Blogging As Cerebral Housecleaning

I used to think that first someone has crisp, well-articulated ideas, and then they blog about them.  However, I'm starting to think the process works the other way around.  Allow me to explain.

Original-Content Blogging Is Not What I Expected
Blogging your own professional & original content, I have discovered, is rather terrifying.   And to my great surprise, I'm learning a lot.  I had not expected it to turn out this way.

I had thought that I'd opine upon all matters, great and small -- and, well, just bless the world with the benefit of my profound insights.  (</sarcasm>)  Said another way, my blogs would be nothing more than a reflection of what I already knew.   I certainly did not expect to research any blog topic -- in general, I'd say that if you need to research a topic to blog upon it, then you don't know it well enough in the first place.

The Ugly Truth:  My Raw Thoughts Are A Mess
But once I started to write out some of my thoughts, I discovered they were terribly ill-formed.  I will have a dozen opinions on a rather general topic, that refuse to congeal into a centralized point.  Sometimes my opinions obliquely contradict one another.  Obvious counter-arguments often stand out, all over the place.  And often I can hardly find anecdotal evidence for my opinions, much less formal, data-driven evidence. 

The net result:  If I publish my thoughts in their raw state, I'd be practically begging for someone to tear me to shreds.  In fact, I'd deserve it.

The Blogging Stakes Are High
This is why blogging original content can be terrifying.  I might write a dozen seemingly-sensible posts, but any one of them might contain a fatal flaw -- which someone might point out (in the comment section), at any time.  Meanwhile, the internet being what it is, if/when someone does, they will likely make their points forcefully and embarrassingly.

Untold others might read it, agree with the poster, and laugh at me.  It reminds me of the scene from Back To The Future, where George McFly explains to his son why he won't let anybody read his stories:  "Well, what if they didn't like them, what if they told me I was no good? I just don't think I could take that kind of rejection."

Blogging and public speaking share the same risk:  Embarrassment in front of your peers.  Any credibility I might have earned,  <poof> gone in a heartbeat. 

Cleaning Out My (Cerebral) Utility Drawer
To protect myself from asserting ridiculous opinions, blogging forces me to dump out my ideas into notepad, and sift through them.  This is the cognitive equivalent of dumping out my kitchen's utility drawer's contents onto the table:  A bunch of must-have items (scissors, tape, etc) mixed in with lots of junk (expired coupons, one-off screws, and miscellaneous plastic crap).    Some items are obviously valuable, others are clearly not (where I marvel at how they made it this far), but most fall in the middle.

The process requires judgment and painful decision-making.  Most items are kind of useful, in just the right circumstances they might add value.  However, each thing must "sing for its supper," where its estimated value must be greater than its storage costs. 

In the case of the utility drawer, questions include whether I save four almost-empty rolls of Scotch tape, and whether those assorted AAA batteries are still any good.    In the case of a blog, it's identifying the deeply-held, empirically-evident assertions (must-haves) from the indulgent fact-devoid opinions (junk).  But in both cases, it's mostly the tedious work of sorting out all the stuff in the middle.

The Output Isn't Always Perfect...
Every time I'm done cleaning out the utility drawer, I wince a little.  Painful decisions were made, and it's unclear whether rules were applied consistently.  Perhaps I should have pared down the contents a bit more, or a bit less.  Some items go to the trash with a hint of regret, while others remain in the drawer under a cloud of suspicion.  

Writing is no different.  Not every part of every argument is rock-solid. There are additional details I could have added, arguments I could have made, and likely rebuttals I could have addressed.    Conversely, I could have removed anecdotes and pared down detail, to keep the article shorter and more to-the-point.  On both sides, there is regret.

In the case of the Utility drawer, I always leave it in a better state than I found it.  Sadly, I wish I could say that the same for my blog, but I cannot.  Similarly, sometimes I start an article hell-bent upon proving a point, and by the time it's fully-written, I've been so steeped in counter-arguments that I'm not sure whether I believe the original point myself.  Quite a few blog posts have been trashed for exactly this reason -- which is especially painful.

...But The Mental Benefits Make It Worthwhile
Nevertheless, when I'm done (even when I abandon the blog post altogether) my brain feels more organized.   More often than not, the issue feels crisper and more well-understood.  Usually I have a strong opinion, but not always -- sometimes I end up with deep sympathy for varying perspectives.

This doesn't mean that I'm always correct in my final understanding.  But I'm always a bit clearer-headed than when I started -- and if so, then the blogging effort was a success, no matter what else happens.

I can then enjoy a moment of satisfaction, before spotting a typo in the third paragraph and hastily logging back in to fix it.

Are Digital Offerings Products or Services?

Companies with any sort of digital offerings often bump up against the same pesky question:  Are these offerings Products or Services?   Said another way,  are these companies choosing a Product-orientation or a Service-orientation? 

In this article, I delve into the differences between products and services, why companies generally lean towards a Product-orientation, and the profound impact it has upon their operational worldview.

Products vs. Services
A haircut is a service.  A banana is a product.  Not much to debate there.   But why, exactly?   What are the defining criteria that separate products from services?

There are certainly exceptions to every rule, but these are generally true:

• Selling a product implies a transfer of ownership.  Selling a service does not.  When I sell you a banana, I transfer its ownership to you.  I do not transfer ownership of a haircut.
• Products have inventory, services do not.  Moreover, Product inventory has storage costs and generally depreciates over time.  I can fill a warehouse full of bananas, but cannot fill a warehouse full of haircuts. 
• Selling a product implies a discrete transaction.  One moment the seller has a banana and no money.  The next moment he has money and no banana.  Services often have a transition period, during which both parties are in limbo:  There is a period in which I am providing a haircut, but have not yet provided the customer's "money's worth."

By these standards, most modern digital offerings are services, not products.  Despite that, indeed despite digital offerings often going by the moniker "SaaS" (Software as a Service), most companies refer to digital offerings as Products.  What gives!?

As it turns out, there are some heady benefits to a Product orientation.

The Benefits of a Product Orientation
The upside is that investors and customers believe that offerings are more standardized and tangible than they really are.  This leads to better sales and negotiations.

• Offerings seem more tangible. Just referring to something as a "product" conveys something tangible, standardized and streamlined.  Such a perception is often vital to gain credibility with both potential customers and investors - neither of whom wants to think that the company is "making it up as they go along."
• Offerings are better-contrasted against "pure" services. Companies with digital offerings also usually want to contrast these offering from their consulting and support engagements, which are far closer to "pure"services.
• Stronger price negotiations. Finally, a Product orientation helps avoid the dreaded "Cost-Plus" negotiation tactic.  This is when a customer will estimate what the services cost the company to provide, and insists upon paying a (modest) markup upon that.   By referring to offerings as Product, it forces customers to assess the value it adds, rather than what it costs to provide.   As a result, Product-oriented companies can charge higher prices.

The Drawbacks of a Product Orientation
The downside is that employees believe that offerings (and consequently your sales) are more standardized and well-understood than they really are.   When left unchecked, this leads to reporting issues.

• Implies that all details of a sale are known up-front.  Product-oriented companies are prone to assume that all relevant details about a deal can be captured at the moment of sale.  After all, for true products, this is generally the case -- you know precisely what you are selling and what it cost.  Service-oriented companies expect that many details will not be known up front, and will manifest themselves as the deal progresses.
• Implies that work ends once a deal is signed.  Product-oriented companies envision that once a sale is made, most of the value-creation process (the "real work") is now over.  Conversely, Service-oriented companies imply that once a sale is made, the "real work" can now begin.  When an offering requires extensive customization, a Product Orientation motivates salespeople to promise the moon, while ignoring the true implementation costs.
• Emphasizes sales over delivery.  Product-oriented companies mostly credit Sales for translating the company's efforts into financial value.  The mindset is something like "The products were just sitting there until Sales sold them."  Service-oriented companies, on the other hand, mostly credit Service Delivery for creating financial value.  The mindset is more like "Making promises is fine, but then we need to roll up our sleeves and get to work."
• Encourages a simplistic view of deal value.  Most digital offerings vary over both volume and time.  For example, one customer might buy a lot of service for a single month, while another might buy a little service for the next two years.   Given this, Product-oriented companies speak about deals as if they were discrete transactions (e.g., a $12M sale) -- and only in the fine print will it mention "well, it's technically $1M per month".   Service-oriented companies envision a deal as a rate:  $1M/per month -- and only in the fine print will it mention "all told, this deal is worth $12M over the next year."

In conclusion, adopting a Product orientation helps companies remain competitive.  However, when designing internal operational reporting (such as how deals are valued, how credit is attributed, etc), adopting more of a Service orientation is often a good idea.

Infographic Resume

Most people detest their resume, but let me tell you:  It's twice as bad when you do reporting for a living.  After all, a resume is a means to convey information:  A resume is a report.

I mean, could I really expect people to believe that I'm capable of producing innovative data visualizations, after I just handed them a mono-spaced Times New Roman screed that could have come off a 1950's typewriter?
 So, years ago, I said to hell with traditional resume formats.  I applied all the tricks I knew about conveying information to create a far more visual format -- the results are below.

Sell Skittles, Not Steak
To me, the death knell of any resume is when the reader gets bored -- which happens far faster than we'd like to believe.  I must admit, when I'm facing a stack of dry resumes, I hardly make it to the end of the first page of each, before moving on.   So, I embraced that reality, and designed an info-graphic that conveyed all the important details up front.

I made sure to create distinct colorful sections, so that people could jump to whatever interests them the most.  I even utilized the space behind the info-graphic to store lists of keywords, so that the document searched well, to boot.   Admittedly, I do still have bulleted job descriptions.  However, because all important details were covered up front, these are more like an optional appendix, rather than required reading.

I must admit, this format certainly isn't for everybody.  It gobbles up a lot of content, and would look empty if somebody used it straight out of college.  Plus, some industries (like Finance) are sticklers for formality and might frown upon such formatting innovation.  Finally, the info-graphic might get stripped out in some document management systems (...although you could solve that by having well-formatted text behind the info-graphic, which conveys the same information).

On the bright side, it has garnered many compliments, from interviewers and recruiters alike.  It stands out from the crowd, which is good news when it's buried in a stack of similar resumes.  And most importantly, it conveys all the information people need in an engaging and colorful manner.


In the end, if reading a normal resume feels like eating a heavy steak dinner, this feels more like nibbling on a bag of Skittles.  And who doesn't like Skittles?  :)

Maybe You Should Try It, Too!
If you're thinking about trying something similar on your own resume, here's a link to the infographic (built in Microsoft Visio), and a copy of my resume for good measure.   (I should mention that the resume itself is in .docx format, and Word documents don't render well on iPhones).  If you come up with anything you're pleased with, I'd love to see it!

The One In Ten Novillion Post