10 Rules for Effective Blogging

Here are 10 useful rules for effective blogging. These are my personal rules, and they work for me. Yours may differ, but that’s OK:

  1. Maintain a regular publishing schedule
  2. Say what you mean …. and mean what you say
  3. Use opinion to establish your argument
  4. Deploy relevant facts to support your case
  5. Draw on personal experience to make it real
  6. Credit your sources
  7. Sometimes, less is more
  8. Declare any vested interest
  9. Find your own voice
  10. Keep it interesting and original

Note: This post is a tribute to the late Elmore Leonard, whose recent passing has prompted many writers to revisit his 10 Rules of Writing

The Music Collectors’ Guide to Personality Types

ShelvesSomething a little less serious this week. Recently, I’ve been working with various clients across executive coaching, career development, talent management and psychometric testing. Given my former experience in music retailing (it was like Nick Hornby’s “High Fidelity” without the romantic interest….) and in deference to my own lifelong hobby of record collecting, I thought it would be amusing to classify people according to their collecting habits, as a way of helping HR managers and team leaders everywhere understand their colleagues.

So, in no particular order:*

1. Listomaniac – Always making lists of their favourite songs, and then constantly updating them. Whether it’s “Top 10 songs about ice-cream”, or “All-time Top 5 pop songs featuring saxophone”, or “10 Songs containing the word ‘toothbrush’ in the lyrics”, Listomaniacs love to demonstrate their arcane (but selective) musical knowledge, and are so absorbed with the process of list-making that they are incapable of committing to a final, definitive choice. Don’t expect the Listomaniacs on your team to make a decision, let alone stick to it. Definitely don’t give them too many choices or too much time to select the catering menu for the office party. (Cf. Mixologist)

2. Completist – More than a mere fan, the Completist is compelled to collect every record ever released by a particular artist (and some Completists are also driven to seek out unreleased recordings, including juvenilia, studio out-takes and rehearsals…). In more extreme examples, this form of OCD involves collecting the entire output of specific record labels or whole musical genres. While the Completist can demonstrate deep knowledge of their chosen subject, they can also get lost in the detail and don’t realise that not everyone shares their passion. When assigning roles to your team, make sure the Completist is in charge of their chosen specialist subject area, but set well-defined boundaries, and don’t let them near eBay. (Cf. Archivist)

3. Anthologist  – The Anthologist doesn’t have time to read music reviews or even listen to anything that hasn’t been recommended to them or curated for them by someone else. In fact, the archetypal Anthologist relies on the end of year polls and critics’ lists to decide what music to buy. Now, of course, the Anthologist’s task is made even easier through music subscription services, podcasts, and personalised web-streaming. Although capable of making discerning choices and informed decisions, the Anthologist often lacks any original thought, and would be lost without apps like Spotify. On the other hand, the Anthologist can give you the low-down on the latest thinking around best practice in agile software development, productivity tools and structuring compensation packages (because they’ve read some blogs and a few trade newsletters).

4. Populist – Never one to let taste get in the way, the Populist knows that a song is good because it went to Number 1 in the charts. Those “Now That’s What I Call Music…” compilations are made to measure for the Populist, who simply wants to buy the biggest-selling hits of the year all in one go. While many Populists might include a few “Greatest Hits” and “Best Of” albums in their collections, the more adventurous types have been known to buy a “proper” studio album (as long as it has at least 4 top 10 singles on it). On a positive note, the Populist will likely be happy working with numbers or in customer service, as they don’t need to exercise personal discretion, and because the data never lies.

5. Audiophile – The Audiophile has to have the latest and most expensive music hardware, with full 7.1 surround sound, if only to play Dire Straits. (I’m pretty certain that every hi-fi shop in the world only has one customer demonstration CD, namely “Brothers in Arms”.) Some would say that it’s the software not the hardware that matters, but the Audiophile knows the price of everything and the value of nothing. History is littered with music technology that promised the world, but failed to deliver – 8-track cartridge, Quadraphonic, DDC, MiniDisc, DAT – so it may be unwise to let the Audiophile on your team manage any IT projects. Likewise, they may insist on having the most expensive laptop available, but if they only use it update their Facebook page, maybe you should be a bit concerned.

6. Archivist – Like the Completist, the Archivist is a fount of musical knowledge – but unlike their counterparts, Archivists know enough of the received musical canon to be able to differentiate the great from the merely ordinary, and they know that not every artist has an immaculate back-catalogue. The Archivist also understands why Big Star’s “Third/Sister Lovers” is rightly regarded as one of the best (if flawed) albums of all time. At the extreme end of the spectrum, the Archivist is a neo-Trainspotter, able to recall minutiae such as the album catalogue numbers, recording dates, orchestral arrangers and sleeve designers (and studio caterer) of every 5-star album since 1957. But on a good day, the Archivist will display great perseverance in pulling together internal knowledge, external data and other essential information to get the right answers.

7. Mixologist – Finally, the music collector who is so enthusiastic about their personal taste in music that they just have to share it with everyone else, via lovingly created mixtapes. Adept at making tapes for every occasion and at every significant stage in their lives (the break-up tape, the road trip mix, songs for a sunny day), the Mixologist will also have regard to and openly acknowledge their sources, influences and inspirations. Unlike the Listomaniac the Mixologist’s choices demonstrate exquisite musical taste and are backed by erudite concepts, connections, and cross-references – they are not simply motivated by the compilation process. True Mixologists are happy to allow their tapes to be circulated, to be copied, and even to spawn “response” tapes in return. As team players, Mixologists will be more than happy to share information, and they like nothing more than to see their ideas taken up and then built upon by the rest of the team.

*Note: This list does not claim to be exhaustive; and of course as with all profiling tools, music collectors may display two or more of the above traits, often at the same time. But they will likely demonstrate a leading preference for a particular style of collecting. As the music critic once observed, “a little knowledge can be dangerous – but too much can be deadly boring”.

Publishing is Dead – Long Live Publishing!

The name of this blog was inspired by a former colleague at The Thomson Corporation. As our team embarked on a major push into digital media in the mid-90s, he reminded us that the old publishing mantra “Content is King!” was being recast as “Content in Context”. Simply having loads of content was no longer enough to command a dominant or exclusive market position – publishers had to make sure their content was timely, relevant and easy to navigate. Ultimately, content has to help users find insights to their problems and solutions to their needs quickly and efficiently.

I was reminded of this recently when I heard some data storage experts talking about the challenges of what to do with all the data we are creating – especially at the rate we are going. According to latest analysis, 90% of all data was created in the last 2 years.

We keep being told that publishing is dead, but it is clear that we are producing more content than ever before – in which case, it’s great to be part of a dying industry! Sure, the business models are changing, and so is the technology; but there are still a number of core publishing disciplines that we risk losing sight of as we continue to develop boundless and limitless volumes of digital content.

There are several skills that publishers traditionally bring to any new content, print or on-line. And it’s not just about technology, SEO or the number of “Likes”. Any content owner seeking to engage vendors to develop their digital assets and manage their on-line presence would be well advised to ask potential suppliers about their experience, strengths and processes in each of the following areas:

  • Commissioning – having a nose for new authors, where to find them and how to nurture their talent
  • Editing – turning text and data into meaningful and coherent content, including length, structure, tone, clarity and access (tables of contents, indexing, cross-referencing, citations, footnotes, bibliographies, etc.)
  • Design – using appropriate formats, layout and fonts to suit the material and the readership
  • Customer Engagement – bringing the audience into the publishing process, through market research, pre-sales activity and user groups
  • Marketing – knowing how to distribute particular content or promote a particular writer
  • Content Management – analysing the usage data and capturing audience feedback, to understand the value of the publishing assets

Yes, these skills do exist in the digital realm, but increasingly the publishing process is being made subservient to the technology, often at the expense of meaning and comprehension. Doubtless this stems from the misconception that the speed and frequency of publication renders everything as mere ephemera – so why do we need to bother with such archaic ideas as an index?

An author acquaintance of mine recently lamented the response of his publishers who, when informed that his text-book needed an index before it could be distributed in schools, responded, “what a great idea – why don’t you send us one!” I can only assume that the publishers were so caught up in on-line media that they had forgotten how most readers navigate books or other content, especially when they are accessing them for the first time.

On-line developers do us a great disservice if they forget that digital content needs tools such as indexes and tables of content to aid user navigation and accessibility – text tagging and search functions are all very well, but they do not always return relevant or meaningful results, and they can create unintended or unforeseen linkages that may be completely out of context.

As a consequence of the exponential growth in on-line content, and our simultaneous interest for archive material (and the demand for data analytics), publishers are increasingly taking on a new and important role as curators – managing content assets, understanding how to present them, knowing the value of the material they are dealing with, and finding the right context in which to provide this content.

This shifting role of publishers is just confirmation that publishing is far from extinct.

Winter blues

I think I may be suffering the early onset of SAD (seasonally adjusted disorder). Even though the Australian winter only started at the beginning of June, I am already feeling the cold and the despondency. My condition is not helped by the knowledge we don’t have another public holiday until early November. Or maybe it’s a symptom of the current national mood, which suggests that although we are highly likely to vote for a change of government in the forthcoming federal election, we don’t exactly relish the prospect.

According to the latest opinion poll, most of us would actually prefer to see a former leader of both the two main political parties lead their respective sides into the election, rather than the present incumbents. Given our compulsory voting law, the preferential voting methodology, and the parliamentary system for choosing party leaders, the electorate is basically denied the opportunity to vote for its preferred Prime Ministerial candidate.

The general election campaign is taking place against the backdrop of an extraordinary period of critical self-analysis about the type of society we live in. For various reasons, our politicians, the media and the chattering classes have been debating the notion of whether or not Australia is a classless society, a racist society, or a sexist society. (To which questions the answer would probably be: “Possibly, but not all the time, and not everywhere.”)

Much of the surface debate has been prompted by behaviour and language generally deemed offensive, and by arguments about whether people actually meant (or understood) what they said or did, whether they appreciated the impact of their deeds, or whether they simply didn’t know any better. While everyone should be held accountable for their individual behaviour, this is not just about semantics, or different moral standards or conflicting social attitudes; after all, Australia is ostensibly an egalitarian, pluralistic and secular country, founded on the notion of “a fair go for all”.

I think this national malaise stems from a collective failure of leadership, which in turn leads to disrespect for our leaders and disregard for the institutions they represent. This failure of leadership is especially acute among institutions that were primarily designed to promote, serve, protect and cater to the interests of the working population. Too often in recent years have leaders, office holders and key figures within political parties, trade unions, religious orders, the armed forces, the media and even major sporting codes been found wanting in upholding a culture of robust ethical behaviour and acceptable moral standards. Quite rightly, people feel angry, demoralised and almost disenfranchised because they have been let down by the very establishments they believe were designed to be there to support and represent them.

It’s not surprising, therefore, that much of the population is tuning out of the election debate (such as it is) because they have little faith in our political leaders in particular, and in public institutions as a whole. Cynicism, even despair, prevails. Hence the mid-winter chill….