Media companies and losing talent

A couple of very interesting posts regarding the ever-changing media world popped up last week. Jeremiah Owyang catalysed some interesting discussion when he posed the idea that the Golden Age of Tech Blogging is over (A theme I’d covered earlier with a less provocative headline – curses!) We both broadly agree on the topic, although I think we’re probably both being slightly biased towards anecdotal evidence and especially an understandable English-language bias.

One thing we both mentioned was the move for senior writers and contributors from notable blogs to be starting out on their own – whether as a group or individuals – e.g. The Verge, The Kernel, Uncrunched, The New Gambit, etc).

And related to that was Neil Perkin, with a typically insightful post asking ‘Why big companies get rid of talented people?’. Considering AOL looms large in the stories of TheVerge and Techcrunch,  it’s a pertinent question to the state of tech blogging, along with all large media businesses at the moment. To quote:

Despite talking a good game, many large organisations remain relatively poor at moving talent around the company. The silo culture that still characterises many businesses doesn’t help. Requirements and expectations become optimised to local needs rather than those of the organisation as a whole. Strangely, the people who can really see the bigger picture and are often the ones to challenge existing assumptions are the ones that begin to not fit so easily into those silos. So companies take the easy option.

In my view, it’s their loss.

I’ve certainly suffered from those elements of traditional business culture, and also been lucky enough to benefit from senior individuals who looked beyond it and saw reasons to do things differently. I also commented on Neil’s post that there’s an element of a culture clash – anecdotally, the most talented digital and non-digital people I’ve worked with have all been more concerned with solving problems across the business than staying within their assigned role or concentrating on office politics and have often suffered for it, even within firms which are supposedly extremely tech focused.

The major difference is that digital tools mean those people have less reason to accept their given role – there’s greater access to other opportunities whether with another company or via self-employment. I haven’t timed it for a while, but a new site via Blogger, Tumblr etc is about 1 minute to set up, and however long it takes to get your first post written – all for no financial outlay.

exit.

 

How big media companies can keep talented people

1. Hire and fire the right people:

First up, there’s an oft-quoted rule about A players hiring A players. You need to be hiring people who you can trust with the freedom I’ll mention in tip 2, and who can work with a high degree of autonomy. Those people who will identify a problem, come up with a solution, and then get it done, rather than just sitting there.

You also need management at all levels who can accept constructive criticism, work with it, and are able to change things. And you need a level of honesty throughout about whether or not it’s working, because even if you can convince yourself within your business that everything is fine, it’ll still be apparent outside of the office by the output.

2. Freedom

Everyone knows about Google and their 20% time. Barely any companies ever actually do anything similar. Lots of people can provide empirical evidence about how small changes and innovations lead to big results, and yet very few companies ever put that type of approach into practice. Every company would love the next big thing, but hardly any would let someone build something and get it straight out the door to see whether it works or not, without months of watering it down into something non-offensive, and uninteresting. I have to mention my former employers at Absolute Radio as one example of a business which puts an above average level of mutual trust and respect in the talented people they employ, and as a result continue to constantly churn out a variety of interesting projects and innovations, some of which are highly successful.

And when it comes to freedom, common sense goes a long way in revising employee contracts and guidelines for areas such as social media. In a litigious area, it’s easy to forget the effect that what may have seemed a legal safeguard will actually have on a normal employee, especially when it comes to legal attempts to own innovation rather than encourage and reward it.

3. Support and reward

Psychologically, money is not the biggest lever to increase productivity and success, provided it’s at a decent level. Crucially in the media industry, the attraction of a career leads to a high amount of applicants for roles, and a correspondingly low level of pay for many. If you want employees to focus on the best way to make your business more money, then you need to understand they can’t do that if they’re constantly worrying and stressed about making the next mortgage payment and their increasing overdraft.

I’m not suggesting you pay huge amounts over-the-odds for people who aren’t going to be productive, but that you adequately reward people that are. And that doesn’t necessarily mean in basic wages – give people a chance to share in success, and make it meaningful.

Whatever your opinion of Richard Branson, there are examples in Business Stripped Bare of cleaners and watersports instructors rising to management positions. At the same time, cabin crews on their airlines earn slightly less than competitor employees but receive other rewards for their contributions to improving the business.

 

Culture Jamming by Hugh McLeod (cc Licence, ref gapingvoid.com)

It’s worth reading this Hugh McLeod post that accompanies the above cartoon on Culture Jamming. The money quote is:

chan­ging your company’s for­tu­nes NOT by trying to directly change what the gene­ral public thinks of you, but by trying to change what YOU think of you.

And that’s the massive, massive problem with most media companies up until now. Along with marketing and advertising, they’re the companies most used to talking at audiences, and have spent decades, or even hundreds of years perfecting that art. And when you’re used to playing a part to an external audience, it’s hard to even start to acknowledge what’s going on internally.

From Hollywood to Aylesbury (and UK freelancers)

When I dreamed about entering the movie business, I always assumed it would involve luxurious offices in Los Angeles or London, rather than a suburban semi-detached in Aylesbury. As it happens, I’m helping out the immensely talented Dalang Films, who are now releasing their own projects after working on many of the biggest films of the last decade.

Hollywood Sign

Chatting about their plans and introducing them to a few ideas around licensing, digital distribution and marketing, I couldn’t help thinking about the way business is changing every day in the UK, with more and more freelances, entrepreneurs and small businesses appearing every day.

A recent story on the Atlantic shared some relevant stats from the U.S.

  • In 2005 1/3 of the US workforce participated in the ‘freelance economy’, with data showing that number has increased ever since.
  • 2009 saw the highest level of entrepreneurial activity in the U.S in 14 years.
  • Online freelance job postings rockets in 2010, and companies are increasingly outsourcing various functions, along with increasing support for telecommuting.

I don’t have the equivalent UK figures, but I’d suspect we’re probably a bit behind due to cultural differences, but the same change is definitely happening. And despite the media fascination with ‘Silicon Roundabout’ in London, or even the ‘Silicon Fens’, there’s a huge amount of small business and individual endeavour that’s being missed.

For instance, the 40-50 people in Digital People in Peterborough are almost entirely comprised of small businesses and individial freelancers, with just a handful of exceptions. And I’d bet a similar picture is true of a huge number of geek meet-ups, or business networking events outside of London.

It’s not an easy life, and I wouldn’t romanticise the challenges of choosing between buying food or paying the bills when client invoices get missed and paid late. Or of working late into the night on something because there’s simply no-one else to help. But I do believe that there’s a cultural and business change happening which not only makes freelancing and telecommuting more acceptable, but will also enable it to become easier, with more support from the various necessary institutions.

And if you’ll excuse me, I have some client work to finish before I sit back with a beer and practice my Oscar acceptance speech. I know there’s not one for marketing, so I’ve offered to help out on various odd film jobs to make sure I get included in the nominations!

The noble purpose of skateboarding dogs

Something I inherently felt about the rise and success of Youtube and On Demand video and TV seemed to click when I happened to be re-reading  59 Seconds by Professor Richard Wiseman. Besides being packed full of quick and useful ways to make practical improvements to your life, it also has a lot of references to relevant studies. And one referred to the role of pets, particularly dogs, in lowering stress and blood pressure.

In addition to real pets, Wiseman also mentions studies which used the Sony Aibo (Now discontinued but available via Ebay), and videos of dogs playing, and all had a similar effect at different levels.

And that’s something which people might have missed when they often dismiss a lot of Youtube or online video content as ‘dogs on skateboards’. Broadcast news has long ended bulletins, particularly on slow news days, with the ‘cat stuck up tree’ or similar heartwarming tale of human or animal misfortune. But if you’re in need of cheering up, being able to find endless videos of cute pets is guaranteed online. Including Tillman, who ended up advertising the iPhone:

But besides helping us to feel better and less stressed, there’s also an interesting flipside, which is that most of the media are in an endless race of shock and awe to try and compete with the real-time internet in new and exciting ways. The coverage of the recent London riots, and the events currently unfolding in Libya as I type, are both constantly providing examples of traditional and new media organisations and reporters trying to utilise, and compete with, the internet at the same time, leading to a strange dichotomy.

Even as seemingly clueless presenters commentated on the evils of social networking during the London Riots, the BBC and other media organisations were repeating content from, and sharing content to, Twitter, for example.

And at the same time, there’s a filtering and curation element of popular entertainment, away from the ever-increasing Fox-style shouting controversy that seems to permeate modern TV news reporting, in that I have never had access to so many broadcast channels and yet struggled to find anything which doesn’t irritate me at the very least. The reasons are many, included my awareness of all the alternatives, the possible effects of lowering resources and funding but trying to fill more hours, and the fact that so much content is being endlessly repeated across channels.

But I can get away from all this with my personal selection of things I enjoy watching, and that might help me relax as much as a skateboarding dog, or might be useful, inspiring, or god forbid, actually relevant to me at a time when I’m actually able to watch it. It would be interesting to figure out what I watch most online, but I’m certain the TED Talks would be up there, along with MotoGP, and various racing and FPS game videos, for example. And then a selection of robots, 3D Printing, Extreme Sports, Vintage Rallycross, and a mix of music videos.

But I’m never actively seeking out the news anymore. I’m letting it come to me via social networks and social sharing sites, and it essentially filters into:

  • stuff that people in my local area are talking about and bringing to my attention.
  • stuff that people in my areas of interest are talking about, and that I’m actively interested in – so technology,privacy,hacking, etc.
  • stuff that’s so big it makes an impact across everything – earthquakes, riots, tsunamis, overthrowing governments.

But a lot of this passes through RSS feeds and Twitter so quickly, that I’m only looking at stuff which matters to me in some way, and I wonder whether that’s actually making me a happier person. I still worry that politicians are all corrupt, corporations are inherently evil, the economic downturn means everyone will be poor for 50 years unless they’re rich enough not to worry, and crime may or may not be on the increase (although in the reality most people exist in, it’s whether crime is actually likely to personally affect us).

But I’m spending less time reading about all of it, and more time actually figuring out how I might be able to do something about the parts which are more important to me – for instance, looking at what the likes of the EFF and Open Rights Group are doing with regards to privacy.

Wait, wasn’t this about skateboarding dogs?

Maybe skateboarding dogs have actually have 3 noble purposes in our lives:

  • When we watch them, we feel more releaxed and our stress decreases.
  • Because we enjoy watching them (and then sharing links with friends), they made sites like Youtube extremely popular extremely quickly, and far more popular than the corresponding broadcast channels, because there’s no barrier to anyone uploading a video of a skateboarding dog they may have spotted.
  • And the huge popularity of video on-demand sites has enabled them to reach scale, even if there have been concerns they aren’t making enough money. That scale gives them some elements of power in terms of advertising and revenue, and that means their survival is continued, allowing millions to upload more content that Hollywood could ever produce (for example), and a breadth of content which ranges from babies laughing to lectures on quantum physics and everything in between. Projects like the Khan Academy, for example, which allows anyone with access to the internet the ability to learn via video tuition.

So the next time you’re laughing at a talented hound riding a skateboard, it’s worth remembering that they’re also serving a noble purpose in better the world…

The ‘second screen’ is an integral part of life…

I happened to watch the excellent Concrete Circus on Monday whilst staying with my parents (It’s available via 4OD at the moment). It’s a great programme about five amazingly talented urban sports stars attempting to make their latest and greatest videos, and heavily references the audience they’ve attracted by sharing their athletecism on Youtube.

I’ve always been a fan of urban sports (skateboarding, urban trials, parkour and BMW in this example), and for once the description of ‘jaw dropping action’ is pretty true. But I was also a little surprised when I suddenly realised the difference apparent across the living room.

My dad was sat engrossed in the action in his chair, occasionally chatting to me about what was on screen. At the same time, I’m sat with my laptop, sharing some thoughts on Twitter and also picking up on each mention of the Youtube clips which made each athlete famous, and saving each one to watch later. It wasn’t that I was using my laptop whilst watching TV – it was the fact that it was so natural that I didn’t even acknowledge it was out of the ordinary until my parents mentioned it after around 30 minutes or so.

Incidentally, having already seen videos of Danny McAskill and Kilian Martin, it was the parkour that amazed me the most, e.g.:

What I started wondering was whether it’s right to call the PC or iPad the ‘second screen’ as TV broadcasters and most media firms would have us believe. Or is it actually that the TV now occupies a similar spot in many ways to radio, in which we’ll have it on, but only pay attention when something grabs us. If I looked at my Twitter usage on a Sunday, I would guess that it builds for about 30 minutes before each MotoGP race, stops for 50 minutes while the race is happening, and then kicks off after the finish, as I mix the pre and post-race interviews and commentary with my thoughts and reactions, and those of my friends and peers.

And mobile is bringing this out with us, whether it’s the likes of QR Codes and Augmented Reality, or even something as simple as Google search. At the National Space Museum recently, I came across some information about astronomer Tyhco Brahe, and found the name familiar for some reason. Within seconds I’d realised it was from online comic Penny Arcade, and confirmed it via Wikipedia. And again,  whilst watching Exit Through The Gift Shop, I ended up researching elements of the programme for friends whilst watching it.

What’s interesting is that in all of these occasions, the computer/mobile usage was part prompted through my own desire for knowledge, and mainly prompted by the social aspects of being able to answer questions/provide context and sharing the knowledge I had access to. Plus there was a strong element of fact checking with a little error correction as well!

Given the value humans put of social activity as a species, it’s not only the interactive screen which should probably be denoted as the ‘first screen’, but it’s becoming vital that whatever you’re doing to get the attention of people, whether via broadcast media, or in a museum, you need to be aware of how to accomodate the ‘first screen’, or be able to successfully compete with it (a riskier strategy unless you can jump over buildings etc).