Interesting article on Facebook boss Mark Zuckerberg over on Scobleizer (is that even grammatically correct?) and it posts a decent question: is the problem with Facebook not the privacy and so on but the fact that the boss of the company is rubbish at being put in front of people?

Let’s look at the evidence in the article:

If we get his brain focused more on the technology side of things and less on the representing Facebook side of things I think we’ll win more. Do we really want Zuckerberg in front of Congress trying to convince politicians that Facebook isn’t evil? No. He has far more value to all of us focusing on the tech side of things,

My report card of him? Hiring: A+. Mergers and Acquistions: A+. Technology leadership: A-. Execution: B+ (only because they could have gotten privacy right when they first shipped). Ability to sell: D-. Ability to positively affect perceptions: D-.

If any client came to you with a boss who was that poor in front of people you would only save him for big events and even then coach the hell out of them.

So instead of the CEO being front and center, is this one of those time where it would be better for a PR person to be doing it? Or even someone else at Facebook? An Engagement Manager? PR or Communications Director? Public Policy Spokesperson? I don’t know what Facebook has at the moment but that would strike me as a sensible option. As the article points out, it would let Zuckerberg focus on his strengths while letting someone else sell the message.

Which is what good PR does of course. And that makes every else’s life easier because a less stressed boss normally makes for less stressed staff.