The Original Social Communication Programme

Read the campaign story

Maersk Line’s original social programme began in 2011 under Jonathan Wichmann, who dates his start to 1 October. In a later interview, he described finding an underused photographic archive and turning images of ships, ports and maritime activity into stories. The work began within communications, with goals broader than immediate sales. It made an industrial organisation available to audiences beyond a conventional procurement conversation.

Wichmann’s accounts describe adapting to different social channels and coordinating local contributions with a global presence. They also emphasise the trust given to an in-house operator. These sources document an operating approach rather than a single creative asset. The case does not convert reported audience growth into proven commercial return, and it treats subsequent platform activity as part of the same programme family.

Editorial interpretation: many industrial brands possess material that outsiders find more interesting than insiders expect. Scale, geography, craft and operational detail can provide a distinctive editorial territory. The opportunity is not simply to post attractive photographs. It is to explain what the image reveals and make room for questions. A strong archive becomes useful when current knowledge gives it context and when rights permit it to be shared.

Editorial interpretation: trust and speed are organisational design choices, not instructions to remove every safeguard. A capable editor needs clear authority for ordinary posts and a separate route for sensitive subjects. That distinction allows an authentic voice without exposing customer information, live movements or unverified incident details. Teams borrowing this model should define the boundaries before a difficult story arrives, rather than improvise permissions under public pressure.

Audit what the organisation already knows

Look for photographs, diagrams, object histories and practical explanations that reveal how the work happens. Check ownership, accuracy and confidentiality before adding items to an editorial backlog. Interview the people who can explain them in plain language. The goal is a sustainable source of distinctive stories, not a one-time archive dump that becomes repetitive once the most spectacular images have been used.

Assign an editorial job to each channel

Different audiences may want visual discovery, professional discussion or timely service information. Define which job each channel performs and avoid automatically publishing the same item everywhere. A small team can choose fewer channels and serve them properly. Consistency should come from the organisation’s voice and evidence standards, while the format and depth respond to how people actually use each environment.

Create bounded autonomy and a correction path

Give the editor a written list of routine subjects they can publish and sensitive subjects requiring review. Include escalation for customer complaints, safety incidents and uncertain facts. Publish corrections visibly when needed. This supports responsiveness without making one person responsible for guessing every organisational risk. The strongest social voice is often the one backed by reliable access to expertise, not merely fewer approval steps.

A small test for another brief

Proposed adaptation: run a four-week editorial pilot using six permissioned archive items and four short explanations from consenting adult staff members.

Measure useful questions, repeat participation and accurate understanding of the organisation’s role. Record the time required to source, review and respond, rather than judging the pilot by follower count alone.

Stop if the programme depends on disclosing confidential operations, staff feel pressured to appear or unanswered service problems are being disguised by attractive storytelling.

• Check rights and remove customer, security-sensitive and personal information from every item.
• Choose one public channel and establish response ownership and escalation rules.
• Invite questions about the work, then answer only what can be verified and appropriately shared.