In a recent blog Neil Williams, head of corporate digital channels at the Department for Business, Innovation and Skills (BIS), describes a Twitter strategy template he initially wrote for his own department, but which is now recommended for use throughout UK government departments.

In this 20-page document (yes, 20 pages!), Williams outlines a lot of useful information which should belong in any corporate twitter strategy document – more importantly, the document is available for use and adaptation by anyone.

Many organisations have developed their own policies to control the use of Twitter as an official ‘mouthpiece,’ expressing guidelines for all staff.

The Mayo Clinic takes a somewhat interesting view – suggesting that staff act as their own selves, but ensure their employer remains in a positive light.  The introduction to the policy reads, “The main thing Mayo employees need to remember about blogs and social networking sites is that the same basic policies apply in these spaces as in other areas of their lives.”  Admirable words and the remainder of the policy remains true to this sentiment, suggesting that employees speak in first person, maintain personal links to Twitter (a personal email address, for instance) and to respect work commitments. 

Conversely, Dow Jones (publisher of the wall Street Journal) took a more ‘pre-renaissance’ view of Twitter.  The original announcement seems to have been removed but has been echoed in a number of locations – here for instance.  Essentially, the writers of this policy (although admirable in the fact they thought to actually write one) really don’t get Twitter, trying hard to remove the one thing that Twitter embodies – the conversation.

Then there was the Walmart ‘incident’ a couple of weeks ago when the blogosphere was in a total lather over whether Walmart had blundered in its own Twitter policy (https://walmartstores.com/twitter/) – the short answer, no, they hadn’t; but being a big easy target, they took a few undeserved hits.

There are any number of consultants who will tell you how to craft your very own corporate Twitter policy – but do they really know your business well enough to shape it perfectly? 

---

Just yesterday, blogger Sharlyn Lauby discussed the ways in which a corporation might develop a presence in Twitter that will engender positive responses from their followers.

I’m not going to steal Sharlyn’s words – read her piece – but she talks extensively about the ways in which the organisation might be seen with a few soft edges; something of a human face.  In essence, to interact with fellow Twitterers, not just tell them things.  What she doesn’t do is set rules, just outcomes.

Sometimes the “numbers men” like to quantify the value of Twitter to an organisation.  Aside from screaming into their ears “this is a big mistake!” there’s little to show from the data being presented.  One of the most commonly expressed “success stories” in documented sales increases from Twitter usage is Dell.  However the numbers don’t seem to stack up.

Various sources (here  for instance) offer a total revenue of $US61Bn for Dell in 2008.  The same source suggests that the tweets from @DellOutlet earned the company $1M in sales in the 18 months to the end of 2008 and another $1M in the first half of 2009, based in the main part on partial discounts (e.g. 20% off a printer as part of a larger order).

Can someone explain how this can possibly be significant?  

With over 600,000 followers and a typical order of somewhere between $500 and $1,000, that suggests a grant total of something around 2,500 sales – or one follower in 240 taking up the offer.

Now, one in 240 isn’t so bad, but how many of those would have purchased anyway?  I’d suggest most – all Dell did was give away profit to enhance their Twitter value.  Bringing us back to the “numbers men” again!  Maybe the marketing gain was worth it.  Who can tell.

But what of the opposite view?  How can a company tap into the conversation?  Know what is being said about them?

---

SaaS CRM vendor RightNow Technologies’ most recent release “RightNow May ‘09” included Cloud Monitor, the ability to follow discussions on social networking sites.

From a recent RightNow release, “RightNow Cloud Monitor helps companies follow discussions on social networking sites.  Based on what the Cloud Monitor reports, an organisation can use RightNow Service to initiate next steps; follow up can range from updating information on the web site to the automatic creation of a service incident or proactive outreach.”

This is NOT automated response.  Instead it is a watching brief on the Twitterverse with some smarts to act internally upon what is observed.

“The Cloud Monitor also uses RightNow’s unique SmartSense emotion detection to dynamically scan the text of tweets (and other content) and assess how consumers feel about a business.  For example, a negative emotion score could be prioritised for immediate action.”

Again, this is not a tool for automated response; instead it is used to trigger internal actions to do something about the event.

Just the way the Internet grew; starting as a circle of friends and growing out into the corporate world, so has Twitter grown and developed, now becoming a full person-to-person and person-to-business communication tool.