Get Out of the Kitchen if You Can’t Take the Heat: PR’s Home Makeover Challenge; #PR; #publicrelations; #discourse; #civility

April 1st, 2012

By Mary Beth West, APR

A favorite saying in the South famously goes, “Get out of the kitchen if you can’t take the heat.” 

For my great-grandmother, who for decades prepared from scratch three hulking meals daily for about a dozen farmhands with all the modern conveniences a 1930s/40s kitchen would allow, it indeed got hot from the relentless burn of a wood-fired stove.  Way hot.  Especially in the Middle Tennessee August growing season with no AC or ceiling fans. 

Whoever wanted to bend my Grandmother Butler’s ear with a complaint, a request or any other idle chit-chat that could waste her valuable time generally had to venture to the kitchen to do it, and hence her love of that old expression.

Fast-forward six or seven decades: the kitchens of the modern world are much cooler and calmer places these days, but the heat still burns in a more figurative application of the phrase, in the forum of public dialogue. 

The kitchen (of sorts) is still there: our interconnectedness through media of vastly diversifying forms provides a place where all kinds of news-reporting and idea-sharing are cooked up – though some not even half-baked, I might add –and served to a global population. 

Thermal heat has been replaced with the heat of emotionally charged opinion, often hitting fever-pitches that stoke feelings of anger and hate between entire populations of people.   

The lines between genuine fact-focused news reporting and unapologetically opinionated editorial are blurred beyond much hope of their sponsoring media organizations ever getting a grip on reality.

The heat is on alright, and often times – I must admit – I can’t take it.  The thumb hits the “off” button, and I’m back to calmer places, back to sanity.  

It’s a real downer.  This isn’t the way it has to be.  With all the potential that media offer today to educate, enlighten and inspire, what most consistently rises to the top are the most shrill, most  misguided and most purposefully destructive voices, viewpoints and personalities. 

A retired Knoxville, Tennessee educator, Sandra D. Cannon, wrote an insightful op-ed piece in The Knoxville News Sentinel this past weekend, describing in an exceptionally well-balanced way her disappointment in how public debate has evolved, from the formats of traditional media to the likes of Limbaugh and Maher.  Read it.  

As a substitute teacher now, Ms. Cannon sees the vitriol in today’s classrooms daily, not only in students arguing among one another but also in arguing with her. 

The outcomes can be seen every day.  Neither many students nor the grown-ups who should know better seem to care about learning or embracing the tools of a thoughtful, productive and well-measured point/counterpoint exchange – one that doesn’t quickly decline into mudslinging of the worst Jerry-Springer kind.   

Amid the muck, the public relations profession represents two faces: first, as part of the machine that’s positioning and protecting the voices that are most contributing to the madness; but then secondly, as a professional discipline that offers an abundance of methodologies, creativity and know-how to make education, enlightenment and inspiration surrounding critical issues a reality.

Toward that second point, the power of organizations like the Public Relations Society of America (PRSA) and its tens of thousands of individual members offer a great deal of talent and expertise.  While a wholesale shift in the status quo probably can’t happen, many folks would agree: the quality of debate in this country has fewer places to go but up. 

They say that a kitchen make-over always contributes back the most value to a home. 

Across the spectrum of public discourse, the public relations profession should turn up a different kind of heat in the kitchen – one generated by a full-on makeover that helps brings out better communication for better outcomes – and in the process, increases the value of the media home we all inhabit.

 

Tags: , , , , , ,
Posted in 2012, Public Relations | No Comments »

@tyratuckerhaag: Be Purposeful in Media Relations Messaging; @businesswire; #PR

March 23rd, 2012

by Tyra E. Haag

Good media relations coverage doesn’t just happen – it’s planned.

All right, all right . . . is this the case every time? No, but it certainly makes things a whole lot easier for PR professionals and journalists when the message is a good fit for both that specific media outlet and the PR firm’s clients.

Simply put: media relations is a two-way street.

It’s one of many public relations strategies used to communicate client messages. Sure, it’s simple enough to throw together a quick media campaign, but without the proper research, thorough dialogue with the client and goal-setting initiatives to reach specific outcomes and target audiences, what’s the point?

Media relations messaging should be purposeful and beneficial for every client, every time. Why?

At Mary Beth West Consulting, we will advise a client if we have reservations about pitching a certain story angle. The last thing our media relations team wants to do is send a potentially weak pitch or a “not-so-newsworthy” release to local journalists with whom we’ve developed a trustworthy relationship to simply “get the client’s name out there.” 

Media contacts do not like their time wasted, and weak content put forth by a client (or their PR firm) does exactly that. 

It is, however, absolutely necessary to dig deep and find the best hook possible to tell each client’s story, which in the end is a win-win for everyone involved.

For those of you interested, BusinessWire recently released its top 20 press releases of 2011. Take a look and see if you can find a common thread among them.

Tags: , , , ,
Posted in 2012, Public Relations | No Comments »

Amy Schwinge: What’s the Key Message Anyway? #PR

March 19th, 2012

by Amy Schwinge, MAOM

With today’s instant viral communications, I have noticed that sometimes organizations focus on the quantity of messages versus the quality.

Even with social media, blogs, websites, e-mail, etc., just a click away, I think the message still should be relevant, on point, and of interest to who is receiving the communication (target audience). 

That is where the key message comes into play.  Even if an organization has a ton of messages to share, each communication should focus on a core message.  For people in the communications field, crafting key messages probably comes second nature.  However, in the fast-paced world of getting the communication out as fast as possible, the key message can be lost.

According to The Public Relations Society of America (PRSA), “Communications cannot always be controlled, but messages can. With repeated use, key messages and proof points ensure dissemination of clear, consistent and compelling information. Such messages serve as the foundation for effective communications, and can drive desired actions and positively impact your business.”

A quick link to a helpful resource: PRSA offers a webinar on how to develop meaningful messages.  This webinar could benefit novice to veteran communications professionals. 

 

Tags: , ,
Posted in 2012, Public Relations | No Comments »

Getting It Right

March 13th, 2012

by Joe Bogardus

While the phrase “getting it right” has become a cliché, its core still rings true.

Mary Beth West and I recently spent an afternoon with a prospective client speaking about branding and the importance of differentiating their message from that of the competition.

We stressed the importance of a competitive analysis as well as qualitative and quantitative research to find the true points of parity and difference within their organization and brand.

The economy and other circumstances are forcing this entity to consider a “marketing” campaign. They exist in a crowded category dominated by a couple of big players.

To “get it right,” we encouraged them to look at their customers – present and potential. Understand their needs and wants. Investigate the competition. Understand what they are saying to the same prospects. Sift through the data and marry that information with their market knowledge and judgment.

We discussed how other brands have gotten it right and ensured them somewhere there is a special message unique to their brand and offering. There is a process to help them “get it right.”

Many organizations skip the above “getting it right” steps, because of the costs and the time involved to execute the various analyses. When completed correctly, the rewards can be enormous to the brand and the business.

It just makes sense to “get it right.”

Tags: , , , ,
Posted in Public Relations | 1 Comment »

PRSA “Public Relations” Definition Could Go One Step Further; #prdefined

March 12th, 2012

By Mary Beth West, APR

As a profession, public relations has historically beaten out most others in living up to the old saying, “the cobbler has no shoes.”

So goes the reality that the profession has struggled for decades with achieving accurate perceptions of what public relations is and what we in the profession actually do for a living.

The Public Relations Society of America (PRSA) took on the challenge anew with an effort formally entitled “Public Relations Defined” to create a universal definition of public relations. 

PRSA National Chair / CEO Gerard Corbett, APR, Fellow PRSA, did a terrific job framing the need for this effort in his kick-off to the initiative earlier this year.

PRSA’s members worldwide were invited to submit their ideas and recommendations for the best-crafted definition and to vote on a final draft.

The chosen winner:

“Public relations is a strategic communication process that builds mutually beneficial relationships between organizations and their publics.”

While I like this definition especially for its simplicity, I would like it even more if within the definition it answered the question, “To what end?”

If PRSA could tack on a simple phrase at the conclusion, “to achieve business objectives,” it would strike more solid resonance with CEOs and other leaders / management functions that public relations’ value is all about making the entities we serve holistically successful.

Apart from this criticism – which I only intend in a constructive way – I have to hand it to them:  Hats off to PRSA and the many leaders involved in this effort for taking on this project.  The time had certainly come to revise PRSA’s previously adopted definition from 1982:

“Public relations helps an organization and its publics adapt mutually to each other.”

If that phrase didn’t automatically trigger a bout of narcolepsy for you, I will hasten to point out that it’s great in 2012 to operate in a profession that self-describes itself as more than just a helper, and more so, that we’re not entrenched in some curious sociological exercise of “adapt(ing) mutually,” a concept which one would more likely read about in National Geographic than Harvard Business Review.  Who on earth would pay a decent monthly retainer for that little deliverable? 

Final thought: as someone who has been involved in the past in PRSA’s national advocacy efforts for the profession, it’s my hope that all of PRSA’s members will do their own part to represent and to communicate to others what we do – in all its expansive diversity of scope and impact – in a way that is worthy of the strongest ideals. 

It’s not PRSA’s job alone.  It should play a role in the life’s work of each of us.

Tags: , , , , ,
Posted in Uncategorized, westwire | No Comments »

What Have You Done for Me Lately?

February 22nd, 2012

By Tyra E. Haag
@tyratuckerhaag

In 1986, Janet Jackson had a huge hit-single with “What Have You Done for Me Lately?” from her third studio album, Control.

That song title exemplifies what most clients want to know at the beginning of each month when they receive the previous month’s invoice from their public relations firm (or advertising firm, accounting, legal, financial services, etc.).

Mary Beth West, principal of Mary Beth West Consulting, reminds our team members to always keep that thought at the forefront of our client service work every day. 

At times, juggling multiple client accounts can present stress and time-management issues; however, as long as we keep the client’s best interest top-of-mind, things always seem to fall into place. This in turn keeps clients happy, but also produces great satisfaction for those of us project-managing their accounts.

Actually defining client service is a bit trickier, though.  A Google search of “definition of client service” yields more than 17 million results.

For our team at MBWC, it’s a bit simpler to understand.

Our clients trust us to help their businesses thrive. We cannot do that by simply meeting their expectations, but by exceeding them.  Providing value and transparency in client services means consistently doing our best work to make sure our clients thrive in today’s business climate.

So, what have you done for your clients lately?

Tags: , ,
Posted in Public Relations | No Comments »

All I Ever Needed to Know About Client Service I Learned in Kindergarten

February 17th, 2012

By Amy Schwinge, MAOM

Have you ever heard that the foundation for a person’s personality is developed by the age of five? 

According to Sigmund Freud, this is true. 

Remember from Psychology class that Freud’s personality model consists of the Id, Ego and Superego? 

Not to get into a Psych lesson, but Freud’s model says that we are born with the Id, then the Ego begins to develop within the next three years.

According to allpsych.com, “By the age of five, or the end of the phallic stage of development, the Superego develops.  The Superego is the moral part of us and develops due to the moral and ethical restraints placed on us by our caregivers.  Many equate the superego with the conscience as it dictates our belief of right and wrong.”

What does all of this have to do with good client service?

What I am trying to say is that I think a person has developed their personality and the foundation for the necessary skill set to provide good client service by the age of 5.

Robert Fulghum agrees.  If you haven’t read his book, “All I Really Need to Know I Learned in Kindergarten,” you should check it out. 

Since I have a first grader this year, I am all too familiar with Kindergarten and its basic principles.

Not to oversimplify the process, but most of the basic rules that we all learned in kindergarten can transfer over to both our personal and professional lives, including providing good client service, such as:

–Treat others as you would want to be treated.

–Always use your manners.

–Be a good listener.

–Talk when necessary or you have permission.

–Share.

–Play fair.

–Clean up your own mess.

The list goes on; I think you can see where I am trying to go with this.

If we all remember and practice what we learned in kindergarten, it would improve both our personal and professional relationships, including client service.

Tags: ,
Posted in Public Relations | No Comments »

Demonstrating Value: Transparency and Accountability in Client Service

February 10th, 2012

By Joe Bogardus

Everything is moving very fast – most noticeably, information.

The various devices available to facilitate information transfer and their advantages have been well documented. With so much happening in the business world so quickly, transparency and accountability in sharing information with clients should be a foregone conclusion.

Not so fast.

When I started in the business (can you hear the rocking chair creaking?), written conference reports from agency to clients after a meeting were commonplace. My early agency mentors stressed the value of reports not only for clients, but for fellow media and creative team members and management as well. It was prized information.

During my client-side experiences, working with WPP and Interpublic agencies, conference reports became less frequent from my agency connections. I often kept the meeting notes, (using the format I learned when I was an account executive) making sure the timelines and the budgets that were agreed upon were met.

In my final client-side assignment, I do not recall ever getting a conference report in an e-mail or via snail mail.

With today’s tools, sharing information between client and agency should be a breeze. Online tools sharing key points of agreement, deadline confirmations and other critical information should be used by agencies to reinforce their client relationships and build the required confidence that things are getting done as promised.

We do a lot of this at Mary Beth West Consulting. Our clients might get a formal conference report or a summary e-mail of a face-to-face meeting or teleconference.  It’s all about open and accountable information exchange. It’s about good business practices.

Tags: ,
Posted in Public Relations | No Comments »

Susan G. Komen and the PR Profession’s Post-Mortem Race for a Clue

February 7th, 2012

By Mary Beth West, APR 

On some issues of heavy consequence in the public relations profession, it sometimes helps to take a step back and watch the dialogue unfold before formulating an opinion.  I had been doing just that on the Susan G. Komen / Planned Parenthood controversy – until today.  Now, it all seems crystal-clear.

Like everyone else, I saw the maelstrom unfold last week throughout the media.  The manner in which the story broke and how the Komen organization reacted with a policy about-face – followed by tough criticism (“they caved!”) – provides a public relations case study that will live in textbooks throughout the next decade. 

An interesting part about it to me, though, is that different public relations professionals are drawing diverse conclusions about who’s right, who’s wrong, and what the real lessons are relative to brand, reputation and effective organizational decision-making. 

One of my PRSA colleagues, Michael Cherenson, APR, Fellow PRSA, posted an entry on the Public Relations Society of America‘s national blog, “Who Really Owns the Komen Brand?”  In it, Mike makes some spot-on observations about the nature of brand advocacy.  He also poses a critical question in his title.  

I disagree, however, with the direction of his conclusion, in which he seems to indicate that Komen simply made a bad decision to no longer support Planned Parenthood, leaving a majority of former Komen supporters feeling betrayed and turning on the brand.  

To me, the answer of who owns the Komen brand – or at least who seized ownership of it last week – is quite simple:  Planned Parenthood.  

It’s Planned Parenthood’s own brand advocates, in my view, who mounted nothing short of a hostile takeover of the Komen brand in order to railroad their message – and their way – with absolute political genius . . . the notion of tying the breast cancer prevention issue intrinsically with women’s reproductive rights vis-à-vis Komen’s prior financial support of Planned Parenthood, with a deep inference that the two cannot be separated.  

In the face of Komen rescinding its funding, Planned Parenthood made an exceptionally swift, underlying case that Komen was turning its back on women.   And the media ate it up with a spoon, as Planned Parenthood well-knew they would.  The Komen folks didn’t know what hit them, with almost total deer-in-the-headlights confusion as to the messaging subterfuge overtaking their reputation. 

I have to ask the question, was it really Komen donors who were posting all those “Never will I give again!” messages on Facebook, or was it the Planned Parenthood Army?  We’ll see what the coming days of analysis into the Internet record bears out. 

Meanwhile, The Wall Street Journal posted an editorial late last night that gives a far better reality-based assessment of Komen’s rationale for its original decision:

“Planned Parenthood has been and is under congressional and criminal investigation (by attorneys general, local prosecutors and various regulatory agencies in Arizona, Indiana, Alabama, Kansas and Texas) for allegations including failure to report criminal child sex abuse, misuse of health-care and family-planning funds, and failure to comply with parental-involvement laws regarding abortions. . . . It is easy to see why Komen might not wish to be associated with Planned Parenthood. Fighting breast cancer is something all Americans can and do agree on; promoting and performing abortions is something that divides us bitterly.” 

In short, there are two sides to this issue, and Komen’s side got completely hijacked. 

Another colleague of mine posted an essay yesterday that, to me, spoke with a great deal of clarity about the real issue at hand for Komen: lack of conviction. 

With characteristic aplomb, Susan Hart, APR, wrote, “Last week’s nightmare of ‘they fund us, they fund us not’ isn’t about funding at all. It’s about who the Susan G. Komen Foundation is. It’s about the organization’s values, priorities and purpose. It’s the up close and personal part of branding that decidedly determines who you are and what you stand for regardless of public sentiment.  And therein lies the multi-level problem for this pink-until-you-puke group.”

Love it. 

And she’s absolutely right. 

Tags: , , , , , , , ,
Posted in Public Relations | 9 Comments »

Executive Compensation: At What Price Reputation?

February 3rd, 2012

By Mary Beth West, APR

It’s not without a bit of odd coincidence that our company’s scheduled blog posts for the month of February are set to take on the theme “Demonstrating Value: Transparency and Accountability in Client Services”. . . when one of the biggest executive compensation flaps in recent Knoxville history is unfolding right now. 

At almost this very time two years ago (January 2010), I wrote a blog post, “The Reputational Fallout of Compensation Run Amok,” prompted at the time by a Barron’s article on the topic of out-of-control executive compensation on Wall Street and Washington’s reaction to it.

Whether an organization is public or private-sector, for-profit or non-profit, executive compensation disclosures can take a real toll on relationships with stakeholders, if compensation levels as well as policies aren’t within some reasonable range of public expectations, particularly given the scale of the organization and the context of its work performance.

Of course, you can’t please everyone on this topic.  Some folks misguidedly think anyone working in the non-profit sector shouldn’t make more than $50K a year.  Non-profits that seek to operate with the performance-driven approach of highly competitive companies generally have to pay quite well to attract commensurate talent in keeping with expectations.

As with practically everything else that can impact public attitudes and opinions, balance is the name of the game. 

Board decisions should be made with an underlying expectation that all information is subject to public disclosure and scrutiny and should let that knowledge serve as some form of guidance on executive compensation parameters.

Tags: , , , , , ,
Posted in Public Relations | No Comments »

« Older Entries
Newer Entries »