That said, I think the author did a fine job in pointing out this caveat, whereas many other "social media experts" do not. I think he also focused on what to me is more admirable in Dell's case. They humanized a gigantic computer company and brought customer service to a new level. The @NameatDell is genius, because it makes people feel that they are interacting with a person when they're really interacting with a brand. And today, that's just priceless. Dell also learned early on the power of listening, and being an observer before jumping into the conversation. Too often, companies just want to be front and center and forget that they're basically invading someone's conversation.
So in the end, good for Dell! What other companies do say "Good for XX"? Who do you give Twitterprops to?
I agree with you that Dell's strategy of initially listening was effective. It can really benefit companies to understand social media tools before they jump in and attempt to integrate it into their operations.
ReplyDeleteGap.
ReplyDeleteThe company just announced that it would reverse its decision to modernize its logo after it received serious backlash from customers on Facebook and Twitter. Apparently Gap threatened to eliminate the classic navy box that frames the serif, all-caps GAP. And this simply didn't fly with Gap loyalists. Thankfully for Gap, the company was listening and responding to customers' comments. Good for Gap.
Maria - Interesting insights on Dell's use of Twitter. Interestingly enough, in my consulting project last year we used Dell as an example of best practices for using Twitter. We approached the idea that Dell was 'humanizing' itself, as you say. Now that I see your post, however, and I think about the results Dell has seen from their Twitter account, I wouldn't necessarily use Dell as a 'best practices' example anymore. Thanks for the insight!
ReplyDelete