I was approached just yesterday about what to call my position. I didn't have an answer.

Everything that is being used seems to be either so broad as to not have a meaning that can be categorized under one banner, or so narrow that it doesn't capture everything I do.

If it ends up that I have to choose something, though, I'm voting for "Instigating Interactive Brand Napier."

As for me, when asked what I would like my position title to be. I said "Information Goddess"

But I seattled more for the clarity and straight forward "Corporate Librarian."

Besides, when I leave this position and if they hire a man to replace me, he might not feel too comforatable being a goddess. ;-)

When you have an unexpected title, you introduce the opportunity for a conversation. It's a tool you can use to engage people. But it also allows you and that person to think about what you do in a completely different light.

At Brains on Fire, we have our Courageous President. Chief Inspiration Officer. Storyteller. Whipcracker. Princess of Particulars. First Impression. Curiosity Officer. Account Advocate. And Visual Linguist. Plus many more (check it out at www.brainsonfire.com - click people and then click individuals).

Take your title from Tired to Inspired. It might just help ignite or re-ignite your passion for what you do for a living.

Cheers,

Spike Jones
Firestarter

great post ann.

i'm going with Diva.

Cam & BL: Love it.

Carol: Understood. But your new title isn't nearly as much fun.

Spike: Of course! I should have mentioned BoF, specifically. Thanks for the link and explanation. Those I love in particular:

Young Gun
Celebrity Massage Therapist
Keeper of the Cash

Brilliant!

I once held the title Director, Consumer Intelligence. Nothing revolutionary, I know. But the VP of Product would always scoff and say, "well, then I'm going to be the head of product intelligence."

The brand continues its slide into oblivion. Unfortunately for some companies, putting customers first is a 2.0 idea.

The "title" of this post certainly got my attention.

What happens when the Web 2.0 bubble bursts and these people have to search for a job in a more traditional setting (you know, like at Google)? How will "Firestarter" match up against some guy you're competing aganst who was "Director of Business Development"? Corporate America veers towards the conservative so I think such titles will hurt more than help.

Also, I think traditional titles make it easier for startups to do deals with larger companies for the same reason. When you exchange business cards and see that you have the same or similar title, you immediately have something in common you can talk about.

I speak from experience. I was once a "community manager" but then became a "publisher" -- same job.

Hmmmm, CBO? (Chief Bullsh*t Officer) Nah, that could cover just about anyone in the C-level.

I once held the title "Director, Market Research and Intelligence"...but I left that position when the organization expressed no interest in what I was hired to do.

Can't complain because I've got a 2.0 title (Community Marketing Manager).

But some of the ones out there are quite silly...

A fun post and great comments.

In my small business, I end up doing just about everything, so President might be a bit misleading. I know it's hardly high-tech sounding, but Chief Cook & Bottle Washer might be most appropriate. Or maybe Chief Executive Officer in Charge of Everything including Taking Out the Garbage at Night.

Thanks for the tip on the Word a Day newsletter.

Ann,

I am going through this process at work right now as and I find myself in Cam's camp. I have broad responsibilities and have license to be more aggressive and fun to use my title as a conversation starter.

I think it also depends on your industry. If you're in banking, you may want to stick with VP (is everybody at a bank a VP...seems like it). If you're working in marketing and/or technology, a more progressive title can expand your reach, spark conversation and lead to exciting opportunities.

I change my title weekly because it's fun, challenging, and situational (kind of like my job here). But I also do it because I wear many hats, and like Cam says, a broad label is meaningless.

Perhaps I should start signing off as:

Shelley Ryan, TMH (Too Many Hats)

Hey, Carol, perhaps you are your company's "Information Sleuth" instead of goddess? I like that word, Sleuth. Or Locksmith. Yeah, could be better than Librarian.

Neil,

You assume I want a job in conservative, dry corporate America-land. But even if I did, I don't think the title would matter. It's the track record. And since we have "different" titles, we have kindred spirits attracted to us. Business prospects expect something different from us. Titles are a marketing touchpoint, my friend. So you can keep them Tired and the same as everybody else or make them Inspired.

David: How about "Mission Control"? (I stole that one from Shelley, too.)

Regarding one's title, step back and ask yourself: "Does it convey something about what I do, or does it make me sound like a pompous, flaky airhead?" If you feel the need to rely upon a ridiculous excuse for a title to help spark a business conversation, your socialization skills might need polishing.

Sometimes I feel like it should be "Mission Out-of-Control."

Titles and business cards reflect a lot about your company culture and your own role within it. If you're Spike (hell, even if you're a guy *named* Spike) at a company called Brains on Fire, my guess is being the EVP of Client Services might strike one as odd. Being the Firestarter at IBM, likewise, would raise a few eyebrows.

If you're transitioning between Brains and IBM, or vice versa, more than just titles will need to be re-thought, in all likelihood.

(I should check out the word of the day -- sounds good. I think we should all put one unusual word in each blog post and hyperlink it to the dictionary. Think of how smart we'd all get. My last post's favorite was "specious").

Thanks --

I'm totally changing my title to CTO "Chief Tweet Officer" in honor of all things Twitter.

:)

Spike, a nontraditional title could knock you out of contention during resume screening -- especially if the resumes are sorted by someone told to look for certain terms. I'm not defending such a shallow review, but it's a reality.

Second, people still listen to Beatles songs. Tiny Tim not so much. Traditional titles aren't tired, they're classics that have become part of the fabric of business. New titles can make the leap to classic status (e.g., business development), but most won't.

According to your site, you're recruiting a Senior Web Designer. That one made the leap. I think the jury is still out on Firestarter though.

Lastly, doesn't your agency serve "dry corporate America-land"? Those are the best clients!

I swear, it seems I do nothing but stir things up on here...I like it!

Neil, point taken on the resume screening.

I totally disagree with you on the "classic" angle. Titles are one of those things in a lot of companies just never think about . It's an overlooked touchpoint. A wasted part of a brand identity.

Yes, we're recruiting a Senior Web Designer. But when we find one, we'll ask him or her what they WANT their inspired title to be.

(I used to be the "New Business Hound." But now, I'm the Firestarter.) As an identity company, we want your identity to permeate every nook and cranny of your company. It's not something that's just left up to the PR and marketing departments. It's what makes up the culture. If Director of Business Development makes some people all warm and fuzzy and helps them sleep at night, then that's great for them. But when I think of my title, it helps me think of all of the ways I can be a Firestarter. To ignite passion in others. To gather kindling and fan flames with kindred spirits - sure for new business, but also for friends and colleagues. I define my title instead of it defining me.

Listen. Protocol sucks. And more people need to question why and how things are done. "That's the way we've always done it" is a one way ticket to extinction.

And lastly, we do work with dry, corporate America-land. But we help it become a little bit less dry or corporate.

I've been the Chief Experience Officer (CXO) for a number of years, so I'm not sure that it counts as a Web 2.0 title. And I agree with some of the comments here. Since I've mostly worked for myself and had my own titles, it has hurt me in the past on those occassions when I decided to get a "real" job. No one ever knew how to place me. But, a google search for chief experience officer now shows 37,000+ entries, so I guess it's catching on and maybe if I look for a real job in the future, I'll finally fit in!

I hate to be a spoil sport here, but ...

If I were to work for a company other than my own (knowing what I now know about the RACKET that is recruiting), I would want my title to be EXACTLY that which is in the greatest demand now and in the future.

Here's why: When candidates put themselves on Monster and LinkedIn, they are hoping to be found by recruiters, right? Well, all recruiters use document matching technology to find resumes.

So if you have internet marketing expertise and duties, but you call yourself an "Online Marketing Maven," recruiters like me won't find you.

And if by pure dumb luck we do stumble upon your resume, if you have a clever title, then recruiters won't know exactly what it means.

The best way to get the job of your dreams is to work your way up into that EXACT same title in your current company.

The second best way is to work your way up to the most logical job that is just one step away.

For example: If your goal is to someday be a VP of Ecommerce with a Fortune 500 company, then first become the VP of Ecommerce for your S&P 5000 company.

If that's not possible, then find out what title is the second in command of the VP of Ecommerce (most likely the Director of Internet Marketing). Then become that.

It's kind of like what happens when an NFL team looks for a new Head Coach: The first candidates they consider are head coaches with other NFL teams. The second candidates they consider are Assistant Head Coaches for NFL teams --- or maybe Head Coaches for major college teams.

They would never consider a candidate who calls himself the "Chief Football Evangelist" ... unless that guy had a really great record. ;->

Likewise, if you want to be the First Chair Violinist with the Boston Pops, then work your way up through the Second Chair.

Exceptions happen, but most recruiters are looking for an OBVIOUS fit for their open job recs. That's (one reason) why recruiting is a RACKET.

See www.28-Job-Search-Tips.com

Well I think alot of people can take on my title of "Shapeshifter" or maybe Mystique!

As a social media consultant at PodTech.net (where Robert Scoble also works) I interface with a lot of these folks.

You can see this list of role descriptions as well as a few of my favorites folks who do this type of role

http://www.web-strategist.com/blog/2007/03/26/understanding-the-technology-evangelist-role-a-few-of-my-favorite-folks/

Titles are meaningless. I am an information security manager at a large pharmaceutical firm. I provide the information and tools they need to properly manage the security risks associated with their information technology assets. Yes, my title, Senior Advisor, is less than descriptive of the work.

Who knew a post like this could inspire such debate? Neil and Spike -- this means you. : ) Really interesting perspectives.. great points. I admit that I particularly like Stephen Denny's comment -- "If you're Spike (hell, even if you're a guy *named* Spike) at a company called Brains on Fire, my guess is being the EVP of Client Services might strike one as odd."

And Denny -- check out Word of the Day this week -- words that sound risque but aren't. Today: testaceous.

http://wordsmith.org/words/today.html

Awww, Ann. Quit it. You're making me blush. What's a blog worth, anyway, if there's no debate going on?

Harry - Thanks for the lesson. But when and if I ever look for another job, don't worry, I'll put down my job as "Director of Business Development" or whatever nonsense the title might be by then. Maybe this mentality by the headhunters can be the axis for a shift in thinking about PEOPLE instead of TITLES. One company we worked for - a professional placement company as a matter of fact - asked us to change their name and identity. And now, do you know what they call themselves instead of "Placement Officer," etc? "Great People Finders."

Well, I've straddled the fence on this one. For one side of my business (the more formal and traditional side), I have the traditional President and Founder thing; but for the creative marketing side, I'm the Chief Idea Officer. No room on the card for chief cook and bottle-washer, however...

I have, for many years, found corporate bull an amusing subject. If one took out all the bull from business

meetings and discussions, you would be left with a lot of really unimportant and superficial stuff. I wrote an

amusing "Corporate Speech Maker" entitled "Corporate Bull". You can find it here:

http://www.designedpresentations.com/documents/corporate%20bull.pdf

See my blog here: http://graham-mclusky.blogspot.com/ Its got nothing to do with corporate bull but we can

always make an exception!

Spike/aka Firestarter, I love the title! Motivating!

Mind if I use it?