Eggs don’t lay chickens

Recently we were asked by a major brand which makes more sense:

1. Try and create a large social media following before making considerable improvements to their Web presence (site, Facebook, etc.), or:
2. First showcasing their spectacular brand by repurposing their impressive print library for the Web, and then going after a large social media following.

Our response: eggs don’t lay chickens. Following is my more detailed response.

Frankly, [idea #1] sounds backwards. It's like saying, "We'll get a lot of people interested in our Hollywood feature film, and then we'll make it." It's counterintuitive to the consumer, not how 'things work', and not what people are used to. As such, I wouldn't expect that approach to result in rapid market absorption / penetration. In simple terms, I'd anticipate more of the same [lackluster results] with that approach.

That said, there are specific strategic exceptions to that 'rule', and it's possible in very limited applications for it to work. But it is by no means a shortcut, and it would take a substantial commitment on the part of your team. Are you guys willing / do you have the resources (time, manpower, content, etc.) to branch off and make social media - particularly Facebook - a focal point? If so, there are ways to make that scenario work. But if answers to those questions aren't a resounding, "YES!" Then prepare yourself for more lackluster results, and frustration when it comes to this market sector.

To summarize, [social media] isn't a 'fake-it-'til-you-make-it' type of an arena (for illustrative purposes, not to say that's what you guys are after). Social media consumers appreciate honestly, genuineness, and consistency. They also quickly smoke out frauds and one-hit-wonders. So ask yourself a few pivotal 'litmus test' questions like:

• What innovative content / ideas will we showcase to continually spark / pique people's interest?
• As a [their industry] enthusiast (I presume the target market) would (do?) I follow this content regularly?
• Can we commit the appropriate resources to this project and guarantee consistency up front?

Perhaps the best illustration of why I'd consider the 'followers first' approach backwards, especially in this case, is Simon Sinek's concept of the Golden Circle. Author of Start With WHY (2009), Simon's basic premise (from his website) is this:

• All organizations and careers function on 3 levels. What you do, How you do it and Why you do it. The problem is, most don’t even know that Why exists.
  • WHY: Purpose, cause or belief. The Why is your driving motivation for action.
  • HOW: Guiding principles. The Hows are the specific actions that are taken to realize your Why.
  • WHAT: Tangible proof, results. The Whats are the tangible ways in which you bring your Why to life.

[WATCH THIS VIDEO - no seriously, watch the video before proceeding]

Followers first is most often interpreted as a 'WHAT' approach, rather than a 'WHY' approach. With that concept in mind, I think the followers first approach will be (mis)interpreted as slightly manipulative and contrived, and thus inauthentic. I know the heart of the organization is in the right place, but we're talking perception here - a perception which becomes 'reality' for the content viewers in question. So the question is; will this approach allow us to put our best foot forward. As mom used to say, "You never get a second chance to make a good first impression." So will this approach create the proper impact your deserves? Will followers be WOW'ed by this message, or will it fall short?

The reason I've lobbied heavily for the repurposing of existing content, if possible, is because you guys already have so much great stuff that (obviously) showcases your brand in a significantly impactful way. Perhaps another way to say this is; you guys have done some really amazing print stuff (for instance, the "cult" thing was genius!) and when people see it they think, "AHA! I get it! I get them - and they get me!" which creates tremendous brand recognition, trust, and street cred - which (should) translates to sales. That concept - that high trust 'because they get me' - needs to be properly presented on the Web as well as you guys have done it elsewhere (print, etc.). And again, I think since the content has already been created - from Sinek's 'WHY' perspective - for use elsewhere, why not showcase it in social media, and give people a (THE) reason to follow your brand. So from that standpoint, in an effort to generate a large social media following, to me repurposing existing content rather than the other way around seems easier, faster, cheaper, more fun, more intuitive to consumers, more genuine & brand congruous, and less of a resource hog.

In closing, the wrong approach runs the risk of alienating your target audience - indefinitely. Subtle psychological forces are at work in the minds of the consumer, engineered in large measure by the high end Madison Ave media campaigns for major brands. In certain aspects the consumer has very high expectations, but sincerity of purpose and message are almost universally rewarded. That is something Madison Ave. hasn't effectively counterfeited - despite all efforts. I believe you guys have mastered sincerity of purpose and message in other mediums like print, and that's your secret weapon. You need to showcase that secret weapon in social media, and the Web at-large.