of which are now participating in my blog. There are many people who want to make genuine connections and do some good in the world.

Many people say they don’t have time for Twitter. My response to that is, building relationships does take time regardless of how you do it. But how many platforms give you an opportunity to build a relationship with someone in Germany while sitting in you livingroom in Pittsburgh? – @togetherwf

Thanks again to everyone who participated in the conversation. It’s my blog, so I get the last word. I agree with much that was said as to what’s already being accomplished through Twitter. That said, I look forward to the day when Twitter (or whatever replaces it) matures to the point where it becomes as useful and ubiquitous as email or the web itself.

photo by mel b.

Twitter is the tool I hate to love. When I first became aware of it in 2007, I thought it was ridiculous. Now I’m in the Twitter gerbil wheel, tweeting and following and searching for the right people to follow and blocking people and unfollowing people and on and on.

It’s hot. It’s sexy. Someday soon someone will spend buku bucks to buy the thing and it’ll be bigger than ever. Or the Google Wave tsunami will drown it. Heck if I know.

What I do know is this:

No one’s using it. And by no one I mean most of the world’s population. Twitter won’t make public how many users it has, but various semi-informed guesses put the number anywhere from 5 to 10 million. To put that in perspective, the current U.S. population is around 305 million and the world population is north of 6.7 billion. Even the 10 million divided by 6.7 billion is a whole lot of zeroes to the right of the decimal point.

Most of those using it aren’t using it. Join me in the wheel and it feels like the Twitterverse is busy, fast and furious. But 5 percent of Twitter users account for three-quarters of the activity, according to a recent study by Sysomos, a social analytics company. And 21 percent of users have never even posted a tweet.

And all the ballyhoo about celebrity users and their Twitter activity? Please. Sure, Ashton Kutcher tweets his 2.9 million followers like a fiend, but there’s nothing in that stream of any interest to me. Oprah Winfrey has tweeted a grand total of 56 times since signing up in April. I’m sure her 2 million followers are waiting breathlessly to see what the 57th tweet will be. Britney Spears and her people have managed just twice that number of tweets to her 2.5 million followers.

Most of those using it aren’t followed by anyone using it. This is really sad: 93.6 percent of users have less than 100 followers, and 92.4 percent of users are following less than 100 people. If you’re a taco truck or coffeehouse NOT located in New York or Los Angeles (where you’ll find the most Twitter users, a real shocker) or some other big city, good luck convincing those 17 people in your area who are on Twitter to come check out your business. (Maybe that Yellow Pages ad isn’t completely useless after all.)

Most of those who ARE using it are using it for evil. OK, not most. But many. All the creeps and scam artists who used to try to cheat you out of your money on the phone or through direct mail have graduated to Twitter. When you read “Get 1,000s of Followers!” think “Make Money Stuffing Envelopes!” or “Where Shall We Send Your Sweepstakes Winnings?”

The numbers lie. When Nielsen says that American Idol pulls in 20 million viewers a week, I know what that number represents. When Verified Audit Circulations tells me that the Wall Street Journal has 2 million subscribers, I understand that, too. But when you tell me you’ve got 20,000 followers, that number has no credibility with me.

Take a stroll through the follower lists of the most respected professionals on Twitter who have big numbers and I’ll bet you find hundreds or even thousands of computer-generated porn bots, MLM hawkers, social media “gurus” trying to sell their  e-books or other “make big bucks FAST” schemers.

That’s not a network, that’s an untargeted junk mail list.

(Here’s a tip: Viagra Headley and Delight Ouellette aren’t real people. Neither is NikiL09238. She and her sister NikiL09433 tried following me but I blocked them. Great names for porn stars, though.)

If you’re foolish enough to follow back some of these idiots, your stream quickly fills up with sewage.

I could write a lengthy post just on the fact that so many Twitter users treat it like every other mass media outlet, using false engagement to mask blatant promotion, but I’ll save that for another day.

Sorry if I sound a little crabby, but it’s frustrating to watch what could be an incredibly powerful communication and social engagement tool degenerate the way it has. Unfortunately I think it will get worse before it gets better. As more people flood the Twitterverse (trends suggest it’s coming), we’ll have to wade through more useless garbage to find real people of value to connect with.