Our Blog

New Media Needs Strategy, Too

Thu, 20 Aug 2009 14:56:43 -0400

The following OP-Ed by me was posted on PR Week today.

As I monitor the buzz around new media it troubles me that so many people are jumping into the tactics new technology brings with little regard to strategy. What do we expect these new channels to deliver and how do they fit into our overall plans to manage our brands and their reputations?
I propose that we consider a new template for how we build a communications plan, one that is driven by a clear objective and sound strategies, which then define the tactics, be they in new or traditional media.
The traditional planning model includes: An Objective, Strategies, Audiences, Key Messages, Tactics and Measurement
Today’s world with its new and developing communications channels, no longer fits so neatly into this model. Communications has become more interactive. We need a new planning model that will allow us to keep the strongest pieces of the old, such as strategy, and marry it to the best of the new, like having authentic conversations that foster communities of people who respect and trust each other.
I have devised a planning template for our new world. While it might not be perfect, yet, I believe it is directionally on target and provides our profession the freedom to think with a new strategic focus.
Outcomes are a much clearer statement of what you want to have happen. In education, it is a clear statement of what a student should learn in a specific course.
Strategies are critical and should remain the same as the traditional template; a broad scale approach for how you plan to achieve the outcomes.
Engagement replaces both audiences and key messages. It is further broken into three subsections:
Themes: Gone are the days that we can communicate credibly in carefully worded sound bites that often require excruciating debate with legal teams. Themes also are the foundation of good story telling that capture people’s imagination and interest.
Conversations. Themes allow us to have genuine, authentic conversations with the people we are trying to reach. If we know the theme we want to communicate, we have the freedom to speak with our audiences, not at them. Ultimately, these conversations make up a good part of what we call tactics today.
Communities: These are groups of people with shared interests, including interests in our companies, brands or causes. Communities of people communicate with each other, not at each other.
Results replace Measurement. Results take us back to the beginning of this new template to “Outcomes,” which are the results you wanted to happen.

More Thoughts on a New Model

Wed, 29 Jul 2009 14:52:00 -0400

Thank you all for the comments on my June 16th blog about, “A New Model for a New World.”

The response shows me that we just might be on to something here. Some of my former employees and former students wrote to tell me they are implementing the model in their work and seeing that it can make a difference. One former student even told me it helped her to land a job.

After speaking with many of you and doing more thinking, I have updated the model a bit, especially under the last point about results. Just as the June 16th model proposed sub-points for engagement, results may need the same treatment.

So, here is the revised model:

Outcomes
Strategies
Engagement
Themes
Conversations
Communities
Results
Opinion
Attitude
Perception
Behavior

First, a word about tactics, which appears to be missing in this new model. I believe that tactics are conversations. After all, we are in the business of influencing opinions and behavior via communications ... or conversations. Those conversations happen in a variety of communications channels such as a website, a blog, an article in traditional media even via a special event. So, as I see it, tactics would be spelled out in the conversations section of a plan.

Results, you will recall, replaces “measurement” in the traditional model. Our profession has suffered the measurement dilemma for too long. We are not like other disciplines and we need to provide the leadership on how to determine success in our field. Not everything we do can be measured so readily as other professions. Sometimes, what does not happen, such as a potentially bad article not appearing, is the result we are seeking. The impact of a killed article is not easily measured.

If we set our sites on outcomes, which is a term used in education to determine what results you want a student to achieve, we should then pay off the cycle with a description of results.

As true communicators, our results are the influence we have on the people we are trying to reach. Did they change their opinion, attitude, perception and did they they act in manner consistent with the outcomes we were trying to achieve?

Focusing on articles, even trying to evaluate if the article was negative or positive, stops far short of the real goal ... what the audience thinks and does. Today, the average person is more educated than ever. The fallacy we make in just focusing on column inches is that the average person does not just blindly absorb and believe everything they hear or read. They filter that information through their own thoughts and form their own opinion. That opinion then has the greatest influence on their behavior, not the angle of a story.

We need to focus on what people think. Just because a negative article appears does not mean that public opinion has gone the same way. I have seen numerous cases in my career where negative press did not equal negative public opinion. United Airlines, for example, had two fatal accidents five months apart in 1989. One would assume their public opinion suffered. Not so, according to the research we conducted. Public opinion following both accidents along the lines of “It was surprising it was United Airlines. They are such a safe airline.” Further, in both cases United saw zero decline in its traffic and advance bookings, the first time that had ever happened following a major airline accident. (See my case history on this site for more details about how that happened.)

This model may or may not be right. The bottom line, however, is still very accurate. Communicators are in a rapidly changing new world and we need a new model ... a new way of thinking about what we are here to achieve.

Your thoughts appreciated, as always.

Rob

A Return to “Normalcy?” What Normalcy?

Wed, 1 Jul 2009 16:41:00 -0400

Speaking with a number of friends inside the corporate world recently, I have learned that there is a growing focus on “A Return to Normalcy,” driven by the slivers of light that some are beginning to see in the economy and the signals that the end to the slow down might be coming as early as this Fall. Corporations, and rightly so, want to be ready for the end of this economic slowdown and many are thinking of using this as a time to prepare their organization for what that means.

The massive layoffs, budget cutbacks, and just plain pain of watching great organizations unable to meet their goals and fulfill their missions, has had an impact on organizations of all types from large corporations, to small family-run businesses to non-profits, governments, and even churches.

We all certainly hope that those little glimmers will lead us to the end of this tunnel and Fall would be great timing. We are all ready to move on.

However, I question the “Return to Normalcy” thinking. My issue is what are we planning to return to? I hope that the end of this tunnel delivers us to a new place, a better place.

Yet, I, for one, have no interest in returning to where we were. If the return to normalcy is measured in terms of getting back to where we were in say 2006, we will have failed and we will risk failing again. With what we have all experienced in the last 18 to 24 months of economic slow down, lay offs, banks that have failed us, etc, we should have learned a lesson that life will not ... cannot be the same.

Instead of focusing on “returning” let’s focus on “redefining,” as in “A Redefinition of Normalcy.” Redefining normalcy in the context of a new order of things makes a lot of sense right now. The world is such a different place in 2009 than it was in 2006, some good, some bad. In the end, now is a time to embrace the good as a measure of defense from repeating the bad.

I have long believed that communications starts with listening and now is a time when communicators should be listening very intently for signs of the new order and the new normalcy. New media and social media have changed how we communicate both inside our organizations as well as with those outside. Some organizations are boldly diving into the new world. Others are still holding back.

Clearly, there is a new order of communications developing. As I noted in my June 26th blog, we are in an era of experimentation where no one has the answers, but there are so many new and exciting tools available to us to make communications even stronger. Those tools can also destroy the fundamentals of good communications, if we are not careful.

The speed at which information travels today, often without regard to the accuracy of the data, is of utmost concern. TMZ announced Michael Jackson’s death six minutes prior to the official time of death as recorded by the coroner on the death certificate. While the fact that he died is not disputed now, it should concern us all that a news outlet would not wait for the official announcement. I wonder if we are heading into an era filled with “Dewey Wins!” headlines and the perils and confusion that speed to get the story might bring.

As the new order of communications develops, I propose that we need a new way of planning and strategizing our communications efforts. (see my June 16th blog). While the template I propose may or may not be the right one, it is that type of redefining and rethinking that should occupy our minds as we anticipate the end of this dark period and await the light.

Clearly, there can be a new normalcy for organizational communications. In fact, that new normalcy is happening on its own. Let’s make sure we are helping to shape it.

I also hope the new Normalcy will see a new and stronger partnership between the non-profit world, which provides so many of the services we need to extend quality of life to all Americans, and the corporate world. As President Obama outlined yesterday, he is hoping for a new order that brings government, non-profits and corporations together stronger than ever before to address the many social problems and opportunities we face.

The Experimenting Era

Fri, 26 Jun 2009 15:28:43 -0400

As we collectively delve into the new world of organizational communications, I am fascinated by the reluctance of corporate communications departments to get into new media.

While I understand much of the arguments and reluctance, especially on the part of corporate legal departments, which are fearful of new media and the “lack of control,” I also understand that we cannot stay where we are or, more accurately, where we were.

I also see that no one person or organization has the answers to the best uses of new media, and that is a good thing. Communicators and the organizations they represent, should be using this time to experiment via calculated risks to see what works for them and what does not. Fear of trying will leave organizations further and further behind with each passing hour.

We are in the midst of perhaps the most exciting era in the history of human communications. I call it the “Experimenting Era.” Clearly, we are still in too much transition to say we are in the era of new media. While that will come soon enough, this transitional phase means that smart organizational communications has its footing in both the traditional media and the new media simultaneously.

The footing in traditional media can operate much as it has in the past. However, new media still needs new thinking and lots of experimenting.

In my June 16, 2009 blog, I propose a new planning model for new media. While this model may or may not be the right one, I see it as a good example of how we need to recalculate our thinking. Let’s not allow the past to restrict us.

As I see it, it is our inability to tear ourselves from the past that is causing the reluctance of today.

There are things that should be maintained. Above all, telling the truth cannot be sacrificed. Telling the truth, primarily thought strict adherence to the facts, is journalism’s hallmark. The new media cannot walk away from this very basic foundation. The god news, despite people’s fears, is that new media communities are already sorting out the truth. In the long run, only those sources who protect the truth and use the facts will survive. The system will police itself, and the truth will prevail.

So, let’s free ourselves and our organizations to experiment with how we will communicate in the future, opening up conversation to a new level that creates more robust communities of people than the world has ever seen, all based on protecting the truth cemented by the facts.

<script type="text/javascript">
var gaJsHost = (("https:" == document.location.protocol) ? "https://ssl." : "http://www.");
document.write(unescape("%3Cscript src='" + gaJsHost + "google-analytics.com/ga.js' type='text/javascript'%3E%3C/script%3E"));
</script>
<script type="text/javascript">
try {
var pageTracker = _gat._getTracker("UA-9656821-1");
pageTracker._trackPageview();
} catch(err) {}</script>

A New Model for a New World

Tue, 16 Jun 2009 12:59:40 -0400

For many years, the Public Relations and Communications profession has used a model template for Communications planning that has stood the test of time ... until now.

With technology rapidly changing the way we communicate with each other and the way organizations communicate with their audiences, now is an interesting time to rethink this template since the words and concepts we use help to define how we relate to the world around us.

I am convinced that no one has figured out the answers to the new communications environment. We are still in an evolutionary period where traditional and new media coexist and where the rules are changing everyday ... every nano second. So, let’s explore how we have been strategizing and how the new media is giving us an opportunity to change. Below is my attempt after careful observation and some experimentation.

The traditional Communications template included six elements:

Objective
Strategies
Audiences
Key Messages
Tactics
Measurement

An objective is what you want to happen. You want people to do something like buy your product or vote for your candidate.

Strategies are the broad scale approaches to how best to accomplish your objective.

Audiences are the people you want to reach, including those who might influence your primary, target audience. The most significant influencers, of course, are the media.

Key Messages are the three to five talking points you believe you need your audience to receive to get them to meet the criteria of your objective.

Tactics then are the actually activities you implement that drive toward your objective.

Measurement, long the bane of the public relations profession is how you determine the success of your communications efforts. Measurement, of course, has been controversial in PR since there are no viable measurement tools yet in the profession.

As I see it, the new world and the new media require a different template, this one consisting of four key elements and three very crucial sub-elements:

Outcomes
Strategies
Engagement
Themes
Conversations
Communities
Results

While one can argue that some of this model might be semantical, I believe the distinctions are important enough to consider.

Outcomes and Objectives are close to being the same, yet the word “outcomes” in game theory, refers to the payoff based on the actions of all players. This more inclusive thought is more reflective of today’s more integrated communications environments where everyone in the communications equation is equal and has a voice, versus the traditional organizational communications model that so often resulted in a uni-directional message, with an inefficient feedback loop.

Strategies are still relevant in new media and, for now, I don’t see them changing. I will however, remain open to evolve, if needed.

Engagement in my view replaces the traditional Audiences and Key Messages. This is the most important difference between traditional and new media and is the area organizational communications has been struggling the most. Engagement has three sub-elements that work together as one.

Themes replace Key Messages. This is where many large organizations struggle the most with new media. The Key Messages of the traditional model were so often finely crafted, exhaustively word smithed, legally scrutinized statements that actually can get in the way of real communications. This is not the way people want to communicate anymore. Using themes, instead, allows you to communicate in the authentic way of the new media that shows respect to your customers, or employees.

Themes also allow you to have real conversations with them, that is a true give and take than culminates in true understanding of each other, which is the true measure of great communication. In a conversation, you can adapt quickly to the needs and understanding of your audience to ensure their needs are met and that they understand your point of view and they understand yours.

Conversations then lead to the development of communities ... that is people who share common interests and hold respect and loyalty for others who belong to or want to belong to that community. This phenomenon is the power behind the social media networks such as My Space, Facebook and Twitter.

Tactics remain similar, but they are folded into engagement. Tactics would be the actual ways you engage your audiences. The new world opens a host of new tactics that we are all still trying to master. Surely, there will be newer ones around the corner and communicators will have to keep their eyes open.

Finally, we come to Results, which is ultimately what happened. I have replaced the traditional Measurement with Results because Results is a more appropriate term that can allow for Measurement, if needed, but can also allow for the multiple benefits of great communications that simply can not be measured.

Results can be expressed in the traditional numeric values of marketing and sales, but it can also be expressed in the verbal story telling of what happened. Story telling, as we have seen across the centuries can actually be far richer and more compelling than the numbers that have become the hallmark of the modern corporate world.

Communications is a human activity that combines both the rational and emotional spheres of our brains. New media, with its grassroots development, is taking us to a new model of human and organizational communications. Let’s open our collective minds to the possibilities of truly effective communications.

I welcome your thoughts.

Rob

<script type="text/javascript">
var gaJsHost = (("https:" == document.location.protocol) ? "https://ssl." : "http://www.");
document.write(unescape("%3Cscript src='" + gaJsHost + "google-analytics.com/ga.js' type='text/javascript'%3E%3C/script%3E"));
</script>
<script type="text/javascript">
try {
var pageTracker = _gat._getTracker("UA-9656821-1");
pageTracker._trackPageview();
} catch(err) {}</script>

ORGANIZATIONAL COMMUNICATIONS 3.0 THE FUTURE OF COMMUNICATIONS

Mon, 15 Jun 2009 23:08:05 -0400

The world of organizational communications is evolving rapidly ...
not only with new technology such as the Internet and wireless communications ... but more importantly how we are already changing the way we communicate and interact with each other.

The days of organizations exerting control over carefully crafted messages is giving way to a more participatory style of communications in which stakeholders expect to engage with an organization, not merely listen to it.   Key Messages are giving way to Themes an organization wants to stand for.

In short, we are moving to “organizational conversations” in which both an organization and its audiences are expected to listen to each other. In reality, we are moving back to the days of conversation, but conversations unlike the world has seen.

This blog ... a conversation in itself ... is dedicated to those new organizational conversations and a better understanding of how they can become more effective for all.

We would love to hear your thoughts.

Click here to link to a page to leave comments.

Rob

<script type="text/javascript">
var gaJsHost = (("https:" == document.location.protocol) ? "https://ssl." : "http://www.");
document.write(unescape("%3Cscript src='" + gaJsHost + "google-analytics.com/ga.js' type='text/javascript'%3E%3C/script%3E"));
</script>
<script type="text/javascript">
try {
var pageTracker = _gat._getTracker("UA-9656821-1");
pageTracker._trackPageview();
} catch(err) {}</script>