Several weeks back there was some discussion in this space about the viability of social networking as a skill. The results were split. My friend at the USDA International Institute, Lauren Jacobs, and I leaned toward the idea that “proficient in Facebook” is not a skill (anyone can set up a Facebook account and “use” it), but a certain depth of knowledge in social networking can be:
Lauren’s point is that social networking might be a good skill to highlight if you truly have a deep understanding of social media and how to use it for the benefit of an organization, especially a small international nonprofit that could benefit from the savvy of a young professional who knows how to utilize free technology to make a deep impact. But I think you really need to school yourself in such intricacies and that involves a whole lot more knowledge and experience than updating your status every hour.
Others chimed in, however, disagreeing (from commenter G):
Not a skill. Unless you’ve created your own social networking site (complete with html and all that fun stuff), I don’t think it belongs on your resume. I think if it was on there, I would wonder about your other competencies, as I don’t know anyone who is unskilled at social networking. If that’s the best thing you can say about yourself, you aren’t going to get the job.
I appreciate both sides of the argument, but I can’t agree with G’s assertion that “I don’t know anyone who is unskilled at social networking.” I would argue, first off, there are plenty of people who plain suck at social networking and don’t understand its implications. The argument inherent here—”if you can do it, you’re good at it”—is downright dubious. That’s like saying anyone who knows how to play baseball is ready for the big leagues. I played ball when I was younger and I can still swing a bat okay, but that doesn’t mean I can hit one out of Fenway.
And second, it now appears that having solid skills in social networking and being able to market them in the right way can get you a high-level job in the State Department: see today’s WashPost article on Alec Ross, a new senior advisor to Hillary Clinton whose job “will blend technology with diplomacy in an attempt to help solve some of the globe’s most vexing problems:”
Projects could include the use of cellphone text messaging as a way to reach isolated communities to warn people of natural disaster or remind patients to take medication. Social networking sites could bring together youth in warring tribes to communicate and organize cultural exchanges. Software could be used to help ensure aid is delivered by creating supply-chain systems.
I don’t know much about Mr. Ross’ qualifications, but I would guess that his experience with social networking extends far beyond the average Internet user. Because you have a Twitter feed and know how to post pictures on Facebook, do you feel this makes you qualified to be the State Department’s senior advisor for technology and diplomacy? It shouldn’t, and I’m thusly led to the not-definitive-but-still-pretty-stable conclusion that deep experience with and skill in social networking is a desirable and marketable skill in international and diplomatic work.
And an interesting final point about Ross: he has “no formal training in technology.” (Sub-text: anyone can become a social networking expert, but not everyone is.)
Unless you’re someone like Stephen Fry, who is able to amass followers after Tweeting his experiences while stuck in an elevator, social networking in and of itself is not much of a feat. An entourage on Twitter or 800 Facebook friends is only indicative of the great, actual events/projects/organizations you’re arranging/organizing/representing.
The smart focus: When you’re doing great things in the “real world”, you can also be doing some great things in the online world.
We could/should continue to consider quantity and quality:
- a great org that writes a great blog and has a highly informative website
- a lesser known org that employs a variety of online media outreach strategies (blog, Facebook, Twitter feed, Idealist)
What’s better/more useful: considered, edited information or hour-by-hour short bursts of sharing?
Big picture: this diversity is part of the IR field, and it’ probably why we like this field, too. You can be involved at its most citizen levels, or through its high-ranking network. It’s great to be part of a field that acknowledges involvement throughout many networks and a diversity of connections.
I agree with you, Lauren, that too often considered, edited information is bypassed for the immediate, short burst of sharing—and it shouldn’t be. Thanks for your great comments.
You’re paying too much attention to the second half of my initial comment. I concede the fact that maybe everyone isn’t ’skilled’ at social networking, but I stand by the first half: “…Unless you’ve created your own social networking site (complete with html and all that fun stuff)…” I might add to that, however, that if your current position requires you to ’social network’ then it’s probably smart to include.
For the record, I wouldn’t put baseball on my resume, either.
I think we’re getting closer to the same page here, G. I agree that you (or me or anyone) shouldn’t put baseball on their resume if it’s only a hobby and not a professionally viable skill. In the same way, I agree that social networking has no place on your resume if you only Facebook/Tweet in a casual way/in your spare time; but, if you have deep experience with social networking on a professional level (i.e., you do it in your job and/or are trained in it), that can definitely have a place on your resume, especially if you are looking for another job that calls for social networking skills. But I also don’t think you necessarily need html or web design skills to be a social networking professional—you can still have professional knowledge of web communications practices and social networking techniques without being a web designer, developer, or coder.