Creative Council

Hi All,

We are planning on creating a Creative Council, which will open up a more consistent and systematic channel of communication and brainstorming between the Squadhelp HQ team and the Creative Community. We do not have the exact details yet, but we are envisioning a consistent online meeting in which a small group of rotating members will have the opportunity to brainstorm constructive ideas and voice their concerns.

Each meeting will likely include up to 8 participants from the creative community. At this time, we are looking for your feedback as to what you feel is the best way to determine participants for each session (e.g. first come first serve registration, random selection after open registration, participants voted by creative community etc.).

7 Likes

Great idea! I would lean toward posting the subject of the session (if you are planning on having main subjects) with the meeting date and time and then instead of completely random selection, use a method so that you have a good mix of old timers vs. new people, etc. There also also time zone issues so also North Americans vs. people in other countries mix.

4 Likes

Maybe have a way for interested creatives to sign up before each scheduled meeting and then choose randomly from that list.

4 Likes

I would think the forums do a good enough job?

No they don’t. Not everything that can or should be discussed can be discussed on the forum as well as sometimes ideas should be made and kept private for the security of the company that is Squadhelp as well as those involved at that given moment. The more ideas, solutions, and explicit details are shared in a public forum, that is when those ideas, solutions, and explicit details are free game for anyone and everyone. From a business and privacy aspect, I can agree that this could find ideas and file ideas for safekeeping and allow them a chance to implement what they choose to implement without worrying about security of those ideas expressed. From the member/creative aspect, I can agree that it allows ideas to be shared that may not be able to be discussed here, maybe should not be discussed here, or any other things that may need to be mentioned in a brainstorm session that a smaller group of people would offer more safety and less judgment in.

Also, the forums are good for discussions, but everyone jumps in on the discussion and things can sidetrack and sidewind and ideas, conclusions, and resolutions are hard to not only brainstorm but be reached because of this. It’s always good to have more than one brain in on things, but this follows the idea and ideal that more than one is great but ultimately less is more. It’s a small team vs. large team aspect. A team is generally always more effective than an individual on many (far too many to list) factors. Going from that, it can also be recognized that the more people added the more dilution that happens. So a smaller number, as long as it is more than one and less than a diluted number – would be effective. The rotation allows perspectives to change and inclusion to be an important aspect but the smaller number of individuals at a time allows for more focus and more attention to details.

Edited to Add:

Also, SH-HQ do not all participate on the forum. This idea allows those individuals at the top tier of SH the business (the Headquarters) to interview and find out opinion, ideas, and other important things from the creatives themselves. Like a round-table of sorts – a survey, a case-study. In lieu of this, a forum is too much all at once and not as professional, secure, and individualized. There’s too many ideas here all at once and too many topics from the beginning of time of the busines that have changed, rotated, evolved, and practices that aren’t used any longer. This allows current issues and ideas at the present time to be discussed to move forward.

1 Like

The problem I see is that people may not be comfortable with their side being represented by someone else. Everyone has their ideas on what works best.

1 Like

That is why Grant said it would be a consistent and rotating, revolving, and evolving thing. Many people will be able to have and use their voice – it’s not just going to be eight people and then done. It will be many, constantly rotated out for differences of perspectives.

I mean I understand your hesitation and apprehension but the alternative is the way things have been. Ideas being brought to the table and sometimes getting lost in translation, lost in discussion, debated, argued, etc. This allows a more in-depth view where ideas and issues can be discussed and the conversations had can be more balanced on identifying and then addressing. The forum will still be the forum (from what it sounds to me) and can still and will still be utilized, hopefully. This just seems like a focus-group of rotating individuals to ADD TO the communication of the BB and the forum. It is meant to support the foundation of communication we already have, not replace.

3 Likes

Just a quick note as we continue to gather input: this meeting will in no way replace the communication that happens on the forum.

2 Likes

@grant

Some thoughts/suggestions: Provide a way for creatives, who are interested in participating, to sign up. That way you can ensure the invited creatives are ones interested and comfortable joining in the conversation. Perhaps when important topics are brought to light that you would like to gather more insight and opinions on a note could be posted upon login for creatives (like a lot of updates are) encouraging them to add their insights or sign up to be a part of the conversation.

I think due to some of the restrictions in place on the forums and messaging boards it would be important to lay out the guidelines clearly and reassure the creatives that their participation,with respect to any guidelines specified, will not result in any backlash or account limitations (considering there may be some topics that are being brought up that would be taboo elsewhere). I think that would make some of the members a little more comfortable participating.

I know comfort may be an issue with some creatives which is one of the reasons for the last comment above also why I’d suggest allowing creatives to choose whether or not their username is displayed to other creatives during said discussions. This could be addressed by allowing users to join using a new username (that is solely for the creative council conversations) where only SH staff is privy to whose account it is attached to. I would be happy to participate and don’t mind anyone knowing what I have to say but I’m aware that I can be a little less shy than some when I have something to say but that doesn’t mean my opinions are any more helpful than theirs so would love to try and find ways to broaden the reach and get as many creatives as possible to join it. :slight_smile:

Another Option that would allow creatives who have something they want brought up but are not comfortable joining in the conversation would be a virtual comments box. Where creatives could submit questions and issues anonymously that could be addressed/discussed during council meetings.

5 Likes

@Grant, this is slightly off topic in terms of the question you asked but I would love to see SH hold at least one council meeting that only involves creatives who have been here since the beginning or shortly thereafter. I am not one of them, just to be clear. But I would really be interested in knowing their thoughts on SH’s progress, their ideas, etc.

3 Likes

I like @LynnParks idea about having the option to change a creatives name within the council but I personally would prefer for members participating in actual meetings to be completely anonymous to all except SH. Maybe have a roster of registered members but keep selected participants of an actual meeting private.

I think knowing who an opinion is coming from can cloud someone’s judgment at times. The ideas are what needs to be focused on and considered, not who it’s coming from. It eliminates any type of popularity contest from occurring and focuses strictly on ideas.

In regard to who is picked for actual meetings I think it’s only fair to be completely randomized from the list of interested parties. Every time a topic is to be discussed it should be shared with the registered ppl and then those ppl should decide if it’s a topic they’re interested in discussing, then random picks out of those interested in that specific topic.

I think voting is a horrible idea because if you’re not known to someone, why would they vote for you? We’d see the same ppl on these topics over and over again and unknowns or noobs would be left out.

5 Likes

I think those are great points @Chasity2ku definitely makes a lot of sense and would eliminate a lot of potential issues as well.

2 Likes