Recruiting & Social Computing

Let's tear everyone apart in public

Chevrolet created a site for its Tahoe model that allowed viewers to create their own commercials.

It was, essentially, hijacked by anti-SUV environmentalists.

Charlene Li says that's good.

"Our definition of social computing is when technology results in power shifting from institutions (like Chevy) to communities (like customers).

By losing that control over the brand experience, Chevy actually brought more people into it..."

"If you're going to participate as a marketer in the social computing arena, you've got to have thick skin and be ready to engage in the messy world of your customer's opinions.

Marketers that have the guts to turn over their brand to the public will in the end win over their customers."

The Bogle wants to do the same for recruiting by subjecting the false claims of employer and candidate to a similar barrage of online attacks.

"The social computing trend, including the growth of blogging, shows that there is hunger for less packaged messages and more authentic conversations between companies and consumers.

"Why can't we introduce openness and authenticity in the conversations between employers and prospective employees?

" The results may not be as glossy , but I'll take real and meaningful over glossy any day.

And I agree. Honesty is great (as long as it's the other guy who's being exposed).

And, I think the Vault is doing some of this already. Alumni tell the world about the hidden cultures of the companies in which they worked.

Talkdigger, Slashdot, Digg, Delicious.

Comments

[laurence haughton]

How is having a site "essentially, hijacked by anti-SUV environmentalists" the same as engaging "in the messy world of your customer's opinions."

And what's makes this kind of thing an "open and authentic conversation."

[Canadian Headhunter]

Hi Laurence,

> How is having a site hijacked by anti-SUV
environmentalists" the same as engaging "in customer's opinions."

It's unclear, you're right. And I've got more on this coming.

Charlie is talking about opening yourself up to feedback of any sort from the net. That means that you have to deal with both ignorant and informed critiques.

She believes that inviting both to vent gives you the opportunity to engage your critics in a constructive manner.

I don't know if that's true since ignorant opinion is often too lazy to pay attention to a reasoned rebuttal.

And most people who are interviewed on TV don't seem inclined to respond to close scrutiny of their real errors when they can avoid it. So why should they be any different online.

> And what's makes this kind of thing an "open and authentic conversation."

Well, Larry, on a blog, the stage is set for authenticity.

The gloves are off from the critics side. And even ignorant criticism may be authentic if the critic is receptive to rebuttal.

And the same is true on the company side.

Whether the participants take advantage of it is another story.

I don't think the players will think it advantageous to be genuine.

However once a door is opened, relentless criticism, might bring a company, for instance, to offer a substantial response.

On the recruiting side, I think Bogle is dreaming when he thinks a candidate will be honest about mistakes when she can avoid it.

[laurence haughton]

On blogs I think the stage is equally set for manipulation, hidden agendas, deception, intimidation, and crazy yip-yap.

I'm waiting to see the hygiene methods that protect authentic blogs from the "zeros, frauds, and bastards" (to quote David Ogilvy).

[Jody Capone]

Didn't know the forum rules allowed such birllaint posts. PS: U know I'm a spammer. Yeah I know, that's why I changed your links bakc to Russia