It's All Relative

Here's why I write this blog.

The other day I got a request to provide some information on how to engage employees.  The person wanted to include an article in a newsletter they were developing and thought we (my company) would want to contribute to the newsletter. 

Free publicity is something I never shy away from. 

I pointed the person to this blog and said - "feel free to print any one of the posts you find applicable."

The person responded with... "the articles in the blog are too theoretical.  I need 200 words on how to put together a program to retain employees."

200 words.  This person believes there is a way to put into 200 words the information needed to design a program to retain employees.

I typically try to put a few hours of thought into the majority of my posts.  I try to show that putting together effective programs that drive behavior is something that requires education, experience, intelligence and I'll admit it - a bit of intuition.  I'm pretty sure that within the 200 or so posts on this blog are 200 words that would provide some one with information that would help with the task of engaging their employees.  Not provide an answer mind you - simply provide some fuel for further discussions and development.

But 200 words on "how to retain employees" is akin to asking for 200 words on how to do open heart surgery.  I'm sure other professions have this problem as well.  Clients ask for a quick response to a request as if there is something on the shelf labeled "for XYZ type companies, just add money."

Putting a program in place that engages your audience and actually gets the results you want requires information about the target audience, an understanding of their experience with these types of programs, preferred communication channels, technology infrastructure, tracking and measurement, etc., etc., etc.  In other words - (more than 200 actually) - a lot of stuff.

Is it just me or has the world fallen into what I call the the "E=mc²" trap? 

Just because something can be boiled down to three letters and a number doesn't mean we understand what we're doing.  Do we really understand the idea of relativity?  Can we build an atomic bomb with only the information in the equation?  Could someone put together an effective influence program with only 200 words?  And the bigger question is - should they?

The point of this rant is that as long as there are companies and people who continue to offer off-the-shelf solutions to the problems businesses face we will continue to deal with the E=mc² affect.

My goal with this blog is to try to convince a at least a handful of people that there is more to influencing an audience's behavior than 200 words.

By the way... this post contains 483 words.