The Marketing Associate came to visit with news that it was week 6 and my turn in the rotation to complete a blog for the organization.  There were a lot of things I wished to say at that point but held back as this was simply a messenger with an edict from management.  From the point of announcement that all staff must blog on behalf of the organization per a roster regardless of other projects or desire to do so, I had deliberated the value of the move.  From a sales & marketing standpoint it’s a purported goldmine, an organization where the breadth of knowledge is diverse the promotion of these ideas from within benefits an organizations profile.  Staff who blog also benefit in the process with the recognition of individual thought leadership in the industry. 

But is the goldmine wrought with fools gold?  Another view to take on this would be that by forcing the blogging this can devalue the blog content overall lowering quality from two aspects.  Firstly, staff are writing not on desire or burning issue but trying to fit in a few words given the schedule.  Secondly, the true pieces of valuable information can get lost in the quagmire of “filler” articles.

It is not as though there are not a number of valuable topics that I should be discussing in some format, top of mind is some of the analytic and reporting work that my team is currently undertaking however the results are clear when correlating survey data with turnover and performance.  The greatest gap is in associate engagement and to no surprise simply handing high performers more money doesn’t guarantee anything, well except a pay raise for myself now.

I seem to have digressed however this topic does bring me back to the point that if a high performing employee has alternative preferences to blogging does this effect the engagement of said employee?