Forget ‘success’? ‘Contribution’? Like Mother Theresa?

Then it all made sense.

All our lives we’ve been told to be ‘successful’ and ‘over-achieve’ (a default if you’re a Singaporean). Our success is measured on the kind of education that we receive, the grades we hauled home, the jobs we land, the lifestyle we adopt and the property we live in. A very singular pursuit indeed.

Nothing wrong with personal wealth and accolades (perhaps some of you contributed a few million dollars to your company’s bottom line that enriched the lives of your colleagues.) But can we do more? Can we make a daily difference to the lives of others? Can we help others achieve and replicate our own success stories? Can we contribute meaningfully?

Success Through Contribution

No debate, we are part of a society, surrounded by family, friends, colleagues and even strangers. Hence, I truly believe it is only natural that our success is measured through our contribution to others around us. Remember that war movies’ refrain? ‘Leave no one behind’. Drucker is right, only if we ‘contribute first, achieve later’, will we be able to collectively move forward.

As a society, as an organisation (commercial or otherwise), as a generation. And what’s a great way to contribute? Sharing. Believe and do it often enough, it becomes natural (just like on Facebook).

The good news: the tools of contribution and sharing are already in place and in our hands.

Here’s a little of my story.

How I Caught Up With the World

I had dropped out of film school at 19, spent the next 8 years on concert stages and in theatre halls, ran a pioneering music label startup for a while and finally landed my first corporate job at Oracle at 28. I was off the starting line but it felt like I was really late to the corporate game. I needed to grow fast!

To make things even more interesting, I started school again. I believed I needed a formal education in corporate business and marketing. Again, I felt late to the game (although running a startup did impart some key learning, for instance, listening to customers is really important.)  I needed knowledge fast!

No surprises here. I looked around the internet (circa 2007) and instantly felt ‘a new social movement’ brewing. The music label business I had ran with the wife was built on the back of the internet and Myspace (I have been online since mIRC (1996)), but this was different. Blogs were really coming into prominence, social networks were coming into life and suddenly, opinionated content are being shared everywhere! It felt like everyone decided to come onto the internet and ‘do something’ (*my theory on this digital tsunami? Generation Y’s coming of age + Generation X’s late adopters finally discovered the lure of social networks)

So with all these contributing of knowledge and sharing of content, there can only be one obvious outcome:

Learning on The Social Internet

If I needed an honest and reliable opinion on a marketing topic, I didn’t need to look further than the blogs of industry experts, even the self-proclaimed ones. The thinkers among them usually have links to academic research I could follow through and the active ones are typically discussing relevant and current issues of the day. Beats learning about business and marketing from an academic textbook (typically a year behind reality).

Need to get a grasp of the news-worthy developments every morning? I discovered my own Twitter community and has since been served with news and fresh knowledge daily by others who share the same passion or industrial affiliation.

Want to know what others are reading and find useful for learning? Try social bookmark service, Delicious.

Need answers to difficult questions on business, technology or any knowledge area you fancy? Ask on LinkedIn Answers. Someone somewhere will be happy to help you out.

Want ‘free’ carefully-researched academic papers or presentations? Try Slideshare or Scribd.

As long as we keep sharing openly and meaningfully on the social internet as I have discussed, I am certain we are all contributing to others around us, enriching their lives and collectively move forward.

Social Sharing is Your Contribution to The Lives of Others

Let’s get personal. Recently, I completed and earned my first degree, a First Class Hons in Marketing Management, at the ripe old age of 31. For a teenage dropout, I suppose that’s a big accomplishment. I am sharing this with you because, apart from my family and my circle of friends, you have contributed immensely to my learning experience and my achievements.

I can only thank the many people (some are friends, most are strangers) who blogged on topics that enriched my learning, posted academic papers on Slideshare or Scribd, shared links to rich content on Twitter, engaged in tweet conversations with me, and gave encouragement and support on Facebook and through this blog.

Since this is my professional and personal blog, I hope you will allow me to archive some highlights of my academic adventure. I hope this will also be a showcase of that experience, to show that my methodology in learning and knowledge gathering through social means can be easily replicated and, hopefully, will contribute to someone else’s achievements.

Berita Harian, Tuesday, 29 June 2010 : National Malay-language daily newspaper, front page header and page 3 article (click to enlarge) MyPaper, Tuesday, May 18, 2010 : Nationally-distributed daily newspaper Click to download and view quote A central theme in my convocation speech (pg. 5) touched on the virtues of open social sharing, especially in knowledge and collaborative work. Convocation Speech, Northumbria University, 22 May 2010

So how about sharing your experience on social sharing? I look forward to hearing from you in the comments.

Among Anol’s many questions, one particularly touched the very foundation of my arguments for enhancing social connectivity in the workplace. Here it is, paraphrased.

Not an easy question to answer. I have argued for leadership figures to lead and implement fundamental changes to encourage open discussion and endorsement of employer’s brand. It is a tall order, as Anol pointed out, because the undertaking seeks to overhaul culture that has probably been ingrained for years within an organisation (especially true in a Singaporean context, many examples of conservative people structures exist). Is there another way in then?

Finding out later that Anol is an Apple fanatic and aficionado was an important discovery (particularly in that moment). The immediate answer then (not the answer, but probably one of many probable answers and solutions) became more apparent to me.

Selling Cool

About a month or so ago, I swallowed my ‘Google boy’ ego, bit the bullet, took a vow of geek celibacy and resolved to remain above the fray:

Technology serves a purpose in making our lives better, so the more of my peers, seniors at work and people in general adopt the smartphone as a tool for learning, the better I will feel. Everyone has the right to access real-time information and knowledge, just as I do, for work or daily life. In any case, I do openly admit that the iPhone is such a usable, intuitive and easy-to-use device. And most certainly not everyone needs a ‘WIFI hotspot’ in their pocket.

But I also realised something that will not keep Apple down or weaken it in the face of competition from the likes of Motorola, Samsung, HTC or any of the other mobile device manufacturer. Simply because…

You can only fight cool with cool.

Let’s face it, Apple is the epitome of cool. No doubt about it. The real hook in their messaging to customers and their admirers is that ’you can be cool’. Anol mentioned a Don Norman’s concept about us wanting to see ourselves in the objects that we own (correct me if I’m wrong). That’s exactly what Apple addresses in its ads. Apple sells you ‘cool’, a state of mind enhanced by how you think others will perceive ‘you’. Here’s a comparative study using video ads. Watch this iPod ad from Apple.

I brought back the iPod ad because it was the beginning of Apple mad love for most ‘non-design’ people that ultimately led to the current obsession with the iPhone. Now contrast that with this Motorola ad for the Droid. “Android 2.1”? “Xenon Flash”? Only the geeks will truly appreciate it. Sterile.

Here’s where Apple triumps again. Nothing in the following video mentions the iPhone (except the end caption). What Apple did was to connect that delicate human moment with the iPhone 4. No hard sell, but gentle tugging at our emotions. Cool.

Now this is my phone. In my opinion, if OS is a winning criteria, quite possibly the most powerful phone in the world right now. However, I’m in no doubt that Google sucks bad at marketing its products (other than their cash cow  aka internet ads) and this video reflects that. This video is all about features, features, features. No ‘you’ or ‘me’ in it.

‘Selling cool’ has certainly helped Apple to maintain its mystique.

So if ‘selling cool’ works for products, can it work in an organisational context? Can companies sell ‘cool’ to their employees?

The Cool Organisation

I say, why not? What’s stopping anyone from internally marketing their company’s brand as ‘cool’? Isn’t communicating the virtues of the company’s brand, in relation to market competitors’, a sure way of keeping employees’ morale up? No one wants to work for a No. 2 or No. 3 brand.

Or am I wrong? Or ‘cool’ is just not feasible in employee relations?

But if you agree that ‘cool’ has its merits in creating employee brand ambassadors, the challenge is then, how do you create a ‘cool’ organisation? How do you create an organisation’s brand that employees will talk about openly and passionately?

Here’s another quick case study on ‘cool’.

Is YOG ‘cool’ enough to be passionate about?

In this CNA article, Zainudin Noordin implied that the Youth Olympic Games is not getting the kind of passionate support that it needs. That what is needed now is people “coming to action” to be passionate about the YOG. After the JJ Lin YOG cheer fiasco, I am sure YOG ‘cool factor’ has lost some of its shine. Is there a fix? Can ‘cool’ be produced on demand?

But most certainly not if someone’s brilliant idea of YOG cool is Ris Low, as in the next video.

What do YOU think? Is ‘cool’ cool enough to change how we perceive our employers’ brands? What will be the stumbling blocks? Is it the type of products or services that will determine ‘cool’? Can management folks appreciate ‘cool’? Do share below with your opinions, I would love to hear from you.

Look Who’s Back

For the second year running, the folks from Six Degrees are back to present Social Media World Forum Asia 2010 in Singapore. This year’s event promises to be bigger than last year’s and will present a host of speakers from many sides of the social media story.

Among the many distinguished speakers I look forward to hearing are:

Brian Solis : Acclaimed original thought leader on social media and writer of the new book ‘Engage’

Blake Chandlee : VP & Commercial Director at Facebook, EMEA

Thomas Crampton : Asia Pacific Director, 360 Digital Influence, Ogilvy Public Relations Worldwide

Shalabh Pandey: Leading digital marketing personality in Asia. Author and founder of Chasingthestorm

I Am Interested in

What I really am excited about is to hear how businesses are transforming their organisations through embracing ‘social media’ within their organisations. Or is it all merely outwardly PR- and marketing-focused? What are the initiatives taken by business leaders to empower their employees to engage in social media? Is it ‘See & No Touch’ approach? Have they built ‘social media-like’ infrastructures in their organisations to facilitate social conversations and learning? Are their employees allowed to be on ‘social media’ in the office?

After all, ‘social media’ is really all about ‘online conversations around bits of information and new learning’.

I look forward to meeting these folks in person with these ‘difficult questions’.

Derek Yeo : Head of Marketing, Tiger Airways

Pooja Arora : Brand Manager, P&G

Jeremy Khoo : Deputy Director, Marketing & Communication, NTUC Fairprice

Disclosure: A Groovyweb will be at the two-day forum as an official blogger, courtesy of Six Degrees. If you would like to follow the live coverage of the event, follow me on Twitter via @ismantanuri

Pink is the author of the best-selling book ‘Drive: The Surprising Truth of What Motivates Us’, a study that argues long-held conventional beliefs in human motivation are actually hampering effective, high performance.

This is a continuation on my series of posts that discusses the intrinsic needs of employees in a new social environment that is increasingly connected through digital means and how businesses can relook its stance on employees’ engagement in social media and derive positive branding opportunities along the way. Pink’s works and ideas have been a huge recent inspiration and motivation for me to continue discussing the need of social engagement through digital means, especially within organisations, in achieving business objectives.

Now what exactly does science knows and business is doing wrong?

Monetary Rewards Do Not Guarantee Performance for 21st Century Work

Here’s the gist of Pink’s argument on what really motivates us, based on scientific findings from a Dan Ariely study sanctioned by the Federal Reserve Bank of America :

The Scientific Solution

In brief, Pink argues the solution to better and effective performance from modern employees are rooted, not in increased monetary rewards, but in providing the right conditions for these three intrinsic motivational factors to take shape:

There are a lot more discussions that can be had based on Pink’s arguments and these scientific findings, including parallels that I am developing in my mind for my own arguments that social connectivity through digital means will aid in providing these intrinsic motivations for employees (for eg. social media providing us with the control to direct our personal and professional communications (Autonomy) and the abundance of real-time information on social media and on the web that can help all of us get better at our work (Mastery)).  But let’s keep that for later.

For now, what better way than to have Pink explains his argument to you in person. Here’s Pink’s hilarious talk at TEDGlobal fully discussing the inspiration behind Drive with case studies and anecdotes.

This next video is a helpful rendering of the same motivation argument made by Pink. Using ‘on point’ caricatures, this visualisation is a great tool to easily understand and absorb Pink’s refreshing perspective on what motivates us.

Connect with Pink on social media via Twitter

The Short Answer

The Beatles said it best. Money can’t buy you love.

That is my sole conviction. Just as the practice of paying bloggers in dollars to endorse products is a thorny and questionable issue, providing employees with monetary incentives to engage on the social web comes with considerable risks to reputations, both employer’s and employees’. The integrity of the corporate and personal brands will be questioned. Don’t forget, we are dealing with social media, everyone is ready to pounce on you at the whiff of a questionable practice or the slightest mistake (see Google search results on ‘I Hate Tiger Airways’).

Furthermore, to quote Daryl Tay:
‘Will paying get the same kind of emotions and authenticity? Will your paid post even be remembered a week from today?’

But I know you will still ask, why would employees openly and willingly talk about their employers on social media when they are not compensated for it?

Let us assume my argument here for ‘happy employees make the best brand ambassadors’ is true and that you buy my theory that employees are the best assets for ‘spreading the employer brand love’.

High Pay = Employee Ambassador = Result of Love & Belonging

Let’s look at it from another perspective, ‘Will high-paying employees be brand ambassadors for their employers on the social web?’ I sincerely doubt it. With the internet as a window to opportunities, employees are increasingly mobile. A high-paying employee paid to market or promote the employer’s brand are compensated to do so. But what about the rank-and-file? What will trigger employer brand endorsement? What can we cultivate internally within the employee network and ecosystem to encourage employee ambassadorship?

Now, you may ask, how can I justify that? Let’s go back into history and revisit the work of Abraham Maslow, in particular his theory on ‘Maslow’s Hierarchy of Needs Theory’ (credit to @thangdynasty again for putting this into my view). Here is the most common representation of this motivation theory:

In short, Maslow theorised that we progress through different levels of self-need in seeking satisfaction and motivation. But only if a more pressing need is fulfilled first, for example, food and shelter before employment, family before friends.

So What Does Our Employment Address?

Our safety and security needs. All of us probably feel we are not being paid enough (who doesn’t?!) but ultimately our family and our own’s safety and security are ensured by the monthly salary we receive. The salary pays for our property and daily expenses and keep us on a social equilibrium. Can this sense of security be replicated in every workplace in the world? More likely than not. So what else do we seek for happiness?

Love and Belonging As Social Glue

If Maslow is right, we yearn for love and sense of belonging. Put aside family and friends you grew up with, we are more than likely to seek fulfilment in these needs through our colleagues: fellow employees we spend most our daylight hours with. Discounting colleagues you’re in dispute with and office politics aside, there is very likely a group of colleagues at work you would consider as ‘friends’ (if you don’t, then I’d suggest you re-look your relationships in the workplace.) All of us wants to belong to a group or be affiliated to like-minded individuals.

When we have determined these friends and established trust, what do we do next?

We literally get into each other’s Facebook and we establish Twitter communes. Vice versa.

Managers and leaders cannot pretend that this does not exist. Because it does and it is happening everywhere. Even in the most unsophisticated of workplaces.

Employees Are on Social Media and They Are Happy

Now that we have established the fact that employees use social media to interact with one another (sense of belonging) and with their family and friend (love and friendship), we can now firmly conclude that social media is not going anywhere because these online social channels fulfil and satisfy employees’ needs for belonging and affiliation. Belonging can actually means multiple choices of lunch partners to hang out with. So these positively equate to the following:

So here’s the good news and conclusion: Employees are more than happy to hang out on social media with their colleagues. And employers don’t have to pay for it because their self-needs for belonging will take care of that.

Agree?

Now The Bigger Picture

The not-so-good news:

1. Employees are not talking enough about their employers’ brand (or products) because they are told not to mix work with personal.
2. Employers are not seeing the big picture on employees engaging on social media and the opportunities that it represent.

Let’s address the more immediate issue 2 for now. Here’s a comment snippet (on a blog post by Belinda Ang) from Anol Bhattacharya who fully explains issue 2:

And Belinda’s response highlights the exact sentiments I would expect from many business leaders today:

The Business Leaders Challenge

If you agree with Anol’s and my own argument that ‘happy employees can be the best brand ambassadors’, then the immediate challenge for business leaders is to identify the value of social media internally and how it can contribute to their organisation’s growth and visibility. We have all heard about the huge buzz that is ‘social media: the weapon of unhappy customers’ but what about ‘social media: the ‘creating happy employees’ tool’?

To consider:

• cultivate social engagements from within the workplace by providing access to social platforms
• extending trust and empowering employees to engage in conversations that involve the employers’ brand
• use employees’ social media engagement as a tool for promoting the corporate brand
• use social media as an internal culture- and team-building tool

What are you thoughts? If you are a manager or a business owner, then I would love to hear your opinion on this issue. Do you feel there’s value in social media for your employees and your brand? Or social media is more risk than necessary for your business?

*Image credits for Maslow’s Hierarchy of Needs: The Skool of Life

‘Can treating employees like customers increase job satisfaction?’

The Satisfied Employee

Here’s my initial response to Brenda’s question (with edits):

Peter Drucker said ‘management’s duty is to preserve the assets of the institution in its care’*. In that respect, all employees must be equally treated with the same care typically reserved for customers. In today’s information-producing workplaces, even more importance and care must be given to increasingly-mobile employees. Unlike the manual worker (who peddles his strength and energy), today’s information-driven employees retain their practice’s knowledge and developed skills and sought to bring them along to the next employer (and, in some cases, including knowledge of the ex-employer’s strategic and operational secrets).

Now watch what Tom Peters had to say about ‘treating your employees like customers’. Peters recounts a story about an American Airlines’ annual meeting in Dallas being picketed by the Airlines Pilot Union. On the same day and in the same city, the same pilot union took out two full pages of advertisement in USA Today to honour the contribution of retiring Southwest Airlines’ co-founder, Herb Kelleher. Why? Because of Southwest’s differentiated support and care for its pilots. In Herb’s own words, the secret of Southwest’s success is “You have to treat your employees like customers.”

The Employee Ambassador

Further, I continued in my reply to Brenda and the main focus of this post ‘Employees as Brand Ambassadors’:

Rakesh Ojha asked this Twitter question on LinkedIn Answers recently:

A fair number of people on LinkedIn mentioned ‘Buy your Twitter followers on eBay’ and I totally agree with that. It is fairly easy to increase your followers count if you are really keen on doing that and there are published methodologies on how to go about doing it. An example, certain keywords that you tweet on will somehow automatically get you followers, for instance, ‘social media’, ‘holidays’ and the very popular ‘sex’.

Personally, I do not really care about my followers’ count on Twitter. A third are probably bots and another third are friends who were wondering ‘what’s this Twitter hype’ and have since left the conversation. I do have to admit a fair number are probably still lurking and mostly reading. They are the quiet audience.

Building a Community on Twitter

Here’s my published answer on LinkedIn Answers (with some edits):

So, above all, build a Twitter community, not your followers’ count.

I don’t think I have covered all there is about building a valuable interactive community on Twitter. If you have any suggestions or would like to share your own personal experience on cultivating your on Twitter community, I hope you will kindly do so by leaving a comment below. Keep on tweeting!

The hot topic of discussion in the social web right now is Facebook’s push towards becoming a more public platform and its ‘shenanigans’ with your privacy. There is now an organised movement (QuitFacebookDay.com) that has earmarked May 31st as D-Day. For a better idea of what has changed on Facebook, I suggest you have a look at the informative graphic below. PC World has a good article that outlines Facebook’s open social strategy too.

The Open Web is The Future Web

Without a doubt, I am all for an open web. I keep my Facebook profile public and I do not shy away from sharing most parts of my life on the web. I believe the more we are willing to share, the better our experience with the web will be and the more knowledgeable and useful the internet will become. Note this: I chose to be open.

I am blogging this in response to Daphne Maia’s own post ‘Privacy Has Been Long Dead. Mark Zuckerberg Didn’t Steal It’. Daphne made some great points that I agree big-heartedly, including:

• Facebook still remains a juggernaut in our lives. Our friends and family are in there and it is a great platform for businesses with over 400 million Facebook users to tap. How will we ever let go?
• Facebook is a “structured blog..within a big big community” and more (eg. games, online shopping, news, etc). I agree with Daphne here that Facebook’s main draw is its blog-like feature, a space to share with people on your network. There are really an abundance of things to do on Facebook. (FarmVille anyone?)
• ‘Facebook users need to learn how to: exercise gumption and exercise discretion’. I agree wholeheartedly. Very important. I have seen so many sharing failures on Twitter (an even more public platform) that I sometimes wonder if people ever realised they are being watched and read.

But my stand and opinion differ from Daphne’s here on on a large part of her observation and belief. Disclaimer (if one is required): Daphne and I are friends, online and in real life. Friends can disagree, yes? :)

Not Everyone Is Schooled in Social. Open Social.

Daphne knows the value of social media, just as I do. We are communication professionals who know how to control the message. The what, where and when to let it out. We share and blog ‘smartly’, we behave appropriately online (Twitter, Facebook, Plurk, you name it, we’re on it!) and we ‘game’ the system to build our own personal brands, consciously or otherwise (Daphne on Google).

But not everyone is as well-versed as us. That is the very real reality. Despite all the goodness of being open and social online, not everyone understands it and not everyone wants it. And that is essentially a basic right of the consumer that has to be respected.

In the long run, I would love to have everyone contribute to the open web but, realistically, that time is still much far off. Lots of education and understanding is needed to move people on the same open-thinking platform, perhaps only with the next generational change even. But for now, we, marketers and communicators, must respect consumers’ rights in wanting to protect their personal profiles and data. That can only be a positive prelude to a much more open relationship with consumers in the future.

Facebook: Rogue Business Practices?

Facebook’s success is fuelled by the rate of adoption and use by the masses. It sold us the idea and premise of a “private social network” to connect with “friends and family”. It has a secured, login-required platform that even Google’s mighty spiders do not have access to. And that was the pretext of joining Facebook for most people. Share your photos and thoughts, say Facebook, and shared away we did. We did not even care if Facebook owns our data for eternity. Why? Because there was ‘CONTROL’. Easily-manipulated controls over our profiles and what was to be shared with others. (There are now 50 settings with 170 options in Facebook’ privacy settings. Can YOU figure it out?)

Daphne made a point: ‘What makes the content you publish on Facebook so differentiated (in terms of privacy) from the content you would put on your blog?’ On the contrary, THAT is exactly the reason why most people on Facebook don’t keep an open personal blog. Instead they trust Facebook to keep their sharing and profiles private within their inner circle. They add friends very very carefully. These folks want to have control over their online profiles and engagements and Facebook offered this great and innovative solution. A ‘friends and family-only’ network. We have to respect this right to remain private as much as we expect others’ not to go through our personal belongings.

The Erosion of Trust

Do you think there is a trust issue here?

In business, trust is everything. Facebook is a business. One that earns from advertisers and 3rd party developers, but the way Facebook is pushing its open social platform forward (way too prematurely, I think) in a daredevil, yet blasé manner, I am not sure if they are building upon the trust granted by its users. People are leaving already. Robert Scoble, despite his arguments for going all-out public on Facebook (with a very public profile with public data. Because Scoble does not trust Facebook with his private data), suggests splitting Facebook into two: one private and one public. Scoble obviously knows the value of trust within the every day republic. Read more on Scoble’s suggestions to Mark Zuckerberg (Facebook’s CEO)

In Facebook’s pursuit to compete with Google and Twitter (both being very public and open platforms) in chasing the advertising dollars, where, I wonder, is the respect for its users that have kept its platform alive and well? Remember, Myspace, once mighty, now languishes, feebly.

Do Not Lose Control of Your Consumer’s Rights

As the graphic illustration below shows, much has changed on Facebook. For me personally, and I agree with Daphne on this, privacy on the web remains an elusive endeavour. As long as you use somebody’s online asset, be it Google, Twitter, Hotmail, etc., your privacy remains at their mercy. Even Steve Jobs got his emails outed in public. Another thing, are we, online users, a part of a huge market research data pool for advertisers? You bet and I don’t care!

But what should remain always yours is your control over your personal profile and your data. As an online consumer, you have the right to make choices on who receives your data and who has the right to capitalise commercially on it.  But should every online move we make be granularly tracked and sold on to 3rd party services without our permission? I’m not keen. Just because someone in my network is playing FarmVille does not mean Zygna (FarmVille’s developer) has the right to access my profile and those of my friends’ and family. That is an outright abuse of trust.

In fact, one of the main reason why I remain on the fence about staying put on Facebook, is that I feel uncomfortable exposing my family and friends’ privacy (those who still value them) and profile data through my very public Facebook page. I chose to be public because I believe in openness but at what cost? Now it seems being public and open is such a selfish thing to do.

So Will I be leaving Facebook too?

I don’t know as yet. I know it is hypocritical if I stick around in Facebook, but much is at stake (including my professional needs) so I would like to look at options and solutions. But for a start, I will look at how I will now interact with Facebook and how I can move my personal relationships within my network beyond Facebook.

For those who treasure and are still pursuing online privacy, Gina Trapani’s Online Privacy: Check Yourself (Before Your Wreck Yourself)  is a good read and outlines what steps to take. When I get home tonight, I will be looking at the service Youropenbook.org. As explained by PC World in the article ‘Facebook Privacy: Secrets Unveiled’, there are so many personal stories, some damning, to be found on Facebook that has been publicly published, unknowingly.

But I am sure you won’t miss me if I do leave Facebook. Want to keep in touch with me? Here’s my Google public profile: http://www.google.com/profiles/isman.tanuri This is the truth, nothing but the truth.

And I’m in control.

Share your thoughts on this Facebook and privacy issue. Are you still keen on Facebook now? Which side are you on?

Graphic above originally found at: http://s3.moveon.org/images/with_dims/facebook-graphic-1.3_750x615.png (Courtesy of @lucian on Twitter)

How did Jason, Adjunct Professor at University of Chicago and Planning Director at Leo Burnett and quite possibly on the exact opposite of the world, discover ‘Role of Social Media in Contemporary Marketing’, an ‘obscure’ literature review I had completed only last September?

Social media.

And how did I make that happen?

Social media.

I had sowed ample digital opportunities where Jason and others could have found this piece of work. And this is how I did it.

Slideshare & Scribd

I had shared this literature review (an extract from the full Final Year Professional Project I had to accomplish for undergrad studies) on Slideshare and Scribd since last September.

Here are the stats, so far:

1257views + 137 downloads on Slideshare

3665 views + 321 downloads on Scribd

Impressive numbers, I guess, for a ‘non-viral’ academic work.

So why did I choose to publish and share my work online? Am I not afraid of it being plagiarised or copied?

The answer is ‘No’. If it isn’t for the openness and the acts of mutual sharing all over the Internet, we’d still be visiting libraries every day, painfully looking for stored manuscripts and hidden knowledge. Or my work would still be languishing in my hard drive, waiting to be ‘nostalgically re-discovered’ a few years down the road. (Technologically, there are restrictions in place on both Slideshare and Scribd to protect your work.)

Jason Parker does it too. See Jason’s slide deck for his first class lecture on Slideshare.

Also, as many people increasingly continue to come online and partake in digital citizenship, I am one who believes that digital personal branding has an increased importance in today’s society and this is the ‘invisible edge’ that is needed to move ahead of the pack. Be it in social circles or, of more importance, for professional opportunities.

Sharing your interests and expertise on social media is one way to do this.

Blog It

I had also blogged about this literature review earlier. I am certain the format of the study (literature review), combined with the timely relevance of the subject matter, had provided enough search engine optimisation (SEO) for my initial blog post to be found. In fact Google searches on ‘literature review social media’ and ‘role of social media in contemporary marketing’ brought up my blog and literature review pretty high on the list. As they say ‘Content is Always King’.

Jason Parker does it too. You can follow Jason on his Social Media Class blog as he updates his class on a regular basis, the social media-way.

Others have also found my work. To date, I have received emails from two current students of Northumbria University in the UK asking for my full project (which I have refused for obvious reasons. School is about effort and interaction, guys). However, I had provided enough ideas and direction for them to accomplish their undergrad tasks.

I have also connected with Susan Schwendener, a fellow communications practitioner, from Jason’s class. The possibilities are endless on social media.

What Price is Social Media Sharing?

I really hope Jason’s Insights and Opportunities in Social Media certificate program class had enjoyed reading the literature review distributed during their Week 1 class. Gives me the chills.

So what did I ask for in return for sharing my intellectual property?

What else but an endorsement in social media currency!

Jason kindly provided me with a LinkedIn endorsement that is viewable by my current and future prospective employers as well as my peers. The permanency and transparency of this and my other LinkedIn endorsements ensures that my professional profile, accomplishments and body of work is as truthful as I present it to be.

Read more about leveraging on LinkedIn for bloggers at Online Media Gazette or how to use LinkedIn to your professional and commercial advantage (via NateRiggs.com)

Acknowledgements

To Jason Parker for extending the opportunity to share what I’ve gained.

And to Erik Yek, my undergrad tutor and Northumbria facilitator at the Marketing Institute of Singapore, for the guidance and patience.

Here again is the literature review ‘Role of Social Media in Contemporary Marketing’. You may wish to download the PDF for later viewing or scroll through the presentation below.

Tell me what you think in the comments?

Are we really a First World country with a world-class service industry serving the economy? Certainly not if our still unresolved issue with Singapore Post (SingPost) is a yardstick for measurement. A simple request for Singapore Post to re-deliver my wife’s parcel (containing online purchases of clothes from Forever 21) has dragged on for almost 3 weeks with no end in sight. Much worse is the customer service treatment we have been receiving at the hands of this monopolistic (we don’t really have a choice, do we?) Singaporean postal service. Truth is: no one at SingPost seems to care!

‘Parcel is Lost in Our Service’ says Singapore Post

The parcel, with a total purchase value of US$385.16, had been declared ‘lost’ by Singapore Post. And this happened while it was in its care! Unbelievable? Unfortunately, this is true, SingPost officially states so in this email and this one too. And for the record, there WAS an attempted parcel delivery to our door step on 30 December 2009 (more on this later). But it seems as though the parcel simply….vanished!

Obviously, we were deeply concerned and wanted this resolved as quickly as possible. As the lost item was a combined purchase between Elisa (my wife) and her friends and acquaintances, it is only right on Elisa’s part, as purchase coordinator, to rectify this quickly. If the parcel is really lost as claimed, then compensation must be made, especially when SingPost has clearly acknowledged losing it. Simple enough? Turns out, not quite.

Ignored by Singpost?

It is painfully obvious from our interactions that Singapore Post does not see any urgency in this matter nor does it feel totally responsible for this blunder. Despite countless calls and information request via emails, no single person at Singapore Post took the initiative or claimed any service responsibility over our case. Read on to find out how SingPost tries to ‘tai chi’ this problem away. (Note: ‘To tai chi’ is Singlish for shifting work or blame to someone else)

Since January 11, Elisa had been making periodic calls to Singapore Post’s customer service hotline to enquire about this parcel. The same mantras were repeated countless times: ‘We are looking into it’, ‘Our operation team is still investigating’, ‘The parcel is still missing’, etc. And she kept being told ‘We will give you a call’, but never heard back from anyone. Not a single call-back came from SingPost in the course of 2 weeks. Unbelievable but true.

This perceived ‘lack of interest’ by SingPost is also evident in email communication. A certain ‘Jxcqueline Lim – Senior Manager’ offered to keep a close watch on this case when Elisa spoke to her on January 22. Unfortunately, that did not happen. See the chain of emails that is still unresponded (and possibly ignored by Miss Lim) since January 22.

All Talk, No Action

From January 11 till the 22nd, this case was ‘ping-ponging’ between Singapore Post’s Customer Service team, their Investigation team and quite possibly their Claims Department. It seems like no one wanted to make any decision. If it takes 2 weeks to locate a single physical parcel, then there must be something seriously wrong operationally at SingPost.

Only on January 22, when we demanded immediate concrete action to be taken, was a police report given to us the very same evening (more about discrepancies of this police report later). We deduced it to be SingPost’s way of saying: ‘Yes, we lost your parcel but can you wait in case it turns up so that we don’t have to claim insurance and save some bucks?’

This whole episode, coming hot on the heels of the controversial Singapore Post’s “Acts of Vandalism” publicity stunt that backfired, does make us wonder the quality of decision-making business managers currently helming the company. SingPost is not exactly doing itself any favour here. And to think I had voluntarily proposed a revolutionary business idea to SingPost previously.

Next, I’ll detail a factual rundown of events that led to this blog post.

What Actually Happened

20 December: Elisa and myself left Singapore for a 3-week holiday in the Middle East.

29 December: Parcel arrived in Singapore on 29 December at 3.10pm. View the online tracking report by United States Postal Service for item CJ242179875US (Elisa’s parcel).

30 December: Delivery was attempted on 30 December by owner of mobile no. +6581461087 to our flat in Toa Payoh Central. The following are text messages (signed off as ‘S’pore post’) sent to Elisa on the same day regarding this attempted delivery:

Another text message was also sent on January 2:

31 December: My mom called on my mobile and mentioned that our neighbour, an elderly lady, had contacted her to inform of a postal delivery man at our door the previous day. Our kind neighbour had spoken to the delivery man and that she was ready to ‘make payment’ on our behalf (we found out later that Goods and Services Tax (GST) was due on Elisa’s parcel). However, our neighbour mentioned that the man was nowhere to be found when she returned to the door later with her money bag.

8-9 January: Elisa sent several text messages to +6581461087, but did not receive any reply.

11 January: Elisa made the first call to Singapore Post’s Customer Service to enquire on re-delivering the parcel. She was told that parcel cannot be located and SingPost advised that it will need at least 2 working days to look for the parcel. SingPost assured her that a return call will be made within the next few days.

Text messages and phone calls made to +6581461087 were still not answered. Gave up on that channel of communication.

13 January: No news from Singapore Post. When contacted, SingPost informed that ‘the Operations team is still trying to locate the parcel’. SingPost also mentioned that if the parcel is not found by January 18, a police report will be made in order to initiate claims. We decided to wait it out and requested to SingPost to provide a prompt update by January 18.

18 January: Again zero communication received from Singapore Post. Elisa made a call and told the same thing: ‘the Operations team is still trying to locate the parcel’.

So no police report had been made. When asked when exactly the police report will be filed, the Customer Service Officer  quipped that she had just updated the system for the ‘Operations team’ to file the police report. Ping! Pong! Among other things:

• Was also told that the police report would take THREE working days to complete
• After which the report will go to the Claims Department to look into the matter and handle the proceeding steps Ping! Pong!
• Will be updated via a phone call regarding the police report and claims

I guess Elisa and friends have to wait. Again.

The Singapore Post’s Police Report Mystery!

22 January: Still no update on a late Friday afternoon so we decided to give Singapore Post a call.

No police report had been made! The atrocity!

The SingPost Customer Service officer on the line said ‘Don’t worry, we’ll take care of it and will call you back on Monday’. ‘NO WAY!’ we protested. Eventually, by sheer verbal force, Elisa and yours truly managed to speak to Jxcquxlinx Lim (Senior Manager, Customer Service) and she agreed to file the report so that a compensation claim can be initiated as soon as possible.

Do see the chain of emails here on this. Notice an attempt to delay official action again, despite an earlier verbal agreement with Jxcquxlinx Lim. Elisa highlighted this in her last email reply.

A police report was eventually lodged by SingPost on the same evening and we duly received a copy of this report. Please do view the full copy of this police report.

Now, let’s play detective! Notice the following discrepancies in the police report:

1. Police report was made in the personal name of ‘Ayub Bin Hamzah’. Is this normal practice? I assume this is a safeguard so that Singapore Post, as a business entity, is likely to be absolved from any connection or responsibility in case a criminal offence had been committed.
2. No signature or name and details of police officer-in-charge visible in the report. The informant ‘Ayub Bin Hamzah’ did not sign as well. Extremely odd! I wonder what is the real story here. Anyone familiar with police reports?
3. Look again at the following text message sent by owner of mobile no. +6581461087 on the afternoon of 30 Dec when the parcel was still in his/her possession:

Notice the time and date message was sent and received:

30 December, 2.59pm

Now look at the ‘Time of Incident’ for loss of parcel as stated by Singpost in the police report.

30 December, 11.47am-11.59pm

So Many Questions!

• The parcel was reported/discovered ‘lost’ between those hours when it is obvious that, evidenced through the text messages sent to Elisa, the owner of mobile no. +6581461087 still had the parcel in his possession. Isn’t this downright fishy? A parcel gone missing while being delivered? Should this not be grounds for a criminal investigation?
• Who is the owner of mobile no. +6581461087 anyway? Singapore Post’s official response to us on this query is “We do not know to whom this mobile number belongs to”. ???
• Singapore Post does not keep track of its own delivery men/women? Inconceivable? Apparently so.
• Could the owner of mobile no. +6581461087 be ‘Ayub Bin Hamzah’?
• If parcel was already ‘lost’ on 30 December, why did Elisa receive another text message from +6581461087 on January 2? What was its purpose? There was no other communication after this message.
• How is it possible that a parcel, in SingPost’s care and ready to be delivered to owner, can go missing and untraceable within the space of a week? Aren’t all parcel shipments individually tagged and tracked?
• There was never a ‘Request for Re-delivery’ note left behind at our door by owner of mobile no. +6581461087 or was there ever an official SingPost call made to Elisa to arrange for re-delivery afterwards. Is this an attempt to cover up something?

25 January: No call from SingPost, specifically from the Claims Department.

26 January: Still no call and no news. So Elisa made a direct call to Jxcquxlinx Lim to ask for status of the claims.

Jxcquxlinx’s reply was: ‘Oh, no staff contacted you yesterday? Someone was supposed to call you. Ok, let me try to get hold of someone from the Claims department and have them speak to you.’

We felt really numb by now. Ping! Pong!

Later on a Fxdilx called, informing Elisa that the claims process will take several days. However, Jxcquxlinx had earlier agreed to resolve the claims process by Monday, January 25. Fxdilx claimed that she was ‘unaware of this’. Com’mon, SingPost, COMMUNICATE!

When asked to speak to Jxcquxlinx, Fxdilx informed that she had left for the day and instead a ‘Miss Umx’ would be calling by 9.30pm that evening. Unfortunately, Elisa missed this call. A return call to ‘Miss Umx’ was, however, unanswered.

The Final Straw: Singapore Post Washes Hands and ‘Tai Chis’ Tasks to USA Post, Forever 21 and Us!

27 January: Elisa picked up the phone and called a ‘Miss Umxmagasvary – Asst Manager, Customer Relations’ (we theorise that the concept of calling back or following up apparently does not exist in SingPost’s operations manual). In the call, the message communicated by Miss Umx simply astounded us!  Elisa asked that this be documented in an email, which was received promptly. The full copy of the email is available for viewing. Reproduced here is an excerpt from Miss Umx’s email:

Dear Ms Elisa

ENQUIRY ON USA PARCEL NUMBER CJ242179875US

Please refer to your conversation with our call center dated 12 Jan 2010.

We are sorry to inform you that despite a through search, we are unable to locate the parcel. As such, the parcel has been declared as lost in our service.

We have reported the lost of the parcel to the USA Post and have requested to liasie with the sender accordingly. We have also informed them to compensate the sender at our expense as in accordance with the UPU Regulations.

As the sender would have the prior right of claim, please advise your sender to file a claim with the USA Post.

Our sincere apologies for the lost of the parcel and the inconvenience experienced

Yours sincerely

Umx (Ms)

Asst Manager, Customer Relations, Customer Service (Business Division)

DID: 65 68456222, Fax: 65 68425114

Case closed?! This is totally unbelievable! MAJOR PING PONG!

This is as good as Singapore Post saying:

‘Sorry, we fxxked up, please help clean the mess after us’.

After 3 weeks of dealing with Singapore Post’s Customer Service and after it admitted to losing Elisa’s parcel, SingPost now wants to close off this matter by making USA Post, Forever21 and us to ‘take care of business’. How much more crazier can this get? There are even more questions now:

• Why is Singapore Post getting USA Post involved in this when it is pretty obvious that SingPost lost Elisa’s parcel in Singapore? The parcel was delivered and arrived safely in Singapore on 29 December at 3.10pm. It went missing under SingPost’s watch, for goodness sake.
• And why is Singapore Post making my wife do their work for them? “Please advise your sender to file a claim with the USA Post”. Not content with making Elisa constantly following up with customer service at SingPost (who lost Elisa’s parcel, by the way, if I haven’t already mentioned that), she is suddenly asked to TAKE CARE OF HER OWN BUSINESS? Nasty.
• “Compensate the sender”: Whatever happened to the person whose money and time has been spent in this? In this email from Miss Umx, there is ZERO mention of claims or compensation to my wife, the paying customer. An oversight? Nah. It is likely that SingPost just does not care. Instead, the email implied as such: ‘Sorry, we tried our best but you are on your own. Now shoo. Leave us in peace.’
• Is this a way for Singapore Post not to claim compensation on its insurance? Or not to fork out any money from its own coffers by making the sender claim from its own insurance, etc.? In the real world, if I were to lose someone else’s property, I should jolly well be made responsible for it.

Answer our questions, Singapore Post!

Elisa and myself have given enough opportunity and time to Singapore Post to ‘play’ nice’ and resolve this matter amicably. Yes, Elisa will probably be fully compensated, albeit in a ‘gazillion years’. But there are still so many questions that need answers, even legal ones.

Thus, we decided to bring this out to a public forum. We decided to let you be a witness and, hopefully, a commentator to this issue. We are always lamenting about our Singaporean service industry and this is probably just one of many cases you’ve heard. Now here’s a platform for your thoughts so that we can all learn from this unfortunate episode.

But above all, we would like Singapore Post to respond publicly to our many unanswered questions and the mysteries surrounding the vanished parcel, police report, compensation etc. Keeping it quiet and under wraps have not worked at all in our favour. We have stopped believing in your ‘stories’ over the phone and now we desire some real deal honesty.

On to you, Singapore Post.

5 May Update:

We thank you, visitors here who have found our story, for reading and sharing your thoughts on the SingPost issue and also for giving us your encouragement and support. We are happy to update that we had received compensation directly from SingPost for the full value of the lost package.

There are still questions that remains unanswered, including what really happened with the lost package and the conclusion of the police investigation on the matter. However, we commend SingPost for taking up our issue directly, visiting us to discuss in detail, leaving comments on this blog and keeping the conversation open. Please read Peggy Chong’s reply to us on this matter.

We hope in some ways we have helped institutions like SingPost and other exasperated consumers find a way to communicate better in resolving similar issues. Technologies and communication platforms that allow a much closer interaction between businesses and consumers have evolved greatly with the Web2.0 revolution. We hope opportunities like these will be fully utilised on both sides of the commercial divide.

Thanks again for visiting and do leave your thoughts and opinions for the benefits of others. I also invite you to read the rest of the blog if you have the time. Cheers!