article writing

104 Harvard Business Review | February 2009 | hbr.org

Letters to the Editor

We welcome letters from all readers wishing to comment on articles in this issue. Early re- sponses have the best chance of being published. Please be concise and include your title, company affi liation, location, and phone number. E-mail us at hbr_letters@harvardbusiness. org; send faxes to 617-783-7493; or write to The Editor, Harvard Business Review, 60 Harvard Way, Boston, MA 02163. HBR reserves the right to solicit and edit letters and to republish letters as reprints.

The Contribution Revolution: Letting Volunteers Build Your Business

I believe informal volunteer contribu- tions, as described by Scott Cook in his article “The Contribution Revolution: Letting Volunteers Build Your Business” (October 2008), occur more oft en than anyone realizes. For example, my col- leagues and I off er ideas every time we

visit other factory operations (customer, supplier, peer network), and they do the same when they visit us.

However, I thought Cook missed an important point: People have been mak- ing such contributions for more than 160 years, long before the internet age. Con- sider one of the best volunteer contribu- tion examples, Dun & Bradstreet, which gets “free” contributions from partici- pating companies and then charges vol- unteers a fee for the service of getting

their own information back. Wow, what a business model!

Scott Ward

Vice President and Chief Strategic Offi cer

Windings

New Ulm, Minnesota

How to Become an Authentic Speaker

Nick Morgan off ers very useful advice in his article “How to Become an Au- thentic Speaker” (November 2008). Executives can indeed become more authentic – and, therefore, more eff ec- tive – speakers when they are passionate about their topic, connected with and open to the audience, and responsive. To accomplish this, a speaker needs to feel like he or she is communicating with au- dience members rather than perform- ing for them, seeking their approval and fearing rejection.

Success also depends on how the speaker frames the experience. A per- son who begins with, “Good morning, in my speech today, I will cover…” or “In my presentation this morning, I will ex- plain…” is set up for failure right away: The words “presentation” and “speech” alone can cause many people to panic and then retreat into a stiff , formal lec- ture mode. That, in turn, can trigger a subtle withdrawal of interest from audi- ence members and even further exacer- bate the anxiety of a speaker who notices the shift . In addition, using pronouns such as “I” and “my” focuses the spot-

Jo e

M ag

ee

60 Harvard Business Review | October 2008 | hbr.org

Intuit’s cofounder challenges traditional companies to follow the lead of internet superstars –

and of innovative peers such as Honda, Procter & Gamble, and Hyatt –

in tapping the contributions of countless people beyond their organizations.

by Scott Cook

Letting Volunteers Build Your Business

REVOLUTION CONTRIBUTION

THE

1827 Feb09 Letters Layout.indd 1041827 Feb09 Letters Layout.indd 104 1/5/09 4:26:26 PM1/5/09 4:26:26 PM

light even more intensely on the speaker, which increases self-consciousness and performance anxiety and continues to distance the person from the audience both psychologically and emotionally.

In my experience coaching execu- tives, I have found that eliminating the words “speech” and “presentation” and using pronouns such as “we” and “our” can yield dramatic results. Opening with

“Good morning, in our meeting today, we’ll be covering...” immediately puts the speaker in a more relaxed, conver- sational mode, with normal breathing, gestures, infl ection, and pacing. This also helps speakers feel closer to the au- dience members, because they are com- municating with them instead of per- forming for them. Speakers who adopt this approach come across with much greater authenticity.

Anne Miller

Presentations Specialist

New York

Morgan responds: I like Anne Miller’s point about speakers communicating with audiences rather than performing for them. The big Zen insight of public speaking is realizing that it’s all about the audience – not you. Aft er all, if the audience doesn’t get it, then no com- munication has occurred. Speakers who focus on the audience typically fi nd that they can get beyond adrenaline-induced nerves and discomfort quickly and start having fun.

I also agree that beginning a speech with “Good morning, in my speech to- day I will cover…” is a recipe for disas- ter, but for a diff erent reason than the one Miller off ers. A dry, prefatory sum- mary gives audience members an excuse not to listen (watch them dive for their BlackBerrys). Instead, begin as Aristotle advised, “in medias res” – in the middle of things, the way action movies do, with several explosions before the credits. Start with a story! It will grab the atten- tion of the audience and orient them far more eff ectively than a summary.

Certainly, using “we” and “our” in a speech is a good way of beginning to

1827 Feb09 Letters Layout wAd.indd 1051827 Feb09 Letters Layout wAd.indd 105 12/29/08 7:18:41 PM12/29/08 7:18:41 PM

LETTERS TO THE EDITOR

106 Harvard Business Review | February 2009 | hbr.org

connect with an audience, and thinking of a presentation as a conversation can also help. But there are diff erent kinds of speeches and diff erent levels of for- mality. If a newly elected president be- gan his inaugural address with “Good morning, in our meeting today, we’ll be covering…” he or she would raise a lot of eyebrows, and not in a good way.

In the end, I fi nd that it takes more than merely changing the opening or the pronouns in a speech to truly con- nect with an audience. It takes deep thought about how to keep the content relevant for the audience throughout and a conscious attempt to bridge the gap emotionally between audience and speaker. The best way to accomplish that is by being open, connected, and pas- sionate – and by listening profoundly.

Should You Invest in the Long Tail?

In her article “Should You Invest in the Long Tail?” (July–August 2008), Anita Elberse challenges Chris Anderson’s the- sis that the emergence of digital distribu- tion systems for cultural goods has ren- dered the blockbuster strategy obsolete. To accurately assess the validity of their positions, however, one must under- stand the way that culture-consuming audiences are segmented.

Anderson seems to imply that mem- bers of most culture-consuming audi- ences hold very delimited and select tastes, and therefore producers should reconsider their commitment to the blockbuster strategy and begin devel- oping cultural goods with niche appeal. Elberse, drawing on William McPhee’s work, maintains that culture-consuming audiences include heavy consumers, with an appetite for all kinds of cultural goods (including niche products), and light consumers, who depend more on social cues for their cultural choices and are thus disproportionately attracted to popular products – such as blockbust- ers. In fact, however, Richard Peterson’s model may best approximate the way

that culture-consuming audiences are segmented: into either omnivores, who consume a wide variety of cultural off er- ings (from both popular and niche cul- tures), or univores, who consume a less diverse array of cultural goods (usually only popular).

Using Peterson’s terminology, there- fore, the long-tail model characterizes the culture-consuming audience as a mosaic of niche-culture univores, who would prefer niche culture to popu- lar culture if they had the choice. This, however, does not accord with what we know. The most discerning and most avid culture-consuming audiences (usu- ally younger and more educated) are not niche snobs but are, instead, omnivores. They may have strong, expert tastes for niche cultures, but that does not mean they disdain mass-appeal cultural goods. Less educated (and older) audiences tend to be popular-culture univores, who will not usually venture into intim- idating niche-culture territory (mostly because niche cultures presuppose a certain level of cultural competence in order to be understood and enjoyed). In a world where the most active, elite portion of the audience does not shun popular products, and the bulk of the public confi nes itself to easy-to-decode mass culture, the blockbuster strategy will continue to be dominant.

Omar Lizardo

Assistant Professor

Department of Sociology

University of Notre Dame

Notre Dame, Indiana

Where Oil-Rich Nations Are Placing Their Bets

In their article “Where Oil-Rich Nations Are Placing Their Bets” (September 2008), Rawi Abdelal, Ayesha Khan, and Tarun Khanna outline the Gulf region’s changing economic landscape and its impact on world economics as a whole. One important point deserves attention: how businesses in Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) countries can use geo-

graphic infl uence over their raw mate- rial – oil – to strategic advantage.

For example, GE Plastics apparently faced margin pressures because of in- creasingly volatile oil-price fl uctuations. Saudi Basic Industries Corporation (SABIC), however, probably had greater insight into those fl uctuations because the Saudi Arabian government holds 70% of SABIC shares and private investors in Saudi Arabia and other GCC countries hold the remaining 30%. SABIC seems to have used that advantage to control costs more effi ciently, thus enabling im- proved production planning and better pricing of the company’s downstream petrochemical products. What’s more, when SABIC acquired GE Plastics, it inherited that company’s global manu- facturing infrastructure, distribution network, established customer base, and human capital. By leveraging its geographic infl uence, therefore, SABIC appears to have ensured strategic cost control while simultaneously gaining an instant global footprint – something that would have taken years for the com- pany to build organically.

Lokin Chemburkar

Solutions Architect

Patni Life Sciences

Patni Computer Systems

Mumbai

Abdelal, Khan, and Khanna respond: Lokin Chemburkar’s observation regard- ing the SABIC-GE Plastics deal is in line with developments occurring through- out emerging markets. That is, compa- nies are trying to capitalize on some homegrown advantage particular to their country of origin – in this case the informational upper hand that SABIC gained through Saudi Arabia’s position in the world oil markets – to build more extensive global footprints. The form of advantage varies across locations, only sometimes originating from state in- volvement and support. It behooves en- trepreneurs and fi nanciers everywhere to pay attention to such newer entrants on the world stage, as both competitors and collaborators.

1827 Feb09 Letters Layout.indd 1061827 Feb09 Letters Layout.indd 106 1/5/09 4:26:35 PM1/5/09 4:26:35 PM

Copyright 2009 Harvard Business Publishing. All Rights Reserved. Additional restrictions may apply including the use of this content as assigned course material. Please consult your institution's librarian about any restrictions that might apply under the license with your institution. For more information and teaching resources from Harvard Business Publishing including Harvard Business School Cases, eLearning products, and business simulations please visit hbsp.harvard.edu.