Turning the Art of Writing Essays and Thesis into Future Work Strategies
Oh no not again. At first I used to dread the feedback from writing my thesis. Partly because it would be strewn with corrections, with little at all cogently explained notes about what I did wrong.
Then there were my old habits that wouldn’t shift. I considered myself an “acceptable” journalist or writer of several years having worked for network and international news e.g. BBC. But here I would learn it cut no ice. It all added to my frustration, and even more the question: “What has the skills of writing a thesis or dissertation have to do with helping me in future work?”
Answer: Everything! But I would need convincing.
I mean anyone can write. We generally all have blogs or a platform. Why faff along with learning a writing skill you’re only going to encounter in university, huh? Wrong!
Today I’m a reader/ associate professor sharing knowledge in, amongst others, Foreign News Reporting, and over the years from welcoming students on the programme I’ve had kind feedback.
So here I’m going to break down an age-old process into a powerful tool that should help you to become a formidable worker or employee in the digital-to-AI age of work.
My Mind Map Approach
Way back in 1991 I was a Black Londoner in Soweto (South Africa’s days of Apartheid). “A Black Londoner” was actually a play on words by the BBC who published the article. It referred to a programme I produced and presented on BBC Radio called “Black London “— which would kickstart my days for foreign news reporting.
Behind, and in front, of that story lie a myriad of behaviour, prospects and readings which I’d hack on an electronic £80K mind map board for students.
Today, I’m going to use the simple but effective belts and braces approach below. To maximise meaning from this requires viewing the essay, not just as final reading product that nets you approval or a distinction, but as document that is a road map to becoming an accomplished future employee or entrepreneur.
Now, if you’re into AI with your writing, it might do for you. I’m an AI-enthusiast who’s recently written about the benefits of AI in storytelling, but nothing will compare to the accomplishment of that artisan skill of writing and understanding the emotional persuasive power you’ve summoned to make your points.
That skill will transform your everyday interactions and conversations with potential managers — when an AI agent is nowhere in sight.
So here goes. As a case study I’m going to choose the title: “Does the world need Foreign News Reporters (FNR)?” Why? Well firstly it’s a timely subject with journalism under threat, brought on by itself and external forces, such as authoritarianism. Secondly, I was a FNR, so I have skin in the game. Here I am reporting on the World Service the inauguration of President Nelson Mandela.
By the way this hack is based on collective feedback from a number of cohorts over years. For brevity, there’s a degree of generalisation, but I hope it suffices to make its points.
“Does the world need Foreign News Reporters?”, is such a simple, and yet deceptive title, so where to start?
The task calls on you to write something your audience will care about. That is make the reader care, and one of the best ways is to identify a current general or universal problem. But before we get into the weeds about that, this question needs answering.
The Question
1. What do you know so far?
2. How do you know what you know?
3. Where can you find more credible information from?
What you know so far
This is the digital spin cycle of expert punditry we’re all caught up at the moment, from arm chair critics, amateurs, influencers, citizen journalists, burgeoning practitioners to the plain ignoramus — who knows because they know. Everyone now knows anything.
First thing. Do a brain dump using a mind map. A brain dump is essentially whatever comes to mind without much pondering. The idea is to exhaust yourself of ideas which can easily be deciphered by a 12-year-old can read. Why a 12 year old? Well famously, it’s not because of a TV programme ( actually is “Are You Smarter than a 10 year old?”), but the sentiment is the same.
Physics Nobel laureate Richard Feynman, in his now famous Feynman technique, suggests your notes should be understood by a pre-teenager. It removes any ambiguity and assumptions. I once had my Masters student pitch their ideas to Archie ( sister-in-law’s 12-year-old son). He proved Feynman’s point and forlornly for some students.
What shall I write, I get asked. Anything that comes to mind and openly for others to read ( as you can see above). Generally, as we mature, we become more guarded and cautious about saying things publicly that might invite ridicule, so being spontaneous is not as easy as it sounds.
Creativity and idea generation is a messy, non-linear process, and it should be, because it’s the art of bringing different, even unconnected ideas together that eventually cohere. Treat your environment as a safe one (one of my roles), where your views are kept in-house. By the way if you find this process difficult you can be trained to be spontaneous which will stand you in good stead for all sorts of jobs and tasks from project mapping, creating that startup, or designing a film.
How do you know what you know?
By the age of two most toddlers undergo a transformation that brings upon self awareness. They begin to understand the toy their holding is them and not a stranger that’s behind the mirror. But from then on, many remarkable things happen, shaped by environment, culture, family upbringing and friends. I’ll reflect on a few, which impact how you know what you know.
Firstly, in the 1950s two psychologists, Joseph Luft and Harrington Ingham, devised what’s called The Johari Window. Consisting of four quadrants it categorised people’s self awareness and their sharing and openness into different themes. It still holds today, and was adapted by a US Secretary of State Donald Rumsfeld giving a press conference in 2002 about the link between terrorist groups and support from the Iraqi government.
The most transparent one is Known knowns— which can be translated into what you know and have sound evidence for. The opposite end is Unknown Unknowns. Here, similar to our two-year-old toddler, you don’t even know you don’t know. In between are other traits. Unknown knowns is what others know that you refuse to countenance and then Known Unknowns where you know things but don’t understand.
Let’s get back to the theme. You’re trying to answer the question: “Does the world need Foreign News Reporters?” You’re searching for information. Even before you’ve started to look, you’re hampered or buoyed by the aforementioned traits.
- Are you someone who’s known as a high achiever and shares?
- Are you someone who believes they’re a high achiever and doesn’t consider sharing?
- Are you someone who generally can’t be bothered. You either don’t care what people say about you, or don’t care for others.
In my lectures I try and overcome this by a simple fun task based on long standing observations by University of Californian, Berkley, Professor Philip E. Tetlock. Tetlock’s study, which has its roots in another expert academic, philosopher Isaiah Berlin, involved observing people over decades to categorise them into two camps.
The ones who were good at predictions about varied world problem and thus were foxes. That is they knew many things. Then there were those who knew one major thing? That is they burrowed deep into a task as hedgehogs and were less susceptible to change ideas, and often applied the same inflexible thoughts to solve other issues. By the way foxes and hedgehogs, which one group dominates TV punditry? Answer at the end of this piece.
Tetlock introduced a point based system. The link here boils down his questions. Are you a Hedgehog or a Fox? Do you stick to one task, that is you’re a hedgehog, or do you multi-skill — a fox?
I’ll divide the class into foxes and hedgehogs and then ensure both parties mix into small groups so there’s parity within the groups.
We’ll then play the game of 20 questions. How do you know, what you know? And at any point if you say I read in on Facebook or saw it one the news, I’ll ask how did the author or news person know and so on, until you’re exhausted of your answers?
It’s a great way to understand trust. Who can you trust, and why? For instance how much do you trust what I’m saying. We’ve never met. So, what’s the value system for ensuring trust. Some kind of trust index, like this below.
Where can you find more credible information from?
Now if you’re in my lecture, that question is simple. Me! I spend my time curating, sourcing credible sources, and urging students to conduct independent research.
According to the global market research company Ipsos, my profession retains a high level of trust. I take that seriously, so my job is not to promote ideas from any one source, but multiple sites and to be critical of them. But whether you’re in my lecture or not, the following helps.
The Star You Don’t Recognise
Each year I invite some of the top named Foreign News Reporters, winners of several awards, to speak to students. But some years something strange happens. I call it the “Star You Don’t Recognise” effect.
Imagine, you’re someone who’s interested in tennis. You get invited to a press conference, and Novak Djokovic, Emma Raducanu, Qinwen Zheng and Coco Gauff show up. Imagine that when you got home and friends asked you about the state of tennis, you didn’t mention a word of what the stars had said, instead you quoted from what you read in a newspaper.
There could be many reasons for this. Firstly, you may not know any of the stars, so they fail to resonate with you. Secondly, you may not have been taking notes to recall anything. Thirdly, you might figure they’ve nothing of substance to say. Globally, as a general problem, we’ve substituted experts in their field for sources Unknown. We believe we know despite the lack of evidence. Society has given us a hierarchy of trusted sources which bears some resemblance to Ipsos index above
It goes: academic expression [article/ podcast] — journalism [and the hierarchy of quality press] — blogs and social media.
Our most trusted source of information is regularly given to books. For a book to come to market it can a minimum two years, let alone the time for prepping. Its trust derives from proofing and independent peer reviewing, but be aware that the book’s content while relevant two years ago may not be now. Hence its greatest strength is in providing context.
Academic research papers should be highly prized. They take about a year to get published and may contain surveys and an array of expert opinion through interviews, offering contextual knowledge. They’re often overlooked because their language can be impenetrable.
Then there’s newspaper articles and TV News videos. Their integrity depends on ownership of their outlet. Within this morass of information, each has its value, and in that, lived-experience towards expertise should be a primary go to.
But if it’s not sourced for you, how do you find good knowledgeable sources for your essay? We’ll answer this through looking at the Persuasive Effect.
The Persuasive Effect.
Imagine you’ve walked into a book shop to browse. A book you had no intention of buying catches your eye. You read the title, scan the size of the book, scour a few pages of the style, look for inside reviews, whilst also seeing how much it cost. It’s all done seamlessly and in this process an emotional trigger will signify whether you buy the book or not. When a reader, for this sake, lets say an expert or lecturer examines a thesis, she’ll do a number of things that inform her of the quality of the work.
She will
- Read the title: does it tell the reader what the text is about?
- She’ll scan the presentation and use of white space. What is is that makes the text inviting to read?
- She’ll quickly read the abstract or introduction for sense making. Then scan the text?
- Then she’ll flip to the bibliography to gauge the amount and the quality of references made
- Then she’ll delve into the work in depth.
Any number of the parameters above has a function that shapes an emotional reception to guide the reader of the quality of the text, which in turn primes a response.
Now to the content. What’s the story it’s telling? And here is where it gets fascinating. Nothing to shout about, but if you thought you were picking up guidelines for just writing an essay, also hidden-in-plain sight you’ve been privy to the Stacked model for launching a start-up, or creating a film.
For the last two decades I’ve been teaching Stacked for launching products, and there’s often a “Aha” moment where students see the cross application of my approach to essay writing and work. One student sent my colleague and I a portrait to say thank you.
So in my next post I’ll explain more about that content. Those tennis stars we mentioned earlier are about to make an entrance, coupled with small nimble team who become your peer reviewers. See you in a mo.
