body-container-line-1

Corporate Governance and the “Nana Aba” Effect: Any Lessons for B2C Brands?

Feature Article Corporate Governance and the Nana Aba Effect: Any Lessons for B2C Brands?
OCT 6, 2015 LISTEN

It is refreshing to see that the adoption rate of social media channels by many Ghanaian businesses, especially the ones with Business-to-Consumer (B2C) service propositions, is picking up steam. I have seen both old and new school folks in the Arts and Culture space (High-life, Poetry etc.), utilizing Facebook, Twitter and Instagram, among others, to communicate events and project information to their key constituents. The political class and indeed those who function within the policy and/or advocacy space have also taken their seats on the bandwagon. These notwithstanding, the rise of social media as an alternative channel for engaging key constituents and target markets in whichever space one functions, has still not caught up with many including mainstream corporate Ghana. It does appear that this trend is yet to fundamentally transform conventional business models in terms of how public institutions or private companies formulate channel strategies or manage their brands in general. This may be understandable for two reasons:

  1. Most companies, I surmise, have not conducted a comprehensive risk assessment related to their employees’ private social media activities.
  2. I suspect the first scenario is so because HR departments continue to retain tremendous confidence in their onboarding processes and Code of Conduct manuals, as tools for shaping employee behavior and conduct. But is this confidence justified? Or is there a compelling case for a more proactive corporate governance response to an emerging risks that accompanies this flurry of social media enthusiasm?

The “Nana Aba” Effect
Barely a week ago, media reports of a major TV station in Accra, Ghana [TV3] publicized its disciplinary action against a very famous anchor by name Nana Aba Anamoah, provoking an overwhelming public backlash that clamored for the reinstatement of the suspended anchor. Her offence? Alleged plagiarism. She had reposted certain pictures on Twitter without proper source citation, thereby giving the impression of originality. The copyright owners responded without pleasure on Twitter and everything begun a journey down south accompanied by satire and public opprobrium. My interest here, is not to examine the facts so as to unveil unethical breaches or otherwise. The issue of concern to me is whether the disciplinary response by her employers was considered in consultation with a Disciplinary and Grievance Policy manual, if any, that clearly spells out undesirable behaviors or conduct and resulting sanctions for breach of same. From the perspective of corporate governance, best practice requires a systematic framework to address operational risks issues such as what happened in the Nana Aba case. Even though there remains no question that the sanctioned employee did the alleged unethical act in her private capacity using her Twitter handle, her status, arguably, confers a fiduciary obligation to protect the brand that gave her status in the first place. Herein lies the business risk (reputational risk) that most B2C brands face in this hyper social media environment. Companies with Business-to-Business (B2B) value models, to some extent, are less exposed to this category of risk. This is because the channel they take to their target market, for both communication and value delivery purposes, is usually direct. Their online presence, if any at all is limited to non-interactive web pages.

Potential Risks
I have witnessed known employees of certain banks in Ghana, putting promotional material on their personal Facebook page and inviting the public to apply for loan and other facilities. The intent may be good and indeed suggests conscientiousness on the part of an employee, who seem eager to meet sales target. All well and good. However, a risk-based review would reveal potential pitfalls that can only be demonstrated through a “What If” scenario analysis. A typical scenario is this: a dissatisfied customer who shows up on this person’s wall to bad-mouth Mr. Conscientious’ employer for poor service received in the past. Knowing the cultural environment within which Ghanaian brands operate, this risk is not far-fetched, not by a long shot. The facts or scenario may be different from the TV3 saga but the principle is the same; reputational risks of brands in the fluid space of social media. B2C brands with very youthful customer-facing staff may be more exposed to this risk due to their (the latter) higher propensity to be distracted by social pressures.

Managing the Risks
The risk of applying haphazard sanctions in response to a reputational risk which may have crystallized out of an employee’s “negligence” is far more risky given the negative impact of unpredictability on employee morale. A detailed and systematic arrangement that involves policy manuals (Disciplinary & Grievance, Social Media Policy, etc.), effective onboarding and continuous training is the only apt response to reputational risks arising from private social media activity of employees. Limiting employee access to social media platforms during work hours is but only appropriate for addressing the issue of low productivity. The staff in the corporate planning departments must begin to think about how social media activities of employees can negatively impact brand value and consequently create mitigation strategies.

body-container-line