10 Reasons Why I Won’t Tweet for You: The Problem with Outsourcing

by Ken on April 18, 2011 · 82 comments

Man Behind the CurtainI won’t tweet for you.

No matter how much you beg, cajole, or even offer to pay me, I won’t. But don’t worry, there are plenty of others who will.

I’ve been sitting on this post for a long time because I’m not the ranting type, but sometimes ya just gotta rant!

As I meet with prospective clients and put together proposals, one question I’m often asked is if I will take care of the day to day management and engagement on things like Facebook and Twitter. Sorry, but the answer is “No”.

When you call a company’s customer service line and you clearly are getting someone in another country who is reading off a script, you don’t like it. If we don’t like outsourcing there, why should we accept outsourcing in Social Media? The potential problems are much the same.

I am a consultant and Social Media strategist. I will work alongside you to create a strategy and plan, develop and implement a variety of tactics. I will help you set-up your Social Media properties and educate you along the way on how to use them to build and engage your community. There are a lot of things I can, and will, do for you, but tweeting isn’t one of them. [Full Disclosure: I DO have one client for whom I tweet, however they are a client with whom I am very close, to the point of being considered an "in house" employee. There IS a difference.] Believe me, if you really want someone to tweet for you, they are out there. We have them here in our area, and they offer pricing structures that include various levels of “I’ll tweet X amount of times each week for Y-Dollars”, and the more you pay them, the more they’ll tweet. Or, it’s a set fee per week or month for something as vague as “Twitter and Facebook management and engagement” with no real criteria as to what that means.

Here’s why I won’t tweet for you, and why you probably shouldn’t hire someone else to do the job for you.

1) I’m only one person with one voice – I admit, when I first started this business a few years ago, I thought tweeting for others would be a main part of my business. But as it has evolved, I understand that I can’t represent a lot of different people on the same platform. I’d have to have multiple personalities to handle more than a few accounts and try to have a distinct voice on each.

2) My voice is not your voice -You are an individual and you have your own voice. My sense of humor is not your sense of humor. More often than not people can tell when the person tweeting for a business aren’t the business themselves. They just can, especially if they KNOW you and your business. I’ve followed friends of mine on Twitter because I know them and their business. This is a small town. When I try to interact with them, I can tell whether it is the person I know on the other end, or some hack they’ve hired to tweet for them. And you certainly don’t want to have one of those “Pay no attention to the man behind the curtain” moments!

3) More prone to error – Coming off of number 2, it’s a dead giveaway when the Twitter account has your name or the name of your business spelled wrong. For two days. And a link to the wrong website in the Twitter profile. Sloppy. And yes, I’ve seen that happen.

4) Twitter account confusion – Like I said, I do tweet for one client. I also tweet for myself and my business. We’ve talked about the Chrysler and American Red Cross situations where someone tweeted from the wrong account. If you outsource to someone who is managing multiple Twitter accounts, the more accounts they manage, the greater the chance of them sending the wrong tweet out over your account. If you’re a house painter and you’re tweeting about your upcoming custom jewelry sale, people might start to scratch their heads.

5) Engagement suffers – It’s one thing to actually tweet on multiple accounts, and another to truly engage on those same accounts. And we all know that Twitter is an engagement platform, not just a broadcast or glorified RSS feed platform. As they grow their client base, the outsourced tweeter will find that they are pressed for time. The first thing that will happen is that they will tweet less for ALL of their clients. Then they will cut back on engagement. And remember: engagement isn’t just responding to people who talk to you. It’s talking to people first and initiating conversation. You’re not just responding, but also reaching out to others.

6) It either builds no relationships, or false relationships – If engagement suffers, so will the relationship building. And if any relationships are being built, it’s between your outsourced tweeter and your customers. It’s NOT between you and the customer. I walked into a store once and the owner was behind the counter. I followed them on Twitter and we had had some great conversations. I introduced myself and they had no clue who I was, despite me telling them I’d be in later that day for a specific item. They had even responded, “Can’t wait to meet you!” Hello? You talk to me yet just a few hours later you don’t remember me or what I need? A rather embarrassing thing for that business owner who had no clue what was being said on Twitter on their behalf. I mean, if you were invited to a networking event, you wouldn’t hire someone to go there and impersonate you, would you? We need to stop treating our online presence as if it is any different from how we would conduct business in person. This IS real life folks.

7) I’m not as invested in your brand as you are – It’s your brand, not mine. You know your stories better than me. You wouldn’t hire someone to run a print ad or commercial for you before approving it, would you? You’ve worked hard to build your business and brand and you need to make sure that whomever is handling it for you online also protects your brand. What if, just off the cuff, I tweet someone that might go contrary to what your business stands for? I’m not saying you need to micromanage, and certainly if you hire me, I want you to succeed, but if you are in charge of tweeting, or someone who works for you in-house is, there is less chance of your brand and image being compromised.

8) It won’t build a community – I’ve turned down several potential clients because all they wanted from me was the handling of their day to day presence. In one case I was told I wasn’t to engage, even if someone asked me a question. In another, the plan called for me to tweet three times a week. Shoot, I can do that in 30 seconds in my sleep. You can’t build a true following based on minimal tweets and no engagement. You can hang out with someone all day, but you won’t get to know each other unless you actually talk to each other.

9) In the long run it will cost you time, not save it – Many times people want to outsource their tweeting because they don’t have time for this “social media thing”. But it could end up using up more of your time. The one client I mentioned in point 8 wanted me to manage a Facebook page for a community based business in a highly competitive business sector. But I was told only to post what they wanted, and not to respond or engage with anyone. OK, so what am I posting? Probably something you had to write for them and then email to them. Doesn’t that take more time than just posting it yourself? And as for engagement, if someone asked me a question about this business, which is in a highly regulated and specialized category, am I supposed to ignore it? Or do I then take up your time via phone or email in order to craft a proper response? Again, using up MORE of your time in the long run.

10) Laziness eventually sets in – If you outsource to someone, especially someone who is handling multiple accounts, they will most likely start out gung ho and tweet like there’s no tomorrow. But inevitably, that will taper off. Eventually, after having set the bar high, they will retreat to a more comfortable pace and you’ll be getting the bare minimum out of them. Punch in on the clock, punch out on the clock. Another day of tweeting done. Ho hum.

In the end, outsourcing customer service, engagement, and interaction means one thing: you want to save money. And, you want to save it in possibly the most crucial area of your business: interacting and engaging with customers. You know, the people who pay you for your products and services so that you can stay in business and make a living. Outsourcing is a short-term solution with long-term implications.

So, no. I won’t tweet for you. My advice is that you either do it yourself (in-house) or don’t do it all.

What are your experiences with those who outsource their Twitter management?

Post comment as twitter logo facebook logo
Sort: Newest | Oldest
PYNTK 5 pts

At least you're honest and up-front about the situation. Social engagement is very time-consuming. It's almost impossible to keep up with what's happening if you're spinning your wheels managing multiple accounts. One of the reasons people still meet face-to-face is because they're looking for more genuine interactions. My experience has been the sobering fact that on-line chatter doesn't do much to add substance to my brand or bottom line.

JenFongSpeaks 20 pts

You know, I held this position for quite some time. And I still believe it's the ideal. But what I found with my clients is that I taught them what to do, got them started right, and then they got busy and the presence suffered. So all that preliminary work was wasted. At the end of the day, as a social media strategist, I want my clients to have an engaging online presence. And they just don't always have the capacity to do it themselves. Is NO engagement better than 2nd best engagement? I don't think so. I think it's important to know your industry, spend a good bit of time with the client so you understand their culture, and stay in constant contact with the client. In fact, I talk to some of my clients daily, and they know which topics I will send to them for them to respond to. But I do spend time developing relationships for them, and it's brought good results. Sometimes we have to temper ideals with reality.

KenMueller 1741 pts

JenFongSpeaks This is one of the times where we need to be honest with ourselves and our clients. If I don't think a client is going to be able to handle Twitter, then I will steer them away from it. And I do believe that there are no times when no engagement is better. I would rather see them focus on one area and do it well, than stretch themselves thin on a variety of platforms that they can't handle.

Part of this goes back to them not having time to do it properly. If you have to talk to them daily and spend time on the phone or in email, that all takes time. I still believe that doing it themselves is best and less prone to mistakes. And I have yet to see a great example of Twitter being done well via outsourcing. People have pointed me to what they believe are good examples, but when I look at them, I just don't see it. I've even tried to engage some of those examples and they've fallen flat in terms of engaging back in any meaningful way.

Again, let me reiterate: I'm not saying it can't be done. I just don't think it is wise. There are certainly exceptions to every rule.

JenFongSpeaks 20 pts

KenMueller I fully agree with giving them only the number of social networks they can effectively maintain. But sometimes even if it's one, unless it is a priority internally for the organization, it can fall to the wayside. I do believe that organizations can effectively outsource social media management IF the agency has worked in and understands the company's industry, and if there is a solid amount of communication going on between the agency and company. A skilled social media professional may even be able to better gauge social media opportunities and places to engage than a novice. Large organizations can afford departments and social media professionals to handle this internally. It has been my experience that this is not always the case for small to mid-size companies, and sometimes that is where bringing in a professional or agency makes sense. Again, not the ideal, but certainly when we begin talking in practical terms, it's what it takes to get the job done.

ginidietrich 5280 pts

I have three words: Chrysler F Bomb.

Enough said.

KenMueller 1741 pts

ginidietrich somehow I don't think that will satisfy everyone here.

ginidietrich 5280 pts

The point is that Chrysler outsourced their Twitter feed. The AE in charge of their account tweeted something that the company perceived as hurting their reputation. The kid got fired. The agency got fired. And Chrysler took their tweeting in-house. Lesson learned.

maryhruth 20 pts

We wrestled with this discussion a couple years ago on the virtual assistant forum I frequent. I'm a solopreneur, not an agency, but I do write tweets for clients under very specific conditions. The tweets are all links to the client's internet properties and they are solely concerned with announcing news regarding the business. The client also tweets, but with my help, the client doesn't have to worry about getting out basic information, and can concentrate on dialogs and relationship building.

While your post makes excellent points, with which I agree in many ways, surely you observe that there's a side to Twitter that is akin to the old PSA (public service announcement) - quick messages bearing news. Such updates can be safely and economically outsourced. At the same time, it's certainly true that at minimum, 80% of your interactions need to be personal if you hope to benefit from your Twitter activities.

KenMueller 1741 pts

maryhruth Hmm. I guess where I come down on this is: If they are tweeting on their own, why would they need you to send out those other more informational , PSA tweets? Can't they do that as well? I view Twitter more as an online version of "YOU" and your business. If you're behind the counter and a customer comes in, you do the engaging. You don't pull someone else out to speak for you.

I think the big difference in our respective understandings of the platform and the underlying philosophy. I just view Twitter as being most effective when it is incredibly personal.

maryhruth 20 pts

KenMueller maryhruth "I just view Twitter as being most effective when it is incredibly personal." Yup. Agree. Just like when you go to an in-person meetup, the most effective connections have a personal aspect, and the interactions as friends are far more powerful than purely business interactions. Nonetheless, you do introduce your business. Same 80/20 rule applies.

@Quartz164 28 pts

Working at agencies all my life I've seen it work both ways. Most of the time social media is best kept in house. However, some agencies are actually part of their clients’ marketing departments. The agency is involved in every aspect of their clients marketing...strategically and tactically. I’ve had my staff on-site at several of my clients 2-3 days a week. They become an extended part of their marketing department. In this type of relationship, it’s okay to have the agency execute social media tactics.

The topic is an interesting one and should be debated on a case-by-case basis. Should you outsource your print, radio and tv advertising? Direct mail? Public relations? Customer service? Each company makes these decisions based on a variety of factors. I've handled PR and crisis communications for clients for 15 years. Each time I've engrossed myself in their business and treated each client as if I worked for their company. A lot is based on trust and how comfortable you are with your agency. Are they part of your business or just an outsourcing tool?

When we’re talking about small businesses, 90 percent of the time it makes more sense to keep the social media in house.

KenMueller 1741 pts

@Quartz164 You make some valid points, Kevin. And I do understand about them working closely as an extended part of the marketing department. I guess where I take serious issue is that Social isn't always treated that way by agencies. And there are a lot of Social Media folks out there who all they do is get paid by a variety of clients to tweet and do Facebook for them. No strategy, no real engagement, etc.

The difference I see between Social Media and traditional media (print, broadcast, PR, etc) is that Social tends to be more immediate and in the "now". With traditional media there is generally a process of content creation and approval that takes place over time. You don't just tell an agency to create and ad, and then let them place it for you without any sort of internal approval and back and forth.

And in your field of crisis communication, the voice of is still that of the brand or company. If something goes wrong you work with the company to craft a proper response, but if someone is going to speak to the media or in front of the cameras, it will most likely be the official company representative, not someone from a PR agency, correct?

And your last point is important. Since I work primarily with small businesses, most of what I write here is from that perspective.

And knowing you, I'm sure you and I would certainly agree on more of this than we would disagree.

@Quartz164 28 pts

KenMueller I agree, there are a lot of agencies, and I use that term loosely, out there that use social media as a revenue source and just crank out tweets and posts.

As for crisis communications and PR in general...The best complement to me is when nobody knows that I've even worked with a client. All the credit goes to them. It comes across as authentic because they were properly media trained and not only conveyed the proper message, but back up their words. I see the spokesperson of a company as a medium. Some are better than others. The message I've helped create is still authentic. Many times the CEO or company spokesperson just buys into the message, but doesn't really create it...

Anyway, we agree on main issue.

KenMueller 1741 pts

@Quartz164 See! We do agree! I love that you like to stay in the background. I hold that same philosophy which is a big reason why I don't put a client list on my website and generally don't talk a lot about my clients. I'm there to help make the client do a better job of projecting and marketing their brand, not to put attention on myself. If I'm TOO visible, then I think that detracts from them.

@Quartz164 28 pts

KenMueller Unfortunately, that's because we're old school Ken! Great post. I love the Wizard of Oz photo as well.

donlafferty 5 pts

I disagree.

Although all your reasons are valid, they're absolutely manageable.

A well crafted strategy involving some form of hybrid responsibility works best when tweeting for a client. My community management specialists frequently forward incoming messages (tweets) to clients for their authentic responses. So even in those cases where we're doing 100% of the mechanical messaging, The Message, as well as messages we'd categorize as "engagement" are crafted BY the client.

We're just doing the button pushing.

Anybody who employs a Twitter strategy designed to drive high social currency in addition to appropriate corporate messaging is going to spend a fair amount of time curating valuable OTHER content for their time line. Remember, the popular wisdom requires a 12:1 ratio for maximum social currency.

In a world where the average American entrepreneur earns $75 per hour, are they really willing to pay all that money to find interesting content, or is it best to outsource this busy work?

This is where the social media consultant who offers community management can effectively provide value to a client by giving that work to a more appropriately compensated employee who has been trained and provided with client-specific messaging guidelines and documented work procedures.

This is business, not the cocktail party everybody wants to believe it is.

Mistakes may happen occasionally, but that's the nature of business in general, and the responsibility of good process and quality control to manage.

KenMueller 1741 pts

donlafferty I guess where I'd disagree is the difference between business and the cocktail party. If it's "just" business, that's sterile. It takes the human equation out of it to some degree.

Like you said, it can be manageable. But your employee's commitment to the brand is not what your client's is. As we move forward, I think you'll find more and more consumers want to know who is behind the account and if it is genuine.

As for the messages categorized as engagement, is there any real engagement? And if they have to craft the response, why not push the button as well? It's no different than sending an email, especially in terms of the time spent.

And as for finding content, it's not a matter of finding content, it's a matter of creating content.

Marijean 78 pts

donlafferty I'm firmly in Ken's camp on this. I haven't seen an example of an outsourced Twitter presence resulting in long-term relationships. You say you're just doing the button pushing, but how is the client actually engaged if they're never there to respond and interact themselves? That's the part I don't get -- and find seriously lacking in the outsourced model. I agree that it's not a cocktail party -- outsourcing is certainly not the answer.

CharterHomes 33 pts

donlafferty I agree with Ken and Marijean here. As an in-house social media specialist, let me add a few things:

Having someone tweet in house amplifies the potential of Twitter. I don't just broadcast, create content, or converse "cocktail party" style - I find new opportunities, new connections, and even new potential clients as I go. I regularly find new ideas that help me be more effective as a marketer for my company - and certainly not just on Twitter.

Removing the middleman from this process makes it more likely that great ideas get implemented across our marketing team.

I'm also able to connect with local businesses, homeowners, and prospects (and smart guys like Ken) - and then meet them in REAL life... which, as a Central PA based business, is important. In a world that's both growing rapidly and becoming hyper-local at the same time, it's that much more important to be connected to both the big ideas circulating in the social media sphere and to local movers and shakers. Outsourcing this outsources much of the benefit.

donlafferty 5 pts

@ken @Marijean and @CharterHomes - I absolutely get what you're saying and have no argument with the validity of your points, but the purist doctrine you're supporting is a barrier to entry to SM, especially for a company with little knowledge of the landscape who might be depending on you for guidance.

@Ken, your comment regarding content would lead one to believe you never provide your community with any content you don't personally create. That philosophy puts a tremendous burden on you (or the client), and limits the value you're able to provide to your community. Do you not retweet excellent content that you haven't created?

@Marijean, although it's possible to have very valuable, mutually beneficial Twitter relationships, for most businesses, the relationship does not reside in the realm of Twitter, it resides much deeper where revenue is at issue. Getting a friendly Twitter user to retweet your stuff is valuable, but only if it reaches target conversions that travel all the way through the sales funnel.

@CharterHomes, while your immersion in the business certainly gives you a better feel for all the reasons you mention, but I don't buy that it's "more likely" you'll drive higher conversion rates simply because you're a W-2 employee and not a 1099 business partner. I'll take it one step further. You talk in terms of opportunities, connections and potential clients when I think what you mean is target conversions that feed into your top line objective - which, by the way is increased revenue. Period. I know social media consultants that make that happen for their clients every day, in fact, the client can rarely keep pace with the sheer amount of conversion opportunities we provide.

Again, to all, I am in agreement with your textbook aspirations for SM practice. In a perfect world where everybody "gets it" you'd hear no argument from me. The reality is, most companies aim for some form of best practice in ALL aspects of their business, but they usually fall short and work hard to close the gaps. Social Media is no different.

Offering a company flexible short, medium and long term options to entry in the SM arena is a more realistic approach, and in my experience, sometimes that includes a hybrid plan of tactical execution, with the ultimate goals of documenting their strategy, instituting an in-house training program, training them up, and walking away.

KenMueller 1741 pts

Don, I understand what you're saying. As for content, yes I RT good content from others. But it's content that I have read and approved of in some way. I would never let anyone retweet content from my account without my approval. I feel the same way about people who retweet things they haven't even read, just based on the title.

And I think this might be a GOOD barrier into an entry into SM. My job is to come alongside companies and teach them how to use these tools. If they can't handle Twitter, then I honestly would rather they didn't try or outsource it. I steer a lot of my clients away from Twitter for that very reason. I believe in the long run it can do more harm than good.

And yeah, I guess I am a purist. It still comes down to Twitter being a very personal medium for me, not an RSS feed.

Like I said earlier Don, I think we'll probably have to agree to disagree. I'm not saying that it CAN'T be done, I just question whether it should. It's not just a matter of Twitter, or even other things, it's more of a philosophy regarding the individual culture of each business. I know several entrepreneurs who are incredibly busy, and yet they do an incredible job handling their own social media, despite the time constraint issues.

donlafferty 5 pts

KenMueller Then disagree we shall, Ken. To put an exclamation point on this, I just ran across this on a LinkedIn group. Franchising the Outsourcing of digital marketing: http://www.jobmagic.com/job/Digital-Marketing-Business-Opportunity-Job-United-States-6517758.html

jasonkonopinski 383 pts

donlafferty Don - I'm in your camp on this. I've seen first hand how agencies can execute managed services with excellent results. Communication isn't just between a client and their customers/prospects, ya know. ;) The same expectation of communication exists between the agency and their client.

We need to get past this Us vs. Them mentality.

KenMueller 1741 pts

jasonkonopinski donlafferty I don't see it as an Us vs. Them mentality. I know plenty of agencies who feel the same way about Twitter and will refuse to do that one portion of it because of the intimacy. Can it work? Yes. But I believe it works better in-house when it's genuine. And again, if you outsource, there is a much greater chance of error, and error that can't be corrected as quickly.

jasonkonopinski 383 pts

KenMueller donlafferty And for every agency that won't tackle managed services, there's an equal number who will - and execute it incredibly well. And quite frankly, you have no understanding of how the relationship between that agency and their client is managed. It might be much closer than you think - and that's where managed services can really shine.

KenMueller 1741 pts

jasonkonopinski donlafferty I know some execute it well, but I would say that more do a poor job. I've seen it first hand with some Fortune 500 companies as I've tried to engage them via Twitter. And I've seen it from the inside at some of these agencies. If the agency person is in-house, yes it can work. But many of these people are managing multiple accounts.

And that doesn't even take into account how disingenuous it may be to tweet under another person's name.

Again, an area where we'll need to agree to disagree.

Mjoshua 9 pts

I like it when you rant. You do the cranky thing really well - especially professionally; building an excellent case. I doubt you'll find many who can solidly disagree. When I have business twitter accounts converse with me, I'm very confused. Who am I really talking to? Who is this person.

Do you think it's best to encourage people to take the "Myname_Mycompany" approach when using a business twitter account? That way it's their voice within their company and not some faceless logo avatar and personality?

KenMueller 1741 pts

Mjoshua I would say either the my name or the myname/mycompany works. I think a name and a face works best. And if you just use the company name, the profile should have the individual name.

Davezilla 5 pts

I'll take the opposing side. DISCLOSURE: I am the Interactive and Social Media director for a national ad agency. We tweet and post status messages for our clients. However, to your point about being "an in-house employee," we're sort of in that area as well. We know some aspects of our clients' businesses better than they do. Is that a fail on their part? No! It's because we care about our clients' success and their customers happiness. Most agencies DO care about their clients' success. We take great pains to create content calendars and messaging matrices alongside the clients to ensure messaging and voice meet expectations. We're also transparent about saying that we are agency folk and don't pretend to be employees of the clients.

I think as long as the relationship between agency/client is strong, you understand each other's brand DNA and work together on the messaging, it can work out fine.

ChrisVogt 6 pts

Ken this is a great article! At one time I thought about outsourcing the social media management for our business but I came up with many of the same conclusions as you outlined in this post. As Gwen mentioned below, I really struggled with authenticity of not being the one interacting with the social media community. It just didn't make sense for our business. Do you find those who do outsource social media for their business being transparent about it?

KenMueller 1741 pts

ChrisVogt I think that is another problem. I think most aren't transparent about it. They act as if they are the person whose name the account is in....Think back to the last election. Everyone talked about how President Obama was tweeting, and we later found out he didn't even know how to use Twitter. I think it's more of a problem when the account is in a person's name, as opposed to the name of a business.

The one client I tweet for, I was hired because they wanted my voice, not theirs, and it's not a secret that we try to hide from people. I'm always surprised when people DON'T know it's me.

KenMueller 1741 pts

ChrisVogt Oh, and I have to say that you are one of the people I look at as an example of how to do it well. I'm glad you chose to keep it in-house and not outsource.

ChrisVogt 6 pts

KenMueller ChrisVogt Thanks Ken! We are completely committed to social media as a business and we appreciate having blogs like yours as a resource.

globaltolocal 6 pts

My company, Global to Local, a translation/interpreting provider, had a similar situation in which we paid a contractor for blog postings. Problem is, it appears that some of the content was "borrowed" from other blogs!! What a disaster!! Wish I had read this a few months ago......now I am the ONLY person writing our blog, which can be found at www.globaltolocallanguagesolutions.com. Thank you for the informative topic!!

gwenm4 10 pts

Great post! And I completely agree with you. Like you, I do have one client that I manage day-to-day updates for -- also a close relationship where I am very entwined in her business goals, audience, etc ---and we meet weekly to schedule content and tweak the strategy. There are so many "experts" out there who offer those pricing models you noted, without even working with the client to discuss what they really want to get from their social media efforts. What's the strategy? If your goal is to create authentic relationships, how can you do that if you're not the one engaging with prospects and current customers?

KenMueller 1741 pts

gwenm4 I agree, Gwen. And regardless of what your goals are, I believe that one of them should ALWAYS be creating authentic relationships!

Trackbacks

  1. [...] be looking for the magic cure, too, like simply shoving all the social media stuff to the intern, or hiring a consultant or an agency to just “take care of it for you” without wanting to invest much of your own effort. The key characteristic here is avoidance, where [...]

  2. [...] Mueller’s “10 Reasons I Won’t Tweet For You: The Problem With Outsourcing” “I walked into a store once and the owner was behind the counter. I followed them on Twitter [...]

  3. [...] be looking for the magic cure, too, like simply shoving all the social media stuff to the intern, or hiring a consultant or an agency to just “take care of it for you” without wanting to invest much of your own effort. The key characteristic here is avoidance, where [...]

  4. [...] The latest opinion trend I’ve been seeing with regards to social media marketing is whether or not it should be outsourced. Particularly, the aspect of social media community building and management – i.e. an agency tweeting on behalf of its brand client. I’ve read posts from those who are for it (such as this one from Jeremiah Owyang) and against it (such as this one from Ken Mueller). [...]

  5. [...] I see “marketers” and agencies offering Social Media packages that include “one tweet per week” or “five tweets per week”. And I scratch my head. Do we really think that works? [...]

  6. [...] accounts. I see “marketers” and agencies offering Social Media packages that include “one tweet per week” or “five tweets per week”. And I scratch my head. Do we really think that works? Does it [...]

  7. [...] bringing me on board to handle the day to day social media management (which is something I hate doing, and of which I’m not a big fan), I had no cooperation or input [...]

Previous post:

Next post: