You sometimes see this described as the honeycomb model; but it is apposite to describe a situation where everyone is permitted to have a unique Twitter profile.
It does not apply to the majority of professional practice firms: they have opted for command and control. It feels like the early days of email.
Look at where we are now? Do you see many firms that don’t allow their people to work without email?
Oh I know what you thinking:
“Twitter is entirely different. For one thing it is a public time-line.”
That misses the point.
It is about enabling everyone to have a voice: no one person, department or locus has sole responsibility for marketing (if that is what you are using Twitter for: “Look at us!”).
At the moment most of the content that is being spewed forth is a repackaged version of what is already on a firm’s website. How long do you think this will last before people begin to turn off? This tail off could be checked if the content was remarkable and wasn’t just syndicated across Twitter as another marketing pipe. Start trying to earn attention. Keep a regular check on those following you. Are they growing?
Even if everyone was on Twitter they couldn’t all send the same stuff. A niche would have to be found. But more than that it would force everyone to find a voice and interact meaningfully.
Rather than looking for ways it can’t be done, go rewrite the policy.
Even if this seems too radical, give some thought to setting up exclusive Twitter feeds for discreet people and teams.
For those new to Twitter one thing to bear in mind is that the space is filling up, and by the time you get round to doing something, it may well be that there are no names left and what you end up with is a compromise. XYZ_Firm_18 may not be that enchanting.
~ JS ~