This is one of the Big, Hairy, Audacious Goal or BHAG — a term coined by Jim Collins and Jerry Porras in their book, "Built to Last: Successful Habits of Visionary Companies" that LinkedIn as are other social networks wrestling with right now.
How do we transform CEOs and the C-Suite into creatives?
What do I mean?
We know that buyers, job seekers, in fact everybody is on-line consuming content, from blogs on Linkedin, to videos on TikTok. Social media is where we get our news, our financial advice, where we find the products we buy and where we find the places to work or not work.
Linkedin has an opportunity
Linkedin's opportunity is that they need to have the 840 million people on the platform, logging in more often and consuming more content on the platform. If you look at other social networks people are logging in daily or multiple times in a day, this isn't the case with LinkedIn
Linkedin therefore started a creator program which is where it will give certain nominated people $4,000 to get them to create content. The goal is to get more people on the platform and more people consuming the content, but the BHAG is to turn CEOs and the C-Suite into content creators.
How do we turn senior people in business into content creators?
If you think about it, most people are scared of posting and commenting on Linkedin. We have been teaching and coaching how to create content and how to engage on LinkedIn as part of DLA Ignite's social selling and influence course for the last 7 years. I can assure you, watching the fear in people's eyes as they are asked to comment on a post, still makes me feel strange. After all, what's the worst that could happen?
Are there CEOs out there on social?
If you look at the CEO of BP, Bernard Looney, here you have an oil company that has a bit of net zero work, but because of Bernard's work on Linkedin, people think BP is a net zero company that dabbles in oil. Clever eh!
Where as Shell, who are poor on social, we still think are a oil company that dabbles in net-zero.
While these are traditional conservative companies making a go at social, which must be applauded, the problem with both these profiles is that they are transmit. It's old school public relations (PR) on social media. And while you have to hand it to Bernard's team at BP it does not tick many of the fundamentals in digital today.
Here's a CEO, in fact the whole of the C-Suite online, providing insight, being educational, even entertaining. Sharing content, but they are also achieving their own objectives. The CRO is looking for leads, the CFO is looking for more backers, the CIO is sharing ideas with other CIOs, etc.
This is a business using social for what it should be used for, as well as creating content.
In fact we have worked with them to be digitally dominant, owning the share of voice and digital conversations. What do I mean?
Let's say you are at a conference and there is a drinks in the evening, you have a call which makes you late. When you turn up you realise that the drinks event is full of all your prospects and customers.
As you are late, all these prospects and customers are already talking to people. In fact they are laughing and joking.
Now, would you want these prospects to be talking to your team or your competitors teams?
If you are digitally dominate the prospects and customers are talking with you, not your competition.
They are engaging on your content, turning up to your live streams, connecting with your team.
What can Linkedin learn from Cyberhawk?
The reason why Cyberhawk chose DLA Ignite's and it's Social Selling and Influence course was the fact they wanted SQLs, (sales qualified leads). As a business they have to sell to fund all of the things they need and it was this push for sales that got the CEO to fund the project.
How do we get more CEOs and C-Suite creating content?
We have to show to CEOs and the Board of the business that there is a business reason to do it, there has to be a business case which shows a return. There has to be a competitive advantage.
Now there are spin offs, like Cyberhawk will IPO faster and at a higher multiple than if they hadn't been using social. But for the board to sign off the spend, we are back to the business reason.
And to "sell" this to a business board you need people with business acumen, people with a track record of working at board level and people who have a track record at mentoring and coaching C-Level people.
Now Imagine .....
How about if I said, I can take you to a place where all your prospects hang out, would you go?
I can pick you up in the car tomorrow and you can hang out there, having conversations with them.
When you arrived, what would you do?
Grab a coffee and go up to the first one and start a conversation? Of course you would.
Or would you walk in and say "buy my stuff, because we are great". Of course you wouldn't, as somebody would call security.
That's the difference. Selling on social is ...... social. You have conversations with people.
You don't go up to people and pitch to them as people will call security.
The great thing about social is that there is no "prime selling time (PST)", you can have as many conversations as you want. One of my customers, does his prospecting between putting the kids to bed and when he goes to bed.
It's time to bring your demand generation into the second decade of the 21st century and it's time to "start fishing where the fish are" ...... on social.