(__PREFACE:__  Please bear with me.  I'm not saying, "I know what we
must do!"  I'm just brainstorming one idea, and I encourage everyone
to contribute other ideas since this feels like a hot-button topic.  I
think this probably due more from frustration with having to re-hash
the past than for any real or perceived threat to our organization.
So I hope I'm initiating a discussion that perhaps will help us reach
a _full_ consensus and peacefully put the issue to rest.)


I, again, want to voice my agreement with Jesse, Brad, Yves, Adele,
and others, that we gain nothing by changing the name of LOPSA.  And
worse, I agree that doing so would likely cause more problems than
LOPSA might be able to weather this early in its existence...and it is
ill-advised to harbor any future plans to change the name, after
heavily invested efforts to gain recognition for ourselves as "LOPSA".
 Even though I made a humorously-intended, but poorly executed quip
about "League" being "embarrassing"[1], I really don't think our
organization's name is a significant setback that will hamper any of
our future efforts to support our profession, provided that we don't
allow it to pit us against each other.

So as I see it--extrapolating from the number of people who responded
from the prior discussion thread--perhaps 15% to 20% of us have had
experiences where the name discouraged our audience from taking our
organization seriously, at least on first impression.

Instead of just telling those individuals who have indicated concern
(myself included, at least implicitly) to, in effect, "Quit whining
and get over it," ...perhaps there is a way to _validate_ those
members' observations and their strong concerns drawn from their
experiences, while at the same time unifying us and keeping us moving
forward, rather than re-hashing the past.

****************************
Seeding the discussion...
****************************

On Thu, Jan 6, 2011 at 09:39, Doug Hughes <[email protected]> wrote:
> This reminds me of the line from "Pirates of the Carribean" where the
> captain says "You are without a doubt the worst pirate I have ever heard
> of". His response, "Ah, but you *have* heard of me".

I've been thinking about it, and I _like_ Doug's take on this.  And I
am being completely serious.  Perhaps one way to increase our success
to get the name "out there" is to _embrace_ the initial skepticism
that Kent, Michael, Robert and I have experienced when introducing
LOPSA to a new audience.

Something that seems to have worked for at least a few companies'
advertising campaigns is to willfully parody their own business, brand
or product names...and I seem to remember some of them had "serious"
products[2].  I think the trick would be to produce a message that
willingly pokes fun at our organization's name, a sort of self-parody,
while at the same time preserving our credibility and the
professionalism of our image[3].  I don't know exactly how to
accomplish that, and if no one else among the membership is confident
they can produce such a message or strategy, that might mean we need
to consult with a marketing agency.

(And yes, I realize that may require more funding than we _currently_
have.  But let's not completely throw any ideas just because we don't
have the resources, now.  Continued discussion and development this,
and any other ideas that are suggested, might lead us to other
possibilities that we _can_ afford.)

The _other_ benefit I think such an approach might provide is a quick
way to channel or divert an audience's potential skepticism of our
professionalism or credibility into a positive interaction.  This
might be like leveraging concepts from Transactional Analysis[4] to
"switch" what begins as a counter-productive interaction into a
productive interaction.  Even if that person isn't immediately
convinced of our credibility, having a sound strategy to divert their
skepticism still might keep open future opportunities to convince that
person of our credibility and commitment to our profession.  In fact,
in addition to skeptical or even derisive audiences, this might be
adapted to similarly reach apathetic audiences.

--Aaron


[1] [bones]"Dammit, Jim!  I'm a sysadmin, not a _Daily Show_ writer!"[/bones]

[2] And I'm not thinking of the Schlotsky's ad campaign of "Funny
Name, Serious Sandwich."  I seem to remember it was a real, completely
non-humorous product or service.  I admit, the fact that I can't
remember what company or product was advertised does _not_ support my
proposal...but in my defense, I only remember hearing the ad once or
twice, and it was several years ago.  (Also, I think it was on the
radio...and if so, wouldn't have had supporting visuals to help it be
more memorable.)

[3] Obviously, this needs to be coupled with a more formal ad campaign
or message.  I'm not implying that our _only_ attempt at broader
recognition should be to parody ourselves.  Also, I think the formal
message probably needs to comprise the majority of any of our efforts
to increase LOPSA's recognition...though not so much that the
informal, self-parody is too under-exposed to provide neither
validation of members experiences and difficulties with advocating
LOPSA, nor a strategy for overcoming initial skepticism.

In other words, if we attempt to leverage the potential perceptions of
the silliness of our name, then even if we don't put heavy focus on
it, we still have to invest enough to take the
silliness...um...seriously, for lack of a better word.  ;)

[4] I am not well versed in the concepts of Transactional Analysis,
and just have a passing familiarity, at best.  For more information:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transactional_analysis    ...also
popularized in Eric Berne's, _Games People Play_ (1964), and in other
books.  "Games" look like they are typically negative or
counterproductive interactions, but I remember some mention that there
are further expansions on the theory that describe techniques for
interrupting these "games" to turn a negative social interaction into
a positive social interaction.  That's the sort of strategy I'm
suggesting for derailing any skepticism or derision we might otherwise
experience from pre-conceived,
_______________________________________________
Discuss mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.lopsa.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/discuss
This list provided by the League of Professional System Administrators
 http://lopsa.org/

Reply via email to