What if we stopped trying to reinvent IABC, and just started making it a better version of what it has always been?

Unluckily, it is difficult for a certain type of mind to grasp the concept of insolubility. Thousands of poor dolts keep on trying to square the circle; other thousands keep pegging away at perpetual motion. ... The fact is that some of the things that men and women have desired most ardently for thousands of years are not nearer realization to-day than they were in the time of Rameses, and that there is not the slightest reason for believing that they will lose their coyness on any near to-morrow. ... Let us take a look, say, at the so-called drink problem, a small subdivision of the larger problem of saving men from their inherent and incurable hoggishness .... —H.L. Mencken, writing in the 1920s

And so I had to laugh at the beginning of an interview published yesterday by the communication industry's premier podcasters, Shel Holtz and Neville Hobson. They spoke with Chris Sorek, the new paid president of the International Association of Business Communicators.

Before they asked him about his big schemes for solving ancient problems at IABC—as I also did last month—Holtz and Hobson got Sorek talking about his last job at a nonprofit in England, called Drinkaware. The mission was to get Brits to drink less. "Under Chris' leadership the charity's website now attracts nearly three million unique visitors a year, the logo is featured on over 5 billlion products and Drinkaware campaigns have started to show 'green shoots' of behavior change," said Drinkaware chairman Derek Lewis in a release announcing Sorek's departure.

You know Mencken would love that term, "green shoots."

In the course of the Holtz and Hobson interview, Sorek identified a number of persistent problems that he hopes to attack:

• The "ABC" accreditation designation: The association needs to make sure it "is objective, is professional, is defensible," Sorek says. This, more than 15 years after the accredited communicator Dan Danbom quipped that the only effect his "ABC" has had is people squinting at his name tag at conferences and calling him, "Mr. Abick." Come on, folks: How is accreditation ever going to mean any more than it does now? It is what it is: credible to the gullible, suspect to the cynical, and a total nonentity to everyone in between. But if it gives the cowardly lion courage, who's gonna complain, or investigate the rigor of the secret test? Not me.

• The Gold Quill Awards. "It should be seen as being the best of the best" in communication awards programs, Sorkek says—and not just by communicators, but by top leaders in business and government. My response? Ibid.

• Communiation World—since 1970, the blandest and most useless magazine ever published on any subject. (I admit, I've missed a few issues: At the World Conference last month, I had a super embarrassing meeting the "new" editor at the World Conference in Chicago. "Wow, when did you take over?" I asked. "Six years ago," she said.) Sorek says that what this publication needs is a focus, on the half dozen issues that members really care about. No, what it needs is an editor who does not work in the hushed IABC headquarters in San Francisco, and who is charged with generating compelling columns, surprising stories and lively conversations about communication. (IABC once had a magazine like that—Reporting, it was called, and it was done by a freelancer named Larry Ragan, out of Chicago, until he quit to start Ragan Communications, in 1969. Sorek ought to look at those back issues, and draw some inspiration.)

Sorek strikes me as a good, smart, in-touch guy, who I believe will make IABC more rational and efficient and user-friendly. "Watch this space," he told Holtz and Hobson. "We're going through a review of what we're doing as an organization ... of what we're offering in terms of IT and IT support—basically our digital presence and how we deliver that for members." He told them to check back after the first of the year, and I'll bet he'll have done some stuff by then.

Also to his credit, Sorek doesn't appear to believe for one minute, as some members allow themselves to do, that IABC will ever become a ballsy political "advocacy" organization on behalf of Communication Goodness. Neither does he seem to go in for the fantastical notion that IABC could ever issue revokable, CPA-like "licences" to communicators, a idea that Holtz periodically fondles.

But Sorek did allow his lips to form words to the effect that IABC needs to help communicators get taken seriously in the C-suite.

I'll keep an equally vigilant eye on that, and the flow of ale England.

Comments

[Susan]

"But Sorek did allow his lips to form words to the effect that IABC needs to help communicators get taken seriously in the C-suite."

David, I enjoy the IABC Houston chapter. A great group of folks who are passionate. I know that you are passionate and am still honored I got to ride in the scout.

The statement in quotes above is where I definitely agree with you and is my focus. So many of us bang our heads against the proverbial wall when it comes to that durn table. And when we get there, we have to hope they actually listen to us. If he can help IABC truly gain that credibility - wow.

[Peter Dean]

David- I have been thinking a bit more and (without any aid from alcohol) came up with the following. It seems to fit with your idea that IABC should just try to be better and not to be different. So here goes:

The fundamental problem, as I see it, is that IABC has a dependable source of income from its membership activities but this income is not sufficient to allow for any significant expansion involving expense and, in particular, is not enough to cover any mistakes- which will inevitably occur if the organization ventures into activities with which it is not familiar. One possibility would be to aggressively embark on a fund-raising program but this is likely to dilute the activities directed towards maintaining a healthy and satisfied membership. The alternative is to take a really hard look at what are IABC's core strengths and work on those to ensure they are the best in class, forgetting all the frills.

My recommendations are:

Discontinue

Communications World
The name "Gold Quill" (wrong image)
Accreditation
International development

Review for improvement

Achievement Awards (former Gold Quill) and other rewards
Roles and responsibilities of staff and Boards
Balance between acting communicators and consultants/suppliers

Priorities

Top quality Conferences
Grass roots support
Membership
Quality image

Things to give up

Belief that switching to the latest technology and gadgets will solve all communications issues.
Urge to be seen as "big" and "important" when there are not enough resources.
Ideas about advocacy. (IABC membership is not comfortable in conflict situations).
Making IABC a power in the boardroom. (Only individuals can do that by virtue of their qualities and aspirations).
Glossing over issues and problems.

And now I can have that drink!

[David Murray]

Now that's some radical thinking, Peter.

To your points:

• Agreed that Communication World should be ditched, but I believe something should take its place. An association—any big community—needs a regular shared experience like a monthly publication provides. It just needs a much more stimulating and useful one than this. I could come up with lots of good ideas, but not for free.

• Not sure they should shitcan accreditation entirely. I think it's useful at least in this way: Jumping through the hoops of getting accredited telegraphs to others in your profession (e.g., hiring communication managers) that you're committed to a career in this business, which is useful for them to know. I just think

• Gold Quill. Agreed. Sounds incredibly old-fashioned (rich, I know, coming from the program director of the Cicero Speechwriting Awards) and has everything to do with WRITING, which really is the last thing communicators want to ID as their forte.

• And as for grass roots support, we hear this a lot. I think the best thing IABC can do to build it, is to get better centrally—issuing more interesting and intelligent and candid publications, holding better conferences and generally churning out less phony, highfalutin baloney. The better the central organization, the more attractive chapter membership and volunteer work will be.

And that sound you hear is the scraping of the bottom of the barrel on my own thinking about how IABC could improve.

Or maybe it's the bottom of your glass.

[Peter Dean]

The glass contained 11% alcohol dark beer brewed by Trappist monks in Rochefort, here in Belgium. Thus emboldened...

1. Communications World is old-fashioned and feeble. It could surely be replaced by something more dynamic, less costly, and a flagship in communications techniques. IABC has got to learn to let go of its treasured possessions.

2, Accreditation has no validity outside the profession and precious little within. It could easily be folded into a revamped Rewards program.

3. Phoney high-falutin baloney exists within IABC because it exists within organisations. Which comes first, the chicken or the egg? But that's what I meant about not glossing things over.

4. The central organisation should be as transparent and flexible as possible. At the same time it should have a clear vision and stick to it. Sometimes you need a leader who leads- cuts through the clutter.

Amazing what these monks can do!

[sac ysl]

Wow questo sito è davvero sorprendente per me, sono rimasto colpito da questo sito.