Which Platform is “Best”?

There was an interesting post on Campaign Asia-Pacific this morning that posed the question, “LinkedIn company page vs. corporate web site: which is more important?” The author makes a number of valid points: that web sites are “graveyards for content”; they don’t lend themselves to mobile viewing; and, they don’t really engage visitors. As such, he thinks LinkedIn company pages are “more important.”

I’m not sure they are mutually exclusive, however; they serve different purposes and target different audiences. What’s the first thing one does when researching a company? Google. And the search results will bring up the company web site, the LinkedIn page and any other sites mentioning the company. One tends to click on the company web site first. While I agree with all of the reasons LinkedIn pages are a must for companies the author that LinkedIn pages are a must for companies listed by the author (ease of setting up, mobile compatibility, ease of sharing, and so on), corporate web sites also still have a role in the digital mix. First, they enable a company to communicate its personality more effectively, whether that’s via design/style or the freedom to post whatever content the company wishes. Dovetailing with that, the web site is the company’s asset, while a LinkedIn page belongs to the host. Its ease of use plus the fact that it is free also limits how much one can actually “personalize” it.

Mobile compatibility is certainly one key advantage of LinkedIn, but I wonder if that issue is not over-emphasized for some businesses. I know I’m old guard and still tend to research companies from a laptop, not my phone or iPad. There are indeed some businesses for which a mobile-compatible site is critical, such as restaurants or shops, or travel businesses targeting people on the move. But for a marketing or communications firm, I’m not so sure.

As the manager of such a firm, I struggle with the various platforms. On which should we focus our time and attention?

• Our web site is indeed basic and static (I wouldn’t call it a graveyard, but perhaps a nursing home; the information just sort of sits there, staring out the window, saying hello when an infrequent visitor stops by). It provides general information about the firm, and was put together on the fly because we’d had potential clients comment about the lack of a site.  To me that indicates that there is still great value to them.
• This blog is our way of communicating news, insights and other content in “real-time.” It’s easy to create and publish content as well as share it on other platforms such as LinkedIn or Facebook. And those two platforms reach different audiences.
• Twitter can also play an important role for some businesses – provided they know how to use it effectively (too many don’t). We don’t tweet at C2, at least not yet. We obviously have a hard time communicating in 140 characters or less.

For now, each of these platforms is a separate but equally important habitat in the digital ecosystem. And with the way media continues to fragment, there are sure to be new platforms that companies will need to learn and use in the years ahead.