Constraints and creativity

Disturbed young manI recently read a Harvard Business Review article called “Why Innovators Love Constraints.” (Thanks to our university’s chancellor, Cheryl B. Schrader [@SandTChancellor], for tweeting the link.) The author, Whitney Johnson, summarizes the virtues of working within defined parameters — primarily, that constraints can drive, rather than inhibit, creativity and innovation.

Her suggestion may seem counterintuitive to those of us who believe free reign is required for creativity. But Johnson is right. The more constraints applied to a situation, the more creative we must become to find a solution. As Johnson puts it:

A tightly-lidded box can stifle and suffocate. It can motivate us to figure out how get outside the box. To make choices about how we will expend the resources we do have available to us, to find cheaper, more nimble ways of doing something as a person – and as a corporation. Our perceived limitations may give us direction on where we might play, or want to play. Indeed, if we will let them, constraints can (and will) drive us to disruption.

Constraints can drive creativity. When we think about creative geniuses — Picasso, for example, or e.e. cummings or Quentin Tarantino — we think about their breakthroughs or breakaways from conventional methods. But they still had constraints. Picasso still had the canvas, cummings the blank paper, Tarantino the camera. But they worked within those constraints to create a new approach.

Twitter is a great example of a medium that constrains us. Within the span of 140 characters, we must compose a thought, a comment, a reaction, a response.

As a result, we have people like Tim Siedell (@badbanana), who routinely serves up gems like this:

And this acerbic bit, after Budweiser’s baby Clydesdale Super Bowl commercial that had everyone sniffling:

I’m not suggesting that Siedell is the Picasso of Twitter. But he’s pretty damn clever, and just about every tweet of his that I read gets me chortling. He’s figured out how to work within the constraints of the medium, just as Picasso did with visual art.

“When it comes to writing, or building a business, we may chafe against constraints, imposed or otherwise,” Johnson writes. “But without any constraints, we are creating ex nihilo, and can easily lose our way. Paradoxically then, a constraint can become a tool of creation.”

Haiku (the 5/7/5 syllable constraint). Limericks. Music (only seven notes to work with). All are constrained. Yet when creative minds accept and work within those constraints, they can create beauty, or at least (with limericks) a laugh or a smile.

Based on this principle, it seems that higher education, which faces many constraints (budgetary, regulatory, infrastructure, and so on), should be ripe for innovation. The challenge, as I see it, is that higher education (in general terms) has been allowed to function with relatively few constraints over the years. When you’ve been given a lot of latitude and freedom for a long time, you may tend to have less incentive to innovate.

But as we know, times are a-changin’ in higher ed. It’s time for creativity and innovation to happen. And it can happen, if we recognize and accept those constraints for what they are and figure out how to innovate within those parameters.

For some ideas on what’s already happening in the realm of technology in higher ed — and no, this is not another MOOCs post — take a look at this top 10 list of the most innovative approaches to technology, as judged by CampusTechnology.com. (Hat tip to Mark Greenfield [@markgr] for sharing this.) Take note of the creative ways in which these campuses are dealing with technology and learning issues.

Image courtesy © Rookcreations | Stock Free Images &Dreamstime Stock Photos.

How journalist-friendly is your #highered website?

newsMedia relations and PR in higher education continues to evolve. The old days of pitching story ideas or blindly sending out news releases is giving way to a different model — one that relies more on the Internet to connect us to our audiences.

We’re trying to optimize our websites to make them easier for journalists to find and easier for Google to index. We’re sharing more news with our audiences via social media. We’re putting our content in more media vessels than ever before, re-purposing print stories for the web and web for print, posting video and audio online, encouraging interaction through blogs and social. More and more, we are relying on the Internet to help get our news and our stories to our audiences.

That audience includes journalists, and many of them rely on the Internet to conduct research about the stories they’re working on. If we’re doing a good job getting of making our institutions visible in the online world of search and social, then chances are a journalist will end up on our .edu site in search for background information, or perhaps a source for an interview.

So, how well do our websites communicate the type of information journalists are looking for?

To my knowledge, no comprehensive study of .edu pages has tried to answer that question. But PR on Websites, a recent study by Nielsen Norman Group, does look at corporate, government and non-profit sites, and much of the information from that study translates well to the higher ed sector.

The free, 287-page report 287-page report offers more than 100 design recommendations for improving the design of PR areas of corporate websites, as well as helpful screenshots, discussions and quotes from journalists who took part in this comprehensive usability study. This is the third edition of this report, but it’s the first one I’ve read, and its expanded list of tips — 103 this time, as opposed to 32 from the first edition — provides a wealth of takeaways that should benefit anyone interested in making their websites friendlier to journalists.

Despite the report’s length, it’s an easy read — as you would expect of any report created by usability guru Jakob Nielsen and his company — so if you do no more than skim the executive summary (pages 3 through 7), you’ll glean some useful information.

“Ultimately,” write report authors Kara Pernice, Hoa Loranger and Nielsen, “PR-related usability comes down to a simple question: Why spend a fortune on outbound PR (trying to pitch journalists) when you neglect simple steps to increase the effectiveness of inbound PR (satisfying journalists who visit your website)?”

Some takeaways for higher ed PR folks and web designers:

Ditch the marketing talk

This should be a no-brainer for anyone with a PR background, but it’s worth emphasizing up front. “Journalists are not gullible,” the report notes, “and they don’t take a company’s own word as truth. Indeed, almost all journalists said that press releases were useful only to find out how a company is trying to position itself.” I would like to think that those of us in higher education are less buzzwordy than PR folks in, say, the tech sector. But I’ve seen my share of marketing dreck in higher ed PR pieces. (Heck, I’ve had to put my fair share of said dreck in press releases.)

The Nielsen folks further advise: “[B]asic information must be easy to find and should be cleansed of the marketese and excessive verbiage that smother the facts on many sites. Journalists don’t have time to … sift factual wheat from marketing chaff.”

How much of your PR content is actual wheat and how much is chaff? Better to do the sifting before you put your content on the web.

Facts, not fluff

Related to the point above, journalists want access to facts about our organizations.

In general, the more interesting facts you present about your company, products,and executives, the better for PR. Journalists look for facts they can use in their stories. Our study participants were much more excited about genuine information than about marketing claims, which they immediately discarded.

How easy is it for journalists to access interesting facts about your school?

Making contact

Make it easy for journalists to contact the people they need to contact for their stories. Doing so “can set you apart” from the competition.

Specifically, the study says journalists want to be able to easily find this information from our websites:

  • Press: Name, telephone number, and e-mail address
  • Company overview: What the company does, its purpose
  • Products and services: Information at the right level of detail
  • Financials: Trends (e.g., current and yearly earnings)
  • Management: Names, images, and bios of high-level executives
  • Philanthropic involvement: Information on social and environmental responsibility or other goodwill.
  • Spin: How the company wants to be perceived, its angle on a story
  • Images: Downloadable, high-resolution images of important people, products, services, and events
  • General facts: The basics of the company (e.g., CEO, headquarters, number of employees, year established)
  • People: Names and contact information for people who can be interviewed

We should assume they’re looking for the same from us.

Get discovered

Above all, make sure that your institution can easily be found via a Google search. “When looking for information and getting to the company’s website, the majority of the participants used Google and typed the company name in the search bar.” Journalists also relied on Google to get contact information. As one is quoted as saying in the study, “I use Google a lot to get people’s e-mail and phone number. Google is a time-saver.”

* * *

Higher ed websites try to serve a multitude of audiences, which makes focusing on a single one (like journalists) tough. But many of the same features journalists are looking for are useful to other audiences, too. The point this underscores for me is an idea that I’ve made before in this space: the colleges and universities need to start thinking like a media organization.

Photo: © TMarchev | Stock Free Images & Dreamstime Stock Photos