Are too many practitioners and PR firms content to be average? As a profession do we have a common failure to use new media, produce dreadful press releases, abuse surveys, lack understanding of bloggers, fail to recognise what makes a good story, habitually lie and abuse case studies?
I’ve found that in blogging about PR it is definitely easier to find examples of the mediocre rather than the brilliant or exceptional. Very little seems to deviate successfully from the norm.
I think such criticisms are wider than PR alone – it is hard to see signs that most people are aspiring to be better than average. But that’s the problem with an average – it is what is common, the norm, the mid-point.
It takes courage and commitment to deliver above average – to exceed expectations, to throw away the book of rules, to just do something else.
The fundamental change – not exclusively for PR practitioners – has to be to strive for higher standards in everything we do. That will, of course, simply shift the average (to be statistically pedantic), but we should seek to stretch the standard deviation away from the arithmetic mean.
Are you happy to cluster closely around the average? Most PR practitioners have the potential to exceed the routine or mundane in their activities. What’s stopping us from being better than the stereotypes of the fluffy PR totty or antagonistic spin doctor? Why are we content that our work reflects so many of the clichéd criticisms?
Does everything have to be average nowadays?