Honesty, transparency and authenticity on the web: how real should a company be?

June 27th, 2008 11:38 am | Anne Ward

A company should be as real as it can without divulging information that could harm client relations or give competitors unfair advantages...

June 27th, 2008 1:48 pm | Kate Harris

This is an interesting topic - business is becoming increasingly personal, brands even more emotional and b2c connections even more direct than ever before. For example, Intel has built a social community where users can not only connect with each other but also literally help form future products in the making. Web 2.0 etiquette around corporate blogging shuns those executives who even dreaming of having their assitants write blogs for them. Its finally PC to have just one facebook profile for both personal and business contacts. Etc Etc. These changes transform the world of branding and marketing drastically, putting real personalitlies, real relationships, real people behind a brand instead of pure ideas. For example, take the Apple and PC commercials - customers personality. They want a face behind a brand, a person behind a message, a relationship behind a transaction. The rise of the corporate blogosphere and social networking only further reinforces this desire - particularly for Gen Yers, who are both 1) driving a large part of modern consumerism and 2) dumping into the workforce. The combination means all bets are off when it comes to being real and personal on the web, the more traditional rules of professionalism need no longer apply unless you work in finance (And even WaMu wants to rope in the youngest with a catchy new nickname, an e-commerce-esque in-store experience and locker-room marketing messages like "Bank Fees are like Financial Wedgies".

We are starting to see that being real on the web can really sell, to the point of making for a whole branding/marketing strategy... but only if there is real value and connection there for the consumer. Just like traditional marketing, the strategic goal of social communities and web 2.0 for businesses has to be relating to the consumer - if the consumer can't relate (i.e. if viewers can't relate to, or associate with, the Mac actor in the Mac versus PC commercials) then the effort looses its credibility and intended effect on the brand. So the conclusion might appear to be, Keep on Keeping it real on the web. And if you really want it to make an impact on your brand, think through the virtual relationship you are building with your customers and form it around the real relationship you have/want with them.

June 30th, 2008 4:21 pm | Dan Hoffman

So, let's start with the question: how real should a person be?  Do you think, that a designed, considered, planned, deliberately created phony will live a miserable, alienated life?  Is it ok to have a public personality, like most celebrities do, that is different than their private lives?  Would it be ok if it brought you great wealth?  So then, what is the difference between companies and people.  Should we personify companies?  That always gets people in trouble with countries.  “Those Koreans really love to drink.”  Hmmmm, risky.  Is it necessary for a company to impersonate, in a world where a company can literally have a “MySpace” page?  Can’ Jack Welch avatar be walking around 2nd life talking to people, only there are 200,000 copies of Jack Welch walking around, and every time someone clicks on him you can get a menu where you can buy a dishwasher, or a sonogram machine, or a trucking route? 

Should I sign every customer service and sales bulletin, like Jeff Citron from Vonage? 

 Here’s a great recent example of a company going for  “personality”: Cut through the data smog, you go Ryanair!: http://www.smh.com.au/news/news/ryanair-ceo-talks-free-sex-for-business-class/2008/06/27/1214472727393.html