Autocar has launched a very interesting award programme for final year University students (including those involved in Public Relations) in association with various sponsors in the motor industry.

I think the chance for any young person to reflect on “the next automotive industry revolution” is fascinating – but the real value is in the opportunity for the six short listed entrants to spend a day with senior decision makers from each of the sponsoring brands.  Shadowing is a brilliant thing to be able to do – to observe and listen how strategic operations work within any organisation is a priceless experience.

One thing that does concern me about this initiative (which is openly stated as being “designed to raise an interest in Haymarket Media Group, publishers of Autocar and Courland Automotive Practice LLP.”), is the timing which appears not to have been determined in consultation with the University sector.

The competition is said to be open to final year University students – but there is no clear explanation of what this actually means.  Is it open only to undergraduates or can post-graduates also apply?  And, as we are in the middle of the Summer vacation (with the closing date being 1 September) – are final years students those who have just graduated or those going back for their final year in 2009/10?

Unfortunately, the timing doesn’t really enable Universities to promote the award to any students who might be interested. 

I’ve often worked with clients who want to undertake educational outreach initiatives – with schools or Universities.  Invariably they do not understand the timings and ways of engaging with such institutions and think that their idea – which generally involves considerable effort for teachers and students to participate – will result in floods of interest.  They are normally lucky to get a handful of entrants without accommodating the needs of the schools/Universities.

I really think the Autocar idea is great – particularly at the current time when encouraging graduates to consider a career in the motor industry is a real challenge despite the great potential that remains in this dynamic sector.

However, it might have been able to fly a little bit more if it had been launched at a different time to suit the students’ calendars and to be clearer about who is eligible to enter.  Nevertheless, if you are eligible, or know anyone who is – do pass on details of where to enter: http://www.autocar.co.uk/News/NewsArticle/AllCars/241202/#

One of the buzz phrases in modern education is “independent learning“, which emphasises that students need to take ownership of how they work towards achieving a qualification and not expect “talk and chalk” teaching.  I am generally in favour of this approach and aim to support students as much as possible.

However, I’m beginning to wonder if many fail to understand that being “independent” isn’t the same as being a consumer.  Some recent experiences make me feel that it is time to reinforce some rules rather than offering choice – to underline that education is about taking responsibility not expecting the right to make demands from those supporting the learning.

For example, we have recently acted on student feedback to accept submission of CIPR assignments by email – this offers a number of benefits to candidates and also helps reduce the cost and time involvement in the assessment process to an extent.  Meeting student needs should be a good thing – evidencing two-way communications.  But there has been a minority response demanding choice – or criticism that the students weren’t advised of this change earlier (it is still over 3 weeks until their deadline) as apparently studying is stressful enough without even minor alterations being made.

Given that this is a professional PR course, I am surprised by such reactions – in the real world, a client or boss is likely to make changes at any time.  Who hasn’t been up half the night re-writing speeches or changing press information prior to an important event?  I also expect most reports and proposals are circulated electronically these days (or should be) rather than being printed, bound and posted. 

We are not offering choice, because that will complicate rather than simplify the assessment process.  Some students might not like this, but the majority do – so the rule has been changed.

Likewise, some students fail to recognise that when it comes to assignments, the real meaning of independent learning becomes evident.  It is not the job of the tutor to determine a student’s topic, do their research or advise on whether they have understood a question correctly.  Where we are allowed, we will provide guidance and tutorial support.  But ultimately, work has to be produced independently by candidates.  In exam conditions, it is clear that you are on your own – the move towards “course work” has perhaps confused this point.

Independence is also important at this stage because the study centre assesses the submissions against the rules and regulations that have been laid down.  We adopt a very professional and independent position in evaluating submissions – students do not have a right to pass, but must demonstrate they have achieved the required level of knowledge, understanding and application – and adhered to the rules.

Increasingly students want to see previous submissions and expect to be able to use this as a model for their work or to benchmark any feedback they are given on their own submission. 

This implies there are “right” answers – but higher education in public relations involves demonstrating independence of thinking, based on independent reading and independent reflection on existing knowledge and practice.  Questions and assignments are intended to be challenging rather than prescriptive – so assessment is subtler than right or wrong, yes or no. 

Even a category such as word count is not a simple “was it or wasn’t it within the allowance?”- as markers are looking at how the limited word count is used in a submission.  Did every word count – or was there waffle in expressing ideas or imbalance in the structure?

Despite the qualitative nature of assessment of such assignments, there is a robust process at work – with first markers (who we ensure are not the candidates’ tutors), internal moderation and review by external examiners appointed by CIPR.  The level of experience and expertise involved is extensive, but not all candidates seem to appreciate this either.

Increasingly, grades awarded and feedback given is challenged – and although it is right that the process can be justified, there is a trend to demand re-marking or expect exact line-by-line breakdown analysis of a submission that is unwarranted.

Sometimes, rules are rules – which might go against the “marketisation” of education.  However, you do not buy, but earn a CIPR qualification.  Students may not like what they are required to do in an assignment – they may find it hard and stressful – but this is the pain, the sweat and tears, that make the qualification worth having at the end.

It is the independence of marking, and the fact that rules are applied, which makes independent study really valuable.  Because when you have passed, you know it is all down to your own hard work. 

Fortunately, the majority of students do appreciate this and are grateful for the support they are given by their tutors, finding feedback informative and ensuring they meet all the requirements specified by assessment.

They know that as tutors we can help and support – but taking ownership and responsibility for studying is what is really valuable for any candidate.  That’s the same in the real world, where those who get on and do what is required – yet demonstrate what real independent thinking can achieve – will succeed, and know they have earned something that money cannot buy.

Reinforcing my belief that now is actually a good time to be starting out in a career in PR, MIPAA JobSearch has been informed of a vacancy for a PR Communications trainee by Nissan Europe to work in its offices in Switzerland.

What is apparent from the recent opportunities that we’ve been asked to promote is the need for young practitioners to think of their careers in international terms – and those who have an additional ability with languages will find this is an asset sought after by future employers.

Even in these first jobs, mention is made of previous experience.  This underlines the importance of placements as part of Undergraduate degree courses – or at the least, looking for opportunities for paid or unpaid experience during vacations.

It is a tough job market out there, but those who are willing and able to enhance their CVs (resume) with practical skills alongside their academic knowledge will find many employers still interested in employing them.

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. 

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. 

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.

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.

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

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%.

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.