After my Dave Snowden grokking last week, I've been reading up on storytelling in KM. Bill Ives has some fantastic reading on this subject and I intend to read Steve Denning too. I was thinking this morning about how people have different niches and specialist talents. For example, I'm a better writer than I am a programmer or designer. And there are a lot of people who are better programmers or designers than writers. Or better talkers than writers. Or better artists than talkers.
I've always maintained that blogging isn't for everyone and that applies inside corporate walls too. Blogs and wikis are not going to suit everyone in an organisation, so they're not the perfect KM solution by any means. One way around this is to look for those 1 or 2 people in a team or group who are natural writers or have an interest in Web writing - and encourage those people to take responsibility for their team's content. This is also the approach most companies take when running their Content Management Systems.
But I was thinking about an alternative approach. What if organisations hired a specialist writer, whose job it is to go around the different teams and elicit stories from people. That person would be a kind of journalist (but forget about the whole "are bloggers journalists" debate, that's not important). The person I'm describing would interview team members and coax stories from them. Those stories would then be transcribed onto a team weblog - with all team members encouraged to comment on or add to the stories. The point is that there needs to be at least one person who knows how to spin a narrativeĆ write compelling content.
Once that narrative is "up there" on the blog - it acts as a springboard for the non-writers to contribute bits of content, eventually adding up to a store of knowledge about the organisation. Think of the writer's narrative as a star, with the resulting contributions being planets that are created around the gravitational pull and life-giving energy of the star.
Just as there are specialist programmers and designers on Web teams, I think there is a need for specialist writers or storytellers to act as a Knowledge Management nexus for organisations. This is an idea I'm exploring for a business - where I set myself up as a consultant KM StoryWriter.
And yes it uses the same skillset that I'd need to write a biography of Web 2.0. I guess I'm exploring ways to fulfil my ambition to write stories for a living. The future of fiction is non-fiction - there's very little market for novelists these days. I think there is a market for non-fiction stories - for example in the form of non-fiction books, or as a Knowledge Management tool in organisations. I feel I'm getting closer to finding my nicheĆ
Comments
Subscribe to comments for this post OR Subscribe to comments for all Read/WriteWeb posts
I like the way your mind works. Interesting. Compelling content there.
Posted by: Janet Tokerud | October 13, 2004 8:44 PM
Reading this gave me unfortunate flashbacks to initiatives in UML modeling whereby "use-case scenarios" would be solicited from customers, to help facilitate the designer's understanding of what the customer wanted.
There are a few lessons from that that need to be stressed if one is going to have a "specialist writer" doing what you say:
1) The specialist writer must be valued. Management must understand (and recompense) the important contribution that this is.
2) The writing must be something the other people can understand (here is where I think UML stuff often had issues as I don't know how often UML modelers shared their models with the customers).
3) The writing must be something that the other people read.
4) The writing must be something that the other people care about (in other words, "documentation? what documentation? Oh, that documentation. Why would I want to read it? I know how the system works - after all, I know the code like the back of my hand.")
These are all big hurdles. They are not as big as getting people who don't care about writing/blogging to write/blog, but they are pretty big.
If you can sell people on those points, I think you will have convinced them that you have your niche and that it can work. You will really then be an Information Flow consultant (or perhaps "facilitator" would be a better word than consultant?).
Posted by: Andrew | October 14, 2004 12:00 AM
All good points. I don't think I like the word "facilitator" though, as this person will be doing the upfront writing as well - i.e. *real* work ;-) Besides, "consultants" get paid lots of money... :-)
Posted by: Richard MacManus | October 14, 2004 1:43 PM