PICTURE THIS

A comic strip in Bloomberg Businessweek – called The Joy of Tech - prompted a smile.  And some thoughts.

It’s clear that Americans’ love of comix has lasted for decades; today, it’s morphed into a major business.  Librarians now cite the rush to check out graphic novels – in the adult as well as kids’ sections.  There’s a great uproar when newspapers cancel specific strips – and, often, popular outcry re-institutes their publication. 

In fact, the preference for “whimsical drawings” (English for the Chinese manga) and bande dessinée (“drawn strips” in French) is almost universal.  Think Tintin and Astro Boy, just two of the world’s most beloved characters.

The big question (at least among educators):  How much should we rely on captions/word balloons and pictures for learning and instruction – at any age?   Many naysay the medium, claiming it oversimplifies content.  Others see no issues; anything that prompts more people to read is good.  Even the late and much-celebratted author John Updike championed it, saying publicly in 1969:  “I see no intrinsic reason why a doubly talented artist might not arise and create a comic strip novel masterpiece.” 

Given this background and our admitted sensibilities, we’re voting to launch (or continue, as the case may be) comix in the workplace. 

We’re not talking satirical, op-ed type of cartoons.  Nor do we advocate pretty visuals, without being accompanied by relevant content.  The pictures we’re seeing deal with how-tos, for one.  Like a new process to apply for internal jobs.  Or a visual preview of the elements of databases.  They can also relate stories – quickly and powerfully.  About culture, the way we do things around here.  About employee heroes and brand ambassadors.  [Add your great ideas here!]

Now we can just anticipate some of the reactions.  “Original illustration is expensive.”  “Our company won’t accept this kind of media.”  “It downgrades our efforts.” 

Nonsense.  All generations read and enjoy comix.  Many do their best learning through pictures.  It’s a true break from screen viewing and, yes, ponderous text.  As to the cost?  Ask your designer about adding an illustrative style to photographs using Adobe.  [Among other techniques.]

Japanese use manga to communicate about every subject imaginable, from romance to business.  Why not us?

MARS VERSUS VENUS

Sheconomy.  The Third Billion.  Influence-Hers.

Obviously, all three slogans tout the importance of women as consumers – and their major role in buying products and services. 

In fact, the numbers do astound:  Women account for 80 percent of buying decisions (though that statistic has been debated of late).  One-third out-earn their husbands.   Forty-four percent are NFL fans.  Et cetera. 

In targeting this group, marketers, through much trial and error, have discovered that women buy differently.  [Duh.]  Loyalty counts.   Explanations are critical.  Social networking makes large inroads into their decisions and preferences.  Once converted, they’re evangelistic and tend to spend more. 

Specific programs from the Dells and Midases of the world, though, have faltered.  Why?  Because originally these companies talked “female,” prettifying, almost downscaling information.  Others have learned the hard way that a woman scorned will resort to viral networking to broadcast contrarian messages. 

Dealing with internal change is different. 

We’ll argue that, today, genders don’t need to catered to as separate stakeholder groups. After all, the lines between the sexes have been blurred.  Men have nearly equal say on spend.  Roles and traditions have flipped.  Many products are almost agnostic in appealing to different populations.

Opt, instead, for engagement in change.  Before the “it” happens, ask both men and women to weigh in.  Request their opinions.  Show them what happens now and what will occur in the future.  Explain in detail why the change is needed – and solicit their help.  And use that help with all due candor and speed. 

Then:  We bet decisions will be made, along with whole-hearted buy-in.  Sure, segmenting and targeting groups in line with their preferences  and profiles makes sense.  For change to succeed, though, upfront participation counts.  No matter which planet you live on. 

POPULAR PHRASES WE'D LIKE TO CHANGE #3

There’s a not-so-new four-letter word we love to hate, one that the media (and our professions) are all over.

In one word?  Icon. 

At least five times a week, sometimes more (depending on the news and featured celebrity), headlines and Web copy label a style as “iconic” or a recently deceased personage, an “icon.”  Now, please don’t misunderstand us:  Elizabeth Taylor, for one, was the ultimate Hollywood icon, an enduring and classic symbol of the acting industry.  And Ralph Lauren could be deemed an iconic designer who popularized that certain je ne sais quoi of preppie-dom.

As communications stylists, we liberally toss around the word as representative of our ideas.  Developing a series of icons, for instance, enables us to communicate in a pictorial shorthand a desired action, a behavior, a brand to a set of stakeholders.  Geeks, too, have seized on these images as signaling quick entrances or exits into different computer programs and files.  [Steve Jobs, we thank you.]

Too, don’t forget that our favorite four letters originated with the Greek meaning “image,” associated at that time with a religious work of art from Eastern Christianity.  As defined by art historians, icons are usually flat panel paintings – also carvings, castings, embroideries, printings – picturing a religious being or objects such as angels.  Colors in these artworks also had iconic (ahem!) meanings, with red used for divine life; gold, the radiance of heaven; blue, human life.

With all that serious history, it’s difficult to call even the moderately famous “icons.”  [Clarence Clemons, Bruce Springsteen’s late and great saxophonist, does fit that bill, in our opinion.]  Or describe a popular style, like the wearing of Uggs, as iconic.  [Add your own two favorite icons here.]

Maybe we’ll know it’s time to retire the word when Fox re-brands “American Icon.”

THE RISE OF E-SELFISHNESS

The Japanese symbol for respectOnce upon a time (and not so very long ago either), the “reply to all” button in email was rarely if ever used.

A year or so ago, The Wall Street Journal chronicled the public humiliation of an agency copywriter who did just that – in a fit of pique and critique.  [No, that individual wasn’t relieved of his position but he did embark on a face-to-face apology tour ‘round the office.]

Perhaps that’s why well-crafted emails – in fact, any missive requiring a reply - no longer evoke a considered response from the receiver, within, say, a day or so.

If you the sender are (pick one or several):  1) unknown, 2) separated  from the receiver by more than six degrees, 3) asking for a favor,  and/or 4) simply keeping in touch, chances are greater than 50 percent that your correspondence will fall into a dead email office – or better  yet, be classified as spam.

We know all the standard answers: 

“I’m overloaded with email.” 

“There aren’t enough hours in every day.” 

“I only watch for specific names/addresses because I’m on deadline.”  [Please feel free to add your own.]

Those same e-laggards holler when their messages aren’t returned.  Grumbling and crankiness ensue; after all, how can they get their work done without the critical information?  There’s much fingerpointing and quoting of numbers like “83 percent of knowledge workers say that email’s critical to their success and productivity at work.”

Regardless of the reason for non-response, from email fatigue to a truly packed calendar, ways do exist to let people know what’s going on.  One’s called the automatic out-of office reply:  “Hey, I’ll get back to you as soon as I can; my monthly report was due a month ago.”  Or:  “If I don’t queue up my credit card charges in my expense report, I won’t be going anywhere.  Ever.  I’ll get back to you in two days.” 

[A more brilliant individual than ourselves declared e-bankruptcy, wiping himself out of the Web-verse in one act.]

Another is called the telephone.  You might be avoiding the world, but it just makes a whole lot of sense to change your voicemail indicating Xtreme busyness or to sneak in an apologetic response in the earliest of a.m.s.    Even other options, texting or Twittering, are far preferable to silence.  Dead.  Silence.

It’s all about communications, ensuring that your personal and professional brand transcends the pettiness of deadlines and annoyances and overload. That you use the right communications with the right speed at work and at play. 

And it’s all about courtesy, the cyber-decency to rsvp to no matter whom, no matter where.  Wonder how NASA’s Space Shuttle and Space Station astronauts handled their e-replies?