A Step by Step Guide in Branding your Business
The most important step to effectively do brand development is to create a logo that conveys a message behind the business to everybody all over the world. Its essence is to do corporate branding for your business. It is a way of devising a functional representation for a company and the company's name.
Probably, you already have a design in mind about how you would want your logo to look best when displayed for your corporate branding. However, you may need to consider the step by step guide and pointers discussed below to make your overall brand development into a reality.
Brand development and guide
A perfect corporate branding takes time to develop. You cannot achieve it overnight. It needs proper guidance, nurture, and strategic expertise. Thus, here is a list of some don'ts that you may need to consider:
Author: Justin Bregar
Article Source: Article Sphere
How Can Non-Profits Motivate and Retain Volunteers ?
One can't help but to observe the positive effect that a successful volunteering program can have on a non-profit's productivity. A well oiled and functioning volunteer program can catapult a non-profit to greater heights of prosperity. Although a plethora of sources highlight the benefits of volunteering to both the volunteer and the recipient of a volunteer's services, some non-profits increasingly experience challenges when it comes to motivating and retaining volunteers. A common problem experienced is the loss of enthusiasm and interest by volunteers after a week or two or perhaps a month of commitment to a non-profit's cause. The question then becomes, "How can this trend be changed for the better?"
The following measures have proven beneficial in keeping volunteers motivated, happy and committed.
1. Express Appreciation:
Volunteers offer an abundance of skills, knowledge and service at no cost to the receiving organization. Regardless of their decision for offering their services, staff members of non-profits ought to express genuine appreciation to volunteers by providing a welcoming and positive environment. Also, staff members should make a conscious effort to refrain from gossiping, grumbling or sharing personal problems with volunteers. A recommended approach in finding solutions to personal challenges or problems stemming from the work environment should be channeled through the non-profit's procedure for resolving employee problems.
2. Develop a Training Program for Volunteers:
The creation of a training program for volunteers will prevent confusion while clarifying required input from volunteers. A clearly developed training program, where designated staff member(s) guide volunteers through their responsibilities will lead to a productive experience devoid of frustrations that typically occur when tasks/responsibilities aren't clearly communicated.
In addition, the training program should be structured in a format that provides room for growth while rewarding volunteer input. For instance, a component of the training program that caters to the reward of volunteers can highlight initiatives such as monthly recognition of volunteer input. The monthly recognition can be carried out through the issuance of a certificate to a volunteer who exceeds expectations. Not only will this input motivate volunteers but it will also express the non-profits appreciation to volunteer input.
3. Sustain Volunteer Passion:
Most volunteers opt to offer their services to non-profits whose mission aligns with their interests. Therefore, a crucial means of sustaining their interest is through the ignition of their passion. The passion of volunteers can be ignited by helping them buy into the vision of the non-profit. To carry out this objective, it behooves on the leadership of non-profits to share their vision, goals, contributions and aspirations with recruited volunteers. Their actions and interactions should also communicate to volunteers that they are an important part (which they are) of the non-profits ability to succeed in its mission.
By successfully carrying out these steps (express appreciation, develop a training program for volunteers and sustain volunteer passion), non-profits will not only experience successful recruitment efforts but they will be rewarded with a happy, motivated and productive volunteer corps.
Sherita N Brace is an International Development Professional and a Blogger. She serves as a Consultant to non-profits and provides grant writing services, program planning services and communications services.
Pilak, N.B. (2009). Cultivating and Retaining Committed Volunteers: An Analysis of Volunteer Identification in Nonprofit Organizations . Marquette University
The Editor's Creed
By Dan Kois, Laura Helmuth, and Jennifer Lai
Last year Slate’s science and health editor Laura Helmuth wrote about editing for the Open Notebook, advocating that an editor subordinate her voice to a writer’s. Dan Kois, a culture editor at Slate, has strong feelings on the matter. So he asked to debate Laura about editing on Slate Plus.
Dan Kois: Ready to explain how you CODDLE WRITERS, Laura?
Laura Helmuth: Hello, Kois. Have you made anybody cry today?
Kois: Laura advocates for a gentle editorial experience, in which the editor's job is facilitating the author’s voice as unobtrusively as possible. I remember being very intimidated by that piece of Laura’s because my approach is the exact opposite. I view my job as facilitating the author’s voice ... but in the crispest, cleanest, Slate-iest way, and that entails a LOT of detail-oriented conceptual and line editing.
Helmuth: Ah, sure, so your editing style is: Write it like I, Dan Kois, would have written it if I, Dan Kois, had written the story.
Kois: Hahaha no, like an amazing version of Dan Kois + my genius author. Laura, you don’t EVER just wade in and rewrite a lede that isn’t working? You don’t ever add a joke or kill a whole paragraph that is lame?
Helmuth: I call it trimming to keep the focus on the main point, which (I tell the writer) is ever so much more interesting than this also-interesting but slightly less intuitive little bit here ... see, now, it didn’t even hurt and now it’s gone. You and I both work with a lot of freelancers—probably more than any other editors here do, since we don’t have a lot of books (for you) or science (for me) writers on staff.
Kois: Correct. I probably edit 15 pieces by freelancers a month.
Helmuth: And freelancers are delicate creatures. They don’t get paid much, they usually work alone (which can be a little crazy-making), and they don’t have a long experience with any one editor. So every piece they write for a new publication is like going on a blind date.
Kois: As a longtime freelancer, I sympathize with the freelancer’s plight! But nevertheless, my two primary concerns are not the freelancer’s feelings—they are a) getting the piece as good as it can be, and b) making that happen as efficiently (though politely!) as possible.
Helmuth: Our different strategies might have something to do with our beats: It seems like books people are much more thick-skinned and used to criticizing one another than science people are. Science writers usually stick to a new study or mountains of evidence. They don’t often make an argument or express opinions—I mean, they do at the bar or sometimes on blogs, but it takes some coaxing to get them to say what they REALLY think to a big and sophisticated audience like Slate’s.
Kois: You are dealing with people who are authorities on their subjects, and are not used to being edited closely?
Helmuth: Oh, yes, sometimes that makes it tricky. But then I resort to the “help the rest of us understand” approach. Not questioning their expertise, but getting them to talk to the non-experts in an entertaining way. A lot of what I do is ask people to sharpen their arguments—which maybe isn’t something you have to ask for in a book review?
Kois: I do sometimes have to get people to sharpen their arguments. Not as often, probably, as you do. (Book critics are argumentative people.)
Jennifer Lai: So where do these different editing styles come from? Was it a deliberate choice you made when you came into your position (in terms of managing people), or is it a function of how you write yourself or have been edited by others?
Kois: I learned my editorial style COMPLETELY from ... being edited by editors at Slate. Slate was one of the first places that ever paid me to write anything, and it was definitely the first place I was ever seriously edited. I remember the first time I ever filed a piece to Slate—a Culturebox to Julia Turner about iTunes celebrity playlists. It was my first experience with Track Changes, and when Julia sent it back to me and I opened it up, I almost barfed. There was so much red on the page it looked like a crime scene.
Lai: But you kind of liked it?
Kois: She was right about everything! Every cut she made, every wording change she suggested, was more efficient and elegant and BETTER than what I had. I was like, Oh, so this is what editing is.
Helmuth: Tip for freelance writers: Set your Word preferences so that the cuts are in green or purple or something less aggressive. Because CUT is mostly what editors do. … And I don’t think any of us lie about the fact that we love what we didn’t cut or change!
Kois: Yes! It’s not a bunch of lies! If I didn’t have good feelings about the piece I would just kill it. I remember her email itself was very encouraging—“This is a good draft, there’s a lot that works”—I think she actually told me not to be intimidated by all the red, and that she was happy with where it was going.
Helmuth: The “this is great” email memo to a writer is an important part of the job.
Kois: So that’s what I try to do now. I almost always follow that model—extremely detailed edit, chipper cover note.
Helmuth: Have you ever gotten payback? Has Julia ever written a review for you that you slice up into a million pieces? Like, “You have such great material here”?
Kois: She is a much, much better writer than age-28 me. So it’s not as violent.
Helmuth: Ha! Were you ever edited by Plotz? Dude is cruel shoes.
Kois: Thank God, no.
Helmuth: David Plotz’s editing instincts are perfect, but he is NOT concerned with the thickness of his writer’s skin. This doesn’t bother me when he edits me. (I’m pretty thick-skinned.) He once eliminated several paragraphs of an introduction by telling me: BORING.
Helmuth: But I definitely edit his edits. When Emily Bazelon wrote this fantastic, deep story about the Nazi origins of modern anatomy, I was the first editor and Plotz was the top editor. He had some great suggestions, but there was one paragraph he didn’t like. So he highlighted it and typed: BLAH BLAH BLAH. I DON’T CARE ABOUT THIS. When I sent the story back to Emily (Emily, do not read this), I took out that line and said something like “David thought we could probably cut this part.”
Kois: That is awesome.
Helmuth: But Dan, don’t you worry that by rewriting things for the writers, you’re squelching their voices? Kois-ifying it too much?
Kois: I try to steer away from edits where in looking over it, I realize, “Oh this is just me trying to be clever.” But part of my job is not to Kois-ify necessarily but to Slate-ify—or in my case to Slate Book Review–ify. There is a certain level of prose elegance and argumentative flair we want out of these pieces, and sometimes it’s easier to just give writers examples rather than try to drag it out of them.
Helmuth: Yes, examples are good. Sometimes they just take the examples you give them, and sometimes they’re inspired to try something different but get what you’re looking for by looking at the editor’s “here’s how you might try it” suggestions. Hm, that doesn't sound mean enough to be coming from you. It’s a good strategy!
Kois: I want writers to walk away bruised but invigorated and wanting more. Like they just ran Tough Mudder or something.
Helmuth: Ha! They’ll be limping for days but paradoxically feeling victorious. You probably don’t have to worry too much about one of my main editorial challenges: Making complicated things simple.
Kois: I am usually trying to get my writers to stop making simple things complicated.
Helmuth: Whether it’s a scientist writing or a science writer who has done a lot of reporting on a given subject, I think it’s really tricky for the writer to know what our audience doesn’t (and doesn’t need to!) know. One of my most common edits is to ask people to clarify, simplify, or remove jargon and technical details. If they’re interesting, great. But usually they get in the way. Also, I try to be easily confused—I’m always looking for ways that a smart but nonscience reader could misunderstand something.
Lai: What advice would you give young journalists?
Helmuth: The first advice journalists get (or should get) is “Don’t take editing personally.” But of course they do. How could they not?
Kois: Every time I get an edit on a piece I wrote, I still have to remind myself not to take it personally.
Helmuth: And you have to be willing to try again. Almost nobody can write the perfect piece for Slate the first or second time. It’s a learning process.
Kois: Thankfully when you’re learning with Laura, she’ll send you a carton of chocolates along with your gentle edit.
Helmuth: SHUT UP KOIS.
Dan Kois edits and writes for Slate’s culture department. He is writing a book called How to Be a Family and co-writing, with Isaac Butler, an oral history of Angels in America.
Laura Helmuth is the health, science, and environment editor at the Washington Post. From 2012–2016, she was Slate’s science and health editor. Follow her on Twitter.
Jennifer Lai is an associate editor at Slate.