NPR - The Opportunity

In a forest, when a big tree falls, light pours in and there is a huge growth burst. Such an event is taking place at NPR. The press say that this event is because the board is anti media. We all know that the opposite is true

In the light of the press' view of what is happening, I feel compelled today to offer up a few attached insider's views of what a new CEO could find in this clearing.

First of all some issues that are now visible in the environment:

• NPR cannot go it alone - Go for the "System" - Networks trump everything that is not a network. We were maybe not sure about that after New Realities but many had that insight. There is now abundant evidence that this is true - look at Senator Obama's fund raising - so a public media system that is a real network including NPR and producers and the stations  that pulls in the full creativity and energy of the public will trump any other system. The best way forward is together. Not because it is "Nice" but because it is the best! The resources that are latent in a system are vast. In a system that includes the public - are stupendous

• The money will dry up really fast - Our economic model is now as bad as for newspapers or the music industry - The shift to the web is faster and more complete than many thought in 2006 - By 2010 the web will be the centre of how life is lived and the economics for those that rely on other ways of connecting will fall off the cliff. Inaction is a decision to die. Action means a huge push to 2.0. No one is able to do this right now.

• We are all stuck. We know where to go but can't even take a first step to get there - the participative person centered system - the destination is no longer in doubt - BUT we don't know how to get there. Most are completely stuck - the Friction of the current world is overwhelming. At the moment death is very likely.

So we know where the "City on the Hill" is. We know that we have to get there. But we are stuck.

So in my humble opinion the work is to get the system unstuck. So how might we do that?

• Acknowledge that we are stuck and begin a conversation about why we are stuck and ask what would unstick us.

• Ensure that this conversation extends into the system

• The source of all healing is acknowledgment up front that we all share a problem

Some principles for getting unstuck that are the rules of healing and new growth:

• Having the expert talk down at you fails - groups of peers are the only way to help people overcome their natural fears of being someone new

• The lessons of the Innovators Solution - if you are dealing with truly disruptive change and you put the change inside the power of the old system - the old system will have to kill it

• You need great evangelists - could our modern Paul be called Jeff or Doc or David or Euan

• The lessons of the Reformation - as you become more successful in the new - the full power of the old will do its best to kill you - you need the power of the German Princes to defend you. Who are the German Princes today? They are called Omidyar, Skoll, Brin and Gates.

• You need signs of success - get some victories fast.

• You need to show your power - Eisenhower sacked any member of his staff that dissed the other allies he knew that victory depended on the alliance.

There is room in the forest for all of this to happen. It has to happen fast.

The great thing about being a consultant is that you can have some detachment. The curse of being a consultant is being detached. The last 18 months have been very hard.

I have great hope for my many friends in the larger system and at 635 Mass Avenue and I have great confidence in Dennis and Howard. Namaste

Comments

[John Proffitt]

Robert -- I have some agreement and disagreement with your assessment here.

First is your notion of developing the "system" between NPR and the myriad public radio stations out there. I think that's a losing proposition, long-haul. Pushing NPR alone toward any given mission is a huge task. Add in a few hundred geographically dispersed and distracted independent entities -- each with different challenges and missions that in some ways directly compete with NPR at this time -- and you have a royal mess on your hands. Talk about pushing a piece of string.

Stations and NPR will remain at odds so long as they have divergent visions of the future, and so long as any one of them doesn't instinctively understand how to be successful in that future. Today, only parts of NPR understand the notions you talk about above, and only a handful of stations understand the future in a similar way. So the idea that we can all come together as a "system" is probably not realistic. I hate to say it, and I wish it weren't true, but that's the reality I see at the moment.

However, I really, REALLY like your idea of developing this new mission capacity in parallel to / outside of the existing system. There IS opportunity here for collaboration and positive "network effects" from the local to the national and back again. I get goosebumps thinking about the positive things we could do together for our communities and our nation if we worked collaboratively as you suggest -- very exciting. It's just unlikely to develop inside the orthodoxy, as you point out. Today, it appears that the orthodoxy is represented by a portion of the NPR board. They seem to have rewarded innovation with execution.

You also called out some of the new media / tech players out there in the private sector that could help us develop and build a new, parallel public service media and community fabric model. That's great. I don't know if those players would be willing to create Public Media 2.0, but I'd like to think so.

I suspect the development of a public service media model for the 21st century will start from two ends. First will be the large players with the money and the national scale to be successful online -- ironically, players like NPR. Almost anything these biggest shops do can be successful due to scale. (NPR's imprimatur can make almost any new media venture quickly successful.)

Then there will be the tiny players in communities across the country. Most likely these will not be the incumbent public broadcasters, who are too married to the old model to change -- especially if they've been successful in the old model, and especially since the best leadership often goes to the biggest shops. Instead, we'll see what was hinted at during the IMA conference this year... non-broadcast public service media groups that form on the web first, in small sizes, and grow organically with their "tribe" (as Seth Godin calls it). Over time these small groups can band together naturally using the web as a connective canvas.

The new, small players might be formed by the disaffected innovators from newspapers, local TV, public broadcasters and others -- folks that want to serve the public interest first and feel that what we need now more than ever is real community, even if that means creating that community online.

I see tremendous (unparalleled!) potential, as you do. But with this latest NPR announcement, I'm drifting further into the Stephen Hill camp -- if you love public media, get out of (traditional) public broadcasting.

[Barrett Golding]

"By 2010 the web will be the centre of how life is lived..."

in fact, you will not be allowed to breathe w/o first logging in for a secure certificate from
http://oxygen.oneworld.gov

[Ted Shelton]

As a long time contributor to NPR, I stopped this year. I bet a lot more people will stop as well. But I would start giving directly to the programming I love and I'd even contribute to a new programming fund to try new ideas. What has stopped making sense to me is contributing money to support radio towers and the rest of the assorted local broadcast infrastructure.

[guest]

Seems like it is time once again to face up to one of the painful truths about NPR -- its governance structure makes no sense. It stifles innovation, speed and great decision-making. Some of the issues the system seems to be dealing with now seem similar in many ways to the issues everyone involved was dealing with back in the mid-90s, during Del Lewis's tenure.

NPR will never be able to be the truly powerful, nimble and successful organization it could be with a board primarily made up of members who have an inherent conflict of interest, given local station concerns. What a shame for the system and, more importantly, for the public at large.

Local stations (as much as I love them and as important as they are to listeners) have