Golden Practices Blog

How Effective is Your Social Marketing?

Veteran CPA firm marketer Katie Tolin had posted an article on the need for a social marketing audit in a LinkedIn group I manage a while back and I just spotted it (yeah, I know, my bad).

I commented there with some specific recommendations and thought I'd share them here with you, too. Here's what I wrote, slightly modified for this blog...

I think it's important for the marketing departmant to have their arms around who in the organization is doing what online (only relevant to the org, of course) and to help those individuals learn the best, most effective ways to interact on the Interwebs.

Knowing where people "are" is a good start, but we (as their marketing educators and supporters) want to help them focus their efforts and be aware of signs of true success so they become increasingly encouraged when they occur.

The signs can be quite subtle and might go unnoticed!

In Chapter 6 of my book, as part of planning social-media use in the first place, I recommend taking baseline measurements as early in the (any) marketing process as possible, and then identifying very specific objectives as part of an individual's role in increasing his or her—and ultimately the firm's—visibility.

Side note: For the individual versus company promotion trade-off, you might like to see my blog post "Why Social Media Rock Stars Are Good For Your Firm." (Sometimes CPA- or law-firm partners get frustrated about the attention an individual "supposedly representing the firm" starts getting when their online visibility increases. This article helps explain to those partners why they should encourage the individual "fame" and not squelch it.) 

As the marketing audit article says, the audit isn't just about assessing where we stand at the moment, but this is an important part of ascertaining success when you're using multiple channels to market.

You can rarely truly know exactly where a lead is generated anymore (unless it's from a specific campaign) and that's OK. We are looking for overall growth. This is all the ROI that you'll need. 

BASELINE MEASUREMENTS

To accurately assess growth later, I recommend taking these broad baseline measurements now:

• number of current clients
• revenue (average and standard deviation)
• revenue change % year over year
• client longevity (length of stay with the firm)
• frequency of client interactions
• frequency of transactions (purchases)
• number of clients lost per month, quarter, or year
• number of new clients per month, quarter, or year

PLANNING AND GOALS

Then it's wise to plan for the right types of outcomes from online interaction. Some very specific sample objectives (besides the obvious $ in the door) might be:

• Increase retweets and mentions (by anyone) related to [practice topic] from [baseline #] to [goal #] by [date]
• Obtain [#] retweets and mentions by target personas including peers and thought leaders in the specialty (i.e., Get on their radar. Knowing exactly who they are in advance is best.) by [date]
• Receive at least [#] unsolicited invitations from trade organizations to speak or write by [date]
• Earn [#] appearances as media “expert” in [publication or station] by [date]
• Receive [#] questions or requests for advice from [define personas] every [frequency]
• Build up to [#] of [define persona] Twitter (or blog) followers (or subscribers) by [date]
• Move [# define persona, or specific names] from digital to personal conversations by [date]

These are very attainable goals with social marketing. Having goals like this (rather than just "tweet often") might help reshape how you or your colleagues are using social-media tools. 

TRACKING WORTHWHILE THINGS

I also think it's important to track the right things. Just # of followers or visits or likes or RTs is pretty useless. I like the marketing department (or individual) to keep track of mentions:

• Where did it appear?
• Who said it?
• Was it positive? Y/N
• What was said? Categorize the nature of the comment and keep a clip file.
• Was the mention about a particular practice, department, or person?
• Did the mention include reference to your content or website? If so, to what specific content or page?
• Who responded and how fast? You may want to keep the response in a clip file, too.

Ultimately, we're looking for an increase in mentions that are positive and made by increasingly influential people in the right spaces. 

Sound like a lot of work? Maybe. No one ever said marketing was easy! Also, what do you want from a basically free marketing channel?

You don't have to do any of these things to be successful...you might luck out.

But if you're not having success, or if you really want to ensure it, you've got to be able to recognize it when it happens. Like I said, social marketing success can be very subtle, but never confuse that subtlety with lack of importance to you and your organization. It's similar to—and deeply tied to—the level of subtlety and importance as your brand. And it merits the same level of forethought and attention.

These days, our brands are often defined by our most recent interactions.

Listener Beware: Don't Take Everything You Hear from Experts as Gospel

I think industry experts have some responsibility to qualify their opinion statements, but their audiences have a far bigger responsibility to vet what they hear.

For one thing, experts don't all agree, so what does that tell you? Further, experts in some areas aren't necessarily experts in all areas. And even when they are, in general, advice is "one size fits one" (a concept I heard a few times at an event last week).

Last week, I was at the Winning is Everything conference held by The Advisory Board—a group of my colleagues who are widely recognized accounting-industry consultants. This year's event was as good as any of their past ones I've attended, if not better.

As always, I heard some great stuff where firms are truly innovating, and I heard some stuff that makes me cringe.

It's true that everyone has an opinion. Especially on hot topics like diversity in the workplace or on the effectiveness of social media.

Sometimes, especially on panels, speakers are simply sharing their observations an a wide variety of subjects, whether their areas of expertise or not. 

It's kinda frightening to me that members of the audience, holding the speakers in deservedly high esteem because of their clear expertise on certain topics, will take observations on other topics and cling to them like gospel. Especially when it's what they want to hear about trying new things (i.e., "don't bother").

This is the case with some sweeping statements made about social-media use in professional firms. Panelists discussing changes in the profession said things like "Firms I talk to about their social-media use say that there hasn't been any ROI [return on investment]."

Aaaaaggghhhhhh! 

Who, exactly, are those firms? How have they been using social media? Did they define their purpose? Specify goals? Once that was done, did they use the right tools? In the right way? With the right groups or people? And for how long? Did they track the right success metrics?

The odds of all those things happening well are very slim, if they happen at all. So, yeah, it's no wonder they can't point to results.

Social media isn't the problem. Lack of planning and spotty execution are the problems. I devoted entire chapters to this in my book, Social Media Strategies for Professionals and their Firms. 

We're so quick to blame the tool and not the methods of using the tool. That's like saying cars crash and fail. Yes, some do. But why?

Social media is rarely effective in a vacuum. Or as stand-alone marketing.

As I discussed in a past blog post called "'What's the ROI of Social Media?' is the Wrong Question," you can almost never isolate the ROI of social media." It's like trying to isolate the ROI of your phone. Or your email's ROI. Impossible.

Anecdotal and blanket statements like those heard last week can prematurely deter others from even caring to learn how to use the these modern communication vehicles. (Don't confuse "modern" with "new." Twitter & Facebook have been around for 6 years, LinkedIn for 9, and blogs for 13+ years). There's enough trepidation within firms (already far behind the rest of the commerical world) about exploring social media. We don't need more.

Coincidentally, the fabulous Rebecca Ryan, a member of The Advisory Board who couldn't be at the conference this year, had commented on my above-referenced blog post with remarks that included this gem: 

Asking "What's the ROI on SM?" seems like a way for decision-makers to end a conversation they're uncomfortable having. (And it works!)

So true.

Please, don't let anyone deter you from exploring any methods for communicating with people and distinguishing yourself and your firm from the pack. 

Take advice, including mine, in its proper context and explore and challenge experts' ideas on your own.

Why Social-Media Rock Stars are Good for Your Firm

Partners and associates often worry about marketing “the individual” versus marketing “the firm.”

When a person markets herself (whether online or off) and receives some attention around it, colleagues can become envious. Some may speculate that she’s not a team player, and that she’s more interested in getting her name known than the firm’s.

Others might pick at her with comments like “You spend too much time on your blog, not doing client work.” Just anticipating these sentiments could preclude her from promoting herself, as if she’d be stepping out of bounds.

But marketing in the professions of law or accounting is much more about relationships than about leveraging a corporate-like brand.

People want to buy from people. Not from logos.

Logos and brands aren’t accountable and accessible. People are. Brands are inherently impersonal yet your firm’s value and long-term appeal are based on your people.

Rock Stars and Record Labels

A good way to look at your firm's marketing is to view the firm as a record label and your people as performers ... with some as potential rock stars.

When a label has only one rock star, you could chalk it up to luck in discovering that talent. With two rock stars signed, people start to wonder if it’s more than just luck. Three rock stars and it’s a trend: the label consistently finds and draws talent.

Think Motown.

A record label that has signed multiple stars is more prestigious among its competitors and is more attractive to aspiring stars. There’s something magical about that label; it appears to have a formula for success.

Your firm should want your attorneys or CPAs to become rock stars so they can elevate the firm’s visibility and reputation.

Rock-stars using social media can quickly put their firm on the map. The higher profile of the firm, in turn, raises the profile of all its attorneys or CPAs.

Creating the Connection

With the visibility comes responsibility.

In all his marketing interactions, a lawyer or CPA should associate himself with his firm in appropriate ways. Online, this means naming the firm and linking to the firm’s website within his bios on social sites like LinkedIn, Twitter, Google+, and blogs.

This doesn’t mean that every profile or photo needs to incorporate the firm’s branding, just that the connection to the firm is consistently reflected on social sites.

And if the person avoids referring to the firm, you might have reason to question his purpose in marketing so independently.

But this isn’t just a social-media problem, it’s an age-old concern. I know of a partner who contributed an article to a local print publication and refrained from naming his firm in his byline. He confessed his intent was to distance himself from the firm—he felt the firm didn’t support his interest in marketing. Whatever his reason, his behavior reflected an underlying problem. The behavior was just the symptom, the root cause was a deeper issue.

In a scenario like this, be careful to address issues like these for what they really are. Don't let fear preclude you from nurturing rock stars. 

Leaving the Label

So there’s this one lingering concern: what if you do support the growth of a rising star, and then she leaves your label?

Your big stars could certainly migrate just as top artists change record companies. This is one reason it’s best to have several rock stars.

It’s true that blogs and social networking sites make it easier than ever for people to build visibility and social capital. And this certainly means they can leave and take this social capital with them. The important thing to remember is that your firm’s stature is already higher for being associated with your stars. That stature stays even when they go.

There’s one way to be particularly proactive about associates or partners possibly leaving that also inspires people to want to create content: establish who will own content like articles and blog posts.

Regardless of the firm’s ability to assert copyright, the wiser approach is a generous spirit of sharing. Agree to let authors use their own articles even after they leave while being clear that the firm can also continue to use the content.

Here’s why you want to share copyright:

When a firm insists on solely owning the content, it creates a disincentive for people (especially non-partners) to contribute their intellectual capital. I’ve seen this completely kill blog efforts, which is a shame because providing content is some of the most valuable marketing you, in a knowledge profession, can do.

Alternately, if the departing attorney or CPA solely owns her content, the firm faces a hassle of scrubbing blogs and websites to remove her content.

Keep it simple and take the high road: agree that the firm and the departing professional can both use it.

When your firm aspires to create, equip, and support as many rock stars as it can, you’ll have far more success than trouble as a result. Encourage your practitioners to create content and participate in social networks to raise both their profiles and the firm’s.

Feature photo courtesy of feiticeira_org on flickr.

Why Outsourcing Social Media Isn't Always the Best Step

Social media takes considerable time and energy.

There are certainly aspects of maintaining a social media presence that are tempting to delegate to interns or outsource to outside companies. 

But wait.

Before you turn to others to "do your social media" for you, remember that social media are just communication tools like telephones and email.

When you have someone "do" email or phone for you, what's that like? How does it go over with the recipient? Would you let just anyone do it?

I prefer you don't delegate the interaction at all. Delegate monitoring and even researching and drafting or the actual act of posting, if you have to.

But be very, very careful if you delegate more. 

If you're a knowledge worker—like a CPA or lawyer—delegating these things well requires finding someone who has exceptional judgment, thinks like you do, and resembles our idea of that superindispensable assistant of the old days—the one who anticipates what we need before we even know we need it. Like Radar O'Reilly.

That person can do your social media "for" you effectively. Interns most probably can't. Outside companies need to be carefully vetted.

(Note: I, in no way, endorse letting someone pretend to be you. I'm referring only to outsourcing company-level social-media interactions. If you have stand-ins for your individual-level interactions, you should be completely transparent about that. Without exception.)

Hiring good judgment isn't cheap. And it's rare to find.

Companies and firms of all sizes—even those with savvy, good-sized marketing departments—sometimes hire outside agencies to interact on the social web on their behalf. Whether it's corporate tweeting and Facebook-page posting, or posting comments on blogs to try to drive some traffic back to their website and boost SEO (search engine optimization), there are businesses who assure you that they'll handle everything you need—you essentially put your entire social web presence in their hands.

And some probably do a good job. (Another note: I've not personally found one yet.)

If you, as the person hiring them, don't know how to go about "doing" social media effectively to begin with, what they say could sound really good. The words and concepts are foreign to you. You don't really want to deal with it. Hiring them solves a big problem for you.

But check out that SEO link I just shared a couple paragraphs ago. Google tells you what to be wary of. Don't let the mystery of what social media entail make you blind to good decision making.

Many of these agencies resort to bad practices and slimy tactics to get you "out there." Sometimes on purpose, and sometimes it's just pure ignorance; they think the approaches are fine. They think what they sell is what you want. Like you sell Viagra or something.

This is why you need to understand what you're actually buying.

A few days ago, I received blog spam from one of the top 10 public-accounting firms in the world who seems to have retained an agency to alleviate their social-media headache.

Oops.

The comment they submitted on an ancient post of mine makes no effort to even pretend to interact with my blog. Its purpose is to attempt to improve search results for the firm related to the keywords included in the comment.

I'll guarantee you that the company is reporting to this Top 10 firm that "we've placed # of links for you as comments on credible blogs." Uh-huh.

Here, I've redacted the firm name and IP address to spare the firm some embarrassment. But not every firm is so fortunate.

Take Martindale-Hubbell (the 140-year-old lawyer-directory company) for example. They hired a company to help them and that company took a similar SEO-boosting path by posting comments to legal blogs.

They at least tried to be conversational. Sort of.

Much to MH's dismay, the hired gun posted a spammy, fake-conversational comment on the New York Personal Injury Attorney Blog whose author Eric Turkewitz called them out. This is the offending gibberish comment:

Being a representative of a law firm, reading an article and blogging and commenting on legal issues has always proved to be useful. To some extent, information given on such blogs and the comments and articles has benefited the victims facing complexities in term of legal issues and helps us also update our knowledge of what is happening around and what all complexities we should expect from our future cases.. It provides a great platform to discuss experiences and share knowledge.

This was particularly bad for MH because they happened to have been well into a promotion about being a leader in social media (which no one in the social-media space believed because of how isolated MH's lawyer listings are from important things like, say, Google searches) even before they proved they weren't a social-media leader with this really bad we-don't-get-it move.

MH stepped forward, answered the questions—albeit a bit inelegantly—and after they got dragged through the mud (see the comments on that mud post, too) later shared how they'd make good. 

Don't let this happen to you!

Be sure you know exactly what the agency (or person) you're thinking of hiring intends to do in your name. 

Do you really want random people making telephone calls or sending emails on your behalf?

Well, letting them interact on the interwebz for you is the very same thing. Without equipping your helpers with information they need in order to represent you knowledgeably, you could really look the fool.

Choose wisely and learn the basics and nuances about anything new to you before you go hiring someone to help you step into it or you could end up with it all over your shoe.

Feature photo courtesy of Joel Abroad on Flickr.

Should CPAs (and Other Professionals) be Active in Social Media?

Bill Sheridan of Maryland Association of CPAs interviewed me asking if CPAs need to be using social media. Spoiler alert: you might be surprised that I answer, "not necessarily."

Also hear what social-media "fence sitters" might need to know and how social media can be used effectively even by a conservative firm. 

 

Sorta Kinda Fed Up With Facebook Disses by Google+ Fanatics

Article after article claims what this one entitled "Google+ is Awesome. Facebook Maimed, Twitter Mortally Wounded?" does:

Instead of treating all of your friends as equals, Google lets you put them into different groups, called circles, such as “friends”, “acquaintances”, “family”, “sports fans”, and so on. These circles represent a powerful innovation.

They allow us to send more personal updates just to our closest friends instead of forcing us to share with all of our hundreds of acquaintances. This simple task is not easy to do within Facebook. Furthermore, Google+ allows us to chop up our incoming news stream based on what circle they are coming from, so that we can focus on just the updates from our family or just the updates from our coworkers. The Google+ circles concept is powerful and easy to use. It represents the defining, foundational difference between Google´s and Facebook´s vision for social networking. If this new model takes off with users, then Facebook will find itself in the uncomfortable position of having to replicate these features within its own platform.

Nothing against Google+ here. I'm still checking it out as I have been for the past couple weeks. There are some things I like a lot about it. And some things that annoy me. But that's not the point of my post. You can read a lot of reviews elsewhere. 

This post is about the lame claim that groups or "circles" is a new concept or "powerful innovation" as the above post claims. 

Hellloooooo.

Facebook has offered groups, called "lists" for years. I know. I use them every single day. Everything written above can be achieved in Facebook. 

I'll be specific:

• Instead of treating all of your friends as equals, FACEBOOK lets you put them into different groups, called LISTS (such as “friends”, “acquaintances”, “family”, “sports fans”, and so on)
• The LISTS allow us to send more personal updates just to our closest friends instead of forcing us to share with all of our hundreds of acquaintances. 
• This simple task IS easy to do within FACEBOOK. 
• FACEBOOK allows us to chop up our incoming news stream based on what LIST they are coming from, so that we can focus on just the updates from our family or just the updates from our coworkers. 
• The FACEBOOK LISTS concept is powerful and easy to use. 

The author wrote: "[Circles] represents the defining, foundational difference between Google´s and Facebook´s vision for social networking." WRONG.

And he wrote: "If this new model takes off with users, then Facebook will find itself in the uncomfortable position of having to replicate these features within its own platform."

Ack! It's there.

Facebook is NOT in the uncomfortable position of having to replicate these features. Perhaps they can make them more obvious, though. Let me show you how easy they are to use. 

STEP 1 - CREATE LISTS

Very easy. In the ACCOUNT dropdown, chose EDIT FRIENDS. Your screen will have a CREATE A LIST button at the top. It looks like this:

 

Make as many lists as you want.

STEP 2 - ADD FRIENDS TO LISTS

Then on the left sidebar, choose FRIENDS NOT ON A LIST to start, or any list name to edit. To the right of each friend's name you can open your list of LISTS and add the friend to as many or few lists as you like. I have a list called "Nothing" and I have miscellaneous pages and what-not in it.

Let's pretend Led Zep is one of my friends. (oh how I wish.) It would look like this:

 

STEP 3 - POST YOUR LITTLE HEART OUT

Either as you post, or for your default privacy, of for each photo album you have, whatever, you can designate who can see it, or who cannot see it, or both.

To change your default or to edit any individual post's visibility, click on the little lock doohickey under your status box, to the left of the SHARE button.

 

When the lock settings open, designate who can or cannot see your stuff, and save as your default if you want.

Enter a person's name or the name of any list you have created. Add as many as you like. When you start typing a name or list name, Facebook will offer up autocomplete help for you. 

 

Voila. You're done. 

 

UPDATED: Oh, and I forgot to share the other important piece. To view the news feed of any single LIST, meaning just the stuff the list members post, is quite easy.

STEP 4 - VIEW NEWS BY GROUP OR "LIST"

Go to your HOME page and, at the top where it says TOP NEWS and MOST RECENT note the little DOWN ARROW on the button called MOST RECENT.

When you click the button, many options open including the ability to select any of your LISTS.

Guess Facebook isn't so far behind after all. And you can still hate Facebook if you want. But at least I hope that, now, maybe all these people quit claiming this is such a huge innovation on Google's part. Geez.

But, otherwise, that article I mentioned is really pretty good. Just skip the first third of it!

Integrating Social Media Into Your Current Marketing

Are you interested in integrating your marketing to include social media channels?

The first question, then, is: “What are you doing now?”

The odds are that you’re doing some things that can be leveraged into social media activities very nicely. Start with an inventory of all your non–social web activities.

Think about what you do and who you do it for, or in front of:

• Print products (brochures, flyers, etc.): What do you produce? How often? Who sees it?
• Websites: Do you have one or more websites? For whom are they geared?
• E-mails: What e-mail communications do you send? How often? Who sees them? 
• Advertisements: Do you have any TV, radio, print, web, or other advertisements? Where, when, and how often do they appear? Who sees them?
• Print articles: Do you write articles or guest columns? How often? For which publications? Who is the target audience?
• Case studies and testimonials: Do you collect or create these materials? From whom? What do you do with them?
• Surveys: Do you take surveys? Of whom? How often? What information do you collect?
• Membership in organizations: Are you involved in any trade, peer, general business, community, or charitable organizations? Who else is involved (audience)? How do you interact with others in the organization?
• Activities or programs: Do you sponsor any of these? If so, what are they?
• Events, classes, or seminars: Do you attend events, classes, or seminars? Which ones? Who else is there?
• Speaking engagements, seminars, webinars: Do you accept speaking engagements and for whom? Does your company host events, or are they hosted by other organizations? Where are they held?
• Media appearances: Do you appear on TV, radio, print, or on the Web as a resource or quoted expert? 

Other opportunities for sharing are our day-to-day interactions such as talking to people, e-mailing them, and print correspondence (including invoices). Any one of these activities can be bridged into another, or into your social media initiatives, as appropriate.

Remember, though, the tone in the social web is MUCH different than in advertising or traditional media.

De-fluff and de-spin with your actions online. In fact, I suggest you do so everywhere. No one likes gobbledygook and spin. 

Social media doesn't have to be a lot of extra work "on top of" what you're already doing.

There are undoubtedly a lot of untapped opportunities to build your reputation as a skilled, credible professional and perhaps even a “specialist” by maximizing what you already do.  

In the comments, let us know how you've made the most of an activity by leveraging it across multiple channels.

 

Above includes modified excerpt from Social Media Strategies for Professionals and their Firms (2010, Wiley).

Why "Personal Brand" is an Oxymoron & Doesn't Jive With Today's Online Marketing

You won’t hear me talk about building your “personal brand,” and that is because I feel strongly that brands are best suited for products and large companies. Brands are inherently IMpersonal.

Conceptually, I didn’t have a problem with substituting “personal brand” for reputation over the past decade or so, as popularized by Tom Peters in his 1997 Fast Company article, “The Brand Called You.” These concepts dramatically changed how employees set themselves apart from the organizations they worked for, which you could call personalizing, but in a way that maintained a corporate-like veil of positioning (spin) to the public.

But this was before online marketing was essential and social media came into play.

If we venture into social media (or any online presence) with a purpose of “branding” ourselves, it’s easy to think we ought to represent ourselves in a corporate-like, sanitized (aka inauthentic) way. This is exactly the opposite of how we need to present ourselves in the social Web.

The fact is, the social Web has truly lifted and burned the corporate veil. Spin is deplored.

Authenticity is a core value in the online world (any world, actually). The online community values usefulness, authenticity, altruism, and validation by outside parties.

If you go back and understand branding’s original purpose, it is to enable premium pricing, thus higher profits. For professionals in firms of any size, excellent reputation or specialization accomplishes the same.

And sadly, of all the professional firms I know who have spent vast sums to brand themselves, very few actually leverage their brands in their pricing! But I digress...

Our focus: a corporate brand isn’t essential for professionals to charge premium prices. A reputation, however, IS.

Being a “brand” can even be harmful to professionals. Why?

Because brands are impersonal and with very few exceptions, people (even on behalf of companies) don’t want to buy personalized knowledge and advice from an impersonal entity. Therefore professionals are far better off presenting themselves in their full, unique, human-y glory, than as a corporate brand. Add to that the fact that corporate brands are generally viewed as inaccessible and, to a great degree, unaccountable, and it becomes clear it's not the way to go for relationship-oriented professionals.

Even the largest corporate brands are trying very hard to position themselves more personally. 

At a recent marketing event featuring top brands, including Radio Flyer, Tropicana, Ford, Chevrolet, GM, Best Buy, Domino’s, Comcast, and Kodak, the single greatest take-away for blogger Jennifer Beese was,

It’s not about the product, it’s about the soul of the brand. It’s about people, not logos. In short, humanize your brand.

Professional firms, too, should recognize this shift and, like traditional "company" brands, stop trying so very hard to corporatize themselves. And rejoice because professionals have a tremendous advantage over corporations in doing this—the professional IS the product and good relationships are part of highest-quality service delivery. It's what customers WANT, hope for, and expect. 

If you are a professional, don’t worry about a building (aka manufacturing) a "brand" for yourself.

Instead, just focus on being true to who you are as you establish and maintain your professional reputation. Seek to do the work that inspires you most, and achieve a strong reputation through excellent expectation management. Being passionate about what you do, and professional and personable while you do it are the best things you can do for your practice to thrive and grow.

 

This is a modified excerpt from Social Media Strategies for Professionals and Their Firms (©2010 John Wiley & Sons).

Managing Your "Private" Life on Facebook While Developing Business

I'm witnessing an increase in the number of people creating "extra" accounts on Facebook to help them manage (separate) business and private personas.

This might seem like a good way to manage privacy such as protecting kiddos or allowing you to let your hair down among close friends and family while maintaining your professional decorum among business associates or even strangers who want to know you, even if you don't know them.

Others do it not so much for privacy concerns, but to avoid sending business-y messages and links to family and "old" friends who aren't into your business. That's thoughtful for sure, but there are other ways to manage this. 

Having multiple Facebook accounts is a bad idea for several reasons, one of which is that it violates Facebook's Terms of Use (see 4.2)

In the FAQs, they more thoroughly explain, 

If I already have a user profile, can I create a business account?

Maintaining multiple accounts, regardless of the purpose, is a violation of Facebook’s Terms of Use. If you already have a personal account, then we cannot allow you to create business accounts for any reason.

Facebook instead wants you to create a "Page" for your business presence rather than a separate personal profile. So, even if you have a company page (like mine) they would prefer that I set up a "Michelle Golden" business person page.

This is what Facebook "likes"!

They describe in the FAQ that you can manage all your Pages (and ads) that you create from your personal account. And if you don't want people clicking into your personal life, they won't. Facebook explains:

Please keep in mind that the fans of any of the Pages you administer will not have visibility or access to your personal account or profile. Any actions that you take as a Page administrator on your Page will show the Page’s name as the [poster] and not your personal name. To create a Page, simply click on the "Create a Page" link under the Sign Up section of www.facebook.com.

This is actually really cool because people can "like" and share your business page and posts so your content can go a lot further than just among your circle of approved "friends." Also, with a "Page" you can see (aggregated) statistics that tell you if you are engaging well with others, or are having your post stream hidden by others! (gasp)

But let's talk about the other reasons you might not want to divide your "friends" between two accounts in the first place.

1) MISSING OUT.

When you divide your feed, and "depersonalize" your interaction to the business peeps, you miss out on the whole purpose of using social media for business development! (more below)

2) MANAGING CONTENT RELEVANCE.

By creating "friend lists," you can designate content you DO want to go to certain people or DON'T want to go to certain people. In other words, if you don't want to burden "family" or "jr high friends" with your business posts, create a group for them and when you write the business post, simply set the post to exclude viewing by that group.

3) MANAGING PRIVACY.

Take advantage of Facebook's incredibly rich privacy settings. Avoid sharing your vacation photos (or any other content or links) with your business peeps by placing photos in a special album just for lists of "family" and "close friends."

REMEMBER, ENGAGING IS WHAT MAKES FACEBOOK VALUABLE AS A BUSINESS TOOL

Facebook is not for broadcasting! (No social media are for broadcasting.) It's for interacting.

Bottom line is that the much of the point and purpose of using social media in business is for people to become closer. As in friends. As in learning what they have in common and stuff.

I have some Facebook friends who only "do Facebook" for business and it shows. There is no personal engagement. No relationship building. No point (at least for me). It's dry. It's boring. It's a broadcast. No thanks.

REAL RESULTS

Yet there are other Facebook business people that I hardly knew or totally didn't know before friending on Facebook. Yet we got closer through Facebook. And these people actually constitute the largest percent of people that have hired me or referred business to me as a result of getting to know one another via ANY FORM of social media. More than LinkedIn and more than Twitter.

From personal experience (I haven't conducted a formal survey, but maybe I should) I attribute this to the fact that I am fairly personal (aka "myself") on Facebook. And they seem to be, as well. I share and they share. And we get to know each other. We mutually participate and banter. I congratulate them on their marathons, "like" their family photos and song posts, commiserate when they have a rough go, wish them well when they are ill. And I mean it. And they do the same. And it results in building our relationships.

HOW TO GET YOURSELF HIDDEN

People who only feed their Tweets, blog posts, and Foursquare without otherwise engaging others are completely missing out on the benefits of the relationship development aspect of Facebook. Typical user behavior is to "hide" the posts of these people.

There are also some people who, when others comment or congratulate, ignore the messages. Typical user behavior is to stop commenting on these people's posts. No one likes to be ignored. Sometimes hiding the posts of these people or even unfriending them is a next step.

Again, Facebook is not for broadcasting. It's not one way. Even brands that merely broadcast, and fail to engage, get "hidden" from user feeds.

WHAT NEXT?

So, instead of creating a separate business presence, first try the friend lists feature to control privacy and/or content distribution.

If that doesn't suit your needs, create a "Page" for yourself as a professional (even if your company has its own page...you can cross link the pages). But if you go the Page route, be sure that you still engage, and still show some of your personality there. If you want relationships to develop, that is!