Did you hear that the blue jean giant The Gap announced a new logo? Yeah, it didn’t create a blip on my radar either. I work in the tech biz, and I don’t shop at The Gap.

But what did get my attention is how it’s re-branding effort bombed (and was subsequently pulled) solely based on the public outcry on social media outlets.

There are many blog posts and news outlets weighing in on The Gap’s misguided design decision, and the stunning influence social media can have on corporate decisions. Some blogs even present the intriguing (if not a bit far-fetched) hypothesis that The Gap’s social media strategy was actually an ingeniously crafted publicity stunt formulated to increase holiday sales and bolster waning stock performance.

So was the The Gap’s decision to announce its new logo using Facebook and Twitter a public gaffe or social coup? President of Gap Brand North America, Marka Hansen believes they “did not go about this the right way.” Sorry Ms. Hansen, I disagree. To my mind, it is proof positive that when a company employs social media properly—intentionally or accidentally—it strikes gold.

What did The Gap get right?

1. They published the announcement on two different social media outlets instead of one. This lets them “manage the message” by combining Facebook’s robust and flexible platform, with Twitter’s “cut to the chase” schema and vast reach. In social media, two forums are always better than one.
2. They have the opportunity to glean far more information than focus groups and studies can ever deliver. Their study sample is The Gap’s most loyal customers and company watchers. Its demographic is worldwide. The responses are genuine and unvarnished. Best of all—it’s virtually free. If The Gap’s number crunchers are smart, they’ll catalog responses that go beyond opinions about the logo. There is gold in them there hills.
3. They quickly responded to public feedback by pulling the new logo and publishing a press release focusing on how their customers influenced in their decision. The company has even offered customers to submit their own designs going forward. Nothing fosters customer loyalty more than showing they are valued.

What did they do wrong? From the tenor of Ms. Hansen’s latest press release, it would seem that The Gap and its branding agency weren’t emotionally ready for such overwhelmingly negative feedback. That’s about all.

Maybe the whole logo idea wasn’t all it was cracked up to be. Perhaps the overwhelmingly negative feedback was more than the folks at The Gap expected. But, their social media strategy was a resounding success. It was done with the right intentions—if not a bit fearlessly. It gave them the feedback they needed. They responded with all the right messages. And most importantly—in the face of negative feedback they didn’t pack their bags and head home. Instead, they are gearing up for round two by exploring new ways to harness the power of social media. Now that’s the way to run a social media strategy.

The other day, I was thinking about the latest social media snafu HP.com’s Networking zone recently ran into. Its experience is an important lesson about how dangerous displaying the musings, and sometimes wrath, of the masses can be. This led me to ponder: what questions do Website teams need to ask themselves before deciding to pipe social media content onto their Website pages? Off the top of my head, four major questions come to mind:

What is the objective? Why are you planning to use social media in the first place? This isn’t to say that your Web team shouldn’t consider social media; only that you need to ask yourself some tough questions before you start. Is it to encourage conversation with customers? Generate leads? Master the wisdom of crowds? Prove your company is “with it”? If the latter is the answer, you are going down a dangerous path. On the other hand, if you are really looking for people to tell you what they think, be careful what you wish for. Expect the worst and plan accordingly.

How complex is the topic? This is where choosing the right social media tool is critical. Complex topics require two important things—character space and smart moderators.

Esoteric and incendiary topics, such as strategies, direction statements, or defense of “good ideas gone bad,” require space for participants to fully present their opinions, and for smart moderators to manage the conversation. For these discussions, blogs, forums, and FaceBook provide the best formats.

On the other hand, highly-focused topics that mention a company’s home-runs, such as what customers like best about a certain product or overwhelmingly popular Website features – or link readers to an important article or press release — will require less space and moderation since the posts will naturally be largely positive. In these cases, Twitter is a relatively safe bet.

Who will man the ramparts? Choosing and training the right moderators is the deciding factor in the success or failure of any social media engagement. Although this seems like a no brainer, the Web is littered with endless examples of interns and part-timers being sent in to do a professional’s job.

Remember this. In any social media discussion, the company’s moderators are the voice of the company—in essence, the new PR team. They are on the front lines facing the unvarnished opinions of customers, journalists, investors, general crazies – and competitors who want to spoil the soup.

This complexity means that being a moderator is a tough, and often thankless, job. It is also why it’s critical that people with the right temperament, education, and training are managing any type of social media discussion. Unprepared moderators—or none at all—allow the masses to define the company’s reputation and value proposition. Good moderators protect the company’s brand.

What is the probable (not best case) outcome? Did a product have serious glitches? Did financial projections fall woefully short? Most companies will shy away from social media to manage these events. In reality, social media is actually the perfect opportunity to set the story straight. This is where the executives rally the troops, craft their best “This is our finest hour” speeches, and moderators steel themselves to manage the damage. Planning for the best possible outcome leaves moderators flatfooted. Planning for the most realistic (or even worst) outcome gives the company the opportunity to send the right message and turn the tide of public opinion.

The cost of being cool

Although these four questions are likely to spur a multitude of other issues, one thing is clear. Social media is dangerous, wild, and highly unpredictable. That’s what makes it “cool”.

But, chasing “cool” without preparing for the real world is a costly mistake. Like all things Web, social media requires the types of complicated planning and cross-organizational coordination that can suck the excitement out of a project.

On the other hand, not doing your homework is sure to lead to a social media presence that is a nightmare for your company to manage, and a public venue for the aggravated and aggrieved. When this happens, social media ends up as a “cool” strategy that is very “un-cool” indeed.

When social networking sites hit the Internet, companies spent many, many months watching it with a wary eye. But once leading IT companies (such as Sun, Dell, and Cisco) took the leap, the race to integrate social media into a company’s marketing mix was on. This has led almost every company to declare social media as a major influence—if not the cornerstone—of its future marketing strategies.

Bold pronouncements aside, the reality is this: most companies are scared silly because they don’t have the faintest idea about how and when to use social media to their advantage.

They should be scared.

As a case in point, let’s consider how HP.com’s new “Change the rules of networking” campaign and associated Web page goes off the rails. This page launches the new face of HP Networking using the perfect combination of “hip & happenin’” content. Lightbox videos. Web 2.0 behaviors. Twitter. You name it.  With all these cool new ingredients, where could HP.com possibly go wrong?

Let us count the ways.

True to its new “voice of the market” strategy, HP.com is using Twitter feeds to create rich marketing content. Unfortunately, the “market” doesn’t seem very impressed. With so little space available for people to adequately state their case, the tweets amount to little more than insults and “happy talk” retweets by HP employees. Hardly the rich discourse and market endorsements HP had in mind.

Twitter formats make damage control difficult, if not impossible. It’s easy to hurl insults in 140 characters – and almost impossible to counter them in the same space. Twitter’s disconnected rolling dialogs also make it virtually impossible for any company to start a conversation and effectively connect the dots. The net result? A rolling critique of HP’s Network strategy on a campaign page intended to pitch HP as a change agent in the networking industry.

So much for using “the voice of the market” as the “hip & happenin’” way to create rich marketing content.

Real estate counts. Most companies practice their own forms of damage control by limiting their tweet rolls to a revolving line in the body of a main page (great for speed readers) or stuffing them in the right panel (perfect when you want to look “cool” but don’t really want visitors to read the tweets).

HP.com, in contrast, dedicates half of its page to these ongoing “conversations”. This is a perfect formula when the tweets are happy talk and kudos. Not so much when “market voices” are opining that Cisco is the better choice.

The Bottom Line | HP.com provides a cautionary tale for any company planning to use Twitter as “rich marketing content”.  Twitter is a horrible marketing platform that can slip out from under you at the drop of a hat.  Its 140 character format doesn’t allow people to fully state and justify their opinions, or allow company moderators to respond effectively. As important, these Twitter feeds demand full-time moderators. If they aren’t on your plan, consider it another reason to avoid Twitter like the plague.

And what about HP.com’s Change the Rules of Networking campaign and associated page? Think of this as a prime example of a social media hole—and why HP.com should stop digging.

Real people, real voices, real time

While the SMB & mid-size market are using social media to just get their name out to the masses, large companies are learning how to use social media & communities in tandem for a whole new purpose. And it is literally changing the face of IT.

Large IT companies don’t need to get their name out there. I mean, who doesn’t know IBM, HP, Apple, or Dell? I would bet that even your grandmother knows the name of one of these companies, even if she doesn’t know how to use a mouse. So, aside from using social media as a slick press release system, how do large companies use these outlets to their advantage?

The death of the faceless organization: For eons IBM has had the reputation of the faceless organization. In fact, it became so faceless that the phrase “blue suits” was coined to describe it. Well, those days are over—welcome the people that are IBM. Over the past 12 months, IBM.com has started publishing the names & faces of the managers & executives who steer IBM—the company, the vision, and the products.  This initiative is supported by its online communities, Facebook pages, and Twitter personas. Now IBM customers & fans can engage with IBMers real time, and hear the perspectives of IBM employees on an ongoing basis. Now IBM has many, many faces & voices—and many of them wear golf shirts.

What goes around comes around: Large companies are made of people, and people want to hear what others are saying about them. This is where the social networking part of the equation comes into play. Forums like Facebook, MySpace, and Twitter offer companies a view into the opinions, wants, and needs of its potential buyers and customers like never before. Just type IBM, HP, Dell, or Apple into the Facebook search engine and see how many pages show up. Or cruise these Websites for links back to their Facebook pages or Twitter profiles. These companies are learning that these forums are more than places to meet & greet. They are the largest-scale, lowest-cost testing forums and CSAT studies they could ever want.

To err is human to deliver spin control divine: Strategies that didn’t pan out. Products that don’t cut the mustard. Far reaching visions that never came to fruition. All the major companies have them, only now social media gives them the platforms to take wrong turns into new directions. Executives use blogs, Webcasts, and Podcasts to subtly shift their company’s visions to accommodate an ever changing business landscape. Meanwhile, product managers use blogs & forums to announce “new & improved features” (or in other words, “fixes for glitches”) in an upcoming product update—or in the worst of cases, fall on their swords. But no matter the topic, issue, or intent, all these social mediums give companies the flexibility to shift, craft, and hone their visions and image to align to current realities.

What do all of these strategies have in common? The power that social media gives people to change a company’s image, direction, and products—whether it is the company’s executives, product managers, customers, or prospects. The benefits of these strategies & forums are not limited to only the mighty few. Any company that is willing to use social media to open a dialog and listen to what people say can become the flexible and responsive organization that potential buyers and customers crave.

I think this is a brilliant assessment, and one that speaks directly to the organizational problems that already plague companies with a broad Web presence. This problem was perfectly summed up by an IBM manager when I asked her how IBM’s teams work with each other. “Don’t think of us as a nuclear Web family” she quipped, “think of us as a largely dysfunctional family of foster children.”

Is your social media marketing strategy destined to go the same way?

We’ve received several pings from readers who wanted to hear more based on Kenna’s post about tweeting for business. After three months in the Twitter box, I’m ready to weigh in on my observations — and share four pieces of advice from the peanut gallery.

This isn’t for sissies. Unless you’re a social butterfly by nature, business tweeting gets in the way of your day job. Unfortunately, if you don’t have consistent presence, your company tends to fall off the digital radar. This begs a conundrum worthy of a paraphrase from Hamlet: “Whether ’tis better to have an inconsistent Twitter presence or bag the whole concept?”  For me, the answer lies in the difference between volume and value.

Less is more. Companies that yak ad nauseum creates problems when you are on the receiving side of the Twitter fence. Based on my list of tweeting companies, less would certainly be more. Companies that bombard me with a constant stream of disconnected tweets makes it difficult for me to figure out what really matters to the company – which leads me to my third tweeting gripe.

Tell me something I want to know. The business Twitter landscape is becoming a vast wasteland where companies push “Google-esque” links instead of sharing knowledge or information in a teeny package. I’d rather know, for example, that a company received an award or launched a new product, than being inundated with links to general purpose articles and stories I don’t have time to explore. For business, tweeting should be all about creating the company’s brand one drip at a time, not proving that you can make it through a Harvard Business Review without going into a coma. Simply put, when business is the issue, your personal epiphany doesn’t create my need to know. This, in turn, leads me to my last peanut gallery entry.

Split personalities work best. The most effective Tweeters are those who have a business and personal persona – and keep them separate. This allows me to keep up with the business side of their world, and eliminates getting alerts when their 3 year old is successfully poddy trained. Sure, I appreciate that this is a milestone in their life. For me, too much information.

OK, I could change my opinions after another six months wading through the Twitter landscape — but I wouldn’t hold my breath.  That said, I’ll check in later as behaviors play out. After all, the Web is nothing if not a moving target.