PRCA - Leading industry thought

Moving House

2011-09-02T15:34:00.001+01:00

For all those who have followed me methodically, periodically, or accidentally over the past three years I would like to announce my blog posts will be moving to the newly launched PRCA website.

You can continue to gaze at the wider world of PR, politics and whatever happens to occupy my mind at this webpage: http://www.prca.org.uk/Blog

Francis

Close Down Twitter? Not In A Democratic Society

2011-08-16T16:42:00.002+01:00

I've just read a comment on Conservative Home by Tory MP Nadine Dorries. It supports suggestions that twitter etc should be closed down during any repeat of the rioting which took place last week.

Before I type my next paragraph, let me be quite clear (though to most people who know me it will come as no surprise): I belong to the same party as Mrs Dorries. I was a Tory Councillor. I was a Tory Association officer. I worked for the Party.

So with that context given.... her idea is one of the most awful I've heard a Tory MP suggest for many years.

Twitter et al helped rioters. Well, it also helped the Police and the other emergency services respond to the rioting. It also helped 'civilians' both during and after the rioting. It's also now helping the Courts and the other relevant authorities in the aftermath.

Her reaction is a terrible example of blaming the medium, not the individual. Doubtless newspapers have given publicity to ideas of which she disapproves -and indeed of ideas and movements which are themselves against the law. Doubtless the same is true also of books. But you don't close down either, because that is not just a ridiculously unfair over-reaction, it's also patently self-defeating.

To quote Kissinger -a man whose career I am sure we have both always regarded with a large degree of admiration- "Leaders are responsible not for running public opinion polls but for the consequences of their actions". The proposal to close down twitter might well get a favourable headline in a couple of newspapers, but the consequence of doing so would be so out of keeping with a democratic society as to be unthinkable.

Credit Where Credit's Due....

2011-07-28T17:39:00.003+01:00

Yesterday, I spent eight hours briefing the media on the implications of the Court of Appeal's ruling in the PRCA and Meltwater case versus the NLA. It was a good day, and we conveyed many of our key messages.

On the back of that, I've received a great many messages of support from the industry's leading figures. They appreciate the time and effort the PRCA and Meltwater have expended in fighting the NLA. Those messages are very welcome.

We have been delighted to stand up for our industry, and delighted to stand shoulder-to-shoulder with Meltwater in this case.

What has perplexed me though is how those who bodies that declined to be involved in the case are now attempting to claim credit for it. Let me be utterly clear on this. Other monitoring providers, and other professional bodies, were invited to join with Meltwater and the PRCA. And they declined.

I read some people's public comments therefore with at least a raised eyebrow.

Let me be quite clear. The only people who have been involved in this case -who have had, dare I say, the balls to fight the NLA- have been the PRCA and Meltwater.

Nobody else.

No other private company.

No other membership body.

We asked a number of those organisations to become involved. They declined. While I welcome their support now, sometimes I do wonder what value their support is when it is nothing more than a blogpost....

As for our role, well I tried to express it yesterday in a recording at M4DC. You can see it here.

To my mind, this is one of the key bits: "Over the course of this past year, some people have asked us why we have gone to the time and expense of fighting the NLA in the Courts. The answer is very straightforward. It is our duty. There is no point being an industry body if you are too scared or too lazy or too arrogant or too indifferent to stand up for your industry. That is what we have done, and I am proud that we continue to do so."

The PRCA's Onward March

2011-07-15T19:13:00.005+01:00

Well, that was a pretty good week really.

What did we achieve?

We launched the PR Census 2011. It is by far the most comprehensive and detailed analysis of the industry ever undertaken. I say that having overseen the CIPR’s attempt to do the same six years or so ago. It gives us detailed knowledge of the size shape, pay and background of the industry and its participants. It will be of great value to our industry, and is a fine example of collaboration between the PRCA and PR Week.

We did a PRW webcast on it. And a Gorkana one too

Our members said that the worst was yet to come for News International -and have surely been vindicated already.

Yesterday was the inaugural PRCA-APPC-VMA public affairs summer drinks party. A thoroughly crowded St Stephen’s Club saw some of the most powerful people in the industry gather, exchange views and drink decent wine. We were even happy to welcome the CIPR’s Phil Morgan and my friend its ex-President Lionel Zetter there too.

The second deadline for our awards closed, with entries up by around a half. And, of course, we welcomed a couple more corporate members.

So the onwards march of the PRCA continues....

NOTW -the wider picture

2011-07-06T12:23:00.002+01:00

Both as somebody who knows the communications industry reasonably well, and as a parent, the News of the World allegations are astonishing and appalling.

The wall of contempt that has hit News International is remarkable both in its ferocity and its justification. And indeed in the financial risk it poses.

Yesterday, Rebecca Brooks struck a defiant pose, clinging to her role. She ought to have resigned. Were I a betting man, I wouldn't be risking much on her still being at the helm in a month's time. The pressure on and from advertisers is so acute that throwing the NOTW's critics her head might well be the only sensible way to stem the flow of money.

Last night, I was chatting with a senior person in one of NI's rival titles. Their concern was that the reputational damage being done to NI would be collateral to the wider newspaper industry. That NOTW's hacking activities would damage not just one newspaper or indeed one group of newspapers, but newspapers as a whole; that this might be the tipping point for the PCC and its always under-pressure self-regulatory model.

Those seemed to be to be absolutely sensible observations. Imagine the reaction of politicians dragged through the mud by the Telegraph's revelations of their expenses arrangements. Their temptation must surely be to repay the industry that they blame for so much personal financial and reputational hurt.

Put all that together with the growing extinction of the newspapers' current business model, and I'm glad not to be in the newspaper industry right now.

Ding Dong the COI is Dead

2011-06-23T17:21:00.001+01:00

Francis Maude has announced the COI's demise. Excellent news. I think tonight I shan't be the only one celebrating its demise.

Here's our official response:

"The Government is absolutely right to abolish the COI. Over recent years, it has become an appalling example of waste, inefficiency and blinkeredness. Within our industry, its reputation for arrogance and indifference has become legendary -very, very few people will mourn its passing.

In our formal submission to the Cabinet Office review, we urged the Government either to reform or to abolish the COI. We are delighted that we clearly share the same sentiments.

Those who weep for the COI do so from a position either of ignorance or of self-interest. Francis Maude has taken a bold and correct decision, and should be complimented, not criticised for doing so."

Keynote at MIPAA

2011-06-21T10:55:00.001+01:00

Yesterday, I had the pleasure of delivering the opening address at MIPAA's Masterclass.

For those of you who don't know MIPAA, it's the membership organisation that represents communicators working in the motor industry. It's also a PRCA sectoral group, with a seat on our PR Council. I thoroughly recommend it to you -if you're eligible to join it, then you should.

My comments yesterday were around the challenges PR faces over the coming years. The full transcript can be found here

But if you don't fancy reading the whole speech, there are the four key challenges I identified:

· Start addressing issues of strategic reputation management rather than tactical delivery. We're still magnificent about bemoaning the fact we often don't have a place at the top table -and rubbish at changing that situation. If we want to change it, we have to genuinely become the chief source of counsel to clients and CEOs.

· Embrace and embed robust evaluation standards. Our work with AMEC is vital here, but until clients, colleagues and we ourselves are willing to invest in evaluation, AVEs will linger on.

· Own the digital space. If we don't own it, someone else will. Digital is now an integral part of PR -we need to understand it, demystify it, own it.

· Attract the best talent. We shouldn't beat ourselves up about our industry -we are truly a colour, gender and sexuality blind industry in my experience. But we can usefully examine what those who choose not to work in our industry think of us -and if we genuinely are attracting and retaining the very best of talent.

Oh and I also made some comments on interns. We need to treat the whole intern issue with care. But at a minimum, we do need to observe the law. And the law is pretty clear -long-term internships bring with them the minimum wage.

Since May 1st, 16 MPs have advertised for unpaid jobs. That is hypocritical and outrageous. So.... we will be referring them to the Parliamentary authorities. Because you can't berate private industry for treating interns badly when you yourself advertise for staff whom you don't pay at all....

The PRCA Training Price Guarantee

2011-06-08T10:06:00.020+01:00

This week's PR Week should make interesting reading. It carries a pretty big ad detailing our Training Price Guarantee, which will be a bombshell for some people I imagine.

The Guarantee is very straightforward -we know our training is better than our competitors'. And we know those competitors charge more. So if you find a similar course offered by one of our competitors for less, then we'll not only beat their price, we'll also throw in a second place for free.

Now I know the worry with any such Guarantee is that there's a heap of smallprint that makes the offer meaningless. But that isn't the case here:

1. It doesn't have to be an identical course -just a 'similar' one. Similar topic, similar length, similar format. And we won't be playing semantics here. We'll be generous to you in interpreting the word 'similar'

2. And we list our competitors -and yes, that list includes CIM and CIPR.

So there's nothing tricky in what we 're offering -it's all very simple. All perfectly genuine.

Why are we doing this? Well because we want to attract even more people to our courses. We know they are of outstanding quality in every format -whether online, or face-to-face, or delivered bespoke in an organisation's offices. And they're delivered throughout the UK, in seven city centres.

We also know that much alternative PR training is highly theoretical rather than of practical use. Delivered by people who long since stopped actually doing PR, and decided instead just to talk about it. And we know that much PR training is priced ridiculously high.

Now that ridiculous pricing didn't perhaps matter as much when the boom years were upon us. But organisations are much more careful with their cash right now, and yet still need to train their staff -help them to keep their edge, help them to stay motivated.

This Guarantee ticks all those boxes.

So take a look at the PRCA Training Calendar . And make the right choice. Contact my colleague Jessica at training@prca.org.uk Because what have you got to lose?

Got a super injunction? Plan as if you didn't

2011-05-09T14:43:00.006+01:00

The super-injunction debate will continue to roll. Should celebrities be entitled to protect their private lives? Or are super-injunctions a curb on freedom of speech. What today’s developments and the wikileaks expose have made clear is that social media and other technological developments have made it much harder, even impossible, to control what is published.

The more you would like to keep a story under wraps, the more newsworthy it is likely to become. Given the speed with which the story is like to break, if it does, then you need to have a communications plan already in place to ensure that you are able to take control of it as much as possible. Here are a few things you can do just in case.

Anticipate the reaction from different stakeholders to the story and what questions/ concerns it will raise
Draft responses and answers
Make sure you have a plan to address the most important stakeholders, ie wife/ husband, clients etc not just the most vocal ones. Ideally they should hear the story from you.
Accept responsibility – trying to shirk responsibility makes you look weak and avoids trust. Take responsibility where it is appropriate and disclose as fully as you can.
You won’t be able to talk with everyone. Have a plan about how to reach your wider stakeholders and what you will say. Will you be engaging with your fans on facebook? Or will you email all your clients directly? Alternatively it may be appropriate to hold a press conference or brief journalists one on one.
Avoid a slow trickle release of information – the longer it takes for all the information to come out, the longer the story lasts. Every time you issue a correction or reveal more details, the less credible everything else you have said becomes.

ETA: This is a guest post by Richard Ellis, PRCA Communications Director

SuperMarr?

2011-04-26T18:05:00.006+01:00

Just like Coulson's comment that the game's up when the spokesman himself needs a spokesman, there's something striking about the journalist's story becoming its own story.

Marr's revelation that he successfully took out a super-injunction has certainly made the headlines -probably indeed made more headlines than had he just allowed the truth to be reported a few years ago.

It raises many more questions than it offers answers -every interview he's ever done where he's even touched on privacy laws or infidelity is surely now being pored over by his fellows hacks. And not with a view to supporting him I'd imagine, because the fourth estate is nothing if not rigorous when it comes to screwing over one if its own. His comment that he would make no further comment is, therefore, hopeful at best.

The broader issue is much more important though.

There is something deeply disturbing about injunctions so overwhelming that even their very existence cannot be reported. And from the perspective of the super-rich, there is something so utterly and obviously attractive about them, that left untouched, their popularity can only soar.

I see that the Lib Dem MP John Hemming today tried to ask a question in the Commons about an injunction, but was stopped. Good for him for trying; bad for us he wasn't allowed to receive an answer. When even Parliamentary privilege isn't quite good enough, something has gone wrong in the balance between public disclosure and privacy; and in the Judiciary's attitude to the boundaries of the law.

In communications terms, there is a clear divide -on the one hand, a few judges and some stonkingly rich celebrities with rapacious libidos. On the other hand, pretty much everybody else.

The danger that the defenders of these super-injunctions run is that they become seen as the guardians of excess without responsibility or repercussion. If I were they, I wouldn't be so keen on that role.

Where Now For The COI?

2011-03-16T09:53:00.004Z

Mark Lund's planned departure from the COI is, of course, just the latest piece of news to come out of Hercules House.

It all adds to a sense of an organisation in flux. We've been a critical friend to the COI over the years -noting the value it brings, but also noting the problems it struggles with.

Our submission to the Cabinet Office consultation on its future didn't pull its punches. We argued:

1. The COI needs fundamental reform

2. Millions of pounds have been wasted on ineffectual Government advertising -often little more than vanity projects

3. It needs to embrace a shift towards PR and away from advertising

4. The US Advertising Council model may well be the wrong one

Our Executive Summary's here:

We agree with the Government's general premise that the way it handles communications needs to change; and that the COI is ripe for fundamental reform. Our experience both of central Departments and of the COI convinces us that significant improvement is possible.

Indeed, we believe that this review should be root-and-branch, in order both to enhance the Government's legitimate communications needs, and to deliver improved taxpayer value for money and return on investment.

The COI needs to be made smaller, less bureaucratic, more business-friendly and more business-savvy. It also needs to be more authoritative within central Government Departments and other public sector communication operations, and to help raise the standards of the weaker-performing operations to those of the best.

We further agree with the Government's proposal that it should pursue a greater use of non-paid-for channels -again both by way of producing greater cost efficiencies, and in order to improve the efficacy of its communications activity. We believe that Governments have gradually become mesmerised by the attraction of advertising, lavishing increasingly large amounts of money upon it, while failing to evaluate its value. Quite simply, millions of Pounds are wasted on advertising ever year.

We support the creation of a cross-industry body, bringing together the professional representatives and largest commercial players in the marketing communications industry. There is a clear need for greater engagement between the public and private sectors, and such a body could be extremely useful in facilitating this.

We are convinced that such a body must be genuinely representative of the whole industry, and not be dominated by advertising interests. We are therefore concerned by the explicit reference to the US Ad Council which, as the name suggests, is not as broad-based as we would expect a UK cross-industry body to be.

We believe that the COI must be central to the Government's stated communications aims. It must also, however, receive strong and clear guidance from the Cabinet Office, and undergo radical reform if it is to achieve the Government's goals.

And here's our full submission.

Getting Fresh in Manchester

2011-03-08T12:23:00.003Z

The Manchester Hilton was positively awash with PR people last week, as the Fresh Awards rolled in to town.

The PRCA's been delighted to support Fresh over the past few years. Aimed at a predominantly out-of-London audience, they celebrate the best that our industry has to offer.

As a judge, I know that the entries are interesting and varied, showcasing the fantastic work that our industry generates.

As an attendee, well the evening was certainly fun! Check this video out

UKPAC and public affairs regulation

2011-03-02T17:34:00.001Z

Yesterday, the UKPAC Register launched.

It's a significant step forward. Combining the existing registers of the PRCA and the APPC, and bringing in new entries from CIPR individuals working in public affairs too, it is the most comprehensive summary of who works in the public affairs industry. It details names, contact details and clients,

I know that 251 CIPR members (including myself) have signed up; and that 61 PRCA member organisations employing 706 public affairs are registered too. Those 61 include -for the first time- 24 in house teams, as the PRCA represents in-house teams too.

Add to that number the APPC's consultancies too, and you have a very significant figure.

Now I know that for some people, this is not enough. They will demand more and more. And, frankly, whatever we delivered would never be enough.

Whatever their criticisms, this is a significant stop forward. It provides a foundation on which to grow self-regulation. It is -though doubtless our detractors will dispute this -a good thing.

Churnalism

2011-02-24T15:03:00.002Z

There's a bit of a -how shall I put it?- whinge in The Guardian.

They make some valid observations about churnalism, but seem to point the figure at our industry, whose growth they blame rather than celebrate Instead, they should try looking a little closer to home.

Yes, it's sometimes the case that press releases are pretty much copied and pasted by papers (a point we've made to the NLA...).

Yes, it's sometimes the case that papers don't interrogate stories as they should.

But there's a very simple reason for this -newspapers no longer employ an adequate number of journalists.

It's been happening for years, and there's no sign of it stopping. As newspaper circulations fall, and as sources of information proliferate, newspaper revenues decrease, and they employ fewer people. But those people are now expected not just to fill hardcopies of the paper, but online content too. So they're pretty busy....

It's hardly rocket science to work out what the problem is.

What is rather more difficult is working out the answer -quite how do we break this vicious circle. Because we lose out too. Answers (in a press release if you like) please.

Getting to the Best Talent

2011-02-23T16:19:00.001Z

Today, we announce the creation of our Access Commission. Its remit is broad but simple: to look at the barriers to entry which exist within our industry, and to examine how to widen access so that the very best people are attracted to PR as a career -and having entered the industry, stay in it.

Every industry has barriers to entry -some (like being intelligent and hard-working) are obviously good; others (like bright people thinking they won't fit in) are obviously bad. It's the bad ones we want to identify and remove. Because we want to get to the very best talent.

So the Commission will examine a whole range of areas -class, disability, ethnicity, parent-friendly workplaces, internships etc etc. It will invite evidence, weigh it, and come forward with practical suggestions to enable our industry to appeal to the very brightest people, regardless of background.

The list of members is pretty impressive. Its Chairman is Insight Public Affairs' John Lehal. And the other members are:

Rishi Bhattacharya, Deputy Managing Director, Edelman
Magda Bulska, Account Manager, Insideout Communications
Leah Bryant, Chairman, PRCA Frontline
Bieneosa Ebite, Chair, Ignite and Managing Director, Brightstar PR
Lee Edwards, Lecturer, Manchester Business School
Nicky Garston, Senior Lecturer, Greenwich University
Kate Hartley, Managing Director, Carrot Communications
Robert Khan, Head of Law Reform, Law Society
Francis Ingham, Chief Executive, PRCA
Sandy Lindsay, Group Managing Director, Tangerine PR
Robert Minton-Taylor, Associate Senior Lecturer, Leeds Business School
Mike Morgan, CEO, Red Consultancy
Dan Murphy, Director of Corporate Communications, Remploy
Gina Ramson-Williams, Group Talent Director, Europe, Weber Shandwick
Danny Rogers, Editor, PR Week
Sarah Stimson, Course Director, Taylor Bennett Foundation

It'll report back in the early summer. I'm looking forward to its work. If you think you have something to contribute, email or DM me - francis.ingham@prca.org.uk @PRCAIngham

What Does 2011 Hold?

2011-02-10T11:07:00.004Z

Our industry's definitely more optimistic about the future than it was this time last year. That's the very clear message of our recent PRCA PR Leaders' Panel.

We asked our member MDs, CEOs and Comms Directors how positive they felt about their own organisation's prospects; about the industry's; and about the country's. We then calculated the balance of opinion by taking the negative responses away from the positive; and by splitting the agency respondents from the in-house ones.

And the results were pretty clear:

Consultancy's/organisation's overall prospects: Consultancy respondents +79; In-house respondents +54
PR industry's overall prospects: Consultancy respondents +53; In-house respondents+20

So -strong confidence from agencies and in house teams alike about their own prospects and about the idnustry's too.

A different picture emerges when asked about the UK's overall economic prospects though:

Consultancy respondents +21; In house respondents -13

The consistent gap between in house and agency sentiment is striking; as is the belief that while our own industry will prosper in 2011, the same isn't necessarily true of the wider economy.

Food for thought as we move through the year. The full results can be viewed at the PRCA site

Happy New Year From The PRCA

2010-12-24T13:26:00.020Z

Another New Year -another opportunity to review the past twelve months, and to look forward to the year ahead.

For our industry, 2010 has certainly been a better year than was 2009. There IS a recovery -ok, its strength varies by sector and by region: and ok, it sometimes appears fragile. But there are more reasons to be positive about the future than negative, and 2011 should be a good year for very many of us.

The PRCA enters 2011 in the best shape it has ever known. Late in December, I presented to our Board a review of our performance over the past three years, and a strategic plan for the next few.

There can be no doubt that we have transformed ourselves over those years -and that we are determined to continue that process of transformation.

So, a few highlights from the past year:

January - NLA Ltd blinked in copyright dispute

February -we grew by more in five weeks than in the whole of 2005 and 2006 combined

March -Copyright Tribunal ruled in our favour versus NLA Ltd

March -Peter Bingle's Bell Pottinger Public Affairs joined the PRCA

April -We announced the 46 PRCA Founding Fellows, including Lord Chadlington and Lord Bell

June Women In PR Group left CIPR, and then joined the PRCA

June -we announced our new officers, with Huntsworth's Clarke and Edelman's Phillips taking major roles heading up best practice and international work respectively

August - Caroline Kinsey was elected as Chairman of the PR Council

August -we announced an alliance with the IVCA allowing our members access to one-another's services

October -our awards attracted a sell-out crowd of 750. They're now second in size only to PR Week's

October -Hill and Knowlton's Sally Costerton became PRCA Chairman and set out her two-year Chairmanship vision

October -Remarkable Group's Amy Bryant-Jeffries became first person to be awarded the new PRCA Foundation Certificate

November -PRCA National Conference took place in Manchester -our first National Conference outside of London in living memory, and an affirmation of our growth outside the Capital over the past three years.

November -We launched designatory letters. Over half of our members have claimed them already

December -having lost to the NLA in the High Court, we stayed the course and move to the Court of Appeal

So what do we plan for 2011?

Well, that will all become clear. But one thing is certain -we have no intention of going slow. We've changed fundamentally over the past few years, and I believe we've become the industry's best and more effective voice.

We represent more than double the number of UK consultancies we did three years ago; we have international members across the world, from Australia to the Ukraine -Indonesia to France; and we represent over fifty in-house PR departments -M&S, John Lewis, the Met Police, Westminster Council, Vodafone, the Law Society, P&G, and many other fantastic names, who wouldn't have even considered joining the PRCA even a couple of years ago. Their faith in the PRCA speaks volumes about how we have changed, and seized our new role.

We intend to build on all of that progress, with detremniation and verve.

As the saying goes -you aint seen nothing yet!

Standing Up For The Industry

2010-12-14T15:06:00.004Z

Last week, we lodged our appeal against the High Court's ruling in favour of the NLA.

This is what I said announcing it:

Fifteen minutes ago acting on behalf of our members and the wider PR industry, the PRCA appealed last month’s High Court decision in favour of the NLA,

In 2009 the NLA decided to extend its hardcopy licensing scheme to cover the sharing of links to newspaper website content. The NLA believes that anyone using a commercial media monitoring service, or systematically sending content to clients, needs a licence to do so.

Meltwater challenged the proposed licensing scheme in the Copyright Tribunal believing it to be unreasonable. The PRCA supported this view and intervened in support of Meltwater and on behalf of our members and end users generally.

Following two rulings from the Copyright Tribunal in favour of Meltwater and the PRCA, the NLA referred the PRCA and Meltwater to the High Court.

We were disappointed by the High Court’s decision and believe it fundamentally to be flawed. We believe it risks putting an end to the freedom with which information can be shared on the Internet. The implication is that the mere act of browsing freely accessible websites will require a copyright licence.

We are therefore appealing the decision. We anticipate that even if our appeal is unsuccessful, the Copyright Tribunal will find that the terms of the licences and the fees sought from customers are unreasonable and so will reduce the fees. In this event, end users will still be in a better position.

Irrespective of the outcome of the appeal, we are confident that our ultimate aim of ensuring reasonable terms for the licensing of NLA content will be achieved.

In the meantime, if you have any questions about what the licensing scheme means for you or your organisation or you would like to be kept informed of developments in this case, then please on the link below.

The PRCA is proud to be representing, with Meltwater, the interests of the PR industry. And while it is our duty as a professional body to take on such a role, your messages of support and help collecting evidence have been crucial to our case.

Thank you for all your help and we promise to keep you informed as the case continues.

You can see a clip of that statement here

PRCA response to today’s High Court ruling

2010-11-26T12:56:00.006Z

London, 26 November 2010 – Following the High Court’s decision in favour of the NLA, Francis Ingham, PRCA chief executive said “We are disappointed by today’s decision and believe it fundamentally to be flawed – it risks putting an end to the freedom with which information can be shared on the Internet. We are discussing the detailed implications of the judgement with our lawyers and in the meantime have been granted permission to appeal.

If you have any questions or comments, then please call Richard Ellis on 020 7233 6026 or 07779 102 758 or email Richard.ellis@prca.org.uk.

Walking The Walk On Evaluation

2010-11-19T10:35:00.001Z

As an industry, we have wrestled with evaluation for far too long. Decades in fact. And most of that wrestling has -until now- been pretty much pointless.

I hope that this week's PRCA-supported evaluation summit, hosted by AMEC and our opposite, cross-Atlantic number the PRSA, will prove a turning point.

Bringing together the leading professional bodies to agree a common evaluation framework is the absolute prerequisite for driving forward our common agenda. We have fully endorsed the AMEC-PRSA proposals and I'm glad that the CIPR has too.

Our Chairman, H&K's Sally Costerton, and the Chairman of our Best Practice Committee, Huntsworth's Alison Clarke spoke for us at the summit. They set out not only our support for the framework, but also our practical efforts to embed it within our processes, and by doing so, to drive evaluation excellence through our membership.

We have set out two highly practical and I believe significant initiatives, that will ensure we don't just talk the talk on evaluation, but we also walk the walk.

The first is that we we will create a specialist evaluation module as part of our Consultancy Management Standard (CMS). This will allow consultancies and in house departments to demonstrate their commitment to robust and relevant evaluation techniques. Passing this specialist, independently-audited module will result in the award of an evaluation kitemark -public evidence of evaluation excellence. Bear in mind too that CMS has now been adopted by over a dozen countries. So our evaluation ambition and reach goes far beyond just the UK.

The second is that from 2011 onwards, we will include a mandatory evaluation element in our awards programme. This year, the PRCA awards became second in size only to PR Week, so this again is a major practical commitment. And I would urge other awards programmes to follow our lead. Credible PR awards require the credible evaluation of PR work.

A note of caution and realism though. It takes more than one afternoon's summit to crack such a deep, ingrained issue. Good intentions and fine rhetoric will take us only so far -that's why we need practical commitments. We delude ourselves if we think that the path ahead will be simple. but at least now we're walking the walk on it eh?

UKPAC Register Open For Business

2010-11-02T12:00:00.002Z

The public affairs industry takes a further step forward in delivering transparent accountability today, as the UKPAC Register is opened up for CIPR members to submit their details.

The PRCA and APPC have run our own Public Affairs Registers for years now, but their weakness has been a lack of comprehensive cover, and the simple annoyance of looking at two different registers. Very soon, both of those weaknesses will be gone.

Just by way of clarity for our member employees –you’re covered by your corporate PRCA or APPC memberships already. So if you’re also a CIPR member, you don’t need to register again –your details will be registered as the whole PRCA Register is uploaded in one go.

I’m a member of the CIPR, and I do the odd bit of lobbying. So I guess I’d better sign up. Off to the UKPAC site I go……

Celebrating Success

2010-10-29T17:04:00.003+01:00

By any measure (except perhaps efficient air conditioning) this week's PRCA Awards were a a roaring success, in a sold-out Park Lane Hilton.

In the 2007 awards -two weeks into my new role at the PRCA- we had a fifth of this week's attendees, and a third of the entries. And, in truth, the evening wasn't very good. In fact, it was so soul-crushingly bad that I seriously contemplating asking Colin Farrington for my old job back at the CIPR. Fortunately, I held my nerve, and decided that instead we'd work hard to improve the awards. And we certainly have.

This week's awards saw a fantastically well-run event, fronted by an hilarious Rufus Hound, showcasing the very best our industry has to offer from across the consultancy, in house and freelance sectors of PR. And attended by 250 people more than even last year's event. I've been to dozens of PR awards, and -biased though i obviously am- it was the most enjoyable I've been to. AS you can see from the photos After PR Week's extravaganza, it was also the biggest. That's a pretty decent achievement.

The only problem of course is this: How can we improve for next year? Well, it's a nice problem to have eh?!

Congratulating Our First Qualification Recipient

2010-10-21T16:41:00.014+01:00

Congratulations to Amy Bryant-Jeffries, the first person to be awarded a PRCA qualification.

Francis Ingham and Amy Bryant-Jeffries, with Stephen Pomeroy, CEO of Remarkable Group

I had the pleasure of presenting Amy with her Foundation Certificate earlier this week, at the Remarkable Group office in Winchester, where Amy has now been promoted to PR Account Executive.

We launched PRCA qualifications just a little while ago, and Amy's the first person to complete the course.

For those of you who haven't looked at our offering in any depth, this is what makes it stand out from the competition:

1. PRCA qualifications are about practical skills, not dull theory
2. They're priced at an incredibly competitive level -consciously below the prices offered by other professional bodies
3. They're modular, so you can start and finish at a pace that suits you
4. They're underpinned by a Qualifications Board of eminent practitioners -Jonathan Jordan, ex-Burson Marsteller, and now founder of Sermelo; Dick Fedorcio, Public Affairs Director at the Metropolitan Police and ex-President of the CIPR; Professor Trevor Morris; Westminster's A;ex Aiken; and Bray Leino's Penny Porter

So if you're looking to give your career or a boost, or to equip your staff with practical skills, why not follow Amy's lead?

Eric Pickles' Strange View of the World

2010-09-29T11:36:00.003+01:00

I have a confession. I like Eric Pickles.

I've worked for the Tory Party and been a Tory Councillor. I know that within Party circles, he's held in high regard, and has a populist, popular touch.

But his latest announcement that he is consulting on banning Councils from using "hired-gun lobbyists that operate in the shadows to bulldoze special interests through" central government is just playing politics.

Let me explain why Eric is wrong:

1. If 'hired gun lobbyists' (what a ridiculous phrase) can 'bulldoze special interests' through the Government, then maybe he ought instead to ask his Department to be a little more rigorous in examining Councils' proposals? If his officials just roll over in the face of any old argument, then I have a pretty simple way he can save the public purse some money....

2. He assumes that no public body has the right to take a different view to that of the Government. From a Secretary of State who believes in localism that's a pretty strange position. Because if he did believe they were able to take a different view, then why wouldn't he let them lobby for that view? As the former Leader of Bradford Council, he should know that Bradford and Whitehall don't always see eye to eye.

3. If he does accept the pretty Conservative view that Whitehall doesn't always know best, then why shouldn't Councils bring in temporary, specialist support to make their case? I thought that from Nick Ridley onwards there was a strong tradition of Conservatives believing that it made financial sense for Councils to use outside consultants to cover exceptional, unpredictable needs?

Of course, I don't believe that Mr Pickles really believes in all of this. But he certainly does believe in the power of publicity. Now his tough man act might deliver him some good headlines in the Daily Mail, but it won't help him deliver better local governance -or better value for the taxpayer either. As we all know, measuring effectiveness by how thick the press cuttings are is a pretty artificial, short-term method.

Here's to you @wadds

2010-09-24T10:33:00.003+01:00

Ok, so I would have enjoyed winning last night's reputation online award for Greatest Contribution from an Individual. But losing to @wadds isn't the end of the world.

He's passionate about social media -and he understands it too, which isn't always the case in our industry. He's also a PRCA member -which means I can find a reason to celebrate my own vanquishing.

So -here's to you @wadds -you deserve it!

Chris Whitehouse Is Just Wrong

2010-09-10T12:19:00.004+01:00

Chris Whitehouse, MD of The Whitehouse Consultancy is on the soapbox in this week's PR Week, with a precis of a longer article first published earlier this month. He's returning to his favourite topic -bashing his own industry. I know he is passionate about standards in public affairs, but it does nonetheless strike me as a strange way to address your profession.

Allow me to make a riposte. I make no apology for it being direct.

He states that "The first time there is a lobbying scandal that involves a company or individual included on the statutory register, the media will generate pressure for the culprit to be punished". Correct. "With no statutory authority to insist on a minimum standard of behaviour and with no scale of sanctions available, the authorities will be powerless to act". Absolutely incorrect. There are standards -set by the PRCA, CIPR and APPC Codes. There is a scale of sanctions -again, set out in our Codes. The 'authorities' (slightly strange word but I'll let it pass) do have the ability and the appetite to act.

I'm never quite certain if the people who wheel out this 'self-regulation is no regulation' line are deliberately being inaccurate, or just haven't bothered to look at what the self-regulatory bodies actually do. Our Code covers all PRCA member employees. It includes a clear, fair and robust disciplinary process. We enforce it rigorously. We have a range of sanctions available all the way up to public expulsion. We are more than willing to use them.

It's a pretty straightforward situation.

The ridiculousness of the industry beating itself up is that there are plenty of other people happy to do so -we really don't need to add to their numbers.

There certainly is a debate to be had about regulation, but it will be a rather more productive one if it includes some facts.

The Internship Challenge

2010-09-03T09:28:00.003+01:00

The issue of how we reward interns for their efforts is being discussed again, and seems all the more stark given the currently weak state of the jobs market, and the reduction in university places available. PR Week for instance, carries an analysis piece this week, including some comments from me. In the same issue, it also runs a piece entitled 'public believes degrees are ten-a-penny'. The juxtaposition is interesting

My old CIPR boss Colin Farrington had a pithy little line 'the best can be the enemy of the good'. I guess he might have deployed it here -would the challenge that some have made for all internships to be well paid run the risk of simply reducing the total number of internships available? That certainly wouldn't help either us as an industry, or the people trying to get their first break.

But equally an industry of slave labourers isn't what we want either -in fact, it shames us. It certainly serves as an unwelcome filter, blocking the path of those unable to afford the luxury of working without pay. As a student, I turned down an unpaid internship with the think tank Politeia -I'd have loved to have worked there, but I couldn't afford to. So I do recognise the problem.

This conundrum is all the more acute given the economic uncertainty we still face. At the PRCA, we think it is just one aspect of the wider challenge of ensuring that the very best available talent sees PR as an attractive, rewarding, open industry industry. It encompasses deep issues such as ethnicity, gender, disability, class. It isn't an issue that is amenable to simple, quick solutions, and we certainly don't believe that the answers are ready made.

But it is an issue we are committed to addressing. We will shortly be announcing the make-up of a commission to examine this challenge, and to come forward with practical recommendations. We cannot promise easy solutions, but we can promise effort and commitment.

PRCA and the Newspaper Licensing Agency -an update

2010-08-19T11:41:00.001+01:00

The following statment was issued to all members earlier this morning:

We understand that the NLA has asked a number of PRCA members to provide witness statements for use by the NLA in its High Court proceedings against the PRCA.

As you know from previous alerts, Meltwater News referred the NLA's Web Database Licence (WDL) and the Web End User Licence (WEUL) -i.e. the one PRCA members are asked to sign by the NLA- to the UK's Copyright Tribunal in December 2009. Amongst other things, Meltwater is arguing that end users should not need to pay the NLA for receiving and clicking on links sent as part of an online news monitoring service. The PRCA intervened in January 2010 in support of Meltwater's case on this point.

In May 2010, the NLA decided to sue both Meltwater and the PRCA (as a representative of its members) for copyright infringement. Amongst other things, the NLA is seeking a declaration that the PRCA's members require (as a matter of law) a licence from the NLA to receive the Meltwater News service. This issue is going to trial before the High Court in November. It is in respect of this issue that the NLA is seeking evidence from PRCA members. That evidence will be used by the NLA to support its case that it is perfectly reasonable for the NLA to charge PRCA members for receiving and clicking on links.

As the PRCA is a defendant in these proceedings, we cannot and do not comment on whether or not you should provide any such evidence to the NLA. However, we do advise that you seek independent legal advice on the implications for you of providing evidence for the NLA before providing any evidence. In relation to any evidence given to support the NLA, the PRCA may ask witnesses to attend Court to answer questions about their evidence.

The Guardian needs a fact check

2010-08-06T09:40:00.004+01:00

Yesterday, the Guardian ran an 'investigative' piece about PR companies supposedly 'reputation laundering' for oppresive regimes.

They should buy a dictionary. Their view of 'investigative' is essentially to start with a prejudice; add a bit of speculation; throw in a cropped quotation. And -bingo! A front page story!

So let us be clear:

PR is a 'growing market'. Not in terms of working for overseas governments, but because it's a growing discipline across professional services.

It's *previously* autocratic governments that are now democracies which realise they need to talk with their populations, rather than just dictate to them.

And I make no apology for London being a global PR hub. A hub for ethical, professional communications advice.

'Professional'. It's an important word. It's one the Guardian should look up in a dictionary. Because it certainly isn't a word that they understand right now.

Signing Up For The Voyage

2010-07-27T11:00:00.001+01:00

As you might have read in PR Week, it's now public that I've committed to stay at the PRCA until January 2013 at the very least. It wasn't a particularly hard decision -I like to see things through, and despite the PRCA team achieving much over the past three years or so, I still think there's a great deal more to do. What have we done so far? Well....

Stage one was to steady the ship. I think we did that pretty well.

Stage two was to improve the offering. We did that too. Our business referral service FAPRA is enormously bigger than it was; our training beats the competition hands down in terms of quality and price; our range and quality of member services has never been better.

Stage three was to grow. Well, we've certainly done that -we now have twice the number agency members we had in 2007. We have in-house teams too. We have a freelancer network. We have international members.

And all the while to start offering the industry the leadership and support it has lacked so often and so noticeably.

So what's the next stage?

More of the above of course, but something else too. We need to set the direction of the industry rather than just comment on it. And with the team and the members we have, we can certainly do that.

We also intend to link up with like-minded, complimentary bodies. We have a number of those partnerships on the cards, and will be announcing them soon enough. The aim is to add value to our existing members, and to increase still further our relevance to our industry.

So the plan for the next two and a half years? Full steam ahead of course!

Photo credit: legenda-.

Actually Doing Something On Diversity.....

2010-07-08T17:13:00.000+01:00

I spent most of yesterday at the Ignite conference on diversity, supported and hosted by Edelman.

I'm not a great conference-goer it must be said. All too often, they're little more than talking shops to puff up the vanity of organisers and speakers alike. But I think yesterday was different. PRCA Board member and Edelman CEO Robert Phillips set the tone when he said that his aim was action not words. I couldn't agree more.

Robert spelt out precisely what Edelman will do to drive diversity, and in the same manner, I set out what the PRCA will do. We will do this:

*Establish a framework for paid internships, targeted at hard-to-reach groups
*Formalise our work with universities, again targeted to reach students who ordinarily wouldn't consider a career in PR
*Provide the first credible, robust statistics on the size and composition of the PR industry, to be refreshed every two years

All of this should help to ease access into the industry, and to allow us to track its composition as it moves forward. Much of this we will do with partners -undertaking the PR Census with PR Week for example.

But the most important thing that we will do is to work with other willing bodies to create robust evidence of the business case for diversity. That case is the missing link.

I am thoroughly tired of hearing speeches that claim there is a clear business case for diversity, but then signally fail to provide any evidence of that case. A sense of 'we should do this thing' will take the industry only so far -and it will do so very slowly. The most powerful driver for action is the one that includes Pound signs. That is why clear, financial measures of the business benefit derived from workforce diversity are absolutely essential if we are to widen access to the profession, so that it can benefit from all of the talent that exists.

A final comment. Diversity isn't just about ethnicity. It's about so much more than that. It's about age, about disability, about -dare we say the word- class. We pigeon hole and marginalise the debate when we limit it to being a question of colour alone. That's a mistake the PRCA will not make.

PRINCIPLES FOR SUCCESS

2010-06-25T09:53:00.000+01:00

Guestpost by Richard Houghton FPRCA, President of ICCO, and Ex-Chairman of the PRCA

It’s more than 11 years since I was the PRCA representative on the first PR Planning and Evaluation Toolkit, a joint publication with the CIPR. An online version PREFix followed and there are now more books, guides and websites on how to evaluate campaigns than you can count.

Despite the level and quality of information available I think it fair to say that evaluation of PR campaigns is by no means ubiquitous and that in many case advertising value equivalents (AVEs) are the sole measure used, despite their obvious failings.

Last week in Barcelona at the 2nd European Summit on Measurement 150 measurement and PR professionals may have taken the first steps to making PR evaluation a core part of all campaigns.

The main participants in the Summit Principles debate - the Global Alliance for Public Relations, the IPR's Commission on Measurement and Evaluation, the PRSA, the ICCO and the US Research Agency Leaders Chapter of AMEC – helped to create the seven key principles of evaluation that were endorsed at the conference These were that:.

1. Goal setting and measurement are important

2. Media measurement requires quantity and quality

3. AVEs are not the Value of Public Relations
- Do not measure the value of PR or future activity
- Where comparisons are made validated metrics should be used
- Multipliers should never be applied unless proven to exist

4. Social media can and should be measured

5. Measuring outcomes is preferred to measuring media results (outputs)

6. Organisational results and outcomes should be measured whenever possible

7. Transparency and replicability are paramount to sound measurement

What does this mean to PRCA members?

We’ve gone on record endorsing the principles as an important starting point for achieving two things. Firstly, we want to drive acceptance that evaluation of PR campaigns is crucial for the planning of future campaigns and demonstrating value.

Secondly, we are looking for wide understanding and acceptance that not all measurement methods are equal and that there are some basic requirements that need to be met for the evaluation process to be successful.

The PRCA’s Best Practice Committee, chaired by Alison Clark of Huntsworth has evaluation as one of its top priorities and we will continue to develop the PRCA’s services in this area including training, tools and best practice.

On the vexed question of AVEs, my view is that if clients want them, then most consultancies will provide them. But at the same time the failings of the method should be highlighted and every effort should be made to provide alternative and comparable evaluation methods that are relevant to other ROI measures used by the client.

Launching the PR Council

2010-06-23T14:51:00.000+01:00

Today is a big day for the PRCA. It's the day we announce the composition of the PR Council.

The Council includes some of the most respected and well-known names in PR, and it will genuinely be a pleasure to hear their views on the issues facing the industry, and on the work of the PRCA.

In a sign of how engaged our membership now is, over two-thirds of members cast their votes in the week they had available to do so. I know that rate is pretty impressive by the standards of any membership body -in fact, it exceeds turnout at last month's general election!

It's important also to note the structural change. For the first time in our 41 years of existence, the PRCA's governance procedures involve in-house practitioners. That is a major change, and is good news for the PRCA, our members and the broader industry we represent.

I see this development as just the latest stage in the PRCA's renaissance. Over the past two and a bit years, we have more than doubled our agency membership; we have successfully opened our ranks to in-house practitioners; we have become the most vocal advocate and defender of the PR industry; and we have -I hope- transformed the services we offer to members.

It's all part of our drive for continuous improvement. And we have much, much more planned.

Women in PR group opens talks with PRCA

2010-06-11T11:32:00.000+01:00

Guest post by Gillian Waddell, MD of Fuel PR and President of Women in PR (WPR) group.

WPR is a well-established industry organisation with just under 50 years of providing uniquely informal networking opportunities for a diverse group of experienced PR professionals at varying stages of their careers. Linking with CIPR some 5 years ago provided an opportunity to widen the membership. However, the twinning of a background of well-known CIPR issues together with individual members' varying concerns has encouraged us to re-consider our compatibility as a CIPR sectoral group. We are aware that a number of our members value much of CIPR's overall offer, and will want to continue to benefit from this, but our success as a group lies in maintaining characteristics such as informality, fun and flexibility within the context of independent responsibility and integrity.

The decision to leave CIPR has not been taken quickly or lightly. We have spent a good deal of time over the past year discussing the various issues, both with our members and CIPR. We have encouraged debate about the future of WPR, and our AGM in February resulted in a decision to hold an EGM to specifically discuss the overall question of our future direction as a group. The result of this was our decision to resign from CIPR, to continue as a group, and to continue with talks with PRCA with regards to how we might link together.

PRCA is held in high regard by many of our members, some of whom are members, some of whom are not. PRCA is widely recognised to potentially offer a "great new home" for WPR - it has a terrific reputation amongst the industry for providing standards of best practice professionalism and integrity within a framework of responsible entrepreneurial, energetic and enthusiastic "PR spirit". We think there could be many benefits to both parties in terms of linking.

There's obviously been lively debate about the recent decision/activity. We understand the decision may not be welcome news to CIPR, but we want to thank them for their support over the past 5 years, and to support those who want to continue with their individual membership of CIPR. We are however committed to a new future which resonates closely with our intents and members.

We are grateful to PRCA for the opportunity to talk, consider ways we can link, and to encourage the means by which our organisation can continue to flourish as a platform for wide-ranging industry individuals at all stages of their professional careers to come together within a unique spirit of co-operation, friendly interaction and support.

LGcommunications Conference - Leeds 2010

2010-06-02T11:32:00.000+01:00

Guest post by David Holdstock, Chair of LGcommunications and Head of Corporate Communications at London Borough of Hillingdon.

As the changing political and economic landscape brings tough new challenges, local government communicators need to communicate more effectively and learn from leaders in the industry.

This new era of austerity is going to impact on all of us and it made this year's LGcommunications conference, held in Leeds last week, the most important conference for public sector communicators in the last five years - maybe the last decade.

With nearly 400 delegates, more than 50 speakers and a range of best practice seminars, the clear message was that communicators have a key role to play in helping to shape the way organisations respond to the tough decisions ahead. Some have grasped the initiative and communications is already driving a huge amount of transformation in local government. In other areas, there is still some way to go. It is clear that as professional communicators, we need to work with leadership teams as improving reputation is a collective challenge. If we work with our senior teams to provide strong leadership, if we have a clear sense of purpose and deliver strategic, cost-effective communications, then we can rise to the challenge.

The centerpiece of the conference was the launch of the new LGcommunications/Local Government Association reputation campaign, which focuses on three key themes - Leadership, branding and communications. These need to be at the heart of every local authority communications outfit if we are going to be able to deliver value for money services and an enhanced reputation for local government in the current climate. It provides the framework for local government communicators to deliver improved reputation and ultimately increase resident satisfaction.

We also announced at the conference a new strategic partnership between LGcommunications and the PRCA. This offers an exclusive and unique arrangement for LGcommunications members who sign up as in-house members. This will add new training and development opportunities for LGcommunications’ members, namely exclusive discounted rates on PRCA face to face training and unlimited free online training, but also links to professional networks that members may otherwise not be able to access. Real benefits for in-house PR professionals in the public sector.

As professional communicators we are in a powerful and in many ways, unique position. We should no longer be going to our chief executives asking for additional money and resources. Instead, we should be going with solutions of how we can help our organisations meet the financial and political challenges that lie ahead for all of us.

In Defence of Self-Regulation

2010-05-19T10:07:00.000+01:00

Paul Bradshaw asks on twitter why we disagree with the Government's proposal to become heavily involved in the regulation of public affairs professionals. In particular, he asks how we can 'reasonably' do so. Well, the question having been posed, let me attempt an answer.

The PRCA -along with the two other relevant professional bodies- agrees that transparency and accountability are central to the practice of public affairs. That is why PRCA members have, for many years, adhered to a rigorous Code of Conduct, and declared regularly the names of their clients and the names of their employees. The same goes for APPC members too. There is nothing secretive here, and the people who pretend otherwise are very often just engaged in wishful thinking to support their own theories.

This accountability and transparency is further being enhanced by the creation of one unified register under the Public Affairs Council, constituted by the three main bodies. This Council will be chaired by an independent person of stature, who will be supported by other Independent Board Members. The identities of those people will very soon be made public, the exhaustive recruitment process having been completed two days ago.

Having set that context, let me address the main issue. Government regulation should be proportionate, effective, and better than the thing it replaces. Where self-regulation exists and works, it should be allowed to continue. That holds true for any normal activity, not just public affairs. It applies to blogging, tweeting, even journalism for that matter. And existing public affairs regulation does indeed work.

We are not nihilists -we will continue to work calmly and reasonably with all parties to make our points. And if the Government does decide to amend the current regulatory system, and legislatively to prioritise such a change, then we will work with them to make it as effective and proportionate as possible. But the key point is this -it is those who scream 'something must be done', and urge the dismantling of a system that works already, who are not acting 'reasonably'.

Election 2010 - Where is the real power?

2010-05-10T14:50:00.000+01:00

Guest post by Howard Kosky, markettiers4dc

So, after a weekend of yet more conjecture having woken up on Friday to the news that no single party had won the election and that the exit poles appeared to have got it right, communication experts have begun to dissect the campaigns to look at where it went right or, more worryingly for some, where it went wrong and what lessons there are to be learned.

But what can we in the communications industry learn or, more to the point, be reminded of from this campaign?

As with many brands and organisations, the UK's political parties have tried to engage with an audience, build a community and deliver a call to action to ‘buy’ their brand i.e. to vote for them. One could argue that, collectively, they have done a very good job. Turnout was up and there were queues outside the ‘shops’ / polling stations of people keen to 'buy' one of them.

We’ve seen traditional marketing tactics deployed including above-the-line advertising. There has been print media editorial with some newspapers switching allegiances, point-of-sale with local sampling teams and broadcast, but what happened to Social Media?

It was only a few months ago that we were being told that this was the election where Social Media would take its place in influencing the political shape of the country in the same way perhaps Barack Obama’s campaign did in the US. However for me, with a vested and subjective interest, I will have to stand in the corner and raise my hand for the power of broadcast and how this media has, once again, shown its strength to influence.

For the first time we have had the Leader Debates, if we can describe them as such. I would argue they were more influential in mobilising an audience than the traditional TV ad of the party political broadcast. We can also analyse the debates themselves and the personal performances of the ‘brand spokespersons’ and draw conclusions and analogies to what we deal with day to day. There is no doubt they were effective in engaging an audience with a call to action to register and vote, but how much influence did each spokesperson have on us the electorate to 'buy' their brand? Nick Clegg most certainly used the opportunity to raise awareness for the Lib Dems and looks set to have a big say in the final outcome if the activity of the last few days is anything to go by.

As we all know, when you are dealing with a powerful media, its great when it goes in your favour but tread careful and be respectful to it, otherwise it can also work against you. One only has to observe Gordon Brown’s ‘gaffgate’ episode to see this in practice.

Rule one as anyone will tell you in broadcast is to assume the mic is live at all times until you are certain its been switched off. I watched with intrigue not only that moment unfold 'live' on television, but also as the TV cameras followed Brown into the radio studio to be interviewed by Jeremy Vine. This is a media which can mobilise itself very quickly and whilst being made aware of the recording and realising the severity of his comments, Brown importantly also realised the influence of broadcast media.

So whilst no one party can claim an outright victory, I hereby declare Broadcast the winner and a timely reminder of its power to influence.

League Table 2010

2010-04-23T10:58:00.000+01:00

Everyone says that they don't care about the Top 150 league table. Just like they say they really don't care if they're in the Power Book or not. Do I believe them? Absolutely not!! Their studied indifference has the same ring of truth as David Cameron saying he genuinely isn't that fussed about his hair; or Gordon Brown telling us that's really quite a laid back sort of guy....

Relative positions matter, especially when there's a move into a different 'class'.

But putting the competition element aside, and looking at the industry as a whole, these are very encouraging figures. This time last year, the PR world was full of doom mongers, predicting the end of the world as we knew it -dozens of agencies turning turtle; hordes of PR execs queuing round the block to get into the dole office..... You get the picture. And what happened? The industry grew by 0.75% over the year.

Now ok, 0.75% is hardly fantastic. Compared with the boom years, it's a pretty sickly number. And very few will look back some time from now and say 'gosh 2009 was a really relaxed, confident year -if anything, perhaps things were too easy'. 2009 was a tough year. But many agencies prospered during it nonetheless, and far fewer agencies went into a nosedive than we might have expected. We ended 2009 in much better shape than we might.

Where does it leave us for 2010 and beyond? Well set in my view. If that was the worst the recession had to throw at us, well.......

It Took Only 50 Years But.....

2010-04-16T10:55:00.000+01:00

I haven't seen the viewing figures, but last night was surely remarkable for being the moment when political debate reached out to the non-anoraks (and yes, I'm in the anorak category here), and became prime-time viewing. About time too -it's taken a mere 50 years to agree the rules after all....

Everyone's pretty clear that Clegg won the night. To an extent, the Lib Dems were inevitably going to be the big winners, just due to finally getting the same amount of airtime as the two bigger parties. But Clegg certainly seemed the most assured, and managed to pull off the classic trick of being Mr Reasonable in a three-way argument.

I've commented to PR Week on what I thought about Cameron's performance -good beginning, strong ending, but no theme or passion in the middle. The election's his to lose, so there'll be relief in CCHQ that he didn't lose it last night. But I think there'll also be disappointment.

As for Brown, well he was solid, he was just the right side of aggressive, and he got the only laugh of the evening. It wasn't, though, the game changer he needs.

The one great disappointment though was surely the set. It was, well, awful. I can't remember who it was that made the comparison last night, but it was more reminiscent of Going For Gold than of the US Presidential model it was supposed to emulate.

Two final comments. It was interesting -and it was insightful- but televised debates very rarely change the dynamic of elections. They more often serve to entrench the views we have already.

There's (rightly) much talk of how the US ones work, but the last time a debate changed the course of an election must be Carter-Reagan. And the second point is the one made by Stephan Shakespeare at You Gov. Polls immediately after such events often don't always reflect what ends up being the settled view. And if you doubt that, google the Carter Ford 1976 debate, how it was initially reported, and how it ended up being rated.

Roll on round two....

Speed Joins PRCA

2010-04-07T17:15:00.000+01:00

Two year and six months into me being DG, Speed has joined the PRCA.

It's a genuinely seminal moment.

The criticism laid at the door of membership bodies is that they are slow moving; that they fail properly to represent what happens in the industry they purport to represent; that they are dinosaurs in a land full of sprinters.

Those are fair criticisms. And we need to learn from them. As an industry, we must embrace digital or die. Too many people still hold out against that simple truth. And on too many occasions, the refuskins are membership bodies.

So I am absolutely delighted to welcome Stephen Waddington and Steve Earl's firm into the PRCA.

They're dynamic. They're modern. They live in the future. And now they're in the PRCA.

One final thought.

I think what Stephen has said deserves to be quoted without commentary:

“We're really impressed with how the PRCA has modernised. We welcomed the decision to broaden the membership to include client organisations, the way that the Association has embraced digital communications and its proactive campaigning on issues such as web licensing. The change has been dramatic.”

Stephen's posted about joining on his blog too. I'll leave it at that I think.

Five Years On

2010-04-06T11:36:00.001+01:00

So, the election's finally been called.

I'm an unashamed politico, so naturally I'm interested in politics. But I'm sure that I'm not the only one who'll be following the campaign with interest until May 6th. Indeed, possibly until May 18th, when Parliament returns.

Today's announcement does make me think back five years.

On the day the 2005 election was called, I was CIPR Head of Public Affairs, and stuck in a management away day, chaired by Colin Farrington in the CIPR flat. I was also Lionel Zetter's Parliamentary agent, and eager to get back to the constituency to start our campaign. Colin very kindly allowed me to leave right away, and for the next month to squeeze my job around my agent's responsibilities. Most of the launch day was spent delivering thousands of leaflets, and touring the mean streets of Edmonton in a car covered in Tory propaganda, wielding a loud-hailer at unsuspecting voters.... Those of you who know Edmonton will know what sort of a day that makes for.

Seems a long time ago.

It prompts one related thought. I was genuinely sorry to see Colin fall ill. We had the odd disagreement after I left the CIPR, but during the time I worked for him, I found Colin a good boss and a decent guy. Now that he's left the CIPR, I hope he finds something that gives him a fresh challenge. I'm sure he will.

PRCA-Bell Pottinger Public Affairs. Setting the Record Straight

2010-04-01T20:15:00.000+01:00

Let's set the record straight re the PRCA and Bell Pottinger Public Affairs, shall we?

There are a couple of suggestions floating around today that somehow BPPA won't actually be listing their clients, despite joining the PRCA. These suggestions have already been rebutted by Peter Bingle and by me, but let's give it another go eh?

Let me be as blunt about this as I can be -and as is allowed by the constraints of polite language.

These suggestions are absolute rubbish.

There is no special deal; no unique exemption. There is no hidden meaning; no covert agenda.

BPPA will declare all of their clients in the same transparent, voluntary and open way that every other PRCA member does. Like every other PRCA member, there will be an incredibly limited, exceptional ability for them to request that they should not declare a particular client where to do so would be illegal; would place employees in physical danger; would breach national security restrictions. If they make any such request, they will have to provide evidence to support it.

This exemptions clause exists now, and matches the one offered by the APPC, and the one that the CIPR's new model of transparency will offer too. It is sensible, limited and ethical. It will be backed up and validated by the UK Public Affairs Council.

The thing that is certainly not sensible is to treat BPPA's decision to join the PRCA -and to embrace our rigorous disclosure demands- as something other than a very significant and positive moment. This was a big decision for BPPA, taken personally by Peter Bingle and Tim Bell; it is a significant boost to the self-regulatory model that the great majority of us support.

So my simple message is this. BPPA is a first-rate, ethical, transparent company, and I am delighted to welcome them to the PRCA.

Maybe just for once, perhaps, just perhaps, we could try and embrace good news for what it is, rather than always trying to find some hidden deceit within it?

PRCA Welcomes Bell Pottinger Public Affairs

2010-03-30T16:11:00.000+01:00

Today's a good day for the public affairs industry, and a good day for the PRCA. Because today it's now public knowledge that Bell Pottinger Public Affairs is the latest PRCA member.

Their entry is something I've been keen on for a long time, and I'm delighted that Tim Bell and Peter Bingle have made the decision to bring BPPA into the PRCA club. It's a totemic PA brand, and its addition to our ranks is another great PRCA 'win' -comparable to Weber's return in 2008 and Edelman's in 2009.

So it adds again to the momentum of the PRCA, and that's something I'm certainly proud of. Over the past two years, we've doubled in size and, I'd like to think, in relevance to the industry too.

It's more than that though -it's a real boost to self-regulation.

The critics of self-regulation have always bemoaned the fact that while BPPA's staff were CIPR members, the company wasn't in the APPC or PRCA. Well, no longer. I'm sure that Tamsin Cave et al will change their line of attack, but the main one's now gone. This affirmation of transparency by Peter and Tim is -hopefully- a turning point in our efforts to avoid the unnecessary burden, expense and bureaucracy of Government regulation.

So -a really good day.

I think I shall celebrate BPPA's entry in a manner that Peter would approve of -I shall open a nice bottle of wine and listen to some opera....

Copyright Tribunal Rules in Favour of PRCA

2010-03-16T10:56:00.000Z

No need to make any further comment on this PR Week story.

Other than to say that we are obviously delighted. And that it vindicates our decision to stand up for the best interests of our members and the industry.

Max ‘Marmite’ Clifford, by Trevor Morris Visiting Professor of Public Relations, University of Westminster

2010-02-18T12:08:00.000Z

Fireworks on Monday night at a panel debate entitled ‘Celebrity Brands – Desire, Dollars and Danger?’ held at the Regent Street Campus of the University of Westminster and with a bustling drinks reception hosted by the PRCA.

A sell out audience of 350 people saw Max Clifford prove he is Mr Marmite.
Clifford polarised the audience by taking several phone calls whilst on stage –he claimed one was from Simon Cowell, though some think it was a classic Clifford set up. When criticised from the floor for his ‘rudeness’ Clifford replied along the lines of ‘I’m not being paid for this, but my clients pay me a lot of money.’

Also on the panel, and not being paid but not on the phone, were ad guru Trevor Beattie, Julian Linley, former editor of Heat, me as chair, and PR guru Mark Borkowski. Max Marmite seemed determined to try and wind up Mark. He claimed that celebrities ‘get me - or if they can’t afford me, then they’ll get someone like Mark.’ Mark’s response was to say that he would refuse Clifford’s clients, preferring to represent people with real talent.

When the audience weren’t being told by Max Marmite what big egos celebrities have, they were treated to a discussion of whether celebrities have actually made us more socially tolerant or simply given the false impression that anyone can become rich - this at a time when the gap between the rich and poor is getting wider.

The rather exotic Shelley von Strunckel asked if our obsession with celebrity was filling in the gap left by the decline in religion. The panel thought not, saying celebrity had always been with us and always would be.

Perhaps the most worrying point raised was about the increasing celebrification of politics, with the most recent fashion being for public emoting.

And perhaps the most astute observation was that Max Marmite is now a bigger celebrity than some of his clients.

Actions Speak Louder Than Words

2010-02-01T17:05:00.000Z

Well, we put our money where our mouth was. We intervened against the NLA.

For a good eighteen months now, their plans to start taxing the receipt and forwarding of URLs have caused a row, with words being traded, meetings held, 'consultations' undertaken. The end result? They ploughed ahead pretty much regardless.

Last week in PR Week, NLA MD David Pugh had a little go at us. He said we'd not taken part in his 'consultation'. And he said we'd 'gestured from the touchlines'.

Let's put aside the fact that on the nine occasions when he and I met formally, we were clear and consistent in our opposition to his plans. And the fact that we facilitated him meeting direct with our members to learn their views. Both of which in my view make it pretty clear that we took part in his consultation. If 'consultation' is the right word.

Well, if were were ever on it, we are certainly now OFF the touchline. We're on the field, intervening in defence of the right to link to content freely made available already by the publishers. On the field, and ready -to continue David's theme- to scrum down.

And the reason why is simple. The NLA's plans have no basis in law in our view; are unreasonable; are restrictive. Actually, are self-defeating for a newspaper model built on the work of PR professionals, and centred on advertising.

All of these points were made clear to the NLA when they asked their questions. They just happened not to like the answers they received. So now we end up in the Tribunal.... Engage!

The NLA Blinks....

2010-01-07T19:48:00.000Z

Just before Christmas, I blogged that the NLA ‘s decision to try and tax weblinks was going to backfire. In their face-off with the PR industry, the media monitors and ourselves, they were throwing into question their very existence.

Well, today the NLA blinked in that face-off.

In response to our pressure, and Meltwater’s decision to refer the NLA to the Copyright Tribunal, the NLA today announced they are suspending their billing process while the Tribunal considers the case.

Do bear in mind the NLA say they’ll retrospectively bill users if the Tribunal happens to rule in their favour. I think they’ll lose the case, but even if they were to win, I am extremely doubtful they would find it easy to back-date bills –I know they’d like to be a wing of the Revenue, but they’re not.

The fundamental point is this though. If they were confident of their position, they wouldn’t have blinked. But they have. And in our view, it’s because their bluff’s been called.

Now their plans are in limbo. And they’ll remain there for between nine and twelve months while the Tribunal completes its work. We’re considering what our next step is, and we’ll keep the industry up-to-date about how we’re fighting for their interests.

But be in no doubt –this is a terrible day for the NLA; a good day for the PR industry. And we intend making the NLA’s life harder still.

Happy New Year!

Why PR People Get A Bad Press

2010-01-05T17:52:00.000Z

Guest post by: Adrian Wheeler

My first boss escaped from the Rank Organisation in 1968. He had spent ten years mediating between the press, Sir John Davis and Rank’s stable of celebrities. The experience left him with psychological scars and … well, experience. When he set up his own consulting firm he wanted nothing to do with ‘public relations’, so he coined the term ‘Corporate Relations Consultants’. It didn’t catch on.

Brian was an eccentric individual, but his aversion to ‘public relations’ typified the attitude of many first-class practitioners then and now. Whenever PR people get together they will, sooner or later, discuss how inappropriate ‘public relations’ is as a moniker and what we should call it instead. Anyone who can get away with describing themselves as something else – for instance, in lobbying or The City – does.

What’s wrong with ‘public relations’? I’ve always enjoyed the response when I tell people what I do for a living. In the early days it meant a furrowed brow: ‘What exactly is that?’ Later on the questions were more acute: ‘Ah – and what kind of clients do you work for?’ Nowadays the reaction can be more equivocal, and I think I see what Brian meant.

There are 2,400 public relations companies in the UK. Only 200 belong to the Public Relations Consultants Association. The CIPR says there are 40,000 public relations practitioners in the UK, of which only 10,000 belong to the Institute. This suggests that most people practising ‘public relations’ do not see it as a profession and do not want to get involved with standards, training and regulation. It probably also means they are not much good.

Statistically, most clients and journalists will meet three of those for every serious practitioner. No wonder clients are slow to trust their public relations advisors. No wonder journalists have a go at ‘PRs’ whenever they get the chance. It’s like an iceberg floating upside-down: general perceptions of public relations are created by the people who care about it least.

I don’t think there is any point in trying to invent a new word for ‘public relations’. Let’s tackle the quality problem from the other end: clients and journalists should begin any conversation with a ‘PR’ by asking: ‘Do you belong to the CIPR or the PRCA?’ If the answer’s ‘no’ they can continue the discussion at their own risk or put the phone down.

It would be naïve to think that every CIPR or PRCA member is free of fault. But at least they are trying to do their work well. They should be encouraged, supported and preferred; then we might see public relations recognised as a professional business service and we might all feel a lot happier calling ourselves public relations people.

NLA Wolf in the Pot?

2009-12-21T13:02:00.000Z

I'm sure we all remember the story of The Three Little Pigs. I read it quite a lot these days (not for my own pleasure you understand, but for the edification of somebody rather smaller...). It strikes me that the greedy wolf rather overstretched himself. If he'd been content to eat just two of the three pigs and then move on,he might have gone on to lead a happy, carnivorous life -rather than ending up in the pot.

The same may be true of the NLA.

They've had an easy ride over the past ten or so years. They produce nothing, but manage nonetheless to be rewarded handsomely on the back of other people's labour. There've been occasional mutterings about taking them on, but those mutterings never quite make it to the top of anyone's agenda. In effect, they keep on eating the easy-to-reach little pigs.

Until now.

In their greed to assert copyright over something that (in our view) isn't copyrightable -and to demand payment for something that is available for free- they're like the greedy wolf. They've overstretched themselves, and in doing so, they have thrown into question the whole legitimacy of their existing structures. Like the wolf, maybe they'll end up in the pot.

Meltwater's reference to the Copyright Tribunal changes everything. It shows that people are no longer prepared just to roll over when the NLA tells them to. It will inevitably make people think again about the unfairness of their existing licences. We applaud Meltwater. We'll be giving serious thought to how the PRCA ought to respond to their bold move.

And in the meantime, I imagine the NLA and will keep on huffing and puffing....

How NOT to treat customers

2009-12-01T15:50:00.000Z

The Daily Mail, Telegraph etc etc today run a story about a mother asking a South Eastern train employee to help her cross a footbridge with her buggy, and being refused 'because they were not insured to lift things like prams'. Now, I must confess an interest. I have a two-month old son, and I use South Eastern trains.

SE's response was reasonable enough I thought: "Our staff will help passengers when possible. However we also need to strike a balance where the number one priority for our staff is the safe running of trains. If it is going to interfere with the safe running of the trains then that must take priority."

Reasonable enough on the face of it.

Yesterday evening rather contradicted that image of reasonableness though. I was on my train home from Charing Cross, with the train about to leave in three minutes. Someone ran to the ticket barrier; his ticket didn't work. This happens quite often, because the barriers often malfunction.He showed the ticket to one of the SE staff to let him through. The SE bloke flicked him a finger, pointed him to the other platform. ie the wrong, further away platform.... The guy looked bemused but ran there instead and was let through the barrier there instead. He then doubled back. The guy who'd turned him away obviously couldn't care less.

I have some difficulty seeing how this meets the SE line 'our staff will help passengers where possible'. I'd rather presumed letting people through malfunctioning barriers was entirely what barrier staff were there for....

I rang SE today to ask them for a view. It took a good few minutes to get through their automated system before someone eventually picked up. They had no response. They also have no email address apparently...

Never mind the 21st century, perhaps they should enter the 20th century and get one? Not exactly the best example of customer service or communications excellence now is it?

Honesty - A business imperative

2009-11-30T17:36:00.000Z

Today's guest blog is by Mark Knight, Director at Broadgate Mainland.

The infamous ‘Hand of Henry’ incident in the week-before-last’s world cup qualifying match generated a media frenzy of indignation in support of the hard done by Irish, victims of Gallic dishonesty.

This controversial event has already kicked off debate on how it represents the erosion of sporting standards.

The public relations industry is no stranger to the honesty argument. How many of you can put your hand on your heart and say that you have not lied as part of your job? Cue howls of indignation at PR offices around the country!

Okay, the vast majority of these are probably white lies: client tied up in meetings so can’t return your (journalist’s) call and the new product/service is generating huge interest (not) from customers and prospects.

The world post the economic recession is going to be a different place with the share of voice tipping the scales in favour of empowered consumers and make-or-break word of mouth endorsement. The general public and the media will simply not accept the levels of subterfuge that some PR agencies and company press offices have adopted as the norm.

Will companies dare to run the risk of PRs causing an outbreak of hysteria on blogs and forums or even worse a negative SideWiki next to a hard earned page one entry on Google?

A reputation of a company is built on honesty and trust. While these rules may get bent when times are good, they undergo intense scrutiny when life gets tough.

PR will always be about presenting situations in the best possible light. But to avoid a ‘Hand of Henry’ incident it’s best to remember PRs and their brands do exist in their own scrutinised, multi-view world. Adopting the highest standards of honesty is not only morally right, it is a business imperative.

Leading Public Sector Communications Teams

2009-11-25T16:15:00.000Z

Today's guest blog comes courtesy of Ian Ratcliffe,Head of Marketing and Communications for Stockport Council, and Vice Chair of LG Communications.

Stockport Council is an Associate Member of the PRCA

Yesterday in Stockport, as Vice Chair of LG Communications, the national body working to raise the standard of communications in the public sector, it was my pleasure to host a day’s seminar involving notable speakers on the subject of Leading Public Sector Communications Teams.

It was a great day that allowed everyone to get together and discuss how communications has an even greater role to play than ever before.

We are all facing difficult times ahead so it was timely to see what we’re up to and look at the key issues concerning leaders of communications.

We had a fantastic group of speakers starting with our very own Leader of Stockport Council, Cllr Dave Goddard who made a strong case for organisational leaders valuing and resourcing their comms teams. In turn, it is essential that the communicators themselves demonstrate huge civic pride in everything they do and bring passion to their role.

Joe Simpson, Director of Politics and Partnerships at the Leadership Centre for Local Government made a fascinating presentation on the importance of storytelling and the transition from ‘communications’ to ‘conversations’ – mirrored in the transition from print to social media.

Next up we then learned some interesting lessons from Mike Greenwood, Chairman of Stockport PCT, as he described this time in the public sector. Mike is an ambassador of strong and effective brand in engendering public pride in an area and made reference to the importance of effective partnerships.

Attention was then turn to an individual level, with the focus on the skills that communicators will need in this new changed and changing economic environment. David Broome and Lucinda Barber from VMA made a thought-provoking presentation on the skills required from a comms leader, which had us all thinking about the passion we need to instil in every part of our role.

Paul Newman, Head of Comms at MediaCity:UK gave us some great leadership advice on not being sidestepped by the small issues – it’s not about where you are now, but where you want to be. Wise words! Paul also updated everyone on the progress of the wonderful Media City project at Salford.

I was very pleased to see that Andy Carter, Head of Communications at Leeds City Council was able to join us for the day. After 12 weeks of the bin men striking, he had us all intrigued by his experience of leading a crisis communications strategy – which I am glad to say has now come to an end! Exciting times and some good lessons learned.

With the perspective of someone who has been both a long-serving council leader of a major city and now a senior executive at a leading communication consultancy, a big thank you to Donald Anderson, Director at PPS, who travelled down from Edinburgh to tell us about his time as Leader of Edinburgh Council. His experience of comms during the Cowgate Fire and the G8 summit certainly gave us some perspective and showed us how the personal touches are often the mark of real leadership, and how they can make a big difference.

We closed the day with Nick Jaspan, founder of the phenomenally successful how-do.co.uk. Nick’s switch from print to online media stressed the ever growing importance of social media and networking in the comms world. On a personal level, if we do not adapt to a rapidly-changing environment, we will get left behind.

I have chosen to end my blog with thanks to your very own Director General, Francis Ingham, who I am sure will be blogging about his day with us yesterday! Francis’s presentation focused our attention firmly on the future of communications and about making the next few years about opportunities – as PR thrives on change! I also found his words on taking our own professional development seriously, as comms leaders will only be accepted on the top table if they have the skills top people expect!

So much to take in, but a great day overall. I hope that everyone who attended can take away the good advice and use it to forge a path for themselves and their teams over the next few years.

Hope to see you all at another LG Communications seminar in the near future.

Ian Ratcliffe

Vice Chair, LG Communications

Head of Marketing and Communications at Stockport Council

In defence of the public sector

2009-11-18T09:04:00.000Z

An interesting night last night, as PRCA in-house associate member Keith Johnston (from STEP) and I defended the public sector's use of PR and PA agencies in a debate with the Taxpayers' Alliance (TPA).

It happened because we wouldn't let a TPA 'research' report into public sector comms stand. They argued that public bodies were spending vast amounts of money on comms and lobbying, and should somehow be legally prohibited from using PR and PA agencies. In fact, they went further than that, and argued in favour of a slash and burn programme of cuts to public sector comms. To their credit, they accepted our challenge to a debate, and the English Speaking Union was kind enough to host us.

The TPA's argument was the bizarre one that all comms serves to reinforce the status quo, and to cement the Government's position. They use the word 'government' to cover any public body, including, for example, all local authorities. I really must break the news to the 200+ Conservative Councils that they are , in fact, doing Gordon Brown's work...

We disagreed naturally. And we made three points. First, that public sector bodies have a duty to communicate with their voters, their taxpayers and their customers. Second, that to suggest this comms activity is all intended to support Central Government's agenda is patently nuts. And third, that using an agency to bring in special expertise is often the sensible, financially responsible thing to do.

Well, it was an interesting debate, and in my thoroughly biased opinion, I thought we edged it. Even if we were up against someone who was specifically -and rather strangely- introduced as the 'World Debating Champion'. Just who did he beat to get that title? Was it a United Nations hosted face-off with Obama and Blair that he just edged on points??

The result? Well, we lost by a few votes. But then again the TPA had brought along more staff than we had. And they all voted for their boss, natch.

PR - The pivotal player

2009-11-12T18:06:00.000Z

With the promise of thought leadership from the PRCA, I’m pleased to announce the first in a series of guest posts from the PR Industry’s finest. First up Mark Stringer, Founder of Pretty Green.

Being asked to write on someone else's blog, is a bit like staying at someone else’s house; it's nice to be asked round, but once you get there you realize you prefer the comfort and security of your own home where there's a lock on all the toilet doors - There's nothing more embarrassing than walking in on your best mate’s wife and trying to explain that you didn't realise she was on the toilet.

Anyway, here I am, sitting in Francis’ front room, having a good snoop around. First impressions: It's obvious that he is passionate about the industry, what it stands for and what it can achieve. I think we might get along, as long as I don’t overstay my welcome…

I share his views, but, having not come from a public affairs background, I'm less ‘Minister’ and more ‘Court Jester’, whose perspective is that our role as PR Professionals is to create and harness content to drive positive brand reputation through the way we behave.

I've a great respect for public affairs, stakeholder management, NGOs; the hard-nosed, behind-the-scenes aspect of the industry. But, I still believe that PR can sit on the top table, without having to be a Corporate Agency. It just means we have to be more strategic and more creative.

Undoubtedly the pet hate for every agency-person is being perceived as the agency that simply promotes what someone else has created. "We've got this (insert Advert, promotion, new bottle etc), can you just get some coverage". A frustrating but popular misconception of what PR is all about.

In today's combusted landscape the beauty is that creating and distributing content is easier than ever before and the PR industry now has a great opportunity to become not only a seat warmer at the top table, but the pivotal player.

We're better placed to lead Digital than the media agencies or the Ad agencies because we know how to integrate it into the editorial mix rather than looking at it as an isolated entity. We are skilled in creating experiences that not only bring brands to life but also deliver editorial and we know how to build strong brand reputations.

But the magic happens when we are able to create as well as distribute. What's interesting is you're often a minority if you talk about your creative director, or creative team, something I've never understood.

Yes PR people are generally more creative than a lot of other disciplines, due to the need to write and create stories on a daily basis, but true ‘creatives’ will always be an essential part of the mix; people who stretch the boundaries and make us feel uncomfortable. The big thinkers, whose ides continue to push us and excite us (and initially leave us dumbfounded).

Anyway, now's the time for us all to believe we belong round the top table, and that we can drive the full marketing agenda, not just the news agenda, and organisations like the PRCA can help us achieve that.

But, as I said before, I feel like I'm sat in someone else's front room and I shouldn't really be ranting too much or I might not be invited round again. Besides, we've got Beyonce in town, so I'm off to find some buskers as we've got some content to create and distribute for Trident and given that as of Friday we've got one less paper to sell-in to, we're going to have to work that little bit harder.

And as one person asked in the office, does the decline of London Lite mean that we'll return to the halcyon days of hearing "Standard, Standard! Read all about it"? We do hope so.

Thanks for having me... I’ll make sure I shut the door behind me.

PRCA in strong financial position

2009-11-10T17:07:00.000Z

Following the CIPR's announcement regarding its finances, a number of members have asked me to reassure them as to our position.

It's a reassurance I'm delighted to give, because we are in an extremely healthy position.

Our reserves are very significant because of sound financial management over a number of years. The Association has produced a surplus in each of the previous four years, and confidently expects to produce one in 2009/10 too.

Our agency membership has grown by 50% over the past two years, and we recently announced in-house and international membership programmes too, further diversifying our revenue streams. Income from our business partners, training and events has significantly increased over the past two years. As a result of strong performance in all of these areas, turnover is up by around 50% compared with two years ago.

So, we entered this recession in a strong position, and we will exit it in an even stronger one.

A week of celebrating PR

2009-10-22T15:34:00.000+01:00

PR all too often gets slagged off by its detractors, and all too often is poor at coming to its own defence. So the awards season is always a good time to remember the good work that PR professionals do.

The PRCA are national sponsors of the CIPR's PRide awards, so the next few weeks will see us at their dozen or so ceremonies, meeting members, handing over trophies. But of course it's not just those guys who run awards - our own take place on November 3rd, and are on track to be an even bigger success than last year's. Corp Comms' are up soon, ditto AMEC's, ditto the second outing of the Fresh PR awards.

The most enjoyable element of awards of course is seeing your friends and colleagues win. So last week's awards in Cardiff were especially good, as Golley Slater and its eminence grise Martin Long won Welsh agency of the year. For those of you who know Martin, you'll realise that it was entirely appropriate the evening ended in a cocktail bar named Ten Foot Tall.

PR Week's event was a storming success too (though not quite so storming for the protesters who were escorted out I guess...). It was a pleasure seeing two titans of the industry presenting and receiving the UK agency of the year award -Colin Byrne handing it over to Robert Phillips. And seeing Alex Aiken beam with pride at winning in-house team of the year. Long overdue.

A good night was had by all -a sore head the morning too I'm sure.

One final thought amid the celebratory stuff. Tamsin Cave of the self-styled 'Alliance for Lobbying Transparency' took exception to my recent post in favour of self-regulation. She called it 'sanctimonious', but decided to reply to it elsewhere. Let me put aside the intense irony of the ALT chief calling anyone sanctimonious (pot kettle comparisons rather spring to mind...), and just say this -if you don't like what I say, then post a comment, and let's debate. But if you want to take issue, don't post a comment on your own blog -a blog which deliberately stops anyone commenting. Seems a little chicken to me.....

Unhorsing the free riders....

2009-10-03T16:23:00.000+01:00

The news that Tory Shadow Cabinet member Francis Maude has pulled out of an APCO reception (http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/politics/article6859374.ece ) should give us all pause for thought. He’s done it in order to avoid being associated with a lobby company. And that’s something that affects us all, and should worry us all.

It follows his recent announcement that a future Conservative Government would impose statutory regulation should the industry as a whole not sign up to self-regulation.

I used to work at the Tory Party, and from what I can judge, this is no idle threat.

Too many public affairs agencies out there still choose not to be regulated. They provide various –frequently transparent- excuses for this. They say that their internal codes of conduct are than independent ones; that it wouldn’t be fair to their clients to reveal who they work with. Etc, etc, etc. What they really mean is that they’re free riders on the ethicality of their peers. That they are ashamed of who they work for. That they are incapable of adhering to proper codes of conduct.

Well, they now have a choice. If they continue to remain outside the pale of decent practice, then they will bring statutory regulation down upon not only themselves, but upon the public affairs industry as a whole. Their intransigence and obstinacy will inflict personal professional damage upon us all.

We’ll be working over the next few months to extend our coverage of the industry, and to increase the already forty-plus public affairs agencies that are today members of the PRCA and already embrace self-regulation. And we’ll also be naming and shaming those companies –and their chiefs- that are putting our industry’s future at risk. Because it’s time they realised the threat they pose to the industry that they purport to love.

The power of personal endorsement

2009-09-15T11:09:00.000+01:00

A slightly unusual post today –though I hope with a vague professional purpose.

Yesterday was pretty memorable, though it began ordinarily enough. Having spent last week at home waiting (unsuccessfully) for the supposedly imminent arrival of our second child, I returned to work, albeit with an intentionally light diary. Ahead of evening drinks for financial PR agencies hosted at College Hill, I had lunch with the effervescent Don Clark, until recently Sales Director at Vocus. Our discussion of his big plans for the future was proceeding nicely until I received the message that my son’s entry into the world was imminent.

Cue urgent phone calls to arrive a speedy return home. Cue also extraordinary enthusiasm from the restaurant staff. With a Mediterranean flourish, they produced a bottle of spirits while I waited for a cab, and toasts began –at the restaurant’s expense.

Result? A nervous ten-minutes made much less tense, and an extremely satisfied customer. Result also, this ringing endorsement –About Thyme is an excellent restaurant, with good, unfussy food, a decent wine list, and –most of all- friendly and welcoming staff. It’s also a great place to have lunch if you’re wife’s about to give birth! Professional point? Your customers can be great builders of your corporate reputation. I certainly intend singing About Thyme’s praises.

And for those of you who might be interested to know, I made it home in time (just) to see the birth of my 10lb 0oz son!

In defence of public sector comms

2009-09-09T17:16:00.000+01:00

With public expenditure clearly set to be the defining issue of the next general election, it now seems inevitable that there must be a serious debate about the use of taxpayers’ money to fund comms work. And by that, I mean not just public sector bodies using agencies, but also public sector bodies directly employing comms professionals too.

There are simple –and simplistic- headlines to be won by comms’ bashing, and the Mail does seem to reserve a page a day for just that. But it is surely ironic that the very mouthpieces which call for public service reform, and for organisations to talk better with the public they serve, are so ready to bash the people who would help to deliver that reform and facilitate that dialogue.

Equally, with all the main political parties talking of the need for tax rises and spending cuts, the days of public largesse are obviously over, and each area of public expenditure needs to justify itself.

That’s why we need a serious debate about this. One that doesn’t try to frame the choice as being between nurses and spin doctors; police on the beat and fat cats.

To that end, we’ve challenged the Tax Payers’ Alliance to debate just this issue. Much of their language on it’s plain stupid. And their ‘research’ wouldn’t stand up as a school project, let alone as the basis on which to legislate.

I’m delighted to say they’ve accepted, and the English Speaking Union have kindly agreed to play host. It’s on November 16th, in the evening. We’ll circulate details in due course. But it promises to be an interesting night, and I’m determined to bring a bit of sanity to this debate. Hopefully the TPA’s own comms people will publicise it too –ah, the irony....

Making the most of opportunities

2009-08-12T11:36:00.000+01:00

Today’s unemployment figures make a sobering read for anyone –but if you’re looking to take the first step in your working life, they’re particularly unwelcome.

As in any downturn, new graduates face a tough time, with a wearisome hard slog of applications, interviews and ‘on this occasion you were unsuccessful in your application….best wishes for your future career’ letters.

Last week’s PR Week carried a pretty good analysis of what that means for our industry. Some agencies are recruiting graduates in similar numbers as over the last few years, but most have been forced to cut back. That’s hardly surprising –our industry can’t expect to be immune from what’s happening elsewhere in the economy.

So it’s more important than ever that if you’re offered the opportunity to prove your value to a potential employer, you grab it with both hands.

I say this because the PR Week piece happened to coincide with a brilliant example of how not to forge a career in PR. A PRCA member (no, I won’t name them) had awarded a highly-prized work placement to someone in her final year at university, looking for a future in PR. Did she make the most of it? Did she make a fantastic impression and smooth her way into the PR world? Well, she certainly made an impression, but maybe not a career-enhancing one.

After two days, she decided not to come back in. Apparently, she hadn’t been given enough responsibility; enough management opportunities; enough face-time with the MD. Naturally, she’d still like a career in PR though. A piece of advice –it’s probably not the career for you…..

Is the market stabilising?

2009-07-30T09:05:00.000+01:00

The question I most frequently ask members is ‘how’s business?’. As you’d expect, some of the answers have been rather gloomy. But recently, there’s been a discernible change.

Nobody should think that everything’s suddenly perfect. But a significant minority of members now say that things are improving -and the majority of members say that things are now stable.

Our most up-to-date quarterly benchmarking data is just in, covering the period April to June. And it provides figures to back up the words I’ve been hearing. I won’t go into the detail too much, because the full report will be launched next week on our website, but the headlines are certainly encouraging.

The number of members reporting an increase in client spend now roughly matches the number reporting a decrease; the number saying that the new business pipeline is busy now exceeds the number saying it’s quiet. And the number saying they’re reducing headcount is now pretty much matched by those saying they’re increasing headcount.

Don’t read too much into this –the downturn hasn’t suddenly performed an abrupt u-turn. And it would be a brave man who predicted the recovery had started -but it might also be sensible to say that maybe the market’s now stabilised? The only way is up hopefully….

Anger at the NLA's proposals growing

2009-07-14T15:04:00.000+01:00

Well, our work to make the industry aware of the NLA's proposals continues -and the anger those plans are generating has started to snowball.

I've spent the last week talking with members about the NLA plan to charge for the receipt or forwarding of URLs. At first there was disbelief -these URLs are, after all, in the public domain; and when they are received, it is with the explicit intention of directing readers towards the newspapers' own sites. But once people understand that the NLA are deadly serious, there is genuine anger. It's anger not just at the actual cost, or the appalling timing. It's anger mainly at the fundamental absurdity of charging for receiving a weblink to material which the newspapers themselves have decided to make available for free. I've said it before, and I'll say it again -this would be money for nothing.

Yesterday, the NLA's MD conducted a webcast through the PRCA. Over forty agencies tuned in to hear him explain and defend his plans. Those members didn't hold back in expressing their astonishment and anger. He was left in no doubt as to the strength of feeling he has provoked. If you want to see it, it's on our website http://www.prca.org.uk/

He also agreed to undertake a series of face-to-face meetings with the PR community. He's agreed to do one in London and two outside of London. We'll be organising them and meeting the costs. We'll publicise those events in due course -I'd urge you to attend and to be honest about your feelings. Monday also sees us convene a roundtable with other stakeholders -the PCAs, the aggregators etc. According to the NLA, the PCAs support their new billing plans -well, we'll see!

So -go to our website, look at the NLA's plans; let me know what you think; let the NLA know; let PRWeek and other publications know. Because if we are robust and determined in opposing this outrageous back door tax on knowledge, then I am certain we can stop it from happening.

On the NLA's Web Proposals

2009-07-08T10:21:00.000+01:00

Our industry faces many challenges right now –proving the value we bring; owning the digital space; stopping giving away time for nothing. These are not the easiest of times for anyone.

We really don’t need extra costs heaped on us right now. But that’s precisely what the NLA is proposing.

There’s a good deal of effort being made to confuse the issue, but at its heart is the newspapers’ claim that they should be able to charge for the receipt and circulation of URLs.

They’re not talking about the forwarding of material –they’re talking about charging agencies and their clients for URLs. They’re talking about charging PRCA members for directing their clients to the newspapers’ own sites. And then charging clients too. That is simply outrageous. If the newspapers want to make their content available for free, and then live off the advertising revenue, then good luck to them. If they want to charge for web content, then –again-that’s their choice. But charging for links to publicly available, free material is utterly ridiculous.

We’ll be fighting this all the way –if you feel the same, then be vocal about it, support us in the media, and let the NLA know that they have gone too far.