Skip to main content

Why It's Hard To Do Employee Interviews Well


Awhile back, Steve Crescenzo came up with the idea of the “C.R.A.P. Awards” to designate worthless employee communication that says nothing, means nothing, and interests no one. (This article is worth a read.) A couple of problems:

#1: Getting approval
  • Social media is simple and reductive. Subject matter experts think in complex terms and prefer to have all the technical angles of their work represented.
  • What the public finds interesting about employees, may actually be offensive to them. 
#2: Sensitive or confidential material
  • A lot of the interesting stuff about what people do cannot be shared with the public
  • Stereotypes abound about government/corporate secretiveness, so content that purports to "reveal" may seem like propaganda.
A better approach might be to engage the external public with your mission, using techniques you can actually execute on social media without too much hassle. These ideas are adapted from the excellent infographic now posted at Contently:

#1: Give people an understanding of your mission in the context of what they already know.

Take a picture of something or someone you work with, and tie it to a day or topic of broad interest.
#2: Give people a chance to take a photo of themselves in the context of your mission.

Ask the public to take photos of themselves interacting with you, with hashtags. The purpose is different than what’s illustrated here though – instead of expecting praise you should expect a lot of complaints. Overall the purpose is to connect and build trust – so the fact that anyone takes the time is actually OK.

#3: Give people something to do that relates to your mission.

Put the public into your mission by giving them something to customize and post.
__
Photo by Scurzuzu (Creative Commons). All opinions are my own and do not represent those of my agency or the federal government as a whole.

Popular posts from this blog

What is the difference between "brand positioning," "brand mantra," and "brand tagline?"

Brand positioning statement: This is a 1–2 sentence description of what makes the brand different from its competitors (or different in its space), and compelling. Typically the positioning combines elements of the conceptual (e.g., “innovative design,” something that would be in your imagination) with the literal and physical (e.g., “the outside of the car is made of the thinnest, strongest metal on earth”). The audience for this statement is internal. It’s intended to get everybody on the same page before going out with any communication products.Brand mantra: This is a very short phrase that is used predominantly by people inside the organization, but also by those outside it, in order to understand the “essence” or the “soul” of the brand and to sell it to employees. An example would be Google’s “Don’t be evil.” You wouldn’t really see it in an ad, but you might see it mentioned or discussed in an article about the company intended to represent it to investors, influencers, etc.Br…

What is the difference between brand equity and brand parity?

Brand equity is a financial calculation. It is the difference between a commodity product or service and a branded one. For example if you sell a plain orange for $.50 but a Sunkist orange for $.75 and the Sunkist orange has brand equity you can calculate it at $.25 per orange.

Brand parity exists when two different brands have a relatively equal value. The reason we call it "parity" is that the basis of their value may be different. For example, one brand may be seen as higher in quality, while the other is perceived as fashionable.

________________
All opinions my own. Originally posted to Quora. Public domain photo by hbieser via Pixabay.

Nitro Cold Brew and the Oncoming Crash of Starbucks

A long time ago (January 7, 2008), the Wall Street Journal ran an article about McDonald's competing against Starbucks.
At the time the issue was that the former planned to pit its own deluxe coffees head to head with the latter.
At the time I wrote that while Starbucks could be confident in its brand-loyal consumers, the company, my personal favorite brand of all time,  "...needs to see this as a major warning signal. As I have said before, it is time to reinvent the brand — now.  "Starbucks should consider killing its own brand and resurrecting it as something even better — the ultimate, uncopyable 'third space' that is suited for the way we live now.  "There is no growth left for Starbucks as it stands anymore — it has saturated the market. It is time to do something daring, different, and better — astounding and delighting the millions (billions?) of dedicated Starbucks fans out there who are rooting for the brand to survive and succeed." Today as …