You already know that the Internet landscape is becoming more complicated and the good old days of presenting just your content about your organisation are rapidly disappearing. Today you run the risk of others being able to ‘contribute’ their views about your products and services as well as airing their issues in public. But don’t despair you have the right to reply! How can you do this in the most effective way?

Naturally most organisations would much rather prospects, staff and shareholders only read positive online content and avoid opinions posted by angry or dissatisfied web users. Although some general feedback may be positive, it is beyond corporate control and likely to be off message even if not outright negative. Whilst this may be the ‘way of the web’, it certainly represents a nuisance factor for many organizations, and something that needs to be addressed.

The reality is that user generated comments; reviews and criticism tend to be highly trusted by other members of the public and carry a disproportionate influential weight. Peer reviews can have tremendous influence on the eventual decisions and actions of others, so taking an active role in managing this dialogue becomes vitally important.

In traditional media customer service complaints and negative press were two separate issues to be dealt with. In the evolving world of social web, there is much more blurring making effective reputation management a more complex issue. What can start as a dissatisfied customer can easily escalate into the online equivalent of many inches of negative press coverage.

When and how should your organisation interact in order to manage your online reputation effectively?

Monitor the ‘conversation’

The first step in online reputation management is to have sight of what is being said. Your organisation needs to quickly identify any mentions of your name, products, services or area of expertise. This is possibly an extension of the media monitoring that your PR agency already does, or maybe your in-house marketing function. There are many software tools available to help, but these can only be used to support organisational processes not to replace them.

Your employees can also help monitor various social channels, but this should only be seen as a supplementary method and should not be depended upon. It is also worth ensuring that you have clear employee social channel policies in place, so that if an employee does discover some feedback they understand that it is (probably) not their role to reply. Such replies can be very adhoc and compound the issue.

Response Etiquette

It is paranoid to focus on dealing only with negativity and complaints; you will also receive praise! If for instance someone posts a positive message on Twitter (perhaps praising your exemplary in store service), it is important to reply with a ‘thanks’. It is polite, it is proactive and most importantly it encourages this behavior in others. However the challenge for many organisations is being able to reply quickly enough, this drives a need for dedicated resource. The social web is a real time environment, replying weeks or even days later is completely in-effective and in some cases more damaging than no reply.

It is of course likely that there will be negativity towards your orgnisation. Dealing appropriately with this is just as important. The person complaining is expressing their dissatisfaction just as they would through a traditional customer service route, but with the added impact that they are doing it publicly. Your organisation needs to respond using the originators preferred channel, but using the best practices that you have developed for every other CS channel you support. Replying privately means that not everyone else will see your response and that your organisation has in fact taken action. The wider audience will only remain aware of the complaint.

A proactive reply shows that you are a proactive organisation that welcomes constructive critisim and is keen to work with customers to improve services and better meet their needs. However you are also justified in not replying to unconstructive attacks. Where an end user is simply being abusive and ranting at your organization, it is highly unlikely that any response you put forward will help move the situation to a mutually satisfactory conclusion. In such cases it is probably better to let the reasonable public form their own opinion.

An appropriate response

As already mentioned it is important to respond in public through the channel by which the original complaint was made.
However, it may not be appropriate or desirable to discuss the entire case in public. Doing so exposes you to the risk of others joining in and the issue becoming a public debate. As more people contribute their thoughts it will be difficult for you to retain control and resolve the problem. Confusion can easily ensue and the original point lost. Also an ongoing public debate will attract undue attention to a matter that simply needs dealing with expediently.

An appropriate public response would be to acknowledge the comment, state your desire to help them but invite them to contact you through a different (private) channel. Remember to highlight an advantage to them in doing this. Many will of course not bother contacting you, but if they do, then the problem can be managed through a more controllable and private medium.

As with every other customer service and media channel, responding calmly, quickly and courteously to a complaint can turn a dissatisfied customer into a brand advocate. Your organization almost certainly has PR mechanisms for dealing with negative media coverage and many of these existing approaches can be used to great effect in dealing with negative brand attacks online.

Is your organisation concerned about it’s online reputation and managing online negativity? n3w media can help you understand the risks specific to your environment and implement appropriate processes to mitigate them. Contact us today to find out more.