In speaking with a wide range of authors and thought leaders lately one of the key things that struck me was the connection between clarity, the ability to prioritize activities effectively and success. I believe that clarity is not exactly a binary state but it isn’t something that exists on a continuum either.
I asked everyone that I interviewed the same series of questions:
1) What’s your platform?- what is it that you expect people to be able to do, think, act or behave differently as a result of being exposed to your content?
2) What markets are you serving or would you like to be serving?
3) What are the offerings that you have or are in the process of creating that are derived from your content?
4) What are you struggling with relative to getting your message out to a broader audience?
What I learned was that if they could clearly answer the first question with a level of specificity (which only about 30% could) the other questions were pretty easy. Many fell into the trap of believing their content could be all things to all people. Theoretically that may be the case for some content but in practice it rarely works. This really plays out when you try to define your markets and develop a suite of offerings, products or solutions. You can’t serve the Fortune 100 and the housewife from Idaho at the same time with the same content in the same format. Those that tried seemed to be distracted and struggling the most. They had little to no clarity, focus, direction, traction or momentum. While it may be noble to try and change the world, it almost impossible to do it all at once.
When it came to the offerings once again those that were clear were far more successful than those that had no direction. While that seems like a statement of the obvious it was surprising to me. Now there are several ways to define a market and in the world of content there are no formulaic answers that work for everyone. There are some that focused very narrowly on a specific industry (and on occasion got decimated when that industry tanked—hello mortgage brokerage and real estate as well as much of financial services over the last two years or so). There were others that focused on a specific population in an organization (such as newly minted managers, emerging leaders) others focused their work on generational segments (baby boomers, millennials, etc). Some did quite well focusing on a specific role or a function (sales managers, creative types, project managers and so on.). Still others focused on specific types of individuals based on a life event or a personality trait (new mothers, entrepreneurs, people in a state of professional transition). Ultimately the list is almost endless as long as the content resonates with them and you can clearly identify sustainable behavior changes in individuals, teams or organizations that can be attributed to your work with your target market than it becomes pretty easy to gain traction. Conversely if you lack the clarity relative to the markets you choose to serve (however you define them) it becomes very difficult to set your priorities in such a way that they are driving you towards your objectives of reaching more people with your work in a variety of formats and modalities.
The same pattern clearly emerged when we discussed the offerings of the authors and thought leaders. In some cases they were a one trick pony (“hey, I’m a keynote guy”) and given the lack of diversification of their “portfolio” as they market has been hit hard, they are struggling and trying hard to get back to where they once were. I for one do not believe that flat is the new growth, or being off 25% is “break even”. Growth is growth, flat is flat and a shrinking business is a shrinking business. In other cases they had offerings that were not clearly defined (“yeah I can do that”) and if they are not well defined, clearly articulated and targeted, guess what? Clients don’t beat a path to your door to buy them.
Others (also about a third of the group I spoke with) had a very clear product strategy, they could defend why they had certain offerings (an assessment tool, a coaching model, a train the trainer solution) and why they chose not to offer others (2 day workshops, consulting engagements). I found it very interesting that those that had the greatest degree of clarity over how clients can obtain the largest impact from their work seemed to be growing and thriving while those that didn’t were either struggling or surviving.
Now here’s the kicker—everyone I spoke with was very busy and had a list of things they were doing, things they’d like to be doing (writing, speaking, developing products, marketing a book, serving clients, etc) but those that had the greatest clarity were able to logically justify why they were doing what they were doing and why there where things they chose not to do. Those that didn’t have the clarity were for the most part “busier” but I didn’t see a correlation between activity and achievement. What I learned, and I hope it’s of value to you as well is it’s wise to take a step back and audit your priorities. It’s wiser to do so if you’ve got clarity around the markets you would like to serve, how you can best serve them and view all of your activities through a clear lens.
Peter Winick has over twenty years of experience and has worked with a variety of thought leaders. In addition, he has built and managed several consulting and professional development organizations.
{ 1 trackback }
{ 0 comments… add one now }