Someone on our team recently invited some tartare feedback from a long-time reader. It gave me pause, and caused me to think about what Spend Matters has become versus what it used to be. The short, and accurate, feedback was that we’ve become too sanitized. That in attempting to disrupt the old media and industry analyst models, we ended up being a bit sterile (and less entertaining) in covering the news. Simply put: as we became the standard, we adopted the stodgy old industry standard. In doing so, we lost much of the original unvarnished and edgy Spend Matters voice.
As I absorbed this person's view, visions of the past flashed into the nooks and crannies that occupy my consciousness when I worry today. As we’ve grown, I’ve needed to increasingly dwell upon cash flow, developing and working with a great team, solid hiring and growing our overall business. Back then, during the more “fun,” witty and entertaining evolution of Spend Matters, I had to contend with more than the occasional legal veil of nasty voicemails and clients who would cut off relations because of something we said.
A friend once described Spend Matters as the People magazine of the industry. I always preferred to call it People meets The Economist for procurement. Never-the-less, we’ve lost the People flair. And it’s something I want to get back to in juxtaposition to ramping our serious research and coverage on Spend Matters PRO. We have space on Spend Matters for procurement irreverence and need to seize upon what delights our sector and allow it to shine through.
So hold me (and the rest of the team) accountable for this. Short of offense or inviting litigiousness, we’ll let our fun edge flow. And please feel free to comment similarly, adding your own onions and capers.
In the meantime, I’d like to thank the person who gave us this feedback. You’re more right than you know.