Is Your CEO On Social Media? If Not, Your Business May Be At Risk.

Roughly 60 percent of Fortune 500 CEOs are not active on any social media channel and fewer than 12 percent are active on more than one channel.

That’s surprising, especially given consumers’ overwhelming desire for transparency from businesses and business owners. Consistent headlines about data breaches and privacy concerns are surely to blame, leading 86% of Americans to say business transparency is more important today than ever before.

It’s no longer safe for businesses to stay silent on their values, business decisions, and political and social stances. Younger buyers, especially, are using digital transparency as a measuring stick to identify the companies they want to purchase from — and those they don’t.

That helps explain why an industry leader like Nike felt compelled to launch an advertising campaign with an athlete is polarizing as Colin Kaepernick. It’s simply a good business decision: some 86 percent of people are likely to take their business to a competitor when there’s a lack of transparency on social. (In fact, Nike’s sales surged in the days following the Kaepernick ad debut, suggesting that Nike’s competitors may be suffering from this very affliction.)  

CEOs are in a uniquely appropriate position to answer the consumer cry for business transparency on social media. Not only can they can speak to the rationale behind business decisions and give a compelling behind-the-scenes perspective, they can also share insights on industry trends that inspire consumer trust and interest.

Even so, nearly 90% of Fortune 500 chief executives are still missing the mark on social. They either don’t understand how social media supports business objectives or aren’t committed to using it effectively to achieve their goals.

That’s a risky situation for those businesses because a CEO’s reputation is directly responsible for 44% of a company’s market value. When you consider the impact on recruitment, corporate reputation, and stakeholder confidence, it becomes difficult to ignore the financial impact of an executive’s personal brand.

Sure, social media transparency is just one component of a powerful executive brand, but it’s an essential component. Not only do consumers want to know what a business stands for, they also want to know the same of the people running the company.

Transparency can even play a significant role in the long-term preservation of a business and its business owners. Think of it like an insurance policy: when brands are transparent and develop a history of transparency, nearly 90% of people are more likely to give them second chances after bad experiences and 85% are more likely to stick with them during crises.

At its core, a CEO’s social media strategy ought to appeal to the curiosities of its most important audiences, whether that be investors, consumers, or employees. According to a recent study by Sprout Social, when it comes to a CEO’s social media activity, consumers find the most value in the company’s reasoning behind business decisions, followed closely by industry thought leadership and inside looks at the company.

Though this type of information tops the charts when it comes to positively impacting consumers’ brand perception, executives with different priority audiences may find alternative content to be more effective. A focus on employee recruitment may necessitate sharing individual employee stories while a focus on investors may inspire more content about the CEO’s entrepreneurial experience and long-term vision.

Regardless of an executive’s target audience or social media focus, it’s important for their online activity to feel as authentic as possible. Whether CEOs choose to run their own social media profiles, manage it in-house or partner with a digital agency, their activity must feel relevant and representative. After all, most consumers set a higher standard of responsibility for business transparency on social media than they set for politicians, nonprofits, friends/family and even themselves.

Is that high bar due, in part, to the current lack of social transparency found among today’s Fortune 500 CEOs? Perhaps. Is there pressure for tomorrow’s executives to adapt or risk alienating their target consumers? Definitely.

Those willing to take their executive presence outside the boardroom and into the digital landscape are primed to enjoy a distinct competitive advantage. After all, simply posting on LinkedIn is enough to make you more socially transparent than the majority of today’s most successful CEOs.

Seeking Funding? Top Investors Reveal What They Look For Online Before Meeting Business Owners

Raising a round of funding is no easy task. There’s a lot to worry about and a lot to prepare for. Your pitch deck needs editing (again), there’s always one more networking event to attend, and you still need to prepare answers to tricky questions about your business.

You also need to land meetings with investors. That’s easier said than done, especially if you don’t have a strong online presence.

Consider this: 65% of internet users see online search as the most trusted source of information about people and companies. (That’s a higher level of trust than any other online or offline source.)

I polled dozens of top investors on their online search habits as they are deciding to take meetings with business owners. Some simply peruse LinkedIn and Google’s page-1 results for a quick first impression; others go much deeper, reading thought leadership articles, scanning social media profiles, and previewing news articles to get a more comprehensive view.

Among the wide range of answers, one thing became absolutely clear: entrepreneurs and founders with authentic and impressive online presences will find it much easier to land investor meetings than those without.

I’ve compiled answers below from eight top investors to use as reference when it comes time to raise funding for your own business. If your online presence needs improvement, you’ll want to review this entrepreneur’s guide to online reputation management and this comprehensive guide to personal branding.

James Joaquin

James Joaquin is the co-Founder and Managing Director at Obvious Ventures. James has been working in venture capital since 2007 and has invested in a wide range of mission-driven startups including Plum Organics (acquired by Campbell’s Soup), TenMarks Education (acquired by Amazon), and Opower (IPO April 2014).

How often do you look businesses and business owners up online? And at what point in the process?

Joaquin: Every minute of every day we're looking up businesses online. The triggers are either to gain more information on a company that has contacted us, or to research leading companies in a business and/or tech area that we're focused on.

What things specifically do you look for? Both good and bad?

Joaquin: We look at a number of factors, including:

• Background of the team.
• Their points of view or thought-leadership pieces published online, at places like Medium.
• Products, customers and accomplishments of the business. If the company has already launched a consumer product, we look online for consumer sentiment and reviews (places like Amazon, Instagram, Facebook, and Twitter).
• Which firms and individuals have previously invested.

How deep of a search do you typically do? Are we talking just Page 1 of Google? Page 3 and social channels?

Joaquin: In addition to the points above, we use LinkedIn as an efficient way to better understand both current and former employees of the company.

What kinds of things have impressed you to the point of definitely wanting to continue the conversation? On the flip side, what kinds of things have been an immediate turn off?

Joaquin: We look for passionate, purpose-driven teams that are reimagining industries in a world positive way. When we find the intersection of profit and purpose, that excites us. A clear lack of authenticity is a turnoff.

Nitesh Banta

Nitesh Banta is an angel investor and the CEO of B12. Nitesh previously co-founded Rough Draft Ventures and was an investor at General Catalyst. He’s invested in dozens of companies including Handy, Boxed, Grammarly, and Mark43.

How often do you look businesses and business owners up online? And at what point in the process?

Banta: I always look up businesses and entrepreneurs before meeting them. I generally do this before accepting a meeting and again before an initial meeting or call. If I end up doing subsequent meetings or diligence I will do an even deeper search online.

Looking up an entrepreneur is a key part of my job as an investor to ensure I am prepared and using an entrepreneur’s time wisely. I would hate to use meeting time asking questions I could clearly answer by spending a few minutes doing research online.

What things specifically do you look for? Both good and bad?

Banta: Initially, I look at the website of the business. I want to understand how the owner positions the business and how far along the company is in terms of team development, customers and product.

I also look up the LinkedIn and personal website of the founders to understand their experience and any mutual connections we might have. Next I will look up their Crunchbase or Angel.co profiles to get a sense of funding history. Finally, I may quickly browse something like Google news to see if there is recent press.

As I evaluate an investment further, I will more diligently look up competitors in the space, reviews from customers and employees and press about the company and founder to ensure there are no warning signs that might make this a bad investment.

How deep of a search do you typically do? Are we talking just Page 1 of Google? Page 3 and social channels?

Banta: My searches get deeper as I go further in the investment process. Before a first meeting I check out the key web presences mentioned above and I will rarely get beyond the first page on Google or initial postings on social. As I get closer to an investment, I will go deeper to make sure the story I hear from an entrepreneur is consistent with reality.

What kinds of things have impressed you to the point of definitely wanting to continue the conversation? On the flip side, what kinds of things have been an immediate turn off?

Banta: A well-designed website that makes a product stand out goes a long way. In addition, the type of people involved with the company (team members, investors, advisors and customers) provide social proof that the company has momentum. Finally, I want to feel like there is a compelling founder narrative to give me an understanding of why a founder is uniquely able to solve the problem they are going after.

Having a really bad product trial experience can be a big turn off. Similarly negative customer reviews or employee reviews are generally a bad sign. Finally, if the overall narrative of the company or founder seems undifferentiated, I would be less excited to take a meeting.

Anything else you'd be willing to share about that process?

Banta: Looking up a business online is a really efficient way to make sure you are taking the right meetings and making the most of those meetings. I am confident I can do initial online research in under 10 minutes, which makes a world of difference when vetting an opportunity.

Sue Heilbronner

Sue Heilbronner is the co-founder and CEO of MergeLane, the investment fund focused on companies with at least one female in leadership. MergeLane has made 37 investments since 2014, including Havenly, Mapistry, Pana, Shinesty, and TomboyX.

How often do you look businesses and business owners up online? And at what point in the process?

Heilbronner: I always look up business owners and founders online, whether they are looking for potential investment, a connection to me, or a meeting. My first due diligence step is LinkedIn.

What things specifically do you look for? Both good and bad?

Heilbronner: If I’m focused on investment possibilities, I am first and foremost looking for indicators that the person has been a superstar in other places in her life. This can show up as educational reputation, honors received in school, promotions received in prior roles, or success in a previous startup. The indicators vary with age, but I’m essentially asking myself “has this person totally shot the lights off in her life?”

I don’t know that there’s much “negative” I’m looking for. Extreme job hopping might be an indicator of someone who might bail on a company if the going gets tough. I pay attention to poor writing, syntax, and sub-par communication skills.

Lastly, I will say that I also am running a personal filter that is something like “would this person be interesting to me?” That’s not the ultimate filter for an investment, of course, but it might be an initial filter to lead me to put my attention on a person or a company.

How deep of a search do you typically do? Are we talking just Page 1 of Google? Page 3 and social channels?

Heilbronner: LinkedIn gets a full background review. If someone is especially interesting, Page 1 of Google and Twitter.

What kinds of things have impressed you to the point of definitely wanting to continue the conversation? On the flip side, what kinds of things have been an immediate turn off?

I end up looking up a lot of people who are earlier in their careers because as a part of my fund I focus more on startups and founders than I do, say, on fundraising (my partner handles that). I am attracted to people at this stage who have created opportunities, whatever that means. Perhaps they’ve chosen an unlikely path, or they’ve been in the Peace Corps or AmeriCorps in combination with being at the top of their college class.

I also love working with athletes. It’s not critical that someone be a Division 1 collegiate athlete, although that’s fun to see. I just like people who “get” sports and competition. I think sports breed competitiveness and tenacity, and these are key success indicators in my book for building a great company and a great career.

Lauren Jupiter

Lauren Jupiter is a Co-Founder and Managing Partner of AccelFoods, an investor in disruptive food and beverage companies, backing its portfolio brands with industry access, expertise, and infrastructure. AccelFoods has invested in over 30 innovative brands, including Aloe Gloe, Four Sigmatic, and Kidfresh.

How often do you look businesses and business owners up online? And at what point in the process?

Jupiter: One of the first things we do when considering making an investment in a company is to check out the company’s website. Websites provide a glimpse into everything from a company’s brand identity and engagement with consumers, to how management prioritizes various channels of trade.

We always perform a full background check on brand founders with every transaction. Because we typically partner with early stage brands, we are investing in founders and management teams just as much as we are investing in companies, so we need to do our due diligence in researching people behind a brand, not just financial and legal info. One of the first steps of this diligence process is performing a Google search on the founder(s) and/or management and reviewing their social media presence, like LinkedIn.

What things specifically do you look for? Both good and bad?

Jupiter: When it comes to the brand, we would hope that, even if the company is small, it has a solid online presence and can be easily found in an online search. We like to see companies building an authentic brand and fostering a digital community of brand loyalists based on strong online content. We also want to make sure that what the brand stands for is aligned with AccelFoods’ own values as a brand.

In the early days, it can be very hard to separate a brand from its founder. A founder’s personal brand can be an extremely positive asset in building a company brand, as it can help reinforce the authenticity and passion that is so important to consumers today.  

That being said, we also want to make sure there are no red flags, with either the brand founders or the company itself. Bad press, litigation, or poor business track records (reputation) can be challenging, particularly when we are just getting to know someone. We expect our entrepreneurs to exemplify the highest standard of professionalism and quality and that starts long before our investment.

How deep of a search do you typically do? Are we talking just Page 1 of Google? Page 3 and social channels?

Jupiter: A quick Google search, especially the “News” results, can be very revealing. When it comes to the founders, how they portray themselves publicly and their own personal brand can have an impact on their likelihood for investment, be it from AccelFoods or other investors down the road. In the same way that a potential employee would put their best foot forward on social media, an entrepreneur seeking capital should too.

Instagram, Twitter, and Facebook are incredibly powerful tools to connect with consumers. Brands with a high number of followers, but little engagement, such as comments or likes, can come across as less authentic than brands with fewer followers but higher levels of engagement. We look for quality, not quantity, when evaluating a brand’s online presence the same way we do when we evaluate a brand’s retail footprint.

What kinds of things have impressed you to the point of definitely wanting to continue the conversation? On the flip side, what kinds of things have been an immediate turn off?

Jupiter: Early-stage brands need to be good storytellers. Having an engaging website that clearly states what the product is, its differentiation, and how it fits with your lifestyle is key for Millennial consumers.

We love seeing high quality content and engagement with followers, particularly for products with unique ingredient profiles or go-to-market strategies that require more consumer education than your typical consumer brand might.

Anything else you'd be willing to share about that process?

Amazon can also be incredibly useful when gauging product and company quality. Scrolling through reviews offers an insightful look into a consumer’s experience with a brand and its product.

Kyle Nakatsuji

Kyle Nakatsuji is the co-founder and CEO of Clearcover, a new data-driven auto insurance startup. Previously, he co-founded the VC team at American Family Insurance, where he and his team invested in promising startups at the intersection of technology and risk management including Ring, Life360 and Revolv (acquired by Google).

How often do you look businesses and business owners up online? And at what point in the process?

Nakatsuji: Early and often. Venture capitalists typically start looking at businesses' and business owners' online presence before the first meeting to prepare, and continue to do so throughout the entire process, as they learn more about the networks of people and companies surrounding the company they're evaluating.

What things specifically do you look for? Both good and bad?

Nakatsuji: When I was on the VC team at American Family Insurance, the biggest thing I looked for was data to back up the overall thesis behind the investment. For instance, finding out that a founder had less experience in data science than you initially thought might seem bad. However, if your overall thesis on the business didn't hinge on the founder having an extensive knowledge of data science, then it's not necessarily considered good or bad -- it's just data, which is never a bad thing to have a lot of when looking to potentially invest in a company.

How deep of a search do you typically do? Are we talking just Page 1 of Google? Page 3 and social channels?

Nakatsuji: As a VC, I usually looked at Google results and LinkedIn profiles before meeting with founders. If they're technical, I also made sure I looked at GitHub, too. During the entire process, I spent time looking at both the business I was considering investing in and their competitors, employees and former employees.

What kinds of things have impressed you to the point of definitely wanting to continue the conversation? On the flip side, what kinds of things have been an immediate turn off?

Nakatsuji: I was always impressed by founders that had a history of study or analysis of the area they're trying to fix because it shows they were committed to the problem in a deeper way, and that it wasn't just a "spur of the moment" opportunity for them. For me, an immediate turnoff was finding facts or evidence that directly contradict what a founder stated in the past. For instance, if the work they did at a prior employer didn't align with the work they were doing and trying to do at their startup, that was a red flag for me. There's a big difference between a debatable hypothesis and misrepresentation.

Gil Beyda

Gil Beyda is the Managing Director of Comcast Ventures, the VC affiliate of Comcast Corporation. He has invested in B2B startups including Demdex (acquired by Adobe) and Divide and Invite Media (both acquired by Google).

How often do you look businesses and business owners up online? And at what point in the process?

Beyda: I always look up entrepreneurs online before meeting them. I start with LinkedIn to see their background and then try to find places where they might blog, like Medium.

What things specifically do you look for? Both good and bad?

Beyda: I look for their qualifications and experience. Plus, I like to see that they are visionaries who have built networks over their careers.

How deep of a search do you typically do? Are we talking just Page 1 of Google? Page 3 and social channels?

Beyda: Initially I'll just do a cursory search, but as we enter into the diligence phase for a potential investment, we'll go deep and try to find anything and everything that is out there -- hopefully not finding anything that might question the character of the founding team.

What kinds of things have impressed you to the point of definitely wanting to continue the conversation? On the flip side, what kinds of things have been an immediate turn off?

Beyda: We are impressed if an entrepreneur has a long history of blogging and offering important insights into various areas of professional interest. Thought leadership is important.

Anything else you'd be willing to share about that process?

Beyda: If we decide to invest in a company, we'll also do background checks on key members of the team. Nobody's background is perfect, but we would like not to be surprised.

Jeff (J.D.) Davids

Jeff (J.D.) Davids has completed over $1 billion dollars of investment deals including angel investments, venture capital deals, corporate ventures, acquisitions & IPOs. He has served on the management teams of 8 VC-backed startups with 6 successful exits, and produces and hosts a series of expert videos, workshops and programs entitled SmartMoney Startups.

How often do you look businesses and business owners up online? And at what point in the process?

Davids: We search companies and executives online 100% of the time.  

What things specifically do you look for? Both good and bad?

Davids: We do an initial screen before we agree to take a meeting. We save ourselves a lot of time by not taking meetings with people whose online profiles do not demonstrate active forward progress of the company. We filter out a big chunk of people who never get a meeting because their online profiles did not reflect that they had industry-leading technology and/or solutions with a "tribe" of supporters engaging with them online.

No tribe, no progress, no investment, no meeting.  

How deep of a search do you typically do? Are we talking just Page 1 of Google? Page 3 and social channels?

Davids: We scrub profiles in the following order:

• Company website with Team Page: This is the #1 place to see if they have a solid team that is well respected in the industry. If they only list the CEO, that's a red flag because they aren't sharing credit with anyone else. Easy to eliminate those.
• LinkedIn: We look at the profiles of the management team, the company, and any advisors. I look to see how many articles they have posted (an indicator of being a thought leader), and if they have any recommendations from colleagues.  
• AngelList & Crunchbase: Do I recognize the names of anyone affiliated with the company? Do they have a good reputation in the industry, and do I know them? If I see a profile with just the CEO and a company profile and no other connections, they either aren't building a tribe of supporters, or they aren't plugged in to them online. Either way, the CEO needs to be creating a "movement" that will attract people to support the company and rapid adoption of its products and services.   
• Google Search: I Google search someone's name to see if they are being written about in the press and to ensure that they don't have a troubled past.

What kinds of things have impressed you to the point of definitely wanting to continue the conversation? On the flip side, what kinds of things have been an immediate turn off?

Davids: If the founders are connected to someone I know who has a good reputation -- as an investor, an advisor, or any other role in support of the company -- this indicates that they have "social capital." You don't have to be "in the club," but if you have made positive contact with someone with a good reputation in the startup circles that I travel with, that elevates you from an "unknown entity" to a "somewhat known entity." I can easily call that person and ask a couple of quick questions to get a good gut check.

What turns me off is people that list 15 patents and how amazingly brilliant they are but no-one is connected to them. A company webpage where the CEO is the only one listed indicates that the culture there is not optimized for collaborative team work.  

Dennis Joyce

Dennis Joyce is an investor across multiple asset classes including commercial real estate, equities, and various alternative investments. He is an active member of Seattle’s Alliance of Angels and Puget Sound Venture Club and sits on the screening committee of both groups. His angel investments include Ripl, Blokable, Visual Vocal, Bluhaptics, and CityBldr.

How often do you look businesses and business owners up online? And at what point in the process?

Joyce: I look up businesses and business owners 100% of the time during due diligence on a deal. I don’t have time to search on every pitch I hear, but if I am at all intrigued and would like to continue a relationship with a founder, I will be connecting via LinkedIn, Twitter, FB and every other format to stay close. I’m your new best friend.

What things specifically do you look for? Both good and bad?

I want to know things like “what is your art,” or “what is your hook,” or “what is your angle.” I’m trying to determine what a future leader is bringing to the world that it desperately needs. I’m looking for that “it” factor.

I look for how many followers they have and how consistent they are with their message. I want to see how committed they are to this business. I want to know the depth of their domain expertise. I try to get an idea of the character of a founder and the circles in which they travel. It’s good to see a future thought leader express themselves in places like Twitter and on LinkedIn and Facebook. A founder needs to balance having a strong voice but must also be focused online. The best founders express their character in their work, but do not let it get out of hand.

How deep of a search do you typically do? Are we talking just Page 1 of Google? Page 3 and social channels?

I will follow on Twitter and LinkedIn. I try to dig into Google and see if there are news articles and will go even deeper and try to read anything I can find, even old blog posts. I will subscribe to YouTube and Facebook channels. I am a huge believer in marketing through these channels and I want to see how well a company is growing their audience in these arenas.

If the founder has an online hobby (like a mixtape DJ or geek stuff) I will try to delve into that deeper. At the end of it all, I am about to begin what is hopefully a long-term relationship with another person and their company, so I need to learn as much as I can about this person and the team.

What kinds of things have impressed you to the point of definitely wanting to continue the conversation? On the flip side, what kinds of things have been an immediate turn off?

Hard question. Of the thousands of pieces of information I am digesting, it is hard to determine things that are turn-ons. I will say a founder’s ability to self-promote and generate interest, get press, attract followers on Facebook or YouTube are the most impressive. That signals to me the founder has the ability to stand up and represent a product or company. I also try to get a sense of how a founder reacts to criticism and rejection because that comes with the territory and needs to be managed.

A turn-off for me is a particularly heavy-handed affiliation to one cause or another that interferes with the product one is selling. We are all guilty of turning others off from time to time, but it is very important for founders to show class and dignity.

Another turnoff is being boring. If I wanted to read a person’s boring tweets about their latest Uber ride, I’d follow more VCs on Twitter. That’s why they are VCs and not founders. Be yourself and be interesting.

Anything else you'd be willing to share about that process?

When I invest in a founding team or a product I am building a multi-year relationship with them. They are becoming part of my family. It is way more spiritual than most people think. People need to be thoughtful about how they portray themselves online. It is important to be the best version of themselves whenever possible.

Originally published on Forbes.

Ryan Erskine is a Senior Brand Strategist at BrandYourself, where he helps people take control of their online presence. Visit his website, follow him on Twitter, and read his book here.

What The Harvard Meme Students Can Teach Us About The Reputation Economy

In June, Harvard withdrew admissions offers from 10 students who exchanged offensive, obscene and hateful memes in a private Facebook group called “Harvard memes for horny bourgeois teens.”

You might be tempted to shake your head and chalk this up to immaturity, but it’s not just college kids being held accountable for their digital posts. Remember the woman who lost her job over an insensitive AIDS tweet? And earlier this year, a dean at Yale was fired for inflammatory and hateful reviews that she posted on Yelp.

If one thing is clear, it’s that we’re all becoming much more vulnerable to online blunders that can ruin our careers. Already, 50% of US adults say their Google results aren’t positive and that number is bound to increase as we live more and more of our lives online.

The scary thing is that, as our online vulnerability has increased, so too has our reliability on digital searches and screenings — both manual and automated — to make important decisions. Depending on the study, somewhere between 30% and 40% of college admissions officers admit to screening social media accounts to learn more about their applicants. And 30% said they had found info online that had negatively affected an applicant’s prospects.

College admissions officers aren’t alone. Today, 75% of HR departments are required to look candidates up online before offering them an interview. And 70% use social media to screen candidates, up from 11% in 2006. With access to tools that help automate this screening process, can you really blame them? Walmart receives 5 million job applications per year. Even if you only spent 5 minutes per application, it would still take you 205 years to get through every application before you even held a single interview.

Customers are following suit. Even when consumers start the buying process with a referral, Google is the very first place they look to do their due diligence. Online search has become the most trusted source of information about people and companies -- a higher level of trust than any other online or offline source.

The Rise of the Reputation Economy

These trends aren’t going to reverse anytime soon. As data aggregators become more powerful and digital information about our reputations becomes more readily available, we can expect our online reputations to play a bigger and bigger role in whether or not we land important clients, business deals, or job interviews. Even the White House is exploring what it would look like to make “social media screening” a part of the vetting process for immigrants to enter the country.

With our personal and corporate digital reputations so heavily scrutinized during purchasing decisions and big life moments, you might find yourself drawing parallels to how banks and credit card companies use credit scores to make their decisions on rates and loans. The difference is that, as we become savvier at retrieving and analyzing digital footprints, the impact of your online reputation is likely to play a much larger role than a credit score ever could.

Think of it this way: the average young person today will switch jobs 12 times in their career. That’s a new job (and another reputation screening) every three to four years of our professional lives. And by 2020, 40% of the US workforce will be working freelance on the side. All in all, more than 60 million people will consistently rely on the power of their personal brands and online footprint to further their careers and bring in a steady income.

Unlike any generation before, today’s employees must consistently pitch themselves to the next employer. (Hence, the rise of LinkedIn.) Any skills you acquire need to be showcased and visible, both for human and automated screeners. The people that figure out how to showcase themselves well for digital screenings will earn more opportunities. Those that don’t will miss out and wonder why they’re getting passed over.

Online Privacy Offers a False Sense of Security

Importantly, the reputation economy goes far beyond what is searchable and public.

The Harvard students shared memes in a private group message on Facebook, and the posts still ended up in the hands of admissions officers. How did that happen?

It’s simple, really -- someone shared them. Even if you believe in the general goodwill of the tech corporations that host all this data, your online posts and messages are only as private as the people you share them with. (One lesson we can take away from today’s political climate is that private emails have a funny habit of getting unwanted public attention.)

And don’t forget that apps like Snapchat have blanket permission to “store and distribute” your drunk and nude selfies — you agreed to it in the terms and conditions — and Facebook has admitted toplaying games with your privacy settings, offering up your “private” account to potential friends by using your phone’s GPS data.

Online privacy offers a false sense of security because it lulls us into thinking we can post, share, message, or email whatever we want online without repercussions.

My advice? Don’t post or share anything online that you wouldn’t want your customers or employers seeing.

Your Online Presence Can Be a Valuable Asset

When people hear horror stories like this one, their first reflex is to hide. Some folks change their name on Facebook or start spending less time on social media.

It’s a good idea, but unfortunately, it doesn’t solve the main issue, which is that colleges, consumers and employers are all using online reputation screenings as an integrated part of their decision-making process.

Your online reputation is the information people (and machines) find about you online, so hiding behind privacy settings -- or not posting anything at all -- actually puts you at risk. If a hiring manager’s automatic screening tool can’t find anything about you online, it’s an easy reason to move onto the next candidate. (57% admit to doing this.) When clients Google you and can’t find anything about you or your business, they’re just one click away from your competitors.

So while those Harvard students were using Facebook to spread hateful messages, remember that you can choose to use your digital presence to build identity capital, support your career and drive revenue.

Be smart about how you position yourself online. It may be your ticket to success, and it doesn’t require a Harvard education.

Tired Of Skimming Through Identical Resumes? Try This Instead.

I don’t know about you, but my eyes start to glaze over as soon as I pick up a resume. All those one-pagers with tight formatting, impressive-sounding titles, bullet points with powerful action verbs — it’s enough to make you crazy.

Resumes seem like a great idea.. until it’s time to actually hire someone. That way of sorting prospective workers may be effective for weeding out the careless (a-ha, a typo!) but it makes it extraordinarily difficult for companies to find standout employees. On paper, the clock-in-clock-out types look the same as the standouts — they have the same experiences, same job titles, and same responsibilities. It becomes impossible to distinguish between the passionate and indifferent, motivated and unmotivated, culture fits and rotten apples.

But those distinctions matter. My suggestion? Put down the polished resumes and try Googling your job applicants instead. You’ll get much more valuable information, and you’ll find it on your own terms.

Here’s exactly what you should be looking for:

Red Flags

There’s a reason 75% of HR departments are already required to search job applicants online. It’s a far more effective way to find those exceptional employees than a piece of paper. It’s also a more instructive method for finding red flags than a polished resume — 70% have rejected applicants based on info they find online.

The first page of search results are a great place to start. Take a quick skim and see if anything weird stands out. If you find a website and active social media properties, you can probably move on. But if you find any red flags — legal issues or negative press, perhaps — you might want to think twice. It’s not to say a bad search result is a reason to automatically reject an applicant, but it’s certainly worth looking into more.

Next, move on to images and public social media profiles. Do you find loads of drunk college photos and inappropriate pictures from Spring Break? Do they tweet, share and comment using offensive language? Do they bash their current employer, insult others and get involved in controversial topics?

Your employees represent your company online, so you’ll want to be careful before hiring someone with this kind of questionable material. Again, it’s not necessarily a reason to reject an applicant on the spot, but you’ll want to proceed with caution.

Unique Value

A job applicant’s online footprint is one of the easiest ways to locate their unique value-add for your company.

If they have their own website, that’s a great place to start. A personal website is a sign that your applicant takes their online presence, job search, and career growth seriously.

So take a quick look around. If they have a blog, read a few posts to get a feel for their writing style and thought process. If they have a portfolio, it could be the easiest way to gauge their skills and actual output on previous projects.

See what other nuggets of info you can dig up. Take a look at their press or awards page — if they have one — to see if anything stands out. Have they been published on top tier publications? Perhaps that’s a connection your company can leverage. Have they been mentioned in trade magazines? Have they published a book? That kind of credibility and expertise might be helpful to have on staff.

Next, explore their social media channels. A large and engaged audience could be a massive benefit for your company. The research shows that content shared by employees receives 8 times more engagement than content shared by brand channels. And brand messages are re-shared 24 times more frequently when posted by an employee versus the brand’s social media channels.

Don’t underestimate the value of a huge and engaged social media following. That network and level of reach comes in handy when it’s time to spread the word about new job openings, important company updates, or that latest piece of press.

Personality and Culture Fit

Don’t wait until the interview to gauge your job applicant’s personality and potential fit with your company culture. An initial look through someone’s social media is often enough to give you a sense if someone is worth pursuing or not.

Look through visual mediums like Facebook and Instagram to get a snapshot into their personal life. Check out their Twitter and LinkedIn to see what articles they’re reading, what stories they’re sharing, and what thoughts pop into their heads.

And if you still feel like you’re missing some high-level chronological understanding of this person’s career experience, just check out LinkedIn. It’s the internet’s functional equivalent of a resume and has the added benefit of providing a full list of other eligible applicants if this one doesn’t work out.

Originally published on Forbes.com.

The Biggest Mistake Businesses Make On Social Media

As a business owner, you’re looking at social media marketing like any other initiative — you’re keen to get involved, but only if it offers clear ROI for your business. And so you go on to make the biggest mistake you could possibly make on social media: you try to cash out too soon.

“But wait a minute,” you say, eyes squinting. “If I’m investing in social media for my business, isn’t the whole point to make my money back?”

Yes! But the worst way to do that is to explicitly sell your products to people before you’ve provided them any value.

People use social media to get news, to follow friends, and to start conversations, so don't be surprised if you find it difficult to fit in with your self-promotional sales content.

A business that uses social media just to shout about their own product or service is like that one kid that won’t stop splashing in the pool, even after they’ve been asked to stop. All the other kids shake their head and share a knowing look, stepping farther and farther away to leave you a wide enough radius to splash by yourself.

You don’t want to splash solo. You may actually get some folks wet, but you also piss a lot of people off.

So how do you effectively engage others on social media and spark some real conversations? How do you build an engaged audience that will want to actually purchase from you long-term?

Many experts will have you believe the answer is pull the attention off yourself and share other peoples’ content. A few examples:

• The Golden Ratio (30/60/10) suggests 30% of the content you share should be content you create, 60% should be curated from elsewhere, and 10% should be promotional with calls to action.
• The Rule of Thirds suggests your social media updates should be evenly split between content that’s A) about or by you B) curated from others and C) personal interactions that build your brand.
• The 4-1-1 Method recommends four pieces of content curated from others, and one retweet for every one self-serving update.

This certainly appears to be an improvement. If the goal is to use social media to provide value to your target audience and spark conversations, then sharing the very best content from experts in the industry would be a sound route to go. (At least the other kids will play with you in the pool, rather than leaving you alone!)

But let’s not forget your whole goal of using social media. You’re looking to get a return on your investment. You want to drive people back to your website as much as possible so you can send them down your sales funnel. How can you do that if you’re mostly sending them to other experts’ sites and other businesses’ content?

In other words, why not create and share your own valuable content and turn your business into the go-to expert?

To build an audience for yourself, you have to provide some sort of unique value. You need to have a compelling reason for others to follow you, engage with you, like your content, and link to your website. As Gary Vaynerchuk says, you need to give, give, give without expectation.

Of course this isn’t something that happens with one article, one video, or one white paper. It’s a frame of mind, a holistic framework that encompasses how you work as a business owner.

If you can create a large enough reservoir of truly valuable content for your target audience, you’ll have plenty of fuel to drive consistent activity across a number of social media channels. You’ll be giving your audience plenty of reason to organically interact with you, share your content, link to your website, and send others down your funnel for you.

In other words, you won’t need to resort to splashing around by yourself to get people wet.

It takes just as much effort to plan an awesome party as it does to splash by yourself all day along. But instead of pissing people off, you get people jazzed to stop by and get wet. And if it’s truly great, those people will talk up your pool party to their friends too.

By providing enough value consistently to your audience, you actually turn your followers into ambassadors. So make your social media feeds the next great pool party. After a few great events and enough thrilled partygoers, you’ll have a line of people our your door eager to make a purchase.

Originally published on Forbes.com.

A 5-Step Checklist to Maximize Press Coverage for Your Business

In 2012, Mashable published an article titled, "Who Googled You? This Website Knows." The pieced trended on Mashable’s front page for two full days and famously brought the team at BrandYourself 60,000 signups in 60 hours.

As you might imagine, a trending article is worth its weight in gold. Once the story was “hot,” other major publications -- Huffington Post, Yahoo Finance and Tech Crunch, among them -- began picking up the story and linking back to the original piece.

New users began signing up to use our product, sharing their experiences on social media and their personal blogs. This compounded the effect even further. Thousands upon thousands of people recommended the service and bragged about their Search Score. 

One of BrandYourself's key takeaways from all this exposure underscored the importance of getting traction in the first few days. The more engagement with an article or other piece of content early on, the better. And when it comes to maximizing press, time is of the essence. An article’s lifespan is short -- roughly 48 to 72 hours before it goes big or gets buried.

With that in mind, we're constantly looking for ways to get the most buzz for an article in the shortest period of time. We’ve learned since then that there are a few crucial steps to amplify reach through the press, get information in front of the right people and give a message its best chance of trending on social media and top-tier publications.

1. Share on social media.

As soon as press hits, it’s time to open the social media floodgates. Now is not the time for modesty.

Share your article across social media channels throughout the day and week. Try several variations on the copy, hashtag and image so you can capitalize on different audiences and keep the message fresh. After all, nobody likes to see the same update 10 times in a row. Pin that tweet to the top of your Twitter feed. Tag the author, the publication and other companies or individuals mentioned in the article so they can re-share with their audiences, too.

In short, do everything in your power to get that piece in front of as many people as possible in the initial two- to three-day span.

2. Implement digital ads.

Hitting new press with those early engagement levels can trigger an article to trend on social media or on the publication itself. Even individually, these outcomes exponentially increase your reach and the piece's chance to rank well in Google search results. Paid campaigns are one of the best ways accomplish all those objectives.

Digital ads allow you to reach a much larger audience than otherwise would be possible. More important, the demographic choices available on today's ad platforms enable you to reach the right audience.

Social networks are perfect for finding your ideal viewer. So are content suggestion platforms such as Outbrain, Stumbleupon and Taboola. No matter the platform, the key is making your audience want to click and share. Think about their wants and desires. What's in it for them?

• Bad: Mashable just wrote a great article about our product's latest feature -- check it out.
• Good: Ever wonder who's Googling you? Find out with our free product.

3. Tap your email network.

Email remains the No. 1 most effective platform to reach people online. That's right: It ranks ahead of Facebook. If you’re not using email tactics to broaden the reach of your press, you’re missing out on a huge opportunity.

Once your article goes live, send an email blast to everyone on your company’s contact list. I recommend using an email marketing platform such as Mailchimp so you can track your open rate. This also frees you from manually sending out batches of emails.

Here's a neat trick to capture email addresses from your LinkedIn connections:

• Go to your LinkedIn homepage and click on the "My Network" tab. Then click "Connections" 
• Click the "Settings" gear symbol in the top right corner.
• Click "Export LinkedIn Connections" in the right column.
• Choose "Microsoft Outlook (.CSV file)" and then click "Export."

If you’re using Mailchimp, you easily can import your .CSV file before you send your email.

I suggest two important tips for your email blasts. First, send yourself a test before it goes out to the masses. There’s nothing worse than finding a typo after 1,500 people already have seen it. Second, include a call to action above the fold. All it takes is a simple ask: “Please share this with family and friends!”

4. Share with clients.

Don’t lump your clients in with the rest of your email network. Instead, send them a separate message that acknowledges their role in your success.

Such an email goes a long way toward strengthening your relationship and making them feel good about doing business with you. A little confirmation bias never hurt anyone.

If they're proud enough to be associated with your brand after a big release, they may take it upon themselves to share the good news among those in their personal networks -- without your needing to ask. Who knows? You could be nurturing your next big brand ambassador!

5. Circulate internally.

This step is an absolute must. Share the news release internally, get your company excited, and encourage employees to share the information with their own networks.

Brand messages shared by employees on social media report 561 percent more reach than the same messages shared by the brand’s social media channels. That’s because employees have 10 times more followers than their company’s social media accounts. What's more, their content typically receives eight times more engagement than content shared by brand channels.

The bottom line: We trust people more than we trust brands, and we engage with people more than we engage with brands. If you don’t get your employees involved on social, you’re absolutely losing out to companies that do.

When a positive piece of press gets published, your level of activity could be the difference between a complete flop and a remarkable sales funnel. Take promotion and circulation into your own hands. Even if your article would do well on its own, there's no reason not to give it that extra nudge.

Once you've followed these steps, don't forget to shoot the reporter a quick email, too. Let him or her know the work you're doing to drive traffic and engagement to the piece. They’ll be thrilled to have your support in boosting their readership and will be more likely to work with you again in the future.

Originally published on Entrepreneur.com.