Cluetrain thesis #4, a decade later: More real people are speaking for their businesses

Ten years ago today, The Cluetrain Manifesto was unveiled. Since then, it has been held up by many as truth writ large. Others dismiss it is impractical, unrealistic, unworkable. In the middle are those who find wisdom in the Manifesto but wonder what all the fuss is about.

Lost in the debate about The Cluetrain Manifesto’s value, though, are the 95 theses that comprise it, beginning with the notion that “markets are conversations.” Certainly, it was a bold concept, given that a market, at its core, is a complex environment in which people and institutions exchange goods and services.

Each of the subsequent 94 theses, though, stands or falls on its own merit. And how they were interpreted a decade ago, while of some historical interest, isn’t very relevant in the vastly changed world in which we live today.

Keith MacArthur, a journalist-turned-communicator (currently senior director of social media and digital communication for Canadian megacompany Rogers Communciations), has undertaken an impressive project to explore each of the theses on their collective 10th birthday. I was particularly pleased when Keith reached out to me to offer my thoughts on thesis number four:

Whether delivering information, opinions, perspectives, dissenting arguments or humorous asides, the human voice is typically open, natural, uncontrived.

Understanding thesis number four requires, as a prerequisite, an agreement with the preceding thesis, which proposes that “conversations among human beings sound human; they are conducted in a human voice.”

The premise here is simple: Conversation is natural, while the function we have come to know as “communication” grew increasingly wordsmithed. It wouldn’t be pretty if an executive spoke to his wife the same way he talks to shareholders about company strategy:

“Life partner, I’m pleased to report that the meal we just concluded conformed to requirements, and the meat loaf exceeded requirements. Now we should shift our competencies from the dining facility to the recreation venue where we can leverage our discretionary time in order to consume some best-in-class entertainment from a wide range of options.”

Fortunately, even the most formal CEO probably tells his wife, “That was a great meal, honey. Let’s go to the living room and find something to watch on TV, unless you’d rather listen to some music and read.”

The growth of social media in the last decade is largely responsible for more and more organizations talking in a human voice. Or, more accurately, the people in organizations have increasingly been talking for themselves, a departure from the carefully crafted statement of record.

• At Ernst & Young, a Facebook-based recruiting effort invited employees to converse with prospects in discussion groups, a far cry from the display ads and job descriptions that usually kick off a recruitment drive.
• Employees from throughout Embarq, a Fortune 500 telco, have conversations with customers over Twitter and other channels, led by @Embarq_Joey who inaugurates conversations with unhappy customers with language like, “Sorry your DSL is messed up. Can I help? Send me a DM with your DSL # and I can check it out for you.” “Messed up” is hardly corporatese, is it? On the same account, he tweets non-work-related messages, like “Home at last!!! Such much to catch up with on the DVR, man!”
• Dave Neeleman, former CEO of JetBlue, spoke from the heart when he recorded YouTube video apologizing for the 2007 Valentine’s Day freeze at New York’s Kennedy Airport. Clearly, no lawyers were involved in prepping Neeleman’s statement.
• Alan Mullaly, Ford Motor Company’s CEO, sat and chatted with participants in a blogger dinner, with no handlers in sight, allowing the conversation to be videotaped, an informal chat most CEOs 10 years ago would have seen as undignified and unprofessional. Today, it’s viewed as authentic and real.
• Marriott International CEO Bill Marriott tells his stories in his own unedited voice on his blog.

These are just a few examples. Others appear in blog posts and comments, podcasts, videos, and other channels that permeate the Web. It’s a good thing, too. People are sick to death of hearing stilted language churned out by communicators and lawyers that sound like anything but the conversations they want to have. And because leaders are recognizing that their markets are conversations, they are increasingly recognizing the need to participate like real people—and for their employees to engage, as well.

Revisiting the thesis affords an opportunity to see how smart companies are showing their humanity in each of the ways described:

Delivering information>—PepsiCo podcasts have featured executives delivering performance results as though they were sitting across the cafeteria table from frontline employees.

Delivering opinions—Michael Hyatt, CEO at Thomas Nelson Publishers, blogs routinely about what he thinks, such as this post about why he believes every traditional publisher should be blogging.

Delivering perspectives—Beth Israel Deconness CEO Paul Levy uses his blog to offer perspectives on healthcare in some of the most forthright posts imaginable.

Delivering dissenting arguments—GM’s Bob Lutz spoke candidly on the Fastlane blog about his own views on global warming. Like them or not, it’s hard to deny that his words were genuine.

(We’ll let the humorous asides go. I’ve never heard one in delivered in corporatese.)

What characterizes each of these examples—and the list that preceds them—is the human voice—open, natural, and uncontrived. Of course, there are plenty of organizations still caught up in the inhuman, forced language of business from a bygone era, but the change is upon us and accelerating; there is no turning back.

None of this would matter if business didn’t benefit from the effort. A recent Heyman Associates study, however, indicated that genuine two-way communication is a more credible way to deliver information. Credibility is a pillar of trust, and trust drives business.

To all those who are weary of shifting paradigms and outside-the-box thinking, nothing could be more welcome.

What examples of authentic human voices from organization employees and leaders impressed you?

1. Thanks Shel, this has a lot of important things to say. My most recent favourite example of authentic communication was your post about the hospital executive who had a genuine conversation with the people working there about how they could mitigate the impact of reduced income.

   Posted by Al Shaw  on  04/29  at  01:24 AM

2. What an outstanding post and great observations. A decade ago, nobody ever thought business execs would be talking that directly. Makes those that still deal in corporate-speak look really pale by comparison. Thanks for reminding us of the simple brilliance of the Cluetrain Manefesto. I’ve quoted it many times over the year!

   Posted by Neal Linkon  on  04/29  at  04:38 AM

3. Good stuff Shel.

   One or two of my colleagues have even been heard to use expletives of various kinds - in social media of all types.

   That’s a good thing in my opinion. Obviously we need to protect the innocent but the odd swear word (used with humour of course) can add a lot of authenticity!

   Posted by Pete Burden  on  04/30  at  03:37 AM

4. The Graco Heart to Heart Blog is a wonderful example of humanizing a product (I believe).  Actually Newell Rubbermaid (owner of Graco and Sharpie) does a good job of creating a relationship with its customers.

   Re: humanzing the brand from the inside out.  Having leaders and employees blog/tweet/facebook etc. about a company really isn’t a big leap from the 1980s movement started by Tom Peters “in search of excellence” which said the best companies are the ones with the strongest/most positive relationships with their employees.  Then into the 90s with the studies that showed that strong corporate cultures impacted the bottom line.  So to me, the next level is taking that inside attitude outside.  If you love your company and really believe in it (whether as a leader or frontline employee) why not engage with others.

   Posted by Laura Perry  on  04/30  at  03:02 PM

Name:

Email:

Location:

URL:

Remember my personal information

Notify me of follow-up comments?

Submit the word you see below: