Until the next time, I wish you success in all your endeavors.
Wednesday, November 23, 2011
Au Revoir
Apologies, but I am putting the blog on hiatus again. My time and energy will need to be devoted elsewhere, and I don't want to blog without really having something to say.
Wednesday, November 9, 2011
Don't Change for the Sake of Change
Change is an interesting thing. It is often talked about and there are books, courses, and probably songs dedicated to it. Most people fear it and even go to extremes to avoid it, yet many, once forced to accept it, often go overboard and change too much. That is change for the sake of change instead of to improve a broken process.
Publishing is all about change, and many would say, has been since its inception. Many publishers resisted the change to digital but now that this is no longer possible, I feel that they're throwing out the baby with the bathwater.
Yes, workflow and process need to change to accommodate this new era of publishing, and even thinking has to change. But before you discard all your resources, human or otherwise, take the time to reevaluate which can be adopted and which need to be upgraded. Some publishing systems still work: editorial still need to acquire good content; production editorial, the project managers of the publishing world, still needed to ensure quality content is produced--in whatever format--on time and on budget; and marketing, sales, publicity, etc. still need to work towards higher sales. Manufacturing is still needed regardless of the size of the print run, and if they have downtime, why not allow for employee development and cross-training? Unless you choose to have e-book producers in-house, there's no reason Manufacturing/Production staff cannot work with e-books and/or learn how to--and they already know your other systems and mission.
If current employees are not able or willing to learn new skills, or you choose to produce/convert files in-house, then additional resources are needed. But before you make them a standalone department, stop and think if this makes the most sense process and morale-wise. Process-wise, the less handovers the better since each handover is an opportunity for delay, errors, and redundancy. Morale-wise, why separate e- and p-production staff instead of having them work together to incorporate best practices and an efficient process?
Change is a catalyst and can be used to inspire innovation...or to just keep making the same mistakes but in different ways. And speed is not an excuse. If you have to catch-up on a system and/or get something to market sooner, hire a contractor or consultant to fill the short-term need and take your time to think through the long-term change. Haste makes waste...and some changes are too costly to undo or redo.
Publishing is all about change, and many would say, has been since its inception. Many publishers resisted the change to digital but now that this is no longer possible, I feel that they're throwing out the baby with the bathwater.
Yes, workflow and process need to change to accommodate this new era of publishing, and even thinking has to change. But before you discard all your resources, human or otherwise, take the time to reevaluate which can be adopted and which need to be upgraded. Some publishing systems still work: editorial still need to acquire good content; production editorial, the project managers of the publishing world, still needed to ensure quality content is produced--in whatever format--on time and on budget; and marketing, sales, publicity, etc. still need to work towards higher sales. Manufacturing is still needed regardless of the size of the print run, and if they have downtime, why not allow for employee development and cross-training? Unless you choose to have e-book producers in-house, there's no reason Manufacturing/Production staff cannot work with e-books and/or learn how to--and they already know your other systems and mission.
If current employees are not able or willing to learn new skills, or you choose to produce/convert files in-house, then additional resources are needed. But before you make them a standalone department, stop and think if this makes the most sense process and morale-wise. Process-wise, the less handovers the better since each handover is an opportunity for delay, errors, and redundancy. Morale-wise, why separate e- and p-production staff instead of having them work together to incorporate best practices and an efficient process?
Change is a catalyst and can be used to inspire innovation...or to just keep making the same mistakes but in different ways. And speed is not an excuse. If you have to catch-up on a system and/or get something to market sooner, hire a contractor or consultant to fill the short-term need and take your time to think through the long-term change. Haste makes waste...and some changes are too costly to undo or redo.
Wednesday, November 2, 2011
Expectations
"X is meant to be tough, but not so tough that you're set up to fail."
Last night I said the above to my son, with "x" being replaced with "school," when he was complaining about having too many quizes to study for. I obviously agreed with him in this instance.
But the "x" could be just as easily replaced with any number of words, including "work" and "life." And saying this to my ten-year-old got me thinking about expectations.
There is a fine line between a "stretch goal" and being set up to fail. If the goal is self-imposed, it's up to you to know your strengths, limits, and what's tough but achievable.
But what if it's set by your boss and you realize it's just not doable? Hopefully you don't feel that you're intentionally being set up to fail; if you are, that's another issue and can be dealt with in another post. Chances are, your boss just isn't aware because she hasn't done your job, so if you make a strong case, backed up by hard facts, she'll hopefully see the light. If she doesn't, clearly document your progress, bottlenecks, conflicts, issues, etc. so that you have a documented case to prove that you accomplished as much as was possible.
And if you're going into a new situation, whether at work or home, take the time to have your and the other party's expectations spelled out at the onset of the relationship. You know what they say about assuming...
Last night I said the above to my son, with "x" being replaced with "school," when he was complaining about having too many quizes to study for. I obviously agreed with him in this instance.
But the "x" could be just as easily replaced with any number of words, including "work" and "life." And saying this to my ten-year-old got me thinking about expectations.
There is a fine line between a "stretch goal" and being set up to fail. If the goal is self-imposed, it's up to you to know your strengths, limits, and what's tough but achievable.
But what if it's set by your boss and you realize it's just not doable? Hopefully you don't feel that you're intentionally being set up to fail; if you are, that's another issue and can be dealt with in another post. Chances are, your boss just isn't aware because she hasn't done your job, so if you make a strong case, backed up by hard facts, she'll hopefully see the light. If she doesn't, clearly document your progress, bottlenecks, conflicts, issues, etc. so that you have a documented case to prove that you accomplished as much as was possible.
And if you're going into a new situation, whether at work or home, take the time to have your and the other party's expectations spelled out at the onset of the relationship. You know what they say about assuming...
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)