Okay, everybody, the experiment is over. Transparency is dead. I'll never hear the word again without thinking of it as anything more than spin—and I can't believe my inner-undergraduate let me fall for it in the first place.
This post by Lee Hopkins says it all, but if you don't feel like reading it all, know this:
A half dozen of the most zealous advocates of social media and a new age of transparency went into business together, forming a company pretentiously called "crayon." They posted a complete basket case of a Web site—http://www.crayonville.com/—a pretty thing that violated every communication tenet (but what did that matter? they were doing something entirely NEW!!!), and they set up an meeting place in Second Life where they had insane and pointless virtual meetings (I attended one).
Crayon was going to be an incredible, wonderful, virtual consultancy—"a mash-up if you will of the best of the consulting, agency, advisory, thought leadership and education worlds—that specializes in new marketing."
In less than a year, all the principals but one have fallen away, and none has said publicly why.
The founder, Joe Jaffe is left mumbling incoherently: "Crayon is relaunching itself as a conversational marketing company, specializing in helping its clients engage advertising-weary consumers through the power of community, dialogue and partnership. To achieve this objective, crayon will focus its efforts on transforming prolific thought leadership and vision into cutting-edge, differentiated and prescriptive strategic solutions."
Original principals Shel Holtz and Neville Hobson left months ago and have said not a candid public word about why.
And the most recently departed "crayonista," as these fellers were so excitingly called, co-founder C.C. Chapman commented on Hopkins' blog:
"I’ve had numerous people ask for my side of the story and I’ve politely declined to them all. Burning bridges and being professional are two very core beliefs of mine. It is tough being such an open and honest guy and NOT saying anything about all this. Not commenting anywhere but watching the conversation happen is a very strange feeling to me, but I know it is the right decision."
I'll presume Chapman mispoke here when he said "burning bridges" is one of his "very core beliefs." But I don't think he realizes how silly he sounds when he says how tough it is being such an open guy and not saying a word about how his transparent consultancy unravelled over 11 months.
The answer is, C.C.: The only thing transparent about your consultancy was its clothes.
P.S. Transparency is dead, but the Cubs are still in it
Comments (12)
Lots of words.
No substance.
Lots of "new."
No news.
Doesn't someone do this every couple of months?
Posted by Diane | September 18, 2007 12:27 PM
Posted on September 18, 2007 12:27
Yeah, but this was a pretty splashy one in the minuscule world of social media marketing.
Or whatever it's called.
Posted by David Murray | September 18, 2007 1:25 PM
Posted on September 18, 2007 13:25
They're all splashy.
And forgettable.
Posted by Diane | September 18, 2007 5:22 PM
Posted on September 18, 2007 17:22
"...To achieve this objective, crayon will focus its efforts on transforming prolific thought leadership and vision into cutting-edge, differentiated and prescriptive strategic solutions."
Do whut?
How can you take seriously anyone who would say this?
Posted by Les Potter | September 18, 2007 7:22 PM
Posted on September 18, 2007 19:22
There were also several other 'crayonistas' who left during the first six months.
Posted by Amanda Renfrew | September 19, 2007 9:00 AM
Posted on September 19, 2007 09:00
There is that term again, "crayonista". That might be fine for California. But here in Virginia, you'd be more likely to hear "Sharpie Dude".
Posted by Les Potter | September 19, 2007 11:18 AM
Posted on September 19, 2007 11:18
Two things about the whole "crayon episode" disqualify it from being important to transparency:
1. It was a private endeavor, not a publicly held company.
2. Nobody cares.
And the reason for #2 is #1.
Posted by Robert J Holland, ABC | September 19, 2007 12:20 PM
Posted on September 19, 2007 12:20
Les, you are the bomb. And Robert, you definitely have a point. But it seems to me that it SHOULD matter the the principals to offer at least a plausible reason for the complete meltdown.
If you joined a new consultancy, screeched at the whole profession for a year about how great it was and how talent-laden and how wonderful--and then the thing dissolved--I think you would want the profession to understand that you are not a crackpot or a fool. For your own credibility's sake, I think you'd offer something more than crayon has offered to explain the death of the new baby.
Don't you?
Posted by David Murray | September 19, 2007 2:17 PM
Posted on September 19, 2007 14:17
This Jaffe is too ridiculous!
Here's his comment on Lee Hopkins' blog, about why he's not talking about this matter:
"Transparency remains key, but at the end of the day there are some things that just don’t belong out in the public. I realize that in the wake of the silence, speculation runs amok, but nevertheless it should not be inferred that there is a sinister untold story, when in fact the truth might be rather plain and simple."
Let's translate: Transparency is key. But some things don't belong in public. But we shouldn't infer anything sinister. Instead, we should hope the truth (which doesn't belong in public) "might be" plain and simple.
Posted by David Murray | September 19, 2007 4:25 PM
Posted on September 19, 2007 16:25
My Brother Robert nailed it -- who cares. The quote I pulled and mocked in my previous comment illustrates the utter pretentiousness of this head "crayonista".
David, you make good points about transparency. Keep it up. It is odd that something hyped so blatantly died so pitifully. It raises questions, but given their own statements, again, who cares.
They came.
They bloviated.
They self-destructed.
-30-
Posted by Les Potter | September 19, 2007 5:42 PM
Posted on September 19, 2007 17:42
Candidly, David, you have a great way with words :)
Posted by Neville Hobson | September 27, 2007 8:03 AM
Posted on September 27, 2007 08:03
Wait a minute...
crayon had issues so transparency is dead? How does one get from A to 10 so quickly?
Transparency does not mean EVERYTHING is public. If it were, companies would make forward-looking financial statements without regard to SEC regulations, divulge their most secret product plans, and exploit employees' medical records and Social Security numbers. C'mon, David. Transparency in business has a definition, and that ain't it.
The reasons I left crayon are personal, not public. They have nothing to do with crayon's or Jaffe's vision. They are, frankly, nobody's business but mine (and Michele's). If I left because of a disagreement over an approach to social media or a dispute over how client engagements are handled, I might well have gone public. But that wasn't the case. It was personal.
Transparency, on the other hand, is very much alive. Read "The Naked Corporation" and visit http://www.transparencybook.com.
Posted by Shel Holtz | October 1, 2007 4:34 PM
Posted on October 1, 2007 16:34