4 Social Media Commandments

Different companies have different and evolving social media policies that hopefully are tailored to the companies' business but below are some social media commandments that most every employee should follow. Here is a start:

(1) Assume everything you post is being read by your boss, supervisor, and grandmother.  The point is once content, updates, posts, pictures etc., are released into cyberspace, they cannot be retrieved.

(2) Don't badmouth your customers, company, coworkers or your boss.  Seems like a common sense proposition but some think their on line content is somehow insulated from their work life, it is not.

(3) Think about who you friend or follow.  You can tell a lot about people based on who they are friends with on Facebook or who they follow on twitter.  That's not necessarily a good or bad thing but how much do you want to reveal about yourself?   Do you really need to be friends with your boss or subordinates?

(4) Common Sense - use it.  Most issues can be avoided by simply using a little common sense.

What would you include?

Facebook and FINRA: FINRA's Social Media Guidance

                                                     

FINRA recently provided social media guidance to broker/dealers.  The Regulatory Notice  guides firms on applying communication rules to social media sites which FINRA defines to include blogs and social networking sites like Facebook.  It does not apply to sites used for purely personal reasons but the line between the two blurs as the growth of social media continues.

What are the highlights?  Here are a few:

  • If a firm or its personnel are using social media to communicate about business it is required to keep records of all such communications.
  • Don't recommend a security on a social media site or it will trigger the requirements of NASD Rule 2310 regarding suitability.  
  • If a firm is going to recommend a security such recommendation must be approved approved by a registered principal of the firm.
  • Webinars and other interactive electronic forums like a chat room are considered a public appearance under NASD Rule 2210.
  • Static information on social media, such as a profile, background, or wall information must be approved by a registered representative before it is posted.
  • FINRA considers a static blog an advertisement that requires approval of a principal but a blog that permits real-time interactive communications does not require prior principal approval.
  • Interactive communications on a social media site that are real time do not require a registered principal’s approval.  
  • Even though a principal's prior approval may not be necessary, the firm must supervise these electronic communications in a manner reasonably designed to ensure they do not violate the content requirements of FINRA's communication rules.

The notice goes on to provide more detail on supervision of social media sites and third-party posts.  Needless to say it's unlikely that a broker/dealer will recommend a security over Twitter or Facebook - that's just not smart at a number of levels.  Any real time communications regarding securities will require supervision by the firm and archiving of those communications.    I'm not sure the notice will "chill" social media use by broker/dealers but I'm also not sure it will drive them to use it as a business device other than general networking.

 

 

The Granny Test for Twitter

                                                            

Over the past few months Twitter has exploded.  It's everywhere, from Best Buy advertisements to Lance Armstrong's updates during the Tour de France.  Twitter has 23 million users and 54% of Fortune 100 companies have some Twitter presence.  The point is, Twitter is not going away in the near future nor is social media. 

For some reason people have a hard time remembering that employers, prospective employers, friends, enemies, and worst of all lawyers are monitoring social media.  Individuals are creating an on line biography on a daily basis.  In the future, candidates for public office and prospective supreme court justices will have to account for wayward tweets and Facebook posts.  Take a look at these examples of off- color tweets from Mark Toth at manpowerblogs.com:

•“hate my job!! i want to tell my bosses how dumb they are and how meaningless this job is, then quit, and be happy!”
•“with my boss on twitter, maaaybe I should take down that sexy picture of her . . . but her reaction will be priceless!”
•“so my job was to test all the food at the new restaurant, can I just say, ughew. I’m going to taco bell . . .”
•“smoking weed at work is so [expletive deleted] great ”
•“I’m really bummed that I’m working today, i asked off so i could study but my boss is a [expletive deleted] who can’t read.”
•“Coworker smuggled out a chair for me. Currently being paid to SIT around . . . I don’t hate my job today!”

Ridiculous, right?  Individuals need their own self-imposed media policies. I propose a simple one in honor of my Granny who had her birthday over the weekend. If you would feel uncomfortable having Granny read you tweet, Facebook post, or blog entry, don't post it. Game, set, match. 

 

Facebook/Twitter and the Boss

A recent study by Deloitte concludes that 60 percent of executives believe they have a right to know how employees portray both themselves and their employers on online social networks. 

On the flip-side, 53 percent of employees say such postings are not their employer's concern and in the 18-34 demographic that number rises to 63 percent. 

Balancing an employee's right to self expression with the business concerns of her employer has been discussed previously here but surprisingly not by many executives according to the survey: 

Organizations grapple with the notion of reputational risk within the context of employees self-expression.  Meanwhile, news of major global bands being impacted by the online activities of their people suggests that discussions around the topic need to be elevated to the highest levels of leadership.  That said, surprisingly only 15% of executives surveyed are addressing these risks in the board room though 58% agree it is important enough to do so.

Moreover, a mere 17% have programs in place to monitor and mitigate the potential reputational risks related to the use of social networks.

The survey also concludes that "clearly defined company guidelines will not change how nearly half the respondents behave in cyberspace."  It concludes:

Therefore attempts to mitigate reputational risk in these online communities should include an emphasis on culture, values, and ethics within an organization.  By reinforcing these fundamental elements, business leaders will have the opportunity to encourage good decision-making in virtual social networking environments.

It's clear based on the survey results that an effort above and beyond the standard internet policy is necessary to deal with social networks and the employee.  Employers will have a difficult time attracting talent if they police their employees' online presence, but where is the balance?  These policies will have to be based on the specific needs to the company and include some flexibility.  This is and and will continue to be an ever evolving process.  There are no hard and fast rules.

Tweets and the SEC

                                          

An article in yesterday's Wall Street Journal focused on corporations use of Twitter and scrutiny of Tweets by the SEC.  The article identified the rub between corporate transparency and SEC compliance:

Blogs and tweets can run afoul of Securities and Exchange Commission regulations on corporate communications. But sanitizing such posts risks hurting credibility with online audiences.
 

Some companies are still hesitant to allow their employees to address investor issues online:

 Intel Corp. in May will be among the first companies to allow shareholders to ask questions via the Web and vote online during its annual meeting. But the chip maker avoids blogs and Twitter for investor issues, because it fears violating SEC disclosure rules or inviting public criticism in a company-hosted forum, says Kevin Sellers, vice president of investor relations.

"There's always going to be a person with an axe to grind," he says. "Do we really want to sponsor that?"

The article goes on to suggest that employers have appropriate social-media policies (as discussed here previously) and use appropriate disclaimers.  Ironically, the SEC is now on Twitter.

On a lighter note, below is an instructional video on Facebook manners:

 

 

What should your company's social media policy be?

                                          

Some employees access twitter and facebook at work.  Some have applications on their company provided handhelds that allow access.  Others are blogging about the workplace.  What is the right social media/web 2.0 policy?   It needs to match company culture and standards. What works for a brokerage firm may not work for an upstart computer gaming company.  So what are companies doing?  Let's take a look:

                                                        

I like Cisco's policy.  It's long, but the common sense approach is always pragmatic:

Common sense is the best guide if you decide to post information in any way relating to Cisco. If you are unsure about any particular posting, please contact the Cisco "internet postings" email alias for guidance. For instance, if you are writing about Cisco business where you have responsibility, you may wish to make sure your manager is comfortable with your taking that action.

Sun Microsystems wants its employees to consider the consequences:

The worst thing that can happen is a Sun sales pro is in a meeting with a hot prospect, and someone on the customer's side pulls out a print-out of something you've posted and says "This person at Sun says that product sucks." In general, "XXX sucks" is not only risky but unsubtle. Saying "Netbeans needs to have an easier learning curve for the first-time user" is fine; saying "Visual Development Environments for Java suck" is just amateurish. Once again, it's all about judgment. Using your public voice to trash or embarrass the company, our customers, your co-workers, or yourself is not only dangerous, but not very smart.

                                                    

Finally, the Department of the Navy ("DON") likes Web 2.0, but security is paramount:

While these collaborative tools present many useful opportunities, their application must not compromise data confidentiality and integrity. SIPRNET provides a secure environment to operate Web 2.0 tools; however, NIPRNET is exposed to external threats that could adversely impact Web 2.0 tool operation and data integrity. Therefore, extra care must be taken when implementing Web 2.0 technologies or integrating these tools into the DON environment.

Policies range from company to company.  Some business will encourage blogging, facebooking, or even twittering to help promote their business. Others will prohibit employees from engaging in freelance public relations.  At a minimum, there has to be a standard to hold the employee accountable to.  Companies need policies.

Interview by Cordell Parvin

                                

I was interviewed today by business development coach Cordell Parvin.  The topics include this blog, Twitter, and Facebook.