3 differences between social media & F2F relationships:
Social media connections are (arguably)
1. quicker to form…
2. weaker, and…
3. more transparent to observers…
…than offline, face to face (F2F) relationships.
The implications of these differences:
Transparency enables Targeting. I can identify potential customers online with relative ease. It’s easy to see what topics interest a Twitterer and strike up legit conversations about mutual interests.
Speed enables Offline Integration. With appropriate targeting, it’s a pretty short step from a weak online tie to a phone call or even a lunch conversation. Send personal invitations to events you’re hosting or a conference you’re attending. The 1-1 nature of social media helps you here. It’s not a blast email from your company but a DM on Twitter or a note sent to a LinkedIn connection – from you.
Weak ties means transience. It’s a well known statistic: 30% of Twitter users don’t return after a month. The twittering executive may not have time to stay in 1-1 conversation with you when their numbers hit 1,000+. And you may not have that kind of time, either. Choose your prime relationships carefully, nurture them, and spend time crafting offline invitations for those relationships (ideally leading to sales handoff).
Related posts:
- Social media = a hybrid venue for B2B marketing.
- Social Media Networking = just like networking. Mediated by technology, that’s all.
- The end of top-down message control
- For the swipe file: impressive B2B tech ad in social media
- A paradox found in grassroots feedback loops
Related posts brought to you by Yet Another Related Posts Plugin.