In an internal memo obtained Monday by CNN, Federal Emergency Management Agency chief David Paulison rips the agency's public affairs staff for a staged news conference in which staff members posed questions to FEMA's No. 2 official, Harvey Johnson.
Stowe flags a contender for word (or phrase) of the week: Corporate Journalism.
[...] In conversations with another McKinsey colleague, Tom Hayes, a former NYT reporter, we came up with the term “corporate journalism” to describe what we were doing inside of the Firm: applying classic reporting techniques inside of an organization to determine what, if anything, was “interesting” and deserved attention. That filter, “interesting” is subjective. Through McKinsey’s lens it meant information that could enrich the firm through more client engagements and increase the effectiveness of its consultants.
This takes me back to a phrase that Mark Tolliver used lots when I was at Sun: "evidence based marketing". In short, get rid of all the platitudes and well-worn phrases and start with the evidence - then back into they hype if you must. These two concepts together are powerful - communications, message-making, marketing, the act of business, all should start with investigative rigor and evidence. From there, a fair dose of honesty and transparency is required.
Wholefoods' CEO has turned their blog into one big transparency machine.
This is another example of a broader shift in communications to direct and open dialog. I'd love to see Wholefoods use the blog to mobilize support for their position.
He pulls no punches, providing...
a detailed look into Whole Foods Market's decision-making process regarding the merger, as well as our company's experience interacting with the FTC staff assigned to this merger. I provide explanations of how I think the FTC, to date, has neglected to do its homework appropriately, especially given the statements made regarding prices, quality, and service levels in its complaint. I also provide a glimpse into the bullying tactics used against Whole Foods Market by this taxpayer-funded agency. Finally, I provide answers in my FAQ section to many of the questions that various Team Members have fielded from both the media and company stakeholders.
Wow... As a Wholefoods shareholder I'm thrilled he is doing this. I'd rather know what is going on from his perspective than that of the WSJ which has this to say:
Whole Foods says it will battle the FTC in court, and the case will make for some entertaining jujitsu as Mr. Mackey argues that his stores aren't as unique as his marketing materials suggest, while the FTC pleads that the merger will make Whole Foods less unique and more expensive at the same time. Such are the absurdities of modern antitrust policy.
Make Wholefoods more expensive? Could it be more expensive? Really...
We need the FTC defining markets about as much as we need a hole in head. Maybe FTC employees don't shop and the new Safeway store down the road from my Supermarket, or the Lunardi's across the street. Either way, let consumers vote with their feet - the FTC appears to be operating under the premise that they as a higher intellectual authority know better what to than we do with our pocketbook and feet.
Big speeches require a massive amount of effort.
Good communicators know this and smart executives commit to it.
The Wall Street Journal has a piece this morning on how Bill Gates developed his commencement address for Harvard.
What's intriguing is how committed Bill is to the process - this is rare in an executive.
A couple of observations:
PR DOES WORK. If I look across our marketing mix today it remains strategically important. And of all the vendor - agency relationships, the one with the PR Agency is certainly the most trying and important.
While PR does work, apparently these are the Top 10 Reasons why PR doesn't work - from over at the PRSite. This is a pretty typical list based on pretty unsophisticated clients.
Here are a couple of other reasons that I've seen occur regularly here in the Valley - where the clients can be very sophisticated:
Loving all the spin and swirls of Wag-Ed's memo on "how to handle Fred" being leaked. What's most amusing is the two assumptions that all PR Pros are doing this. Really they aren't. And 6,000 words, don't worry hacks, Execs generally don't read anything exceeding 500 words.
All of this stems from Wired's story on transparency. I also chatted to Fred on the Channel 9 piece. Fred's a terrific journalist and very, very smart. Frank, like Fred, is also a good guy. I'm surprised anyone feels the need to defend this practice or conveniently bundle it under the guise of transparency.
But while I'm on this track, how about every journalist publish all their notes for all of us to read post publication of a story. Tapes become podcasts. Notes loaded into a blog or Wiki. Sources disclosed. Now we're talking transparency.
Chris makes a great point:
By the way, as far as I can tell, everything in the memo is accurate. I also think the executives were very well served by the document; they did indeed stick to their message and they got pretty much the story they wanted. This was also, as it happens, the story I wanted--or was it just the story I thought I wanted because I was so effectively spun by Microsoft's PR machine? The mind reels...
And therein is the rub, when great journalists with good ideas meet willing, prepared participants, terrific stories are generated. I don't mean prepared in a cynical way - I mean in the sense they know what they are meeting about, what the other person wants from the meeting, what the context is, and what the key facts are. From that perspective, the Wag-Ed memo was good. Long, but good...
Sun is on the hunt... "This key member of Sun's Executive Communications team will be responsible for researching and identifying emerging market conversations, working across Sun's Global Communications group to develop discrete proposals, and incubating concepts with members of Sun's leadership team including the CEO and his direct staff." They are a great bunch and this would be a terrific gig if you love communications and technology. Give Noel a bell if you are interested. (noel.hartzell@sun.com)
Alan has an insightful post on the latest Oracle vs. SAP skirmish... Is this just playmaking on Oracle's part or a legitimate case of corporate espionage? Either way, Alan makes a key point that the court of law is different than the court of public opinion...
For SAP, which cultivates a Boy Scout brand, this presents the ongoing problem of whether and how to respond to yet another Oracle gambit, not simply in the court of law, but in the court of public opinion. If it deigns to play ball, it will hedge its "Rise Above" philosopy (a little different than Oracle's), stooping to its competitor's aggressive play-calling as it recalls for the marketplace that, c'mon folks, Oracle's the dirty one here. Whether it does this directly or through surrogates, the reminder that Oracle is a media-convicted trash-sorting secret-stealer will be run by way of simple Mirrors, plays that expose the truth, or Recasts, plays that spin the truth. But that, of course, will put one SAP foot into a well-laid trap because it will allow Oracle to run its own Mirrors on SAP's possible new penchant for pinching private data.
In the era of three letter acronyms - many of which have spawned billion dollar industries - it turns out that reputation is a critical motivator for investments in IT, legal and compliance.
One of these acronyms is PCI - the Payment Card Industry Standard. In short, if you are a retailer or merchant processing credit or debit cards, you need to comply or get fined. But the real motivator is loss of reputation. As Michael says:
PCI is good, strong, it has the right ideas and motives, but it doesn’t cost enough to ignore. £500,000 isn’t enough for a big push, or even the big publicity to generate more talk around a big push. The loss of brand reputation absolutely is.
Just look at the TJMax case. The reputational damage is now in the extreme and a major communications issue. I wonder how many communications teams are working with the IT teams on crisis planning related to IT compliance? If not, get going...
Great story in AdAge this morning on P&G moving to dialogue-driven communications. They get that it's no longer about "telling and selling".
Procter & Gamble's Jim Stengel described a major cultural shift that is turning the world's largest marketer into a starter of conversations and a solver of consumers' problems rather than a one-way communicator. "It's not about telling and selling," said the chief marketing officer of the company that once lived by that simple mantra. "It's about bringing a relationship mindset to everything we do."
Too often the focus is on a "digital or nothing" strategy - with an emphasis on moving into the interactive realms. Stengel is right that the imperative needs to be different: "the need for brands to be authentic, trustworthy and generous".
And I like this view: "Market share is trust materialized."
Haven't been blogging much later - just very busy and on the road in Europe for a week with customers and partners.
Interesting pointer from Stowe to an interview by Paul Dunay with Jack Welch about corporate blogging. Jack's advice? Be authentic.
[from Buzz Marketing for Technology: EXCLUSIVE: Jack Welch Discussing Web 2.0 by Paul Dunay]Buzz Marketing: So what is your advice for companies adopting new Web 2.0 technologies like RSS, social networking, podcasting and videocasting?
Jack: Just be authentic. Be clear in your vision, and have one message and one view that are authentic. I worked somewhere once where they had different messages for employees, analysts and the press. There should be only one message for everyone, and fight like hell to get that message across everywhere you go.
I was asked some similar questions on corporate blogging (which I've always thought was a bit of an oxymoron).
Second. Just do it. Get going internally and let it evolve. If you get it, get going. Don’t spend hours on consulting fees or hanging with PR people, web teams and lawyers. The technology is available as a utility. A blog can be created in minutes.
Third. The rewards significantly outweigh the risks. But the biggest rewards come not from writing blog posts but rather the comments and resulting dialogue. You shouldn’t look at this as a publishing mechanism but rather a “conversation machine”.
Other tips:
- There are no corporate bloggers – there are just bloggers. Be real. Be authentic.
- Blogging is a conversation. You need to move from transmitting to participating.
- You don’t need a blog to be blogging. Start contributing to others blogs with comments and thoughts.
- Never, never, never spin, lie or pour smoke into the blogosphere. Straight-talk will win you kudos.
- Give it time. Don’t expect raving fans at day one. In fact, expect the opposite for a bit. The blogosphere is very critical and self-correcting. Take feedback and tune accordingly.
- Have fun. This is a relatively informal medium. Revel in it.
Thoughts... Comments...
Yeah! This is something I've been trumpeting for years. It's time agencies threw out timesheets and focused on the value they bring to their clients. You don't measure value in minutes or buckets of clips, but rather in terms of ideas.
Crispin Porter & Bogusky's bold deal with Haggar, struck last year, in which the agency took an equity stake as part of its compensation, stood out as a rare exception from the sad status quo of agencies selling ideas as if they were pork bellies to be traded by the ton. "We're in the intellectual-property business," Crispin's Jeff Hicks said at the time. "We don't sell time."
Ok, I get the value of time sheets in terms of measuring productivity and time spent on a clients business. But why over-emphasize it? Why not focus your talent on what really matters - Ideas!
PR agencies are going to once again have to follow the lead of ad agencies (I fear) on this one - especially as communications continues to be transformed around content and participatory communications:
Agencies' moves into content creation -- such as Bartle Bogle Hegarty, New York's co-production last year of an MTV special that's set to become a TV show -- is another factor for rethinking traditional labor-based compensation models. Agencies might share syndication revenue or retain rights to creative content. When Crispin created a video game for Burger King, it was paid a fee in addition to what it is paid to create advertising, one executive said, although the agency does not receive a percentage of sales.
Update: My wife and Jesse inspired me to add to this post.
I bounced this off my wife last night and she made a very good point. What about all the tactical work that goes on inside a communications agency? Like it or not, lots of work that agencies do relates to block-and-tackle communications and not just the big idea. How do we charge for that? In this respect, counting the hours might make more sense.
So perhaps what we need is an overlay - where agencies can build and participate in the upside of idea generation (and by default the downside). Reflecting on this, perhaps what we need is more blended models rather than the one-size-fits-all model of today. I believe today's model kills "ideation" as an activity by confining it to the scope of billable hours. It also has the effect of nuking what I call "idea entrepreneurship" - the creation of ideas that transform business models and models.
Central to the tenet of "idea entrepreneurship" is that agencies co-invest with clients - they put up the hours and nouse, the client contributes products, services etc. The only agency I know of that is doing this today is Arnell Group. Measurement gets easy in when "idea entrepreneurship" is at play. Great ideas = Great dollars.
They are paid to post on a blog other than their own. They then become a freelance writer, journalist, hack, whatever you want to call them.
The move by CNet and others to pay bloggers based on page views is no different than previous payment terms - such as words or stories - made to journalists, so, why call bloggers anything other than that? All that has changed is that the payment is more aligned with the reader/viewers interest level.
Further, the move is likely to continue to blur the lines between the independent publication and there so called independent bloggers. Take Information Week whose vendor blogger blogs away in a very self interested fashion only then to be named by the same publication as "one to watch" in the coming year in a full page spread. Self serving? Self interested? Biased? Yep - all of the above. And not an ounce of disclosure or transparency by either party.
As Steve suggests, this should raise an eyebrow - more than an eyebrow. But is very different than bloggers pimping products in post. It is far more subtle than that.
I initially misread a post by Mitch Ratcliffe, taking it (below) to suggest that if we don't pay bloggers in the same way as journalists their posts don't have to be informative or accurate? That isn't what he meant as his comments suggest.:
"at ZD Net bloggers are compensated based on the number of page views they receive and a fraction of the pages in TalkBack, so at the end of the month the size of a check expresses something, but not necessarily our success in being informative or accurate."
I do think though that publications are attaching the mantle of blogger to paid writers and thereby opting out of any sense of integrity that applies to the masthead. Mitch is making an equally important but different point that popularity doesn't correlate to accuracy - anywhere.
This has been going on for sometime, and pointed to by Tom Formenski and others - so Steve's revelation isn't so much that as a rehash. Either way, it's worth flagging as the standards we expect of publications are increasingly compromised and new means of bloggers generating revenue come to fruition.
Nick makes a good point that businesses and workers tailor what they do in response to economic incentives - a shift in the way publishers and journalists make money means a shift in what gets published. But the message also makes the medium. And once fiercely independent online media are being transformed.
Giving free Acer notebooks to bloggers is a classic misstep by Microsoft - not only does it reak of impropriety, it also shows a clear lack of savvy in dealing with the blogosphere.
Equally, accepting free notebooks from Microsoft is the wrong move for bloggers to take. Keep them and you have zero credibility without disclosing clear as day that the machine you are evaluating it on is worth a tidy $2,200 and Microsoft gave it to you free. Even then, I doubt you'll have much credibility.
Send them back and request a site from which you can download Vista and test it out on your current system. Lets see if Microsoft has enough confidence in it's own products to do just that.
The argument that this is just a product reviews program is garbage. Bloggers aren't professional reviewers - our strength and value is that we aren't. And if it was, the systems would have been delivered with the expectation that they would be returned.
No ethical journalist would ever take a free notebook from Microsoft. Neither should any ethical blogger.
I know plenty of great people at TelstraClear in NZ. Their comms team must be spinning in circles this morning after the CEO's Christmas email to employees leaked to the media. Full of motivational beauties like:
"Oh yes, we lack the killer instinct - we are too tame, too lame, and too timid to call ourselves a challenger.
"A challenger winds their opposition, kicks them down to the ground, and then makes them bleed like something from a Quentin Tarantino movie and then finishes them off - fast.
"In comparison, we are like a Walt Disney Bambi character. We are not Uma Thurman in Kill Bill, we are more like Captain Feathersword in The Wiggles, all bluster and no action."
And
Right now, we are on a trajectory to disaster ... we are being out-marketed, out-smarted and out-gunned in the marketplace. We are too slow in reacting and we lack the killer instinct," Freeth said in the message, first published by Australia's Communications Day.
Freeth said their parent, Australia's Telstra, was expecting the $14.8 million profit and that at some point in the next few weeks he would have to inform chief executive Sol Trujillo TelstraClear would not hit the target.
"Two weeks ago, Sol's parting comments to me were he feeds those who feed themselves. Well, based on our current forecast, we will be anorexic and starving by the end of this financial year," said Freeth.
There will be a few employees that this actually does motivate. But one of the key communications rules for any CEO is that when broadcasting, you are communicating to all employees. There is a fine line between straight-talk and inflamatory negativity. And, context is everything - did they forget Christmas all together?
Link to 'We're on track to disaster - enjoy Xmas', says Freeth - 22 Dec 2006 - Business
Mike has some good thoughts on dealing with Industry Analysts. Also points to some other thoughts. Worth listening to.
Kerry continues to miss the point of effective messaging.
As a combat veteran, I want to make it clear to anyone in uniform and to their loved ones: my poorly stated joke at a rally was not about, and never intended to refer to any troop [sic].
I sincerely regret that my words were misinterpreted to wrongly imply anything negative about those in uniform, and I personally apologize to any service member, family member, or American who was offended.
It is clear the Republican Party would rather talk about anything but their failed security policy. I don't want my verbal slip to be a diversion from the real issues. I will continue to fight for a change of course to provide real security for our country, and a winning strategy for our troops.
Translated this reads along the lines of:
How hard is it to say "I'm sorry". As in, "I'm sorry for harping on about this but it's such a great example of bad communications followed by bad messaging and irresponsible leadership".
Less than two years after acquiring Butler Group, Datamonitor plans on buying Ovum. Four months ago Ovum bought Summit Strategies.
Alan Kelly went to ground for a year or so and is now back with what looks to be a terrific book on "Playmaking". Looks like this seasons 'must read' for communicators.
You run plays. Plays are run on you. Every organization and every person runs plays to increase their relative competitive advantage in busy marketplaces. Some do it well. Some try to avoid it. Some do it directly. Some use surrogates. Some run one play at a time. Some run many simultaneously. Almost all do so on instinct but fewer with the support of stated objectives, policies and augmenting research.
You can read more on his site "The Playmakers Standard". Or download the intro and sample chapter. I'll post a review once I get my copy.
Paul Holmes is in Delhi this week for the ICCO (International Communications Consultancy Organisation) World Summit, which has brought together some senior public relations people from around the world to discuss "next practices." His posts are absolutely worth reading. Some of the highlights so far:
Go read and subscribe to The Holmes Report - money well spent.
According to CNet.
In a blog entry on Monday, Schwartz ponders why public companies like his must issue paper-based press releases or stage "anachronistic" telephonic conference calls every time they want to reveal information considered material to their financial performance. (He made a similar plea last year.)
"I would argue that none of those routes are as accessible to the general public as a this blog, or Sun's web site," Schwartz wrote.
Link to Sun CEO wants SEC's blog blessing | News.blog | CNET News.com
Lee Gomes on the use of the word Breakthrough in press releases. There are plenty of other common phrases. Like "leading" - if everyone is leading then who isn't? A simple and imperfect Google search on 'press release leading' resulted in 92,700,999 results...
All companies, but especially those in technology, like few things better than to talk about their "breakthroughs," those great leaps forward that make products out of the formerly impossible. A search by Factiva Consulting Services found that more than 8,600 press releases have been issued over the years with "breakthrough" in the headline, a majority of them by computer and electronics companies.
Our laziness in crafting news releases isn't just tiresome, to Lee's point, it perverts the very language we depend on for our trade.
Source: Portals - WSJ.com
This time it is Aberdeen getting gobbled-up by marketing firm Harte-Hanks. Aberdeen Group will remain as a separate operating unit and keep the Aberdeen Group’s fact-based research brand. Aberdeen have been long regarded the most, well, vendor-friendly of the analyst firms so this is probably a good fit.
Paul covers the acquisition of Financial Dynamics by management consulting firm FTI last week. He's beaten me to the punch on several thoughts I had on reading this in the FT:
Here is what Paul had to say in The Holmes Report:
Nevertheless, the possibility that other management consulting or professional service firms might take an interest in public relations consultancies—particularly those at the high value-added end of the business—is intriguing, and many PR agency principals believe their firms have more in common with the consulting business than they do with the advertising business, which traditionally has been the biggest buyer of public relations agencies. Charles Watson, chief executive of FD, says financial PR has more in common with consulting than with the advertising agency businesses and predicted that there could be “other similar transactions to come. There is a growing recognition on the part of the consulting business that reputation and risk management and communications are becoming more important issues for their clients at the CEO level.”
Mike Rothman points to continuing consolidation in analyst land as Yankee starts to flex its muscles on the back of activity from Ovum. This also reflects the continued bifurcation of the analyst market - "Big Gorillas" offering packaged insight and events vs. "Nimble Nats" offering strategic insight, commentary and thinking. Given that the "Nimble Nats" are very content and market centric I also wonder if they wont be targeted by the media companies (CMP, CNET) for acquisition or at least strategic partnerships.
Steve Rubel, (MicroPersuasion, Edelman) and I are doing a web cast at the invitation of PR Week on Thursday, September 28. Details below. Nonsubscribers can register, by the way.
Everyone is talking about new media channels such as blogs and podcasts. But what does this reality mean for the future of PR and communications? PRWeek is convening a Web cast to discuss critical issues in the ever-changing new media landscape. Moderated by Keith O’Brien, PRWeek news editor and editor of prweek.com.
Adfreak covers what is one of the weirdest law suits in recent weeks?
Kitson, a Hollywood fashion boutique... claims that Us Weekly has caused the store harm by refusing to give it any publicity lately. Kitson is “favored by young celebs such as Lindsay Lohan, Paris Hilton and Denise Richards,” so it’s the sort of place the celeb-centric press tends to publicize endlessly. Indeed, Us Weekly used to do so, notes the article in the Los Angeles Times. But now, says Kitson’s owner, a falling out with the boutique has prompted the magazine to avoid any mention of it. And this systematic shunning “is costing the store $10,000 per week,” the suit alleges. If the boutique’s legal action is successful, will it establish a right for places like Kitson to get tons of ink in venues like Us Weekly? Stranger things have happened, though not many.
"Systematic shunning"? Isn't that something PR people deal with every day?
Tom highlights how the cascade of influence is changing - using the LonelyGirl15 (LG15) story. Turns out that LonelyGirl15 (LG15) is in fact and aspiring NZ actress - and - that the videos were anything but amateur.
The first parts of the story were published in online sites, then came the major newspapers: New York Times, Chicago Tribune, LA Times with their coverage. Their stories then helped spark the interest of TV and radio news crews.
The LG15 story is not an important story in itself, but it is an important news story. This is not a contradiction, it is a description of its place in our culture.
The LG15 story shows how the media functions, how they influence each other. It shows how the media networks: blogger, citizen, mainstream, and anything in-between -- push/pull news stories up into the broader mediasphere.
To get into the broader mediasphere, it seems news stories often have to make it into flagship publications of journalist rigor, such as the New York Times, Chicago Tribune, LA Times, the Wall Street Journal, and The Times (London.)
Tom says it well in an earlier post.
Yes, the subject matter of this story was not about anything that matters that much. But imagine this same type of cooperation on really important stories--that's what excites me.
There is always intense competition to be first with a story--but that is good. And it is complimentary competition rather than adversarial. There is no such thing as bloggers versus mainstream media.
This is the media model for the future: a mediasphere that uses the best qualities of professional media combined with relentless pursuit of information by citizen journalists. That's a potent formula that bodes well for our society, IMHO
Just in case you thought Sun and Dell were smoking something with all their Green messaging, take a read of this piece in Computerworld. In fact, Green is the new black when it comes to messaging. Take a look at the messaging leadership that GE is demonstrating.
In fact, GE is one of the few to extend it across to a brand play ("ecoimagination") while maintaining a degree of authenticity. Sun on the other hand is really doing a great job of attaching the product to tangible benefits - like energy rebates - and product branding - "cool threads".
What is going on here is interesting. Recognizing the very tangible commercial advantage of messaging green, companies like Sun, GE and Dell are moving beyond messaging as hyperbole and into making the message very real. The stand to gain from the mantra of "live the message and prosper".
Paul highlights the blog behind the phone. This is a terrific example of a PR blog. Like Paul, the transparency here is great. It describes the program and highlights their intent. Love the links etc. Great work by H&K.
The blog is definitely a "blogvertisement" or PR blog ("Prlog") that uses blog features to promote the phone. What is missing here is community activation (as far as I can tell) - that is, activating the community of early "chocolate phone" adopters by providing them with a platform on which to engage and participate. It also doesn't link to citizen recommendations on the product.
That said, it's a great example of what it is and not ashamed to be that. It does highlight - in case anyone was confused - that their is a difference between commercial and marketing blogs and citizen blogs.
Some classic quotes here... Including a range of Bush gems...
Apple is enjoying a little first mover PR advantage with its pricing comparisons to Dell. First mover advantage is something that has been both promoted and discounted, but in the PR wars it's worth lots - especially when your foe doesn't move quickly (real-time) to counter the noise.
What I think people are missing here is that Dell's model is geared to moving prices in a competitive way. I'm not sure Apple's is as aggressively geared. They're a smart bunch down in Austin - watch what happens next with Dell Pricing... If there is one things I have learned - competing with Dell on price is a fools errand.
I've been watching Apple's announcements of the past week with keen interest (esp as I just installed a mini mac at home with Sonos). As someone who lives on both the Mac and Windows I care less and less about the operating system. Apple's is lovely and reliable - I would argue better. Windows is annoying and ugly - but fast and supports a plethora of software that I have no choice but to need (Internet Explorer) and some that I prefer (Outlook, Office, Powerpoint). Pogue does a better job than me on all of this.
So long as Microsoft and Dell have that advantage I'll keep buying their products - first mover advantage or no first mover advantage. So long as Apple has its advantage, I'll keep buying theirs. And so long as my employer keeps buying at least one of these systems, I'm stuck with that as well.
Which leads me - very circuitously - to my main point. The future won't be about who is better but rather who can tie it all together - and from that standpoint Apple is off to a good start... I'm going to want the best of both worlds on one system.
And oh, those Dell guys, they'll be in the middle of this as well, you wait and see.
Great page on the New PR Wiki on astroturfing.
Good wrap on press release optimization (or press release SEO) for search. And more here on search.
Tim has a great post on the multitude of start-ups with $10,000 to spend on a PR agency. OK, I'm one of them. It just seemed like such a nice round number to start with. Somehow it's crept-up a little bit though... Must fix that...
Tim is right (he is right on most things)... we all want PR pros. But I don't want $15,000 dollars worth of service. I don't even know what that is!
I want results. I don't care what it costs or whether an agency has to under or over service to deliver it. I just want results against the agreed budget. You commit, I commit, we all commit together.
What is more troubling to me as a Valley CMO is:
1) finding a great agency is bloody hard work. They are few and far between. At any billing rate. Few CMOs I know get the value of PR or AR, let alone the value of a good agency... I accept we are part of the problem, but...
2) finding an agency that gets your business and has a real enthusiasm for contributing to the growth of the business - harder still
3) finding an agency that understands that great ideas get funded - near impossible. They are caught in the conundrum or belief that ideas require budget prior to being generated. Bullshit. (and I am talking about real ideas, not those regurgitated from the last pitch)
4) finding a team that can explain why they should get paid more and then associate some kind of outcome with the result - well, if you find them, let me know. The most common justification - "we've been over servicing your business for six months now, you need to pay us more" - is nuts. Nuts!
5) finding an agency - the word is a bit of an oxymoron. It implies some kind of powerhouse of ideas and execution - the strength of a team. What you generally end-up funding is one very dedicated individual surrounded by some other folks - generally you aren't quite sure what they are doing but they all arrive for meetings and scribble madly into notebooks.
What is needed is a new kind of agency. One not built on billable hours and 10k budgets. Maybe one built on the power of ideas to drive a startup's growth curve? One with the courage and conviction to articulate a value proposition that resonates with the CMO of a start-up and ability to explain what the budget should be.
You see, we live less in the conceptual world of brand and reputation and more in the real world of qualified opportunities, pipeline growth and time to sale.
Until then, 10k sounds like a nice round number to start with. Agencies shouldn't let it end there. We will pay more. And I am willing to put my money where my mouth is.
Dave Senay is the new President CEO! I worked with Dave for many years and am deeply indebted to John Graham and him for the support and counsel they provided to me over the years. The two of them represent everything any employee or client could wish for out of a leader.
Congrats also to Paul Johnson who is the new Vice Chairman of Worldwide Growth and President of Public Affairs.
This is a long and widely anticipated move by FH - and its the right move for them to make. John Graham remains, in my mind, the greatest agency leader we have seen in the past 60 years - what they have achieved at Fleishman is remarkable.
disclosure:: I was a Fleishman senior VP and partner for many years and Kristen is a partner there today.
Dell is out of the gate with a corporate blog... Like every corporate blog it is looking for a voice and will probably take time to find one. It's a little corporatey - but then its a corporate blog. The bloggerati just need to get over every blog coming out the gate reading like a conversation at the local pub and not rehashing the past trials and tribulations of bloggers. It takes time for a corporate blog to find its collective voice.
Perhaps the best thing we could do to welcome a new corporate blog isn't to critique it (just yet) but rather to participate. Engage them if you are interested. Give it time to settle and grow and nurture it with comments.
PRWeek says they are out to tell a story - if the story is - as it seems to be - "take a look at our really hot boxes" - then I hope they continue down the path of more recent posts which do seem to have more of a narrative.
The fact that they don't address past issues doesn't really bother me - I really could care less about the ranting and raving about Dell customer service - I use an Apple and a Sony... :-)
Anyway - I have a long history with Dell and am a big fan - it's great to see them taking steps in the right direction with regard to their communication. A company that has direct at its core should be engaging in conversations. The do to the tune of about 3 million calls a day so why not here!
Been on the road over the last week visiting partners, customers, more customers and speaking at the PRSA technology conference in New York City. Thanks to Eric over at iPressroom for the invite. Also managed to catch-up with a few of my team that are now ex-Nortel. Was great to see them doing so well.
I'm not sure why I don't post as much while on the road - no reason other than the frantic pace of running between this airport and that. Here are a couple of posts that I enjoyed along the way...
On the flight home this all got me to thinking that we are in an age in which a power shift is occurring from specifiers to recommenders. Specifiers speak from a position of authority and exclusivity. Recommenders speak from a position of experience and participation. I picked-up a copy of PC Magazine - it is getting pretty thin. Once the power specifier in the consumer tech space it really is little more than a catalog. If I really want reviews and insight, I head to Cnet, Engadget, Amazon, Gizmodo... I look at what real users are saying and rating. I read the informed opinions of Redmonk and Alex. Then I filter.
(For those looking for my presentation slides, I'll post them tonight).
Ouch... quite a story from Jon Udell. BTW, InfoWorld's use of tags is neat...
I've just been working my way through a stack of emails for a range of positions we have open here at LogLogic. It got me thinking that I could probably help all you job seekers out with a few pointers on the things that drive us nuts:
As I said, this stuff drives us nuts. We will take the time to look at your resume despite what seem to be best attempts to cause us not to do so. But at the end of the day you want to be ahead on points before you walk in the door.
Good luck. There are wonderful opportunities out there. Don't start behind the pack with a lousy application.
Maurice Saatchi has a piece in today's FT titled "The strange death of modern advertising". He observes that "At the age of only 50, advertising was cut down in its prime. Advertising holding companies used to boast about their share of the advertising market. Now they are proud of how much of their business is not in advertising. How did this happen?"
It is happening because creativity declined just when it should have exploded. Instead of treating consumers with respect advertisers chose to assault us with and endless tirade of irrelevant and shallow ads. And the media - the medium (for the most part) lost our respect.
He goes on to touch on message clutter. Marketers made this mess for themselves by zig-zagging on messages.
Each brand can only own one word. Each word can only be owned by one brand. Take great care before you pick your word. It is going to be the god of your brand.
Try this simple test on your own company's products or services.
Pick a brand. Any brand.
Maurice offers a pragmatic solution - "one word equity". I couldn't agree more. "In this new business model, companies seek to build one word equity - to define the one characteristic they most want instantly associated with their brand around the world, and then own it. That is one-word equity."
This act of distillation and focus should