Do Thought Leaders Need To Be Practitioners?

Written on July 28, 2009 by Adam Kmiec in Marketing & Advertising

One of the things I love about twitter is the free flowing dialog that can take place. I found myself in an interesting conversation with one of my favorite tweeters @schneidermike. What I like about Mike is that he always has an opinion and he’s not afraid to take a different point of view. Honestly, on twitter, that’s a unique characteristic. In truth there’s too much “playing nice” on twitter. Mike gives it straight and I love that quality.

Our conversation tonight stemmed from this tweet in which he said, “Besides @chrisbrogan, who are your favorite CRM experts?” As we traded tweets back and forth I was taking the position that, Chris isn’t a CRM expert and he certainly isn’t a Social Media “thought leader.” Again, I’m entitled to my opinions, just like Mike is.

The one tweet that stuck out to me in our exchange was this one, in which Mike said “whoa there buckaroo! a thought leader does not need to be a practitioner.” Mike was responding to a tweet I wrote that stated “@schneidermike you’re killing me – thought leadership in social – show me the portfolio, what has he done?”

In short, Mike’s stance was that you don’t have to “do” to be a recognized leader. I realize I’m paraphrasing by the way. While, my point of view is that a true expert and leader should be able to practice what he/she preaches. What I don’t want is someone that walks into a room, talks a bunch of philosophy, but then can’t deliver.

Think about this situation…you meet with a lawyer because you’re being sued. You ask to see his body of work…his credentials if you will. He responds instead with a passionate speech about the legal system, due process, and American value that would put Al Pacino to shame. You’re pumped, you’re excited, and then you realize the lawyer totally avoided the question…because in truth he has no credentials and has no ability to go from THEORY and PHILOSOPHY to actual practical means. Total bummer.

To me, my exchange with Mike shows the big problem I have with our industry and social media as a whole. We have too many theorizers, talkers, and philosophers who become seen as experts despite their inability to put together a solid actionable plan. This screws it up for every single smart strategist, marketer, etc. out there, because we get tainted with the smell of people who are essentially all talk and no show. Not cool.

Am I wrong? As Mike says, “a thought leader does not need to be a practitioner.” Do you believe this? I don’t. I think there’s a big difference between talking about hitting a baseball…the science and physics behind it – and the ability to actually hit one.

Your thoughts?

Tags: Best Of, Experts, Snake Oil, Social Media

http://www.search-marketing-answers.com/blog alanbleiweiss

Adam, I'm of the “Practice what you preach, or get out of the way” school. I can't tell you how many times in the course of my life in countless areas of expertise I've run circles around preachers who don't practice. It's nauseating.

When I'm discussing methodology with peers, if they tell me “But so and so says…”, the very first thing I say is – that's all good and fine – can you show me one case study that proves out their theory? I never ever get a case study.

Sadly though, some preachers have such huge followings that somehow their follow count translates into trust.

I call that pathetic.
http://twittermaven.blogspot.com warrenss

Adam, well said. I've often thought about this. One thing that works well in the social media fish bowl is the spreading of ideas. Unfortunately, there can be a lack of credibility as it is much easier to talk than do the heavy lifting. Moving from philosophy to action is hard and requires participation between two parties. As a result, more ideas than implementation. Hopefully, we'll get there..
tdhurst

Agreed. Theory, philosophy and opinions don't mean a whole lot if you have zero experience actually putting your ideas (or having someone else use them) to work.

The current social media thought leaders are just the geeks who got here first, nothing more.
http://twitter.com/shawnthinks Shawn Freeman

In most situations, my instinct is to side with experience. Traditionally, experience leads to better decisions. Said another way, experience lends credibility to a theory.

However, lack of experience isn't always a liability. More than once, I've seen someone who worked for me come up with a successful idea simply because they were unencumbered by years of practice. In essence, their ignorance allowed them to see the situation differently and find a unique way of solving the issue.

Ultimately, I'd be wary of someone that only “talks the talk,” without having “walked the walk,” but never close your mind to unique ideas, regardless of the source. You never know who is going to come up with the next big idea.
http://detroit.fwix.com Jamie Favreau

Very valid point.

I am studying PR and the Social web. Am I an expert, by no means, but I am getting to know what works and what does not in this day and age.

I know there is a difference between CRM and Social Media interactions. I mean you do business with who you know, like a trust. This can only be measured over time and the relationships! So we are all learning how to use this technology and programs which are being produced to change the way we don business.

You should have some knowledge if you are an “EXPERT” but you also have to know what field you are in. IF the lines get blurred then there is a problem.

CRM is separate from Social Media. They may want to engage the consumer but they don't really mean you are both unless your job description says so.
Pingback: Do Thought Leaders Need To Be Practioners? « crm like soft
tnapper

Thought leaders are like college professors. You wouldn't go to Harvard to hire your hypothetical lawyer. You would ask friends who the best lawyer was for your case. Just as in our business there are people who think about our space but aren't the people doing the work. The separation between thought leader and do'er is healthy. It can be the same person but if 80% of your job is making it work for your one client then you don't have time to step back and see where the rest of the world is flowing. Conversely someone who is working at 30,000 feet sometimes cannot see the tiny changes currently happening on the ground.
adamkmiec

Tom-

I agree that sometimes the best teachers are not the best “doers” – but I think thought leaders are different than teachers. To me a thought leader is someone like Steven Levitt. He's not only one of the brightest economists out there, he can teach really well (as evidenced by his TED presentation), and he's a hell of a thought leader (aka Freakanomics).

Adam
Pingback: Web Media Daily – July 29, 2009
http://schneidermike.com schneidermike

To be clear, my stance is that @chrisbrogan is both a thought leader and practitioner.

My point was that if everyone thought like Adam, we would not do anything new. Ideas, philosophy- these are forays into uncharted waters or new ways of thinking about standard practices. That stance- it's safe. It eliminates the element of risk that can lead to great reward and even to competitive advantage. Professors, philosophers, leaders, analysts often deal in theory and hypothesize. There is value there and, when their ideas are well thought out with logical conclusions, why do they need to be the ones to prove them? Why can't the crowd prove the theory?

My comments, as Adam has stated, are out of context and were designed to spark debate more than to defend someone who does not need to be defended (see defense below *sigh*). Afterall, I am an analytics guy and am almost always asked for data to backup my thoughts. For the record, I am also a skeptic. I am an empirical learner. (I guess) the difference is that I am willing to consider philosophy, pick up the pieces that I agree with, test and learn.

The original stance by Adam was: Chris Brogan is no CRM expert. When I asked the question, I was talking about CRM as a process, not as a toolset [although I know that he knows his was around a database and also around segmentation].

“@schneidermike you're killing me – thought leadership in social – show me the portfolio, what has he done?” http://twitter.com/adamkmiec/status/2898658568

You mean besides build an extraordinarily impressive community at http://www.chrisbrogan.com? Besides the speaking engagements and generally being looked at as a leader by the industry at large? (We could ask the crowd, but you know I am right.)

How's this? http://www.bit.ly/cbbio
“We help bigger companies (SONY, Citrix, Pepsico, Comcast Interactive, Microsoft, etc) figure out how these social tools like blogging and Twitter and Facebook and all the rest might change the game. We build strategies, help with execution, and in general, do as much as we can to teach the brilliant people we meet at these places how to fish in these new waters.”

Furthermore, this stuff is still pretty new and there are still few case studies. I would bet dimes to dollars that the people who have them are keeping locked in a vault and using the 2-key system to pull them out as needed versus putting them all up on the web for public consumption. I just had a conversation with a colleague this morning about scientists and their willingness to talk about methodology and technology, but not about the specific compounds. How else are you going to get a competitive advantage?

I leave you with a question. How did you get your first Social Media gig before you had any experience?
http://chrisbrogan.com Chris Brogan

Not that you asked me, but because I'm part and parcel of the conversation, I thought I'd step in.

1.) You'll never hear me call myself a thought leader. That's douchebaggery.

2.) I have quite a roster of companies I'm working with right now, but we're deep into the DOING, and so aren't ready for case studies yet. Again, it'd be douchebaggery for me to claim success yet with these clients, as we're just now getting to the fun stuff.

3.) My first professional roles were in call centers and customer service. I started as a rep, worked my way up to the advanced teams, and then later was made manager of a call center. I then grew into roles that had me building projects where call centers were used as pieces of a larger puzzle.

4.) I do CRM as a byproduct of what I do, but I sure don't consider that WHAT I do, any more than I consider videoblogging a career (for me).

So that's my take in the first person.

Carry on.
http://chrisbrogan.com Chris Brogan

Oh, you were asking about the practical side:

In social media stuff, I've built blogs, run podcasts, created videoblogs, launched presence across multiple platforms, built content marketing, crafted email marketing campaigns, worked with live streaming applications, integrated several APIs for a dashboard project, taken apart RSS feeds, and all other kinds of tech stuff that would bore you too much.

Beyond that, I've got several years experience with various folks from different parts of the web, so it might depend what else you wonder about in the “is he DOING” department.

I'm a huge fan of, “If you've never done it, why should I give a shit what you think?” Even me.
http://thelostjacket.com Stuartfoster

Theory is just that: Theory. Show me what you can do and then I'll listen to what you have to say. Saying that a “thought leader” doesn't have to a practitioner of the product that he or she is talking about? That's complete nonsense at best and laziness at its worst.
http://chrisbrogan.com Chris Brogan

Based on Twitter, if your question is whether or not I'm doing what you've done, no. Definitely not. I'm not an agency in the sense that you represent it. I'm what's next. Maybe. From my perspective, I'm working on the human elements of business communication, not trying to build interactive digital media.

My experience doesn't line up the same way as your resume, for sure. But that's why I'm getting all the opportunities that I'm getting. They know what everyone else has done. It's a chance to do something new.
http://chrisbrogan.com Chris Brogan

That's all I have to add. Didn't mean to do it over several comments but I kept getting thoughts. : ) . All done for now.
http://twitter.com/adamstewart Adam Stewart

I'm repeating here, but there are way too many people spinning their wheels, regurgitating the same theories and social media buzzwords without creating the case studies and work to prove any of those theories. They are instead just saying the same thing over and over again, building on theories they have never executed. You learn by doing and executing. And not just executing in social media. You learn by marketing strategy, and determining how social media fits in as a tactic.

From a creative marketing standpoint, there are too many playbooks, guides, etc. out there. If you stick to the playbook all the time, everyone engagement ends up being the same.
adamkmiec

Mike

2 things real quick:

1. Just want to make sure I'm hearing your correctly. In general, not Chris specifically, do you think a thought leader should be a practitioner?

2. Don't want to take your comments out of context; I took our discussion to mean people in general though it started with a conversation about Chris.

To answer your, I never got a social media job. I don't see it as a unique skill. I've been a 13 year interactive marketing veteran though that has worked with and/or lead real projects an initiatives like:

GoArmy
BMW Films
The First American Airlines website that included the ability to book online
Buddy Lee
Yearbook Yourself
etc. etc. etc.

I can point to a body of work that shows I can “do.”
tnapper

That's where I think the difference is. People that really “do” well and can thought lead are very rare. I still say that they are different people. I want a thought leader to question what I'm doing so that I can be better. Someone who is great at their craft is someone who I admire and someone I compare my own work to see where it is falling short in its craft.
adamkmiec

Chris

Good comments and thanks for hopping over. It's about time you returned the favor – given all the times I've been on your site This was never about you, but then again it's all about you. I'm looking forward to seeing real tangible work and more importantly results come from the opportunities you referenced.

There's too much vapor out there. To many people talking transparency, dialog, and 2-way conversation and not enough real work being done.

Adam
adamkmiec

Yes, that's what I'm saying. A thought leader should be able to guide me around the pitfalls, but I gotta tell you that's tough to do if you've never actually done it.
http://schneidermike.com schneidermike

In general, I do not think a “thought leader” needs to be a practitioner. That is my stance and I stick to that stance.

Does it improve credibility? Yes. I agree with you, but I don't think that the person needs to be the one specifically to prove a good theory? No.
adamkmiec

“Sadly though, some preachers have such huge followings that somehow their follow count translates into trust.” that quote NAILS it. It's my problem with the industry right now.
http://schneidermike.com schneidermike

Well, you did call him out, so as you said it was always about Chris.
adamkmiec

I think we will evolve, change, and get there! It has to.
adamkmiec

Thanks for clarifying. Different strokes for different folks. One isn't better than the other, but I can tell you that clients want to work with people who have done “it” and can do “it” – not just talk about doing it.

My belief is that those who can do will survive in this industry and this space. Time will tell.
http://jasonkeath.com jakrose

So, Chris, for the people that would call you a thought leader, is there a better term, or is it just better used from a third party?
adamkmiec

I don't disagree. The conversation started with Chris and our conversation sparked the blog post. But, the post is about the industry as a whole. We have lots of talkers…
http://chrisbrogan.com Chris Brogan

Well, all terms like that should be from other parties. If YOU call yourself a guru, you're a douche.

But I dunno. Am I really a thought leader, or just someone who extrapolates on what I've observed or experienced? I mean.. what's in a word?
http://chrisbrogan.com Chris Brogan

But there are plenty of people doing. I've launched blogs and trained corps how to engage and given guidance that made action move forward, and I've done all levels of the engagement.

To decide from external views who's done what is the same as assuming that since someone worked at an agency that handled big accounts they personally have knowledge and experience. You can bring the coffee to the big dogs at an agency and still claim such.

N'est pas?
mncahill

Chris has obviously done the work, and been a continual boundary stretcher in many areas…

I think we're getting lost in semantics here. The point is simple. While you may be very bright and may actually stumble onto some very interesting ideas for a particular niche, it is narcissistic in the extreme for anyone to think that they are a “thought leader,” expert, guru, etc. if they have not actually done the work.

Hence it is an affront to those of us who have been building online communities, social media, etc. since the dawn of the Internet to see someone sign up for Facebook and immediately assume they are a “Social Maven” or whatever they throw into their profile.

We're in the age of Micro-celebrity, and right now there's a battle to carve out space as preeminent online personality within an array of niches. It's going to be up to us to figure out who is the real deal, and who is just a passing blast of hot air.
http://chrisbrogan.com Chris Brogan

I have plenty of people who'd suggest that I've done work that benefits them.

GM – @cbarger (or Fritz Henderson, if you read the WSJ piece).
Pepsi – @boughb
Citrix Online – @lisahorner
Comcast Interactive – @fancast (I don't think Robin D'Agostino has her own account)
Sony Electronics USA – @marcycohen (starting shortly on a nice project)
Microsoft Office Live – @officelive

Just to name a few.

But the thing is, it's not the same work as you were doing in the past. Most of what I do involves education, strategy, and first moves.
adamkmiec

I think nomenclature is the key. I value your ability to excite people, to get them to think differently, to galvanize an audience. To me that's a great asset to the revolution taking place online. In my realm of definitions that's an evangelist. That's not a dirty word – it's a good word.
adamkmiec

The gap I think that exists is too often we can't SEE your work. I can point you to mine…

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Hire
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/America%27s_Army
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Army_of_One_%28Rec…

etc.

I'm not looking to compare resumes of work. I'm saying that this industry has become one in which we can't point to the “work” which makes it hard to separate charlatan from thought leader
http://social.name/ Norbert Mayer-Wittmann

I think the funniest part about “On Waldon Pond” (by Henry David Thoreau) is the part where he mentions that he's going to town for the day to get a mattress and some nails — now that's a practitioner!

Even better is if you practice what you preach — which, I guess, Thoreau did for most of the rest of the time. I just thought it was ironic for him to refute his basic theory by buying into the very symbol Adam Smith used to describe the capitalist system Thoreau's book was criticizing: the nail itself, the quintessential symbolic fruit of the division of labor.

I agree: All talk, no walk is useless.

And I have yet to find ANYONE who can even DEFINE “social media”. (see e.g. http://conversative.net/blog/2009/04/05/social-…

nmw
http://jasonkeath.com jakrose

to me that is exactly what a thought leader is, though you are right, it is all words. if someone thinks your ideas are shite, they likely would not call you a thought leader.

“someone who extrapolates on what I've observed or experienced”
mncahill

Norbert: Try this for a definition: http://www.allthingscahill.com/2009/02/social-m…
http://chrisbrogan.com Chris Brogan

Somehow my last comment vanished. My fault.

Here's my idea: call me a charlatan.

I say this without irony or anger. I just really don't see the benefit of defending. My clients keep buying. They buy second projects (meaning they don't feel cheated). I get new referrals. The majority are Fortune 100s.

I'm okay with who I am.
http://social.name/ Name

I think the funniest part about “On Waldon Pond” (by Henry David Thoreau) is the part where he mentions that he’s going to town for the day to get a mattress and some nails — now that’s a practitioner!

Even better is if you practice what you preach — which, I guess, Thoreau did for most of the rest of the time. I just thought it was ironic for him to refute his basic theory by buying into the very symbol Adam Smith used to describe the capitalist system Thoreau’s book was criticizing: the nail itself, the quintessential symbolic fruit of the division of labor.

I agree: All talk, no walk is useless.

And I have yet to find ANYONE who can even DEFINE “social media”. (see e.g. http://conversative.net/blog/2009/04/05/social-media-101-how-to-define-social-media-session-01/

nmw
http://twitter.com/sonyab Sonya

Leaders of any kind do not have to be practitioners, good at what they do, or have your best interests at heart. History (political and business) is rife with leaders who should never have been followed. Leaders are good at leading, even if it's down the rosy garden path. However, I want street cred. If I follow someone, I want him/her to be a practitioner, good at it, and have the community's best interests at heart. So, I would say, the best thought leaders are practitioners.
marketingsavant

Hey Adam,

As someone who makes a living in the practice of helping firms develop and execute thought leadership, I picked up on the back & forth between you and @schneidermike as it was going on (one the fundamentals that thought leaders practice is to stay “tuned in” to what's going on) out there…

I have to say that I was taken aback by the “thought leader does not have to be a practitioner” quote. In essence, they do have to be a practitioner, but it doesn't mean that they have to have done everything on which they posit a point of view.

For example, McKinsey may produce a wonderful whitepaper about the coming opportunities & challenges of working in Russia. While they may not have clients doing so, and they may not have a direct 'body of work' with Russia, one can simply look to their body of work in globalization as part of their practice and ascertain their qualifications to be a thought leader, so to speak, on Russia.

The other example are coaches. You have great coaches in many sports and professional disciplines who are not, by the nature of their job, practitioners at what they're thought leading on. However, they have unique insight, a point of view, a philosophy and the ability to teach (educating the market/customers/constituents is also a fundamental for thought leadership). While they may have been practicioners at one time, they were often not the best.

As it relates to Chris Brogan and CRM social media. Perhaps, Chris is not a CRM guru by trade, however, as a marketer, technologist and business leader, (and social media notable, at the very least) his blend of work, though not directly related to the discreet discipline of CRM, could quite readily qualify him as a thought leader int the CRM and social media spaces.

Further, thought leadership is attained through audience validation. An audience (customers, prospects, fans, donors, whatever) “bestows” the “title” of thought leader on an individual. A thought leader to one person or group isn't necessarily a thought leader to a different person or group. Someone may be the thought leader in an industry, their town or in their association, but may not be considered so in another context.

By all of the criteria by which we measure thought leaders (this is a sample: http://www.marketingsavant.com/2009/02/the-elem…), Chris has the majority of the qualifications.
http://schneidermike.com schneidermike

@jakrose, it's more about who says what about whom. This all started when I called Chris a “thought leader”. Of course it would sound bad if Chris was “Tarzan”ning around, beating his chest and calling himself a thought leader, but it sounds awesome when I say it [or if you or someone else in the space were to say similar].
http://social.name/ Norbert Mayer-Wittmann

Yes, I checked that out.

The way I see it, that includes the entire world wide web.

Certainly some software facilitates interaction more than other software, but even just following a link can be a form of interaction (I'll admit that that's a little extreme, but the point is: without a clear definition of what social media is supposed to refer to, people cannot say very much — or much that might be considered meaningful — ABOUT it)
adamkmiec

I don't think I was asking you to defend – again it's not an attack. If your clients keep buying then you must be doing something right. I can't wait to see whatever it is you're working on actually come to light so I and the rest of the world can see it.
adamkmiec

Very well stated. I appreciate the depth you went into here. Awesome stuff. I think “Fiery Irish Rose” really nailed it here: http://www.fieryirishrose.com/2009/07/the-real-…

The people she throws out as thought leaders are the ones I respect.
http://social.name/ Norbert Mayer-Wittmann

I've decided to entertain the idea that perhaps “social media” might refer to a SUBSET of the world-wide web (rather than including all of it).

That doesn't mean it's my opinion, but rather that I'd like your feedback on whether / how that might be the case:

http://conversative.net/blog/2009/07/29/social-…

Here's a little thought experiment (to get the juices flowing): just because a website in Germany or Russia or China is not on a list of “social media” sites maintained by some rating agency and or statistical number-crunching service doesn't make those sites any more / less social. If you would not like to interact with 300 million people in China, then that is simply YOUR decision to ignore them — but they are probably using the web much in the same way as you or I use it: to interact in a SOCIAL manner.

But that's just IMHO — and I welcome any + all different opinions (and I'm happy that Adam also celebrates the multitude of different opinions… much in the spirit of Voltaire [see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evelyn_Beatrice_Hall ;] ).

nmw
http://www.marketingprofs.com bethharte

Sorry, had to jump in here [right here, in this exact spot! ]. Adam, your list of Wiki postings really don't carry much weight either…for me anyway, sorry. It's just a listing, right? They don't really give us insight into YOUR part. What strategy did you perform? What tactics? Did you have a measurable plan? Did you meet the measurable objectives? What creative process did you use? What was unique or different? Did you use typical marketing tactics or something new and innovative? Did you come in under budget? Did you let the clients lead the campaign or were you in the driving seat? Were the clients happy? Can I call them for a recommendation? You get the picture… (Not picking on you per se, just the notion of “mine is bigger than yours.”)

I could point people to a lot of things that I've done, but it's not the story and it surely doesn't explain my part or my thinking process. As well, I've been engaged in social media for 5 years. Do I have case studies? Nope. But I think people know me well enough to know that I can walk the walk…and talk the talk.

Pointing to work doesn't separate the charlatan from the thought leader. I've seen a TON of social media case studies that were junk. Perhaps what's good marketing, PR or social media is in the eye of the beholder.

In reading between the lines here I think a lot of people are pointing fingers at Chris and others NOT because they truly want to see their work, but because they want to know the secret sauce of THEIR success and try to recreate it because they can't do it themselves. (Hmmm, I think some ears are burning…)

I LOVED that Chris said there isn't a comparison here. He's doing something NEW and not recreating an interactive agency. And that's what I think is bothering some folks because they can't wrap their heads around it or recreate it.

As well, Chris or anyone else is NOT beholden to share their work with anyone else. The only people that matter are our clients and our management.

So, to answer your question should thought leaders also be practitioners? Yes. I think they should. But as I said above, they don't need to prove that to anyone who ISN'T buying/paying.

Just my $.02 for what they are worth.

Great discussion here Adam!
adamkmiec

Beth-

What I provided were links. I can provide others, like this http://www.oneclub.org/os/osi/showcase/?year=20… – you can open up Communication Arts or Creativity and see the real work produced.

There's a difference between talking about what you can do/what you've done and being able to show it. Show it is a loose term – it could be visual, it could be a reference, it could your name in print. My overall point is that there are too many people being put on pedestals without anyone saying…wait a second, what have they done.

I don't want Chris's secret sauce, assuming it exists…and I don't think what he's or others is new…circa 1999 this same thing was going on when it came to websites. He and others don't need to show their work – but I can tell you that many clients…myself included wouldn't hire someone that couldn't show me what they've actually done in the real world.

If I attend a conference and Chris or Laura or some other “thought leader” is on stage I deserve to know the facts – after all I paid to attend and listen
Pingback: Social Media 101: How to Define “Social Media” (Session #02) - Conversative Network
Pingback: Thought leaders and practitioning | The MarketingSavant Group
http://www.marketingprofs.com bethharte

Is it that for every topic someone speaks on you want a specific case study or tangible proof of exact experience?