I just read this article and it reminded me of so much of what I was doing back in November of 2013.

The key to engagement is to be active and honest and produce the content that will get your message across. As the article states, what people want is not really what most organizations really want to share, they want honesty, heart, and (self-referentially) engagement.

A case in point, Jeri Ryan, an actress who has starred in many TV Series in her career. I bring her up as a great example of someone who gets engagement. The platform that she used was Google Plus, but it was only tangential to this topic. The important distinction was how she chose to use the service. She actually engaged individually with her fans, which is something more than a lot of other celebrities are comfortable with doing. I’ve written about this particular thing before on this blog. I have noticed that many people seeking or maintaining a certain level of fame think that they can create a social networking persona and simply use it to dump links and material to their work and leave right after that. It turns them from living people into two-dimensional billboards. When you elect to engage, you really have to pursue the entire endeavor otherwise people will notice your two dimensionality and while the initial surge will be impressive, there won’t be anything on the tail end to maintain your initial levels of engagement. Jeri Ryan proves that if you actually do engage, the rewards continue to build. In the case of a television celebrity, engaging with your fans brings them closer to you and perhaps they are more loyal, more attentive to what you have to say, quite possibly even more accepting of any causes you may want to share with them. Only Mrs. Ryan can answer the question of whether engagement with the fans was a good thing or not, as a fan, it was nice to see from my vantage point.

Which brings me back to November. Much of it is water under the bridge but there is still was a lot of work that could have been done. The level of engagement is key, and much like the linked article above, I still strongly maintain that if you have a cause or mission and you want to promote it, it has more to do with understanding your audience than it does trying to carefully construct some framework from which to launch some blind campaign. The difference is that people respond to an authentic message, one with heart, more readily than they do something that was pre-processed, sterilized, vetted and canned. To quote Chef Gordon Ramsay, if you want a successful restaurant you need to provide simple honest fare using fresh local ingredients. This wisdom can be applied to anything else, not just running a restaurant. It can also apply to engagement, with the core lesson being that you’ll get your best bang for your buck if you provide simple, honest engagement using fresh local talent. People want to engage with other people, not with a monolithic edifice. To draw back to the cooking metaphor, would people be more interested in eating a dish that was sourced locally or would they rather eat something sourced from Sysco or GFS?

Another thing that I was working on, was the notion of engaging the crowd. In the previous arrangement, it was a lead-in to the notion of crowd-funding a goal. At least from the company hosting the talk, that was their bleeding-edge analysis of where all this social networking and engagement is actually going in the future. The organizations that engage with the most honesty (heart) will have a better chance at meeting their goals.

Alas, all that is over now, but the article did move me to want to comment on it.