My Photo

Blogs I'm enjoying right now

  • David Grossman's blog
  • Tony Sharp gets political
    Tony has an interesting take on IC - his blog doesn't just talk about good practice - there's an underlying political edge. I don't agree with everything he says but it makes me think (sometimes!).
  • The Chime Blog
    Thoughts from my colleagues across the Chime Group
  • Competent Communicator
    The work that Sue Dewhurst and I did to define competencies for communicators

  • Wedge at Kilobox
    An always interesting collection
  • Spreading Science
    Explaining the theory behind how the world works - even I can understand it
  • simply-blogging
    Marc, Dan and Kelly -
  • David Ferrabee's Blog
    I love how he writes it
  • Heather Yaxley
    Heather's ideas on PR and stuff

« Oh scr*w it.... | Main | Can ugly people make it in internal communications? »

08/19/2010

Comments

Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.

Re CIPR - you'll have to be more specific!

I'm not sure how to take being considered a "usual suspect"?

But I think the conversation you describe: that being about the tension between the "writers" and keyboard pushers on the one hand...and the "multidisciplinary folks" on the other is one that is likely to be resolved by a recognition of far greater mutual opportunity than by one asserting superiority over the other.

Watch this space. :)

Mike Klein
Copenhagen

We're planning on 'crumming this in the future as soon as diaries clear.

In the meantime a cliche comes to mind: If you think like a hammer, everything starts to look like a nail. the route by which one comes to a career in employee (or other) communication can be quite telling. When I talk to CEOs and executives, they are pretty dismissive of "the writer brigade" to be frank. They see those skills as purely instrumental and a bit like having the need for a phone system. Their respect for the profession only rises when the communicators are able to advance commercial and cultural agendas by not just packaging strategy but influencing it. I think the issue is that The Writers don't seem to feel confident enough to have a "peer to peer" conversation at that level, and the Strategists (are just arrogant enough to happily) do so.

I think another interesting angle is Adam Hibbert's observation that to him (and presumably other like him) the comms role is one of "faciliation/mediation". I believe that's a component but am less sure it can be that definitive. My clients seem to benefit most when I get off the mediation fence and jump in with challenging questions about how communication supports their strategy and vice versa. I think we've gone beyond the world of channel and content (and bloody "writers") managers and into a new space that some just aren't equipped to deal with. I think we will see a divide in the profession that grows into a chasm. Like Mike says, neither is superior and both are needed - but if a CEO spots a typo neither of us will give a shit as long as the idea and advice are good. The tacticians will lose sleep over it, while the strategists will go to bed secure in the knowledge they got an idea across, which will live on long after some minor writing error has long been forgotten.

We're about to post a Mike-led post on intent which might (or might not) spur some new avenues of exploration on the topic.

The comments to this entry are closed.