Big Businesses Befuddled by Blogging

A new report is out from Makovsky & Company and Harris Interactive that looks at the state of blogging among Fortune 1000 companies.

And results are...drumroll please...most companies are still struggling with what to do about blogging.

Let's get to the results:

- Nearly half of senior executives polled do not have corporate policies pertaining to blogging, although 77% believe that their organizations should address such policies.

Analysis: While this number is higher than earlier reports, it still points to a larger problem, which is the lack of knowledge about what employees can and can't say (regardless of whether they are on the clock or doing "business"). Fact is, companies need to have guidelines in place regarding, e-mail, blogging, IM, message boards, etc. This is not necessarily to be restrictive, as most policies are common sense stuff, but rather to raise the issue among employees and actually encourage productive conversations.

- Even though 12% of senior executives say their companies have taken legal or other action in response to a blog, only 20% report having a formal process in place for monitoring blogs written about the company.

Analysis: This is just ridiculous! If you are a Fortune 1000 Company, most likely people are talking about you. You should monitor blogs as a way to gather information, just as they certainly all monitor MSM. For goodness sakes, just pay some high schooler $15 an hour to monitor for you, or better yet, pay them $100 to set up free monitoring services like Blogpulse and PubSub.

- A minority (15%) say that someone in their organization is currently writing      a blog related to the company or its activities.

Analysis: Is this referring to official company blogs only? If so, then it ignores the thousands of employees who mention work-related material on their blogs.

- Only 30% of senior executives report that they have a thorough understanding of the term “Internet blog.”

Analysis: Not much to say here. This number is LOW...however, I wouldn't read a ton into this based on the methedology of the study (see below)

- Further, 8% report organizing a team of dedicated people to write sanctioned blogs about the company and its activities.

Analysis: If this is a team tasked with developing a blogging concept that makes sense for the organization, great. If these are the only individuals allowed to blog, that is just stupid and wont work anyway.

- Three percent said their company changed its product, service, or policies      because of publicity generated by a blog written about it.

Analysis: This is the number I really expect to rise over the next few years as companies turn to social media as tools for a larger strategy of co-creation. This is where you can use blogs as an information resource and find your real ROI.

My Conclusions:
1. Knowledge and understanding of blogs is still extrememly low, even in large corporations. I imagine this is even more so in certain sectors (manufacturing for example) and would have liked to have seen the industry breakdown.

2. The fact that more businesses are not at least monitoring blogs is pathetic. This is free information. This information matters, and if you think it doesn't that is fine and dandy and will save you a few pennies...right up until the day it does matter and you discover you are screwed because you thought you were too good for a bunch of internet dorks to bring you down.

3. These surveys continue to blend the distinction between corporate bloggers and employee bloggers. While blogging policies will likely be similar for each, the goals surrounding and effectiveness of each will be very different.

4. This area is still wild, full of excitement (much of it overhyped) and rich with opportunity. The opportunity includes the chance for a company to develop a valuable point of differentiation or the potential for a compnay to alienate employees and consumers. Blogs are scary to big businesses, however in today's competitive climate, companies may feel compelled to rush into the fire and hope they do not get burned. Why? Because they know someone else will, and if you can get through the flames unscathed, they just may find nothing but clean air on the other side.

Methodology disclaimer: The survey examined 150 "leading executives" from Fortune 1000 companies (6 had never even heard of corporate blogging). Though it says that the responses are from a large range of sizes, locations, industries, etc., the breakdown is not provided. Perhaps more importantly, it makes no reference to what type of executives were polled, i.e., whether they were in communications, HR, finance, etc. Here is the punchline:

"Data from this sample are not weighted and are representative only of the body of individuals surveyed. In theory, with a probability sample of this size, one can say with 95 percent certainty that the results have a sampling error of plus or minus 8 percentage"
points."

8 points represents a pretty big swing and this calculation doesn't even consider whether certain variables should be weighted.

Summary: This survey provides more evidence for some familiar themes
1. Companies still are struggling to figure out what to do about blogging
2. Not enough companies have a blogging poilcy in place
3. Not enough companies monitor blogs

---

Technorati Tags: blogs, corporate, Harris, Makovsky, survey
 

Comments

[Amanda Chapel]

The Makovsky release is a complete bastardization of the findings. “Befuddled by blogging?" Says who? Corporate execs are judging blogging as NOT in the interest of their corporate agendas.

See http://www.strumpette.com/archives/107-Corporate-Execs-Thumbs-Down-on-Blogging.html .

Bloggers have to stop drinking their own cool aid.

- Amanda Chapel

[Jeffrey Treem]

Wow, first off I must say I am honored that the infamous Strumpette dropped by for a visit.

Secondly, I agree that the idea that companies are "slow to react to blogging" is a mischaracterization in many cases. Certainly, some companies are aware of blogging and have simply chosen not to actively publish their own blog.

However, I vehemently disagree with you on several points:
1. Companies don't get to decide whether blogging is a credible medium, consumers and journalists do, and already have in many cases.
2. Regardless of these particular numbers, every survey has revealed that senior executives at major companies express a lack of knowledge and/or confusion about new media. To say that they are making an informed strategic choice to avoid blogging is clearly not the case.
3. None of your arguments excuse the companies who are turning a blind eye to blogs. People are blogging, whether companies want them to or not, and that can have real consequences in terms of the brand and the bottom-line.

I’d think you would give me a little credit given a) I pointed out that these numbers are largely bogus b) I never argue that every company should have a blog, only that companies should consider all the communications tools available to them, so they can select the ones that make sense.

Oh and lastly, it is spelled Kool Aid, and my mom would never let me drink it because she said it would rot my teeth.

Cheers,
Jeff

[Sherrilynne Starkie]

Hey Jeff, did you notice that "Amanda" posted nearly the same comment on both our blogsites? Cool aid all round. Things that make you go hmmmmmmmmmmmmm.

[Jeffrey Treem]

Not surprised at all. I was tempted to delete the link in her comment out a desire not to drive my minimal traffic her way, but that didn't seem kosher.

To her/his/its credit, she responded to my comment on her/his/its blog fairly promptly, although she/he/it totally butchered the meaning of what I said. Seems like she/he/it always has to be the contrarian.

However, you would think at some point, she would at least get it right and spell it Kool-Aid.

Cheers,
Jeff

[Amy Gahran]

Hi Jeffrey

Yes, as will all statistics related to media, take it with a big rock of salt. The field is notoriously subjective.

In response to Strumpette, you wrote (in part): "Companies don't get to decide whether blogging is a credible medium, consumers and journalists do, and already have in many cases."

Actually, I think it really comes down to individuals, rather than consumers, journalists, or companies. I see such a wide range of perspectives on this issue that I hesitate to paint in such broad strokes.

YMMV, of course.

Oh, and I just blogged you:
http://www.rightconversation.com/2006/05/are_target_audi.html

Thanks!

- Amy Gahran

[Jeffrey Treem]

Amy,

Great point. The issue gets complicated by the many identities we have. Sure I am an individual, but I am also a consumer and some people are journalists and employees. Whether justified or not, people sometimes grant authority and trust to individuals based upon their position or affiliation and not their actions.

However, you are completely right that individuals, not groups, are deciding for themselves whether blogs are credible. I know plenty of PR practitioners who think blogs are an absolute joke.

Also, I love the discussion going on at your blog about "audiences." This is something I have frequent discussions about with colleagues.

Bottom line: The industry needs to find a way to promote more two-way communication that engaged individuals. Whatever they call this is mostly irrelevant, however, I think
a movement away from current language would be helpful.

Cheers,
Jeffrey