Photo : D.R.
Ludovic Bajard is Associate Director of Human to Human, a Parisian communications agency specialised, since 2003, in monitoring online opinions, as well as in consultancy for the development of Web communications tools and communication via social media. With a staff of 15, the agency works with a certain number of large French companies such as Carrefour, Société Générale, TF1, Bouygues Télécom, La Poste and RATP (in charge of the Paris public transport network).
Commerce International: What are the stakes raised by social media on Internet for companies?
Ludovic Bajard: “Users of the different types of social media – social networks, blogs, forums or video exchange plat-forms – are not media professionals. Unlike journalists, we cannot demand that they stay objective or at a distance, nor that they check their sources – they tell their own stories and are read for this personal angle. This is why these new prosumers [editorial note: producers and consumers of editorial content] frighten brands. As a result, companies have a new way of managing their outside relations: they must deal with tens of thousands of stakeholders, rather than several dozen journalists. This multitude of players raises operational problems within organisations. They require the same reactivity in answers provided when delicate situations arise. On the other hand, the issue of who speaks – the company, its communications manager, its CEO – is also crucial. We can see that on Twitter, brands have trouble personifying their messages.”
How do companies tackle these social networks?
L.B.: “The reality is many-faceted. On the one hand, certain companies are already very much involved on all levels: commercially – with the aim of canvassing new clients or securing client loyalty, to dialogue with their stakeholders or even to test product and service innovations. With these very comprehensive measures, companies place their clients at the heart of their projects: they converse with them, listen to their praises, but also to the changes that they would like to see implemented. This manner of doing things puts company practices into question: taking into account client requests requires a real cultural revolution for firms that do not necessarily have a culture of being very close to their targets. On the other hand, some other companies have adopted the ostrich policy: knowing neither what to do, nor how, they choose to ignore these new spaces. Very often, these companies follow an old organisation model in which the client is not listened to.”
Which companies choose to invest in these new spaces?
L.B.: “Companies linked to IT were the first position themselves in the social
media; this is explained by the fact that the first to converse on Internet were computer nerds or geeks, whose main interests were hi-tech products. General-interest platforms were developed and today, companies from all sectors are using the media in interesting ways. Geographically, it is in the United States that can be found the most modern initiatives – the use of Internet is stronger there than elsewhere, notably amongst the young –, even if Japanese and European companies (especially British, French and German ones) are doing some remarkable things. As for size, no rule exists: many CAC 40 companies still consider social media as an extra channel for acting as a mere broadcaster – for corporate communication at least, as the situation is a little different for product communication. And on the other hand, small companies are very innovative, for they see this media as a way to communicate effectively with a reasonable budget. These new spaces are thus also within the reach of SMEs.”
Which networks should companies privilege?
L.B.: “There is no rule. The first thing to do is to look at where people are likely to want to dialogue. But the other thing is that the company needs to be a subject of conversation. For online dialogues depend on spontaneity: we find subjects that are raised by families, between work colleagues or at the counters of cafés. People raise topics that fascinate or, on the other hand, preoccupy them. There are thus certain sectors of activity for which it is difficult to find online exchange spaces: no one talks about insurance, for example…”
How can social media be useful to companies?
L.B.:“It can be used quite simply to make money! For example, Dell has some thirty different accounts on Twitter, including an outlet making special offers to 600,000 subscribing followers. In 2008, it earned 3 million dollars, in other words 2.1 million euros, for the group. Social media can also enable companies to test product or service innovations amongst a highly committed community, generally made up of experts and enthusiasts. The latter see this association as a sign of consideration: and by federating them, the company structures a community that is favourable towards it. The advantages are many: these people are very often opinion leaders; they are in a position to guide their entourage, and when a new product is launched, they reveal themselves to be formidable brand ambassadors. Not forgetting that when companies are going through a period of crisis, they will not hesitate to spontaneously defend them. This is the case, for example, for the RATP (Régie Autonome des Transports Parisiens), which manages a community on Fabrique RATP year round during strike periods.”
Are companies prepared to invest in these new measures?
L.B.: “Generally speaking, companies should be much more transparent than they are today. They now deal with clients who want to understand. So they should take time to explain things to them, at the risk of seeing the clients take action against them. And what they say should be more authentic, more human. Many companies open a group on Facebook, but block comments and dialogue with no one. As if the social media were merely a new channel for broadcasting a press release or the latest advertisement… But playing the conversation game can help deflate growing polemics. It is in the interests of companies whose production bears industrial risks to be present on these spaces to explain the efforts they are making to limit these dangers; they thus demonstrate that they are being careful. If they don’t make the effort, they also risk leaving the social media in the hands of radical and hostile communities. Especially as there are many online rumours: social media networks are a choice platform for those wishing to spout rubbish.”
English 
