Brands use employees’ social networks as influencers. But what do employees get out of it?
I've noticed a trend where CEOs of well-known companies are investing more in their personal brands on LinkedIn and X.
However, the level is increasing, and they want something similar from employees.
I think building your own profile is great, but not completely at the expense of the brand. It seems a bit like an invasion of privacy to me, maybe the employee has slightly different values, interests and things that they would rather share. I also don't think they will be rewarded extra for promoting the brand.
And take people who, for example, started building their brand a long time ago at their own expense, and now the company only benefits from it for free, or only as part of the employee's salary.
What is your opinion on this whole thing?
Should they be compensated? If yes, how?
Replies
What makes this messy is that "optional" often stops feeling optional once culture starts rewarding the people who post. Do you think most companies are honest about that pressure?
minimalist phone: reduce your screentime
@jade_melissa1 IMO, pressure is a taboo, they take it like a sure thing to post how "amazing" they are.
I think employees should get something real out of it, bcz attention and trust on personal profiles are not free assets. Would you see revenue share as fairer than random bonuses?
minimalist phone: reduce your screentime
@ian_maxwell2 I am not so sure, maybe a pay raise, % of equity makes sense when your employee is a semi-celebrity.
A lot of brands want the authenticity of employee content without giving employees the freedom that makes it authentic. Can that model even work long term?
minimalist phone: reduce your screentime
@leah_josephine If it is not genuine, the pressure and dissatisfaction will grow (and the quality of the content will decrease). Not sustainable.
If someone already built their audience before joining, expecting free promotion feels a lil too convenient for the company. Should that be treated differently from regular employee advocacy?
minimalist phone: reduce your screentime
@miles_anthony2 there should be compensation for that. It is obviously parasiting on someone's fame.
I think the biggest issue is not posting once in a while, it's when visibility starts becoming an unspoken part of job performance. Have you seen that happens already?
minimalist phone: reduce your screentime
@naomi_florence1 I think that some people are forced to do it but without compensation. They suffer :D
Well, firstly, to employees - it's not their business. It's not their responsibility as well.
So I am totally not supporting use of employee's social network.
Secondly, it's more like unpaid marketing (from employee pov).
The brand gets exposure and uses their employees....which sounds more like...a one way street.
(That's me as an employee and not as a marketing person😂)
minimalist phone: reduce your screentime
@indu_thangamuthu Even if you are a marketing person, you know it is not right :D just a huge scope of work without compensation :D
@busmark_w_nika Hidden in the JD 😂
ProdShort
@busmark_w_nika For me, a personal profile belongs to the employee, not the company. Building an audience takes time, energy, and consistency, so if a company wants to benefit from it, there should be something real in return.
Sharing company content from time to time makes sense, but expecting employees to constantly promote the brand on their personal accounts feels too much, especially if there is no clear compensation or benefit.
minimalist phone: reduce your screentime
@amraniyasser and some companies are pushy lol
Personal profiles shouldn’t be treated as company assets. I’ve seen teams push this and it usually creates friction over time. If it’s being used as a distribution for the company, then it needs to be treated as something the company is leveraging, not something it owns. Compensation should reflect that. Either through a defined share of the upside tied to that distribution, or by making it an explicit part of the role with clear boundaries. Otherwise, it ends up being one-sided very quickly.
minimalist phone: reduce your screentime
@arun_tamang I think that some companies paid the 3rd party to create that content for their employees, okay, it is a kind of investment, but still doesn't reflect compensation for an employee and his/her channel.
@busmark_w_nika Paying someone to create content is a cost on the company side, but the channel still belongs to the employee. The value comes from the trust and audience attached to that profile, not just the content itself. So even if the company invests in content, it doesn’t really balance out if they’re also relying on that existing trust for distribution.
minimalist phone: reduce your screentime
@arun_tamang This!
same here - totally against it.
I even worked once in a company where I was expected by my manager to do so and I got improvement feedback if I didn't do so.
My own personal profile is mine and not the company's, it's for the employee choice what and when to share something.
minimalist phone: reduce your screentime
@nirit_weisbrot_altony Did they offer anything on top for doing that? Or they wanted it for free? :D
I get the tension here; personal branding feels empowering until it turns into "company work" without boundaries or upside. It's smart to nurture your own voice, especially if you've invested time building it pre-company, but mandates can cross into overreach.
Companies benefit hugely, so yes, compensation makes sense for required advocacy. Think bonuses/gift cards tied to impact, training stipends, or equity bumps; not baked into base salary. Voluntary programs with recognition work best long-term.
minimalist phone: reduce your screentime
@swati_paliwal How much is big compensation for that?