This is not a new idea, I wrote about the value of conversations over two years ago, and The Cluetrain Manifesto is 15 years old. Sometimes we just need to be reminded of the things we already know.
For me that reminder came in the form of my recent visit to Continuity Insights Management Conference in New Orleans. Conversation and debate enables insights – reading also helps, but I digress.
The feature that struck me about this conference, more than the other major industry events I have been to, was that dialog was present during all the sessions I attended – not just during the networking or free time.
The CIMC conference reminded me why I had lost interest in blogging. It had become a monologue rather than a conversation.
Not only was I reminded of the value of conversations by the visit, but also re-invigorated by the wonderful feedback, to want to contribute ideas and encourage ongoing reading, thinking and discussion.
Which is why I am already planning to go to CIMC next year, with an expectation of similar positive experiences.
It is not the words and lofty ideas that matter it is the conversations. A resilient discipline needs to be able to engage its practitioners in conversations, not just about our current practices but also (and perhaps more importantly) about how we manage change and move into the future.
We often talk about the so-called ‘resilience disciplines’ – but rarely stop to question if our discipline is in fact resilient itself.
But in order to promote conversations we first need to be where people gather who take an interest in our subject, and we need to engage them first in order to promote conversation on the more abstract ideas. In my case blogging with a new strategy for promotion and engagement.
I never thought I would be writing these words but … stay tuned for a post later this week about that constant source of BC conversations the BIA.
What motivates you to discuss and debate practices and how they might evolve?
Any thoughts on the question if BC is a resilient discipline?