Sales promotion is now PR

PR Conversations has been hosting an interesting debate around a new definition of public relations on the basis of a study to examine existing popular definitions. 

However, the outcome seems very normative and doesn’t engage with, or reflect, the common understanding of PR as a promotional tool that is prevalent online.  In 1997, Philip Kitchen described this traditional definition of PR as a “reductionist view” which sees PR as little more than a tactical activity in the marketing mix, alongside advertising and sales promotion.

Most PR academics and professionals argue that public relations has come a long way over the past 25 years or so in distinguishing itself from marketing.  But, although our message about the importance of relationship building and reputation management seems increasingly understood by senior executives, it appears that this has been to the advantage of our marketing colleagues rather than PR itself.

Marketing is no longer seen as communicating only with consumers and potential consumers.  Internal marketing is now vital in ensuring employees are “brand advocates“, with social media the new avenue.  That pushes out PR in this arena. 

Likewise, PR’s ability to generate debate and discussion for companies, issues or news items, has been rebranded as buzz, viral, word of mouth (wom) or conversational marketing – with the budgets and chutzpah that marketing manages to create with its ability to link an approach to generating sales or ROI – real or perceived.  That’s another reason why online communications and social media have generally been dominated by marketing rather than PR professionals.

In the area of corporate responsibility, PR has similarly lost ground.  Local communities are engaged through cause related marketing, which has led onto the phenomenon of social marketing and green marketing.   That effectively means marketing owns the triple bottom line of people, planet and profits.

A few weeks ago, I noted that the Highways Agency had won gold in the Institute of Sales Promotion Awards for its “Don’t be that Guy” driver awareness campaign. 

This would once have been seen as a public information campaign – a core remit of PR.  Indeed, Jacquie L’Etang traces the British history of PR back to such community relations activities.

It is not just the public sector where sales promotion is laying claim to traditional PR campaigns.  Asda and Diageo have just completed a “new responsible drinking initiative” which claims to help consumers “make responsible drinking choices at home”.

To a certain extent, I feel that PR has failed to own the territory that marketing has not only recognised as vitally important, but persuaded management to engage with. 

But there is more to this than marketing’s ability to use linkage to bottom line benefits, that PR often fails to do.

PR’s role extends beyond transactional relationships, where everyone is communicated with on the basis of a selfish organisational agenda.  It aims to reflect a more altruistic or communal relationship which is predicated on the idea of earning support or securing a license to operate.

Of course the bottom line is vital – but not just in terms of generating sales.  A short-term focus might seem essential in the current economic climate, but for an organisation to be around tomorrow it needs to focus on a sustainable, profitable bottom line.

So managing relationships and protecting the corporate reputation needs more than a marketing perspective.  Although the definition proposed at PR Conversations presents these aspects as the role of PR – we need to learn from our marketing colleagues in how to ensure the business benefits of such a position are clearly presented.

The longer we take to realise and act on this – the harder it will be to reclaim the territory that has been inhabited by our slicker, marketing colleagues. 

CIPR results: sweet smell of success

The latest round of CIPR Advanced Certificate and Diploma results have just been announced.

It is great when there is a high success rate, but perhaps that is even more difficult on the candidates who fail to achieve the required standard than when several of their cohort get bad news. 

I’m always impressed by those who take failure on the chin, appreciate the feedback they receive and are determined to improve when they have to retake an assignment.  At least they have the opportunity – in the past, school or University used to be much more along the lines of having one shot and then feeling like a failure in that topic for life (my unclassified grade in Latin O level is a fine example).

Of course not everyone reacts well and some candidates feel de-motivated and may give up their studies.  That is a real shame as there’s a lot to be said for learning from our failures.

Provided you are able to gain feedback and learn what to do better next time, failure isn’t all bad.  I’m concerned sometimes that those who scrape through may not realise their work needs improvement.

I also think it is important to realise that passing or not passing an assignment relates entirely to what you did and not to who you are. 

PR Licensed to Thrill

It might seem surprising, but the MIPAA JobSearch service has had a number of really interesting job opportunities recently.  These are primarily for those with a couple of years experience – but graduates with placement experience are also wanted.  The jobs are also often offered with short-term contracts – although if you are starting out in your career, such opportunities are a great addition to the CV/resume.

The vacancies we hear about seem to fill very quickly, as there is clearly no shortage of good young talent in the marketplace.  Still it is encouraging to see that even in the hard-hit motor industry, PR is keen to identify and recruit fresh faces. 

Opportunities have been available for in-house posts and with consultancies – and social/new media skills are particularly sought-after.

The latest vacancy registered with MIPAA seems to reflect the glamour of the business – although I should warn any applicant that my own experience of motor industry PR is a lot of hard graft as well as many fun moments.

But, I couldn’t resist pitching it for the MIPAA website:

If you can make a mean martini and are shaken not stirred by the dramas of motor industry PR, then Aston Martin may just have the job for you.  MIPAA JobSearch has details of a vacancy for a qualified Press Officer (temporary contract) who has a minimum of two years experience with automotive or luxury brands.  See:  JobSearch.

End of the Road for PR? Or time to step up a gear?

The Motor Industry Public Affairs Association (MIPAA) PR Masterclass today asked whether we’ve facing the End of the Road for PR?  The aim was to provide insight and advice on ensuring PR in the motor industry is capable of playing a leading role in organisations at this critical time.

First up was Rowan Stanfield of C&M who’d been asked to talk about: The impact of the rise in online communications: strategic opportunity or the death of PR?

Rowan had a tough challenge in arguing in favour of specialist online PR agencies to an audience of seasoned in-house and agency practitioners.  Her Tweet that she had fun stirring up the #prdebate reveals an appetite for the challenge.  And, whilst accepting her points relating to the value of metrics as a research tool and to measure of PR’s effectiveness online, her views about the declining usefulness of traditional PR skills were robustly countered by MIPAA members. 

C&M’s #prdebate argument is that the PR industry has lost its capability to lead clients in a New Media landscape and that the changing world requires a new online service offering.  A thought-provoking notion, but time will tell if an online specialism will outrank the generalists.

Another perspective on motor industry PR was then presented by the renowned and respected motoring journalist, Gavin Green.  This was the ultimate “customer review” as Gavin had researched the topic: What’s wrong with automotive PR? – a media perspective with input from half a dozen other top motoring writers.

Naming names, Gavin highlighted the good and bad of motor industry PR – and having spent time working “on the dark side” at Jaguar, he spoke from a clear position of understanding the challenges.  Trust and relationships were the keywords – with a parting thought that the best PRs are getting better and the worst are getting worse.

After lunch, we challenged Paul Willis, Director, Centre for Public Relations Studies, Leeds Business School to consider the question: Adapt or die – do PR practitioners have the skills to survive?

Paul presented lots of evidence supporting PR as a strategic management function – his prerequisite for survival.  Building on the work of my PR Conversations colleague, Benita Steyn, Paul argued that PR had a role to play in terms of an organisation’s societal and corporate strategy – not least in the face of four drivers in the current zeitgeist (and yes, as our “token academic”, he did cite Herder):

1. global economic scenario – accompanied by declining trust in businesses and politicians (notably in UK)
2. social media developments – and the impact on traditional media
3. increasingly active and empowered stakeholders
4. management expectations of PR – senior recognition of the value of PR accompanied by concerns about the lack of practitioner competency.

These factors were emphasised as both threats and a huge opportunity for PR, particularly if practitioners are able to provide an informed holistic insight to senior management giving them a unique value compared to more silo-oriented colleagues at the top table.

Finally, Ford of Europe chairman – and Ford of Europe vice president, governmental affairs, Joe Greenwell reflected on What do CEOs want? – the perspective on PR from top leadership.

As that all too rare breed – a CEO with a PR background (although Joe started his career in sales & marketing), Joe provides a real understanding of what value PR can bring at the highest level.

Identifying himself as a champion of PR, Joe drew on several masters of the profession himself.  These legends of motor industry PR, such as the late David Boole of Jaguar and Walter Hayes of Ford, secured senior support for PR counsel by demonstrating its value in managing the reputation and establishing leadership positions for both the CEO and the organisation.  They also understood the power of authentic voices such as engineers, designers and factory supervisors in communicating with influencers, who were not exclusively automotive journalists.

David sadly died in 1991, whilst Walter took the steering wheel at Ford in 1962.  Neither had to cope with social media, but both understood exactly the issues that we’d started the day by considering in terms of the need for an understanding of relevant influencers and the way that conversations reflect on a company and its products.

Joe’s advice for PR strongly echoed the findings presented by Paul – demonstrating that academic views of PR are reflective of the real experiences of senior practitioners and CEOs.

Huge thanks to the speakers for more than meeting the challenge of provoking MIPAA members to think outside the day job – and also to Gabi Whitfield, MIPAA chairman and Communications Director, Nissan Motor (GB) Limited, who did a brilliant job top and tailing the day.  And, not forgetting the participants who asked some great questions and added further to stimulating thought.

So not yet the end of the road for motor industry PR – but perhaps a time to shift up a gear or two.  And a real opportunity for future membership development within the MIPAA Business Academy.

Technorati Tags: Motor industry,public relations,future of PR,MIPAA,Rowan Stanfield,Gavin Green,Paul Willis,Joe Greenwell

PR students get Behind the Spin

Check out Behind the Spin – some really interesting articles that are articulate and very well written largely by PR students.  (Good job Richard)

Awards aren’t a measure of effectiveness

Marketing is more measurable than PR – how many times have you heard that? 

Well, first there’s the old adage attributed to Lord Leverhulme: “Half my advertising money is wasted. The problem is that I don’t know which half.”  That’s probably an optimistic assessment of much advertising in reality.

The current Thinkbox TV advert for TV advertising is apparently

“the sort of ad that starts conversations about TV ads; which ones we like best; why we remember them above other types of advertising, and how today’s advertisers can successfully plug into this “hard-wiring” phenomenon.”

Yes, the ads featured are ones we remember with affection – the claim that they “are still returning value for their brands despite being some distance form their original air-date” would need to be substantiated.

And, that’s a giant leap to the statement: “If TV can do this for these brands, with the right creative and media, it can do the same for today’s advertisers, delivering results today and in the long term. Nothing else does this quite like telly.”

How many other adverts were broadcast over those years that we fail to recall at all?  Or indeed, how many of these classics only come to mind with a prompt?  For every great advert that stimulates recall, a positive attitude, an opinion change or maybe, at the best, a behavioural outcome – there are millions more that are wallpaper and do not even register on our retinas or eardrums.

I’m not saying that advertising and marketing don’t work, but it’s interesting to see how many times the Thinkbox website makes claims about the effectiveness of TV advertising.  Is measurement only the holy grail of PR – or shouldn’t we be honest and say that much of what is done, particularly in mass communications, will not have an effect.

Well perhaps promotions are more measurable, you might think.  Well, check out the press release for an IPA gold award winning campaign the Highways Agency “Don’t be that Guy” driver awareness campaign.

There are lots of claims here for “effectiveness”, but no measures to demonstrate this.  Okay so the objective was perhaps only at a cognitive level – “to encourage road users to be adequately prepared for their journey”.  But do we know how many heard the message, thought about it – and, to be truly effective – did ensure adequeate preparedness. 

Or take a step back – how many road users before the campaign were unprepared – why was this the case, what was it that demonstrated their lack of preparation, was it a lack of awareness of the need to be prepared, or a knowledge-deficit, or some other barrier?  What research was undertaken to identify what would lead to a change in willingness to prepare? 

The award seems to acknowledge that the campaign “was seen by a large number of drivers” and demonstrated “genuine insight” and “humour of the concept”.  But did it work?

Devising a campaign and targeting “a well-defined segment of the driving population” is about what you do, not what you achieve.

More public money will be spent this summer “with a refreshed message designed to reach a wider audience” – but how do we know that last year’s campaign made any difference?  There certainly could be measures put in place, and maybe there were, but when judging and promoting the campaign as an award winner, these should be central to the rationale.

Arguably, this campaign was actually public relations – which involved promotional activities.  But regardless of whether it is marketing or PR, the same issue applies. 

If we don’t set out clear measurable objectives and undertake research into the current influencers of an attitude or behaviour at the start and end, the chance of our campaigns being effective or even memorable is surely less than 50%.

Social media and recession proof PR

The latest edition of the MIPAA members’ magazine,  Revolve is available to download and will be snail-mailed in the next few days.  I think it will be interesting to look back over the contents in a couple of years and see how the themes and trends develop.

This edition, not surprisingly, focuses on social media and PR in a recession – undoubtedly the two main public relations topics of our times.

Both will be covered at MIPAA’s Business Academy PR Masterclass: The End of the Road for PR? – which takes place at the London Transport Museum on Thursday 18 June (see www.mipaa.com)

This is our annual brain-stretching event where we ask a series of presenters to challenge current thinking.  The key note subjects and speakers in 2009 are:

The impact of the rise in online communications: strategic opportunity or the death of PR? – Rowan Stanfield, online PR consultant at C&M, the “uber-new PR
agency for the interweb era”

What’s wrong with automotive PR? – a media perspective – Gavin Green, national and international renowned motoring journalist, contributor and former editor of Car magazine

Adapt or die – do PR practitioners have the skills to survive? – Paul Willis, Director, Centre for Public Relations Studies, Leeds Business School, and formerly deputy MD at Ptarmigan Consultants

What do CEOs want? – the perspective on PR from top leadership – Joe Greenwell, Ford of Europe vice president, governmental affairs and president of SMMT

We are very grateful to these speakers for giving up their time for the Masterclass and all those who support our workshops (as featured in the magazine).  Organisations like MIPAA cannot survive without the goodwill of dozens of people.  Our educational programme aims to offer exceptional value for money – which is only possible because the presenters seem to enjoy working with our members pro bono. 

Running MIPAA – and especially producing the magazine wouldn’t be possible without the hand of genius that is Philippa at Mark Oliver Design.  She always manages to weave a stylish production from the articles that are drafted by either me or our members.  We also rely on the support of Newspress in printing and distributing the magazine on our behalf and running our website.

It is tough in PR in the motor industry at the moment, but we hope that MIPAA can really prove its worth at this time – and we can only do that with the back-up of our many friends.  Thank you all.

Shocking PR survey

Being creative to generate media coverage is one thing, but the PR team working with Comma (a major player in motor oil and car care products – whatever that means) has produced a truly shocking PR survey.

The press release claims that SEAT drivers the worst at basic car checks – revealing three of the worst publicity-hungry habits:

1. Extrapolating from limited research
2. Creating a threat based on a huge leap of unproven logic
3. Throwing in a spurious event as a hook to the story

At least we don’t have a quote from a dodgy academic or psychologist – but these other PR crimes are bad enough.

There is no clear data presented to substantiate the headline against SEAT drivers – or any logic for the linkage to a particular brand and oil checking behaviour.  Percentages of respondents per brand is a ridiculous calculation – you may as well look at signs of the zodiac, colour of the car or any other odd variable.

The extrapolation claims that more than 5 million motorists never check their oil level -which apparently is based on 17% of the respondents (this is reported by Halfords – although its “research” put this figure at 23% of motorists).

As usual, the counter figure of 83% checking their oil – or 44% doing so at least once a month, isn’t seen as worthy of highlighting because the data doesn’t fit the PR agenda.

The threat is that motorists could face a “£1,413 repair bill (average)” – but this isn’t clarified in the release beyond saying it is based on Warranty Direct data.  What is the chance of such a repair occurring isn’t considered.

And, then let’s have a pseudo-event – National Oil Check Week 2009 (June 15-19).  Last year this was a day when motorists were urged not to become a “dipstick” – that at least was an amusing use of language.

Awareness weeks and days are such a cliché:

A quick Google search reveals that in the US, it is currently National Rip Current Awareness Week, National Headache Awareness Week, Tire Safety Awareness Week, not forgetting Lead Poisoning Awareness Week in Ohio (not to be confused with the International event later in the year).  And, it is National E-Security Week in Australia.

Then we have the whole series of “take your something to work” days – dogs, daughters (and sons, or child) – or we’re urged to celebrate Secretaries’ Day (sorry – that’s been rebranded for administrative professionals) and numerous other opportunities to buy a card or promote a product.

Maybe there is no harm in all these non-news activities – and in some cases, an issue is raised onto the public agenda.  But, it seems a lazy and trivial way to address a safety or health-related issue – and yet another annoying piece of clutter when used simply for promotional purposes.

Check out the list on Holidays for Everyday – how much effort is spent on trying to “create awareness” around all these pseudo-events?

And in case you’re interested – today is Ballpoint Pen day.

Should PR terminate text books?

As governor of California, Arnie Schwarzenegger announces plans to replace traditional school textbooks in favour of “digital learning aids” – should PR follow suit?

On the one hand, I think this is a good idea – if it means tutors creating a series of digital resources, a playlist, of interesting and useful information from a wide variety of sources. 

Traditional textbooks are wasteful – should students seriously read these from front to back, or is their use more in terms of drawing out specific information and chapters? 

Looking at a PR textbook, such as Tench & Yeoman’s edited “Exploring Public Relations” – you’ll find primarily a collection of concepts, theories and case studies drawn from a wide range of original and other edited sources. 

For tutors and students it is highly useful that the individual chapter authors have collated this information to give a solid introduction and understanding of relevant PR topics. 

I take a similar approach in putting together my Greenbanana study materials – but I am planning to make this resource work online better.  Using an interactive ebook format, I would like to add links to original and supplementary reading, video, podcasts, presentations, case studies, exercises, discussion forums, assignments and so on. 

Even having standard textbooks available in digital format has advantages such as searchability (no book contents list or index is every truly comprehensive) and portability (with an eReader you could store thousands of books).

But there are downsides – firstly a Google approach to studying is disjointed and takes information out of context.  It is a “cut and paste” approach to learning. 

Without reading an entire chapter, paper or book, you can miss the point that an author is making.  I recently marked exam papers where one question gave a quote from Jacquie L’Etang regarding PR as an “ethical guardian”. Because few students had read the original work, most reported that the author proposed this concept, where she was actually questioning and critiquing it.

Also, “digital learning aids” may be of mixed quality – much of what can be found online lacks consideration, robust evidence or the benefit of an editor to review, check sources and remove errors.

Humans also need downtime from the technology and using printed sources is a good way of doing this.  You can read a book anywhere and rather than “cut and paste”, you are encouraged to think more when reading – whether that is stopping to reflect, or simply copying out or making notes.

You cannot use eReaders or computers everywhere – and they inevitably experience technical problems.  They also lack the tangibility and permanence of books.  In George Orwell’s classic 1984, Winston Smith’s job involved rewriting historical documents to match the current official viewpoint (which changed daily).  With digital technology it is easy for information to be rewritten – and that is useful to avoid out of date facts.  But, a lot can be learned from how opinion and what was once fact changes over time – will we be able to access this when earlier editions are routinely deleted?

There are lots more arguments in favour of going digital – and more against. 

I have hundreds of PR books – which I find a pleasure to own, but also a nuisance as they take up space and are hard to reference.

As a tutor, I would love more of my students, especially the undergraduates, to read textbooks.  They are so lucky to have access to a University library – but they also can use ejournals bringing a lifetime of sources to their computer screen.

A world without books would be a poorer place

Can a Kindle or iPod engage a child at bedtime in the same way as a classic book read aloud by a parent or a picture book the child learns to read by themselves?

Would I feel the same about inheriting a “digital learning aid” as I do about my grandfather’s leather bound books, which he saved up to buy over years?  Or my mum’s 1950s schoolbook which has her name carefully written inside the front cover?

PR probably can do without textbooks – but would what we gain be greater than what we lose? 

Technorati Tags: Books,public relations,Arnie Schwarzenegger,eReader,world without books

Should PR students choose between skills and knowledge?

What’s the point of a qualification in public relations?  It seems that many practitioners still believe that learning practical skills on the job is all you need.  PR Week in the UK has just run its annual end of term report questioning the value of a PR degree, and citing those luddites who favour non-PR graduates.

The truth is that to be successful in life (not just PR), you should understand why you are doing things, not simply have “how to do it” competencies.  That’s accepted in other areas – from the traditional professions of medicine and law, to skills based occupations such as plumbing and being a pilot.

Why do many in PR continue to celebrate ignorance and treat the work as little different to working on the checkout of a supermarket in theoretical underpinnings?  What’s to be proud of in thinking anyone can do your job? 

Of course, some PR graduates may not be able to apply the knowledge that they’ve studied and need to work on improving their skills.  But it is ridiculous to criticise the value of PR degrees on the basis that graduates lack practical experience – indeed, many have undertaken vocational experience as part of their studies.

No-one is completely competent in everything when they start their careers – or when they encounter new areas (such as social media).  So working in PR should be about lifelong learning – and that means those practitioners who have practical experience considering the value of substantiating this by improving their knowledge of underlying principles.  That’s what the many successful students of the CIPR qualifications are doing.

It seems terrible to me that many in PR are content to keep doing what they’ve always done – and never bothering to read a book or improve their knowledge or competencies.  Learning on the job doesn’t necessarily mean doing things right – look at the ongoing criticisms of many PR practices. 

I’ve worked in and around PR for over 20 years – and I’ve been involved in the academic side for the last decade.   But I continue to seek to improve my skills and also my knowledge – I don’t see these as mutually exclusive nor something that is only for juniors.

As Malcolm Forbes is quoted as saying: The dumbest people I know are those who know it all.

At least the PR graduates that I’ve worked with are willing to learn – unlike those who seem year after year to trot out the lazy criticisms of PR degrees.

Technorati Tags: Public relations,degree,graduate,skills,knowledge