Feeds:
Posts
Comments

Archive for the ‘International’ Category

This week I fine-tuned my blog site to focus more on the global future of higher education. I have come to believe that international education is our best hope for achieving world peace, expanding media revolution literacy, solving debilitating global problems, achieving cross-cultural understanding, and producing informed and effective global-thinking leaders.

As a result, I spent several years studying globalization in general and have concluded there are two primary forces already at work reshaping the academy:

Disruption: The digital technology revolution has disrupted the academy with new social media platforms, interactive websites, and other Internet innovations. Technology changed how we teach and replaced traditional lectures with Internet searches and ever-expanding interactive media tools and resources. New on-line markets are also appearing. How institutions are marketed and communicated has changed as well. And the changes brought about by the Internet revolution have even enabled governments to change their national priorities and refocus their education roles.

Convergence: These forces are extremely powerful, but may be less apparent. They are accelerating globalization while at the same time stimulating the transformation of higher education. Beyond technology disruption, forces such as worldwide economy shifts, changing faculty and student migration patterns, intensified foreign competition for money and students, increased world travel in general, the impact of polarized political ideologies, new aggressive foreign policy initiatives, a growing nationalism in some part of the world, and aggressive nation-branding campaigns, all are converging to change and globalize virtually everything.  And all of these forces also have strong implications for how international higher education will inevitably evolve.

In the coming weeks and months we will be exploring the implications of these forces for university advancement professionals, academic leaders at all levels, faculty, students, alumni, donors, business leaders, foundation heads, prospective students, politicians, and everyone  affected by the consequences and opportunities of the globalization of higher education.

Coming in August: My new book The Transition Academy: Seizing Opportunity in the Age of Disruption addresses many of these issues. (CASE Books at http://www.case.org/books)         

 

Read Full Post »

This week I attended the Council for the Advancement and Support of Education’s annual Summit for Advancement Leaders.  Each year the CASE Summit examines the issues that will disrupt and change the future of higher education. My last post discussed some of these higher education issues and previewed my new book on the topic coming in August.

The fact is almost all nonprofit institutions face many of the same challenges. They must find new donors, deal with the consequences of a technology revolution, compensate for changing government support, and face the economic and marketing realities of globalization. This certainly will require more sophistication. But because most of these problems are related to advancement work, there also will be many new opportunities for higher levels of institutional leadership.

As I thought more about what success in this changing marketplace will require I became more convinced than ever that advancement professionals will have to be very integrated in how they go about their work. In fact, I now believe they should go so far as to incorporate each other’s language when explaining their individual goals and visions. For example, when talking to donors  fundraisers should also reference the need to build strong institutional brand identities, the importance of consistency in explaining competitive advantage, the need for high visibility in new target markets, the coming changes in student recruitment, the benefits of an international student experience, etc. And this same type of cross-discipline referencing should apply to everyone else in advancement as they communicate with their constituents.

In other words, when all advancement professionals talk with their constituents as if they are all in the business of marketing the institution, the result will be the perception that this institution understands the challenges of a rapidly changing world and is on its way to a whole new level of academic distinction.

Read Full Post »

Once again we have questions emerge about freedom of speech in a digital world. First in Paris with terrorist attacks on a magazine which was exercising its freedom to publish cartoons offensive to Muslims,  and now in Garland, Texas with an art exhibition.

In Texas the situation was an invitation to artists to exhibit their work, even if their images  were offensive to Muslims. For some it was a matter of defending their right to express whatever they want whenever they want. One artist said he only decided to show his work after he heard that extreme Islamists said he could not. But for others holding this event at all was simply a matter of bad judgment. It would amount to a challenge to extremists and a danger to the lives of innocent people.

Freedom of speech today operates in a world where digital media produces powerful emotional images and instant international threats. In such a new world should the intent and potential consequences of free speech be reexamined? For example:

*Is freedom of speech absolute?

*Does one person’s freedom permit endangering the lives of others?

*Do extremist groups such as ISIS calling for “lone wolf” attacks in countries constitute a “clear and present danger” enough to impose certain temporary restrictions?

*Or, should there be stronger public appeals for individuals to volunteer speech restrictions during such periods of danger.

As a communication consultant I would advise a “client” to let good judgment about safety override absolute speech freedom during those times when lives are clearly in danger. The digital world is a totally new and hostile one with the capacity to instantly ignite violence.

In such a world it is not at all contradictory to simultaneously assert a strong belief in the freedom of expression while at the same time suspending it temporarily for the sake of public safety.

Read Full Post »

Many people in the US think of their country as exceptional. Individual freedom and justice is promised to all. But there were too many reports this week about rather dramatic exceptions to those values. Authenticity earns credibility, and without it people will not believe what you say. Here are some of those reports:

*Live coverage of riots in the streets about police brutality in Baltimore, with demonstrations and similar problems in other cities.

*Scenes of “mean-spirited” political polarization in congress and on the campaign trail.

*A TV documentary about the My Lai massacre in Vietnam showing mass killing by US soldiers.

*Video recollections on PBS of North Vietnam rolling into Saigon, the US pulling out, and the South Vietnamese losing their country.

*Reporter recollections of Richard Nixon promising a truce in Vietnam, but then following  with an invasion of Cambodia and riots in the US streets.

*Documentary coverage of students at Kent State University being gunned down as they demonstrated their war opposition.

*Reported perceptions that the US makes promises it does not keep and draws “red lines” that it does not enforce.

ISIS beheadings imagined next to those of the US Vietnam My Lai massacre create a rather serious credibility problem for the US. Images of Middle East dictators cracking down on citizens pictured next to those of US police brutality certainly do not reinforce values of freedom and justice.

In a new media 24/7 cable news environment both live and imagined images will either reinforce or contradict promises of “life liberty and the pursuit of happiness.” Authenticity is what earns credibility. And credibility is essential for people to believe what you say about your values.

 

Read Full Post »

Search NGO on Google and you find the following definition: “A non-governmental organization (NGO) is neither a part of government nor a conventional for-profit business. Usually set up by ordinary citizens, NGOs may be funded  by governments, foundations, businesses, or private persons.”

The term NGO, however, is used in different ways by different people. It’s true that many  simply see them as non-profit organizations. But most accounts suggest that the term was first used when the United Nations first appeared in the 1940’s and enabled the creation of certain international non-governmental organizations which focused on human rights, health, environment, development, and other organizations with more of an international mission than traditional U.S. nonprofits.

The number of NGOs in the world therefore depends on how you define the term. But a staggering number of them exist… and they all share a service mission, a separation from government, and a nonprofit status.

From a communication perspective, governments all have credibility problems with many of their audiences. They all have domestic and foreign policies defined by special interests. And many of their audiences are predetermined to misunderstand or disagree. NGOs on the other hand have an independence which enables  a bit more credibility and increases their likelihood of having some success solving complex problems.

This past year I learned about an organization called Young Professionals in Foreign Policy (YPFP). I was amazed to learn that it has thousands of members world-wide, and most of them do not work directly for governments. They work for NGOs. And they think of themselves as working everyday on foreign policy.

Because of their independence from government, their credibility, and their vast number, the potential of NGO’s to solve the world’s problems is enormous. Therefore, they are a very good career option for service-minded students, and for volunteers to give their support.

 

Read Full Post »

Last week I had the pleasure of helping to welcome the new president of the Council for the Advancement and Support of Education (CASE) to Washington. CASE is the largest and most international of all education associations and it serves those who handle marketing, communication, fund-raising, alumni relations, and government affairs. She comes to her new responsibility from Melbourne, Australia. But she also has years of experience in the UK, Europe, and most of the rest of the world.

Reflecting on the future of education and what it will take to adapt to the challenges of a revolution in technology, major changes in government support, and the unavoidable forces of globalization, I became acutely aware that communication and media savvy leadership will be essential for every organization, not just CASE.

I also realized that for some time now I actually have already been writing about all this from the perspective of leaders, or more precisely what leaders need to know about why communication always breaks down and how media revolutions really do change everything.  Whether I was writing about governments and foreign policy, or about universities and globalization, I was always focusing on implications for leaders.

So I was able to welcome the new CASE president by telling her she is the right person at the right time. But I also suggested that all CASE members will need to assume new leadership roles because competition will become global, student markets will change, new money will have to be found, and everyone will have to be kept informed.

Realizing all this, I decided to adjust the theme and content of my blog site and posts to reflect the perspective that was already evolving… what leaders in all types of institutions need to know about communication and media.

Not only do leaders need to know why communication always breaks down and how to respond, but they need to know why brand identity is so important and how to use it. They need to know how internal communication becomes external, and how to deal with challenging political realities inside and out. They need to know how to run really productive  meetings, and build forward-looking innovative teams. And they need to know how to deal with the increasingly aggressive 24/7 news environment, as well as the strengths and weaknesses of various social media platforms.

Leadership is a much written about topic, to say the least. But not enough is written about its many complex and challenging communication and media dimensions. This blog will set out to fix that.

Read Full Post »

Last week I discussed why government communication is destined to fail. People hear what they want to hear, adversaries are poised to attack. and the daily pressure of 24/7 journalism is relentless.

I  suggested that a simple message or theme repeated over and over again about individual freedom and opportunity might have a better chance of getting through. And in the long run, such a message might be the most important one.

This week I am suggesting that “public diplomacy” might be the best approach to this kind of “brand identity”communication. And nongovernmental organizations (NGO’s) are the best at doing it, especially if they are nonpolitical.

Public diplomacy is basically organized “people-to-people communication. People are brought together from different cultures to experience normal things. They come to appreciate their differences, their foods, and traditions. Even many kinds of international travel can accomplish this empathetic understanding.

Governments also conduct public diplomacy. But they cannot do it with the same credibility as NGO’s. Even so, they can add some legitimacy to their other foreign policy communication by sending academics, musicians, artists, writers, students, etc. abroad. In other words, Americans can convey “the idea of America, just by being “good Americans” in other countries.

My experience in international education has led me to also see international higher education as public diplomacy. In fact, it might be the purest form. Some prefer to call this soft power. But I believe the globalization of this industry has the potential to increase cultural understanding though student and faculty contacts and exchanges, while at the same time focusing research capabilities and expertise on solving the world’s most complex  problems.

Diplomacy is important. It is how governments deal with each other. But when it comes to genuine peace-making and real world problem-solving, I believe that effective soft power public diplomacy will be essential to saving our planet, and ourselves.

Read Full Post »

Cities cannot escape media revolutions, especially when those revolutions bring new technologies that intensify, multiply and expand both messages and relationships.

Neighborhood problems are exposed more dramatically. Poverty is more difficult to ignore. Frustrations of minorities come more to the surface. Management issues are scrutinized more consistently. News coverage changes from daily events reporting to intensive issues investigation. And these same new technologies help extend a city’s story far beyond its borders.

These dramatic changes in how individuals and communities communicate have had both good and bad consequences. The very technology that has the potential to bring people and neighborhoods together has often magnified their problems and exacerbated divisions. And while communities of interest can come together on-line, such virtual communities are often not geographically aligned and end up stimulating conflicts.

What seems to differentiate cities from nations, however, is that mayors and city managers tend to be less political and more pragmatic in dealing with these new problems. Issues related to neighborhoods, poverty, immigrants, water, energy, air quality, climate change, etc., are real and urgent but have little to do with political ideology or religion.

This reality has led some analysts to imagine groups of city managers and mayors from around the world meeting on a regular basis to address our recent and violent international problems. For example, the current crisis of immigrants joining ISIS and other extremists to bring terror to the world has become basically a city problem. Is it therefore not reasonable to think that groups of city leaders meeting from around the world might be able to find pragmatic solutions?

In short, countries have national identities, histories and borders to be concerned about. And world organizations get caught up in those politics. But cities have immediate problems to solve, and invariably address them pragmatically. Therefore, maybe cities really can lead the way to more effective international problem-solving.

Read Full Post »

Horrible atrocities are now multiplying from North Africa to the Middle East to Europe at warp speed. Has the time now come to focus on communicating that this is more of a world problem than a regional one… and that it will take the entire world coming together to do something about it?

If you have ever experienced the power of integrated communication, seen self-fulfilling prophesy work, and understand that repetitive persistence is effective, you might be able to imagine some communication initiatives worth trying.

I have been amazed to discover just how many individuals and organizations consider themselves to be working in the area of “foreign policy.” Over this past year I have been connecting to a group in Washington called Young Professionals in Foreign Policy (YPFP). I expected that most members would be working in government. But I was surprised to learn that members come from countless NGO’s, associations, embassies, think-tanks, international monetary organizations, lobby groups, as well as from many different branches of government.

Gary Barnabo, president of YPFP, explains that “diplomacy is no longer just about governments and countries. It is about people and networks.”  That approach to people-to-people communication is usually called public diplomacy. And so as I thought more about this diverse group all working in foreign policy and having a common interest in public diplomacy, I wondered about the possibilities of their collectively addressing terrorism.

For example, as a public service project, would it be possible for many of the larger and well established of these organizations and government agencies to collectively adopt a set of common themes? Those themes would call for urgent world-wide action against terrorism and make clear that the only way to end this cancer once and for all is for the leading governments and organizations of the world to take the responsibility to get it done.

Armed with the right message themes it should be possible to flood the universe with them using a large-scale, carefully planned, multi-platform media campaign that is coordinated and implemented by these participating organizations and agencies. The key to success is sticking with the campaign and same simple themes until world leaders are moved to make the decisions necessary to fulfill the prophesy.

I have seen this work for individual institutions. And what works for them should also work for foreign policy projects where integrated communication and collaborative planning is possible. To be sure, it always takes talented leadership and endless persistence. But where there’s a will, there usually is a way.

Read Full Post »

The world seems to be coming apart with a new crisis every day in some part of the world. When you think about all of them collectively you can get a bit despondent. Is there any hope for survival, let alone progress?

Once in a while you might hear the advice that if you want to produce change you should manufacture a crisis! Crises create urgency and tend to pull people together with a new determination to take action. Crisis managers always ask how they can make something good from adversity, and it is often possible.

The recent terrorist attack on the French publication Charlie Hebdo is an interesting case in point. No one could ever argue that these senseless assassinations were a good thing. But the resulting visibility actually rallied more world-wide support for freedom of speech than one could have ever predicted. The result clearly was counter-productive to the terrorists’ cause and provides a new opportunity for communicators to use this situation to advance the cause of freedom.

The situation in Jordan this week may have provided still another unwanted opportunity to produce change. The horrible assassination of the Jordanian pilot may have triggered the needed public determination to persuade and activate the already formed coalition of nations to stop this cancer called ISIS once and for all. A widespread awareness that this problem is the Middle East’s problem to solve has been present for a while. But this event could finally be the necessary catalyst to motivate serious action.

The role of government, news media, and NGO communicators around the world now should be to siege this moment and make the most it. Multi-platform strategic  communication initiatives are the most effective when they can capitalize on an urgent and emotional event so as to keep that sense of urgency alive.

I must say it never seems ethical or even wise to create a crisis in order to produce change. That can backfire. But when you have a crisis handed to you, you certainly need to see it as an opportunity. And communicators have the perfect tools to help people see this opportunity, and then to keep them focused on the positive change possibilities.

 

Read Full Post »

« Newer Posts - Older Posts »