Editor’s note: The following post was submitted as a comment in response to a Jan. 27, 2012, column by PRWeek (US) Editor-in-Chief Steve Barrett regarding the “Public Relations Defined” initiative, which is a PRSA-led international advocacy campaign to modernize the definition of public relations. In the column, “Let’s Cut the Crap and Get On with the Work,” Barrett takes a dismissive view of the initiative and its ability to advance the profession.

Update (3 p.m. EST, Jan. 30): The comment has been published at PRWeekUS.com.

I say … this does come as a surprise, what with Julia Hood, Haymarket EVP, helping to plan the [“Public Relations Defined” initiative] last September as then-president of the Arthur W. Page Society, and with Danny Rogers, PRWeek UK editor-in-chief, endorsing the initiative as an “appropriate” endeavour that “matters” because “finding a new definition of PR [will help the] tens of thousands employed within this well-established industry … to more clearly and consistently explain what they do — and the value they add.

Mere technicalities, one supposes, when page views are at stake.

Perhaps it’s worthwhile to hearken back one year ago, to when much of the discussion taking place in the blogosphere centered around the need — and, specifically, the need for PRSA — to modernize the definition of public relations. Had we ignored those discussions, I suspect today’s cheeky headline would have been, “When Will PRSA Get Off Its Arse?”

Damned if you do, I guess … as noted blogger Arik Hanson has rightly pointed out, we are a profession that loves to criticise our own.

Still, we’ll let the profession’s interest in this initiative speak to its worth.

Since the project’s launch Nov. 21, 2011, there have been approximately 300,000 page views of the PRDefined website; 30 trade and business media articles; 50 blog posts; thousands of blog comments (including several by noted public relations theorist James E. Grunig, Ph.D.); 1,000 definitions submitted; 152 observations received during the public comment period; and thousands of Tweets using the #PRDefined hashtag.

Crap? Bloody brilliant, I’d say …

Continue reading " How #PRDefined ‘Gets On with the Work’ of Building PR’s Value "

Editor’s note: The following is a guest post from Jane Wilson MCIPR, CEO of the Chartered Institute of Public Relations, which represents public relations professionals in the United Kingdom, on why the CIPR has officially joined the “Public Relations Defined” initiative. CIPR became the 11th global partner of the international advocacy campaign that aims to modernize the definition of public relations.

I am delighted that PRSA has invited the Chartered Institute of Public Relations (CIPR) to be a partner in the “Public Relations Defined” initiative. By inviting PR professionals to share their insights and perspective on what defines the modern practice of public relations, a process which has already produced some excellent contributions, PRSA is facilitating a timely debate.

The CIPR has recently completed a process of engaging with our members around the U.K. using focus groups and scenario planning, to identify the key elements for a secure future for the profession in the decade ahead. Among the recommendations based on this research is that PR needs better definitions.

Anecdotally, we know that despite a range of strong and durable definitions, including the CIPR’s own, there is little consensus among PR professionals about the way to describe the nature and purpose of our activity. Consensus would better enable those who engage with public relations to gain a consistent idea of the value of the practice and what it can achieve. It would enable PR to be more proactive, to demonstrate that it is intrinsic throughout an organization, to help those organizations develop a culture of relationship building and customer care that enables the achievement of strategic objectives.

A strong, accurate definition will help establish the organizational “place” of PR. Jay O’Connor, CIPR’s 2010 president, extended the CIPR definition by stressing the role that public relations must play at board level, helping to explore, define, plan and execute strategy. She particularly underlined its role with respect to reputational risk and opportunity, and good governance. In my view, this also needs to be taken in to account when we seek to improve understanding of public relations.

You could argue that this process betrays a lack of confidence in the definitions that already exist, or even that the process of looking again at the definitions is wasted time. In my view this is wrong. A process that draws in the widest possible range of submissions has a greater chance of producing a definition that connects more professionals to the debate about what we do and why.

That debate is stronger now than ever before.

Continue reading " CIPR CEO: Why We Joined the ‘Public Relations Defined’ Initiative "

Ask any public relations professional to name the question they get most often and, inevitably, it comes down to “What is PR?”

You can hardly go into any new business meeting or grab coffee with a friend without hearing the question. For a profession in which businesses spend billions of dollars on our services, there is remarkably little understanding of what we do.

Recent discussions, blog posts, tweets and mainstream articles paint the following picture:

• Public relations professionals (and, thus, the audiences we serve) continue to struggle with this question;
• Existing definitions are not sufficient; and
• No one definition is considered the de facto industry definition.

My guess is you can relate to this, based on your own experiences.

PRSA has been listening to and engaging in many of these conversations, and after careful consideration, we have come to the conclusion it’s time to do something.

Continue reading " Public Relations … Defined "