Professional Digital Social Networking—Where are Your Boundaries?

I invite you to share your thoughts and opinions on the topic of boundaries for professional digital social networking.

For someone who did not grow up in the age of the internet. For someone who is constantly learning and working hard to hang on within this fast moving world, I feel pretty good. I am a regular blogger, use LinkedIn as a professional tool rather than just a list of random people and am active on Facebook.

I also have a Twitter page, although I never post and currently have ten people I do not know following me. I have no idea who these ten people are, nor what they are following due to my lack of posting activity. I “get” all of the above mentioned social media platforms with the exception of Twitter—I have to confess that I am still working to get my head totally wrapped around it.

Given these new social media platforms, where do our new professional boundaries lie? We know that it is generally rude to call a professional colleague on their cell phone after a certain hour, and we know not to phone someone who works out of a home office at midnight to leave a voice mail message. We also know that it is not generally acceptable to show up on the door step of a professional colleague’s home unannounced and uninvited.

Where are the lines in cyber space? I have created my own lines, and I am interested to hear yours.

For me, LinkedIn is professional. I conduct myself as if I were in an industry member’s office or at an industry event. Not boring or stiff, just professional. My communications, for the most part, are purposeful and support a variety of professional objectives.

Facebook, on the other hand, is personal for me. I certainly conduct myself appropriately and my posting behavior is similar to the manner I would conduct myself if I were at a restaurant having dinner with friends. However, my personal communications don’t necessarily have a purpose other than to let friends know I am thinking of them.

In our professional lives we generally want to accomplish something, move toward something. Hopefully, in our personal lives we often just ARE. No agenda, no strategy.

I am rarely hesitant to share my opinions on a WIDE range of issues with people I have a personal relationship with. I consider myself respectful, but I do enjoy debating such things as politics, religion, books, Brad Pitt’s latest movie and life in general. I especially enjoy debating these topics with people I disagree with because often I learn something new.

Friends and family, even those friends and family you disagree with on big issues, still love you the day after a vigorous debate (typically conducted over a few glasses of wine). However, sometimes when we say inappropriate things in professional company, the “love” can evaporate quickly.


Some business-to-business companies have started using Facebook for professional purposes, but I have not interacted with the pages and groups companies within the pharma industry have created. Although I am a member of a number of LinkedIn pharmaceutical industry groups, I enjoy using Facebook as a combination reunion tool, social organizer, a convenient way to pop busy friends quick messages and a vehicle for sharing pictures with people I don’t see very often. In addition, I fairly frequently use Facebook as a soapbox for my political opinions and frustrations with the hope of generating some discussion.

Rumor has it that Facebook will be upgrading their platform so that you will be able to maintain separate personal and professional friend lists and profiles. This would be great as I really do love the functionality of Facebook.

Generally speaking, my life is an open book. I grew up in a bustling household where privacy was not readily available. However, even though I will share nearly anything with anyone, I do I have my boundaries.

I prefer that my pharmaceutical industry colleagues and customers see me in a professional light. Not stiff or boring, just sharp, fairly together and fun.

I don’t really need for the entire pharmaceutical industry to see pictures of me in high school (huge hair and all) or some silly picture taken one morning with my stepson before I could put on make-up or even get through the shower (that my husband thought would be funny to post)--these are some of the photos within my Facebook albums, but would never, ever see the light of day on LinkedIn.

These are my boundaries—what are yours?

Double Down on Strategic Advertising

by Susanna Hamner and John Maas, BNET

The scenario: Hard-sell or luxury-oriented ad campaigns are starting to sound tone deaf to recession-wary consumers. Some competitors are pulling back on advertising.

The tactic: Increase communication with customers to show how your product can ease the difficulties they’re going through.

Advertising budgets often become easy prey during down markets — but companies that start to slash do so at their own peril. “If there’s any time to increase communication, it’s during a recession,” says Andrew Razeghi, a marketing professor at Northwestern’s Kellogg School of Management.

During the recession that followed September 11, just 25 percent of all companies boosted their ad spending — and those that did saw their market share rise more than twice as fast as it typically rises during a normal economy, according to a 2001 Cahners Advertising research report. According to a MarketSense study, during the recession of 1989-91, Pizza Hut and Taco Bell saw sales jump by 61 percent and 40 percent, respectively, after pumping more money into advertising, while McDonald’s slashed its ad budget and saw sales drop 28 percent.

It’s not that easy, of course. Marketers need to spend smart — and tune their message to customers' shifting attitudes during a financial crisis. “The closer a brand can cozy up to a consumer with a message along the lines of ‘we’re all in this together,’ the better off a brand will be,” says John Quelch, a Harvard Business School professor and author of Greater Good: How Good Marketing Makes for Better Democracy. For instance, a credit-card company should change its message from “use our card to give memorable holiday gifts” to “our card gives you the most money back.”

Taking advantage of its “Talk to Chuck” campaign, brokerage giant Charles Schwab brought out its CEO this fall to reinforce a calming message of reassurance. “I’ve been through at least nine of these ... and I’ve learned that I have to keep my patience,” Schwab says in one commercial. What’s the logic here? “The recession is sufficiently serious that investors don’t just want to talk to Chuck, they want to see Chuck,” Quelch says. “He’s a savvy person capable of holding the hand of the younger investor.” For companies without a high-profile “Chuck,” the communications budget may be better spent on smaller hand-holding gestures. Razeghi suggests preparing white papers about the recession to send to valued customers. “It reassures folks you’re still in the game,” he says.

Caution: Now is not the time for positive, brand-focused campaigns that won’t resonate with cash-strapped customers. But don’t campaign on fear, either. “People are sufficiently panicked already,” Quelch says. “A message that exacerbated the fear would be counterproductive.”

This One Will Separate the Men From the Boys

As a professional woman, I feel quite licensed to utilize a cliché that could be viewed as sexist..."Separate the men from the boys."

I don’t know of any other clichés that better describe the current economic environment. Few would disagree that it is rough out there. Every company I know is being cautious, monitoring the environment carefully and cutting unnecessary expenses.

Although companies certainly run much leaner than they used to, nearly every company can tighten its belt a bit when necessary. However, which budgets should be trimmed, which budgets should be candidates for elimination if necessary and which budgets should stay in tact and maybe even be increased?

There are no cookie cutter rules. However, I believe that it is logical to ask ourselves the following questions as we are reviewing and adjusting our budgets:

• Will this budget cut damage my organization’s core value proposition?
• Will this budget cut give my competitors a window that might leave my organization exposed and vulnerable?
• Will this budget cut hamper my ability to keep sales opportunities moving through my sales pipeline even if my pipeline is moving slower than it does in better economic climates?
• Will this budget cut strip my organization of essential resources needed for long-term prosperity—talent, customer service, innovation, product development, manufacturing quality, etc?
• Will this budget cut damage my brand, potentially beyond repair?

Many of the cost-management tactics I see companies implementing right now are reasonable and responsible. Some of the tactics I am seeing are short-sided and just plain silly…these companies will likely be permanently damaged, probably will never catch up and will likely fold.

The weak are being separated from the strong. The untalented are being separated from the talented. Archaic organizations are being separated from forward-thinking organizations. The men are being separated from the boys.

Nearly everyone I know is on edge right now. It is rough out there. However, those of us who keep our heads on straight and think about how we can continue to advance our value propositions will make it through this. Those who cut to the bone, cut harmfully into their value propositions, cut their own legs out from under them and let their competition stroll past will in all likelihood become a memory.