In the medical profession, folks graduate from medical school, but they are not yet ready to go out and practice medicine- they need to do some more formal training- a residency- usually in some sort of specialty.  (Even family practice is a specialty.)  Yet in residency, the training and additional education young doctors need before they can practice on their own comes in two forms.  One is specialized reading- sometimes the reading is assigned, but most of the time, it is assumed you will use your “educational money” and buy the specialty text books you’ll need, not only as a resident but in practice, when you come up against something you might not have seen before.  The second is on the job practice, where you see patients but are supervised by another “attending” physician, who is supposed to help you learn and guide you, like a mentor.  Not all doctors teaching residents are good at imparting the art of their practice to others, as well as the base knowledge required to do the job.  Practicing medicine and teaching it are two different things, and not everyone is good at both.

Similarly, many teachers went into teaching because they love learning.  They loved being in school themselves.  They loved having a guiding path through all the cool stuff there is to know, and somewhere along the way, decided they wanted to do this themselves.  They mastered the whole school process, start to finish. They almost have a nostalgia for school- it is a precious place to them.   But the problem is often that the best students don’t always make the best teachers.

Teaching is a different skill set from learning.  While teaching and learning are clearly complimentary, they are not the same thing.  My dad, for example, was a brilliant engineer, and fantastic at math.  Yet when he tried to help me with calculus homework, I often ended up frustrated and in tears.  For me, the conflict arose because he largely couldn’t remember what it was like not to know all this math, and couldn’t explain it in a way a neophyte would understand- what the Heath Brothers call “The Curse of Knowledge” in their great book, Made to Stick. I think many teachers suffer from this problem as well-they love their subject matter and understand it so well that they have a hard time remembering what it was like not to know.

The skill of being able to be a guide through complicated material, all while making it an exciting and engaging process is a rare skill.  While I think there are methods and checklists and other tools people can use to help make what they know accessible to others, great teaching is an art form.  It requires not only understanding the subject area, but understanding it well enough and liking it enough that you can make it exciting for almost anyone.  It requires a bit of stage presence, improv skills, and being able to communicate with the students so you know what they understand and what they don’t.  Teaching at its best, is an interactive experience between teacher and student. (This is also why going to high school or college just by watching a bunch of DVD’s is not equivalent to being enrolled in a real school with real classrooms, but I digress.)

Sometimes the best teachers are people who are less interested in the one true path, but recognize there are many individual ways to get to the same goal.  They are good mentors, guides and parents.  They are interested in someone else’s success, and they get joy in seeing others succeed, and don’t worry that someone else may be smarter than they are- in fact, the best teachers are often looking for those smarter than themselves, so they can continue learning and growing themselves.

The essence of a great teacher involves being passionate about your subject area, and being a fantastic communicator, who can turn that love of knowledge into a spark of inspiration and curiosity in others.  It’s the reason why I think all teachers should learn a bit about marketing and the way people turn commercial ideas into what Seth Godin would call “an idea virus” that spreads on its own.  Using the tools the Heath Brothers talk about in Made to Stick, for example, can help anybody make their ideas and communications more effective and more memorable, by essentially hacking what our brain natively finds most interesting.  This can help business people end “death by powerpoint” presentations, but it can just as easily make you a better writer, a better teacher, and a better communicator across the board.

In the end, good teaching requires that people are personally invested in the process and look on it as mentoring as well as a delivery of knowledge vehicle.  The teacher might be driving the bus, but the bus can be an old school bus, a greyhound, a tricked out  tour bus, a local or express.  The bus comes in many sizes, varieties and with different amenities.  But unless the bus is responsive to the needs of the passengers, and can get them to where they need to be, it’s not very useful.  The driver, like a good teacher, needs to be aware of the road, the path, and the needs of the passengers in order to do the best job possible.

We need to make sure all of our teachers- at every level, from elementary through graduate school, training and beyond- understand not only how to make lesson plans, but how to meet the needs of kids in their classrooms.  And sometimes, it’s going to require “marketing” that science lesson, history or math to a group of reluctant learners, to get them on the right road in the long run.

Are you a good teacher?  What makes a good teacher to you?  Is it a skill or an art or a mixture of both?

The web started out as a way for academics to share information.  They built the web as a “platform” for these conversations.  I don’t think they could have forseen what it has become over time, because it has evolved, as the needs of people using it have changed over time, with each new tool or site or use adding additional knowledge and information in its wake.  Sure, the idea of a platform, like a blank canvas, that changes as the needs and creativity of the users changes, is amazing.  I’d argue that with that logic, we can look at democracy and capitalism as “just a platform”, but clearly they were created with some sort of intent behind them.

Platforms, like Facebook or Twitter, have clearly evolved over time.  Like the code that runs the web itself, its changed enough that its original form seems barely recognizable, like an old farm house that kept having rooms added on to it until barely anything of the first structure exists.  Sometimes the way the initial foundation is constructed reflects what tools were in use and available at that time, leaving us with archaic pieces glommed on to less efficient pieces of code (cough- Windows- cough).  The question then becomes whether or not to abandon the old to make way for a whole new platform, like the Mac did with its OS based on Unix, or to keep modifying the old, and hope the rickety building sticks together.  The legacy of the old foundation and initial purpose still flows through the veins of the platform, however.

The creators of platforms, ranging from web communities or even the iPod and iPad, may be surprised, and even thrilled at what people have been able to do with their creations, enjoying how these “children” have grown up over time, changed, evolved, and even exceeded the parent’s wildest dreams at the moment of conception.  I’m sure Mark Zuckerberg  has probably had a cringe moment or two when his Mom or old girlfriend contacted him on Facebook, but has also been thrilled that people see him as a visionary and having created something 500 Million people engage in- exceeding the population of the US.

Sometimes its difficult to see what to do with blank canvases.  Sometimes its hard to explain to others “What is it good for? Why do I need to use it?”  But if you ever want someone to engage, to have the platform grow and evolve, you had better be able to answer, even in a simple way, why someone would possibly want to be there, and what the attraction is.  If you can’t bait the hook, you can’t catch the fish, or in business, make the sale.

So, my dear geekarati friends, please have patience with the lay folk and come up with a better and more compelling sales pitch than “it’s just a platform.”  That tends to be what we refer to as content-free speech- words are being said, but the meaning is obscure.

The same thing is true for businesses, economics, families,you name it- as it’s true for bacteria or lemurs. If you find a niche and can exploit it to your advantage, you have a strategy for success that will carry you far. That is essentially the whole basis for great books like “Blue Ocean Strategy” (Amazon Link) that talk about finding markets where the competition isn’t fierce, or just isn’t there yet- you have the ability to own the niche.

One way businesses achieve this is by creating their own ecosystems.  Apple is brilliant at this, with iTunes and the App Store- it has created a whole economy that it owns.  It lets others play in the sandbox, helping diversify the entire ecosystem, making it more robust, and letting others compete to fill in the niches of best song, or best movie or best work productivity App, all the while taking a percentage, like an agent, as owner of the ecosystem or world.  Amazon has done this, as has Ebay.  All of these ecosystems compete at points of overlap- like a town encroaching on an animal’s habitat- but for large swaths of the ecosystem, there is less competition and life goes on pretty happily.

Finding your niche is difficult for a lot of folks, in part, because it starts with the very hard question of who YOU are, what you do best, and what you love to do.  Sometimes, we can fill a niche because we are perfectly suited for a job that’s available, but if it doesn’t make you thrilled or excited to go to work every day, how are you really going to have the heart required to maximize the opportunity day after day?

Another spot of friction is when you know your talents and strengths, how do you communicate those to others is a short, coherent, easy to grasp way so they can help you find a niche that works?  Some people refer to this as a lobby or elevator pitch- what is your tag line that inspires other people to be interested in you and hire you?

For example, on Twitter, I am largely known as LD Podcast, for the podcast I’ve done about learning and learning disabilities.  But the important part there is really the Learning part- that transcends people struggling in school or work with things like dyslexia and ADHD.  I feel I’m all about learning and teaching, and trying to find the most effective ways to make your message clear.  I read business books and marketing books because these fields are all about making messages clear in order to get someone to buy something.  I take all these ideas and concepts and apply them to help businesses, medical education, and other clients/niche owners to make their ideas and talents more easily understood.  When you understand, quickly, what someone or some business is about, you can quickly decide whether you need that service, and you can convey that information easily to others- making the idea a virus, as Seth Godin would say.  The principals are the same whether we’re talking math facts for middle school kids or marketing plans for adults or social media tools-  you’ve got to be able to make a case and sell your ideas for anyone else to understand them and do anything with them.  And that, in a nutshell, is about good, precise communication.

Which brings us back to science.  In science and technical writing, precision is really important.  I’ve spent hours struggling over a sentence or two in an abstract, trying to get the exact language as concise and accurate as possible.  Likewise, in law school, your ability to win a case or argument depends on how you use language to communicate your client’s position to another, and use supporting information to convince the decision maker you are correct.  In business and marketing, you have to do the same thing- use language to convince someone your product or service solves a need or problem- maybe even one they didn’t know they had. (Just ask Ron Popiel, or read about him in Malcolm Gladwell’s “What The Dog Saw“.)

In the end, it’s all about finding your unique niche where you can thrive.  You need enough resources (which includes money and customers for business, often money and students for education) to make the most of the niche, and you have to be constantly willing to adapt and change with the environment.  If you can’t adapt and evolve, you will likely suffer, decline, and possible even go extinct, or at least out of business.

It’s easier said than done of course.  But the process starts and ends with you, not with the shiny new objects or social media tools or anything else.  I’d love to be able to say Get Twitter and life will be perfect, but that’s not true.  Like monkeys figuring out to poke a stick in a log to get food, it’s all about how you use that tool to its greatest effect that will bring you success, and it often involves experimentation, failure, and reinvention time after time.

I know my life is one great experiment.  I think I know something, and that knowledge gets challenged.  I can stick to my guns, or adapt to the new conditions.  I have to apply what I know.  In reading The Checklist Manifesto- How to get Things Right, they talk about two distinct kinds of mistakes we make all the time.  There are errors we make of ignorance- we don’t know what we don’t know- and then there are egregious errors-  when we know the right thing to do, but we just can’t seem to execute as we’re supposed to, leading to disaster.

For example, I know easily 20 different diet plan that promise to help me lose weight, but it’s not a lack of knowledge, it’s the consistent implementation over time that causes trip-ups.  Part of it is programming the environment, and making doing the right thing easier than doing the self-destructive or ignorant or convenient thing.  Part of it is keeping simple rules forefront in your mind, and avoiding the infinite shades of gray.

Success will be measured by how well you can adapt to the “rules” or metrics of your environment, or control the environment to your advantage. It’s how well you can fill your social, cultural or economic niche.

And that’s why studying biology and evolution is essential to everyone.  Period.  Know your niche and optimize it.

I’ve ended up with two copies of Switch now (my pre-order and the promotional copy) and I am thrilled to have two, since it’s a book my husband is now starting as well, and this will eliminate any book battles at bed time, akin to our competition to read the last Harry Potter, when the first one to bed got to read the book and the other had to wait until the next night for a crack at it.

I love books that seem to get to the fundamental nature of problems and conflict, boiling things down into their essence and parts, so you have a new lens or template through which to view the world.  Made to Stick did this very well, condensing disparate parts and pieces of what makes stories, ideas, and messages of any sort memorable into a template of sort that helps me every day when I look at how to present ideas to others in a compelling way.

Switch takes on the huge problem of why change seems so almost physically painful, whether that change is personal or professional.  When we look at a big problem, like education or healthcare, it can seem impossible to tackle.  The problem seems too big.  There seems to be no good place to dig in and start making a change, and there seems to be too many external restraints that need to be overcome to make the problem seem remotely doable.  It may be written off as a “cultural problem” or a “system”problem or even a “few bad apples” problem, but in the end, a few small changes can often lead to cascading change, much like Malcolm Gladwell talked about in The Tipping Point.

Switch starts out with an analogy that change can be like a rider on an elephant on a path.  The rider is analytical by nature, the elephant is big and emotional, and the path is the things that need to be done to move forward to get to the destination that we all aspire to by creating change.  While I was initially not in love with this analogy, but it works in the book as a tool to frame out the different parts of creating successful change or innovation in any group or situation.

For change to be successful, all three of these components need to work together- the facts and numbers analytical portion must be happy; the moody and resistant portion of the group must be reasonably happy and convinced that they’ll give change a try, and the pathway needs to be clear enough and short enough to motivate the riders and elephants to choose it as an option or alternative to the status quo.

Let’s take a personal situation and apply this formula. (It’s easier than solving healthcare in a blog post.)

I just walk/ran my second half marathon.  For someone who just really started a concerted fitness program seven months ago, this would have seemed like a silly and crazy thing to even consider a year ago.  My elephant knew I needed to get in shape and get healthier, but there always seemed to be a reasonable excuse to avoid the gym- the pathway to health and fitness seemed foggy and the goal was noble but not specific and defined.  My “rider” knew what I needed to do, but we needed to construct a path to get there.

One of the steps was finding a personal trainer.  This way, I get to work out privately, and I’m coached so I pushed myself more than I would on my own- I have someone to impress.  I have an appointment to keep, and I’m not discouraged by the extra-fit others that are already at my destination, but just show me how much farther I have to go, causing a distraction from the smaller steps I need to take every day.

Another huge step was to find big external goals to work for, like these half-marathon events.  The distance events are like the end of a semester exam, as much as measurements of strength or pounds or inches lost are.  They are a test of strength, endurance and preparation, and show me what I can accomplish, as well as providing a comparison point for past performance.

By creating a pathway with many little goals along the way and big tests, the goal of better health becomes more achievable and more doable.  Every day behavior like skipping workouts or eating too much crap has its own built in penalties- for any endurance event, you pay the price for everything you did right or wrong along the training path.  This then makes the daily changes a bit easier to do as well, knowing the big wall is coming up fast as the race approaches.

I need the numbers- the analysis of the progress to satisfy my rider.  I need to feel good about myself and the changes that are occurring to satisfy the elephant, who might rather be eating girl scout cookies and watching Project Runway.  And all of this is easier when the path is much more specific, clear, and the change looks doable in its chunked-out parts.  It makes even thinking about doing another half-marathon possible, because I know the change is possible and the next goal is attainable, because I’ve done it before.

The brilliance of Switch is that this formula is tied into Maslow’s heirarchy of needs and one that applies to almost any situation.  For example, most of the strategies suggested to help kids with ADHD succeed in school involve not trying to fundamentally change the child, but change the environment to help the child do what’s needed.  Checklists of chores takes the amorphous “Do your chores” and breaks it down into specific, doable tasks, itemized and specific.  Showing a child how to be a bit more organized, and giving them tools that help ensure that they can keep the system up, with frequent checks, develops new, more constructive habits.  Getting rid of the daily speedbumps that turn a child off course- whether that’s always having things ready the night before to avoid morning panics, or smoothing the homework path by putting all their tools in one box and having a set place and time for work, or even putting hooks by the door so everything is available and convenient are small changes that can lead to big results.  Change can occur even in kids known to struggle in school, but they need those small successes to satisfy the elephant who needs to feel good, and they need “stuff to do” to satisfy the rider, but the pathway and environment are just as critical to success.

IDEO, the legendary design firm, works so well because their template works to make change of systems or design of new products integrate almost seamlessly into the way things are done.  they start out with understanding the problems or issues at hand- really getting to know what’s going on and how the situation isn’t working.  They then observe people using current products, or working with a customer, to understand how things are done now, and to start to get ideas about where a system or process might eb breaking down. Then they start the brainstorming and visualizing possible solutions ot the problem.  They rapidly put together prototypes, and then evaluate and refine what worked or didn’t work with the inital attempts, to tweek and further diagnose what will work in the end.  Then, they take their final product and implement it- what Seth Godin calls “shipping”- because all the greatest ideas in the world are worth nothing if they aren’t actually put into use.  Success means shipping- you’ve got to get the ideas out the door and into the real world- where the rubber meets the road.

While I’m still thinking a lot about Switch, it’s a book that helps me tie together all the separate ideas discussed above:

- how personal change and cultural change aren’t really so different;

-how many people problems can be solved by tweeking external environments and expectations;

-how good design and understanding problems are both key to making change successful,

and how in the end, it’s all measured by the implementation, and satusfying both the numbers people and the emotional folks as well- it’s a good change if people can see the difference and that how they feel about the change may be as critical to the outcome as any other part.   Never short-change the power of dedication, passion and enthusiasm- they will carry you pretty far down even a murky path, provided the obstacles aren’t too big at first.

I would definitely recommend Switch, another excellent book by Chip & Dan Heath- and don’t worry if you don’t love the metaphor of the rider and the elephant.  Like all good mysteries, it makes more sense in the end than in the beginning.

Seth has asked people to read it, think about it and give a thoughtful review.  I couldn’t wait to tell you about it until I finished the book- I’ve found myself quoting concepts in the first few chapters to friends  already, so I thought it was time to share.

Seth starts out the book by talking about how the old American dream and template we’ve all been fed is history.  There are tons of people who still believe all you have to do is follow the rules and you’ll get a job where you then follow the rules and get rewarded.  But the bottom line that many folks are finding out is that following the rules has ended up being a sucker’s deal, a bait and switch bargain.  The safety and security of jobs and pensions and retirement at a reasonable age, in reasonable health, where you enjoy a permanent vacation until you die is history, and we just have to accept that.  It sounds harsh, but I think we all know that’s true.

As someone with young kids, I know I have to prepare them for a very different world than the one I grew up in, and  that is both scary and challenging.  They’re going to need flexibility, maintain those qualities of being curious, being creative and innovative problem solvers for the rest of their lives.  With schools still programmed, in many sectors, to produce widgets for giant “work”  machines, how can I counteract this effectively?  Certainly, my kids are growing up exposed to innovative thinkers making their own game every day, but I know I still have to find more opportunities for them to flex these muscles on their own now, so they are willing to do so as they get older as well.

Seth encourages all of us to be creative, to be artists, to become remarkable and indispensable.  I wanted to find an exception to this rule, but I found I can’t.  At first, I thought- well, you know the professions- Doctors, Lawyers- we need those folks to make everything else work- how much real creativity do you have as a physician?  Well, and then I took a closer look at what my husband does every day.  Sure, he’s an OB-GYN, but he’s involved with research, working on projects including looking at fetal growth curves, how they can eventually eliminate prematurity, and other projects that at the heart of them require this creative problem solver mentality.  He has to take everything he knows, figure out the problems that are still there, that cause problems big and small every day, and design research protocols to try to make them better, so each patient coming through his clinic gets the best care possible.  It means getting the doctors and nurses and patients in the practice to consider different schedules, to try new clinics like “birth control before breakfast” and step out of their own comfort zones and potential myopia.  He has to ask people to try to do things differently and make a difference- not just by bringing new people into the world (which is pretty amazing in and of itself) but to be able to do so in a constantly changing environment, with financial pressures, with each patient having their own unique set of problems, and being able to improvise on the fly.  The best doctors do this well, and do become linchpins, not only to their patients, but to their colleagues and institutions where they practice.

I wanted to find some exception to Seth’s rule, being a believer that education and formal college educations are not worthless, but have value beyond memorizing facts. I want to believe we do teach people things in school that matter and its not all about grinding creativity out of people.   But I think becoming a linchpin is not about whether you’ve had any formal training or education in anything- it’s ultimately about taking your cumulative knowledge and experience from every thing you have ever done, and be willing to use all of it, at any time, as tools to solve the next problem.

For example, I started reading Seth Godin and a bunch of books in the “business/management” section of the bookstore, not long after my husband introduced me to Marcus Buckingham and the Strength-based approach to, well, everything.  I rapidly found that all the books in the education and parenting section of the book store, where I frequently spent time, were missing the boat.  The really interesting stuff about managing people, developing them to reach their full potential, and the like were all sitting in the business section.  I realized that running a family is exactly like running a small business, and everything I knew had infinite applications outside of the box one might put them in.  “Pediatric logisitics”- managing kids/people, schedules, activities, performance (grades), camp, and keeping an eye on the larger issues at the same time are all the same skill sets I use in my business, in running Podcamps, in every other aspect of my life as well.

The main point here is this- you have to be a person who strives to make a difference in everything you do.  You have to care.  You need to look out for yourself, but you also can’t afford not to look out for others as well.  You need to be able to use all of your experience, no matter where it’s from, and weave it into a new solution to try and make a change for the better.  There are no more silos.  There are no more boxes.    It’s all about bringing all your resources to bear to try to solve problems big and small, and not being afraid of having a “crazy” idea.  Those crazy ideas in the hands fo the right people, shared with other people who care, mean all sorts of resources can be marshaled and then moving the needle becomes easier than ever.

Thanks, Seth, for the jolt of espresso to my creativity, and for reminding me how important it is to care .  Thanks for the reminder that we have  to be willing to try the “impossible” (which turns out only to be a bit difficult) and can be accomplished if we just try to see the possibilities rather than shut down because it seems risky or scary.

I look forward to the chapters to come.

Back when I was an undergrad in the mid-eighties, the Wharton kids were all looking to join big Wall Street firms  and do mergers and acquisition work.  By the time we graduated, the heyday for this was coming to a close, and instead the recent grads had to readjust their expectations because the days of wining and dining newly minted graduates from one of the country’s most prestigious business schools had begun to dry up.

Mergers and acquisitions has always been about buying up smaller companies and acquiring talent you don’t have one your own.  It can be an extremely strategic and cost effective move.  But the bigger firms and businesses become, the harder they become to manage.  There are more and more moving parts.  Instead of trying to satisfy a niche audience very well, there becomes a push to satisfy the most number of people possible.  So instead of rabid fans of the special, businesses begin to play to the ubiquitous middle of the road.  And this works, sometimes for years.  But eventually, they become vulnerable to the small, nimble and risky competitor, which has less to lose by taking chances.

Seth Godin wrote about this in a recent blog post about the publishing industry.  What would happen if your profits dwindled?  What would you do differently?  Because that is the exact mindset of your competition.  They don’t need to clear millions of dollars of profit every year- they are perfectly happy just taking a small chunk of your business, until the point when you can no longer continue as is and they have sunk you, one small bite at a time.

Looking at retail, the big department stores have consolidated, in part, because there’s been a development of many brands with their own stores, own infrastructure, that no longer depend on the buyers for a big store for placement and sales.  In fact, with the internet, they can set up their own store for very little, and avoid placement in your big store at all.

Our local malls are experiencing a large amount of turnover, in part due to the failure of the anchor stores and their diversity, but also because of the rise of more and more small brands competing in the same niche you could find in the Department store.  Should I buy a Coach bag from Macy’s or the Coach Store, three doors down?  At this point, price only matters.  And Macy’s is no longer the only place to go to obtain this same merchandise.  Their shelf space has become more and more irrelevant in distribution.

My husband even remarked that health care is entering the same cycle we’ve seen in family farms.  Small individual businesses (independent doctors and their practices) are gradually consolidating and often coming under the wing of one larger entity (first large practice groups, or practices are bought outright by a hospital) for the sake of scale, the benefits of negotiating price and taking advantage of larger discounts, lowering administrative costs and the like, until very few individual small businesses will exist outside these larger entities, for good or for ill.

The problem with this consolidation/splintering cycle is that the large businesses become vulnerable to poaching by the specialty/niche providers, because the niche providers have less to lose.  the large firms can take advantage of economies of scale, but it also becomes easier for them to lose their way, lose their compass, manage all the different parts and cease to worry about pleasing the customer but instead become more interested in whatever they have to do to maintain themselves.  They start to think like sheep and less like scrappy entrepreneurs that are willing to take risks and try new things.

It’s the gradual onset of “This is the way we’ve always done it” that becomes the vulnerable Achilles Heel- the inability or unwillingness to take a look at what you are already doing, and imagine that it could be done differently, or better.

None of this is to say that big is bad or entrepreneurs get it right.  I’m trying to say that if big has its very clear advantages, is there opportunity for them to develop sections, departments, or even a think tank that has the task of looking at the business as a competitor might, but from inside the gates?  In there room to constantly challenge the status quo?  Or is there just a balance between big and small that can be managed the way W.L. Gore does, by not letting any one building or division grow beyond a certain size, because it eliminates the intimacy and flow of ideas that they value so highly?

As I see big industries disrupted by the way the internet is changing our decision making process, I wonder if what the big boys need is as simple as remembering what it was like for them before they were big.  And I wonder if the small guy, looking to become a part of something larger have to be equally concerned how to maintain their edge once they are in a safer harbor.

Sometimes security and safety is a panacea- an alleged cure-all that instead of solving all of our problems, actually creates some of its own in the process.  It can make us forget what it was like to be hungry and struggle, and we need just enough of that struggle to remain competitive and innovative.  Without it, we get lazy and complacent.  And striking a balance between these two extremes is not easy at all.

Complete Set Could be Yours!

I just finished reading Malcolm Gladwell’s latest book, What The Dog Saw. Unlike The Tipping Point, Blink, or Outliers, which are basically “single” ideas expanded into book form, What The Dog Saw is a collection of Gladwell’s remarkable writing from The New Yorker. You can see this collection, in part, as ideas that elaborate or continue themes Gladwell talks about in previous books, and others that might fit into a future book as well.

Each of the pieces does a great job at what I think Malcolm does best- take a few stories, and deconstruct them, to underlying principals,as if each story were a puzzle piece to solving some larger mystery or problem you’ve thought about but never really found a solution to yourself. He is a fantastic story teller, and can make anything from ketchup to hair dye fascinating. (This link will take you to an audio excerpt from the book from the section on hair color).

But what I get most from Malcolm’s work is insight.

For example, I read about Ron Popeil in the early chapters, and the deconstruction of the infomercial pitch made me think about how those pieces are elemental to any sort of business- you need to have a product or service that can be the star, and you have to find a way to tell the Star’s story, make it intriguing, and then make sure you ask for the money, so everyone can share a piece of the Star’s story for themselves. If you take those pieces and then keep them in mind when you are, say, constructing a presentation, or your website, you start to look at it in a whole new light.

In later chapters, Malcolm talks about genius, and how we also make snap decisions- an idea that’s reminiscent of Blink. But it’s making me consider how we evaluate people, how people evaluate each of us, and what small things you can do to create better “impression management”. There are some people, and one of my children is this way, who are naturally charming and engaging. These are the people we love to be around- they seem to be extra alive and have that X factor that gains them attention whether they want it or not. As a parent, I see part of my job as developing the person behind the charisma, and trying to make sure my child has the smarts and experience to back up his charm. In the end, that first impression opens up doors and lets you have greater access to opportunity, but it’s the execution on that opportunity that will eventually determine whether or not you’re successful.

What The Dog Saw is one of those books I’ll keep coming back to, because there are stories in here, and puzzle pieces I’ll be combining and recombining for a while, to see what new picture shows up in the end. Thank you, Malcolm, for a new book that causes me to think and consider more than any other book I’ve read recently- there’s gold buried in these pages.

Contest!

Thanks to the great folks at Little Brown Publishing, I received a set of Malcolm Gladwell’s books (pictured above) and they would love to send one of my readers their own complete set as well!

(I’m glad to have it, since I regularly lend out these books to friends, and ironically, my golden doodle took a bite out of What The Dog Saw, but didn’t do too much damage – here’s proof:)

(What the Dog Saw became briefly What the Dog Tried to Eat, but fortunately not too much damage).

Please leave a comment here or on one of the other posts I’ve written since November 15, 2009 on what I’m learning while reading “What The Dog Saw” and we’ll place all the names in a hat and do a drawing- I’ll announce the winners here, and Little Brown will send you a complete set for your own, just in time for the Holidays.

Thanks for stopping by, and even if you don’t win, I highly recommend What The Dog Saw. The sections make it easy to pick up and put down- a great book to read every night before bed, for example. I came away from the book simply in awe of Malcolm Gladwell’s writing and ability to tell stories- sometimes shifting in between diverse and seemingly incongruous stories, to show us the analogies and similarities that bring what makes us tick to light, and I only hope to aspire to that kind of brilliance in my writing.

Over these past few days, I’ve met a new group of amazing people, with skills and passion in over-drive.  People who have brilliant ideas, projects and powers to make things happen.  It’s been truly inspiring.  Instead of the Web feeling old hat, it feels like a place where magic can still happen, and it’s becoming less and less about just the shiny objects and more about using tools for self-actualization.  We’re moving up Maslow’s famous hierarchy of needs, and it’s beyond looking for food, clothing and shelter, and more about who we can become.

On many levels, the Web2Open was also about the evolution of the unconference as well.  It’s about giving people a platform to share their passions, to meet people they might never otherwise run into, because of geography, or cultural reasons, or any of the reasons we sometimes shut ourselves off from what’s truly possible.  For example, I had a truly amazing dinner with JC Hutchins last night, discussing creativity, valuation of creativity, and how we decie between doing the easy thing and the hard one, and the strength it often takes to say no to people who are really looking out for their best interest, not yours.

I’mn learning that community is not just a bunch of people, but it’s people you can call and they not only pick up the phone, but they are happy to sign onto your plan or idea, because they trust you.  Your community can have many layers and the strength of the connections may vary, but the best stuff happens when you say “I have this opportunity for you- what do you think?”  and there seems to be very little pause before they say “You bet- count me in.”  That’s priceless.  That’s people voting with their feet, their voices, their wallets, and they do it in part because they know you will deliver and make it worth their while.  And when time, attention and money are tight, that kind of opt in is priceless.

It’s going to take some time to fully process everything that’s happened, let alone dig out of my inbox and send the PDF’s I owe people, links, etc.  What I can say for sure is this memory will be with me for a long time.

Thank you to O’Reilly Publishing, Brady Forrest, Jen Pahlka, Sara Milstein, especially Meghan Reilly who helped us pull this all together from the TechWeb end;

Christopher S. Penn, the Marketing Ninja, Michelle Wolverton, the best VA and friend ever, for their support and assistance;

All of our great volunteers to who helped man the desk- more on these superheros in my next post;

All the speakers, attendees and everyone who participated in any way in the Web2Open.  You made it the event that it was, and I feel incredibly lucky to have been a part of it.

This could also be entitled “What I’m learning from Malcolm Gladwell and Ron Popeil”.

I picked up Malcolm Gladwell’s new book,”What the Dog Saw“- a collection of some of his New Yorker pieces. Since I wasn’t as blown away by his recent Outliers book as I had been by The Tipping Point and Blink, but even in the first chapter, I’ve found a story that’s speaking ideas making it more than worth the purchase price already.
The first chapter talks about Ron Popiel, of Ronco, informercial, and Showtime Rotisserie fame. Ron himself comes from a long line of pitchmen, honing their craft on the boardwalk and fair circuit, before Ron introduced TV into the mix. Ron Popiel has had an affect on my life, as I look back on it, from the first time I bought a Ronco Record in the late 70’s. (Does anyone else remember Ronco and K-Tel? Play that funky music, white boy…..) While I consider most infomercials the height of getting people to buy stuff they don’t really need- this guy is a master marketer we could all learn a few things from, especially when it comes to social media.

How many Ginsu knives and ShamWows do you have in your house? Veg-o-Matics? Pocket Fishermans?

Gladwell does a fantastic job of talking about the art of the informercial, and of Ron as an inventor. Ron has managed to get people to buy stuff for years by mastering the art of show and tell. He makes the product the star, and while he talks to you about it, he uses it and demonstrates, convincingly, how the product in hand will solve problems you never even really knew you had. On top of this, he gains your attention, entertains, and then makes an elegant turn and knows how to ask for the money.

Even in the days leading up to the new FTC regulations requiring truth in advertising, celebrity endorsements and the end of the small print *results not typical*, it’s hard to imagine how any of this will effect Ron. Ron shows everyone, in a personal and empathetic, emotional way, that his products do amazing things, and that every result is typical- no one is surprised. Now, they may get home and decide they didn’t eat as much beef jerky or dehydrated food as they thought, or eat as much salsa as they thought when they bought the veg-o-matic, the product does work exactly as promised. Ron is in the clear.

What I’m learning from all of this, is that even in social media, we have to be clear on what we’re doing. What are we selling? What is the product? Is the product the star, or are we trying to compete for attention with the product? And most importantly, do we know how to convert the interest into money? Do we know how to ask for the money?

As a consultant, I’ve been working with small and medium sized businesses to educate them about what social media can and cannot do for their business. My “pitch” is not for a specific product, but to try to help companies understand social media as a portion of their marketing strategy and how to make the most out of it. I earn money by charging businesses for my time and expertise, and helping them tailor a business strategy that makes sense for them in a way they can measure. I show companies the tools, we discuss pros and cons, and then try to get them to decide where they want to put their time, money and effort, and proceed accordingly.  And as much as I can dazzle people with all I know- the “turn”- converting Spectators into Buyers is what needs to happen.

And this goes for every business, every product, every person who needs to sell something to someone else.  We need to have products that can sell themselves, because we demonstrate that they are relevant and necessary to our customers. We need to make sure they know how much they need our products to solve their problems, and be ready to ask for the money and sell the product to them when they are ready to buy- not too soon, and not too late.  We need to make our case, and the convert the swayed person into a customer.

Ron sure makes it look easy, all the time.

But he’s gotten to where he is because his products aren’t smoke and mirrors- they do what they say.  Yes, I have 2 ginsu knives that are as wonderful as they were when I bought them, years ago, impressed by a sales guy at a home show at a convention center.  I am a happy customer, and Ron has earned my trust as a result.

I think we can learn a lot from Ron, and from Malcolm Gladwell’s new book, if we just remember to let the product be the star, to make sure we understand show and tell, and  most importantly, how to ask for the money.

The Federal Trade Commission has issued new guidelines that go into effect December 1, 2009 regarding the use of endorsements and testimonials in advertising that for the first time specifically include blogs.  While there’s a ton of rumors swirling around about what this means, here’s my two cents worth, read from my viewpoint as an attorney, albeit one who does not currently practice in this field professionally.

Brief History

Back in 2007, the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) published a notice in the Federal Register seeking comments from the public on the existing Guidelines Concerning The Use of Endorsements and Testimonials in Advertising, looking for information about the usefulness and the economic impact of the Guides, as well as seeking information about the increased use of consumer endorsements.  The FTC then published a notice in the Federal Register again in November of 2008 discussing the comments received and posted proposed revisions to its Guide, requesting comment on the proposed revisions. (This is all required under the rules of Agency Law, and has been done precisely as required.)
Seventeen comments from various advertising concerns were received, including, most relevant to online content producers, BzzAgent, Word of Mouth Marketing Association, Public relations Society of America (PRSA), the Direct Marketing Association, the Interactive Advertising Bureau among others.

The final version of the new Guidelines published October 5, 2009 will become effective as of December 1, 2009, and are no longer subject to revision or public comment.  For the reference librarians among you, you can find the new Guidelines at 16 C.F.R. part 255, or view them online by clicking here.

What are the Guidelines and Why are They Necessary?

The whole point of having FTC guidelines regarding endorsements and testimonials is to try to ensure truth in advertising, so that if the typical consumer sees an ad on TV, in a magazine, or online, they are aware it is an ad, and that the information contained within it is reasonably truthful and reliable.  The FTC is in charge of enforcing the rules requiring advertisers avoid outright lies and fraud, and advertisers and endorsers are subject to fines for doing so.

The advent of consumer generated content on a mass scale has radically changed who can provide information, opinions, endorsements and testimonials.  So where do bloggers, podcasters, and other user generated content producers fit into this mix?

The “New” Rules of Disclosure

The rules themselves are not particularly new, but they do extend to cover new media sources, consumer generated content, and attach the same standard used for businesses, celebrities and the like to the “Mom & Pop” blogging world.  Blogging as a medium is now going to need to take itself more seriously, and bloggers are going to have a new level of professionalism expected of them as it concerns endorsements or reviews that have some sort of exchange or quid pro quo attached.

Yes, I can still complain that the service stinks at my local grocery store.  But if the local grocery or one of its competitors gave me anything or paid me to write a review of their service online, I need to disclose that in my review, so people can discern any potential bias.

So How do I know if I am doing an Endorsement?  Am I equivalent to an expert or celebrity?

The Guidelines expressly define what constitutes an endorsement or testimonial and treats both identically.  Endorsements “must reflect honest opinions, findings, beliefs or experience of the endorser.”  They “cannot convey any express or implied representations that would be deceptive if made directly by the advertiser.”  This means the endorser is covered by the same rules that would apply to any ad agency- there is no longer any safe harbor for consumer generated content that is exempt from the Guidelines.  Likewise, advertisers have to disclose the connections between themselves and endorsers, and are liable for any false claims made by their endorsers.

The rules further state that as used in the rules, a product includes any product, service, company or industry, and an expert is defined as “an individual, group or institution possessing as a result of experience, study or training, knowledge of a particular subject which is superior to what ordinary individuals generally acquire.”

In plain english, this means:

- Almost anyone can qualify as an expert for the purposes of the rules, by just being able to review a product or service.

-If you receive money or any sort of exchange, including a free product, even if unsolicited, you must disclose this in the endorsement somewhere.  You can’t disclose it after the fact- it needs to live with the endorsement.  Writing about it, positively or negatively, does not matter- you are effectively an endorser and need to disclose this “quid pro quo”. (Section 255.2 regarding Consumer Endorsements).

-  If you are endorsing something, you must be a bona fide user of the product at the time the endorsement is given.  So writing a positive review about a book you didn’t read is deceptive;  writing a review about a product you intend to try but haven’t yet is deceptive as well, IF you have received any sort of exchange.  I can write about how I like my R16 mixer and say anything I want about it, positively or negatively, because I paid for it myself, even if I haven’t put it through all its paces.  I don’t have any disclosures to make because there’s no quid pro quo in any way, shape or form.

-The advertiser is liable for any false claims you make.  If I was paid or got a free service in exchange for trying it out and writing about it or podcasting about it, and I decide to say that “X brand soda is not only tasty, but cured my cancer” (or something equally unprovable and clearly a false claim) the advertiser as well as myself are liable and can be fined for that statement, No Matter How Large My Blog Audience Is or Is Not.

There are great examples in the actual guidelines I recommend you read if you have any questions.  It should clarify most situations if you have any questions.

But I think there are inevitably some gray areas- here are some personal examples:

-Chris Brogan is a close friend who has written a book.  I bought the book, but then I was also sent a review copy as well.  If I write a review, what are my disclosure requirements?
Well, I have received the product for free, but I also paid for it.  I am also friends with the author, and may have some bias because of it.  The BEST practice is to disclose both the copy received and the friendship along with the purchase- that way, everyone is clear when reading the article about potential bias.  I could review the book without disclosure because I purchased the item and probably get away with it.  However, full disclosure of the circumstances surrounding the review or discussion of the book is clearly the best policy, as it always has been.

-Another close friend, Andy Quayle,  has an internet hosting service I use for my blog as a paying customer.  If I talk about Tubu to friends or blog about it, what do I have to disclose if anything? I don’t have to disclose that I know the owner because regarding this “exchange”, I am just like any other commercial consumer- there is not reduced price or free service given with an expectation of advertising by word of mouth or otherwise in return.  But even when talking to my friends, I tend to do disclose  that I know Andy anyway, because it actually tends to add rather than subtract credibility on the whole.  If you tell someone “I use this service and it’s great- I know the guy and he really cares about his customers”- this benefits you, the business and your friend who know all the facts and have a good basis to judge your credibility and bias on the issue.  Lack of disclosure doesn’t substantially change the message, but it may lose some of its value as well.

A product available on Amazon.com starts to receive a bunch of reviews that are part of an elaborate joke or hoax, equivalent to being “Rick Rolled”.  As someone writing a review, are you liable?  No.  This is still fine, unless you were paid or received a free product or service.  You can still refer to a product sarcastically or rant or anything you like on Amazon or elsewhere, as long as you weren’t paid to do so and don’t disclose it.  Review to your heart’s content.  And if you were paid or received a free product, disclose it, and you’re fine.

How Does This Effect Celebrity Bloggers?  How will they have to adapt their content, if at all?

Let’s take a quick look at a couple of celebrity bloggers and their businesses, from the outside, and how these new regulations may affect them.

Take Gary Vaynurchuk.  Gary produces Wine Library TV, and this started as a way to build community around wine and sell more wine out of Gary’s family shop.  If Gary is paid by a sponsor to endorse a certain wine, discuss it on his show, or otherwise blog or rant about it, good or bad, he needs to disclose that he recieved payment for that.  If he is sent free bottles of wine even just one, and then discusses it in any way on any of his channels, personal or Wine Library TV, even if it was through a distributor and not from the Company directly, solicited or unsolicited, he needs to tell his viewers that he did not pay for the wine, and where he got it from.

Likewise, if Gary recommends that you attend a conference where Gary gets a hefty speaking fee, he has a commercial interest as does the host, in your attending the conference.  Asking Gary to “pimp” this out to his network is, in essence, asking for advertising over the web, and Gary will need to disclose his financial interest to avoid potential complications.

Likewise,Mommycast.Com is one of the longest running parenting podcasts, and the people behind Mommycast have received some great sponsorships and endorsements.  Some of them, like Dixie and their Aveeno Baby campaign (of which my show, the LD Podcast was a part of last year) are explicitly acknowledged in the audio portions of their show.  Other potential sponsorships or promotional exchange deals, such as when Mommycast went on the Disney Cruise, have not been totally transparent as to what was paid for or sponsored content.  In the future, any such program where there is an exchange of money, endorsements, items, whether solicited or not, will have to be part of the the written, audio and video shows they produce.  They can continue to produce the great content they always have, but they need to disclose what has been given in exchange, if anything, for their endorsement, review, opinion or other representations, regardless if the material is scripted by the sponsor or not.

This also means music shows will need to disclose if they receive free CD’s or downloads from the artists trying to promote their music, book review shows will have to disclose if they did not purchase the books themselves, and review sites looking at commercial products of any type will have to detail anything they received in hopes of review.

While some bloggers like Laura Fitton, a.k.a. @Pistachio have handled this to date by providing a page on their blog with bulk disclosures of all clients and potential interests, the rules are fairly clear and best practices require that the disclosure live along with the content.  Without indicating that there is a relationship in individual blog posts that promote a partner, there is a substantial chance consumers will not scour the website for all existing relationships, so best practice would require disclosure within each audio, video or blog post where an endorsement is made.

Implications for Twitter

Chris Penn and I discussed this a bit today.  “Buzzing” or promoting things for money in 140 characters or less is going to be challenging.  Safety says that you should probably link to a blog post where all detailed disclosures, if any, can be made rather than not disclose.  Twitter is microblogging, after all.  Likewise, we may see hashtags like #PE for paid endorsement take off, to meet disclosure requirements in as few characters as possible.  Tweets from companies directly are not consumer endorsements and are fine.  If you ReTweet someone’s else’s paid endorsement, you have not personally benefited from the transaction, so you are just passing along the message.  Because you haven’t been the recipient of any quid pro quo, you are unlikely to risk any liability.  What’s going to be interesting is to see how the FTC handles mass contests like “Win a Mac Book Air” and how this interacts with the endorsement/paid advertising regulations.  I would expect these sorts of issues will be some of the murkier ones to sort out once the Guidelines go into full effect.

The Good News

This is probably the first time independent bloggers, podcasters and video producers have some up against any sort of formal regulation or rules.  However, it’s already the rules and conditions that most people follow and have self-imposed anyway, as failing to follow these rules harms both your credibility as well as that of whatever you decide to endorse.  This is just another case where good common sense prevails on a day to day basis.

Bloggers, Podcasts and video producers- any producer of consumer-generated content online- are now being treated as real business people and grown-ups.  This will probably result in all of us “producers” being taken more seriously.  Blogging has grown up, and warrants actual rules and regulations- we should be pretty proud.  Likewise, it means we should expect that advertisers and companies treat our opinions and views with more respect as well- the relationships they seek with us will be even more valuable when done correctly, because there will be a clear benefit and avoiding an expensive potential fine of up to $11,000 per post, for violations.  This means advertisers and companies may spend more time talking to and training their blogging staff, street teams and the like, which again, will benefit both the disseminators of the information as well as consumers.

Implications for Advertisers

The implications for advertising through blogger outreach programs has a new level of seriousness, however.  Since ad agencies are liable for any false claims a blogger might make, there may be more review required of potential posts, or requests to remove posts with false claims after the fact, to avoid liability on the side of the advertiser and blogger.  This will start to change the endorsement space, hopefully for the better as each side treats the endorsement and recommendation or review process more seriously than ever before.

At the end of the day, the FTC has put together a reasonable set of guidelines that asks everyone to be reasonably responsible for themselves and what they ask other people to say about them.  While I am eagerly awaiting to see what kind of enforcement actually occurs and how the cases are determined, good common sense and basic disclosure practices adopted by most credible and long-standing bloggers already will keep everyone out of harm’s way.

Just remember, even if it’s free, even if it’s unsolicited, let everyone know.