Now, for those of you who have previously read my blog, you know that I’m a proponent of transparency and when it comes to an issue like monetization, I think companies need to increase transparency to lessen the impact of employees who believe that making money isn’t their problem.

Years ago, I worked for a company that had a gainsharing program.  The idea was that when the company was successful and earned revenue above a certain target, the results were share with employees. When business didn’t go well, those results were also shared with employees who wound up referred to the program as “painsharing.” More then anything, the program made it clear to all employees that everything had a cost and that if there was an expense, there needed to be revenue.

Now that didn’t make reporters report any less, nor did it make editors assign fewer stories or photographers shoot fewer photos, but it did make nearly everyone pause and think.  For example, editors asked if there was someone else already on duty instead of a reporter working overtime to cover a meeting and designers took a closer look at how much space they needed for a special section. But don’t get me wrong, the program did not suddenly erase waste nor make everyone more frugal.

With the economy being what it is, one would be hard pressed to find a company still running a gainsharing program. But I think the broader lessons are just as relevant in these difficult times.

I’m not proposing that everyone should follow the Dallas model (and yes I know that they say advertising is not really setting strategy), but I do think a better job needs to occur with making building revenue everyone’s problem and where that is already successfully happening in print, it needs to be extended to online.

So if I’m not calling for a Dallas approach, then what do I mean?

Simply put, I think there needs to be an approach that provides a seat at the table for all relevant parties not just advertising and/or content. I would suggest that from the start you involve people from your tech, business development, advertising and content and design teams. Make it clear not only what the goals are, but also what are the expenses. And make sure not to overlook any expenses, for example even the use of open source software can have associated expenses.

How often does advertising come up with an idea for a special section that content readily can’t fill? Or how often does content decide to create a special package that ignore advertising or sponsorship opportunities? Occurrences like those and many others happen in many different types media companies.

While an approach that treats everything as a product and is inclusive in its creation doesn’t guarantee a revenue positive effort, the alternative just doesn’t seem to be working.

What’s the approach at your company? Drop a comment and let me know.

I can not think of a more fitting symbol for a troubled industry then crumbling offices and derelict buildings.

While much of this may exist outside of the watchful, critical eye of readers and advertisers, it is not lost on a newspaper’s staff who, understandably, interpret the poor conditions as a symbol of low regard. To them, if their corporate or private owners cared about them and respected what they did, they would not let them work in that environment.

With revenues continuing to shrink, it is understandable that there will be those readers of this post who will argue that I cannot in good consciousness be suggesting that companies invest limited dollars in infrastructure. While I respect that opinion I think it misses the point. I would say how can you not invest in infrastructure. All the equipment a staff uses, from the pens and pads to the computers and servers to the copy machines and printers have a direct impact on bottom line. Can you imagine an automobile manufacturer expecting its employees to churn out contemporary vehicles using old and broken equipment in an antiquated facility?

I recognize that increasingly, newspaper companies are faced with difficult decisions about how and on what to spend limited funds. But I think the approach of ignoring infrastructure, from office furniture to computers, to phones, to even the paint on the wall and the bulbs that go in the lights, needs to stop. Everyday, editors and publishers expect more and more of their staffs and, all too often, offer less in return. Frankly, there needs to be more of a balancing act otherwise performance will continue to degrade, morale will continue to suffer and more and more employees will continue to leave the industry.

So my advice to newspaper companies is to look elsewhere for savings and to spend at least some of what is needed to improve their facilities. And if the response is that there is no where else to look, I would reply look harder — your business and your future depends on it.