September 2nd, 2010 by Steve

The lost boys (and girls) final part: training not lip service

At the moment, there are two main problems with training people when they start their first PR agency job. One is that PR is modernising so quickly that it is a fast-moving feast – meaning the whole agency really needs constant training. The other is that most agencies have a long and undistinguished history of being pretty lacklustre about training people properly.

There I go again, wooden spoon in hand. But it’s true. Admit it. There are a few exceptions, many will say they have a structured training programme but they’re hardly comprehensive, while others do next-to sod all really.

The ability to turn entry-level people into really good PR people is not just a commercial priority, it’s something of a moral obligation too. Given these types of stories about exploitation of graduates by agencies, the industry is going to soil its own reputation if it can’t take a more responsible approach.

It’s blindingly obvious. Agencies are people businesses. Winning and retaining the best clients is linked closely with attracting and developing the best people. Inadequate training is bad for business and bad for the industry. And I’m sure the industry bodies would agree wholeheartedly with that.

So what should training for entry-level staff look like these days?

Well, first off in my experience the best training schemes recognise that the person starting their first PR job doesn’t just need skills and knowledge to enable them to do their initial jobs, but to equip them well for the rest of their careers. And to enable them to progress as fast as they’re able to. It’s not just a question of giving everyone a gun, boots and a tin hat and then sending them into combat. They need to understand how the machine works and what its aims are, and be exposed to some of the many subtleties that will determine success. Equally, they need to know what not to do if they want to keep themselves ‘alive’.

But the scope of training needs to be pretty broad. There needs to be sufficient time allowed to undertake it. It needs to be taken seriously, treated like another client essentially. And the individual needs to understand its purpose, rather than see the scheme as a series of disconnected chores.

Here are nine things I think entry-level training for PR agency jobs should encompass. Pace will depend on individuals and budgets of course, but this lot is all realistic – or should be – within the first year:

1. How to do the basics: most agencies seem to be reasonable good at ensuring people have some basic grasp of what the job entails and what it’s all about in order to get started. Of course they do – otherwise there’s a massive risk that someone will monumentally f*ck up something important. Learning on the job is vital, but equally there should be some structure behind what’s required to deliver all of the client work assigned, how best to manage time and how to undertake basic personal administration.

2. The money side: exposure to the fundamentals of how the agency makes money, banks and may lose money. The basics of risk and reward. But also some outline knowledge of how clients’ budgets work and how we help manage them (and what things tend to cost).

3. Keeping everyone happy: you have three masters – clients, the media and the person who pays your salary (the agency). You need help juggling their multiple wants and needs, all of which may suddenly turn without warning.

4. People development: OK, you’re on the bottom rung, but you need to know what the other rungs all look like and how others will help you to get up them. It’s part of their jobs too. Agencies should ensure their people are all clear on how they develop people, then come good on their promises. Few do. I am by no means perfect, but am doing all I can to be far better at it in future. Oh, and firms should have transparent salary scales, rather than trying to play mind games and fob people off with vaguaries.

5. Understanding the media and media change: yes read the media, but also understand how it works and how it is changing. Even ask senior people about media change at interview stage – if it’s clear they don’t understand it, it might not be an agency that offers you a long-term future.

6. The agency and its difference: most PR firms are pretty ropey at explaining how they’re different – because many of them AREN’T that different. But where points of real difference exist, everyone in the business should understand them, rather than relying on some mystic osmosis to enable people to find out.

7. How we do new business: I know some agencies don’t let junior people pitch, ever. It’s not always appropriate, as whatever is needed to win the pitch is the priority. But people should all be exposed to new business and be involved, in whatever way possible, in sales from day one. The best new business people of the future will be those who start early.

8. Legal/contractual obligations: well the contractual stuff can be tedious, but it’s the best way to understand what the agency has assured it will do and what the scope of the account is. Perhaps more important, though, is to understand the legal implications of PR work – media law, employment law, criminal law, copyright and so on. It amazes me that PRs are hired to represent brands to the outside world and yet so few get even the most rudimentary instruction of the legal risk of doing so and the potential consequence of their actions. If you don’t tell them, you’ve only got yourself to blame if the sky starts falling in.

9. English: the best saved ’til last. I wish it weren’t so, but far too many people coming into PR these days have poor spelling, a scant understanding of grammar and seem to have never received any instruction whatsoever on how to use the humble apostrophe. And don’t start me on incorrect use of plurals. So rather than moan about it, those who get it should help them. That is all.

Anyway, I hope these few posts have been in some way useful in setting out what PR firms should be doing, commercially and morally, to breed the best talent for tomorrow. And what people coming into the trade can do to increase their odds of landing the right job, and ask the right questions in doing so.

PR has largely been paying lip service to proper people development for too long. We need to improve, and the new generation trying to get a foot in the door is the best place to start. Before it becomes a lost generation.

emailAdd to del.icio.usDigg This!Share on FacebookStumble It!
August 31st, 2010 by Steve

The lost boys (and girls) part three: how to land that first PR job

Shame on me. I said I’d write this last Friday. I have a valid excuse, but won’t bore you with it.

So if PR agencies should be more optimistic and assertive in hiring entry-level staff at the moment, are there staff out there who’re worth hiring?

That seems like a stupid question. Surely the backlog of graduates with PR, marketing and journalism qualifications, or other degrees, or no degrees but bags of ambition, is such that competition is rife and agencies can pick from the very cream of the crop?

It’s partly true. Agencies that I know of have certainly got more applicants for entry-level positions than they’ve had for a long time. But if my own experience of the past few years is anything to go by, the vast majority of applications are, in the main, utter shite.

I would say this. I’m a pedant. I am by no means perfect, but equally I can normally spot an incorrectly italicised bulletpoint at 50 paces. Fundamentally, if people care about their jobs and their careers, they will care about the quality of their work, always. Mediocrity is not my friend.

Even so, by more watered-down standards, the quality of approaches made by many entry-level applicants to PR agencies in the midst of a gruelling recession is shocking. Not just what they write, but what they say and how they act. All-too-often, applications are insipid, errors are rife, and both personality and ambition are conspicuous by their absence. Harsh, but in my view true.

There is no magic formula for landing the first job in PR and getting a foot on the career ladder. Equally – and this is intended to be helpful to genuinely keen, intelligent and media-thirsty people out there – there are a few basics that will help your application stand out, so that you’ve impressed from your very first contact:

1. Don’t make spelling errors. This is blindingly obvious. There is a thing called a dictionary. Use it. Prove you can at least both read and type.

2. Communicate your difference. You are applying for a communications job. You aren’t expected to be the world’s best communicator, but equally you need to pinpoint concisely why you should be considered.

3. Don’t bullshit (but if you have to, make it exceedingly good bullshit). If you try to over-egg your achievements and experience, it will be spotted. We spend all day doing this stuff. Equally, pure cheek will at least raise a grin and may get you a foot in the door.

4. Personalise properly. Don’t send blanket emails. Spend the time approaching each firm individually. Call up if you like – few people do this these days, and it may show you have balls.

5. Don’t kiss the agency’s arse. Anything banging on about why you approached this agency because you ‘know’ how great it is will probably be scoffed at. If you do think you’d be suited because of what makes that agency different, say so – but play it straight and ease up on the praise.

6. Don’t focus exclusively on your academic achievements. Yes a PR degree can be useful, but it is no substitute for real-world experience (academia: queue here to take issue with this point). Same goes for other degrees. You will learn harsher lessons about PR in your first months on the job than you ever dreamed of as a student – show that you acknowledge that.

7. Think about the email title. ‘CV for consideration’ won’t make you stand out. ‘Busty blonde seeks PR job’ will, but for the wrong reasons. Be smart and you stand a better chance.

8. If you’ve done work experience with PR firms, explain what you learned and how it improved your skills. Don’t just say you worked somewhere from one date to another. Surviving a few weeks of photocopying and donkey work does not an account executive make.

9. Develop a digital profile and use it to flaunt your wares. Wadds has already imparted wisdom upon this topic. One of the first things a prospective employer is likely to do is Google you. Exploit that, and keep the private life private too.

10. Show your enthusiasm for the job on offer. The three essential ingredients of a good PR are intelligence, real passion for the media and hard work. We can spot the former, while the latter is to be proven down the line and by others’ comments. The middle part is up to you to show the agency when you make the approach and, if you get one, at the interview.

Tomorrow’s concluding part: what to look for in an agency’s approach to training.

emailAdd to del.icio.usDigg This!Share on FacebookStumble It!
August 26th, 2010 by Steve

The lost boys (and girls) part two: can agencies afford to hire them?

Yesterday I tried to set the scene about the challenges the PR industry and graduates are facing at the moment over entry-level positions – boiling it down to something like agencies need to sort themselves out and the best grads should retain hope.

Most people who make the hiring decisions about entry-level staff at PR agencies have empathy with those who want to get a job at the moment but can’t. Some aren’t hiring because they don’t need the extra staff or can’t justify being over-capacity. Others will say they simply don’t have the time to invest in training entry-level recruits. Then there’s the tendency to get freelance support in rather than make permanent hires. It all comes down to a combination of cost and risk.

And rightly so. Now is certainly not the time for any PR agency, however well it may be doing, to throw caution to the wind and hire way ahead of need.

But my main point here is that skilled people are the absolute bedrock of a PR agency’s success, and a two-year hiatus in the intake of entry-level personnel combined with lack of proper training for the future will not only damage graduates’ career prospects but the PR industry.

Yes of course the focus at the moment must be on delivering great client work, attracting clients and producing the best financial results possible in the circumstances, but without a commercially mature and systematic approach to developing people, things will eventually start to unravel. Note that I said approach, not necessarily investment.

Can agencies afford to hire people? Well, only they will know. But in the recent boom years many took on ‘hot’ graduates without even thinking about what use they could be put to. Competition to hire them was fierce. Now there are things like hiring freezes and freelance-only mandates, which may actually cost agencies more in lost business opportunities or higher costs.

Some agencies are continuing to operate graduate recruitment schemes and have simply scaled back on the volume in the past couple of years. Good on them. But many seem to have mothballed everything.

Even if an agency cannot financially justify taking on any extra staff at the moment, here are the things I think all should be thinking about in this area, rather than burying their heads in the sand:

1. Make entry-level recruitment a commercial priority now.
If you can’t recruit at entry-level, have a plan for doing so. Build a pipeline of people you may want to hire in the future and those who – without making false promises – you may be able to hire should circumstances suddenly change. Make this something that everyone in the company is committed to and understands. It will mean you have a broader pick of talent should you need to, the ability to hire quickly and directly, and there is enormous benefit in your current staff understanding that you are being responsible about entry-level positions so that they’re being challenged to develop rather than stagnate.

2. Upgrade the approach to entry-level training.
So many PR firms pay lip service to training. Or talk about how much they spend on it, or how much of an individual’s time is ring-fenced for it. Training is not a line item in a budget or a headline statistic – it must be systemic, part of the fabric of the business. People must want to learn, people must want to teach them and everyone must understand what the purpose of it is. The raft of informal training initiatives run by the CIPR and PRCA shows that individuals have appetites to learn even in a recession – in many cases, recession pressures make it more of a priority.

Agencies need clear, comprehensive and realistic training programmes for all staff but with specific tracks for entry-level people. In my view, the scope should include the broadest reach of conventional and digital PR, and open their eyes to how PR’s ‘editorial world’ may develop in the future. Training must move from an afterthought to being the client delivery and client development backbone of the business. Budget for external support will inevitable be thin or non-existent, but existing staff can teach them a lot of it providing adequate time is set aside. There are mountains of time squandered each month at most PR firms through not charging clients properly for work undertaken, inaccurate time reporting and constant griping about colleagues not being able to complete tasks properly (normally because they haven’t been taught properly…). So it should be straightforward and wholly commercially feasible to commit regular time to training, for everyone’s benefit

3. Be clear with potential recruits about what you’re seeking.
Graduates get the run-around from PR firms far too often. PR needs the best talent coming in to take entry-level jobs. PR will increasingly have to compete with other areas of the marketing for talent, particularly as digitisation means PR is having to redefine what it is and how it generates value. So agencies needs to explain and market their entry-level training and development ethos clearly. They must show how working with them is different. They must be clear about what to expect from their careers in the initial months and and years. They should, ideally, be open about salary scales. Most of all though, be clear about what clients you’d like them to work for and what they’ll be doing. Too often, potentially brilliant graduates wither on the vine or move jobs too soon simply because they were oversold on the excitement of the work or the opportunities they’d be given. Equally, recruits need to be honest about what they’re good at, bad at and ideally seeking rather than trying to talk their way through the hiring process just to land a job, no matter how scarce those are

Tomorrow, what the (potentially) lost generation of PR applicants should be doing to land the right job. Not just the interview, but the lock, stock and barrel.

emailAdd to del.icio.usDigg This!Share on FacebookStumble It!
August 23rd, 2010 by Steve

New clause for PR contracts: the relationship break?

When PR agencies and clients decide that their relationships have run the course, there’s normally a grown-up conversation about it being time for them to look elsewhere.

“It’s just not working out”.

“I’ve put so much time in, but I just don’t think you feel the same way about it”.

“I am not getting any younger, I have plans; I need us to take this to the next level and I want to know if you’re with me”.

Not always though. The very public spat in PR Week between Shine and its ex-client SAB Miller seemingly shows how, when things go sour and the wrong things are said, an acrimonious split may be inevitable.

The problem is that PR agency contracts don’t really make provision for a gradual falling out of love, a growing disappointment when promises of virile publicity are not matched with the desired level of performance.

Perhaps, then, it’s time for a new type of clause to be added to contracts to cover such circumstances and prevent the ‘growing apart’ part – a relationship break.

It could read something like this:
XX.X Once the Initial Period has expired, either party may terminate this Agreement (without cause) by giving not less than X months’ written notice to the other. Alternatively, should the parties consider, mutually and severably, that termination is a reasonably likely if they continue to work together due to the PR programme not meeting mutual expectations, both parties reserve the right to exercise a 90-day hibernation period (the ‘Relationship Break’) after which time normal terms and conditions will apply as usual.

Mind you, I suspect it might mean the rise of the ’sharking’ agency that scavenges for scraps while clients are temporarily unattached.

With thanks to the inspiration and life skills of Speed’s resident expert on such matters.

emailAdd to del.icio.usDigg This!Share on FacebookStumble It!
August 2nd, 2010 by Steve

Why so many national journalists are moving into PR: would more hacks make PR better?

There have been a number of recent announcements about hacks who’ve made the move to the ‘dark side’. Guardian business writer Richard Wray joined Vodafone; Nick Hasell, editor of The Times’ Tempus column, moved to FD; Daily Mail columnist Alice Dogruyol became comms head at Occo. Edelman has also signed up the BBC’s former head of news, Richard Sambrook and FT writer Stefan Stern.

Journalists who move into PR undoubtedly bring precious skills such as the ability to sniff out a good story and provide insight into how it will play out. They can also draw upon impeccable media contacts. However, as with any cross industry move, it’s not a career change without difficulty. Whilst some skills are clearly transferable, there are of course politics and personalities at play within PR companies and their clients. Hacks, in some of these circumstances, may not be the most flexible of hires – especially if their journalist sensibilities clash with the need to provide a client service which supports various stakeholders.

And let us not forget, PR is about so much more than media relations.

Despite some of these reservations, at senior levels hacks probably make great hires. Removed from account and client relationship management, they can certainly give strong strategic input and provide a fresh perspective on a client’s communications objectives. After all, journalists know better than anyone what makes a good story.

However, a hack moving into an account management or client relationship role, without proper training and experience, would be a tough move.

A grounding in PR, built up over years, is essential at that middle level where PRs are expected to be a jack of all trades. At this stage in their careers, PRs must be great writers, networkers, organisers, multi-taskers, financial planners, strategists and consultants, as well as fantastic man-managers. It probably requires some of the most varied skills needed in any professional industry.

Could a hack take it, I wonder?

emailAdd to del.icio.usDigg This!Share on FacebookStumble It!
July 8th, 2010 by Steve

The mystic reputation-boosting power of bad 90s rap

Amidst the mountains of jizz I receive every day about how wonderful social media is and how groundbreaking campaigns are making the earth move for marketeers, one novel and fascinating trend is the use of 1990s-style rap to communicate important points.

Now I’m all for livening things up and innovating in the delivery of messages, but for me this type of pap-rap should have been buried along with three-sizes-too-big jeans, an insistence on wearing Raybans in half-lit rooms and the worship of Adidas shelltoes in mauve.

First it was the Cisco intern rap. It looks like the chap took it upon himself to do this, but of course looks may deceive.

Now Amazon is getting on it, even using the maligned music medium to communicate the salient points of acquisition news.

Should the PR industry be looking to adopt a similar approach to communicating its challenges as it goes through modernisation pains? If so, some covers that might be worth of exploration:

Snoop Dogg – What’s My Brand Name?
Notorious B.I.G. Featuring Puff Daddy – Less Money, Mo Problems
Will Smith – Gettin’ Digi With It
Puff Daddy Featuring Mase – Can’t Nobody Hold Me Social Media Buzz Down
MC Hammer – You Can’t Measure This

emailAdd to del.icio.usDigg This!Share on FacebookStumble It!
July 2nd, 2010 by Steve

Social media bingers ‘under the influence’ – shock

Social f&cking media eh?

If you’re a PR, it’s everywhere. All the time. Dozens of tatty bits of spam each day. Hundreds of tweets from inane PR types about the fact that they’re buying a coffee, how ‘busy’ they are, some apparently fascinating new fact (normally days after the event) or their latest Lambrini escapade. Loads of sage-like wisdom from the social media powerlords about the future, the larger social implications and the sheer exuberance that stemmed from what several dozen people had to say about a topic that’s actually very on the grey side.

If a lot of the Twitter conversations I’ve seen recently are comparable to conversations in a pub, it’s time to sup up and sod off home.

But enough of this pessimism and wholly unfair fingerpointing. The point of this post is an appeal for all PRs to get real and move on on the subject of social media influence. Of course social media has growing influence. It’s sort of obvious that if people suddenly have the ability to talk to individuals, politicians and brands all over the world, that two-way communication is becoming inevitable and that the transparency has hitherto unforeseen power, it will have influence. Yes social media has influence. Yes it is measurable in some way, because it is digitised so has an audit trail.

Yet those PRs who bleat on about how fascinating it is that influence can be measured, that ratings and supposed positivity around a brand or a person can be extracted in graph form, are spending too much time wallowing in the same wafting smells and not enough considering the bigger picture. Which is that media is changing, outcomes can be better measured but we are not there yet in making PR a fully measurable cost centre. Not by a long way.

Equally, the social media experts (they call themselves that, so clearly it must be so, given the scope of their social media influence of course) who run down other forms of media are short-sighted. Media is changing. The rules are changing. Influence is changing. We don’t know what it will look like in future, but saying something like the internet is now all-powerful and telly is less so is missing the point by a country mile.

The way I see it is this: some clever people are putting time and thought into making PR more measurable and making sense of media/technological change, and they will get their rewards I hope. Meanwhile, a lot of (by comparison) very workshy or blindly-led people are banging on about things like social media influence as if it’s the be-all and end-all of modern, better justifiable PR. My guess is they’re doing it because they’re late to the party and reckon it’ll get them sales/prevent them from looking like dinosaurs. And all they’re doing is confusing matters and making the industry look a bit fickle.

I’ve deliberately left lots of links out of this post. I could attribute much of this venting to individuals and their published content, but that’d be a cheap shot, even for me.

So instead, consider some of the emails and tweets I’ve seen in recent days from agencies and individuals offering ’social media services’, advice and trumpeting interesting social media things:
- Five ways to get started with a social media strategy
- The power of Twitter influence
- Social media engagement and why communities work
- Building social media into your engagement framework
- Social media is good for you (because it’s so social)

FFS.

It’s the equivalent of old school PRs 20 years ago braying about why newspapers are widely read by people, why being on the front page means your story is prominent or why television can be influential given it can attract a captive audience of couch potatoes.

Social media is one of the most important developments in media ever, because it is direct to readers, is two-way and leaves an audit trail. Fact. Get over it. Get on with it. And while you’re at it, figure out how editorial influence and search marketing join up too please.

And for the love of Jesus, will someone please send me a message about how to make PR properly measurable in a very straightforward way; so that for once, finally, after years of struggle, I can clinically prove the value of what I do for a living?

emailAdd to del.icio.usDigg This!Share on FacebookStumble It!
June 22nd, 2010 by Steve

AMEC 10 and the glass ceiling of measuring reputation value

I posted a comment to this effect on PR Moment, but one thing that strikes me about the AMEC 10 PR evaluation discussions and grandesque declarations (though the intention is spot on) is that if the PR industry begins a gallant guest to put pound signs in front of everything it does to enhance reputation, it will fail.

The Barcelona Declaration of Research Principles represents baby steps, so this is absolutely no criticism of what last week’s debate aimed to achieve. And it’s absolutely agreed that outcomes and business results are what need to be measured.

But in the interests of modernising the long view of PR evaluation, we need to recognise that quantifying, in a clinical and pound sign-oriented way, precisely what PR investment does for brand value and hence shareholder/stakeholder value will always have limitations.

Commercially, reputation’s value lies in its ability to get customers to spend or recommend. And the only way you can truly measure reputation levels in order to gauge that is to go and ask everyone who could potentially be a customer what they think of you and whether they will buy/recommend. And do so frequently. Even then, there are no assurances they will give you the right answer or any degree of clarity.

Further point: AVEs dead? Not dead, no; but of increasingly limited value in the modern media world. It may be useful to know what the equivalent ad exposure would have cost. But it does not allow you to measure PR value, and anyone who ever claimed it did that was grasping at straws in the absence of something better.

Comparing bought media costs to what earned media costs only helps you to highlight that they’re different beasts, rather than drawing some sort of comparison that allows relative value to be assessed. That in itself is an aide to better understanding how PR has value and how it can be used as a commercial asset. But it’s a crude tool and only useful as an aside to the quest for better, grown-up measurement.

The main thing that PR agencies need to be when modernising their evaluation, and that the industry needs to be in pulling people together to crack this, is honest. Just because media is digitising and the resulting audit trails give us far more to go on does not mean that we can put pound signs against everything and be absolutely convinced that we’re right. PRs need to be clear with clients on what can be measured, what can’t be measured and why you’d even want to measure some of these things in the first place.

We need a single approach to unequivocal proof, not just a way of winning the case through sheer weight of argument and personality.

emailAdd to del.icio.usDigg This!Share on FacebookStumble It!
June 15th, 2010 by Steve

Speed experiences something rather fishy

A pleasant tale. Or tail.

Visitors to Speed HQ in Leicester Square will have been swept off their feet (and into a meeting room, or towards the lollipops in reception) by our front-of-house dynamo Sonia ‘Sonic’ Carneiro. Possessing superhuman powers, she single-handedly makes the places run smoothly in the face of peril, amuses her colleagues constantly and ensures hungry clients have something to eat when they turn up having missed lunch.

What few know, though, is that employment contractual negotiations with Sonic were not routine. Flexible working, pension generosity, birthday off, broadband paid for at home – the things that have again made us Holmes Report Best UK Agency to Work For – failed to impress.

What Sonic wanted was lobster.

At least that’s what she said. I’ll never know. It may have been (face it, it was) just a way to wind me up. Each day for the past few months I have been reminded that the lobster promise had not been fulfilled.

Until today. Tuesday, 15 June, 2010. The day Sonic finally got her lobster.

What have I started?

emailAdd to del.icio.usDigg This!Share on FacebookStumble It!
June 15th, 2010 by Steve

The book: chapter three

Time for another quick literary snorkel into the progress on the book on PR that Stephen Waddington and I are writing.

Chapter three is nearly done. It’s a fairly meaty one, covering the stinker of a word that is disintermediation – cutting out the middle-man.

There will be a full preview of the whole book here in due course (i.e. once the bleedin’ thing is finished) but in the meantime here’s what the third chapter covers:

- What disintermediation means for brand risk: how to make sense of media change rather than just sweating about gaining some sort of control.

- Where the power base lies and how it may evolve: the ‘wall’ of old media and how influence is changing.

- The art of conversation: are brands, honestly, up to it?

- The mashing up of future media: how one media will emerge, and the reputation management implications for brands.

- Media everywhere: how content delivery and accessibility is altering reputation and brand engagement.

- Media planning in a converged media world: command versus control, and how to plan and chart editorial influence when the rules have all changed.

More soon.

emailAdd to del.icio.usDigg This!Share on FacebookStumble It!