Comments on: Where are the thought followers? http://gobigalways.com/where-are-the-thought-followers/ Fri, 01 Jan 2010 22:44:00 -0700 hourly 1 By: Joe Luedtke http://gobigalways.com/where-are-the-thought-followers/comment-page-1/#comment-1626 Joe Luedtke Sat, 21 Jun 2008 20:26:24 +0000 http://gobigalways.com/?p=325#comment-1626 Yes, "thought leadership" is an overused term and I agree completely with need for "thought followers", but what I've found to be typically missing is the "lead"ing in "thought leadership". As you state, too often thought leadership translates into a whitepaper or a marketing program. What is often missing is the leadership necessary to bring that thought to life. Coming up with new ideas is easy. Nurturing them to reality is the challenge. Yes, “thought leadership” is an overused term and I agree completely with need for “thought followers”, but what I’ve found to be typically missing is the “lead”ing in “thought leadership”. As you state, too often thought leadership translates into a whitepaper or a marketing program. What is often missing is the leadership necessary to bring that thought to life. Coming up with new ideas is easy. Nurturing them to reality is the challenge.

]]> By: Steve http://gobigalways.com/where-are-the-thought-followers/comment-page-1/#comment-1590 Steve Wed, 18 Jun 2008 16:32:50 +0000 http://gobigalways.com/?p=325#comment-1590 From a company perspective, I think in today's world, thought leadership is a dated term that assumes one corporation can truly lead the dialogue. You used the term 'thought participation,' which is more apt. Kim Feraday (other responder) has it right. I also use the term 'thought direction,' implying the ability to not just participate in the conversation but to bring it into different topical areas...and maybe to lead the conversation...for awhile. But to imply that one company can unambiguously claim a crown of thought leadership is bordering on arrogant. Sure, it might be possible for a startup with a big innovation and even larger pipes. But if it's possible, it is fleeting...and for so many reasons, e.g., company's ongoing performance, performance of respective products, market direction and competitive forces, macro-economic forces, the will and voice of 'the people,' ever-increasing pace of change, etc. Realistically, the crown can go to a few, but to one? From a company perspective, I think in today’s world, thought leadership is a dated term that assumes one corporation can truly lead the dialogue. You used the term ‘thought participation,’ which is more apt. Kim Feraday (other responder) has it right. I also use the term ‘thought direction,’ implying the ability to not just participate in the conversation but to bring it into different topical areas…and maybe to lead the conversation…for awhile. But to imply that one company can unambiguously claim a crown of thought leadership is bordering on arrogant. Sure, it might be possible for a startup with a big innovation and even larger pipes. But if it’s possible, it is fleeting…and for so many reasons, e.g., company’s ongoing performance, performance of respective products, market direction and competitive forces, macro-economic forces, the will and voice of ‘the people,’ ever-increasing pace of change, etc. Realistically, the crown can go to a few, but to one?

]]> By: Kim Feraday http://gobigalways.com/where-are-the-thought-followers/comment-page-1/#comment-1589 Kim Feraday Wed, 18 Jun 2008 00:25:30 +0000 http://gobigalways.com/?p=325#comment-1589 Maybe what we also need is thought leaders who start looking at their roles differently. Instead of spewing "divine knowledge" from on high, maybe what we need are thought leaders who, in the Socratic tradition, frame and guide the discussion. This more effecively leverages the knowledge of all participants and (hopefully) results in new/better ideas, that are fully vetted and ready for prime time. Alot of these new technologies have given more people a voice and made thought participation more viable. In a way it's similar to the role pamphleteering played in the 19th century. What we need is the equivalent of the town square where we can readily exchange and respond to these. I'm not convinced that part has been sorted out yet. Maybe what we also need is thought leaders who start looking at their roles differently. Instead of spewing “divine knowledge” from on high, maybe what we need are thought leaders who, in the Socratic tradition, frame and guide the discussion. This more effecively leverages the knowledge of all participants and (hopefully) results in new/better ideas, that are fully vetted and ready for prime time.

Alot of these new technologies have given more people a voice and made thought participation more viable. In a way it’s similar to the role pamphleteering played in the 19th century. What we need is the equivalent of the town square where we can readily exchange and respond to these. I’m not convinced that part has been sorted out yet.

]]> By: Marc Meyer http://gobigalways.com/where-are-the-thought-followers/comment-page-1/#comment-1588 Marc Meyer Tue, 17 Jun 2008 21:18:40 +0000 http://gobigalways.com/?p=325#comment-1588 Paula, maybe he meant that conversations should have thought participants thought moderators and thought administrators. Though in the big picture, some will lead, some will follow and then some will stand on the sideline and just watch as it goes by. Paula, maybe he meant that conversations should have thought participants thought moderators and thought administrators. Though in the big picture, some will lead, some will follow and then some will stand on the sideline and just watch as it goes by.

]]> By: Dave Kresta http://gobigalways.com/where-are-the-thought-followers/comment-page-1/#comment-1582 Dave Kresta Mon, 16 Jun 2008 20:37:52 +0000 http://gobigalways.com/?p=325#comment-1582 Yes -- "thought leaders" seem to be a dime a dozen. I prefer to use another metaphor -- be a "rut jumper". It is too easy to be stuck in our thinking, to follow the rut, so to speak. "Rut jumper" doesn't have the same pizzaz as "thought leader", but I believe it is much easier to challenge yourself, daily, to not be a slave to the ruts that our thinking so easily follows, as opposed to waking up and saying "today I will be a "thought leader". Even better than going solo, is to encourage rut jumping all around you, walk between the ruts with your colleagues, and find some new roads to travel. Yes — “thought leaders” seem to be a dime a dozen. I prefer to use another metaphor — be a “rut jumper”. It is too easy to be stuck in our thinking, to follow the rut, so to speak. “Rut jumper” doesn’t have the same pizzaz as “thought leader”, but I believe it is much easier to challenge yourself, daily, to not be a slave to the ruts that our thinking so easily follows, as opposed to waking up and saying “today I will be a “thought leader”. Even better than going solo, is to encourage rut jumping all around you, walk between the ruts with your colleagues, and find some new roads to travel.

]]> By: Oliver Marks http://gobigalways.com/where-are-the-thought-followers/comment-page-1/#comment-1581 Oliver Marks Mon, 16 Jun 2008 16:14:43 +0000 http://gobigalways.com/?p=325#comment-1581 Don Burke of the CIA said last week at the Enterprise 2.0 conference 'middle management is about making the trains run on time'. To mix metaphors, too many cooks in the kitchen (ie too many 'thoughtleaders) can play havoc on internal processes. Confused middle managers = broken workflow processes. Somehow this always seems to imbue external communications as well...coherent participation, often with a healthy dose of consensus thinking, works wonders on the validity and believability of outbound messaging for companies of all sizes. Imposing an emperor as 'thoughtleader' with a few associated 'yes men' drones can be a great way to stifle creativity in everyone else and constipate productivity... participation is key.... Don Burke of the CIA said last week at the Enterprise 2.0 conference ‘middle management is about making the trains run on time’. To mix metaphors, too many cooks in the kitchen (ie too many ‘thoughtleaders) can play havoc on internal processes. Confused middle managers = broken workflow processes.

Somehow this always seems to imbue external communications as well…coherent participation, often with a healthy dose of consensus thinking, works wonders on the validity and believability of outbound messaging for companies of all sizes.

Imposing an emperor as ‘thoughtleader’ with a few associated ‘yes men’ drones can be a great way to stifle creativity in everyone else and constipate productivity… participation is key….

]]> By: Paula Thornton http://gobigalways.com/where-are-the-thought-followers/comment-page-1/#comment-1579 Paula Thornton Mon, 16 Jun 2008 02:30:36 +0000 http://gobigalways.com/?p=325#comment-1579 Hmmm. I didn't recall that conversations had leaders or followers or if they did, that it mattered in the long-run, just that the effort moved forward. I actually do think it's a good point you raise. Just adding a different perspective. :) Hmmm. I didn’t recall that conversations had leaders or followers or if they did, that it mattered in the long-run, just that the effort moved forward.

I actually do think it’s a good point you raise. Just adding a different perspective. :)

]]>