Crisis Guru

Question:

Dear Crisis Guru:

Thanks so much for the information and the follow-up call.

As I said in my original note [ Note to readers: See Crisis Guru #27 ], we've been experimenting with podcasting, but I've been running on instinct more anything else. I believe that I have managed to keep the content relevant as we focus on exploring executive messages and catching up on critical programs, but we are also learning from Web stats that all topics and guests are not equally interesting to listeners.

I find that the radio-style format of podcasting allows us to put a more personal tone to some of the communication that is hard to replicate in written form. Employees can hear the podcast guest's voice inflections and sense their excitement about an opportunity or perhaps the seriousness of a challenge.

However, with this said, I have one other follow-up question. Part of the power of podcasting is the idea of syndication. This can make the idea of not getting tied to a schedule (and thus mindless content) a little tricky. Once someone subscribes to a podcast they expect to receive regular content or they may feel like the podcast is not a keeper. At least I feel this way. The strength of podcasting is that it doesn't come off too 'slick.' This builds trust. However, inconsistent delivery of episodes can destroy that trust. Any thoughts on balancing the avoidance of overuse with the regularity of syndication?

Currently, I am trying to keep content relevant by working top executives into the guest mix (not necessarily an easy task as most are new to this and wary ). We've found that employees tune-in in greater numbers to hear them speak. I produce about 1-2 episodes a month and keep them to about 10-15 minutes in length, and typically focus only on one interview rather than making it a 'show' with multiple segments. Quick in an out for the listeners is the thought.

Anyway, thanks for your thoughts. I will begin chanting that mantra before each show.

Manager, Business IT Communications

Answer:

Dear Manager:

Some thoughts on your follow-up comments:

Instinct is all we have. In fact, despite all the testing and analysis, much of employee communications remains subject to the instincts of communicators and leaders.

Audience interest is tied to only one thing . . . content . . . content . . . content. Audiences are composed of individuals with individual content needs. Therefore only a tiny number of subjects will be of general interest . . . and most employees (7 out of 10) want only to know that they can get out of work on time at the end of the day.
Subscribing to anything is still subject to the content provided coinciding with audience member interest. Translation: with a large audience you will hit the bull's eye only a couple times a year absent a takeover, down sizing, business unit collapse or war . . . when attendance will go up.
Regularity creates content mediocrity. Better to be infrequent, irregular, and important than consistent, bland, and pointless, with an occasional sparkler thrown in.
Make sure the programs are available for a while so word of mouth can get people to them.
Provide a mechanism for listeners to get questions back to the speakers . . . run the questions and answers on some easily accessible Web site, with notification to all potential participants. The Q & A could trigger follow-up listening by many who skipped or missed the original broadcast.
Test, test, test. You have an audience large enough to learn things. Try broadcasting competing single subject programs simultaneously . . . you could test different formats . . . but I suspect you will find yourself back where we began the conversation—sensible, simple, constructive, useful, single subjects that matter, delivered when they matter.

All the best,

Jim Lukaszewski




Back to Commentaries
CRISIS GURU #32 Real Time Answers to Real Time Questions In his Crisis Guru Commentaries, Jim Lukaszewski provides real answers to real questions about your most critical communications problems and issues. This issue was triggered by the question below. To submit a question, please direct it by e-mail to crisisguru@e911.com. Be sure to include your full name, affiliation, address, and telephone number. All published questions will be identified by title and industry only. Your confidentiality will be protected. TODAY’S TOPIC: PODCASTING TO EMPLOYEES FROM SENIOR MANAGEMENT—VALUABLE TOOL OR NOT? MORE QUESTIONS Question: Dear Crisis Guru: Thanks so much for the information and the follow-up call. As I said in my original note [ Note to readers: See Crisis Guru #27 ], we've been experimenting with podcasting, but I've been running on instinct more anything else. I believe that I have managed to keep the content relevant as we focus on exploring executive messages and catching up on critical programs, but we are also learning from Web stats that all topics and guests are not equally interesting to listeners. I find that the radio-style format of podcasting allows us to put a more personal tone to some of the communication that is hard to replicate in written form. Employees can hear the podcast guest's voice inflections and sense their excitement about an opportunity or perhaps the seriousness of a challenge. However, with this said, I have one other follow-up question. Part of the power of podcasting is the idea of syndication. This can make the idea of not getting tied to a schedule (and thus mindless content) a little tricky. Once someone subscribes to a podcast they expect to receive regular content or they may feel like the podcast is not a keeper. At least I feel this way. The strength of podcasting is that it doesn't come off too 'slick.' This builds trust. However, inconsistent delivery of episodes can destroy that trust. Any thoughts on balancing the avoidance of overuse with the regularity of syndication? Currently, I am trying to keep content relevant by working top executives into the guest mix (not necessarily an easy task as most are new to this and wary ). We've found that employees tune-in in greater numbers to hear them speak. I produce about 1-2 episodes a month and keep them to about 10-15 minutes in length, and typically focus only on one interview rather than making it a 'show' with multiple segments. Quick in an out for the listeners is the thought. Anyway, thanks for your thoughts. I will begin chanting that mantra before each show. Manager, Business IT Communications Answer: Dear Manager: Some thoughts on your follow-up comments: Instinct is all we have. In fact, despite all the testing and analysis, much of employee communications remains subject to the instincts of communicators and leaders. Audience interest is tied to only one thing . . . content . . . content . . . content. Audiences are composed of individuals with individual content needs. Therefore only a tiny number of subjects will be of general interest . . . and most employees (7 out of 10) want only to know that they can get out of work on time at the end of the day. Subscribing to anything is still subject to the content provided coinciding with audience member interest. Translation: with a large audience you will hit the bull's eye only a couple times a year absent a takeover, down sizing, business unit collapse or war . . . when attendance will go up. Regularity creates content mediocrity. Better to be infrequent, irregular, and important than consistent, bland, and pointless, with an occasional sparkler thrown in. Make sure the programs are available for a while so word of mouth can get people to them. Provide a mechanism for listeners to get questions back to the speakers . . . run the questions and answers on some easily accessible Web site, with notification to all potential participants. The Q & A could trigger follow-up listening by many who skipped or missed the original broadcast. Test, test, test. You have an audience large enough to learn things. Try broadcasting competing single subject programs simultaneously . . . you could test different formats . . . but I suspect you will find yourself back where we began the conversation—sensible, simple, constructive, useful, single subjects that matter, delivered when they matter. All the best, Jim Lukaszewski
The Lukaszewski Group Inc. 100 South Bedford Road, Suite 340, Mount Kisco, NY 10549 U.S.A., 914.681.0000-Office 914.681.0047-Facsimile 203.948.7029-24/7 Copyright © 2009, James E. Lukaszewski. All rights reserved. Permission to print one copy for personal use is hereby granted by the copyright holder. Reproduction of additional copies without written permission of the copyright holder is strictly prohibited.