Return on attention and Current Cites

I was quite taken with the phrase “return on attention” while reading The Power of Pull a while ago. I was also interested in the deprecation of the term information overload.

It’s not so much about finding which information is most valuable, as many of those who fret about information overload would have it. Improving return on attention is more about finding and connecting with people who have the knowledge you need, particularly the tacit knowledge about how to do new things.

Forwarding a particular current awareness bulletin to colleagues the other day, I wrote: “I confess that I find this type of digest less and less useful. Or rather, maybe, their return on attention is not high enough incentive to make me want to look at them.”
However, there is one digest that I will usually look at. My colleague, Roy Tennant, noted the other day that this is the twentieth year of Current Cites. Current Cites is selected by several hands under the overall editorship of Roy. I find that it provides very good return on attention 😉
Roy deserves our congratulations for keeping Current Cites going for so long. I wonder is part of its success down to the variety of personal perspectives that inform the selection?

3 thoughts on “Return on attention and Current Cites”

  1. Eric,
    Thanks for the suggestion. I post notice of each issue via Twitter, from my @rtennant account, but I don’t see posting the cites themselves. 140 characters just aren’t enough for our witty contributors to do justice to the pieces they cite.

  2. How about a separate CC Twitter account, with barebones info for each CC piece — Title, brief source, contributor initials (or Twitter names if they have one). Simple enough that it could be done with student labor. You don’t need to write anything on the content of the pieces — People know enough about the quality of the CC writers that they’ll visit just on the basis of knowing your good reputation.

Leave a Reply