It would be a mistake to think that social media is new. Certainly, using the Internet to tend a personal and professional network is state-of-the-art, but the behaviors, disciplines, and benefits of social media have been around as long as civilization. The central enabler for the development of communities, tribes, organizations, cities, countries and companies has always been the network and our ability to trust and work with others.

That’s why the skills that generations of people have developed long before the Internet was even conceived are so useful today. If one understands the essentials of how to communicate with others, to persuade them, to be personal with them – then one can make a social media strategy work. Without those skills, no matter how conversant one is with the capabilities of Twitter, Facebook, Linked In and YouTube it will be difficult, if not impossible to convert time spent on-line to positive outcomes in real life.

It would also be a mistake to think that a successful social media strategy can work anonymously. Even in a virtual world, a network is ultimately personal, and the participants must be faced directly and honestly by the owner. After all, trust is built on an understanding of who someone is, their point of view, their strengths and their weaknesses. Underneath the art and science of social media there has to be a real person who is willing to reveal themselves at an appropriate level. That does not necessarily mean revealing the details of a personal life, (that kind of revelation is best confined to intimate social circles), but there is a level of professional honesty and openness required to compel a network to follow, trust, care and buy whatever is being offered. That’s why corporate communications rarely satisfy a social network in person or online: they don’t reveal anything. Just like analysts wanting to know the real story behind an official press release, a social network needs more than the usual vague communiqué.

Of course, it’s easy to sympathize with any company that finds it difficult to do more than “corporate communications”. In order to please as many potential customers and investors as possible, they are compelled to design communications that avoid conflict of any kind. It’s a rational way to avoid alienating customers and investors: if one declares personal belief or a different opinion, there is always a risk that some percentage of your audience will not agree. Unfortunately, without a point-of-view there is little reason to pay attention in the first place. Conventional wisdom is safe content, but it can’t convert a network into buyers.

Social media is not without danger and yet that danger of disagreement must be faced. In recent articles, I have discussed the challenge of defining a network (see Define the Beast) of feeding it a regular, nutritious and provocative diet of high value content, (see Satisfy the Beast, Junk Food or Health Food and Feed the Beast: The Social Media Marketer’s Challenge), and getting the Beast to pay attention, and collaborate with you (see The Beast of Difference: Getting the Network to Pay Attention and Let the Beast Cry). In addition, it is important to personally face up to the Beast and allow that what you say may anger a portion of your network – and may even turn them away. However, those who remain will be much more likely to buy your ideas and your products.

At the dawn of the 21^st century, before blogs, social media, Facebook and Twitter were commonplace, I found myself in the position of an “accidental entrepreneur”. Out of work, and facing yet another recession with a jobless recovery, I made the decision to start a consulting practice. I had no capital, no clients and no pipeline, but I did have an insight. After years of working as a marketing leader for financial firms, I had noticed that much of what everyone did to “market” their companies wasn’t helping. A central assumption of sales and marketing is that one must aggressively push the positive benefits and features of products or services. Anything negative should be de-emphasized or even ignored in favor of the good news.

At one point, it dawned on me that the positive assumption doesn’t always hold true. In order to work, the potential buyer has to abandon their inherent and rational skepticism about a flawless product. They had to believe perfection was possible in order to believe the pitch. In the back of their minds, most people understand that everything has something wrong with it and that most sales and marketing pitches will never be completely honest. At best, they are seen as overly optimistic, and, at worst, intentionally misleading. I began to experiment with the idea of telling customers and prospects up front what was wrong with the company, the product or the service. Interestingly, they always believed whatever negative thing was claimed without skepticism – and without demanding proof. And when the negative was then used as a proof point for the positive, they also believed it. More importantly, they were then more likely to buy the product.

By telling the ugly truth, a company could become more credible and more worthy of trust. I found examples such as Southwest Airlines and GE Capital where this approach was used to drive sales, build customer loyalty, and grow powerful networks of supporters, buyers and investors. But telling this kind of truth isn’t exactly easy – as it defies what everyone assumes to be true. Going against the conventional wisdom starting with the bad news is daunting for anyone to consider. “You mean I need to sell by telling people what’s wrong with us?” It defies everything we think we know about marketing.

I wrote an essay, “The Truth as Marketing Tool”, and tried as best I could to describe how this concept works. After writing it, however, I hesitated about distributing the essay. It could put off many sales and marketing professionals who might disagree and perhaps even feel that it implied that their existing practices were a form of dishonesty. How could I send something out that might offend or push potential customers away? What if they didn’t hire me because we disagreed? I considered putting the article in a desk drawer and forgetting about it. After all, with some clients, I could just be quiet about this strange idea. If they wanted me to come up with more superlatives about their products and help promote them with the usual practices, I could keep my mouth shut and do the work, couldn’t I?

Maybe…but then I realized that if I managed to hide my point-of-view, those clients wouldn’t receive my best work. They likely wouldn't be satisfied, and my fledgling practice would be marred by stories of disappointed and unhappy clients. Hiding the essay would be a dis-service to them and to me. Isn’t it better if they knew what to expect before engaging me? Wouldn’t it be better if I focused on the kinds of clients who would get my insight, find it useful, and be very happy with the service I provided? If I believed that truth was the best marketing tool for clients, wasn't I obligated to tell the ugly truth as well? There was no real choice. I had to face my network openly and honestly if I wanted to build a practice. Since this was in a time before blogs – I crossed my fingers and sent the essay to everyone in my contact list.

Two weeks later, I had my first client. He read the article, it struck him that this might be just what his company needed – and he wanted help to adopt it in his company right away. That first client self identified himself as my perfect customer – he truly belonged in my network. Ever since that first client, all of my business can be traced to some kind of insight I shared with my network – whether it was through a blog, in e-mail or in person. Whenever I face the network – and allow it to potentially discover how it might disagree, I get business. At the same time, I gradually lose the people in the network that disagree with me – they stop answering my calls, stop opening my e-mails or unsubscribe from my blog. As difficult as it is to lose network members and to perhaps displease people, it’s most likely the best possible outcome. Better that they know the ugly truth about me before they are disappointed.

Face the Beast, honestly tell it what you think, and then it can engage with you and your business.