Have a Seat
(What follows is an updated post based on feedback from my good friend Matt Galloway.)
With the Superbowl upon us I thought I might touch on the topic of armchair quarterbacking - a person who offers advice or an opinion on something in which they have no expertise or involvement the process. I’ve seen this for a while on the blogosphere and now see it emerging in traditional media sites. In my opinion it just has a feel of bad form but the reality is, in the communications industry, badmouthing the efforts or lack of effort by others in our field verges on violating the high ethical standards all our respective organizations have set (PRSA, IABC, AC, etc.).
Let’s visit some reasons why being an armchair quarterback is a bad practice in general:
You don’t know the reasons why decisions were made (the basic premise) - I will be the first to tell you after attending a client meeting the tactical decisions which emerge might be nothing like what I would have suggested going into the meeting. Research, finance, human resources, audience profile, tech knowledge, culture and more all come into play making even the smallest strategic and tactical decisions. It is impossible for anyone outside the room to know all this. If you weren’t at the table you really just don’t know the real reasons.
There is a better format to review criticize - I had an old boss who had a practice of always praising in public and criticizing in private. People loved him and the best managers at this company learned from him. You can too. If you have a suggestion regarding how an organization might have done something different, send them an email. Trust me it will be easier to write and they will most likely appreciate your thoughts even more.
Regarding the “advice”, wise men don’t need it and fools won’t heed it - Nuff said, don’t waste your time. Better yet, go do something more productive.
Who asked you for your opinion? – Unless it was the company I say keep it to yourself. Better yet, write a review about an effort which totally rocks!
Who would you hire? - Think about it who would you rather hang with at a party, the bore in the middle with nothing good to say or the nice guy off to the side who talks about all the great things in the world?
What goes around comes around - Trust me on this one, I believe in Karma and see it all the time. To be honest, when I see an article of the armchair quarterback nature it makes me want to go out of my way and call all your work into question in a very public forum. I would never do this but trust me, someday someone will probably for the same reasons you are.
End-run
Okay, so you really, really want to be an armchair quarterback and write a blog post about what was wrong with someone’s efforts then go ahead. But let me offer some suggestions – don’t include names and talk about the topic from a theoretical point of view. Be sure your comments are grounded in fact and not simply conjecture and if you must write that blog post do some research. To be clear, there isn’t anything wrong with saying the emperor has no clothes but make sure you find out why he’s naked before telling him he’s doing it all wrong. Maybe all his clothes are simply in the laundry.
Peace.
![Reblog this post [with Zemanta]](http://img.zemanta.com/reblog_e.png?x-id=3cc21a5c-a5d6-4998-8228-1b5fbca120d9)
Excellent. I think that says exactly what I thought you were trying to say in the first place.
Your re-write made it clear to me that the very mention of “b(l)itching” in the original version put me on the defensive and distracted me from your very sage advice – don’t be an armchair quarterback.
Unfortunately this leaves me with nothing to post on my own blog since I was intending to lambaste your original post. Sadly, your rewrite leaves nothing against which to contest. Oh well.
-M.
Matt, as always I appreciate your comments. I agree there is a certain catch-22 to the above but I would argue it falls on the side of sage advice rather than just being bitchy for bitchy sake. – kind of like when a parent gives good advice – it’s not bitching… then again I guess its all in the eye of the beholder. If you think I was bitching then by all means please call me out on it. Sage advice deserves a different response.
Regarding to armchair quarterbacking, again not too sure I agree with your premise. I wasn’t referring to any specific post or blogger or media person. In fact, I made sure I didn’t. My advice is in a very general sense. But I still see where it could be taken the wrong way. So I made some edits above, softened the tone, even taken my own advice… tell me your thoughts.
Bill,
I was gonna write you a personal email, but then I realized, “Hey, I’m not a communications professional – I’m not bound by any of those silly stated, assumed, or implied ethical standards of your trade organization.”
So here’s the question that came to my mind as I read your post… “I wonder if Bill was in the room when the decision was made (by whoever set Bill off) to blitch about another communications professional’s actions or inactions.”
I suspect you weren’t. And if that’s true, then – by your own logic – you can’t possibly know what the motivating strategy is behind the action (blitching in this case).
This epiphany gave me pause, at which point it struck me “This post itself sounds a little, well, bitchy… on Bill’s blog. Hmmm. I think Bill call’s that ‘blitching’.”
On closer inspection, it seems that you’re ignoring your own advice on may counts here -
You’re airing your grievance in a public forum (on your BLOG in fact.)
You’re offering advice to people (the blitchers namely) who will likely not heed it and I’m reasonably certain didn’t ask for it.
From this post it sounds like you get hired despite this blitchy post. (Which might make one question the “Who would hire you?” argument.)
Of course I know you, and I clearly understand the intent of this post – but it’s easy to image how one might call this hypocritical. I realize that you are talking about very pointed posts attacking specific people or companies – but it wold be easy for someone to interpret your post as a passive-aggressive response to a specific action instead of the generalized guidance for young practitioners that I know it to be.
Bottom line – your advice is sage as always – but it illustrates the Catch-22. Sometimes folks need to talk about the elephant in the room even if sounds like blitching. You address this in you closing paragraph but you make it sound like the last resort of the weak willed instead of the courageous action of someone declaring that the emperor has no clothes. I have no idea what your trade organizations considers ethical, but I think it’s always appropriate to denounce unethical practices. And it’s courageous when this view is unpopular.
It’s one thing to attack an action (or inaction) that simply doesn’t make sense to a 3rd party observer (i.e. attacking a firm for “overcharging” for when a dollar amount is disclosed publicly that, at first blush, might seem disproportionate to services rendered) – this type of blitching fits your post exactly. But I think some actions are abusive and/or unethical despite the motivation – using shills in social media for example, or intentionally misleading the public with false or incomplete information. By not speaking up, one becomes a passive accomplice – enabling harmful practices that erode public trust for all communications professionals.
So when, if ever, do you think it’s acceptable to “blitch”? How do you justify this “blitchy” post on your blog? Or do you categorize this post as something other than “blitching”? And if so, how do we tell the difference?
To be clear, I completely agree with your sentiment – but I was left with lots of conflicting ideas and questions.
-M.