On defining and communicating the brand

by Nick Charney

---

When Destination 2020 was first released I remarked that "the recognition that the public service brand (as a profession) was in need of a major overhaul" was one of the most interesting things to come out of the report (See: Unsolicited Thoughts on Destination 2020). Given our recent discussions on public sector ideology (See: The Public Service as Ideology, My Public Service Ideology and Why Worry About Ideology) I thought it might be useful to go back to the 'Fundamentals of Public Service' section of Destination 2020, have another read, and see what shakes out.

Here's what it says:

... Building the Federal Public Service brand is a work in progress, and employee engagement will continue with the goal to further refine the strategy to address this priority area. Two new actions will help the Public Service reach its destination:

Engagement process to define and communicate the Federal Public Service brand 

An engagement process will be launched with public servants to shape what it means to be a public servant. Defining the Federal Public Service brand will include crowdsourcing the definition of who we are and developing a strategy to communicate to Canadians and public servants who we are and what we do.

A suite of measures will support the engagement effort and reach across internal and external channels to foster a strong image of the Federal Public Service, including defining ways to:

• showcase the role the Public Service plays in the daily lives of Canadians through dynamic vignettes and portraits to show how public servants affect the lives of Canadians directly or indirectly; 

• strengthen whole-of-government approaches to promote employment opportunities within (e.g., virtual tours, interviews, and videos); 

• profile the good work public servants do in communities across Canada (for example, the Government of Canada Workplace Charitable Campaign, volunteering with homeless shelters, and adopting a local food bank); and 

• highlight key achievements of public servants by showcasing awards of excellence and making them more visible, and appointing high-profile current and former public servants as Public Service ambassadors, who can project a strong positive image of the Public Service.

Public Service of Canada Landing Page to profile what public servants do and to promote employment opportunities

To advance these initiatives, a Public Service of Canada landing page will be launched to profile the great things that public servants do to serve Canadians. The landing page will function as a "home" for the Public Service, available to both public servants and Canadians. Horizontal communities will also be featured and can profile the landing page with their members.

What shakes out for me ...

While I agree that the brand is a work in progress, I disagree with the approach. How can we know that a communications strategy and a website are the fix to the problem when we've only just begun to define it (See: When did the public service become an ignoble profession or Can bureaucrats be interesting when the world demands they be boring)?

Haven't we put the cart before the horse? 

Shouldn't the engagement process be designed to unearth new solutions as opposed to validating old assumptions? We need only look back four years to see that Treasury Board Secretariat (TBS) tried this before. Remember the short lived Public Service e-Magazine 'It's My Day'?

If not, that's fine the site is still live despite the mag only being operational for a calendar year (2008-09). Prior to Googling it, I assumed that someone at TBS would have archived the pages by now (e.g. when TBS implemented the Standard on Web Accessibility).

But surely this time around things will be different

NB: I wrote an entire section here that I decided to pull because I could neither contain my sarcasm nor drive home my point effectively without it; just re-read the subtitle, it captures the essence. 

Sarcasm aside

I'm genuinely interested in how this engagement rolls out; not so much from the process standpoint but in terms of its content and more importantly the resolve that will be required to wade into it in a meaningful manner. Despite the challenge, I think we have a tremendous opportunity in front of us. But I can't help but wonder, do we have what it takes to roll up our sleeves and get our hands dirty on this one?

Are we going to ask the tough questions? 

Are we going to take a good hard look in the collective mirror of our common interests?

Are we willing to honour the fact that despite our differences we are all bound in the same social contract be we citizens, public servants, elected officials, union bosses, journalists or academics?

Are we willing to accept our own fair share of the blame for the mistakes of the past and take greater responsibility for our future?

Or, will we choose to keep our hands clean and resign ourselves to yet another website?

---

Non-sequitur: I published an article on Public Sector Transformation (co-written with IOG President Maryantonnet Flumian) in this quarter's Commonwealth Innovations Review, if interested you can download the journal here.

Weekly Column: Online Namespaces, Twitter and #Swineflu

I was strapped for a good idea for a column this week so I put out the question on twitter:


To which I got this reply (and others):


In my presentation a couple of weeks ago I mentioned the need for government departments to at least lay claim to their departmental twitter accounts, even if they weren't ready to use them. Essentially, my argument at the time was that government departments need to circumvent the problem of cybersquatting (or in this case twitter squatting) and the potential for harm to one's brand that could arise there from.

Just how easy is it for someone to lay claim to your department or agency's online namespace? About this easy.

Point proven, right? (Hint, PCO doesn't own that twitter space ...)

Ok so let’s move on to a more in-depth conversation within the context of the twitter-fuelled swine flu panic, which will provide for a more interesting discussion.


A Case Study: Swine Flu Spread by Twitter

While it is obvious that you cannot catch swine flu from Twitter, what you can catch is a greater understanding of the importance of Twitter's ability to spread information quickly, and the subsequent need for government departments and agencies to use Twitter to help shape that spread.

As Evgeny Morozov, a fellow at the Open Society Institute in New York puts it:

Here is a tough question to communication experts out there: how do we reach the digital natives out there, especially those who are only accessible via Facebook and Twitter feeds? The problem is that while thousands of concerned and misinformed individuals took to Twitter to ventilate their fears, government and its agencies were still painfully missing from the social media space; the Twitter of account of Centers for Disease Control and Prevention was posting updates once in a few hours -- and that was probably the only really trustworthy source people could turn to online.

Disclaimer

Before I proceed I want to be clear that what follows is by no means intended to be a criticism of PHAC or their handling of the Swine Flu situation. I am simply putting on a citizen engagement via social media observer hat and doing some preliminary and hypothetical analysis.

A Closer Look at PHAC on Twitter

Interestingly, the Public Health Agency of Canada (PHAC) is already on Twitter. Even more interesting is that PHAC's Twitter account was actually created back in September 18, 2008:



Second, it would seem that their first tweet didn't occur until April 28th:

I can only speculate that the decision to start actively using twitter (rather then just idling the account) has something to do with the perceived demand/need to provide more reliable information on the swine flu via twitter.

Morozov again has some insight:

... In an ideal world, [government organizations] would have established ownership of most online conversations from the very beginning, posting updates as often as they can. Instead, they are now faced with the prospect of thousands of really fearful citizens, all armed with their own mini-platforms to broadcast their fears -- which may cost it dearly in the long term.

The question of whether we need to somehow alter our global information flows during global pandemics is not a trivial one. A recent New York Times piece highlighted how a growing number of corporations like Starbucks, Dell, and Whole Foods are turning to Twitter to monitor and partially shape conversation about particular brands or products. What the piece failed to mention was that conversations about more serious topics (like pandemics- and their tragic consequences) could be shaped as well.

I think that there are three interrelated things worth discussing within the context of PHAC's use of Twitter to disseminate information about Swine Flu, they are (1) frequency, (2) conversation, and (3) trending.


Frequency

PHAC's timeline at the time of writing this column contains seven (7) tweets - all linking to their website. My assumption is that PHAC is only using (or has only approved the use of) Twitter to drive people to press releases. Yet, given the amount of the discussion on Twitter about Swine Flu, a low number of tweets severely limits the agency's exposure and reduces their overall ability to shape the conversation.


Conversation

While writing this column I started to wonder if they would respond to someone who tweeted at them (e.g. engage in two way communication), so I threw them a softy:

4 hours later I have yet to receive a response. In fact they have not responded to any of the tweets directed at them or referencing them.

Truth is that I wasn't expecting a response, because I know how difficult it is to know how to respond to an inquiry via Twitter "as a government organization".

But the truth of the matter is this: the proliferation and expectation of instant communication as facilitated by services such as Twitter and the multi-layered communication approval hierarchies of government just don't mix. One of these things is going to collapse, and my guess is that it will be the latter. Until then, rigid communication policies will ultimately hamstring departments and agencies looking to engage citizens via social media.


Trending

The last thing I think we can learn from PHAC has to do with trending. Let's again examine PHAC's timeline. Looking at PHAC's 7 tweets we see that:

• 4 mention "Swine Influenza"
• 2 mention "swine flu"
• 1 fails to mention swine flu in any variant

These slight variations are important because the majority of people on Twitter are not talking about "Swine Influenza" - they are talking about "swine flu" and "#swineflu" (the latter are both trending topics, while the former is not). The result is that 70% of their tweets are left out of the larger conversation, thus impeding their ability to contribute and shape it.


Conclusion

You may be asking yourself: when my department or agency is facing a communications crisis of pandemic proportions, will it be able to wield social tools with confidence and efficiency in order to engage citizens and shape the conversation?

I think the better question is: Why wait for a crisis to find out?

If you are interested in further reading, Chris Brogan has some great tips for businesses looking to use Twitter, I am confident that they apply to government departments and agencies as well.

And please, at the very least secure your organization's online namespaces before someone less forgiving/honest than I do it for you.

Cheers,

Round-Up October 13

I started poking around on BNET Business Network website and found some pretty cool stuff I wanted to point to:

1. 3 ways to connect with Gen-Y Workers
2. Kiss your brand goodbye
3. Gen X is unhappy at work
4. Are you at war with Generation Y
5. How to start a mentoring program
6. The End of Time Based Management
7. Turbo Charge Meetings
8. Encourage Excellent Performance

Mike Kujawski has set up a GoC Best Practices Wiki. Mike also has some upcoming armchair discussions at CSPS.

Chamika sent me this timely article that prompted me add another feed to my RSS: Invert the Management Pyramid

Brigitte, in Atlantic Canada pointed our attention to this wiki ... yes, apparently the GoC has a wiki (still a "proof of concept") but there nonetheless.

Event

There is an IABC/Ottawa Speaker Series featuring Mark Blevis and his insights about the return on influence.

Where/When:

The Code Factory at 246 Queen Street from 5 to 7 pm on Thursday, Oct. 16.

Description:

The digital age of communications and public relations has resulted in organizations being able to more easily and more affordably reach and engage with their target audiences -- internal and external.

Mark will examine some real life impacts of social media in action and inaction, discuss the rules of engagement associated with the trust economy, and suggest ways in which digital communications can be used for outreach and relationship building.

More Info/Register.

CPSRENEWAL.CA Weekly: In (Very) Brief: Public Service Branding in the Age of Social Media

[Disclaimer Note of frustration: For the record, I would just like to say that I have struggled to write this column hopefully the delivery doesn't dull the message.]

[h/t for the slidehare presentation below to Mike Kujawski]

What The F**K is Social Media?

View SlideShare presentation or Upload your own. (tags: socialmediamarketing marketing)

Ok so if you haven’t checked the deck yet, do it now. I refer back to it sometimes so it helps if you are familiar with it. Overall, the (excellent) presentation makes me wonder about how the government communicates with both its prospective and current employees.

An Awesome Hypothetical

Let's imagine for a second that the barcamp folks got together again, but for a different purpose. Say we were brought in to pitch to the central agencies (PCO, TB and Finance) about the vast potential for the use of social media in government. Let's further imagine that for some reason the central agencies decided to let us roll with it - specifically to address recruitment and retention issues. The central agencies ask us if we mind if the key players from the PSC, CPSA and the CSPS (and whoever else you can think of as relevant) join us. We enthusiastically welcome them – a bigger audience!

All of a sudden all the players are in the room and the barcampers have been given a safe space to be creative (une carte blanche) and walk people through how we can leverage social media to bolster the GoC’s recruitment and retention.

It’s like every social media guru / agent of change’s wet dream.

But what the hell would we do?

Given, we would all have some pretty cool ideas about what technologies to deploy (slide 4), the justification for deploying them (slides 5-46), and of course how to deploy them (slides 48-69).

In short the barcampers would provide the ‘what (technologies) to’, the ‘why to’, and the ‘how to’, but what about the ‘what (message) to’?

What is the Message?

What is the message that the GoC wants to deliver to its potential and existing hires? We have been poking around this issue recently on this blog while Etienne discussed it a while back when he blogged, Why Work for the Public Service?

Given, this blog and its authors are not officially cogs in the GoC’s message machine – neither are you. In fact, many of us are so far removed from that entire process that we may well be overlooking some very good work out there. This isn’t meant to be critical of existing mechanisms, but if there was a great piece of branding out there for the public service it would have likely been picked up by now and fed into the social media machine(s) … even if it was something simple and static. Given the familiarity and pervasiveness of social media, users would have mashed it, blogged it, podcasted it, dugg it, stumpled it, tweeted it, facebooked it, myspaced it, Delicious'd it, Reddited it, Newsvined it, Technoratied it, Slashdotted it, Blogmarked it, Twined it ...

The underlying point is that if there was a great example, we would all know it by now and that content would be all over the web, not just sitting and waiting at its point of origin.

Hmmm …. (recall slides 17 & 35?)



(BTW - Is this the message?)

Our Brand is Our Business (whether you care or not)

I suppose in a sense, what we do here is a small attempt at delivering that message through a different medium (blog) to a more specific audience (people interested in getting more involved in their organization’s culture). The point is that, as public servants, we are constantly engaged, (obvious when thumbing through this blog, but not so obvious when participating in seemingly unrelated fora) in a conversation about the public service brand.

Duh! (slide 31)




If other people care a whole lot more about recommendations from others (slide 25) than they do about advertisements (slide 24):




Then my conversation with a stranger on the bus about my job has greater implications for the public service brand then any advertisement delivered through a traditional medium (recall slides 21-23).

How many times have you as a public servant had to explain your job to eye-rollers or chucklers? Often just telling someone you are a public servant labels you. You are falling victim to the brand that already exists in the minds of other people.

Yes, the brand may be suffering. No the answer is NOT to try to control the brand further (recall slide 57):


(Oh and don't forget that messages are not conversations (recall slide 52)).

The answer may be to set the stage for current public servants (by engaging them!) to build their brand and engage in those conversations (with strangers on the bus, or with people via their social networks) about what it is like to work in the public service.

One logical step towards achieving that goal may be to allow them access to those tools at work, and support it with the necessary IT infrastructure. The only difference between the conversation they have on the bus and the one they have via social media is that the latter reaches a hellulva lot more people, and does it a lot quicker.

Nothing says committed to recruitment and retention in the age of social media like:

WARNING: Access to the Internet is monitored

The site you have tried to access is not authorized ... It has been rated as inappropriate ...