Hiring a PR professional? Are you asking these questions?

How many times do you ask these questions when you look for a PR agency?

Public relations agencies of different hue and size may keep pitching with your organization, to get an opportunity to engage with your communication strategy and execution. And we have always seen that organizations just look for these – does your agency have the scale, size and a national/international presence, and would you be able to reach across all (including social) media, in every nook and corner of the world!

There is nothing wrong, and in fact, it’s important to check on what credentials your prospective agency comes with! Well, at the same time, it is important to bear in mind, that the agency must also have the ability and agility to engage in PR strategy and execution of an organization of your kind.

You may hire the best of the agency in the universe, but think about this – is there a point if their strengths do not sync with your company’s scale and strength, and what if their capabilities are more specific to large sized companies, and not for the kind your company is – a niche small organization, yet with its own unique service offerings or qualities.

So why not check for the following few, when you think it’s time for a PR agency.       Does the agency have a history of delivering PR value to companies of your kind, and how often have they done it?

• Do they have the agility – not just in the pitch of theirs, but do they seem to fit your scheme of things – would they find synergy in working with a client like 
• Do they have the kind of commitment to work with companies like you in the medium and long term, so that you eventually get the real benefit of engaging with an agency. Else, if you are just looking for one off bursts of media coverage, the need to spend time analyzing the agency can be done away 
•  Do they have the de-learning skills for adapting to your needs? This is so important. Like it or not, large and global agencies come with a mindset, and even if they are willing to do their best, they may not be if your communication needs are vastly 
• Do they have an understanding of your specific industry needs, and would they be willing to invest the time and energy in gaining insights into your media visibility 
• Are they just a plain vanilla release churning agency? Or do they learn in-depth about you, see what works best for you, and showcase 
• How much more credibility and enhanced image value can they bring to the table (not just across, but over a period of 2 – 3 
• Are they contemporary? Are they social in the true sense? And they in the business of facilitating the journalist world’s news crowd-sourcing 
• In case your needs are local, do they have an insight into what works in that market/geography of yours? Sometimes an easy exercise in one part of the world, may not be even doable elsewhere. And they must be willing to tell this, straight on your 
• Do they speak of practical and doable communication work? Sometimes large agencies are too good at large scale events, which will fetch some visibility burst; but the value that you derive from such exercise is zilch.

So, if you are looking at a PR agency to help you in your long term communication plans, ponder over these questions, and make sure that you understand the dynamics of the value promised.

Rudimentary details a k a information integrity.

What puts off journalist friends most, when you churn out information on behalf of a client, in the form of a press kit or a media release is this – factual errors. 

Might sound so rudimentary, but as a matter of fact such errors creep in while we battle with deadlines, or with over-enthusiasm to send out the release so that we help the journo meet the deadline?

It’s the journalist’s responsibility to check the facts in any story – that said, if you are representing a client, you are the custodian of the facts mentioned in any media information that disseminates from your end.

Factual errors are not the big ones like the client concealing the facts or misrepresenting reality, in a crisis situation. Simple errors like getting the name of the person/product spelt wrong, getting the timeline of events wrong, or just spelling the CEO’s surname wrong – such errors come easily to the notice of the consumer – the reader of the viewer of the news, when and if it finally gets there.

And if it does, at stake is the credibility of the journalist, the media house, and your own client. In most cases, such mistakes creep in, in minor details which we tend to take for granted.

As a PR pro, make sure that the eye for detail is in play, every time, with every client. When you claim to manage reputation of clients, the least expected from you is to ensure information integrity.

Simple yet powerful tips for spokespersons in your organization

The word battle ready might sound ominous, but that is how spokesperson must be always.

There could be a call from anywhere in the globe on something which happened a few minutes ago, and which would have an impact on the company or its fortunes. It’s a viral world and not always does the spokesperson have the luxury of having information by the minute. 

But the ability to respond in an appropriate manner to any query from anywhere is one quality which is a must!

The spokesperson does not have a magic wand to all queries, and it is important to admit that – the best answer when confronted with an uncomfortable or ill-informed query is very simple – give me a while and we will come to you with the facts!

But most times, out of a quest to close the issue, and under pressure of the situation, the response is a bit casual. This is a perfect recipe for inviting negative media, and possibly messing up an already fluid situation.

In case the spokesperson needs any coaching in this front, the organization must provide it time and again.

Most organizations tend to have the belief that spokesperson must be suave and possess extra-ordinary skills in communication, particularly verbal. Yes, this is an added advantage. But that is certainly not a pre-requisite at all. In fact, track some PR crises and how suave spokesperson handled them – you will see that the over-confidence that comes out of being suave and flamboyant brings in a tinge of arrogance – a perfect recipe for many a media disasters!

Facts, put across in simple language with amazing clarity and miles ahead of a suave and ambiguous, arrogant and just too casual remark.

The term spokesperson, in the present scenario, is a misnomer in a way! The spokesperson or your media representative not just has to speak, but to respond in other media – mails, newsletters, and social networks… an endless list this can be. He must be competent in handling all this – yes with speed, but more than speed in a language that is appropriate and publishable to the world!

 Many PR careers have been shunted by usage of inappropriate language, unintended it may be – someone somewhere leaks it out when things go out of the hand! The mantra ought to be state the facts and only facts, in a language that can be scrutinized anytime later.

While speed of response is a paramount criterion, it never can be at the cost of language that reflects an unprofessional attitude!

Sometimes, it does happen that the chief executive himself is the spokesperson – this is mostly when there is a larger than life event, or a huge crisis etc. - whatever be the reason, the past shows that the top management, out of their familiarity with the media, take to a casual approach in handling queries – and this sparks of a full blown PR debacle!

It’s important for senior leadership to take to some caution in handling such situations, and to repeat, facts mist not be colored by style and the way it is delivered!

Hope these simple yet powerful tips help your spokesperson to handle PR situation better this New Year! And as an organization, make sure the needy training is imparted through PR professionals, if it will help!

Beware if your PR guy promises you the moon!

Does you PR advisor tell you this – come what may, we will make sure that we get 
your company covered in the media – in a nutshell, call it a “column cm guarantee”?

Nothing can be far from a blatant lie, and honestly, PR never works that way in any 
part of the globe.


As a matter fact, if you have a long term PR/communication strategy for your company in mind, 
you must quietly stay away from such ‘column space coverage’ guarantors!

Look at the media (and the journalist fraternity) as end consumers of your content. They have their their own creativity constraints – and its in a sense a battle between classy content, the most crucial advertisers (who walk away with a chunk of the col cms), and the editor who wields the wand as to what the reader must see and know! 

The same analogy can be drawn to all kinds of media – print, television, online and so on. Add to this, the clutter of competition in your own industry – which is only increasing by the day!  

In all this, if someone walks up to you and gives you as assurance of guaranteed coverage, it can be only if you are gullible enough to think that any of us in the PR business wield that influence.

The fact is, none of us, yes, NONE of us have that, and to some extent, it would be an insult to the independent thinking of the media if we imagine such a thing!

While we could be your company’s image advisors, we are just facilitators to friends in the media – sometimes involuntarily pushing information we perceive as useful, and at times offering a helping hand when sought. We are only catering to the content needs of the journalist fraternity, and this is in their own terms.

In all this, we also see how well we could position our client PR needs, and offer some expertise in creating media oriented content, which will be relevant and consumed!

Look at PR advisors as partners in your long term communication strategy execution plan. Not as someone who could just wave a magic wand and get you instant headlines in the next mornings newspapers! And by the way, such a magic wand never exists with any PR advisor! 

Managing performance - isn't it all about communicating it?

Any employee who gives his best in the organisation does so, anticipating a good, transparent and clearly laid down performance management process.

And speaking of performance management, while employers may have the best of practices in place – if the same is not communicated well to the stakeholder, the objective and objectivity of the exercise gets lost in a maze.

The value of  performance communication management for any employer brand is timeless! Jack Welch is quoted to have said this on performance management (ranking): “Ranking has been portrayed as a cruel system.  The cruel system is the one that doesn’t let anyone know where they stand.”

And where they stand can be only clear, when each engaged employee/partner is communicated of how his contribution to the organizational goals and revenues will be measured.

A lot has been said and written about how it is important and crucial to manage performance in an organization, not much emphasis has been laid on the importance of communicating it to the members of the organization – at all levels.

This leads to a lot of confusion, uncertainty, and most of all, shock and surprise when in the middle of the year/end of the year, the employees are measured, reviewed, and  evaluated by a process which they are not even prima facie aware of.

A lot of  times, such a performance management exercise, which is truly objective and equal to all gets perceived to be biased, and partial; the only culprit in this whole event is the absence of a well laid down communication strategy – within the organization to all internal stakeholders.

That strategy which will, well in time, at the beginning of the period or year under review, state in writing to each and every employee the measures and attributes by which his/her contribution will be done.

Lack of such communication will also have an adverse impact of the really performing lot in the team. Whilst they give in their best, which would have exceeded their division and business objectives, they would see that their not so performing peers also seem to hold the same stature and growth in a ‘patriarchal’ management (perceptions matter a ton).

This can be highly dangerous to the overall health and long term growth of the company. Unless people see a visible difference between where performers will stand – higher – and where non performers will stand – lower or out of the organization – the best of  performers will desert the organization.

Communication, in the right time and in a very transparent manner (with all the measures quantified, sans any scope for bias), will be a decisive differentiator that would enable all concerned to view the process as legitimate and objective. And once this happens, tremendous amount of discipline comes by in the way everyone views the short term and long term goals. And they also know how and where they will grow within, with the kind of work they do in the period under review.

This highlights the critical nature of the performance communication process, and the time and energy the HR team, the SBU heads, and the CEO ought to spend in making this exercise possibly the best communication amongst the employees. If there is one single exercise that would contribute directly to the top line and the bottom line of the organization, it is PERFORMANCE COMMUNICATION.

The best way to do this will be to create a sort of ‘war room’ that takes care of the whole communication process – planning, vetting, implementing at all levels top down, ascertaining feedback on whether everyone had understood their goals right through. And post the actual performance process, a check on whether what happened is as per the communiqué to each of the employee.

Is your organisation performance communication ready?

CRISIS..... How does your organization stay prepared?

None of us want a crisis to strike us or our organization… but that is an ideal scenario! Many time, a crisis strikes out of the blue, making the core management team of the organization run for cover! Not just that – when a crisis hits, there is chaos all over, that adding to the already vitiated organization eco-system.

The organization eco-system includes all the stakeholders – the organization and its product and services, the market place, the positioning vis a vis competition, the employee, the financial institutions that have invested in the company, the stock market, and every single public shareholder…. The list is partial, and will depend on the size and scale of the organization.

While the occurrence of the crisis per se, cannot be predicted, the response to such a situation can be planned in advance – and this is what we call a war-room for crisis management. This war-room (primarily comprising of your internal communications pro’s) is ever prepared, and swings into action when there is a crisis - if at all there is one.

This war room will/must have people drawn from the top leadership of the organization (sales, marketing, finance, HR and so on) who will work in tandem with   the core communications professionals and will caliberate the response for any crisis.

The crisis team (the war-room) will be well prepared with all the facts pertaining to the product, service, people, infrastructure, the dynamics of the various markets it which they are present, the relevant information of the prime-competitors etc.

Apart from the communications teams which is well trained to interact and speak appropriately to the media, key resources in the organization are identified time and again (once a year minimum), and they are imparted with the communication finesse in handling all kinds of media queries, when the situation warrants. 

A mechanism is put in place is such a way that once any event (crisis) occurs, all the key stake holders in the war-room are connected seamlessly and appraised of the events, the facts, the implications, and the consequences plus the actions that will e taken y the organization in the aftermath of such a situation. This fact brief to the core team – irrespective of where and when  the crisis occurs -  must all be done in 30 to 60 minutes. And post that the team hits the road in tackling the PR front with ease.

While it is the responsibility of the leadership of the organization to calibrate the response to any crisis, the ability to get the message across, in the best way, to all the internal and external stake holders is the key winner in the long term.

That happens seamlessly only if there is a war-room mechanism in place at your organization. With media staying connected 24/7/365, carrying out their social responsibility of disseminating information as it occurs, it is only a crisis war room that can save the day for your organization.

Not just that, your war room will actually impact your long terms interests in a positive way!

So, does your organization have a communication war-room?!

Crisis in Communication? The Koodankulam impasse - PRhq thoughts!

Koodamkulam is now the epicentre of brewing trouble, with the protests by the local populace snowballing into a mass movement. While what and who is propelling and catalysing this people aggression is a complex question, its by now clear that the government as well as the plant authorities have completely bungled in foreseeing such a situation in the aftermath of Fukushima - which has probably brought in a change in perception.

We all did see some nuke experts and political observers ask "why now and why after 20000 Crores down the drain" (that includes me too), may be Fukushima and the way nuke energy is perceived by the common man post that is the answer. But that is besides the point in a scenario where a considerable population is up in the arms against the project.

For now, there is no easy way out as the use of force and such strategies will only boomerang on the establishment. The mess on the ground in the vicinity of Koodamkulam is clearly the fruit of a non-effective communication/public relations by all the stakeholders. 

The way forward could be a multi-pronged strategy which might take a few months, but that is much better than trying to by force start the operations and continue to earn the wrath of the population who have also contributed by giving away the land and to some extent livelihood for the sake of the plant.

1. Communications commitee - The PM has in his own style formed a high power committee which will study the safety aspects and submit a report. This is so flawed in the way its communicated - if all the experts and the plant authorities are already saying that this is one of the safest plants, then the common man will only get more scared as to why a commitee is being formed this late. Instead, the central government must form a communication committee that will go to the site and its vicinity and take on the job of assuaging the fears of the villagers, who percieve a danger in the plant becoming operational. 
2. Isolate the non-stake holders - There is news that the agitation is fuelled by some outsiders with some religious leanings. The central and state governments must use all their might in identifying these forces, and forcing them out of ground-zero. A classic example is the Anti-Sterlite plant movement in the very same place. For years, there were a series of agitations (almost round the year) for reasons that were more valid than the present one. Yet, those agitations, even when blessed and fuelled by the regional politicians, not for a day affected the operations of the Sterlite plant. If a private organisation can do that, it only is possible to isolate all the non-concerned actors at Koodamkulam. What is needed is the conviction to address the genuine concerns, and get all the fringe elements out of the game.
3. Form a villagers commitee - It might appear that its too late in the day for such an exercise. In reality, it may not be. The authorities should go ahead and use all kind of media to reach out to the villagers and tell them that the government/plant authorities are willing to address every single concern/fear that may be in the mind of every villager, who thinks he or she may be affected. This must be a sustained exercise, with no timelines, and the intent must be to understand what exactly are the percieved fears that loom large in the minds of the people in that area. Those which are well founded must be answered with facts, and those ill founded and planted by miscreants can be quashed to the dustbin.
4. Unleash a PR campaign - Other than some national english dailies in which we have seen people like Dr M R Srinivasan publishing their views on the heightened safety aspects, there is hardly any space for the pro-plant views in any media - be in in at the village and regional level, national, regional and local print, television, and any other media that might help in reaching people on the ground. Seminars and lectures in the national news channels where the nuke intelligentia rant there views will not make a shred of difference to the agitation/agitating people. It is precisely the absence of such a people targeted communication campaign that is enabling the fringe elements, be it religious or otherwise to fuel the agitation. If the fringe can manage a perception that there is a massive opposition to the plant, it is very surprising to see that the authorities cannot plan a turnaround in that perception.
5. Re-visit the proximity effect of the plant - This is a bit of technical stuff. The whole concern seems to be centred around 'what if there is a tsunami or a massive quake, and how does the radiation affect us?'. And the answer to this by experts seem to be that this region is not prone to a tsunami. This is a funny logic no one will buy, even if backed by tonnes of geological facts. The point is - no one said the S Indian coast will be battered by a tsumani which took away entire villages when it happened. Such arguments do not hold water to the common man. The way is to critically state facts, and in case some villages continue to have objections, the only option is to see if they can be re-settled, with means of livelihood in tact.

A combination of all these above will make sure that a space is created for a people centric dialog, which would lead to a solution to Koodamkulam. The above can be complemented by a flurry of social development initiatives that would lift the standards of living of these villagers.

In case such a sustained and planned campaign by the authorities is not put in place, the solution will not emerge. That will be to the advantage of the fringe elements who hold forte now, stalling the project that could solve the looming power crisis in the country.

---------------------

Strategic crisis communication - an live-wire case - thoughts by the PRhq team.