Judging by their efforts, the most pro-active practitioners of social media outreach in the government are turning enthusiastically to the mobile web, Facebook, and other Gov 2.0 modes as they strive to expand their respective agencies’ prestige and audience reach.

For those of us who are focused on recruitment, it’s a little surprising that most of these initiatives don’t begin with the intent of attracting new hires. Still, these leading agencies are building their brands and that, done well, results directly in more informed and enthusiastic recruits.

Here are three examples of federal organizations that are demonstrating a sophisticated understanding of the power of social media, although each emphasizes a different aspect of the challenge:

• the U.S. Army’s IPhone application,
• the White House’s use of video on its Facebook page, and
• the EPA ‘s development of guidelines for its employees’ use of social media.

The Army has released an IPhone app that allows access to a vast store of materials, including content from the Army’s Facebook and Flickr pages, as well as all the video products on its Web site. Released in mid-December, the app achieved more than 20,000 downloads in its first month alone, soaring to a Top-25 ranking for free news sources at the iTunes App store. Take note of its Find a Recruiter facility if you need evidence of the app’s more direct contribution to recruiting. You can find out how to download the app at www.army.mil/mobile/.

Best Practies case number two is the White House, which recently posted a seven-minute video on its Facebook page. The video is a professionally produced mini-documentary about the White House advance team’s trip to an Ohio town to prep for a presidential visit. From a branding standpoint, this slice-of-life coverage, complete with jiggly hand-held camera work, reinforces the authenticity and appeal of everyday activities by the team. Other agencies—particularly those with a more urgent mission to recruit employees actively—can find a polished model here. This is exposure to on-the-job reality at its best, an indispensible tool for reinforcing the appeal of an agency to the community of potential recruits, which is almost always more expansive than agency human capital planners imagine.

My last case is not flashy in any way, but underscores an emerging need in federal social media use: how to ensure that overenthusiastic employees don’t go overboard with the tools at their disposal. EPA’s guidelines are judicious and prescient. Among agencies that encourage informed employee/brand ambassador use of social media, this is a first. In the hope that other agencies will emulate it, I’m reprinting EPA’s handy flowchart below.

Although employer branding has been around for years (Simon Barrow of TMP Worldwide’s UK subsidiary defined the term back in 1996), it hasn’t quite received presidential attention. In fact, government agencies, however, in spite of encouragement from OPM, have been slow to make it a priority. But all that’s about to change. In October, Harvard’s Kennedy School along with University of Maryland and OPM held a closed door meeting with members of the administration and Congress. OPM Director John Berry is taking key ideas garnered from the gathering to the president.  As reported by The Washington Post, one of the hot topics is that “Uncle Sam should do a better job branding and promoting his work. “

Agencies have their own reasons for being and need their own unique brands. The Post article states it well: “The Army and the Marine Corps know how to do it. Certainly money is a motivating factor for recruits, but the military, in part through TV commercials, has successfully branded itself as a place where young men and women go to become mature adults with a clear sense of mission. You can't say that about your average civilian agency.” [Emphasis supplied]

How frequent is it to see employees of a company "sell" themselves purely on the fact that they work(ed) there?

How many companies do add enough value to a resume for someone to brand himself with it's name (and rely on it to find a job)?

Well, give a look at www.pleasehire.us, a website developed by the interns at Crispin Porter + Bogusky (one of the coolest ad agency around, Agency of the Decade according to Ad Age).

Who said employer branding was something that had to happen from the inside out?

Read an entertaining piece on Yahoo! the other day about how out-of-date certain terms are in relation to describing the Internet. Most were what you would expect, like Weblog (for blog), World Wide Web for Internet, and “surf” (which was ridiculous the minute it was first said out loud. “Hey, look everyone – I’m surfing the Internet!” No. No you’re not. You’re sitting in a chair. You’re barely even moving. And take off the wet suit.)

I’d make the argument that the same thing has happened with the employer brand. There’s an entire lexicon that has developed around the concept, which is fine as far as giving people a common framework. But I think it also tends to complicate efforts.

Rather than seeking a basic, concise understanding of what’s going on in the workplace, how to communicate it, and how to improve it, we put our efforts into crafting the “employee value proposition.” (Just saying it makes it seem important enough to talk with anyone about it. You know, like the CEO. “Oh, I thought you just wanted to hire and keep employees, but now that I know you want to create an employee value proposition, that’s different. Come on over to my house for a barbecue. How about some stock options?”)

Let me offer up something a little more direct. Something, that in it’s simplicity gives us the focus and objective we really need.

Here’s the scenario.

Two friends are talking.

Sooner or later, one of them is going to ask the question “How’s work?”

Whatever the answer, it’s going to leave an impression. And someone is going to walk away with an idea about an employer, maybe even your company.

These conversations are happening everywhere, every day – through professional networks and on social networks, in back yards and in front offices. And they’re conversations we all need to affect.

And we need to affect them not with academic jargon that raises eyebrows, but with conversation that creates interest, the kind of conversations that people really respond to.

So, how’s work?

r

It looks like the Beltway will be tightening its belt. President Obama has pointed out that just as American families are making sacrifices so must those who serve government. With a new initiative holding programs and projects to stricter standards, agencies as well as contractors must show the value of their contributions to the American people.

“Mission statement” rhetoric will not cut it. What a company might proudly view as its heritage may soon be seen as habit. Instead, contractors must perceive and communicate the genuine, immediate and long-term value of their offering. Enduring organizations tend to invest in discovering how their value proposition remains applicable as circumstances change. And waves of change are now surging throughout the government community.

The President’s challenge to the government community. March has roared in like a lion in Washington. As the snows were melting from the Capital’s first major snow storm of the year, the President, joined at the White House by his campaign rival Senator John McCain (R-AZ), came through on an election promise. On March 4, 2009, President Obama vowed to change how things get done in government. In his news conference, he gave a rationale consistent with the events of the past few weeks: "As we get our economy moving we must also turn the tide on an era of fiscal irresponsibility so that we can sustain our recovery, enhance accountability and avoid leaving our children a mountain of debt."

Now he has targeted what he considers the abuses of contracting: "The American people’s money must be spent to advance their priorities - not to line the pockets of contractors or to maintain projects that don't work."

The White House Memo, entitled "Government Contracting" not only calls for a review of all existing contracts, but for the establishing of contracting guidelines going forward. By July 1, 2009, the Administration will issue government-wide guidance to "identify contracts that are wasteful, inefficient, or not otherwise likely to meet the agency’s needs, and to formulate appropriate corrective action in a timely manner." By the close of FY 2009 at the end of September, OMB Chief Peter Orzag must indicate new guidelines governing key areas of procurement for each agency.

A shift in the role of government. The memo further raises the fundamental question of what work is "inherently governmental." Hence it challenges agencies to delineate the ground rules for outsourcing. The burden of proof has suddenly shifted from the recent implementation of Circular A-76, in which agencies have been under pressure to show how they can beat out private sector rivals. Now the agency must prove why it is outsourcing and give additional proof if it will use a non-competitive or cost-plus vehicle. The memo explicitly states that "contractors may be performing inherently governmental functions." And it asks for the lines to be redrawn.

Good news for small business. Even as the President called for stringent scrutiny of major contractors, he opened doors for small businesses. Interestingly, in the news conference, the President linked this issue with outsourcing: "We will stop outsourcing services that should be performed by the government and open up the contracting process to small business." The new hierarchy of contracting gives greater emphasis to small business side by side with a return of "appropriate work" to government. Branding, of course, is important here as many set asides and small businesses have very low profiles.

Agreed: more contracting officers. A few weeks ago, TMP had the opportunity to discuss employer branding with recruiters of greatly needed government contracting officers. Consider that government spending has increased over the last nine years by about 155 percent to almost $532 billion. But the acquisition workforce, e.g., contracting officers and specialists, has increased only 10 percent. Meanwhile to the President’s chagrin, there have been fewer and fewer full competitive contracts (a trend that began with the Clinton administration).

Not surprisingly, George Washington University legal professor and acquisition expert Steven Schooner told the Washington Post that the most important review ordered by the Memorandum is to evaluate “ability of the federal acquisition workforce to develop, manage and oversee acquisitions appropriately.” That’s where we need a stronger contracting workforce to help ameliorate what the President sees as a "broken system." And that calls for an employer brand appealing to business-minded young people on par with other opportunities: http://www.fai.gov/FAIC/Default.asp

I’ve heard it said that a recession is something that happens to other people. If it happens to you, it’s more than some term that defines a segment of the business cycle – it’s personal disaster.

However, information being delivered about the economy is taking on the look and feel of some local news station clawing for ratings – it’s the business equivalent of yelling fire, murder, blizzard, hurricane, and 50-care pile-up on the freeway, all rolled into one glorious this-is-the-end-of-the-world-as-we-know-it (a fine REM song by the way). And it’s coming from everywhere, 24/7 so to speak.

So let’s examine what’s going on. 11.4% unemployment in January. 12.2% when confined to non-agriculture industries. Man, that’s one nasty downturn. Except the year I’m referring to isn’t 2009, it’s 1983.

You mean we’ve been through this before? And more recently then the Great Depression everyone seems to want to dredge up?

Well, yes and no. This is not an equal opportunity recession. Certain industry sectors and geographic regions are getting hit much harder than others. In January of this year, unemployment in the construction sector was a whopping 18.2%, durable goods manufacturing was at 11.2% in that same period, with leisure and hospitality at 11.5%. Michigan is getting beat badly with 10.6% unemployment reported in December of 2008, with Rhode Island not faring much better at 10.0%.

However, Education and health services is at 3.8%, Government at 3.0%, and Financial services surprisingly at 6.0%. In the meantime, Nebraska reported 4.0% in December with Kansas at 5.2% and New Hampshire at 4.6%.

Now I’m certainly not calling for a chorus of “Let the good times roll.” There are many people that are in dire straits and need help. But I am suggesting we look more precisely at what’s going on.

r

Friend and colleague, Steve Ehrlich, recently published his predictions for 2009. This inspired me (saying I’ve been inspired seems so much nicer than the truth: I’m stealing his idea) to offer my own predictions. So here are my prognostications for the practice of employer brand management in 2009 (I thought about providing predictions for 2008 to demonstrate better foresight, but realized the irony of getting some of them wrong might be lost.)

1. Two employment sectors will thrive in the year ahead: oil and gas, and the federal government. The primary point of differentiation will be whether or not candidates think they look good in a hard hat.

2. Gen Y will give up on the idea of being gainfully employed and will, instead, insist on receiving immediate retirement benefits.

3. The sandwich board will become the most successful recruitment message channel in the year ahead, creating real-world social networks while simultaneously creating careers for tens of thousands. Special 2010 prediction: This phenomenon will quickly vanish after sandwich board employees unionize and, in the quest for more prestige, switch to panini boards. Confusion reigns.

4. Employers will see a direct correlation between employer brand management and employee engagement, embracing the practice to innovate, increase productivity, and grow their way out of the current downturn. (I felt obliged to include one serious prediction.)

5. Applicant Tracking Systems will be connected to Global Positioning Systems, creating a super-system that, even though it will still be a black hole for candidate resumes, will enable prospects to instantly know how far they are from Schenectady.

r

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sandwich_board

Nothing wrong with a good fad (which is even better than a trend, but not quite as good as a craze). That is, as long as we recognize the ultimate insignificance and/or absurdity of said fad.

Here’s a couple of the latest. Newest diet fad: eating only foods that start with the letter Q. This includes quail, quince, quinine water, quesadillas, and apparently nothing else – your diet is so limited you lose interest in eating, shedding pounds instantly. Newest energy fad: powering everything with “biofuels,” or for a more accurate description, left-over deep fry oil. (Hey, did anyong notice that after the last space shuttle launch, Florida smelled like onion rings?)

And naturally, the latest employer brand fad: we’re a green/socially responsible/saving the planet all by ourselves in our spare time company.

The intention is great, and appreciated – it’s the application that leaves a lot to be desired. Yes, people are interested if their company is a net positive when it comes to the community and the environment. However, unless your organization is doing something remarkable to that end (and no, having blue recycling receptacles doesn’t count), you’re not going to create much in the way of differentiation.

I get why some companies have to march to this tune, and it’s usually because they have to clean up their own real or perceived environmental mess. As for the rest of you, put it in perspective. Recognition, advancement, respect, fulfillment, and price-point attributes like compensation and benefits still carry the day. Get those right and you’ll never have to worry about any positioning fads.

r

So the word is out – the economy contracted by 0.3% in the last quarter. Let’s put that in perspective. 0.3% of the solar system would be the equivalent of Rhode Island, 0.3% of time I spent studying in college would be the equivalent of the time it took to write this sentence, and 0.3% of quality television programming would be, well, impossible to determine since it’s mathematically impossible to divide by 0. Yet apparently this is enough of a change to send the economy into a tailspin. Ah, the mysteries of life.

It looks like the economy will continue to shrink over the next 1-2 quarters (I have it on authority of the online version of the Magic 8-ball (www.msu.edu/~vandrag2/8-ball.html).

With that in mind, should we abandon the employer brand? Of course, not (imagine haughty laughter). In fact, I would argue that we are faced with the convergence of something entirely new during this downturn that makes the need for well-managed employer brands more essential than ever. I’m speaking of business cycle meets social network.

Now you’re probably thinking I mean branding your organization on sites like Facebook, MySpace, or LinkedIn. That’s fine, but it’s not what I’m driving at.

I’m actually talking about incorporating our understanding of how social networks form, evolve, and thrive, above and beyond networking sites. Think sociometry. For those of you who didn’t put this on your summer reading, Wikipedia defines it in this way: Sociometry is a quantitative method for measuring social relationships. It was developed by psychotherapist Jacob L. Moreno in his studies of the relationship between social structures and psychological well-being. (Way to go, Jacob.)

A lot of it has to do with identifying nodes within the network – key points of intersection that bind people together – the same points of intersection that will drive opinion of the employment experience within your company, and therefore, outside of your company as well. Think of these nodes as network leaders, or for our purposes, the ideal employer brand evangelists.

Targeting these network leaders during a downturn is akin to identifying and communicating with trend leaders from a product adoption standpoint, key influencers that through their engagement, give everyone else permission to engage.

During a downturn, they are the most important audience you can imagine, and when the economy turns around, you’ll be in position to capitalize on the strong employer brand foundation you’ve created.

r

Random rave: to Ted Kirschner for my new blog photo. I feel so iconic now.

Everybody loves structure – a place for everything and everything in its place (at least, that’s what we talk about at our weekly OCD club meetings). So certainly, the idea of structure has its place within the concept of brand development. After all, we have brand architecture, brand guidelines, graphic standards – all kinds of things to help us maintain discipline and manage the brand.

So then why have I been bristling lately when it comes to graphic standards? Shouldn’t I be elated? Shouldn’t I be espousing the beauty of grids and image use? Shouldn’t I be reveling in the joy of a definitive color palate and headline font?

I should, but lately I just can’t. It’s not that I don’t want to – it’s just that it’s become apparent that graphic standards are never put together with employment marketing in mind.

As discussed previously, there is a direct relation between ubiquity and breakthrough. There is also a direct relation between ubiquity and funding. You can’t achieve the former without lots of the latter. This is usually not an issue with product or service brands. But it is an issue with employer brands. Which means employer brands are more dependent on breakthrough in order to rise above the noise.

But graphic standards are created with the product, service, or corporate brand in mind, not the employer brand. That means they are more likely than not to be rather unremarkable, containing one or two elements at the most that might be mildly adventurous. It’s usually not an issue from a non-employment standpoint because with a significant budget, you too can “own” those rather unremarkable elements.

Not so with employer brands. Those elements blend into the background quicker than beige on taupe. And with it go your opportunities to break out.

The solution? Employment marketers need a seat at the corporate brand table. This way the rules, standards, and guidelines can become effective for the entire organization, not just part of it.

r