Editor’s note: The following is a guest post by Billee Howard, managing director of the brand innovation group and creative development officer at Allison + Partners. Howard has more than 15 years’ experience in brand development, strategic media relations, CEO brand building, corporate positioning, business-to-business strategy development and economic and investment promotion.

With experience emerging as the foil to technological innovation, communications continues to emerge as among the most powerful and potent tools in the CEO arsenal. As such, programs that influence outcomes and drive business performance trump those that merely illicit approved awareness. As the year unfolds we see all of these principles unfolding broadly across the business landscape. The commercialization of many leading brands is being driven by the notion of Art + Commerce = Innovation (and winning experiences).

In the recent months, we have seen a change in the business model from a product-centric notion to an experience-driven culture. Experience continues to emerge as the defining factor of competitive differentiation, and the new cornerstone of the supply chain, as the age of total experience management unfolds. We see this everywhere, with brands from McDonald’s (multibillion-dollar investment in complete re-design of restaurants) to eBay (pop-up stores aimed at demonstrating their role in overall next-gen retail) investing significantly in re-imagining winning experiences as much as innovating beloved products and services.

With experience at the forefront it is also important to acknowledge the growth on an innovation-centric corporate culture. The notion of specialization continues to sweep the landscape working to define more unique and memorable experiences in every way, from the proliferation of niche businesses to the emergence of specialty focused roles inside leading organizations.

Continue reading " A CEO’s Most Powerful Tool is Communications "

Editor’s note: The following is a guest post by Burghardt Tenderich, Ph.D., associate professor and associate director of the Strategic Communication and Public Relations Center at the USC Annenberg School for Communication and Journalism. Burghardt manages the development of the biennial Generally Accepted Best Practices for Public Relations study, which assesses the scope of the public relations industry.

Corporate public relations budgets are mostly up, and the scope of the profession is experiencing growth in areas such as internal communication, customer relations and social media. These are some of the findings of a new study published by the USC Annenberg Strategic Communication and Public Relations Center.

GAP VII, the seventh biennial Generally Accepted Best Practices for Public Relations, shows some of the most significant findings in the area of measurement and evaluation: On average, corporations now spend 9 percent of their total PR budget on research-related activities, a sharp incline from 4 percent in the previous GAP study. This pronounced rise speaks to widespread adoption of social media monitoring tools and increasing use of primary research in program planning and evaluation.

The GAP VII research team, led by Jerry Swerling, Kjerstin Thorson and me, surveyed 620 senior public relations practitioners. This makes GAP VII the largest and most comprehensive study ever of the most senior communicators in public and private corporations, government agencies and non-profits in the United States. USC Annenberg conducted the study in cooperation with PRSA and other professional associations: Arthur W. Page Society, Institute for Public Relations and International Association of Business Communicators.

GAP VII aims to provide PR practitioners with actionable information they can use to better manage the communication functions in their organizations; identifies best practices against which they can benchmark their own organizations; and pinpoints trends to be aware of as they plan for tomorrow.

Continue reading " What the USC Annenberg GAP Study Tells Us About Public Relations’ Success "

As the public relations industry grows in size and stature, it is coming under increasing scrutiny by the public, media and government. But not all scrutiny is bad, especially if it helps broaden the understanding of a profession and advances its role and value.

Twice in the past year there have been investigations into public relations spending by the federal government. The most recent was launched in late February by Senator Claire McCaskill (D–Mo.) and Senator Rob Portman (R–Ohio), who have triggered a wide-ranging investigation of the federal government’s use of public relations and advertising services. At the initial stages of this inquiry the Subcommittee is seeking data for the past five years pertaining to “contracts for the acquisition of public relations, publicity, advertising, communications, or similar services” at 11 separate Federal agencies.  We have our concerns, which we expressed directly with the Senators and through an op-ed published in Roll Call.

It isn’t surprising that government spending on public relations is being scrutinized during times of economic austerity, when politicians of all stripes compete to be the most prudent with taxpayers’ funds. Such scrutiny — if conducted fairly and objectively — may prove valuable for public relations.

Continue reading " Congress Investigates PR: Will It Like What It Sees? "

Editor’s note: The following is an excerpt from an op-ed published today in Roll Call. The opinion piece was written by PRSA Chair and CEO Gerard F. Corbett, APR, Fellow PRSA, in response to a Senate investigation into the federal government’s use of public relations and advertising contracts. PRSA also sent letters to Senator Claire McCaskill (D–Mo.) and Senator Rob Portman (R–Ohio), who are leading the investigation, to express its concerns with the investigation.

The Senate’s investigation into government use of public relations services is detrimental to restoring the public’s trust in politicians.

When faced with a tough re-election battle, what is the easiest path to winning over John Q. Public? Proposing proactive solutions that benefit your constituents or taking on an industry you deem to have too much influence?

In the case of Sens. Claire McCaskill (D–Mo.) and Rob Portman (R–Ohio), the answer appears to be the latter. As Roll Call reported Feb. 29, the pair is trying to appease cost-conscious voters with a “wide-ranging investigation” of the federal government’s use of public relations and advertising services.

As chairman of an organization that represents 32,000 public relations professionals in the United States, I share the Senators’ concern that the government prudently spends taxpayer dollars. What I question, however, is their motivation and seeming interest in using the PR industry as a punching bag for America’s dysfunctional political system.

In an era of disastrously low trust in government and politicians, McCaskill and Portman’s investigation may be missing the proverbial boat. It disregards public relations’ central value to government: its ability to engender a more informed society through ethical, transparent and honest communications between the government and its citizens.

Therefore, any investigation into the government’s use of PR firms should not be undertaken unilaterally. It must be met by an equally robust examination of how the government communicates with the public and how it can better use innovative PR firms and professionals to best reach and inform citizens.

Killing the messenger won’t make the government’s public trust and transparency issues disappear.

Continue reading " PRSA to Congress: Don’t Kill the PR Messenger "

Editor’s note: This is the fourth post in a series of guest commentary pieces from PRSA 2011 Leadership Assembly Delegates focusing on five key strategic areas within the public relations profession.

Public relations professionals need to build greater credibility through better measurement. That’s the assessment made by a group of senior public relations professionals at PRSA’s 2011 Leadership Assembly in Orlando, Fla.

It’s no secret that public relations professionals have long desired a quick and standardized method for measuring the value of their work. We still use advertising equivalents that are problematic, but alternatives are often very costly. Public relations professionals need more statistical training. For example, is it possible to distinguish public relations from other strategies through regression analysis?

Another challenge is trying to identify those crises or other organizational issues that do not occur as a result of public relations efforts. In these cases, can the organization compare itself to similar ones within an industry? An additional issue is return on investment pressures that focus on short-term results when measurement should really be occurring six or twelve months later.

Former PRSA Chair Michael Cherenson, APR, Fellow PRSA, noted one way to address the need to increase statistical courses for business and public relations students is through PRSA’s outreach to MBA programs. The group discussed a possible certification in statistical analyses and how it might be instituted. In addition, the delegates said we often discuss measurement, but not specific application of it. Additional initiatives might include specific Silver Anvil awards focusing on measurement and evaluation.

Continue reading " Measurement as a Path to Credibility for PR "