"Why we need to be 'cool'? How social media is changing consumers vs.
How corporate executives still stick to the old paradigm
Prepared for Swiss-Korean Business Council
February 17, 2011
Hoh Kim
THE LAB h®
Conclusion after more than a decade of strategic communication consulting:
Whose mouth is better?
“My”mouth
“Their” mouths
My strengths
OMy weaknesses (mistakes, wrongdoings) O
Hoh Kim 2010 2
Context: Why?
Copyright 2011 THE LAB h 3
Social media is changing consumers‟ attitudes & actions
towards companies…how?
Corporate leaders need to change their attitudes & actions
towards consumers… how?
Three Questions
• “Every company = Media company”: What does it mean to my business?
• “Be cool”: Do I know how to communicate my weaknesses?
• “Socialize”: Does my company publicize or socialize?
Copyright 2011 THE LAB h 4
Three Conclusions (in advance)
• “How are we doing as a „media company‟?”: You
should ask & answer this question within your organization.
• “We need to be cool”: You need to be cool with „bad news‟ in
social media, and deal with it by adding your position, rather than trying to
take the bad news off. Don‟t try to test the „Streisand effect‟!
• “Socialize, not just publicize”: You need to identify and build
stories around your leadership and business, and try to socialize, not
publicize in social media.
Copyright 2011 THE LAB h 5
1. Some Stories
“Streisand Effect”
“The Streisand effect is a primarily online phenomenon
in which an attempt to hide or remove a piece of information
has the unintended consequence of perversely causing
the information to be publicized more widely and
to a greater extent than would have occurred
if no contrary action had been attempted.” (wikipedia)
Copyright 2011 THE LAB h 7
“Streisand Effect”
• Unsuccessful lawsuit by Barbra
Streisand against photographer
Kenneth Adelman and
Pictopia.com for US$50 million
• from “unknown picture”
over 420,000 visits the
following month
Copyright 2011 THE LAB h 8
Photo source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Barbrahouse1.jpg
Streisand Effect and
Dunkin‟ Donuts in Korea(April 2007)
Copyright 2011 THE LAB h 9
What were they thinking?
10
Mass Media
Bad News
Public Relations
Consumer Media
Mass/News Media
Corporate Media
Bad News Bad News
Good Response on Bad News
“Minus” paradigm “Plus” paradigm
Copyright 2009 THE LAB h
from „Silence and Denial‟
to „Disclosure and Apology‟
• “Paradox of Transparency”
• Trust and Weaknesses (Dr.
Robert Cialdini)
11
출처: 조선닷컴http://news.chosun.com/site/data/html_dir/2009/06/02/2009060201586.html?srchCol=news&srchUrl=news1
Avis 이미지 출처: 구글 이미지http://images.google.co.kr/images?sourceid=navclient&hl=ko&rlz=1T4ADBR_koKR279KR289&q=avis,+we+try+harder&um=1&ie=UTF-8&ei=ouafSveVNpeEngfh6d3tDQ&sa=X&oi=image_result_group&ct=title&resnum=1
Copyright 2009 THE LAB h
Anything common?
Hoh Kim 2010 12
0
1000
2000
3000
4000
5000
Chosun.com
NYT.com
Data gathered: 1) “Public apology (Kong-gae-sa-gwa)” in chosun.com; 2) “Public apology, apologize, and apology” in nyt.com
13Hoh Kim
Trend: Public apologies
in Korea and the U.S.
0
100
200
300
400
김영삼 김대중 노무현 이명박
News
Blog (x 00)
14
News (headline search only) and blog post search by Naver using “사과,김영삼,” “사과, 김대중,” “사과, 노무현,” and “사과, 이명박” were conducted April 18, 2010
Hoh Kim
Trend (Korea): “Presidential” apologies
0
500
1000
1500
2000
Clinton Bush Obama
News
Blog (x000)
15
News and blog search by Google using “apology, clinton,” “apology, bush,” and “apology, obama” were conducted April 18, 2010
Hoh Kim
Trend (the U.S.): “Presidential” apologies
Use of Youtube for „one to many‟
public apologies on social media
Hoh Kim 2010 16
Domino pizza: Patrick Doyle (2009. 4) – 750,000 viewed on Youtube
jetBlue: David Neelman, (ex-) CEO (2007. 2) – 360,000 viewed on Youtube
Benefits of video apologies
• Editing (production)
• Timing (release)
• Search (attention)
Hoh Kim 2010 17
MATTEL Bob Eckert CEO (2007. 8)
Before video apologies
After video apologies
Purchase intention 71% 76%
Trust 75% 84%
Source: HRD Research (August 2007)http://www.mediacurves.com/nationalmediafocus/J6482/
“The Pizza Turnaround” campaign
by Domino‟s Pizza(stock price of the first half of 2010 went up 70% compared to 2009)
Hoh Kim 2010 18
2. Some Statisticsfrom THE LAB h® Cool Communication Studies
Context of the Study
2010 (c) THE LAB h 20
Background & Motivation
• Opinion leaders‟ engagement: blog vs. twitter
• Opinion shaping: one-way promotional message driven
corporate campaign (AD/PR) vs. two-way conversation
between corporate person and individual consumer/individual
consumer and individual consumer
• Perception gap: general public vs. twitter users
2010 (c) THE LAB h 21
What is “cool” communication?
• Disclosure: Communicating Weakness too vs. Strengths only
• Apology: Accept vs. Avoid your responsibility in front of your
mistakes or wrongdoing
• Actions: Improvements made vs. Rhetorical apology after
your mistakes/wrongdoings
• Listening, trustworthiness, responsible, (two-way)
communication
222010 (c) THE LAB h
Cool Communication Study:
How was the study conducted
General Public* Study Twitter User Study
Subjects Nationwide men/women 19 years old and above
Korean Twitter users
Subject Size 500 305
Sampling Error(95% Confidence Level)
+/- 4.38% +/- 5.61%
Method CATI (Computer Assisted Telephone Interviewing)
Online research
Sample Extraction Quota sampling based on region/gender/age
Random participation through Twitter announcement + Twitter users on the Research and Research panel
Duration April 1, 2010 10:00 – 21:00 May 1 – 17, 2010
* Some Twitter users among the general public group may have been included. Therefore, this study should be understood not as a comparison of Twitter users vs. Non- Twitter users but of Twitter users vs. the general public in Korea.
The following 10 conglomerate companies were given as options in the questionnaire – Kumho Asiana, Lotte, Samsung, POSCO, Hanjin, Hyundai Heavy Industries, Hyundai Kia Automotive Group , GS, LG and SK. The order of these options was rotated in order to minimize respondent bias.
232010 (c) THE LAB h
Corporate Reputation:trustworthy
self-promotion
listening
responsible
communication
purchase intention
2010 (c) THE LAB h 24
“most trustworthy”:
Samsung vs. Posco
3.60%
0.70%
2.60%
2.30%
2.30%
6.20%
2.60%
11.10%
41.30%
27.20%
0.70%
0.80%
1.90%
1.90%
5%
5.90%
6.10%
10.50%
13.20%
54%
0.00% 10.00% 20.00% 30.00% 40.00% 50.00% 60.00%
GS
Hanjin
Kumho Asiana
Lotte
Hyundai Heavy Industries
SK
Hyundai Kia Automotive
LG
POSCO
Samsung
General public
Twitter users
252010 (c) THE LAB h
“most competent in self-promoting”:only category (twitter > general public) for Samsung
0.30%
1.60%
1.30%
6.20%
2%
0.70%
4.90%
17.40%
3.90%
61.60%
0.60%
1.00%
1.50%
4.00%
4.50%
5.00%
6.50%
7.80%
12%
57.10%
0.00% 10.00% 20.00% 30.00% 40.00% 50.00% 60.00% 70.00%
Hanjin
GS
Kumho Asiana
POSCO
Lotte
Hyundai Heavy Industries
LG
SK
Hyundai Kia Automotive
Samsung
General public
Twitter users
262010 (c) THE LAB h
“most engaged in listening to customers‟ opinions”:
Samsung vs. LG
2.3%
0.7%
9.8%
9.5%
3.0%
12.1%
17.0%
4.9%
23.3%
17.4%
1.8%
1.8%
2.9%
3.6%
3.9%
6.9%
7.1%
9.3%
16.6%
46.0%
0.0% 5.0% 10.0% 15.0% 20.0% 25.0% 30.0% 35.0% 40.0% 45.0% 50.0%
Hanjin
Hyundai Heavy Industries
GS
Kumho Asiana
Lotte
POSCO
SK
Hyundai Kia Automotive
LG
Samsung
General public
Twitter users
Very active in corporate blogging; the first for a top 30 company to share the
customers’ comments without screening
272010 (c) THE LAB h
“most responsible”:
Samsung vs. Posco
2.60%
3.90%
0.70%
1.60%
7.20%
5.60%
7.20%
9.20%
40.30%
21.60%
0.80%
1.30%
1.60%
1.80%
3.90%
5.40%
7.60%
10.10%
14.80%
52.70%
0.00% 10.00% 20.00% 30.00% 40.00% 50.00% 60.00%
GS
Kumho Asiana
Lotte
Hanjin
SK
Hyundai Heavy Industries
Hyundai Kia Automotive
LG
POSCO
Samsung
General public
Twitter users
282010 (c) THE LAB h
“most skilled in communication”:
Samsung vs. SK
2010 (c) THE LAB h 29
6.60%
1.30%
4.60%
1.00%
11.10%
2.30%
4.90%
31.50%
23.30%
13.40%
1.70%
2.00%
3.20%
4.20%
6.40%
7.00%
9.90%
10.60%
13.60%
41.30%
0.00% 5.00% 10.00% 15.00% 20.00% 25.00% 30.00% 35.00% 40.00% 45.00%
Kumho Asiana
Hanjin
GS
Hyundai Heavy Industries
POSCO
Lotte
Hyundai Kia Automotive
SK
LG
Samsung
General public
Twitter users
SK Telecom was the first company among the top 30 Korean companies to open a corporate blog and directly
communicate with consumers
“most desirable to purchase”:
Samsung vs. Samsung
2010 (c) THE LAB h 30
1.00%
1.30%
3.00%
5.90%
7.50%
3.60%
14.80%
12.80%
23.30%
26.90%
0.20%
0.60%
0.70%
1.60%
2.20%
3.00%
3.10%
9.10%
25.10%
54.60%
0.00% 10.00% 20.00% 30.00% 40.00% 50.00% 60.00%
Hyundai Heavy Industries
Hanjin
Kumho Asiana
GS
SK
Lotte
POSCO
Hyundai Kia Automotive
LG
Samsung
General public
Twitter users
Reputation Quotient (RQ):
Samsung, Posco, LG, Hyundai-Kia, SK
in both categories
2010 (c) THE LAB h 31
Rank General Public Twitter Users
No. 1 Samsung 50.9 Samsung 28.0
No. 2 LG 13.7 (-37.2) POSCO 21.0 (-7)
No. 3 Hyundai-Kia 9.0 (-41.9) LG 15.9 (-12.1)
No. 4 ~
No. 10
POSCO
SK
Lotte
Hyundai Heavy
Kumho Asiana
GS
Hanjin
8.1
6.2
3.7
3.6
1.8
1.7
1.2
SK
Hyundai-Kia
GS
Kumho Asiana
Lotte
Hyundai Heavy
Hanjin
14.5
6.1
4.7
4.5
2.3
1.9
1.3
Samsung among Twitter users:
In “corporate communication 2.0” categories, Samsung
is NOT #1
2010 (c) THE LAB h 32
General Public Twitter Users“Most trustworthy” Samsung (54.0%)
Difference with No. 2 POSCO (12.2%): 40.8%
POSCO (41.3%)Difference with No. 2 Samsung (27.2%): 14.1%
“Most competent in self-promotion”
Samsung (57.1%)Difference with No. 2 Hyundai/Kia (12.0%): 45.1%
Samsung (61.6%)Difference with No. 2 SK (17.4%): 44.2%
“Most engaged in listening to customers’ opinions”
Samsung (46.0%)Difference with No. 2 LG (16.6%): 29.4%
LG (23.3%)Difference with no. 2 Samsung (17.4%): 5.9%
“Most responsible” Samsung (52.7%)Difference with No. 2 POSCO: 37.9%
POSCO (40.3%)Difference with no. 2 Samsung (21.6%): 18.7%
“Most skilled in communications”
Samsung (41.3%)Difference with No. 2 LG (13.6%): 27.7%
SK (31.5%)Difference with No. 2 LG (23.3%): 8.2%
“Most desirable to purchase”
Samsung (54.6%)Difference with No. 2 LG (25.1%): 29.5%
Samsung (26.9%)Difference with No. 2 LG (23.3%): 3.6%
Cool Crisis Communication:disclosure
apology
actions
2010 (c) THE LAB h 33
Transparent/candid disclosure of wrongdoing
2010 (c) THE LAB h 34
2.00%
0.70%
7.90%
3.90%
9.50%
11.50%
19.70%
32.80%
5.20%
6.90%
1.30%
2.70%
3.10%
4.00%
4.40%
9.70%
13.90%
14.20%
14.70%
32.00%
0.00% 5.00% 10.00% 15.00% 20.00% 25.00% 30.00% 35.00%
Hanjin
Hyundai Heavy Industries
GS
Lotte
Kumho Asiana
SK
LG
POSCO
Hyundai Kia Automotive
Samsung
General public
Twitter users
“Genuine Apology for Wrongdoing”
2010 (c) THE LAB h 35
3.00%
7.50%
7.50%
1.60%
1.60%
9.50%
5.20%
32.50%
22.60%
8.90%
2.00%
2.30%
3.00%
3.30%
5.00%
7.40%
12.80%
14.40%
16.20%
33.70%
0.00% 5.00% 10.00% 15.00% 20.00% 25.00% 30.00% 35.00% 40.00%
Hanjin
Kumho Asiana
GS
Hyundai Heavy Industries
Lotte
SK
Hyundai Kia Automotive
POSCO
LG
Samsung
General public
Twitter users
“Make Improvements and Go Beyond a
Rhetorical Apology”
2010 (c) THE LAB h 36
1.00%
2.00%
7.90%
5.90%
10.50%
3.30%
26.90%
6.90%
20.70%
15.10%
0.90%
2.30%
2.80%
3.50%
4.50%
4.60%
10.70%
14.10%
14.30%
42.10%
0.00% 5.00% 10.00% 15.00% 20.00% 25.00% 30.00% 35.00% 40.00% 45.00%
Hanjin
Hyundai Heavy Industries
GS
Kumho Asiana
SK
Lotte
POSCO
Hyundai Kia Automotive
LG
Samsung
General public
Twitter users
Cool Crisis Communication Quotient:
Samsung vs. POSCO
2010 (c) THE LAB h 37
Ranking General Public Twitter Users
No. 1 Samsung 35.9 POSCO 30.7
No. 2 LG 14.8 LG 21.0
No. 3 Hyundai/Kia 13.9 SK 10.5
No. 4 ~ No. 10
POSCOSK
LotteKumho Asiana
GSHyundai Heavy
IndustriesHanjin
13.17.24.53.43.02.71.4
SamsungGS
Kumho AsianaHyundai/Kia
LotteHanjin
Hyundai Heavy Industries
10.37.87.65.82.92.01.4
Samsung vs. POSCO
2010 (c) THE LAB h 38
General Public Twitter Users
“Company to officially disclose its wrongdoing”
Samsung (32.0%)Difference with No. 2 Hyundai/Kia (14.7 %): 17.3%
POSCO (32.8%)Difference with No. 2 LG (19.7%): 13.1%
“Company to genuinely apologize”
Samsung (33.7%)Difference with No. 2 LG (16.2%): 17.5%
POSCO (32.5%)Difference with No. 2 LG (22.6%): 9.9%
“Company to make efforts for improvement”
Samsung (42.1%)Difference with No. 2 LG (14.3%): 27.8%
POSCO (26.9%)Difference with No. 2 LG (20.7%): 6.2%
The most used channel for obtaining the news
2010 (c) THE LAB h 39
0.0%
2.3%
13.1%
0.0%
35.1%
5.9%
25.9%
17.7%
0.7%
0.7%
0.5%
1.1%
9.1%
10.2%
15.8%
61.9%
0.0% 10.0% 20.0% 30.0% 40.0% 50.0% 60.0% 70.0%
don't know/no response
others
mobile
radio
portal sites
newspaper
online newspaper
TV
General public
Twitter users
Experience of Posting an Online Review
over the Past Year
2010 (c) THE LAB h 40
67.20%
15.90%
0.00% 10.00% 20.00% 30.00% 40.00% 50.00% 60.00% 70.00% 80.00%
online review over the past yearGeneral public
Twitter users
Contents for Respondents with Online Review Posting
Experience
2010 (c) THE LAB h 41
55.10%
19.50%
25.40%
37.00%
41.80%
19.70%
0.00% 10.00% 20.00% 30.00% 40.00% 50.00% 60.00%
positive/negative
negative
positive
General public
Twitter users
3. Socialize? How?
Fact vs. Story
Traditional Website vs. Social Media
Don‟t tell others(consumers, journalists, even your
employees) that “integrity” is your corporate value.
Find what actual stories(experiences) of “integrity” exist
within your organization and tell them.
Some Final Thoughts
• The interest for social media among opinion leaders from
business and political circles in Korea has increased alongside
the popularity of Twitter and smart phones that enable easy
access to social media
• Companies must pay attention to how they are perceived by
social media users.
• You got to be cool: “Highlighting strengths, underplaying
weaknesses” paradigm is no longer feasible, because company
mistakes and wrongdoings are increasingly unveiled to the
public through social media.
2010 (c) THE LAB h 46
• Social media users no longer perceive a company based on a unilateral “image advertisement,” “press release or newspaper article” or “one-off promotion” but are rather influenced by conversations coming from social networks.
• The first criteria for establishing a positive relationship with social media users is enabling real people from the company to participate in social media and talking about their strengths and weaknesses in a “cool” manner.
• In such Cool Communication® , everyday trust, responsibility, listening, and communication are key elements, while in crisis situations, the disclosure of wrongdoing, genuine apology, and actual efforts for improvement are crucial.
2010 (c) THE LAB h 47
"Why we need to be 'cool'? How social media is changing consumers vs.
How corporate executives still stick to the old paradigm
Prepared for Swiss-Korean Business Council
February 17,2011
Hoh Kim
THE LAB h®
Appendix
Appendix: Respondents Demographics
2010 (c) THE LAB h 50
Category Sub-categories General Public Twitter Users
By Region SeoulIncheon/KyonggiDaejon/ChungchongGwangju/JeollaDaegu/GyeongbukBusan/Ulsan/GyeongnamGangwon/Jeju
106 (21.2%)140 (28.0%)50 (10.0%)52 (10.4%)52 (10.4%)79 (15.8%)21 (4.2%)
183 (60.0%)67 (22.0%)13 (4.3%)8 (2.6%)8 (2.6%)
25 (8.2%)1 (0.3%)
By Gender MaleFemale
248 (49.6%)252 (50.4%)
200 (65.6%)105 (34.4%)
By Age 19-2930s40s (Twitter users until here)50s and above
97 (19.4%)107 (21.4%)114 (22.8%)182 (36.4%)
126 (41.3%)135 (44.3%)44 (14.4%)
By Education Level Below middle school graduateHigh school graduateCurrent college student & graduate
71 (14.3%)175 (35.6%)247 (50.1%)
0 (0%)10 (3.3%)
295 (96.7%)
By Income Below 2mil Korean Won 2mil.-2.99mil. Korean Won3mil.-3.99mil. Korean WonOver 4mil. Korewan Won
126 (29.9%)85 (20.1%)93 (22.1%)
118 (27.9%)
25 (8.2%)47 (15.4%)62 (20.3%)
171 (56.1%)
By Occupation Self-employedBlue collarWhite collarHousewifeStudentUnemployed/Others
72 (14.6%)63 (12.8%)81 (16.4%)
139 (28.0%)59 (11.9%)80 (16.2%)
040 (13.1%)
184 (60.3%)0
55 (18.0%)26 (8.5%)
Total 500 (100%) 305 (100%)
2010 Cool Communication Study full report can be downloaded @
• http://www.slideshare.net/hohkim/2010-thela-bhcool-communication-
studyenglishfinal (English Version)
• http://www.slideshare.net/hohkim/2010-the-lab-h-final (Korean Version)
THE LAB h® specializes in executive coaching and workshop in
the area of strategic communication:
. Business Storytelling for Results (individual)
. Bad News Management Workshop (group of 12-20)
. Principles of Persuasion™ Workshop (group of 15)
For any inquiries on the Cool Communication® Study and THE LAB h®
executive coaching services, please contact Hoh Kim @ [email protected]
2010 (c) THE LAB h 51
Top Related