Writing Boots

On communication, professional and otherwise.

Somebody set internal communication back 30 years. But it wasn’t me.

06.01.2011 by David Murray // 32 Comments

When I was editor of the weekly communication trade publication The Ragan Report in the 1990s, all I had to do to get a raft of letters was refer to an employee publication as a "house organ."

The operative phrase was: You just set employee communication back 30 years!

Silly, I know, to think you could set a whole profession back 30 years just by using old terminology.

But I do miss the underlying assumption, that this was a profession progressing. Progressing in all sorts of ways—from top-down to interactive, from "babies and bowling scores" to strategic, from corporate platitudes and stilted language to human candor.

These days, if you were going to set the profession back 30 years, in which direction would you push?

Aussie communicator Paul Murton remarked on a blog the other day that he was talking to a colleague, and they came to a discouraging conclusion:

while the importance of ’strategic’ internal comms (linked to business strategy and engagement) started rising in management eyes (say) 5-10 years ago, it now seems it’s now more often taking a back seat to tactical communication that just keeps people informed as an afterthought. External comms, PR, investor relations, marketing comms are still where the investment goes and internal comms teams are being depleted (and paid less in less-senior positions) in companies all over the place.

Is it just two people in Sydney who think this, or is it more widespread?

Ah, yeah. It's more widespread.

In 1996 on Ragan Communicaton' behalf I launched a thing called the Journal of Employee Communication Management. In my first editor's letter, I called it "The Harvard Business Review for internal communication." It came out six times a year, and each issue contained six practitioner-written essays, of 3,000 words each. These case studies, confessions and clarion calls would generate rebuttals, spark year-long debates and serve as the bases for keynote conference sessions with titles like, "Employee Communicator's Manifesto."

Sounds like 1896, doesn't it?

The journal thrived in the first few years of publication, remained profitable for a number of years after that, and lasted until about 2008, when it died, not because the Internet made such journals obsolete (the Harvard Business Review is still coming out). Mostly, it died because there weren't enough people in the whole world who were actually thinking about employee communication to write 36 decent essays every year, let alone read them.

And now I see the former publisher of that journal promoting its 20th annual Corporate Communicators Conference by promising, "No abstractions. No pie-in-the-sky theory. Only: practical tips and strategies that you can use tomorrow."

Reminds of what my dad used to say, when the family seemed at a standstill, "Let's do something, even if it's wrong."

But he was joking.

Communicators, where are you going?

And for the love of house-organ cheesecake*, why?

* A free tube of Preparation H to the first geezer who can tell us to what I am referring here.

Categories // Uncategorized Tags // Corporate Communicators Conference, employee communication, internal communication, Paul Murton, progress, Ragan Communications, the Journal of Employee Communication Management, The Ragan Report

Mediocre writer claims communicators don’t need to be fine writers

07.19.2010 by David Murray // 15 Comments

“Who cares about writing skills?” is the intentionally provocative question asked by prominent U.K. employee communication consultant Liam FitzPatrick, in a recent post on his blog, “Internal communication—it’s not rocket science.”

Writing Boots regular Reuben Bronee objected to FitzPatrick’s blog post.

I thought I’d have a conversation with it instead. FitzPatrick begins:

Years ago I went for a job interview at a well-known PR agency and was rather taken aback to be asked to do a writing test. I never got the job and never got any feedback so I’ll leave it to my loyal readers to judge if my writing would have let me down or [whether] I can blame it on my dreadful interview technique.

Liam, you’re on.

But it is something that has puzzled me over the years. Does a competent communicator have to be a good writer or are there other attributes that are more important?

That last sentence isn’t only clunky; it posits a dodgy opposition. That is, it could be true (and in fact it is true!) that one must be a good writer to be a competent communicator and that there are other attributes that are at least as important.

To be honest I don’t think being a good writer matters—I’ve met plenty of great comms people who couldn’t write to save their lives and I know a few fantastic writers who I’d never trust to give communications advice.

Generally, when a good writer makes a claim as bold as this—you’ve met “plenty” of great communicators who couldn’t write a lick, eh?—he or she backs it up with an example. “For instance, there was the media relations maven who couldn’t write a press release, but who was so charming she’d just call up reporters and dictate the stories to them! And who can forget the speechwriter who couldn’t get anything down on paper for the CEO, but he could pump the old boy so full of enthusiastic blarney that the message didn’t matter! And then there was the communication VP whose communication advice was so good that not only did she not have to write well, she didn’t have to speak! Just a clever wink and a twinkle of the eye was usually sufficient ….”

And that was one of the findings that came out when Sue Dewhurst and I conducted our skills research a few years ago. Simply put, many senior communicators see writing as a technical or craft skill that can be bought in as it is needed. 

“Bought in”—a telling Freudian typo, perhaps. First, shouldn’t management prefer to hire communicators who don’t have to order out for good writing? Second, writing is often needed at a moment’s notice. (See, I needed it just now!) Who has time to call Tony Morrison and brief her on the context of an urgent communication need?

Other abilities are much more important when it comes to planning messaging or gathering feedback for senior leaders.

These “other abilities,” he doesn’t specify.

Clearly writing involves certain skills that are invaluable for a communicator. Empathy with your audience, simplifying complex ideas and finding ways to make a dull subject engaging are certainly useful.  …

But I’m not sure I’d appoint a director of comms on the basis of their ability to win a Pulitzer prize.

Don’t worry, Liam; Pulitzer candidates won’t be lining up at your door.

I’m not suggesting that a communicator should be allowed to get away with bad writing.

Wait. You just said that you’ve known many great comms people who couldn’t write to save their lives. Another hallmark of good writers is intellectual integrity, Liam.

All I’m saying is that it doesn’t make sense to prioritise writing over any other skill – if a single skill is all that matters why shouldn’t it be film-making, web design or spamming twitter?

Such a slovenly argument, it doesn’t deserve a response.

Take a look at some of the skills models that exist and make your own mind up!

After you’ve blurted out six or seven unsupported absurdities, this is your coupe de grace? You tell your readers to “take a look at some of the skills models that exist” and make up our own minds?

Liam, you can write better than that.

Or can you?

Categories // Uncategorized Tags // importance of writing skills, internal communication, Liam FitzPatrick

Employee communication is different … and so are the E2E Communication Awards

02.17.2010 by David Murray // Leave a Comment

 Most HR executives can't stand employee communication. They talk about "having it" in their portfolio the way the rest of us talk about having an inoperable tumor in our belly.

Most marketing people, on the other hand, love employee communication! They love it so much, they recreate it in their own image, and call it Internal Marketing!

PR people like to do employee communication too. They take it one campaign at a time.

The E2E Communication Awards is for those of us who believe that employee communication is different: from HR, from marketing, from public relations: Another discipline entirely, with separate principles, different techniques and goals all its own.Logo

You wouldn't enter your art project into a science fair. So don't enter your employee communication work into some PR awards.

Peruse the perfectly calibrated categories and the agreeable entry process for the E2E Communication Awards, and you'll know exactly what I'm talking about.

But do it soon. The deadline for entries is April 2.

Sincerely,

David Murray, Program Chairman

P.S. Employee communication impresario Steve Crescenzo has just agreed to present the best of the winners at the Employee Engagement, HR and Social Media 2010 conference in Chicago May 12-13. Mark your calendars. More details to come.

Categories // Uncategorized Tags // E2E Communication Awards, employee communication, human resources, internal communication, marketing, PR, public relations

Now Available

An Effort to Understand

Order Now

SIGN UP TO RECEIVE BLOG UPDATES

About

David Murray writes on communication issues.
Read More

 

Categories

  • Baby Boots
  • Communication Philosophy
  • Efforts to Understand
  • Happy Men, and Other Eccentrics
  • Human Politicians
  • Mister Boring
  • Murray Cycle Diaries
  • Old Boots
  • Rambling, At Home and Abroad
  • Sports Stories
  • The Quotable Murr
  • Typewriter Truths
  • Uncategorized
  • Weird Scenes Inside the Archives

Archives

Copyright © 2023 · Log in

  • Preorder An Effort to Understand
  • Sign Up for Blog Updates
  • About David Murray