When it comes to building your reputation in social media, relevance beats size

By | March 1, 2013

Be warned – this is a blog about my own company, MWW Group.  If you consider that a no-no, you may want to stop here.  But I hope you won’t.

As an industry, PR firms are often like the shoemaker’s children.  We counsel clients on how to build their reputations, engage stakeholders and drive conversation.  But when it comes to doing it for ourselves, well, that is often ad hoc – when we can fit it in between client priorities.  Especially for a nimble, hard-charging agency like MWW.

If you asked me who did a better job on self-marketing and social media engagement between MWW and Edelman, I would have to admit that I would expect the answer to that question to be Edelman.  They are more than 10x our size, are known for their digital prowess, and we all know they have a lot more resources allocated to firm marketing and thought leadership.  They launch research at Davos, which can’t come cheap.

I was pleasantly surprised when Everything-PR.com did a head to head matchup between Edelman and MWW, that MWW was more digilicious than Edelman.  How did that happen?

  1. Authenticity – MWW’s social media engagement is deemed more authentic – Edelman seems to tweet on a rigid schedule, while MWW tweets emerge organically as conversations are actually happening. (And giving me permission to continue my personal philosophy that structure isn’t always better!)
  2. Two-way street – MWW edged out Edelman on listening – which is at least half of any real conversation.
  3. Relevance & Engagement – More people participate and share our content than Edelman’s. And while Edelman is 10x the size of MWW, we are only “out-followed” by a multiple of 4.

The moral of the story:  when it comes to reputation, particularly in today’s environment where your stakeholders own your reputation and the conversation about your company, relevance and influence matter more than size.

 

 

Be Sociable, Share!