I recently came back from a week in Big Bear where I volunteer every year as a camp councilor. There are all kinds of reasons why I volunteer at this camp. One of them is that I learned to be comfortable with myself and around my peers there. As a councilor I get to witness kids interacting with each other. Maybe this is something parents experience all the time, but for me it is always interesting to see a group of 10 or more kids in a room, given a task, and the internal politics that takes place before they can tackle that goal.
It comes down to leadership.
There are different kinds of leaders. Some lead from the front. William Wallace comes to mind. But, in war at least, we haven’t had a General lead from the front since Alexander the Great. It simply drains a person too much to lead from the front. Especially in a modern battlefield where too much is happening all at once.
Some lead like ants: working hard and getting others to follow in line. Others lead like owls, giving sage advice in a calm and zen like manner. Others lead like a puppy; bringing an unparalleled enthusiasm to galvanize others into action.
So the question is. What types of leadership does journalism need now?
A generation ago we needed business savvy leaders. People who could take a small newspaper and turn it into a thriving business. People that could lead because of their stature, cut-throat competitiveness, and biz-savvy. The journalism industry has different goals and needs now. Today we need flexibility, innovation, community, collaboration and tech-savvy, to name a few.
Which begs the question: Do we need new leaders? This isn’t a question relating to specific people, but characteristic traits.
I have often used the chessboard as an analogy for the state of journalism “Content is king, collaboration is queen, the board itself is transparency,” but the game of chess needs a leader. Somebody that can step back and look at the board and make decisions.
Just as a William Wallace type General would be ineffective in a modern battlefield could a Randolph Hearst make it in today’s journalism environment? What new characteristics would Hearst need to nurture and what would be outright foolish in today’s journalism environment?
So I went to my Tweeple for some thoughts.
Well, talking about leadership suggests there’s actually a group of people to lead—a community that bands together not because we have to (e.g., my local paper is the only game in town) but because we choose to (e.g., this group is doing something worthwhile & I want to be a part of it…).
So I’d say a journalism leader needs to be able to articulate an overarching vision & purpose for the community as a whole: “This is why we should stick together instead of spinning off into our own orbits: …” and then s/he comes with whatever the vision happens to be….
BTW: How do you generate that list of tweets you embedded in your blog?
@Alan
For that I used a site called Twickie which was created by Chris Pirillo. I have also found that Publish2.com has a new feature that allows you to curate twitter responses (disclaimer I’m on the board of Publishe2.com).
Check out Twickie it is pretty sweet.