September 27, 2009 in Public Relations by Orchardo
25 Questions to Ask Before Hiring a PR Firm

Red check mark.Before I started the Idea Grove, I was a senior corporate communications executive for billion-dollar companies. I’ve led public relations campaigns of all sizes and budgets, and I know how important it is to select the right PR firm during the agency review process.

That’s why I’ve created a simple assessment tool to help companies make the right decision — and avoid common mistakes.

From my experience, the most common mistake is to fall for a slick agency presentation without fully understanding one or more of the following: (1) the agency’s specific qualifications; (2) how the agency will prioritize the company relative to other clients; (3) how the agency will charge for its services; (4) whether the agency will be a good personality fit.

Many PR firms are downright spectacular during the agency review process, but just mediocre once they’re a few months into the engagement. This is because large firms, in particular, win new clients through the sales efforts of senior executives — but then make a junior staffer the primary contact on the account.

With that in mind, I recommend that corporate communicators conducting agency reviews ask themselves the following 25 questions –- comparing PR firms across the categories of Qualifications, Prioritization, Cost-Efficiency, and Compatibility — before making a decision:

Qualifications: Can the Agency Do the Work?

1. During our discussions, has the agency demonstrated a good general understanding of my industry?
2. During our discussions, have agency representatives listened well and done their homework to gain a grasp of my company’s specific goals and challenges?
3. Does the agency seem to have sufficient personnel and breadth of expertise to meet my needs?
4. Does the agency have case studies that demonstrate success with similar clients and/or projects of similar scope?
5. Has the agency provided enthusiastic client references?
6. Do representatives of the agency seem intelligent and creative?
7. Have representatives of the agency suggested good ideas that I had not previously considered?
8. Do representatives of the agency seem passionate about what they do?

Prioritization: Will I Be Valued as a Client?

9. During the review process, has the agency been prompt in returning my phone calls and responding specifically to my information requests?
10. Has the agency been straightforward in identifying the individual who will be my primary, day-to-day contact person?
11. Does my primary contact have a sufficient level of relevant experience?
12. Has my primary contact taken a prominent role in meetings during the review process?
13. Has my primary contact personally serviced some of the client accounts cited by the agency in case studies and client references?
14. Does my primary contact have the authority to offer advice and make decisions when I need them quickly?

Cost-Efficiency: Will I Get My Money’s Worth?

15. In creating a proposal, do agency representatives focus on meeting my needs – or do they ask, “What’s your budget?” and deliver a plan that absorbs all available dollars?
16. Is the agency straightforward in discussing how it bills for its work?
17. If the agency bills by the hour, does it openly share the specific billing rates of its individual employees?
18. Do the agency’s billing rates seem reasonable compared to other firms?
19. Do the agency’s client references vouch for the agency’s flexibility and fairness in billing?

Compatibility: Will the Agency Be a Good Partner?

20. Is the personality of my primary, day-to-day contact a good fit with mine?
21. Do agency representatives communicate freely and easily with my company’s employees in meetings?
22. When asked their opinion, do representatives of the agency say what they think – not just what I want to hear?
23. Do the agency’s recommended tactics seem honest and ethical?
24. If the firm serves other companies in my industry, are agency representatives forthcoming in discussing any possible conflicts of interest?
25. Does my gut tell me the agency is promising what it can actually deliver — and not exaggerating simply to get my business?

I’ve organized this assessment tool as a printable PDF score sheet, designed for easy comparison of competing agencies. Download it here.

 
April 20, 2009 in Brand Strategy, Public Relations by Orchardo
Sometimes, Your Company’s Wins Are Nothing to Brag About

david_goliath12061When your company scores a victory, it’s not always best to brag about it. In fact, it’s sometimes best for the public to think you lost.

I know this may seem a little counterintuitive to you transparency-preaching (if not always practicing) new-wave flacks out there, but bear with me a minute, OK?

Let’s look at the example of corporate lawsuits. I’m not talking about the kind of lawsuits where two corporate giants are battling each other over trademark infringement, a business deal gone bad, or other such snits. That may get the business wonks excited — but from the rest of the world, it elicits an “Is American Idol on yet?” yawn.

I’m talking about the lawsuits where an individual or group of individuals — a.k.a., “the little guy” — takes on your big, bad Fortune 500 company.

Beating the Little Guy

In the long run, John Maynard Keynes famously said, we’re all dead. Also in the long run (not quite as long, but close), deep-pocketed corporations usually beat the rap when they are dragged into court by an individual they have wronged (or allegedly wronged). This is true no matter how heinous the corporation’s misdeeds (or alleged misdeeds).

Let me guess: You don’t believe me. You’ve read too many of those “little guy wins big” headlines over the years, haven’t you?

Headlines like: “Old Lady Wins $3 Million from McDonald’s for Spilling Hot Coffee on Herself!”

It’s enough to make you pull at your hair and shout, “Damn lawyers!” — isn’t it?

The Fine Print

No one ever seems to read the fine print years later, after the esteemed legal counsel for those deep-pocketed corporations have earned their paychecks.

Remember the Exxon Valdez oil spill, which devastated the Alaskan coast in 1989? Despite a $5.3 billion judgment, Exxon didn’t pay a dime of it for nearly 20 years. The company only agreed to pay in 2008 — after the damages had been slashed by more than 90 percent.

As for that “old lady” who spilled her coffee — 79-year-old Stella Liebeck — she never did see the $3 million she was awarded in 1994. The judgment was reduced by 80 percent, and the plaintiff, who suffered third-degree burns, spent eight days in the hospital, and endured two years of treatment, settled for even less rather than wait through endless appeals.

And just last week, a respected photojournalist named Chris Usher, who sued Corbis after the stock photo agency lost more than 12,000 of his images — including coverage of the historic Bush-Gore presidential race — had to settle for compensation of just $7 per image after a seven-year battle.

See how it works?

And if you’re going to bring up the Greg Kinnear flick Flash of Genius, don’t even go there. Dude ruined his marriage and his life to win that case.

Hold the Press Release

What happens in these cases, almost invariably, is that it doesn’t turn out as well for the little guy as the media originally reports.

When the end finally comes, your execs may decide to take turns giving each other high fives in the boardroom. That’s fine.

But if one of them calls to tell you to put out a press release about the big win, I’d encourage you to pretend your cell phone is on the blink and to make a staticky hissing sound into the receiver. And if you’re on the office phone, I’d encourage you to pretend it’s your cell phone (the one that’s on the blink).

You see, this is the kind of victory that big companies shouldn’t brag about. Goliath beating David is not good PR for Goliath.

In fact, the best possible PR that companies can get in these situations is what they get without even trying. The media generally does corporations a big favor by losing interest in these legal battles long before the final verdict.

So sometimes when you win, it’s best to keep it to yourself.

Damn lawyers.

(Image source)

 
0
November 12, 2008 in Public Relations by sbaradell@ideagrove.com
A Gentle Tongue Can Break a Bone

A ruler can be persuaded through patience,
and a gentle tongue can break a bone.

– Proverbs 22:4

I’ve never been the loud, brash, in-your-face type. As a child, I was naturally shy — to the point where I was afraid to answer the front door of our house. I was introspective … always drawing, writing, thinking.

Seems like a recipe for becoming a librarian, an actuary or a taxidermist (Norman Bates, anyone?). But instead, I ended up a newspaper reporter and, ultimately, a PR executive and spokesman for billion-dollar companies. I present to Fortune 1000 executives, speak to large audiences, and talk with classes of college students all the time.

So, did I change? Not really.

I say this to offer hope to those of you who are afraid you don’t have the “outgoing personality” you need to succeed in public relations. Frankly, the PR field has too many surface smiles and surface thinkers, and not enough going on underneath. That’s something we introverts can use to our advantage.

Introverts vs. Extroverts

Let me explain what I mean by an introvert. An introvert is not someone who can’t do well with an audience. Many of the world’s best actors, musicians and other performers are introverts. They do it because they love their work — not because they love the crowds.

An extravert starts with the love of the crowd and works backward. What do I need to do to capture their attention?

An introvert starts with the love of the work and moves outward. What do I need to do to share this work with others?

In PR, extraverts are a dime a dozen. They’re the ones who get off to fast starts in their careers, who seek out every opportunity to gladhand and namedrop, who learn a little about a lot of things and a lot of people. They spread themselves around and gauge their success by how many people they know (or appear to know.)

Introverts are the ones who actually find their employer’s or client’s business model fascinating. They take the time to study the company in depth; to understand the competition; to know what marketing strategies are working and not working in the space, and why. They’re the ones who aren’t satisfied with glib answers.

They’re also the ones who have better long-term potential to form relationships of mutual respect with journalists and other influencers — not to mention the CEOs of the companies they serve.

Share What’s Inside

Talk to your clients and the media honestly, knowledgeably and with a genuine interest in your subject matter, and you don’t have to be loud to have influence. A gentle tongue can break a bone.

The key for introverts is to recognize this and to fight through their shyness to let others know what they have to say. To borrow another proverb from the Bible, don’t hide your light under a bushel. You’ve got a lot of talent to give; you just have to know where to put it.

 
7
September 3, 2008 in Journalism, Public Relations by sbaradell@ideagrove.com
How to Tell When a Reporter Plans to Flip the Script

I love journalists. Hell, I used to be a pretty good newspaperman myself, and the blogosphere has given me a chance to dabble in the discipline of journalism again here and there. I also work daily to convince CEOs who are suspicious of the media (is there any other kind?) that most journalists do their jobs with integrity. I annoy my corporate clients when I tell them what I believe: that you’ll hear more heartfelt discussion of ethical questions in a newsroom than you’ll ever hear in a boardroom.

Having stipulated all that, let’s be real: Reporters are known to occasionally flip the script on their subjects.

By “flip the script,” I mean they sometimes will give you the distinct impression they are writing something that will flatter you or otherwise serve your interests — when all along they’re planning to eviscerate you with the spiral binding on their reporter’s notebook.

Is this ethical? Let’s just say I’ve known reporters who feel bad about doing it. But frankly, it’s a necessary part of good journalism. A classic example is brilliantly portrayed in the 2005 film Capote. In the movie, author Truman Capote struggles with his deception of killer Perry Smith; the scene where he refuses to admit to Smith that his book is called “In Cold Blood” is painful to watch.

Was Capote’s behavior wrong? You tell me — but it resulted in the greatest nonfiction book of the 20th century.

I’m no saint; I’ve done it myself. In fact, I won an award from the Associated Press Managing Editors of Texas the time I did it to televangelist Robert Tilton. Tilton was riding high and making millions when I talked with him in 1990. He hadn’t done a media interview in years, and he chose me because he was convinced I was a naive kid who would buy the snake oil he was selling. I never lied to him — but I also never said a word to disabuse him of the notion that I was that naive kid. My story was the beginning of the end of his ministry.

Of course, day-to-day examples of flipping the script aren’t always this heroic. Sometimes people just get screwed.

So, as you prepare your CEO for that next big interview with the news media, what are the warning signs that a reporter plans to flip the script on you? Here are eight of them:

1. The journalist is vague about the story angle.

Reporters don’t call you unless they have a pretty good idea what they’re going to write about. For example, they might want to profile you as a fast-growing company in your industry, or they might want your take on a specific trend or controversy. If you ask them their angle and they mumble something that doesn’t sound like a focused story idea, it might be because their real angle is that they think your CEO is a crook.

2. The journalist has a history of hard-hitting reporting or pointed commentary.

After being contacted by a reporter you don’t know, the first thing you should do is Google them to see what kind of stuff they write. If you go through a half-dozen CEO profiles and find one coronation and five eviscerations, those probably approximate your odds.

3. The media outlet typically does not have nice things to say about people like you.

Be mindful of the slant of the publication. For example, alternative weeklies traditionally take an anti-business approach. Unless you’re an upstart entrepreneur who is doing something disruptive to the status quo, this kind of outlet may not be for you. More and more mainstream media outlets are falling into political camps as well; if you’re a non-profit organization dedicated to reducing carbon emissions or saving lab rats, don’t go on Fox News unless you want your cause ridiculed before a national audience.

4. A competing media outlet has just said something nice about you.

Reporters hate getting beat on a story. They also hate doing the same story someone else just did. So if you’ve been the subject of some laudatory coverage, you’re eventually going to meet up with a reporter who wants to knock you off your high horse. Be prepared.

5. The journalist is reluctant to tell you who else has been interviewed for the story.

You can learn a lot by asking a reporter who else he or she has interviewed for the story. For example, if the reporter has prepared for the upcoming meeting with your CEO by talking to a bitter business rival or even-more-bitter ex-wife, you might be in for a bumpy ride. If a reporter hems and haws when you ask the question, that might be all the answer you need.

6. The journalist is uncomfortable when asked his or her point of view.

It’s often useful to ask the reporter his or her point of view on a controversial issue. Many reporters share their perspectives freely when their opinions are neutral or in alignment with yours. When they think you’re full of it, on the other hand, they tend to ramble on about objectivity and how the “story is about you, not me.” If they start talking like that, you’re probably toast.

7. The journalist gives nonverbal clues that suggest deception.

The general clues people use to determine if someone is being deceptive (microexpressions, for example) are helpful in a face-to-face interview. When reporters are distant, make little eye contact, and seem overly protective of what they’ve written in their notebook, you might be in trouble.

8. The journalist makes it apparent that he or she has already done ALL of the reporting for the story — except for talking to your CEO.

You’re dead meat now. The reporter has lined up everything and just wants to fire away at you — “I’ve discovered this document in your trash; I have the chatroom transcript; I talked to your mother-in-law; what’s your response?” Duck and cover.

Even if you strongly suspect a journalist is planning to flip the script on you, that doesn’t mean you should respond with a “no comment.” In fact, you still need to provide the reporter with information and, in many cases, the CEO should go ahead with the interview.

But you’d better go into it ready — focused for battle, talking points down cold, with both guns blazing. And record the conversation.

[This post is also at MarketingProfs.]

[This post is a Media Orchard Classic.]

[Image source]

 
1
September 3, 2008 in Public Relations by sbaradell@ideagrove.com
When You Always Tell the Truth, You Never Have to Remember What You Said


If you were to ask 100 people on the street what professional group is the least honest, our guess is that the following would be the top three results (in no particular order):

1. Politicians
2. Lawyers
3. PR People

Of course, it’s also true that while everyone says they hate Paris Hilton, she’s still in every magazine on the newsstand every week. And most people still vote for politicians, hire lawyers, and so on.

So Media Orchard generally figures our occupation’s less-than-sterling rep is something we needn’t worry about too much.

But then news of the latest PR ethics stink wafts through the transom, forcing us to flee our tiny office — and to at least say something.

The bad news came in threes last week:

1. The AP reported that HealthSouth CEO Richard Scrushy paid a writer $11,000 through a PR firm to write sympathetic articles that were published in The Birmingham Times.

2. Catherine Seipp wrote in National Review that a PR person once offered her money to write an article bashing a left-wing organization.

3. And Jim Sinkinson, publisher of Bulldog Reporter, opined that dishonesty has become a “trademark skill” for the public relations profession.

Wrote Jim:

A young summer intern in Bulldog Reporter’s offices recently commented that public relations sounds like a fascinating profession — one she’d like to consider entering, she continued, “except that you have to be able to lie — and I wouldn’t want to do that.”

When PR spokespeople — President Bush’s press secretary, for example — aren’t being exposed for outright prevarication, they’re being unmasked as inveterate deceivers. Only weeks ago, The Wall Street Journal’s lead story blew the cover on PR-paid writers for pharmaceutical companies who ghost write articles for physicians. The good doctors in turn place the less-than-objective articles in prestigious medical journals, never crediting (i.e., hiding) the true author and sponsor…

If the truth really sets us free, if the truth makes the most powerful story, then why does PR’s reputation for dishonesty prevail? Or, more directly, why do so many PR people so often use lies and deception as the foundation for their communications strategies?

We don’t know, Jim — but would you mind handing us that ball of twine beside you so we can hang ourselves?

OK, let’s take a step back here. Why don’t we examine the three bad-rep professions one at a time, and try to understand why each is so often associated with dishonesty.

POLITICIANS

This one’s easy: If they didn’t lie we would never elect them, because (1) we expect them to be perfect and they’re not, and (2) we expect them to tell us everything we want to hear, so they do. Next –

LAWYERS

We have something in the United States called an adversarial legal system. This means that even guilty people get a defense, which means lawyers often know they’re defending guilty people — which means, in essence, they’re lying and this lying is an inherent part of our legal system. Next —

PR PEOPLE

We’ve been straining our brains on this one, but we really can’t come up with a good excuse for PR people. So after much thought and consideration, we’ve concluded that maybe a lot of PR people are just big fat liars.

And we think maybe something needs to be done about it.

Richard Edelman thinks so, too:

We cannot be seen to be corruptors of the media … [W]e have to go further to prevent future misbehavior. I am calling for the key associations in the PR business around the world to consider licensing PR firms in their countries to do business. We have, for example, the APR accreditation process from the PR Society of America. That effort to assure professional standards of practice is fine as far as it goes.

But we need to go further, to have CEOs of PR firms sign onto a code of proper behavior, that forbids payments to reporters, that mandates transparency on arrangements with third party experts and that bars a media company from having a licensed PR firm in the family. These standards must be enforceable, with the group given power to expel transgressors, then to demand a public apology and remanding of questionable earnings to the aggrieved client.

I will attend the February 5 board meeting of PRSA and make this proposal. Can others who are similarly outraged and frustrated please help me with the wording of such a resolution, so that we have the means to protect our precious profession.

We’re with you all the way, Richard. Thank you.

Update: Paul Holmes chimes in on the same point.

Technorati tags: , , ,

[This post is a Media Orchard Classic.]

 
1