Evangelism is Dead, Long Live Conversationalists

The root of the word education is e-ducere, literally, to lead forth, or to bring out something that is potentially present. - Erich Fromm, The Art of Loving

I was reading a rant by Clay Shirky (via TheNub) about why ChangeThis will not work.

Yes, Shirky gets to the heart of the matter with what's wrong with marketing today - but it falls on deaf ears because of the manner it's presented. He makes a fatal flaw in communication (yes, I've made it too; divorce is a powerful teacher) in assuming that the folks behind ChangeThis and the old marketing guard are static, inflexible and incapable of expanding their minds.

The post is well worth reading if you can get beyond that:

...admitting that posts are not pieces and that readers are also writers would upset their view of the problem as “We publish, you distribute.”

(Read the previous Beyond Cluetrain Conversations: The WE Story for context or this post may or may not make sense without it.)

Clay's points fall on deaf ears because the message that screams out louder is: They don't it. The US is what's missing. I/You language typically has the effect of creating discord.

There can be no communication if it is conceived as going from 'I' to 'thou.' Communication works only from one member of 'us' to 'another.' - Peter Drucker, legendary management consultant

Here's an example I/You conversation from The Art of Possibility:

He says, "Give me a raise or I'm quitting my job."
His employer passes the buck, or tries to appease him, or lies to him, or tries to get him to put off acting on his decision.

The We approach:

He says, "We're apparently both happy with my work, and I sense our loyalty is mutual. Yet this salary doesn't support the other commitments in my life. What do WE want to have happen here? How can WE make the whole thing work?"

As much I'm an advocate of customer collaboration and deep hanging out and engaging with customers to understand their desires and dreams to build out the right product in the first place...When it comes to getting it out into the marketplace and distribution I too am guilty to succumbing to the established marketing beliefs.

As much as my popular Myth of a Quiet Launch sounded like breaking new marketing ground, it was not. It was still the old one-way unilateral please-spread-the-message evangelistic stuff. It didn't allow for US to be equally influenced. I've spoken of building bridges instead of preaching to the converted, and the WE story is that bridge.

Evangelism at least as it is usually practiced is dead, period. Preaching to the choir in I/You language is ineffective. Larger technologies companies often have a Chief Evangelist. Perhaps instead you'll be seeing more Chief Conversationalists. And my own conviction is that every stakeholder - all employees, customers, potential customers, investors, partners - are conversationalists too.

Yet these conversations to allow for communication must occur in a WE place that acknowledge and respect the potential of a third place - neither I or you - to grow and expand and emerge.

The Net is goes beyond a media for disseminating out memes. What a great way to publish, I thought! My earliest forays into blogging were woefully one-way. I had something to say and spread to the world! This is only accelerating with the entry of more corporations entering into corporate blogging initiatives and other social, participatory media. It's not just a great unfiltered megaphone.

Probably the reason that blogs are reverse-chronological is that you can see the arc, or what the authors of the The Art of Possiblity call the long line, of the WE story. Reading my older posts on marketing make me wince now. But I've evolved and what counts is what I say now. And now isn't static. It may not be the same tomorrow. I'm learning, evolving too.

We simply need to be educated, not ranted at. "You don't get it" or "They don't get it" doesn't educate us.

The Net isn't a media - rather its power lies in being a third place - a space for the WE story to unfold.

Rather, in the process of understanding something, we let it affect us. It shapes us, and we shape it. We absorb it into the context of our lives. - David Weinberger

A more powerful perspective is to enable prospects - and customers - to shape your thinking. - FusionBranding: How to Forge Your Brand For the Future by Nick Wreden, my review here

Blogging is the ultimate virtual mentworking tool, the phrase coined by Beverly Kaye , meaning “a process of giving and receiving by participating in relationships in which everyone is a learner and a teacher.” - Dan VanDen Heuvel (via Lip-Sticking)

We all can be educated - or brought forth to our mutual potential - in Erich Fromm's definiton. And fluidly live within the emergent third entity, the WE, where we are both influencer and influenced - teacher and student - writer and reader - and create better companies and products and relationships in the process.

[The WE] asks you to trust that the evolution you set in motion will serve you over the long line. What happens after that is not in your control, but springs spontaneously from the WE itself. - The Art of Possibility, post here

Comments

[Eric Rice]

I'm an evangelist, which is a term easily understood. As far as I can remember, the "we" approach is one that works for various forms of persuasion and marketing and leadership. It implies some sort of vested interest by both parties.

Conversationalist? I laughed out loud at that one. Maybe because it just sounds so corny. "Hi, I'm a Conversationalist!"

W.T.F. does that mean? And answer that question without thinking about it and somehow you, I mean WE, start giggling. Seriously.

Good intentions, but um, productive nomenclature? I'm not convinced.

[Evelyn Rodriguez]

Eric, I've been an evangelist too...well, I still am in a lot of ways, so this post is about my own transformation in thinking. I don't have a beef with evangelists as individuals per se, just trying to EXPAND the definition to be much more than how it's practiced today.

I wasn't talking about DOING persuasion as much as BEING persuaded. I sense a little defensiveness in your response and that also happens a lot - not just evangelism. If I'm a customer it's much harder to communicate to an evangelist who is defending their product, company, industry, technology, worthy cause or any position rather than 100% absorbing my feedback and really letting it sink in. If I'm taking the time to talk even if it is negative, I do care (I'd won't bother at all if I don't).

I didn't give much thought to nomenclature so perhaps "conversationalist" isn't the most apropos. But it's not the main point - I was trying to capture the in-between space of relationships. I'm sure folks laughed at Evangelist at one time as well...conjures up Jerry Falwell or some other frightening image ;-)

Three main points:
1. "WE" is a "third" emergent, real-time entity - the full context is in chapter "Telling the WE Story" in the book, The Art of Possibility. I'm not sure the entire richness of that idea is expressed well in this post or the excerpt I link to - but it's well worth reading at the bookstore cafe. Just a breath-taking chapter. It's certainly not how most evangelism is conducted. It's not how most relationships are conducted.

2. Corporate evangelists aren't quite as dogmatic as the definition for 'evangelist' suggests but you've got to wonder about the intentions behind that nomenclature. Defn: Zealous preaching and dissemination of the gospel, as through missionary work.

You are among the evangelists on the cutting-edge as many bloggers are. I write this blog for a very wide audience - yes, even some of whom are entirely unaware of or highly suspicious of Cluetrain Manifesto. (Remember I said I was an evangelist too ;-)) The majority of marketers and evangelists (um, even in the blogosphere) do NOT allow themselves to be influenced and shaped anywhere near as much as they are attempting to influence and shape. And continuous improvement on this front is never ever a bad thing.

3. I see missed opportunities for true communication all the time. Both Clay and Seth live in NY state and probably could easily get together for a coffee some morning; I bet they probably have a lot to learn from each other. But I/You mindset (Seth ignored Clay's comments publicly) doesn't make it as likely - not impossible but questionable. I have to wonder how much this happens in all kinds of contexts. Communication is harder than it appears. I'm no expert but I'm sharing what I learn as I go.

[hugh macleod]

Communication is indeed harder than it appears. Say we worked for the same compnay, and our employer gave us this amazing IM/Blogging/Communication tool.

So... we could communicated awfully well, in theory.

But only if we liked each other. If I hate your guts, if I want to take you out, doesn;'t matter how good the tools are. Communication isn't going to happen.

So then cultural issues come to the fore. Where you worry less about the people's tools, and worry more about how much your people like each other.