"Booo"… I can hear to the rafters already, as you all say "too easy…"
But hear me out a minute.
Most blogs are personal. Most blogs deliver the highly opinionated view of one person. In fact, blog "purists" would prefer it that way.
But I look back on the many organizations I’ve been a part of. Scout troop, fraternity, community group, IABC committees and boards, political party groups — every single one had a problem with timely communication. In most cases, there was a will to communicate, but poor technical channels. A group blog would have solved a lot of problems,
Bad comms is a killer. In an organization like IABC Scandinavia — a handful of members spread over tens of thousands of square kilometers — it is a killer if you cannot communicate.
A blog could be the answer.
Set up a blog, give all the regional leaders author rights. For that matter, give every member author rights. Invite and encourage members to write in. Make it loose and unofficial. Sure, that’s where you announce the next meeting. But it’s also where you critique the meeting. Or announce a job opening.
Let me answer some of the obvious questions:
1) What if we don’t have much to say? If you open authorship to all the members, you will find that other people have a lot to say.
2) We will need to monitor the conversation. No, we elected you as leaders. We monitor you, not the other way around.
3) Sounds like a lot of IT expense? Can be set up in an hour. And I, Allan Jenkins, will pay for the first two years of hosting. Free gift.
4) We already use email… shouldn’t we keep that? Anything posted can be reformed to email, so that’s not an issue. At any rate, within a year or two, all savvy communicators will prefer RSS.
5) No other chapter does this? Fine…. for once, be in front.
Price? Peanuts. Time to set up? About an hour.
Readers… Pile in with your views.
Suggestion No. 2? One week from today,.
{ 8 comments }
Sounds like a no-brainer to me, as you dastardly Americans say. (And couldn't you have had the decency to be born in *any* other country? You're far too intelligent and erudite to be an *American* [author shudders as he says the word])
I don't know about intelligent. And whatever erudition I possess is the result of living in Melbourne, where many afternoons in the stands eating meatpies, drinking Vic Bit and roaring for the St. Kilda Saints honed my rhetorical skills to a dullish fine edge.
An obvious solution but none the less brilliant. Quick, easy and cheap. The question is not why a Scandinavian blog, but why not? What could it hurt? This assumes all/most members have internet – a no-brainer as my American colleagues have said, and that all/most have something to say. Well, 'DUH' (Americanese for obviously) – they're COMMUNICATORS. They won't be able to help themselves. Take me for example…
I can go along with the idea that a blog COULD BE the answer. But here's some of the recurring questions that come up in my mind.
1) We have no research that shows that a large number of our IABC members use blogs or want to. As a matter of fact, most members in Europe with whom I have had conversations say they don't have enough time to read the info they already receive without seeking more. No matter how simple a channel is to put in place, don't we (IABC) always advocate that ALL communications should be based on research and then measurement?
1 bis) If people don't have time to go to the web site, what makes you think they'll go to the blog?
2) In Scandinavia it might be feasible to give authorship to all members, but what about in the Europe and Middle East Region, where there are hundreds of people? Especially since I was just reading an article that says that the natural limit of human social networks is somewhere around 150…
3) Weren't Chatham House rules invented for a reason? I attend a lot of UN meetings. They are forever trying to have informal dialogue sessions where national delegations can talk through issues. Inevitably there is no dialogue at all; one government after another gives statements, because they don't want their informal comments to be used against them in formal discussions. The real dialogues happen in the corridors. On a related point, I work for an organization with members in 84 countries, and we have to manage debates because not all cultures are equally comfortable and we have to actively make a space for the opinions of the less bold. There might be people who don't feel "safe" having a debate in the public sphere. Isn't that one of the reasons why clubs of any sort were invented? So people have a place to feel safe and not exposed?
Kristen, here are my answers to your three questions:
1) Blogs are just websites, so what you are saying is "We have no research that shows that a large number of our IABC members use websites or want to." I don't think that's true, but I think we can show any communicator who thinks so the career door. I sure wouldn't hire a communicator that "doesn't want to read a website (or a blog)."
2) So have an all member Scandinavian blog and an all-leader European one. What's the issue?
3) In your third para you seem to be for and against blogs…. for and against informal conversations. Which is it? I'm for the informal ones, but I'd like to hear how your views apply to IABC.
1) I'm obviously not being clear enough. I am talking about delivering member benefits to members of the organization. In that specific context, I have run across many people who have said things like "I know there is a lot of content on the IABC web site, but I don't have time to dig through it". That being the case, what makes you think they are going to have time for blog conversations? Case in point, we had a pre-conference blog for Eurocomm last year. Neville pulled together a great team to try and get the ball rolling on the topic before we hit the first session. So for the month before Eurocomm, the pannellists pretty much talked to each other, because despite our promoting the blog to members, no one joined the debate.
On a more general note, I know several people who tell me that if I really want to get a written message through to them to fax it because they are swamped by electronic messages, but faxes stand out. We've actually tried that in IABC France where we sent faxed reminders, and it was really interesting to see the reaction: totally new faces at the meeting, people calling back to say they couldn't come but would love to receive such notices in future, etc.
There is a certain segment of people who enjoy spending loads of time in front of the computer screen, and others who don't. Age, culture and other demographic issues correlate more or less to who these people are. In Europe, I have not seen a lot of signs that a large share of our members are currently seeking out blogs.
2) The issue is your suggestion not just to have officers, but all members as authors. My question is whether that is feasible when you are talking about more than 500 people.
3) I am neither for nor against any channel of communication in principle. That wasn't my point. What I was saying is that a lot of people want their informal conversations to either be off the record or private. There are cultural issues related to using blogs that I've never seen discussed.
Good idea. And you can point to the student-run Forward Blog (we're both 'senior' contributors) as an exemplar of a group blog. It's Metcalfe's law in action: the quality of conversation increases as more people become connected.
Good point, Richard. And you can also point to the Marcom blog (http://www.marcomblog.com) as another example of a multi-author site. Plenty of good input and commentary there.
The challenge with Eurocomm may well have been that 'ordinary' communicators were intimidated by the august list of speakers and facilitators — "what could I possibly have to say that would be of interest to these heavyweights? They'd just laugh me out of town as 'stupid'". But letting people see folks from EVERY level contribute can be a dynamic for change.