Education, not directive action, is needed to cover footballers’ tweeting blunders

Footballers are at it again. Mistaking banter for the offensive. This time it is young starlet Suso, who branded fellow Spanish and Liverpool teammate Jose Enrique “Gay” on Twitter after having his teeth whitened.

He thankfully covered up the initial swear word (F***), but using a term such as “Gay” opens him up to a round of ridicule and criticisms from campaign groups involved in sport.

He rightly deleted the tweet rather rapidly, after probably being advised by Liverpool’s communication team, but his apparently homophobic comment has landed him in hot water with the FA, and they fined him £10,000. Rightly so.

Suso later apologised (probably after being advised) on his Twitter page, writing: “I’m very sorry if anyone has been offended by my comments about the photo of my team-mate Jose Enrique.

“It was only a joke between the two of us. I realise that my words were unfortunate and it was not my intention to offend anyone. I apologise again if anyone was offended.”

Enrique also took to the social networking site: “Is amazing how FA can fine my friend Suso Fernandez for a banter thing. Was just a joke!” he wrote.

This goes back to the argument about social media and impacts on corporate reputation and on the reputation of football. Liverpool chiefs and FA regulators pledged their continued support to several anti-discrimination campaigns in the aftermath, who lobbyists suggesting that the money goes towards the cause.

The Reds became the first Premier League club to sign up for Gay Pride, and are the leading supporters of the Kick Homophobia Out of Football campaign.

The FA said in a statement: “Following an independent regulatory commission hearing on Monday, Liverpool’s Jesús Fernández Sáez (Suso) has been fined £10,000 and warned as to his future conduct for a comment posted on Twitter. The charge, which the player admitted and requested a paper hearing, was that he acted in a way which was improper and/or brought the game into disrepute in that the comment was posted on his Twitter account and included a reference to a person’s sexual orientation and/or disability.”

What does this mean for social media use by employees of professional clubs? Clearly an education process needs to be undertaken sooner rather than later, with the clear assumption that some players (like Suso) are just kids and they need some guidance.

Suso is just the latest in a long line of Premier League footballers to cause controversy with their postings online, with Rio Ferdinand , Ashley Cole and Emmanuel Frimpong all charged in recent months for their comments.

There is a clear sign that many players do not know what is appropriate and what is not appropriate. Words – culturally and socially – have different meanings and after Gordon Taylor’s promise to include cultural lessons for foreign footballers to understand society, perhaps another one is needed on how to control social media output and what postings are acceptable in the wider context of communication.

A more robust social media policy by clubs would help. A clearer definition of words, too, would help the cause to ensure when players ‘tweet’ they produce great content and a real insight into their lives, not just a sense of petulance.

Benefitting from better communication and leadership: Year of silence prevents football clubs’ aim for transparency

The Guardian, and more specifically, the brilliant David Conn, released an exclusive story about the ‘Kick It Out’ campaign slamming top football clubs for a ‘year wasted in hypocrisy’.

The esteemed chairman of Kick It Out, Lord Ouseley launched a damaging verdict of vicious situations resulting from racial fallouts in professional football, and the inability of the governing bodies, the clubs themselves and the players to react such allegations and accusations.

It was hardly surprising that Lord Ouseley criticised the lack of ‘leadership’ and ‘morality’ shown from the above and the initial lack of urgency to deal with the racial virus affecting football is utterly ridiculous.

In the aftermath, Chelsea and ex-England captain John Terry was charged with using racial language was still able to participate in Euro 2012, and lead his club side for a year without any action. His four match ban was laughable, and a disgrace to those who want to eradicate these demons from the game.

Liverpool, too, were guilty of pleading needless support to Luis Suarez when he was found to use racial language towards Partice Evra. Despite cultural misunderstandings, something pointed out by David Bond at the BBC, he was rightly punished and missed a good portion of Liverpool’s struggle last season – was it enough?

It was clear that these clubs were intent on protecting their most valuable “assets” despite their racial actions, which, in any other workplace, would have resulted in suspension and then, the sack.

What’s so different about football? These clubs and multi-million pound machines, relying on their “assets” to provide the foundation for the riches professional sport brings. These players appear to be bigger than the “organisation” itself.

The old case of the “individual” against the “organisation” is clear. Transparency, however how much we crave it, will never transpire in a business that is solely focused on the field. Clubs and the industry need to decide what’s bigger? The player or the organisation.

No one, as of yet, has made a moral-stance in protecting the greater good of the game. The PFA chairman Gordon Taylor spoke about introducing safety nets to protect players from the small minority of fans who stupidly throw objects, but he fails to recognise the bigger safety fears and possible precautions from not dealing with these gross misconduct on the field. These are role models and leaders in sport. Their actions are seen worldwide by millions, and allowing major offences, like racism, to go unpunished (which a four-match ban is) is truly disrespectful everyone.

“Leadership is so important; you have to send a powerful message that racism is completely unacceptable,” Lord Ouseley told the Guardian. “But there is a moral vacuum. The big clubs look after their players as assets. There was no bold attitude from them, to say that they would not put up with it.”

The lack of clear leadership at these times show that football is an industry catching up. The PR-fails of Liverpool (Suarez t-shirts, for one) show that there is too much inward focus in terms of communication and leadership, and much infatuation about dealing with the club rather than the industry. The FA needs to protect the game, but clubs have to be singing of the same song sheet.

It will be good to see these “assets” would last more damaging accusations. Chelsea sacked Adrian Mutu for taking recreational drugs, Rio Ferdinand was suspended for a year for missing a drugs test, Kolo Toure was banned for taking diet pills, but no one yet, big professional club or governing body, has taken decisive action against clear acts of racism.

Sheffield United sacked Ched Evans after the striker was charged with sexual assault. Lee Hughes’s career was put on hold for three years after he was imprisoned for causing death by dangerous driving and was released by his club West Brom. These are small signs of leadership after very serious offences. Racism should fit in this category.

Players should report every encounter of racism suffered, but if those accused of being racist are to be found guilty, they should be banned for a year. At least. Not by the governing body, but by the clubs – that would show some real leadership and would communicate more openly that these awful acts of racism will not be tolerated, whether you are deemed as a “valuable” asset or not.

Let me know what you think?

@StevenWoodgate

Sports Development – A Change of Perspective

GUEST POST: To add more context, and highlight the changes of the sports industry as a whole, Sport Researcher Stuart Owen has kindly offered his opinion on the current trends of sports development and how that has be impeded by the media and technology. This is the first and quite a personal one, so visit back for Stuart’s expert look into the sport development industry and the changing mindset. Enjoy.

 

Stuart Owen: A vision into sports development

Sometimes it can get boring reading constant news stories, press releases, and articles about the importance of physical activity and trying to get more of us participating in sport. At times it can be easy to lose perspective on why we should be doing it.

As someone who has loved competing in various sports and is keen to get others to do the same, I often find myself questioning the value of sport and why I want to get other individuals more active.  This has led me to believe that before I can put enthusiasm behind why others should participate, I need to first question what got me interested and passionate about trying to maintain a physically active lifestyle.

In a quest to understand my underlying urge to better myself and compete in a sports environment at a recreational level I have to take myself back to my childhood. Obviously, before I go any further, it is my clear understanding that biomechanics and genetics play a huge role in determining people’s ability and innate competitive drive. I have no doubt that I have a competitive edge within me which has driven me to prove myself against others and ultimately attempt to come out on top.

Sport, in this sense, has provided me with the perfect proving ground. An in-depth discussion about the value of genetics and sport is best left to a Sports Scientist, but in my opinion, it is necessary to always respect the significance genetics play. Looking beyond this though, I had a realisation about what sport really offered me as a child – respect and admiration from others.

I wouldn’t say that I was ever the most confident individual at school; I would be the quiet one who would just get their head down and get on with their work, dare I say it, I guess it was classed as a ‘geek’. This was fantastic in that I academically achieved everything that I wanted to at school, but when it came to being respected by my fellow peers, well that was more difficult. It soon became clear that regardless of what I did I would always have the labels of ‘geek’ or ‘goody-goody’ hanging over my head. That is where sport came in.

I genuinely still remember being fearful of joining the school football club because of the individuals who took part in it; nonetheless, I built up the courage to go along. Once I was out on that pitch I was in my comfort zone, able to prove what I was capable of. This in turn allowed me to gain a little respect from my peers. I’m not saying I lost all my labels and that suddenly I was strutting around school being known as the next Beckham, but now I had the label of ‘geek who is also good at sport’ above my head. Fantastic. Sport empowered me as a child and by simply doing something I enjoyed I also gained more confidence and respect as an individual.

This is exactly where Sports Development policies are going wrong at the moment.

It is so easy to look around and see various initiatives informing us on how we can get involved in sport, where we need to go for this, and the general benefits it will have on our health and wellbeing. Nonetheless, it is lacking that personable element.

We are almost in a state of saturation where we have heard the facts and stats about obesity, that we are now overlooking them because we are bored of hearing about them. We need to re-think how we can engage with individuals, of which a large majority will be children. I believe that we need to move away from focusing, although still value the importance of, the health benefits of sport, and look more at the character building and empowerment aspect that physical activity can offer.

Now I’m not saying that this perspective will work for every individual, but then I’m not a believer that one size fits all. To get more people participating you need to come up with several different initiatives/techniques and if just 1 out of 10 of those appeals to an individual and makes them connect with the idea of what sport can offer them, then that’s just great. After all that is the main perspective of Sport Development-to engage individuals to participate in sport.

Now, I’m not going to list ideas of what initiatives can be created to help individuals understand the empowerment element of sport, but I sure intend on doing this as my career hopefully advances within the Sports Development industry.

One thing I am sure about is that awareness is the key, and in this modern day, social media is the best and most effective way of engaging with young people. Let us make people aware of what sport can do for them instead of just bombarding them with information on what they should be doing.

Sportandev.org (https://twitter.com/sportanddev) are a prime example of an organisation that acts as a platform to communicate the good that sport can do; it goes much further than simply listing the health benefits. On a daily basis I read, via their twitter feed, the good that sport is doing in teaching children about AIDS prevention in Africa, just as one example. This is just one such illustration of the good and empowerment that Sports Development can offer. It’s time to look beyond purely the health benefits.

As a final note, I don’t want people thinking that I only believe people can be empowered through sport; by no means do I believe this. Sport is just one form of enablement, a form that I found helped me, but people may find that enablement through art, music, drama etc. Putting my sport mind to one side, it is of greater importance to me that individuals are able to empower and find themselves through any form of activity, but for now my mission is to help those who wish to achieve that through sport.

Stuart Owen studied Sports Development and Coach Education at the University of Bath, and is currently working as a Sports Researcher at the Leisure Database Company.

Conclusion: Sport Communicators need to address Social Media abuse – Part 7

We are now on the seventh and last part of the research into sportstars’ use of social media and issues surrounding reputation management. The response received surpassed all expectations. Thank you to everyone who’s stayed loyal and read all seven parts. If you’ve missed one – or a few – they are attached at the bottom. Hopefully you’ll keep sharing and spread the word..

 

Otherwise, I will need to rely on a sports club to bid seven figures for me/the blog. 

Many thanks,

@StevenWoodgate

Conclusion

This seven-part series has considered whether sport PR needs the introduction of a bigger and a more detailed social media policy to prevent reputation damage and conflict arising between the individual and the organisation they represent.

The hypothesis set out for the research sought to prove how  ‘Social Media policies in sports organisations need to address abuse by individuals to avoid negative effects on corporate reputation and control corporate image’. PR theory was considered to understand the demands of corporate reputation and how they are affected by the use of social media, and found wanting when it came to understanding the unique relationship between sportspeople and their organisations, as well as between clubs and their fans.

Secondary research laid the foundation to illustrate what kinds of stories are published via social media. Content analysis revealed the extent and nature of the problem, with three different categories of twitter traffic identified – tweeters, who help a corporate reputation, twits who are relatively harmless but not helpful and twats, who can be positively destructive.

The content analysis conducted on eleven sportspeople demonstrated, overwhelmingly, that inappropriate social media use is common throughout sport. That is not to say this use is always a negative, rather it includes missing opportunities to enhance the corporate reputation of one’s team. Footballers are the obvious target considering their global impact, but it is up to their corporate communicators to set policy and lead by example. Football already has a somewhat tarnished reputation and the fact it does not apply social media guidelines to common practice inevitably makes reputation management even more difficult.

The coexistence of social media and the traditional mass media will not be as easy to achieve in the arena of sports, as it might be in many corporate environments. Sportspeople have to be careful and review their own use of social media reconsidering the use of communications experts to guide them.

After all, a sportsperson is not a communication professional, and some help will be required to understand the risk to reputation.  Self-regulation or self-censorship by sportspeople of their use of social media is an acquired skill, and needs corporate guidance. Quite simply, sportspeople need to be shown what ‘good’ looks like.

In a world where sport is increasingly commercial, global and driven by business principles, risk and reputation management may well prove to be the driving force behind a new approach to social media. The desired integration and alignment within companies of sportspeople and management require that a reputation must be built both ‘inside out’ and ‘outside in’.

Corporate Communicators may well be the initiator and driver of implementing a social media reputation approach, building a leading coalition with sportspeople and management. Bringing valuable insights on stakeholder opinion and potential risks to reputation to the boardroom and to the sportspeople’s minds, corporate reputation should be given the attention it deserves and earn corporate communicators a standing invitation to overall reputation strategy discussions. Introducing a social media policy should be the first big step in addressing online reputation management.

Corporate communicators should therefore be prepared to take the next steps. This research believes that the below list of recommendations are essential in making the best use of social media:

–       Introduce the purpose of social media

–       Be responsible for what you write

–       Be authentic

–       Consider your audience

–       Exercise good judgment

–       Understand the concept of community

–       Remember to protect confidential information

–       Bring value

–       Productivity matters

–       Prepare to face consequences and possibly expulsion

Further research needed to confirm the findings and draw greater validity and authority should include the following:

–       Widen the analysis by looking at the explicit relationship between corporate reputation and twitter traffic over a much longer period, across a broader range of sportspeople, and involving more than just the UK,

–       Deepen the research, by applying the above framework to one specific club in which several different sports people are tweeting, to quantify the actual impact on corporate reputation of tweets, twits and twats.

–       Break down the elements of corporate reputation and the role of power that resides with investors, rather than fans, and see whether social media has any impact

As this research and blog posts have proven, doing nothing about the use of social media is no longer an option.  Corporate communicators and senior managers need to act now before more of its sportspeople become ‘Twats’ and before it has significant effect on corporate reputation.

Please read and share the others in this series: 

Sport and corporate reputation is a tough mix: Part 1

Corporate communicators need to control their employees: Part 2

Sportstars do not understand corporate reputation: Part 3

Why do fans follow sportstars on social media: Part 4

The Social Media battle between Corporate Communicators, Journalists & Sportstars: Part 5

Discussion and Analysis: A better Social Media policy is needed in Sport: Part 6

 

 Hope to hear from you soon – @StevenWoodgate

The Social Media battle between Corporate Communicators, Journalists & Sportstars

The fifth part of this series looking at sportstars, social media and issues surrounding reputation management comes from qualitative interviews with those in the industry. The other four parts can be found at the bottom of this post.

Interviews

To understand and investigate the data extracted from the questionnaires further (Corporate communicators, Sports Stars and Sports Fans), a series of interviews were undertaken from a broad spectrum of the industry. Not only professional and semi-professional sportspeople were interviewed but those within industry ranging from journalists, corporate communicators and PR professionals.

This was an important step to add context to the current data and provide a qualitative angle to progress and investigate further.  Do experts concur that the conflicts between sportspeople and their organisations over social media need to be controlled through a management policy?

This blogger was able to obtain interviews with six in-house sporting corporate communicators, including: Trevor Braitwait, Director of Communications at Sheffield Wednesday FC; Simon Williams, Communications Officer at Southampton FC; Max Fitzgerald, Communications Executive at AFC Bournemouth; Mike McGreary, Website Manager at Middlesbrough FC; Ian Cotton, Ex-Director of Communications at Liverpool and Tom Tainton, Media Officer at Bristol Rugby. Each quote has been disguised to keep views confidential.

From the interviews undertaken, there was a resounding difference between the thought of reputation and social media, and the constant battle between the individual and the organisation.

“Protecting and promoting our brand is a key part of my role. There is no specific strategy as this unfolds on an ongoing basis.” 

Worryingly, and quite unnaturally, senior management at sports clubs has made the conscious effort not to introduce a strategic strategy to deal with reputation. Across other business sectors, plans are put into place but this shows the immaturity of the sports communication industry. The younger professionals coming into the industry sees their roles slightly differently:

“Reputation management is a critical element of my role – we try to boost our reputation and ‘culture’ created by the boss and the coaching staff through positive reinforcement on our social media channels.”

This shows the willingness and eagerness to use social media more actively within the whole communication and PR strategy. As it shows in the corporate communication questionnaire, younger people are using social media to get their messages across and they are more aware of the importance of it.

“This (Using players’ social media account to boost reputation) can backfire, as two high profile football clubs recently discovered to their cost… The reputation of the club is and always will be greater than that of any individual.”

This shows two things: a clear age gap in thinking about social media, and potential differences between team sports. Some policy is for the players to express themselves and rely more on media curation to measure and keep an eye on any bad publicity.

“I think it’s important that players are given the chance to show their character on these platforms. It can however, be useful when promoting club offers due to their wider reaching fanbase.”

Again, it appears from these interviews that the younger corporate communicators are keener to use individual social media accounts to promote engagement and building and maintaining reputation.

“Every player receives social media training as well, as well as guidelines for social media use. We highlight the risks that social media can carry, particularly within the framework of media and public responsibility. Players directly represent the club and, as a result, are expected to portray themselves and their teammates in a positive manner at all times.”

Younger communicators also know the consequences and potential “pitfalls” of social media and have quickly asserted his influence to give the club a shining light for the players to use.

“By showing a personable side to the Club and creating open access to our players, we hope that supporters have a positive view of *club* and thus will be encouraged to invest time and money into our product.”

Despite the apparent differences across the three interviews, all agree that an in-depth social media policy would help to clarify current “grey areas”. Some know that they “are speaking to the media every time they tweet” and this view, from a media relations point, will help to identify potential areas for a reputation hit. Sport is highly speculative and the media can use these ‘posts’ as content to attract headlines and unnecessary, avoidable issues.

Not only it is imperative to understand the in-house corporate communicators view, it is also imperative to understand how these stories are sourced and used. After consulting journalists ranging from online, print and radio, further understanding can be taken to influence policy.

Older journalists are still adapting to sportspeople using things like social media with many believing the journalism industry is becoming more of a ‘Soap Opera’ rather than its primary objective to deliver high quality news content. One senior journalist sees social media and publicity in a different light.

“An agent’s sole raison d’etre is to get publicity for their clients in order to raise their profile and subsequently their earnings. It’s a murky and cynical business and cricketer’s, once largely removed from it, have smelt the money and are moving centre stage. “

The nation’s appetite for celebrity culture and speculative stories are ever increasing, and this senior journalist sees social media as a publicity tool for sportspeople to attract more attention. In this example, cricketers are becoming centre stage and the likes of Kevin Pietersen are becoming household names.

Their social media accounts are heavily watched in case a potential story appears. This seems to be a case of trying to build and maintain of the individuals as opposed to other collaborating with the individual’s organisations. These players are building context to market themselves and the speculation stories being produced

Interviews with sportspeople

Sportspeople sometimes create their downfall. Speculation and stories are a react to ill-informed tweets, used by those that do not appear to be educated on the consequences and understanding of social media. The data gathered from the questionnaires show clear indication that more guidance is needed to prevent future inappropriate use. As questions arose about their inappropriate social media use, many were unaware that those images and posts were made public, even when talking directly to someone.

This is an education corporate communicators need to have with their employees to prevent avoidable reputation damage. After interviewing eight sportspeople about their use of social media, many interesting points came across. As Figure 1 will show, many sportspeople enjoy using social media as fan engagement and ‘banter’ with fellow professionals.

More needs to be done to boost understanding and the consequences from using social media inappropriately as sportspeople do not understand the extent of social media and its potential impact.

Through clear guidelines and with the help of a communication specialist, their education about how to use social media could be significantly improved. To show this understanding, a focus group took place to understand how online journalists see social media use and what they think of it.

Selected Quotes

‘Well, to be honest, Social Media is there for banter purposes. Me and the lads often joke about it and use it to wind each other up. I often keep in touch with friends and that on it but the sole purpose of it is to joke about.’

‘They shouldn’t be bothered. It is not theirs to use. It’s mine and I wish to use it the way I wish.’

‘The social media account is mine and I can use it as freely as possible.’

‘I was drunk at the time and hugely regret it. My family sees what I put and I wasn’t proud. It was embarrassing. The lads at the club took the piss even the management got involved.‘

‘I was annoyed that I was left out and vented my frustration. It was silly but I felt like I wasn’t treated as well as I could have been and posted it just out of anger. Obviously the manager, and some of the fans, saw it and it ended up me having to make a public apology.’

‘I was annoyed that I was left out and vented my frustration. It was silly but I felt like I wasn’t treated as well as I could have been and posted it just out of anger. Obviously the manager, and some of the fans, saw it and it ended up me having to make a public apology.’

Figure 1: Selected quotes from Sportspeople Interviews

Focus group with online journalists and corporate communicators

Projecting reputation is hugely important in sport. Sport is speculative and can easily be attacked by the media who are looking for ‘easy’ stories. As mentioned before in the sportspeople questionnaire, the players seem indifferent to those journalists using their posts as stories, but their understanding of corporate reputation need to be improved.

Online journalists, Nick Howson and Vanessa Keller, who work exclusively in news gathering and content creation, know the true value of the usefulness of social media and in the interviews for this dissertation, they believe it “breaking down barriers” that were previously there.

Not only is it making their jobs easier, but also they believe they are getting more truthful responses rather than the “spin” they receive when trying to obtain quotes through their agents.

Not is social media clearly changing how journalism is practiced, but it shows the potential pitfalls that corporate communicators need to correct to ensure the barriers between the organisation and its consumers stays together.

“Traffic-wise, social media is great at getting more hits and impressions on our page. It’s an original source not the spin that clubs try to put out. In ways, it is even better than a press conference, as players are always under the watchful eye, they used social media more carefree and aren’t restricted in what they say.”

“There is becoming less need for PR, social media is becoming the number one source for journalists to go to.”

These were just some of main finding resulting from the focus group. Journalists are actively using social media as the main source for potential stories and speculation. It needs urgent addressing by clubs’ communications department, as this is a way where important can be leaked to the public. A clear social media policy outlining the consequences of such actions would provide a base a better place to prevent sportspeople people ‘twats’.

Even more so, the LinkedIn discussion with corporate communicators discovered that introducing social media policy can be rather tricky regardless of its usefulness.

Corporate Communicators Focus Group Highlights

“I suspect the nuance between rules and guidance is probably crucial. However, there can’t be a one size fits all solution. A Premier League football club is very different from the Met Police, disability charity or a small funeral company…”

“Many organisations just don’t know what to do about social media. They put policies in place that are a bit of a sop but what else can they do?”

“The problem with social media is that once it’s in the public domain there’s little you can do to get it back. Staff are entitled to have a private life but if they post their misdemeanour’s on a social platform it’s no longer private. It’s up to the employer what they do about this but the dilemma is that they don’t own the employee.”

“As a freelance press officer working in different organisations’ press offices I agree that some Press Offices don’t see social media as their responsibility…. But equally a lot do! Monitoring it is the challenge!”

Figure 2: Selected quotes from Corporate Communicators’ Focus Group

From the primary data gathered, the case studies need be sorted out to determine who are the ‘tweeters’, ‘twits’ or ‘twats’ (Next post) – and how social media policy should be framed to handle each in a way that enhances corporate reputation.

Please read and share the others in this series: 

Sport and corporate reputation is a tough mix: Part 1

Corporate communicators need to control their employees: Part 2

Sportstars do not understand corporate reputation: Part 3

Why do fans follow sportstars on social media: Part 4

 

Thanks for reading, Steve – @StevenWoodgate

Research on why fans follow sports stars on social media and what it means for corporate reputation: Part 4

Part four of this blog and research series sees a questionnaire put to sports fans about why they follow sportstars on social media and whether that has any bearing on corporate reputation.

Questionnaire to Sports Fans

Not only was this questionnaire key to finding some valuable data, but also based on the other two questionnaires (corporate communicators  and sportspeople), it provided some clear strategic direction to underpin the need for better understanding of social media corporate reputation in sport. The fans keep sporting clubs afloat and are the reason why sportspeople can command such high salaries and benefits.

This questionnaire was sent out on online through social media channels and there were 80 respondents. It was hardly surprising that the biggest age bracket was between 18-24 (61%, n=80) and because of its sports connection mostly males (76.8%, n=80) filled it out. With spectator sport, males dominate the likes of football and cricket therefore it does not make these results any more invalid. It can be classed as a fair representation of the sport and through social media in sport.

Figure 1 shows a break down of some of key findings from the questionnaire. Interestingly, over three-quarters of respondents (76.9% agree, n=80) follow a sportsperson’s account because of the club they are associated with. This strengthens the case dispelling some stakeholder theory as it is made abundantly clear that personal social media accounts contribute to the overall reputation of the club. If the “talent” is brought in, then his or her association with the club is blatantly obvious.

Worryingly for sporting organisations is that almost half of respondents (46.4%, n=80) would change their attitudes towards the organisation because of a selected social media post, backing the hypothesis that social media abuse will result in issues involving reputation.  A similar figure (46.3%, n=80) also believes that many of the sporting employees use social media to damage the organisation’s reputation. This will come more apparent with the case studies highlighted in later chapters.

Fans and supporters of professional sports look to up to the “talent” as role models and inspiration and interesting two-third (65.8% agree, n=80) believe that the personal social media accounts of sportspeople make the clubs they represent reputation stronger as a result. This is despite of the worries resulting from purposely damaging reputation or potential attitude changes.

Figure 1: Data Highlights from Sports Fan Questionnaire

	Strongly   Disagree	Slightly   Disagree	Slightly   Agree	Strongly   Agree
I follow my team on Social Media because of the sport   star’s use of Social Media	25.6%	24.4%	39.0%	8.5%
I follow sport star’s Social Media accounts because they   are associated with the team I support	12.2%	9.8%	41.5%	35.4%
Sport stars’ Social   Media messages would change my attitude on the way I portray the team they   are associated with	23.3%	29.3%	35.4%	11.0%
If sports stars’   Social Media accounts were managed, I would stop following them	8.5%	18.3%	36.6%	35.4%
Certain sports stars   have bigger influence than others	1.2%	4.9%	22.0%	70.7%
Some sports star use   Social Media to damage their team’s reputation	14.6%	36.6%	40.2%	6.1%
Some Sport stars’   reputations make the team they play for stronger	9.8%	12.2%	41.5%	35.4%
Some sport stars’   reputations make the team they play for reputation stronger	7.3%	25.6%	45.1%	20.7%
Sport Stars should   face disciplinary measures if they use SM incorrectly	19.5%	14.6%	29.3%	35.4%
A strict SM policy   will help build the reputation of both	15.9%	20.7%	30.5%	31.7%

 

Questionnaire Summary 

To understand the individual versus organisation battle that is evident throughout this research, this questionnaire targeted sports fans that use social media for their sporting consumption. Under half (47.5% agree, n=80) follow their sports team first and more than three-quarters (76.9% agree, n=80) only follow personal sportspersons accounts because they are associated with the team they support. This emphasises the need to manage the “talent” as fans and supporters will follow these personal accounts out of loyalty.

Despite corporate communicators and sportspeople clear urgency to provide guidelines for social media, sports fans were clearly less enthused with more two-third (72.0% agree, n=80) claiming they would ‘unfollow’ social media accounts if they became “managed” and just over three-fifths (62.2% agree, n=80) believing a social media policy would help the organisation and the individual.

This number is still relatively high, but is not as high as the other two questionnaires (corporate communicators  and sportspeople). This, however, is slightly expected with fans wanting to know anything about their club and the players they follow. As mentioned before barriers are thinning between business and consumers and some strategic guidelines would help to maintain those barriers.

This is a challenge for sport PR.

Organisations rely heavily on fans and supporters for income and maintaining reputation, therefore social media accounts need to seen as personal but the content produced needs to be under a watchful eye. Media curation seems like a possibility but sport is very speculative and under the media spotlight, and for that reason it would be too much to handle. Content analysis showed some examples of certain sport stars’ use of social media and it shows clear indication and backs up the data the questionnaires have produced.

Please read and share the others in this series: 

Sport and corporate reputation is a tough mix: Part 1

Corporate communicators need to control their employees: Part 2

Sportstars do not understand corporate reputation: Part 3

Why do fans follow sportstars on social media: Part 4

Understanding corporate reputation from sportspeople: Part 3

Following the first two parts of this series (listed below), the blog moves on to focus on sportspeoples’ view of social media and its impact on corporate reputation. A small survey was produced and provided some interesting results and conclusions that are listed at the bottom of this post. 

Sport Corporate Communicators need to control their employees: Part 1

Corporate Communicators need to control their employees: Part 2

Questionnaire to Sportspeople

To influence the individuals’ understanding of social media and its output, you will need to understand their point of view. The second questionnaire targeted sportspeople through Twitter. Despite over 200 leading professionals being asked to complete the questionnaire across a range of sports, there were only 13 responses. Despite the relatively modest number, however, many interesting insights were evident in how the respondent sportspeople’s understanding of social media can help corporate communicators.

Figure 1 shows how their initial feedback on how they currently see social media and how they react to the media’s and fans’ feedback. From the data extracted, it appears that many of the sportspeople who completed the questionnaire are ‘indifferent’ for much of the speculation and stories.

A particular interesting statistic taken from this table is that almost half of the responses find ‘The press using my social media posts as stories’, ‘The press using my social media posts as speculation’ and ‘Fans replying to my posts’ sections ‘Somewhat Interesting’. This, in some ways, shows that the sportspeople are oblivious to corporate reputation and the consequences of their posts. Not only they use the accounts personally (92.7 agree, n=13), they pursue their own interests and appear have no interest or, more likely, knowledge about the impacts of corporate reputation or are they are encouraged to promotion the club they represent (92.3 % agree that they are under obligation to promote they club they represent, n=13).

Figure 1: Sportspeople’s Views of Social Media and how people react to them

Despite not being too concerned about corporate reputation, Figure 21 shows sportspeople believing that their personal reputation makes the clubs they represent reputation stronger (84.7% agree, n=13). This can speak volumes about the self-loathing of professional athletes, however, as they are the “talent”, swapped and traded for seven figure sums, they can have the opinion about being concerned only for themselves.

 Figure 2: Key Data Highlights from Sportspeople Questionnaire

	Strongly Disagree	Slightly Disagree	Slightly Agree	Strongly Agree
I use my Social Media accounts personally	7.7%	0%	15.4%	69.2%
I use my agent/agency to send out mediated messages	61.5%	7.7%	23.1%	0%
My organisation/ team provides strict Social Media policies	38.5%	15.4%	30.0%	7.7%
I use Social Media as and when I want	7.7%	30.8%	53.8%	0%
I’m under no obligation to promote the team I represent	7.7%	23.1%	69.2%	0%
What I post on Social Media will reflect the team I represent	7.7%	23.1%	38.5%	23.1%
I would be punished if I was to post something negative about the team I represent	30.8%	7.7%	15.4%	38.5%
Certain sport stars have bigger influence than others	0%	7.7%	0%	84.6%
Some sport stars use Social Media to damage their team’s reputation	38.5%	23.1%	23.1%	15.4%
Some sport stars’ reputations make the team they play for reputation stronger	7.7%	7.7%	38.5%	46.2%
Sport stars should face disciplinary measures if they use Social Media incorrectly	7.7%	53.8%	30.8%	0%
A strict Social Media policy will help build the reputation of both, the sport star and the team they represent	0%	0%	53.8%	38.5%

The most significant number to take out of the questionnaire is that 84.7% (n=13) of the sportspeople believe that the sports stars’ reputations actually make the team they play for reputation stronger (Figure 3). This shows clear indication that a social media policy needs to be introduced. If the sports stars of an organisation believe they are bigger than that of the organisation, matters need to be addressed and corporate communicators need to manage this.

Figure 3: Some Sport stars’ reputations make the team they play for reputation stronger

Comparisons between Corporate Communicators and their ‘Employees’

After analysing the data from the two initial questionnaires targeting sportspeople and corporate communicators, clear individual versus organisation friction is taking place. One of them includes the use of current Social Media guidelines. Corporate communicators (87.7% agree, n=59) believe that their organisations provide social media polices whereas only a few sportspeople (37.7% agree, n=13) believe that is the case.

Discipline is also a key theme that both parties disagree on. Almost two-thirds of corporate communicators (59.3%, n=59) believe that disciplinary measures should be in place for the irresponsible use of social media, whereas under a third of sportspeople (30.8%, n=13) believe the same.

This is not too surprising considering the sportspeople’s popularity and influence in social media. Nevertheless, the two most interesting and intriguing figures to come out of these questionnaires are that both corporate communicators (95% agree, n=59) and sportspeople (84.7% agree, n=13) agree that some employees’ reputations are bigger than that of the organisation.

If this were the case, social media policy should have been drawn up and be in circulation to take effect. Those corporate communicators in sport seem to be reluctant create and implement an internal policy to deal with any potential reputation issues. This, again, would help maintain the status and professionalism between the individual and the organisation.

Even more surprisingly, corporate communicators (71.2% agree, n=59) agree that a strict social media policy would help both the organisation and the individual, with the sportspeople, the overwhelming majority (92.3% agree, n=13) believe the same thing. Sportspeople clearly saw the value of a social media policy with a list of guidelines to help prevent discipline and misconduct charges. However, the importance of the organisation’s and the individual’s interaction with its consumers (fans) is vital.

Taking the statistics and understanding from these two questionnaires are from sportspeople and corporate communicators; it is vital to understand how the fan stakeholders feel towards the use of social media and how they react to it. The first step in doing this was to produce and disseminate a third and final questionnaire (Part 4).

Sport Corporate Communicators need to control their employees: Part 1

Corporate Communicators need to control their employees: Part 2

 

Thanks for reading. Feel free to share. 

Corporate Communicators need to control their employees: Part 2

Following the first part of this series of how sports stars can be detrimental to corporate reputation through using social media ineffectively, the second part looks at corporate communicators and how they see social media and its impact on corporate reputation.

Corporate Communicators want more transparent Social Media policies

By Steven Woodgate

To find deep, practical understanding of the industry, a survey specifically designed to target those who work in an aspect of corporate communications was created. Following a two-week timeframe to fill out the questionnaire, the data was collected with many interesting conclusions.

Figure 1: Wordle Word Cloud for Job Titles of Corporate Communicators

Discussions have been going on about who should manage the role of reputation management in organisations and particularly the role and specific job title of corporate communicators. As Figure 1 shows, and out of 59 recipients, the clarification of the job title within organisations remains very unclear.

Reputation management is not new and the lack of clarity over coming up with an appropriate and targeted job title will ultimately cause confusion. The two elements of the organisation and the individual clashing because of the use of social media will not become clearer with the lack of a job title.

As seen in the word cloud, the word ‘Manager’ appears to be common within the industry; however, there appears to be little that they actually ‘manage’. Reputation management, especially online, is difficult to ‘manage’ as it is hard to measure. Sports PR works in the same way. It is extremely interesting that there was no ‘Reputation Managers’ or similar job titles. Interestingly, there was no gender spilt (Male – 53%, Female 47%, n=59) for those who filled out the questionnaire, however there was a distinctive viable when it came to age. As mentioned before, the questionnaire was published online to target those who are involved actively with social media and online content, and it appears that the age group between 25-39 are those who are in charge with 61% appearing to take ownership of social media (Figure 2).

Figure 2: Age when it comes to Corporate Communications

With social media and reputation management being the key theme of this survey, many more conclusions and statistics were established. The survey was designed to broadly cover all platforms of business but the key and constant theme of this research, the individual versus the organisation, appears to be in the mindset of these corporate communicators. The results in Figure 3 proves, pretty conclusively, that some individuals’ reputations are bigger than that of the organisation’s (47.4% agree, n=59) and a social post directing from the individual will have a direct impact on reputation (98.3% agree, n=59).

Media curation may be a new concept, but with sport PR being largely involved with fan engagement, “talent” retention and marketing, it would be near impossible to analyse immediate content. Some of stakeholder theory suggesting to treat all stakeholders equally is, yet again, practically impossible to do.

Social media provides all sorts of influencers; although this is hard to define, the results from this survey indicate that corporate communicators do know that certain employees have more influence than others (96.6% agree, n=59). Therefore, it is essential that guidance and monitoring is put into place rather than leaving these employees posts anything they want and not receive the appropriate discipline.

With a good majority of corporate communicators agreeing (71.2% agree, n=59) that a strict social media policy should be put into place, corporate communicators should prioritise social media reputation management more in their workload. Sport organisations have further dilemmas as their ‘products’ to market and sale are indeed the “talent” therefore this social media reputation management need more clarity and work on. Creating the resource is not the issue, but having clear guidelines to social media, will help take some of the burden off.

Figure 3: Data Highlights from Corporate Communicators Questionnaire

Further to the result collaborated, it appears that social media is becoming a bigger area of responsibility for the PR professional. With 61% of corporate communicators taking responsibility and ownership of social media within their organisation, it appears there is still a sizable gaps from ‘ownership’ to ‘managing’ social media output.

Again, this raises the individual versus organisation debate resulting in corporate communicators not managing the social media output in line with online reputation. This may be something they cannot manage, but they can monitor it and be in a position to influence social media output by the individuals.

Figure 4: Which of these areas of PR/Communications do Corporate Communications have responsibility for?

The role of corporate communications is changing as well. As you can see from Figure 4, 52 out of the 59 believe social media is their responsibility and with no clear social policy in place, this job would become tremendously difficult. Despite social media being a big part of their role, data collected from the questionnaire about sending social media posts out with and without dialogue from senior management and research shows clear differences.

From the Figure 5, 52 of participants believe that reputation would be enhanced with mediated dialogue from senior management and corporate communicators rather than leaving it to the individual to post unsupervised. Over half also believe that is would boost employee and customer satisfaction if social media policy provided some guidance.

Figure 5: With and without dialogue, Corporate Communicators view on how social media posts will help or hinder reputation

Conclusion

This illustrated the need to implement a social media policy would be of great benefit to the organisation and its resulting impact on individuals to avoid conflict with their social media to use.

To understand this further, a questionnaire was sent to sportspeople (Part 3 coming soon).

Part 1: Sport corporate communicators need to control their employees

By Steven Woodgate

Rugby Finally Care About Reputation Management

It is fair to say that England Rugby has taken a battering following the fallout from this year’s World Cup. New Zealand may have been victorious in rugby but it was England who were victorious in the battle for column inches. It was a victory they did not need or want.

Martin Johnson’s side were criticised for drinking, dwarf-tossing, anti-social behaviour, and pretty much everything else and ruined what was supposed by a hopeful World Cup campaign. The fallout from the campaign was huge with The Times receiving conclusions from an internal report where it appeared most of the players and staff were clearly unhappy and resentful to how they were treated throughout the three months.

Mike Tindall’s capacity as well became under heavy scrutiny following his antics and retired from the role straight after the hopeless defeat to France. Now, under new management, England look to move out of this nightmare.

The problems began in earnest though. Scrumhalf Danny Care is the first to be hit with new discipline measures following some rather decent reputation management.

On the front of it, this may look solely a rugby decision, under the new interim boss Stuart Lancaster, but what sticks so oddly is that Care is dropped from the Six Nations for being caught drink-driving on New Year’s Eve. Previously, under the old regime, Tindall was awarded his capacity whilst serving his second drink-driving ban. Quite a contrast, isn’t?

Care won’t be the only one punished with such measures, as only three weeks ago Lancaster reprimanded the Harlequins man for being drunk and disorderly rather publicly. Johnson, a previous World Cup winner, barely condemned his squad’s antics in New Zealand, calling it ‘overblown’ and ‘boys being boys’.

Unfortunately, since the game turned professional in 1995, rugby’s professionalism in England is yet to catch up. Domestically, it still has somewhat of a semi-professional status with a structured wage-limit in place, where countries like Australia and France are able to pay bigger wage packets to attract the better players.

Perhaps for England Rugby’s reputation management, it will need to consider what is important in progressing forward. Football’s reputation and professionalism increased significantly with the revolutionary introduction of the Premier League.

Obviously this newly installed discipline in the RFU will provide better opinion from the public and may challenge many of the established players to be better behaved and begin representing their country more professionally.

The RFU went into ‘crisis management’ mode last November following The Times’ discovery and Chief Executive Ron Andrew came under extreme pressure to resign. However, he managed to stay and started to rebuild his reputation as well as England Rugby’s. He mentioned that he had to address a range of issues following “tough information”, but he believes that the level criticism can help England rugby improve.

Banning Care is a massive statement, not only for his manager but also for the RFU as a whole. Looks like the conclusions are beginning to take affect.