On getting personal in business blogging
Posted 17 August 2005 - 12:47am by Laura
When I first started writing this blog on pingVision, I wondered about how personal I could or should get on what ostensibly is a "professional" blog. Well, the topic came up recently on a number of business blogs, so what better time to revisit the question than the present?
In the aftermath of BlogHer '05, there were a number of posts that addressed the conference discussions of business blogging and getting personal. What really caught my attention, though, was profgrrrrl's questioning the appropriateness of one woman's decision to "come out" during the conference:
The "moment" (yes, gratuitous quotes, but you'll see why) for me was at the end when one woman said that she has a web site for her consulting business and she's polyamorous and she's going to put a link on her business site to her polyamory information. Wow. I mean, I have no problem with what she's doing with her personal life, but do prospective business clients really want to know about your sex life whatever it may be? I mean, should I put on my professional web site "if you lick my toes, I'm yours forever!" (OK, that was a joke. I don't like having my toes licked. Well, I guess I don't know if I do or not. It's never come up. But you get the point, right?)
Ironically, profgrrrrl's post also features photos of blisters on her feet, which leaves me wondering: How is one woman's personal disclosure about her private life any more shocking or potentially unwelcome than a series of photos of blisters? I might ask, Do I prospective business clients really need to see your blisters? I don't like to look at my own blisters! (To be fair, profgrrrrl blogs anonymously for reasons including wanting to keep her job -- But that points up the importance of the issue of mixing professional communications with personal info and/or political views.)
The woman who came out, Amy Gahran, describes her reasons for her disclosure:
I outed myself in that forum in order to make the larger point that humanity is not one-size-fits-all - that many people who are out of the mainstream in one way or another, or who or endure difficult circumstances in silence, often feel alone and vulnerable. That not only hurts them worse - it hurts society by allowing us to remain less aware and compassionate.
It was definitely a bonus that my announcement was greeted with applause. (I wasn't expecting that.) However, I'm not surprised that some people disagree with my decision to publicly disclose this aspect of my life.
In a personal blogging context, all this obviously is a non-issue. People do personal blogging for all sorts of personal reasons. But in a business context, all of this changes. Or at least raises some questions and concerns.
What is the purpose of a business-oriented blog?
Blogging, by its very nature, is a disruptive revolutionary new force mode of communication in business. In some ways, it's the very personal nature of blogging that gives it its power in the business realm.
Ostensibly, such blogging is a way to obviate, or at least reduce, the need for a "public relations" facade to present to the public. The blog, because of its more informal and spontaneous nature, paints a much more intimate (and, one can argue, accurate) picture of the company and the people in it. Or at least that's the idea as it's commonly discussed these days.
This puts a premium on making the blogging more informal, more personable, more personal. Otherwise what's the point? Writing a bunch of press releases and calling it blogging isn't going to achieve much. You have to put at least some of yourself into your business blogging.
So how much should the writer of a business or professional blog get personal or political? Some people just mix it all together. I have no idea how that works out, personally or professionally. Others take the Balkanization approach -- have separate blogs for different areas of their lives.
Me? I have a personal blog for personal things -- I won't give the URL here yet, as the site's still undergoing some design and module tweaks -- and I participate anonymously on a couple of political sites. People fired up about the latest in Washington aren't going to be too interested in my thoughts on browser quirks. And I don't think anyone reading this would be particularly interested in hearing about my latest Wal-Mart adventure.
Some, like Shelley, seem to find a comfortable balance between the personal and the professional. Me? I'm still trying to sort it all out.
How personal do I want to get here?
This is an essential question all professional/business bloggers must ask themselves. Small business owners will also ask themselves just how personal they want to get in the medium in which they are, in effect, "branding" the business. If business blogs are best at supplementing or supplanting "public relations," this is a serious question that inevitably will come up. For some, everything is personal. For others, everything is political. For many, business is business -- keep your private life private.
Amy Gahran's response to profgrrrrl says, in part:
Frankly, if a potential client learns I'm poly and doesn't want to work with me because of that fact alone, I don't want to work with them. Really. Being poly, I'm keenly aware of the importance of honesty and quality in relationships, and I would not work with someone who finds a significant aspect of who I am threatening, shameful, distasteful, or evil. That is not the basis of a healthy, mutually beneficial relationship.
Yet I can imagine that many bloggers -- especially those writing in the professional/business context -- may not feel comfortable being so open. Aside from privacy concerns, there's also the more mundane matter of potentially finding yourself in more heated discussions. Some people love a good fight, but do you really want to have that on your business site? (Or is that even something you can avoid?)
Then there's the matter of how blogging directly affects your day in the office. For example, one issue that comes up all too often for woman in business is that our culture traditionally tends to stream women away from management roles. It's been a long battle in the business world for women to gain professional respect, and be treated as peers rather than "the girls." How much could personal blogging about cats and shoe shopping undermine that? Or, to be less flip, how does the act of letting one's guard down in opening up on a blog affect one's ability to keep the "game face" in the work environment? (This really is a question worthy of its own blog.)
Then there are the potential implications for re the job hunt. Will a Google search that digs up blog posts about your previous job, for example, negatively impact your employability? Mel wonders:
[I]f these results are being used to determine someone's professional value, what professional standards are being applied to the search process? Are they documenting this process (to ensure fairness, equality or ethics)?
I think the short answer is: "probably not."
What's "bad" - for all of us - are the moral, cultural and political bias that is going into the evaluation of those results that determines our merit or value as citizens or employees.
This is the "reality check" that should give anyone food for thought re getting personal in a professional context. Your blog posts become part of your unofficial curriculum vitae.
Informed decisions
I do not judge Amy's choice to come out or her personal life -- why should I? And, in general, I don't really have any problem with people getting personal on business sites. But her decision, and the reactions to it, emphasize that the question of just how personal to get in business blogging should not be taken lightly.
This is another one of the transition points in blogging and business blogging. We're looking at tough questions. This goes beyond getting fired. It goes beyond posting frequencies. It gets to social and business norms. It gets down to, how many blogs do I need to write about all that I want to write about. Do I have one blog with a category called personal stuff? Do I have six personal blogs to cover ranges of topics (the answer to your question is, yes I do)? This kind of questioning is good and really helps all of us be better bloggers, IMHO.
If this topic interests you -- and I suspect it must, if you managed to plow through this far -- Amy Gahran has a survey on how people feel about personal and political content in business blogs.
As Tris puts it:
Why now? Why should we care? The problem is, I think, that blogs started off as very personal efforts. We knew about peoples' struggles. We knew about their lives. Then as business blogging grew people started setting up rules for themselves, and others. Is that limiting? Are there rules. What about when something great happens in your life? Or bad? It's obvious from this blog and my others that I have rules. Sometimes I break or bend them. Some rules aren't ever broken. Amy, and I, really want to know ... please fill out the survey. Hey it's only 10 questions. Go on, it's easy.
Easy questions to ask. Maybe not so easy to answer. Your mileage may vary.
from Laura's blog
most-popular pingVision blog posts
Syndicate
Comments
First of all, great post! You've spoken to a number of relevant issues and positions that are key. It's a nice addition to the emerging discussion about this very important issue. Secondly, thanks for including my thoughts (although I was horrified by my subject/verb dis-agreement! apologies).
I do agree with those who argue that there are genuine concerns about blogging employees when it comes to sensitive company information, discussing specifics of your job and/or clients. I do think an employer should have some sort of recourse where these kinds of issues are concerned - especially if it does impact their ability to do business or their reputation. From what I can see, the majority of professional bloggers are using their blogs to promote themselves, their knowledge and build their reputation. These folks know better than to broadcast any information that is unprofessional. So I don't really buy the anti-blogger arguments that I've been hearing about rampant lack of professionalism. There are well known examples of this, certainly, but it's not widespread.
So if we view blogs as a tool for reputation building (and management) then we have to look at questions about personal presentation. What aspects of ourselves do we want to share or promote? Ten, even twenty, years ago many gay and lesbian staff would be taking a genuine risk coming out in their office. This is changing (although I wouldn't go so far as saying it's totally changed since there are still many, many LGBT people who cannot come out in their workplace due to the social environment or lack of policies that protect their rights) and that change has brought about new ways of talking about relationships and life partners around the water cooler. In fact, there are a lot of things that we might not have discussed ten years ago that people are talking about more openly.
I believe that blogging and the internet have accelerated our understandings of ourselves and our lives in ways that no other media has done. All those things we might have merely *suspected* that other humans enjoyed or talked about we can now confirm with a simple search on Google - from creepy to comforting and everything in between. This is normalizing (for better and worse) a lot of identities and lifestyles that were formerly not so mainstream. We might now find out, for example, that the dude in accounting is a leather daddy (because he's won Mr Leather Daddy three years in a row). This is probably a big part of his identity and given that he takes part in public events it's something he's proud of. An accomplishment and confidence builder. And yet, we would never regard the Mr Leather Daddy award in the same way as we would, say, a golf tournament. One of these things is morally acceptable, the other is not. And yet, for somebody like me, who hates golf (and most other cliched corporate interests) I'd be more likely to want to meet the Leather Daddy guy not because I have an interest in that sub culture but because I could assume that a) this guy has a lot of courage, b) he's unconventional and lives life according to his own terms c) he's confident enough in himself to go out in public and take part in this event d) he's comfortable and proud enough of his sexuality to express it openly. What I'm getting at here is that, in terms of the nexus of professional and personal, we have to start evaluating lifestyles and identities according to the kinds of qualities they reveal about the person - rather than our own moral compass. If your own morality is getting in the way of evaluating another person's identity as a professional than who is the one who is unprofessional? As long as his lifestyle doesn't interfere with his work, what's the problem with him announcing this fact on his personal website or blog?
Call me radical, but I believe the entire idea of "the professional" needs to be smashed and reconstructed. Just take a walk through any business district and you'll see that the majority of women are still wearing skirts and heels, full makeup and requisite hair and accesories. That's quite enough of a reason for me. There are implicit understandings about who we can be in the workplace. A great many of those things are grounded in common sense. But quite a lot of it is tied to conservative and traditional value system. From my experiences in the corporate environment, I've observed that the general rule is that conversation and self representation is entirely tied to consumer values. This kind of environment is toxic for anyone who does not share those values. I am excluded from such conversations and even find them offensive. But that is the corporate norm. Just as I will not dress in drag (and I consider the professional presentation for women in corporate world as a form of "drag") as an index of my professionalism.
Until we can be judged by our work and not our identities as individuals we have not reached an idea of "professional" that is truly progressive or equal. I believe that blogs are beginning to shatter those old ideas and the problem is not with the people who are starting to say "this is who I am" but with an oppressive, outdated and conservative image of the professional whose identity is not the least bit challenging to a conservative/consumerist status quo.
I want to hear about people's hobbies, their relationsips, their sexual identity, their religion, their politics, their world view. I'm interested in other people. I'm not frightened by the idea that my coworker has a sex life that is very different from mine. I'm not upset by the fact that my other coworker has a different religion than I do. I'm not offended that my other coworker is an active environmentalist (well, actually, I'd adore that person!). I think it's far more toxic to hide who we are than negotiate our differences. That's the key - respecting and negotiating difference rather than creating an entire ethic that idealises one worldview and identity (which is the current corporate norm).
Just to clarify what I was saying before, I was speaking to (or intending to speak to) the questions that the blogger herself has in taking on the business/professional blog, not how management can or should look at blogging by its employees.
You make some great points, and I very much appreciate that you took the time to write such a thoughtful comment here.
Count me as one who sees both sides of the corporate aesthetic. Speaking for myself, I do not have an abhorrence to business attire. I consider it part of the uniform -- the uniform all business people put on to interact. In a way, I suppose it's a way of leveling the playing field. This isn't the peasant in rags appealing to the monarch in splendorous robes, it's one business person, well-off or struggling, meeting with another. The power dynamics exist, but I think they're attenuated a bit by the "uniform" of the business suit. It's a way of defusing the very real class issues that exist in our society.
Again, speaking for myself, I appreciate being able to wear something more feminine than a Brooks Brothers suit tailored for my figure. Yet when it comes to my usual business dealings, the "code" I prefer in my own office is more casual, more individualistic. But then, we're a creative company. That's almost expected.
I previously worked for a company that had no dress code, and I found myself actually asking for one. One guy came in repeatedly wearing a t-shirt, swimming trunks and thongs. And he was meeting clients like this! He was incredibly talented. But to me, the way he presented himself to work was a bit disrespectful and unprofessional. It's like saying, "I can't be bothered thinking about you, so deal with it." He was a really sweet guy. I'm quite sure he did not intend his choice of attire to be taken that way. But people don't read our intentions, they can only go by what we do, and interpret as best they can.
This may seem off-topic from the question of blogging, but I think the business blogging question is an extension of this balancing act between individual expression and, for lack of a better phrase, corporate identity. When does individual expression begin to undercut the atmosphere of professional respect and courtesy? To use your example, it's one thing to learn that "Jim" in accounting won Mr. Leather Daddy last year. It's another if he's blogging about his clubbing experiences in a business blog. I'd have the same problem with a blogger giving a stroke-by-stroke account of his golf game. Why is he telling me all this in a business blog?
And if he hasn't blogged about it, but what he'd heretofore considered his private life is suddenly Googleable, Jim himself might have qualms. It's one thing to "come out" to a roomful of people, and quite another to have it happen permanently for all the world to see. Perhaps as we all find more snail trails behind us on the net, this kind of information will become less political. But in this day and age where politics are becoming more abrasive and confrontational, the question of how much personal life to put "on the record" is something everyone might consider.
There's much to explore in this issue, but this comment has run too long already.
Hi, Laura and Mel. Thanks for such a great conversation!
Just a few thoughts:
1. They WILL find you. The internet has become almost entirely search-based. By that I mean that if you want to know about someone, you search for them in Google and other services.
That, as we all know, can turn up a hell of a lot of stuff that doesn't appear on your resume, business blog, etc. Some of it may be things you've posted to discussion forums. Some of it might be your personal blog. Some of it may not even be *by* you, but rather other people mentioning you.
...So unless you maintain a policy of strict anonymity online, or consistently use pseudonyms, it's a pretty safe bet that people (including current/prospective employers or clients, colleagues, your Aunt Edna) will find those other aspects of your online personality.
Personally, I think that if that information about you is going to get out at all, it's ultimately safer to "own" it, to take personal responsibility for it. Especially if it's something that matters to you, and which you are not ashamed of. Especially if it's something controversial that someone might accidentally or deliberately "out" you on. Because if you don't take responsibility for it, someone else will and the rumor mill will start. Better to speak for yourself.
...And if it's something you wouldn't want your coworkers, boss, or clients EVER finding out about, then don't mention it online. Anywhere. Period.
2. About integrity, Mel wrote, "In terms of the nexus of professional and personal, we have to start evaluating lifestyles and identities according to the kinds of qualities they reveal about the person - rather than our own moral compass. If your own morality is getting in the way of evaluating another person's identity as a professional than who is the one who is unprofessional?"
Bravo. I couldn't agree more. For me, integrity (in every sense of the word) is central to both my personal and professional identity. Indeed, one of the main reasons I choose to be polyamorous is because of the strong emphasis this community places on communication, honesty, consent, and integrity. Those core values are relevent to both my work and my approach to relationships. By being poly I've had a somewhat unusual perspective on life, and that has led to numerous insights which inform my work. I think it's relevent to share that in Contentious.com (my main blog). I don't think those insights would make as much sense if I didn't publicly say that I'm poly.
According to my survey (and I'm updating the results as I compile them) most of my readers appear to be fine with even controversial personal disclosures as long as they are relevent. I don't know how widely that applies elsewhere, but since I outed myself my readership certainly has not dropped one whit! I'm glad I did it, even though I could have been more graceful about it. (I've always been a klutz...)
As for the people who were scandalized, embarrassed, repelled, etc. by my mentioning that I'm poly at BlogHer or on CONTENTIOUS -- sorry. If there's one thing I've learned, it's impossible to please everyone. I'm confident that in this case, the offended, etc. represent a very small minority (you can see the numbers for yourself). That's more important to me.
In fact, it seems like most times I speak up online honestly about something that matters to me, even if it's solely professional and not at all personal, someone always squawks -- one reason why I named my blog "Contentious." I deeply respect and value that people disagree with me on many matters. However, I am not afraid of disagreement or criticism. I believe I have more to gain by speaking with integrity. For me, that's always good business. (Although admittedly it's not always fun.) Some people, it seems to me, are deathly afraid of attracting criticism or doubt. I just figure it's part of life.
...Anyway, I think I may have turned more people off by saying that I think the press release format has outlived its limited usefulness, than I did by mentioning that I'm poly. There are all kinds of disagreements and prejudice, after all.
Somehow, I seem to find a steady stream of intriguing clients and colleagues, mainly via Contentious.com. Despite all the squawking and ruffled feathers lately, I think I'm still doing OK, business-wise. Everything blows over, eventually. People have an amazing ability to accept, adapt, and rationalize. That's fine.
3. For people who are offended by the personal disclosures of others, I think it's important to take responsibility for your own reaction.
It's like dealing with jealousy (something I learned from being poly). Most people believe that "offended" and "jealous" are discrete emotions for which someone else is to blame. However, when you take responsibility for your own reaction, you have to consider *why* you experienced that reaction. Underneath the superficial label probably lies a tangle of emotions, assumptions, and expectations. It's worth examining all of those. (Although society tells us not to, just blame the other person and push it away. Don't examine your own insecurities.)
In truth, you can learn a whole lot by examining your own negative reactions, including feeling offended, embarrassed, etc. And what you learn from that experience can inform important aspects of your life and work.
..If you have the courage to face the discomfort, that is. That's the catch. The vast majority of people don't want to face any discomfort. The illusion of uniformity is much more comforting. Unfortunately, it's a lie -- and we all have to take up the slack that lie creates in ourselves, our work, and our relationships.
Thanks,
- Amy Gahran
Amy, first of all, thanks for such a long and thoughtful reply. I'd like to clarify that, in my remarks above, I was not writing about my own response to anyone's personal disclosures (except about the blisters). Your disclosure is your decision, and not mine to judge, especially since we don't know each other. I was simply exploring the greater question of how much someone writing a business or professional blog will want to disclose.
But I do disagree with something you say here: that personal disclosures equate with "integrity." How much do you have to throw at someone before you've satisfied this ideal integrity?
Maybe "integrity" is the wrong word. To me, integrity is very simple: Say what you mean, and do what you say. It's taking responsibility for your own actions. As such, I believe that the statement...
... captures only half of the equation. There's also the responsibility on the part of the discloser. What is the intention behind the disclosure?
When someone offers up something that does not relate directly with the business relationship, is it purely the responsibility of the other person to just deal with it? And if the deal goes sour, is it purely because of the listener's discomfort with the discloser's personal views? If the deal goes well, is it purely because of the disclosure? Or in spite of it?
What if, in a meeting, someone pulls out a pistol, sets it on the desk, and says, "I'm just showing my integrity by being honest about my support of Second Amendment rights"? Is that integrity? Or a threat?
What if someone starts talking about their faith, or -- as Katherine relates in a comment below -- starts a prayer meeting right there? Is that friendly charity? Or is it proselytizing?
Or let's use a less confrontational example. Let's say someone in a business meeting announces, "I have herpes." Is that honesty? Is it a rebuff?
In each of these examples, the disclosure seems out of context. The other person will wonder, Why is he telling me this? What am I supposed to do with that information? In the absence of context, the other person has to provide it him-/herself -- most likely with mistaken conclusions. Does the discloser bear no responsibility for the consequences?
This gets back to the intentions of one's business blogging. What information is necessary to disclose? Is any information appropriate, as long as it's true? If I tell a potential client that my mother is ill, the other person might ask herself, Why is she telling me this? Is she angling for sympathy in this negotiation?
Communication takes two parties, and both are responsible for how the relationship develops.
I don't think anyone argues that business is about "uniformity." If we were all the same, then we'd have nothing to trade. But I do believe that business is about commonality -- building relationships and forging contracts based on mutual interest, that lead to mutual benefit.
Of course everyone is an individual, with his or her own preferences, quirks, strengths and weaknesses. Business doesn't deny that, but rather is about building bridges of opportunity between disparate entities that otherwise might never even meet. When the forging of such ties is done with integrity, it becomes its own thing -- something that I feel has the most potential to change the world.
Thanks for your response Laura. I'm greatly enjoying our conversation!
You wrote, "Your disclosure is your decision, and not mine to judge, especially since we don't know each other. I was simply exploring the greater question of how much someone writing a business or professional blog will want to disclose."
That's totally the spirit I took it in. No worries :-)
You also wrote: "How much do you have to throw at someone before you've satisfied this ideal integrity? ...What is the intention behind the disclosure?
"When someone offers up something that does not relate directly with the business relationship, is it purely the responsibility of the other person to just deal with it? And if the deal goes sour, is it purely because of the listener's discomfort with the discloser's personal views? If the deal goes well, is it purely because of the disclosure? Or in spite of it?
"What if, in a meeting, someone pulls out a pistol, sets it on the desk, and says, "I'm just showing my integrity by being honest about my support of Second Amendment rights"? Is that integrity? Or a threat?"
Hmmmm.... I think you're conflating a few concepts here. when I said "integrity," I was referring to this definition (per Dictionary.com):
"The quality or condition of being whole or undivided; completeness."
I know it's common to treat "integrity" as a synonym for "honesty," but in fact it has more to do with seeing yourself as an integral whole, where all aspects of your life interrelate and influence each other. A concept like "relevence" (especially crucial in professional communication) only has meaning in the context of whether you view the person who's communicating as an integral whole, or are focusing only on certain aspects.
IMHO, it's very healthy to present oneself as whole and human, at least occasionally. Even at the risk of occasionally challenging defaults and making some people uncomfortable. This doesn't have to mean spilling your guts and exposing every scraggly detail. (I always believe in good editing :-) So I think we agree that it's up to the communicator (blogger, in this case) to decide what to reveal about her/himself, and why.
...Which brings us to intention. I agree with you that intention is important, and that communication does take at least two people. Both people have responsibilities, if they wish to communicate effectively.
However, no communication takes place in a vacuum. There's always a background of context, and part of that context is whatever's considered "normal" -- a set of default assumptions and preferences for the situation (social, professional, familial, etc.). I'll just call them 'the defaults' here for short, but please understand that the specific defaults vary by community, situation, and other factors.
When new information is presented that doesn't fit the applicable defaults, it won't go unnoticed. The inevitable attention generally comes with an involuntary emotional response, positive or negative (or mixed). This makes such communication a little less predictable, and thus a little more risky. Which means such messages ideally should be crafted and delivered with care -- but not, necessarily, avoided.
The thing is, the defaults exist for a reason. They function as social glue which we all rely upon. They work very well for a lot of people, in most situations, most of the time. They make the world a bit easier to navigate (at least for the majority of people who fit most of the defaults reasonably well).
I'm not knocking social/professional norms and other default assumptions or preferences; I rely on them daily. :-) However, I am saying that often we tend to forget that the defaults exist -- and that they are, in fact, only a subset of the actual possibilities.
...Then some inconvenient bit of information floats by, and it lands outside the defaults -- thus calling attention itself, and to the fact that the default assumption or preference exists.
What to do then? Look for an explanation or justification for the out-of-the-ordinary tidbit? Or take notice of the default it fell beyond, and consider whether that default needs to be modified? Or both?
I think: Both.
Communicators should realize that out-of-the-ordinary disclosures will inevitably distract, raise eyebrows, and pose risks. So treat them with care. If possible, make them constructive and relevent. Give your audience clues on how they might process unfamiliar or unexpected information.
...AND ALSO give your audience enough credit. They can take responsibility for their own reactions, even negative ones -- and maybe even learn something useful from the experience. Your job as a communicator is to treat them with respect -- not necessarily to shield them from any possible challenge to their defaults. If you've honestly done your best to communicate with respect, then their reaction is their responsibility -- although yes, it may yield some blowback. Consider that risk carefully.
But we all bump up uncomfortably against the world sometime, and we all survive it.
Of course, don't expect any uncomfortable or controversial communication to go smoothly. Something will get weird. Expect imperfection -- from others, and for yourself. Have a jumbo-pak of compassion handy, you'll need it.
...Also, regarding my comment about "uniformity" and your response -- I'm sorry I wasn't clear, and I understand your reaction. I wrote too harshly and quickly. Please forgive me, and allow me to restate that point.
What I meant to communicate was that our social and professional defaults do help us by providing the common ground that allows business and other types of interaction to occur. That means they provide a level of uniformity -- not total, by any stretch. But level enough allow us to deal with each other, generally in constructive ways.
The tradeoff is that all those aspects of ourselves which don't quite mesh with the defaults don't simply vanish. Each of us must account for them somehow -- often in isolation and even secrecy, which makes it difficult. That's the "slack" I mentioned.
For many people, this sensation of having to take up the social "slack" is minimal. For others, it's a significant burden -- and sometimes compounded by concern for others who carry the same kind of slack, or shared frustration at seemingly arbitrary boundaries. Often (though not always), I've found that people who fit the defaults well don't grasp how deeply they might chafe others. I've been guilty of this lack of awareness myself.
Although they might seem rigid at any given moment, the social and professional defaults are constantly evolving in response to new situations, information, and goals. This evolution isn't always smooth or fun, but it is constant.
Right now, the boundary/overlap between the personal and professional is a set of default assumptions in flux -- in some quarters, at least, especially online. I'm not surprised that this topic is generating some friction and even strong words. (You should read some of my survey responses!) Many people on all sides feel strongly about it.
Eventually we'll sort it all out, and move on... but things will probably be a bit different for everyone at that point.
Thanks again,
- Amy Gahran
Editor, CONTENTIOUS
... for the benefit of people *other* than yourselves. There's an important element (at least, in my opinion) to the disclosure of personal information in a professional context, which I'm not sure has been brought out yet in this discussion... which is supporting others to feel less scared of what others might think of them. What do I mean? Take Amy's announcement of being polyamorous - she's taken a conscious decision to be open about this. There have been detractors... but there appear to have been many more supporters than detractors, *and* a large number of people who, actually, aren't particularly bothered either way. Effect on Amy? I suspect she feels more comfortable with her situation - not least, because nobody can now threaten to "out" her, or actually do so in a way that forces her to respond to such a disclosure.
But what about another polyamorous person? One who (hopefully) is entirely comfortable with who they are - but who fears that being open and honest about themselves might be detrimental to their career. So they live a life with a significant part of who they are concealed from public view - and with the nagging concern of "how will I respond if my secret gets out?"
But that person might hear of Amy's disclosure - read the public reaction to it - and think, "you know, maybe it's *not* such a big deal for me to just acknowledge, publicly, who I am".
What if more people did the same? Lived a life of open integrity (by both your principle, which I share, but which I normally phrase as "say what you mean, and mean what you say", *and* by Amy's, of living a whole life)... maybe we'd get to a point where personal aspects of our lives that are neither illegal (by the laws of the countries where those people live) not immoral (such morality determined by the widest possible consensus, *not* the most restrictive definition) do not *need* to be hidden away.
Personal disclosures may be irrelevant in a business context - big deal. The contrary position, that personal disclosures are *inappropriate* in a business context...? No, I can't buy that. I am an individual - the profesional skills I have have been wrought, in no small part, by the personal journey I have taken. If someone wants the former, they get the latter as part of the whole package. If they have a problem with some aspect of the latter, then *I* have a problem with letting them benefit from any aspect of the former.
And I harbour this quaint notion - that, some day soon, people who once felt that thy had to "hide away" who they are in a business context will see enough positive examples of people who've resolved not to play that game to think, "I am who I am - I'm not ashamed of it - maybe I'm even *proud* of it - and I won't hide it - and, look... my professional career has actually benefitted - and I've given hopen and encouragement to others in the process".
Apologies for the length of this comment! :-)
In "Journey to Ixtlan,"Don Juan says to Carlos,
It is a truism, especially in this day, that "no man is and island." What we put out on the internet, we put out to the world. Yet I ask myself, what do my clients need to know about me? If I blog about business, I ought to set my business experience down. I ask myself, "does this information help others to understand my experience as a business person?" Does the fact I mountain climb or scuba make a difference? Perhaps if I am involved in furthering mountain climbing or scuba diving, it does.
Are my religious views important? At one firm (although I never witnessed it as I was not part of the inner circle) the men in the inner circle would get down on one knee, and in a wagon wheel-spoke pattern touch hands and ask for the Lord's help in closing major corporate sales.
We had one individual, not inner circle, witness during lunch and read from the Bible.
By the way, the above was in the heart of Silicon Valley and not the heart of the Bible Belt.
In the 1960's a large aerospace firm contracted to send men to the moon would have a weekly staff meeting where about 18 people got together. Three were women and the men's tradition was to pass around a centerfold-type picture of a woman for everyone's admiration. Finally, unable to stand it, one of the women said she was going to bring in a photo of a nude man. It was then the men decided she was a grouch with no sense of humor. The point was, they were creating a hostile environment.
But on the chemical plant, I saw worse. There was one manufacturing area that was called, "the gallery," and one wall was covered like wallpaper with nudie girls. There were four women who had to access that facility and we found out that the best defense was to act bored and not intimidated.
Yet all these cases - Jesus and bunny - were a way for the inner circle to assert their commonality in ways that had nothing to do with business.
Perhaps people can find out more about us more easily because of what we say. The question is, why do we say what we say when we say it? Unless it's a religious group, I am skeptical of Jesus in the Board Room. I am equally skeptical, unless it's a Gentleman's Magazine, that photos of nude women are appropriate to the decorum of a meeting to discuss inertial guidance computers.
Personal information is important if it bears directly on the business. Anything more might make the audience wonder if they have stumbled onto the wrong meeting, and it can even set the wrong tone.
I don't normally make a practice of this, but upon request, I'm posting an email response from profgrrrrl (who's cited in the original post), with some of my own comments:
I apologize for the misstatement.
I believe I was clear that your pictures were on a personal site. I just found it ironic, the blister pics in a post about what's appropriate for a blog, business or otherwise.
Inferring motive: mea culpa. I will add, though, that many, if not most, people who blog anonymously do so at least in part to avoid being Dooced -- especially in this day and age, where it's happening all the time. Anyway, my apologies for suggesting your blogging is a firing offense.
And thanks for the response. (I turned on moderated anonymous commenting so you can reply directly next time. Comments from unregistered visitors will through moderation until our spam filter is trained well enough.)
First, "polyamorous" means next to nothing. According to Amy, it does not mean bi-sexual, orgiastic, multi-sexual, trans-erotic, polygamous, adulterous, promiscuouous, or participating in sex trade.
So, what does "poly" mean? Having lots of conversations with others. This is what it seems to mean. "Multiple loving relationships" which translates into "lots of talk fests". Big deal. No offense, Amy, but I think this is a publicity stunt, and it is no "outing" at all. It makes light of those who really do "out" themselves about truly controversial lifestyles.
"Poly" is mainstream, common, not controversial or exotic or alternative. Everyone has multiple conversation partners.
Next, two points that the advocates of personal trivia in business blogs seem to miss is the Relevance of Personal Trivia and the Usability Characteristics of Irrelevant Fluff.
Readers of business blogs are looking for valuable content. Period.
I don't think they really crave lots of personal details. They want a business blog to be credible, accurate, relevant, reliable, up to date, etc.
It is selfish to blabber on and on about irrelevant trivia. Employees get fired for introducing too much private drivel into phone conversations with clients, inter-office emails, memos, business meetings, etc.
Why do some feel a strong urge to inflict their personal trivia on readers? Is it narcissism? Egomaniacal? Grandstanding? Delusions of grandeur?
If it's inappropriate for a business meeting, what makes it suddenly okay for a business blog? Isn't a business blog very similar to a business meeting? You attend both for relevant information about...a business. Not for recommendations on CDs, films, or to share anecdotes about children or spouses.
One of the biggest complaints from web site and blog users is the inability to find the meat. Users complain about difficulty finding relevant information. But now we have people championing the inclusion of still more obstacles to info foraging.
I just don't see how personal trivia accomplishes any worthwhile goals. Your personality should be shining through your writing style, not your private trivia.
Perhaps my attitude is gender-based. Men tend to avoid discussing children, emotions, shopping sprees, shoes, films, restaurants, etc. But women seem to be more prone to discuss these things.
If a man were to discuss personal trivia, most other men would be bored or repulsed.
Steven,
Congratulations. You have single-handedly shut down a great discourse.
I'm not going to pick through your entire comment, but the reason why people share personal information on their blogs is as varied as the blogosphere itself. Of course blogs started out as personal reflection. For myslef, the personal connection why I am interested in a particular non-business subject I think adds depth to the artilce itself.
As you chose to vent in this way on our site, I thought I'd use your comment as a launching point for a complementary topic related to business blogging....
While I would agree that there are valid questions as to what exactly is "appropriate" for business blogging, I submit that there also are matters of tact and tone. Personal and political blogging can get quite strident at times. Rants come with the territory. Yet, for some of the same reasons you offer for what you consider to be appropriate subject matter, I would argue that tone and tact are equally important when it comes to communicating in a business blog.
For example: speculating that Amy's reasons for disclosure are a "publicity stunt"; labeling such disclosures as "fluff" and "trivia"; describing her as "selfish"; offering speculation of psychological pathology ("Is it narcissism? Egomaniacal? Grandstanding? Delusions of grandeur?"); and suggesting that women "seem to be more prone to discuss these things".... All of these I would consider of a tone wholly inappropriate for a business environment.
Speaking for myself, I don't see how strident rhetoric accomplishes any worthwhile goals (except perhaps venting in and of itself). I could not speak to your personality, but in the comment above your personal attitudes come through quite clearly. I remark upon them here as your words appear on our site.
Perhaps I'm being unfair. I can go only by your comment here. I confess I've not had the time to do background research on your own blog to contextualize your remarks.
One of the largest conundrums the web has posed is the privacy issue, and the fact that what one considers to be a "personal" page can very easily be found by prospective clients/employers/employees not to mention friends/family and colleagues. With Google being so fast to react and very good at indexing, a simple search of a persons name (somethimes with a town/region qualifier or profession) will yield a great insight into a person who is active on the great www.
As such, especially in the web design industry it is imperative that users self censor to prevent future embarassment.
Just my $0.02