As you’ve likely noticed through my horrendously inconsistent blog post schedule, I’m not exactly one to stick to a formula for blog post frequency. I write when I feel like it. For the record, I feel like writing every day and I do write nearly every day, just not usually on here. You see, most of my writing on this topic occurs in client deliverables, especially this time of year (last fiscal quarter for our clients). It’s no excuse , I know. Plenty of great minds out there manage to find the time to pump out quality blog content non-stop, but I’ve come to realize that that’s not necessarily my role, nor is it the purpose of this blog.
So what is the purpose?
To occasionally share general digital media landscape thoughts and sometimes specific digital marketing insights and learnings, which I’m continually amassing from my journey as a consultant, trainer and speaker for various public and non profit sector organizations around the world.
What can I continue to promise?
I can promise you that I will always be transparent, honest and sometimes quite blunt. Things will be said on here that probably wouldn’t fly in a client deliverable, although nothing will be said on here that I wouldn’t say in public. Duh.
What am I really fascinated with the most within this space?
People. I have a constant curiosity/addiction for learning new ways of doing things from other cultures, sub-cultures and individual personalities. I have a fascination with alternate worldviews, thought patterns and paradigms. I believe most problems, no matter how large (war) or small (your boss thinking social media is a passing fad) stem from clashes of one or many of the above and a reluctance to try to understand them. This is why I focus so much on people before tools, why the books I read are about people not purely technology, and why I don’t like being called a “twitter expert” or “social media guru” (discussed in a prior post). I apply a mix of strategic business thinking, marketing theory, sociology, psychology and common sense to the way I approach problems. Most importantly thought, I like to bounce ideas off of others through various social channels.
Where else can you find me?
I tend to be most active on Twitter and LinkedIn from a professional angle, and Facebook from a personal angle (including photography). I do dabble with Foursquare, although I also have my hesitations. For a full list of my social channels, you can go here.
[…] This post was mentioned on Twitter by Mike Kujawski, Mickie Kennedy. Mickie Kennedy said: My renewal of blogging vows: As you’ve likely noticed through my horrendously inconsistent blog post … http://bit.ly/eMbFfW #nonprofit […]
Great to hear you’ll be back and sharing your knowledge with others.
Two things to expand your approach and watch out for.
First, careful reducing something as complex and dangerous as war to a few components in a mix and match. Context is key, variables changes, and some of the social tools we create in the international realm lead us to conflict. “Cultures, sub-cultures and individual personalities,” are a few of several components to war, and by focusing on cultural difference, you risk creating irreconcilability on a cognitive level that pits us down cultural lines. Inevitable war. You might just end up like Samuel Huntington in the process.
Second, common sense is a cultural expression that implies the acceptance without challenge of a culturally defined approach. Common sense leads to mirror imaging, and is one of the biggest challenges in trying to understand a new culture. The application of alternative paradigms and common sense is in itself a contradiction. Sometimes attacking your common sense will lead to new approaches.
Thanks Anon, I agree on point 1, that using “war” as an example is a dangerous over simplification, especially since I didn’t follow it up with a lengthy discussion explaining what I specifically meant. It was an unnecessary exaggeration, but I’ll keep it in for the sake of transparency.
On your second point, I try to take an audience specific approach to common sense and look at it from various standpoints as opposed to a single prescribed truth. I was not referring to solely “my own” common sense, but rather understanding the potential “common sense” viewpoint of my audience and all potential stakeholders involved. Naturally, each can be different, which is why trying to understand them is crucial.
I should have explained that better. Thanks for your thoughts.