Monthly Archives: August 2006

The American Journalism Review has an article in their October issue on John Sawatsky, a Canadian journalist who’s become a leading authority on the art of the interview. "His conclusion: too often we’re asking all the wrong questions."

The art of asking good questions is a skill useful in so many areas: journalism, of course, but also on sales calls, in focus groups, or simply during a chat with a personal friend who’s gone to you for help. Money grafs:

Resist the temptation to converse, sympathize, and add value or meaning to questions, he says; use short, neutral questions that repeat the source’s own words. If the source makes a value-laden statement–for example, "Brian can be excessive at times"–follow up with: "What do you mean, excessive?" …

Ask a closed-ended question and sources "will confirm or deny 98 percent of the time. That’s the science." The unpredictable part is what happens next. "Socially, people are taught to add a postscript to a confirmation or a denial. As journalists, we hope the P.S. will describe or explain the issue we’ve raised. That’s interviewing by accident. If you get somebody who doesn’t want to play, you’re in trouble." …

Instead of asking Sarah Ferguson, for example, "Is it hard being a duchess?" ask: "What’s it like being a duchess?" Instead of asking Ronald Reagan, "Were you scared when you were shot?" ask: "What’s it like to be shot?" …

The best questions, argues Sawatsky, are like clean windows. "A clean window gives a perfect view. When we ask a question, we want to get a window into the source. When you put values in your questions, it’s like putting dirt on the window. It obscures the view of the lake beyond. People shouldn’t notice the question in an interview, just like they shouldn’t notice the window. They should be looking at the lake."
"I get it," says a voice from the back of the room. "Mike Wallace is like a stained-glass window."
"That’s right," Sawatsky says. "Stained-glass windows are beautiful to look at, but it’s all about the window, not about the view."

Life at the border is the most interesting.

All conflicts in the real world happen at the borders of countries. Once as a kid I had two feet and two hands in four different U.S. states at one time (UT, NM, CO, and AZ) and I felt more alive. Cross a border in Europe, as I have done many times the past two months, and you experience a whole new language, sense of style, and dinner time.

The border is most interesting because it’s where contrasts are illuminated. Contrast drives everything. Contrast is important for good decision making — you need to know what your alternatives are.

Physically traveling puts you at the borders of the world and literally provides cultural contrasts. But I wonder if we could extend this idea to thinking. We all need to have a “home” somewhere — that is, a few core strengths, an industry we understand, a customer segment that’s familiar — but increasingly leaving home and thinking at the border is necessary. Spend time in new industries. Take new kinds of risks. Most important, expose yourself to new kinds of people.

I spoke with an executive the other day who hired artists — painters, sculptors — to live in the office of a services company. The artists were asked to do what they did everyday: make art. It had no apparent relevance to the services company at all. But something interesting happened. At lunchtime the artists would sit and talk with the company’s employees. They’d hang their art in the offices of the company. They’d mingle and mix at company social events. In short, this company served as a patron to random artists because they bet the artists’ presence and way of thinking would have a positive, indirect impact. It did indeed. That company placed itself at the border of their industry and the world of modern art.

How can you get closer to the border in your world?

(Hat tip: Pierre Claus for the conversation sparking this post)

Several months ago blog reader Sean Ness of the Institute for the Future in Palo Alto invited me to one of their events. I couldn’t make it, but Sean encouraged me to stop in one of these days to learn more about their work. In-between meetings last week I spent an hour at the Institute for the Future and came away really impressed. In their own words…

The Institute for the Future (IFTF) is an independent nonprofit research group. We work with organizations of all kinds to help them make better, more informed decisions about the future. We provide the foresight to create insights that lead to action.

After giving me a tour of the facility, we sat down and Sean described some of the big trends they see developing over the next decade. Some of the themes that most intrigue me:

• A "group economy" threads together past visions of emergence, new kinds of capital, collective action, grassroots economics, etc.
• "Lightweight infrastructure" builds grassrootes economies into physical structures.
• "Sensemaking" is about the importance of focal points and maps in an ever-less-bounded world. Physical context increases in importance.

After a good chat Sean handed me seven thick research books on everything from "The Future of Global E-Education" to "Cooperation in Business in the 21st Century." When I got home to my computer I had three emails from Sean — links to blogs that may interest me, additional reports not released to the public, and an introduction to someone I could find interesting.

That’s what I call professionalism! IFTF keeps a low profile since it does much of its work on a confidential basis with private sector clients, but it’s an organization worth keeping tabs on if you — like me — are trying to figure out what trends are going to converge in the future to shape the world we live in.