If you looked at 20 resources offering guidance for dealing with negative feedback on business-focused social media sites, you will find very similar rules:
- Respond quickly
- Address the situation
- Stay positive
In theory, this advice makes perfect sense. In reality, it doesn’t always work. Take one of our experiences for example.
Round 1: A young, vocal detractor posted a negative review on a client’s Facebook page. I would categorize it as a somewhat merited attack expressed in a very vengeful manner. When the post was discovered, we proceeded with the customary strategy:
- Responded promptly.
- Addressed the concern of the detractor, thanked him for bringing it to our attention, and provided some insight into what steps were being taken to resolve the perceived problem.
- Invited the detractor to contact the company (provided a name and number) to discuss any questions or concerns in person.
Textbook fix, right?
Result: Apparently, this particular book was a “choose your own adventure” volume—and the detractor chose an alternate ending. Within minutes of our client’s posted response, the detractor began a full-scale attack campaign, recruiting friends and family to join forces in harassing the company through Facebook. One negative comment turned into eight, which then turned into a photo album, leading to the grand finale—an “I Hate” Facebook page. Why did this happen, when we’d done everything “right”?
Round 2: We responded, again inviting the detractor to an in-person meeting to discuss concerns. Each direct response actually seemed to motivate the detractor to step up his smear campaign, leading to an increase in negative postings. We obviously needed a new strategy:
- Against all common advice, we did not post immediate responses to the continued negative comments. The attention only encouraged the detractor.
- Since each personal response fueled the fire, we addressed the perceived problem globally through status updates and addressed it to the entire Facebook community instead of responding personally to the detractor.
- We invited everyone in the Facebook community to contact the company if they had any questions or concerns regarding the perceived problem.
- We began proactively posting status updates about any and all steps or programs in place addressing the perceived issue.
Result: Brand ambassadors began speaking up, complimenting the company and posting positive reviews. The attack campaign fizzled. Since we became more proactive with our posts regarding the perceived problem, it has left little room for negative feedback. We continue to monitor the “I Hate” page, and activity there has significantly decreased.
In Conclusion: I have every confidence that the detractor will come back, but we are prepared. The standard steps for handling negative feedback on social media sites are a good starting point, but that is all they are … a starting point. The response an unhappy consumer may take to those steps is unpredictable. If things take a sharp turn toward the unexpected, you may have to take the time to re-evaluate your steps and pursue an unexplored path—one that is customized to your unique crisis. As we all know, the exceptions make the rules.
Crisis Communication Rules for Social Media – Open to Interpretation
If you looked at 20 resources offering guidance for dealing with negative feedback on business-focused social media sites, you will find very similar rules:
In theory, this advice makes perfect sense. In reality, it doesn’t always work. Take one of our experiences for example.
Round 1: A young, vocal detractor posted a negative review on a client’s Facebook page. I would categorize it as a somewhat merited attack expressed in a very vengeful manner. When the post was discovered, we proceeded with the customary strategy:
Textbook fix, right?
Result: Apparently, this particular book was a “choose your own adventure” volume—and the detractor chose an alternate ending. Within minutes of our client’s posted response, the detractor began a full-scale attack campaign, recruiting friends and family to join forces in harassing the company through Facebook. One negative comment turned into eight, which then turned into a photo album, leading to the grand finale—an “I Hate” Facebook page. Why did this happen, when we’d done everything “right”?
Round 2: We responded, again inviting the detractor to an in-person meeting to discuss concerns. Each direct response actually seemed to motivate the detractor to step up his smear campaign, leading to an increase in negative postings. We obviously needed a new strategy:
Result: Brand ambassadors began speaking up, complimenting the company and posting positive reviews. The attack campaign fizzled. Since we became more proactive with our posts regarding the perceived problem, it has left little room for negative feedback. We continue to monitor the “I Hate” page, and activity there has significantly decreased.
In Conclusion: I have every confidence that the detractor will come back, but we are prepared. The standard steps for handling negative feedback on social media sites are a good starting point, but that is all they are … a starting point. The response an unhappy consumer may take to those steps is unpredictable. If things take a sharp turn toward the unexpected, you may have to take the time to re-evaluate your steps and pursue an unexplored path—one that is customized to your unique crisis. As we all know, the exceptions make the rules.
2 Comments