At least three additional things are necessary, imho, for a (non-CEO, non-marketing) corporate blogger to be successful:

- writing talent: I refuse to read poorly written posts; flagrant spelling and grammar mistakes make me got nuts.
- good judgement: an R&D tech (to use your example) that lifts the cover a little is fine; if he lifts it too far he runs the risk of endangering the company?s objectives instead of contributing to them.
- management?s trust: the blogger has to know that someone has his/her back.

Those are my suggestions, others might have others.

MS

This whiffs of command and control. Corporate blogging that really makes a difference doesn't come by appointment - it comes from the bottom up and from the most unliely sources.

Richard,

Interesting insights on corporate blogging and, maybe even more telling, on the different points of view held by English and American marketers. It's interesting that we Americans would have fewer qualms about having a marketing person serve in the position of a corporate spokesblogger, yet the British would consider such a thing to be a contrivance.

This is as much about how marketing is viewed by each culture as it is about responsible blogging.

Thanks again for sharing your insights.

Regards,

Mike Bawden
Brand Central Station

HI!

When it comes to corporate blogging, I feel it's imperative to stick to a pre-defined messaging framework, and one "blogger" who follows the framework by working closely with the CEO and the Communication team. A large organization with diverse interest will have a number of specialists, who will communicate several messages that's not in sync with the messaging framweork. I strongly support SUw's statement "to talk to people as if you are speaking to each individual one at a time." Well, this requires significant time investment, i.e, keeping track of interested bloggers and prospective ones. More importantly, engaging them on an ongoing basis with messages of mutual interest. The exercise entails relationship building, hence one person and not "specific skills bloggers."

I was taken by your comment “It is clear that major companies should have "specific skills bloggers" who can blog reliably and credibly in their areas of expertise.” Of course. But there is a case for looking at many other channels for communication.

I have been working through a number thoughts on the application of Public Relations from a corporate perspective and have six successive posts on the subject.

What is becoming obvious is that there is an emerging need for a wide range of expert communications skills across a wide range of communications channels and consultancy with the knowledge and expertise to be able to manage and deploy these channels and skills.

Furthermore, the monoculture and ubiquitous press relations model is becoming niche and we are all going to have to work with niche channels for communication henceforth.

Not all such channels are new (take, for example wiki's) it is just that their day has come.

Corporations are learning a lot rom blogs. It is showing them the future, a very interactive future and one that needs a shift change in the PR profession to match.

A retro-logo for this vision of the corporate blogger can be found at

http://home.earthlink.net/~jimbonius/nipper/index.html

In the interest of utter transparency, I must admit that I am employed by Edelman. Not that this has any bearing on my comment, but hey.

I agree with those comments made by both Suw and others as to the necessity for "passionate, friendly, genuine, interesting, authentic, honest, open." But I'd like to add "informed" and "on point" to that list as well.

I come to this opinion through some experience--a new recruit at Edelman (shout out to transparency)-- I've just begun a personal/professional blog that lacks both.

Because altho* blogging and internet communities such as thefacebook, myspace and friendster (all to which i belong. . .and oh the list could go on) are LINKED, I believe that the respective purposes and the audiences of these phenomena are DIFFERENT. The existance of a profile, the gimick of 'inviting people' to be your 'friends,' and the messaging possibilities have not required precise or knowledgeable entries to grab an audience and create 'community'--blogging (esp. corporate blogging. . .corplogging??) does.

* and my apologies for grammar and spelling errors to those for whom it drives nuts! ;-)

Being in the PR business, I am sure that you understand how important no matter who the company decides should be the corporate blogger, that ghost writing should not be allowed.

With all of GM's troubles, I would like to think that Bob Lutz actually writes his excellent and insightful entries and not a PR person acting as a ghost writer.

To agree with Dennis, it does smack a bit of command and control. Blogging (even that done outside of the enclosed young adult communities that Katie points out--that are not the best example of anything) are often about a strange synthesis of content and persona. Corporate blogs often want to control the way a blogger's persona is presented by directing the message. So, the first point for a corporation finding the right blogger should be to ask themselves if they like the personality/persona of the blogger, how that blogger presents him/herself to the rest of the blogosphere, and if they are willing to let that person spin the content according to their mode of interaction with the rest of the blogosphere.

Corps. often ask bloggers to write in a specific manner, and thus control how the blogger disseminates information--so the personality/persona of the blogger must dovetail nicely with what the corp wants, or both parties risk losing something in the process.

Corporations should be very, very careful about stepping into the blogosphere, which runs alot on persona and rhetoric. Too much spin and we'll figure out what's going on; then the results could be pretty ugly.

A person in "the research and development unit or an engineer in the technology or design areas" responsible for the company blog?

You've got to be kidding.

Have you ever read anything written by an engineer?

All good additions
Plus unquestioned expertise
Thanks for writing

I don't want command and control. I do want employee blogs. But I also want informed experts in marketing, R&D, HR speaking about their areas of special competence, without a script.

MB sorry to be so late in responding...was on vacation and off line on needed break Agree on your comment on marketing people and difference between UK and US views Based on my trip to Germany with my family, there is even more suspicion of marketing in that market. The idea of corporate sponsorship of the arts is seen as quite revolutionary...the money comes from corporate philanthropy instead of marketing so it is community relations, not aimed at selling the company or product. This is self defeating in my view--smaller budgets and a seen but not heard type of attitude.

Key to success in blogosphere is deep knowledge...that is why I am suggesting specific skills bloggers. I agree with your point on relationships.

Sorry I am so late in responding...even I take vacation!!
Agree that companies have to figure out a blog strategy and that it goes beyond bloggers in specific skill areas. For instance, there is still lack of clarity in highly regulated areas like pharmaceutical or financial markets. I think we need to push regulatory bodies like FDA to allow big pharma to become more transparent without risk of sanction.

TG agree to a point
Companies should select an employee blogger then give him or her enough latitude to operate. It is absolutely clear to me that excessive control of message undermines the entire effort.

Yes I have. And I stick by my statement. Not every R&D person is a born writer of great copy nor is every one a complete incompetent at communications.

I believe you missed the point of my post (if I recall it correctly)...yes, excessive control undermines message, but the corp should examine what it is trying to accomplish with the blog and if they are willing to risk peer-to-peer communication, which may not always be about corp matters. Conversation in the blogosphere among peers isn't always cut and dried content. It has a personal component that, in some ways, corps are not necessarily willing to
demonstrate.

Further, the idea of transparency--how transparency occurs between individuals in the blogosphere is far different than the idea of transparency as portrayed in corporate blogs.

So, what is the corp trying to achieve by blogging?
Does it want to present a personal side or does it want to get out a message? These are two different things--as people are not necessarily brands, nor products nor markets. People approach blogging in one way, corps approach blogging in another, and the two ways aren't necessarily compatable without some sort of mediation and meeting of the minds.

A meeting of minds isn't necessarily controlling the message.

Tish G.