Finesse PR

Downgrade of US - An opportunity for India???

2011-08-09T11:39:00.003+05:30

The downgrade of US Sovereign rating from AAA to AA+ with further possibilities of downgrades marks a Titanic shift of equilibrium in the Global Economy. US long a symbol of stability and aspirations for other national economies is today paying for its own misdeeds. The American politicians have spent money assuming that there is an endless supply. Most of it has been spent on fighting costly Wars which have been misadventures. Be it Vietnam, Iran or Afghanistan each war that it has fought has been long drawn with no tangible results. Whatever has been achieved due to these have been too little for the kind of resources that have been spent by the US.

True the world is a lot safer, but the wheeling dealings that go on to retain the so called sphere of American Influence has strained its relations with more than 50% of the mankind. The people of US have also long lived beyond their means. Their spending has been driven by plastic money and easy recourse to funding. The confidence to spend recklessly came from every nation queuing to park their funds in US Treasuries. So much so that China, with whom US at best shares uneasy relationship, having approximately US $1.5 trillion in US treasury holding is its largest creditor.

However the global meltdown of 2008 exposed the cracks in the US Financial Armour and the cracks have only widened. The US leaders appear clueless and they have tried to adopt the only way they know, unbridled spending.

The Global economy for the last quarter of a century has been built around US consumerism. Be it India or China, the growth has come riding the US economy and any negative effect is going to have repercussions through out.

However this also presents India with a huge chance to become a truly global leader economically. The Indian economy is still largely driven by domestic consumption unlike China which has become the manufacturing hub and therefore is hugely dependent on Exports. The exports from India today comprise largely of Services especially IT. These are bound to suffer, but if India can get its act together then this may be the chance that we were waiting for. If we can, in India, reduce corruption and increase equitable distribution of growth, carry out judicial reforms and create an atmosphere of policy stability and practice fiscal prudence, we can become the next big destination for parking of sovereign funds in the next decade or so.

Whatever the end result but one thing is sure: the end of days of US hegemony are in sight. Nobody, least of all me, would want US economy to falter, but this is only possible if there are great sacrifices from the Americans - people as well as their leaders.

In the meanwhile back in India we require only sacrifices from our Politicians, since Indians have always been sacrificing, to reclaim the ancient glory of India. We as a race are tolerant and peace loving, we have a multi cultural, multi religion society. If India were to rise to the Top, it will be beneficial to the entire world which is so fiercely divided on religious and ethnical lines.

PR Strategies for MSME(Micro, Small and Medium Enterprises) sector

2011-07-28T20:58:00.003+05:30

Recently we were approached by a company, which is in the process of launching an innovative product for children, for possible PR support.

After talking to the client, understanding his business and going to the drawing board for a possible strategy, we were left in a dilemma. The dilemma stemmed from the fact that clients and consultancies centre their PR strategy around media.

This particular client also wanted, what we simply term as, media relations. While this was understandable, our problem was the fact that media in India has this tendency to only cover corporates who have already attained some sort of market leadership in their categories. Also the offerings directed towards children hardly has any space.

While we have had immense success in creating categories and media space where none existed, this was a tough challenge. The challenge was made tougher by the fact that the client who spends resources will not necessarily give you the time in seeding the space.

This set me thinking, as we have often in the past gone back to prospective clients and frankly told them that there is little we can offer them by way of Media engagement but we can strategize for them. Most of these potentials have shied away from engaging us. As a PR consultant is our role confined to only media relations? My firm belief is NO, even though most of us end up doing just that. So what is it that we can offer to the MSME sector?

To answer this question, we must examine as to what is it that we specialize in? My answer is Communication. What is a client trying to do? The client is trying to communicate with his target audience. So why can't we, as communication specialists, make his communication process more effective. Sadly we ourselves are not able to communicate this fact to the client.

Media (offline) is a tool to address the target audience. We can tap this through expensive advertising or lower cost media relations.

But if we do not have advertising budgets and media relations is likely to be ineffective, then are we supposed to call off the PR campaign? I think not, though most of us tend to.

My suggested strategy is as follows:

First, Identify the target audience - based on the likely users of the client's services or products

Next, Identify the vehicles that can be used to reach out to this audience - Offline Media (Print and AV), Online Media (Websites, Social Media, Blogs), Trade Channels Exhibitions, Trade shows etc.), BTL activities (direct contact programmes, roadshows etc.)

Then, Formulate Engagement strategies for this audience

And, Devise Communication strategies to begin a dialogue with the Target Audience

Finally, Identify where all can you plug in the Client initiatives / business / growth plans / products

Once these steps have been completed, present this to the Client.

If you can make a difference to the clients business and help him grow, there is every possibility that he will buy into your services. The key is to become his partner through your core competencies. We are in the process of trying this out and I will try and share our experiences on this.

Are CSR Campaigns being misused for PR Gains:

2011-07-07T19:19:00.001+05:30

Recently a coupon site snapdeal.com was in news for running a CSR campaign in a village and the village being renamed as snapdeal.com. I heard some of my colleagues in office discussing how this was a major PR coup and that the client must be so happy with its communication people.

This set me thinking as to what is the real purpose of CSR? Is CSR undertaken by corporates purely as a publicity gimmick, or is there more to it? Should we as PR professionals encourage the practice of undertaking CSR campaigns purely from a PR perspective.

When I posed this question to my colleagues stating that I was uncomfortable with a CSR initiative just to derive PR mileage, the response was enlightening. They said that by this initiative, snapdeal had installed 20 odd handpumps in the village where the villagers had to trek miles to get water, in the process providing them with water, which was a necessity that was required. If they in return derive some mileage, then what is the harm? It was also pointed out that when most of the stories that are carried in the media in India centre around crime, at least these types of stories can motivate others to make some positive contribution to the society. I must admit they have a valid reasoning in the sense that something is better than nothing, But I am still uncomfortable with this idea.

I still remember the time when we were handling this leading footwear brand and the Marketing Director approached us saying that there is a request from the Government of India to contribute shoes to the children who were being given the National Bravery awards and can we help generate media coverage over this saying how the company was socially conscious. We were aghast and shaken to the core and needless to say we dissuaded the client from the publicity aspect of it.

In India giving is a tradition and it is said that "when one gives, the left hand should not know what the right hand has given". This has also been followed by big Business Houses like Tatas, Birlas, Singhanias, etc. for decades. Having been bought up with such ethos and values, creating pure publicity blitzkrieg around CSR activities, makes me cringe.

What the PR agencies and others preach to justify their actions is that media exposure of Philanthropic acts only galvanizes others to contribute. However my take is, that one should set out to undertake charity and CSR programmes for the reason of giving back to the society which has helped them gain wealth in the first instance, and if there is media or other exposure of such acts then it is good, if there is none then it is better.

I do not have any problem with CSR programmes where the primary motive is to benefit the society and the secondary motive is to derive mileage. But when the primary motive becomes to derive mileage and the rest becomes secondary then there is a serious ethical issue.

In Snapdeal's case, this company is a start-up, still looking for funding, most probably still not profitable and this company undertakes a so called CSR initiative spending a paltry $5000 and tom toms it to the world. This is pure bull and I have objections to this kind of act being publicized by the media. I can already hear our clients asking us to devise such low cost CSR initiatives (so called) to gain maximum media mileage. What perfect nonsense???

The so called PR success of the Civil Society Campaign for a strong Anti - Corruption Lokpal bill is turning into a major PR failure:

2011-06-27T14:54:00.000+05:30

I know, I know, I will be vilified, railed against and called a Government stooge by anybody who reads the header for this blog. But I request patience and a thorough reading of the complete blog before branding (with hot iron :) me.

When the campaign for the anti-corruption Lokpal Bill was launched with the Gandhi Crusader (though many still doubt the Gandhi credentials) Anna Hazare sitting on a fast to death, the people lapped it up, being fed up with daily exposes of corruption scams, one bigger than the other (Commonwealth Games scam of US $ 20 billion, 2G Telecom Scandal of US $ 50 billion etc.). The media too got into the act and their was frenzied reporting across TV channels, Newspapers, Magazines, social media: you name a place and you had massive coverage!!!

This came as a bolt from the blue for the government that already reeling under attack for the various scams. Talks on the net and in the media turned the "civil society movement" into a mass movement and evoked images of a popular revolt like in Egypt, which was still fresh in everybody's memory (did I say everybody ....... here I err as everybody did and I will explain later how). All of this sent the government bending backwards to accommodate the Civil Society. Soon announcements were made that a joint drafting committee, comprising members from the Civil Society and the Government, was being set up to discuss and suggest a bill in a time based manner.

There were cheers all around and it was hailed as a great PR victory and perhaps one day would have served as a case study across Business Schools. So far so good.

But here is where the script started taking a turn. The Civil Society Leaders were not prepared for such a cave in and the question of whom to appoint on the Lokpal Draft Committee became a contentious issue. When the nominations were made the choice of father - son Bhushan duo drew incredulous howls from even the most ardent followers of the movement. The Government was quick to seize the opportunity and while it started engaging in meetings of the draft committee, it also started a slanderous campaign against the civil society members of the draft committee. The result was that the focus of the medial and the civil society shifted from the core issue of the Lokpal bill draft and onto the civil society members trying to counter the slanderous campaigns.

The PR managers of the Government, having tasted blood, fired their next volley. The government representatives of the draft committee started engaging in an abusive mud-slinging match with the Civil Society Leaders. Here the movement committed its next and perhaps the biggest mistake. They engaged in a "tit for tat" mud slinging match with the Government.

This battle for media bites became so shrill that everything else was drowned in its cacophony. This is what the Government wanted, and the end result today is that the Government says it will not bow down to pressure from the Civil Society movement and the Civil Society is threatening another fast unto death. Will the Civil Society succeed? It is a big question and only time will provide us with an answer, but on the face of it, it looks like the battle has been lost by the Civil Society.

Where did the Civil Society Movement err??? Let us do a dispassionate analysis. They launched a brilliant Campaign and succeeded in getting the sound bites required, but the campaign was fundamentally flawed and ignored the basic tenets of PR. When you begin a PR campaign the first thing that you do is: the timing - this is very important; then you identify the target groups - here the Government and the people of India; Once the TG is established you identify the pressure points of the TG; then you identify the influencers who have the capacity to act on these pressure points.

This is where the PR managers of the Civil Society erred. The first and the basic error was the timing - there is still more than two years to go for a General Election. While they correctly identified their Target Group, they failed to properly identify the pressure points and the influencers. The other flaw was that it looks like more spur of the moment activity rather than a well thought out process.

When I say they were correct in identifying their TG it means they correctly identified the Government and the people. While their first PR moves had the Government on the ropes - the reason was that they and the Government alike thought that the bites were covering everybody - and this was a mass movement. While the Civil Society believed and still continues to believe that this is a mass movement, the government quickly realised that this was not. The facts in India are that 70% of the population lives in Rural Areas and they are the ones who come out and vote in large numbers. While the urban population, that has all the visibility, largely engages in monologues and when it comes to action like voting, abstains.

This realisation of the Government has turned into a self belief. Another thing cementing this belief is that the elections are still a long way off and with the voters' tendency to have short memories, the government and its mandarins are safe into thinking that when the elections come this will be another non-issue. The Civil society has made its biggest error in not taking the movement to the villages, all the voice that one hears and all the leaders are urban. Is there one Rural Leader amongst the Civil Society Members who can be identified?

The leaders of the movement, should have avoided the mud-slinging match with the government and then this would not have backfired. The belief that media coverage is the end to the means is a basic mistake. They must realise that media coverage is just a tool, though a very potent one, but still a tool. Where is the connect with the "AAM AADMI" - the common man. Even if the connect is there, they have hardly managed to show it. How many rural demonstrations in favour of the bill have happened? How many people from the villages have participated? How many of them have understood what the bill stands for?

For the rural population struggling to eke out a living where it can get food for two times, Government schemes like NREGS make more sense and they see the government in that light.The promise of UID and the expectations that it will give them more money earmarked for them, makes more sense. For them media coverage and us shouting from the cocoons of our air-conditioned offices onto social media, does not make sense.

It is here that the Civil Society lost its plot. They haven't yet realised that to make the Lokpal Bill a reality, in the way they want it, they have to influence the biggest constituency of the Government - the rural population. Had the timing been 2013 -14, the pressure would have added up. But now the government is secure in its belief that its biggest pressure points - the rural population and the elections are not being affected.

This may yet end up as a case study in Business Schools, but not as a successful PR campaign for the Civil Society, but as a failed PR campaign that began with a lot of promise.

How a Good Investor Relations Programme could have avoided the crash in Stock Prices of Over Leveraged Companies:

2011-06-23T09:58:00.002+05:30

The week beginning 20th June 2011, saw the price of one of the stocks, GTL, crash by 70%. It was an interesting study: this had happened once around two years back when the shares of another company, Orchid Chemicals, had similarly crashed overnight by more than 50% without any fundamental change.

In GTL's case, it seems the crash was forced by rumours which were in the market for a couple of days that the promoters had defaulted on their loan repayments. The fundamental problem, in GTL now and Orchid then, was that the promoters had overleveraged themselves by borrowing against pledge of their shareholding in the company. Once the rumours started of default, there was a dip of around 10% in the stock prices, on the previous working day on the bourses. When the bourses opened on 20th everyone wanted to jump on the sell bandwagon before the lenders against shares came to the markets to sell in order to meet the margin requirements of the promoters.

This selling saw a catalytic move and, despite the promoters coming on record saying that none of the lenders had sold or were selling the shares in the market and clarifying that there was no loan obligation default, the cat was out of the bag. It was too late to stop the selling and all hell broke loose. Next day saw similar runs on the stock prices of two other companies, where the pledged promoter shareholding was large. The market is full of rumours of selling and default in other stock counters as well and there is literally a fear psychosis in the stock markets as of now.

From the Communication angle, this provides us great insight into what went wrong and how a proper communication strategy - a structured investor relations and crisis management programme, could probably have prevented such a carnage.

Let us first analyse what went wrong communicationally for GTL. Fact of the matter is that GTL is a very investor savvy company and institutions have always loved this stock. The reason for pointing this out is that if this can happen to a company like GTL, it can happen to anybody.

What were the steps that GTL should have taken proactively which it did not, in all probability, take? In India there are no regulations governing the end use of funds borrowed by promoters against their shareholding. While promoters are mandated to declare the amount of shares pledged, that is all.

GTL promoters, first, should have communicated to all their stakeholders and the investor community on the utilisation of the funds borrowed against shares. This would have ensured transparency and put to rest any doubts that one had about the promoter intentions.

Second, the promoters knew that the Indian stock markets were underperforming and were giving negative returns. They were plagued by one bad news after the other relating to Government and policy. Also they knew the dates of redemption of loans well in advance, so they should have been prepared that any slightest delay or renegotiation on loans could have negative impacts. Under such circumstances they should have kept their Institutional and other large investors fully apprised on a proactive basis, so that these investors stood by the company if there were bad times. In fact if the lenders were threatening to sell the shares to meet promoter margins or redemptions, a fully transparent management could have placed the shares of the lenders at a discount to these large investors. But the management it appears did not do so. There was, it seems,complete lack of proactive approach from the company.

Third, when the rumours started, I am sure the promoters and the company must have got calls trying to verify the facts, the company did not do anything concrete to stop the rumours. Why didn't the company come out with statements and go public when the first bout of selling happened on Friday, when the share price decreased by 10%? Because the managements were complacent.

Also, it seems that there was no Crisis Communication programme or even if there was, it failed. Another reason could be that the Crisis Communication programme did not take into account the Investor relations programme. A Good Investor Relations Programme should have anticipated the likelihood of this happening and would have proactively engaged in a much more frequent dialogue with the investing community to help keep and maintain their faith in the company.

While it is also possible that despite the best investor relation and crisis communication plan, this would still have happened but at least nobody could then have pointed fingers. Here any semblance of a Crisis Communication strategy, was completely missing from the public domain.

What I am advocating is not rocket science but only the need for Communication and Management teams to remain focused on engagement strategies, more so particularly, when the external environment is bad. Promoters need to think of expenditure on Investor Relations (IR) and Crisis Communication as a Capital Expenditure. Imagine if I had gone to the company and asked for a paltry Rs.3 million for taking care of the IR programme per year, the company would have laughed.

But see the scenario now: the company has lost roughly Rs. 20,000 million in market capitalisation; the investors are scared and sceptical about the company; and there is a run on it. Lenders confidence has been shaken, employee morale has been hit, etc. Even if GTL had engaged in an IR programme for 10 years, they would have spent only Rs.30 million and the returns would have far outweighed the expenditure.

There is still time for scrupulous Promoters and Managements, who are here for the long term and serious about their businesses, to hire professionals to undertake complete IR and Crisis Preparedness programmes. This will, in all probability, help them build sustainable brands and businesses and the Return on Investment (ROI) will start from day one.

The Perils of a slowing Indian Economy: greatly exaggerated...:

2011-06-20T13:34:00.000+05:30

Every day the headlines and articles in leading Business papers and magazines scream at you pointing out the perils of a government in limbo - a slowing economy. Today's Economic Times headlines reads - Scared and Stifled, Babus delay decision making. Another headline says - "D Street (Dalal Street where India's oldest stock exchange BSE Is located) Mavens see Sensex sinking to 15k by December" marking a 16% fall. On the other hand you have data which says that Advance Tax collections are robust, salaries set to increase by 11-13%, PE investments on the upswing. These are contradicting news and can be very confusing to someone who wishes to analyse the investment potential of India.

True, the recent corruption scandals which are plaguing the government and the fight between the Civil Society and the government over a tough anti corruption Lokpal bill have created a sort of a Logjam. The government is busy staving off one scandal after the other and trying to protect its own turf and in the process all the decision making has taken a backseat. But this cannot continue forever. The lack of decision making at best can only be temporary. There are powerful reasons for this. Today no political party can afford to let slip on the economic growth: if they do so, they can expect to be routed at the polls. The fruits of growth have started permeating the life of the common Indian. Though the fruits are not distributed evenly, they are there for everyone to see. People who have not tasted the fruits aspire to taste them and those who have tasted them will not let go. In short, the momentum for growth has been built to such an extent that it is almost irreversible.

The businesses which finance the political system unofficially, also will not sit idle if they foresee the reversing of the economic liberalisation process.

These two factors have to be considered sooner than later by the government because if they lose the support of the people and their financers then the game will be truly up for it. This gives us real hope that in the next couple of months, the government will put its house in order by acceding to the genuine demands of the civil society by taking concrete steps to weed out corruption from the fabric of Indian society. The policy and decision making should resume and the indecisiveness plaguing the system should be a thing of the past.

Public Affairs and Communication Scenario in India:

2011-06-07T21:09:00.004+05:30

Public Affairs and Communication??? If you ask a layman in India what it means the most probable response would be that it means the affairs that our politicians and other public luminaries have and their expose by the media :). Well that might mean stretching the imagination a bit too far, but I just wanted to point out the almost non existent state of this branch of Public Relations in India. However when we throw up the term Lobbyist, it is more widely known. But ask anybody to conjure up an image of a lobbyist and the image most likely to crop up is a person carrying a briefcase or a suitcase full of wads of currency and handing it over to the greedy influencer and in this I am not stretching the imagination.

Not many would know and those who know agree that Public Affairs and Communication is a very legitimate way of initiating a dialogue with the policy makers and influencers on behalf of your clients to get across their point of view. Of course the very point of the dialogue is to try and make the policy makers accept your clients views. However if there is no dialogue then how does one communicate. The recent Telecom scandal in India where the exchequer was cheated to the tune of potentially US $ 50 billion and one of the proponents of Public Affairs, Nira Radia and her company Vaishnavi, were caught on tape influencing policy for kick backs has only reinforced the image of a lobbyist with a bagful of cash.

India an emerging democratic superpower has to get its act together. The Indian public is disgusted by one scam after the other exposing the level of corruption in the Indian Political and bureaucratic setup. Increasing young population with rising ambition wants to see a country which is free from corruption and thriving. The immediate aftermath of the telecom scandal and rise of civil activism against corruption would be a knee jerk reaction of banning all kinds of public affairs practice. But is this the right approach?? If I put this to the public right now, I am sure the overwhelming response would be, YES.

But I am convinced this is not the correct way. Every section of the Socio economical fabric has the right to be heard and put their views across. This is possible only if we allow dialogue. Proponents of Public affairs are just doing a job: they are facilitating a dialogue between the concerned parties. But if we impose a blanket ban on this, do we think we can stop the rot in the system. I think not.

The way forward would be to legitimize Lobbying and Public Affairs activity and introduce laws to regulate the activity. We, in India, could learn from our global contemporaries, especially the western world, where lobbying is a permitted activity. The laws there require every person who wants to lobby to register and maintain an account of the expenditure incurred on all public figures to the last penny. These figures are then made public. What a wonderful way of stopping a politician asking you to buy a ticket for his daughter to holiday in Hawaii? Something akin to this would go a long way in stemming the rot and also cleansing the public system of systematic corruption.

I guess the time has come for all of us to ask the Lawmakers to introduce a Law governing the dealings of politicians and the corporate world to make India a truly global superpower.

Misconceptions about PR

2010-05-19T11:59:00.003+05:30

Most of those who are a part of the PR industry and even those who are not, often have several misconceptions about PR. I am touching upon several of these below that I have personally witnessed in the last two years that I have been in the industry:

Advertising & PR are the same: People believe that all publicity is Advertising and therefore since we are in the publicity business, we are in Advertising.

The most interesting manifestation was visible when one of the team at a clients’ told us that we were the first guys who he had met who were not doing advertising and were only pursuing PR. He told us to rethink our business and include Advertising as well. Oopsie… The rest of the meeting with him went into making him realize the difference between the both, which was rather embarrassing for us as we had been working with them for quite a long time.

Females in the PR industry: Another misconception associated with PR is that PR agencies only appoint good looking girls because they have more “pleasing power” and they attract more attention which helps in getting their work done… How skewed can this get???

I am told that some PR agencies also have strict guidelines about how to dress up professionally. It does not really make sense for a PR person to dress up in “attractively” just to seek attention. But, so deeply engrained are our biases that we believe that only drop-dead gorgeous girls can be good PR people. An academically minded professional who was given additional responsibility of PR was at the receiving end of her own colleagues who did not think that she did not look “PRish” enough for her job. She has since joined the civil services and as luck would have it, is in the Information Services…

I do not believe that only good looks can get the work done. What matters is that a professional needs to be presentable and in our business, interactive.

Because of this mindset, generally only “lookers” are appointed for the PR function by the corporates and PR agencies. Unfortunately, this brings with it another categorization – “dumb”.

Most media believes that most PR women are dumb. And I am forced to concede to a recent statement by Shashi Tharoor which said that “media cannot accept an attractive girl as a serious business professional”.

I wonder if girls will ever be recognized for their professional skills rather than what people believe that they are???

PR a revenue generating exercise: Clients often tend to believe that by undertaking a PR exercise, they can increase their revenues overnight. PR is NOT a sales function, though it assists in adding to the revenues in the long run.

PR highlights the USPs of the organization, creates perceptions which do not exist or shares information about new products and services. PR is a facilitator for information dissemination and perception moulding but not for sales. The best that PR does is brings the buyer and seller at a common platform, but it does not sell!!!

PR is all about having good media relations: Those who know PR believe that PR is not public relations but press relations – and now media relations. The perception is that PR professionals have to have good relations with journalists which can help them get good coverage in the media and most stories can be generated because of good relationships.

I believe that this is wrong… The only thing that matters when it comes to generating a good story is the content and information that we share and the way we are able to communicate it – in short, does it sound convincing to the journalist and whether he/she is convinced that this makes for a good story?

Why Rookies of Mass Communication are more interested in Journalism

2010-04-14T17:21:00.002+05:30

The much debated power of journalism has captivated the imagination of millions who aspire to be Barkha Dutt or Pranav roy. They aspire to be one amongst the top rated journalist this country has ever seen. They join famous schools and colleges to do several courses, in the hope that they will be a part of this glamorous career.

In India, journalism has reached the coveted heights where from PM to CM, everybody seems to oblige them in one way or the other. They are treated like celebrities wherever they go and they are seen as symbols of truth and justice. This very showcase of power and liberty inspires many to follow their footsteps.

As debated in the previous articles, I shall not comment on the quality of these institutions but I'd rather focus on why people are confused and choose other verticals like PR as the founding stone to fulfil their aspirations.

Most of the rookies I have interacted with, have no clue as to the kind of hard and tedious work and long hours that journalist has to put in to do an honest story.

They have hardly any information either on PR, Advertising, or Journalism. Their only comment on what they want to become say five year down the line is - a reputed journalist.

Journalism is the prize possession they would want to achieve, but if you ask them “How”, they have no clue whatsoever.

Alleged Colleges of Mass Communication should provide them with a clear roadmap as to how the education that they are getting, would enhance their chances to fulfil their aspirations. If they wish to become a Reporter/Journalist there should be clear roadmap of how they should achieve it.

But no one can deny the fact that today the focus is on glamour and power rather than on reporting and in one way or the other, Media is also responsible for creating this ecosystem.

What to do with colleagues who are very good workers but have "poorest of the poor" comprehension of English?

2010-04-13T18:31:00.001+05:30

Today I am faced with a peculiar problem for which I am still scratching my head trying to figure out a solution. This problem I am sure is prevalent all across the PR Industry and I would like to know the solution. One of our colleagues with more than a decent track record in delivery across media both vernacular and mainline English, has not even passable knowledge of English. Unfortunately for all of us coming from the interiors of India, English still happens to be the main language of communication at least in the written mode. This is especially true for emails.

Our problem stems from the fact that his written English is as bad as it can get. Typically one of his colleagues edits his mail and then he sends it. We are all aware of this and have let it be in the hope that he will slowly pick up and start doing his own writing. But this seems to be not working and today a wrong mail was sent by him to a client who is very particular, causing embarrassment all around. He just escaped being fired by the skin of his teeth. We all feel sorry for him, but how do we get him to improve?

This brings me to the larger question - why can't the so called Industry organisations run some kind of English classes for those aspiring to make a career in the Public Relations sector. Since this is a problem that most of the PR professionals, that I have come across, have - poor written communication skills. To give a classical example Chartered Accountants in India were never known for their communication skills,however ICAI, the governing body recognised this and today runs courses for CA's on communication in conjunction with the best institutions that there are in the country. The CA profession has benefited immensely and today you will find a marked difference in how a CA communicates, though there is still a long way to go. But at least they have made a beginning.

I just hope that all of us working in the PR sector wake up to this reality and take some corrective steps or else many a career like my colleagues will be in jeopardy.

In today's era of Communication, Is the Clients' fascination with Multiple Offices justified?

2010-04-13T18:27:00.002+05:30

We are living in an era where communication methods are evolving on a daily basis. If I tell today's generation, that to get a telephone connection one had to apply and wait for years together then they would probably take me for a mentally deranged person. Yet I remember the 70's and 80's when telephone was a luxury and one gave a neighbours number as a p.p. number to be contacted in an emergency. When I bought a Fax machine in 1992 most of the people were unaware of such a contraption.

90's bought the era of internet and e-mails, I actually had an incident when a pretty neighbour of ours walked into my office and pointing to the Fax machine asked is this the e-mail :). Yet today we take this all for granted such has been the progress of technology in the field of communication. We no longer need physical presence we are available 24x7 over mobile phones/email/messengers.

One would have thought that with so much advancement in Communication and with support from the Aviation sector in India, one could do with having large centralised operations for PR set up with Strategic offices in cities of importance.

We decided on this model and have successfully executed PR campaigns not only across India, but also in UK, US, South Asia - Lanka, Nepal, Pakistan, Bangladesh, Maldives; Singapore, Middle East etc. with a centralised delivery team in Delhi. Clients who have worked with us have endorsed this by staying with us for years together.

Yet I am dismayed sometimes at the mindset of people at new Client pitches. You send them your profile which mentions this fact and they call you for pitches. Here you are more often than not asked, how many offices do you have? One looks flabbergasted, is this guy for real? We have sent him our profile, he has called us for a pitch assumingly after having read the profile, then why this stupid question? One patiently explains and tries to show him the power of communication, but this guy will not understand. He wants an agency which has 50 offices. More the better.

One loses out in the pitch to agencies who show 30-40-50 offices. And what are these offices, more often than not they are affiliates or one man desk manned by junior level guy. And the client wants this? I can only scratch my head and wonder at the intelligence of such clients. Whenever we have lost a pitch to the so called big agencies, we have monitored the PR campaign of such clients closely for years together and have wondered at the output.

One would not be complaining if the outputs were good, as you would at least have the consolation that the account went to someone who is good. But rarely have I seen accounts going to better agencies. My question is really to all those people sitting on clients side, who happen to read this, Is your phobia with number of offices justified? Shouldn't you be looking at the bandwidth that the agency is bringing to the table? Shouldn't you be looking at people who can actually partner you in your enterprise rather than act as vendors?

Managements at Clients should realise that unless their marketing team gets rid of this phobia, they might end up the ultimate losers, by appointing agencies who at best can perhaps do sporadic media relations and lot of ego massage of the marketing team. And by the time the realisation of a mistake dawns on them, it might be too late for them to catch up with the competition.

What do PR courses teach you...

2010-03-19T18:37:00.002+05:30

I think PR is one field which is the most “misunderstood” by people. Most of us know it only as an extended part of media or to be more precise as a division of ‘Advertising’ but no one knows what exactly it is.

When I took up education for my bachelors and later my masters in Mass Communication, ‘PR’ was the subject which was given least importance. In fact, in my years of graduation only a couple of pages were “wasted” in making notes about PR. I haven’t really understood why: Was it my lack of understanding of the subject ,or was it that the stock of knowledge of my teachers on the subject was limited?

Most of the fresh graduates from any mass communication or PR course have one thing in common, i.e. the definition of PR, ‘Creating Goodwill of the Company In eyes of its audience’. But if we ask them how they will create this ‘good will’, then almost all sport a ‘puzzled’ look. And God forbid, if someone asks them the names of top 10 publications of India, then they are in real trouble!

Also, most of the PR students know of a PR tool called “Press Release”, as it is a common word used by their teachers in colleges. But when it comes to writing it, most of them land up in scratching their heads or ending up with 1 paragraph or the best of all excuse: “Sorry our teachers have not taught us this”.

I think the problem is not at the students end, but with the educational institutes which are offering these wonderful courses. The educational hubs which take pride in calling themselves as the heralders of quality “job-oriented” education and offer different courses in media, churn out 100s of “so called” PR professionals at the same time. But the lack of depth in the course content ensures that none of them are equipped with the necessary skill sets to ensure their right fitment for the job. It is imagined that “learning on the job” will work where education failed!

Most of the novices who take PR as their career have to learn one thing that if they want to be a good PR professionals, then they have to unlearn the theory books of their colleges and have to make a fresh beginning with a open mind, so that they can grasp the complexities of the field.

Deliverables in PR exercise

2010-03-02T14:15:00.000+05:30

Yet another mail from a prospective client asking for quantifiable deliverables from the PR exercise!!! How many times have we faced this question during pitches and what has been our response?

I have asked this question from innumerable PR professionals and have yet to come across a satisfying response. Similar questions posted on various forums like Linkedin etc. have all elicited a tepid response at best. Most of the deliverables are centered around media coverage and the editorial economic value of the coverage. Simply put the easiest way of doing this is to calculate the advertising value based on the space (column centimeters) and multiply this by 6-8 times (the factor given internationally to editorial coverage vis a vis advertising).

But how fair is it ? If a half page story carries one quote from the client, still it is considered to be a half page editorial space for the client. There are seldom stories which are entirely devoted to the client. At the maximum I would say the average across all clients would be in the range of 10% for stand alone stories. We do have cases of 100% stories on the client but this is rare.

Why can't the so called associations representing the PR Industry like PRCAI, IPRA, PRSI etc. work out a common denominator? Why can't we have a PR Measurement Index (PRMI)? The quantifiable deliverables are something which has vexed the PR Industry ever since the beginning. These so called International and National associations, if they are serious in doing some good work for the profession and seeing the profession evolve into a strong Industry must apply themselves to this task.Then only can they be called the true torch bearers of the profession.

I have certain thoughts on the subject, which may or may not find acceptance. I will express these in my next article.

Media Monitoring as a Service

2010-03-02T14:13:00.002+05:30

Most PR agencies in India include Media Monitoring as a part of their PR activities. The cost of the PR exercise quoted includes the cost of the media monitoring and is not charged as a separate service. However while media monitoring is done in-house, most PR agencies also outsource the Monitoring services to specialised Service Providers. This is done in order to try and capture the maximum coverage that appears across geographies. This is a standard practice and is not an issue.

The issue at stake is that with most clients wanting free PR service or wanting them at a cost which is like free :), how can agencies survive. This is even more true if you want to engage competent Monitoring agencies. With Media Monitoring which used to be 10-15% of the cost, spiraling to 20-25% of the normal retainers charged by most agencies, isn't it time that we started billing our clients separately for the media monitoring?

Internationally it is a norm to charge extra for monitoring, it is high time that we adopted international norms, since most clients expect us to deliver to global standards.

How far should we go in handholding a Client?

2010-02-17T16:56:00.004+05:30

Yesterday we had an internal disagreement on the extent that one should go in guiding a client. The disagreement centered around an article which we thought would be difficult to place in the media in the format that it came in. The person servicing the account felt that since we do article writing we should pitch in and mould the article to suit our purposes. The problem was that this was a technical field and though the article was nicely put, the writer was not summing up. There was no way we could structure the article ourselves.

This set me thinking as to how far do we go as consultants in handholding the client. Do we write complete articles for our clients? More importantly do we have the technical expertise for such things. We generally advise our clients on a lot of things like what to speak, how to address, even what to wear but sometimes one has to tread cautiously.

There was this big client of ours which was looking at merger and acquisition activity and fund raising. Given my background as a Chartered Accountant and the fact that we had been working very closely with the client for three years, I was inducted into the Financial Committee which was overseeing the entire activity. This was perhaps a first for any PR agency and gave us a high, but when at a certain point things were not working to the plan, effort was made to make us the scapegoats since we were outsiders. Also we were putting in huge amount of extra effort not in our mandate and were deriving no monetary gain.

Then there was this time when the Director of one of our clients wanted to invite the Page 3 media for one of his party since he wanted to be seen as a socialite. We had to put our foot down and explain to him bluntly that this was not in keeping with the image of the organisation as a serious player in its category. The Director still nurtures the ambition of seeing his pics on Page 3 and mentions this at every conceivable opportunity.

This brings me to the questions that I began with - how far should we go? Should we cater to every whim and fancy of our client? How far should we go beyond our mandated work?

I guess there are no easy answers to these questions. Most of the PR proponents might differ with me and say, we should do whatever it takes to appease our client. Some of them may even go to he extent of saying that apple polishing is one of the core mantras that a PR professional must practice.

I differ on this and feel that while we may go beyond our mandate but these must be occasionally and the client should know this. If the activities are done on a regular basis then we risk not being compensated and also being made the fall guys in crunch situations.

Public Relations vis a vis Advertising - a marketing dilemma?

2010-02-09T19:46:00.000+05:30

The easiest thing for the marketing head of any organisation to do is to draw up an advertising budget and undertake advertising as there are tangibles in terms of advertisements that appear. Also advertising is a more evolved field so there are measurement tools which help justify the huge ad spends.

Moreover in the AV media ever since most of the channels started taking breaks at the same time, flipping of channels I presume has lessened and the stickiness to channel being viewed is more. This increases the chances of an advertisement being viewed by the viewer.

However when it comes to PR, the same organisations who are willing to spend millions on advertising, hesitate to spend a few lakhs on a communication exercise. Increasingly we find even smaller organisations spending huge amounts on celebrity association.

While I am not an expert on advertising and so would not like to comment on the efficacies of such an association, I remember talking to the marketing head of an organisation which was paying huge amounts for such an exercise and asking him the effectiveness of the exercise, his answer really left me wondering on the decision making process. He said that "more often than not, celebrity endorsement decisions are taken in drawing and bed rooms rather than the board rooms".

I am not talking about PR replacing advertising, but am advocating that marketers of all hues should look at a combination of both PR and advertising while drawing their marketing plans. While for larger organisations with established brands it is all about capturing the maximum mindspace and hence over emphasis on advertising, for smaller companies still in the process of brand building this is not true.

The fact is that advertising is a costly affair and the smaller organisations do not have the luxury of resources to spend on a failed advertising strategy. For these companies it makes more sense to rely on PR as the preferred marketing tool to build their brand. One quarter page advertisement in any leading newspaper will set back the organisation by a huge amount. On the other hand at the same or marginally higher cost, it is possible to retain the services of a good PR agency, which will constantly be working for brand building of the organisation.

In marketing at is all about the push and pull effect. Every marketer wants a 100% pull effect and constantly works towards it. For smaller organisations it is always 100% push and the PR exercise is the most cost effective way of correcting this imbalance. We have found this to be especially true for organisations looking at funding. PR exercise has the potential to provide the necessary thrust and the requisite pull to attract investments and funding. Over dependence on advertising can in fact erode the finances of organisation pretty fast.

To give you an example: There is this organisation which has a good business model, and which we had helped raise financial resources by undertaking an extensive PR campaign. This is now in deep trouble financially. The mess came about because the company burnt up huge amounts of cash in advertising while the targeted revenues were not met. The company has already raised finances twice and is going for third round of financing but the very survival of this company is at stake. Also surprisingly, in bad times the company decided to do away with PR, forgetting that PR was instrumental in getting them funding in the first place and an effective PR strategy may still have helped in their critical times.

This is not only the case with this company, but most organisations view PR as a non core activity. I think it is high time that organisations realised that Corporate Communication is not about only "spend, spend, spend" but is a critical activity.

In times of crisis, PR can actually send a strong message to all the partners of an organisation like employees, vendors & suppliers, investors and buyers. In the recent economic meltdown, most of the Indian companies cut their marketing budgets. The first to be affected in almost all cases was PR. This actually should have been the last activity to be stopped. They say that "the tough get going when the going gets tough" which is why the communication dialogue must never be stopped.

It is time that marketers and managements resolved the dilemma of Advertising vs. PR and started viewing PR as a core activity.

Crisis Management: An Overview

2010-02-05T11:45:00.000+05:30

Most of us in the PR Industry have heard and used the word Crisis Management, courtesy us most of our clients have also heard about Crisis Management. Almost all of us when making a pitch for business talk about how we will help organisations deal with crisis, if and when it happens.

But are we as PR professionals really geared up to tackle Crisis at our Client's end? Do we really prepare our client in advance to deal with Crisis? If we do have a crisis management programme in place, how often do we review it? Have we ever conducted a mock to test the efficacy of our Crisis plans?

I am sure that the answer to most of these questions would be a NO. We, the practitioners of Communication strategies, lack preparedness in our own organisations to tackle Crisis at our clients end. Just think, how many times in the innumerable brain storming sessions that we regularly undertake have we discussed Crisis Management? We tend to put up a hurried and confused response to a crisis when it occurs and that is largely due to unpreparedness.

Today with communication mediums like social media, internet, innumerable TV channels always searching to come up with Breaking News, Telecom revolution etc., evolving and becoming faster by the day, the risk of even a minor incident being blown out of proportion and becoming a crisis is always lurking around the corner. If we are not prepared to tackle such situations then we are risking our clients reputation which we have nurtured so painstakingly. In the process we are putting our own agencies reputation at risk.

Two high profile examples are worth mentioning here. The first and one of the most discussed globally is that of Tiger Woods. What were his PR guys doing? Especially in Celebrity management, crisis management should have been on top of the list of the strategy for PR. Why didn't they advise the client properly? They should have advised him to come clean in the first instance itself, rather than going into a denial mode and having skeletons tumbling out of the cupboard one after the other. Remember Bill Clinton and Monica Lewinsky. Despite all the sordid details, Clinton still ranks very high in public perception. But see the perception about Tiger Woods. He is in hiding unlike Clinton who probably could not afford to do so. But what is Tiger Woods gaining by being in hiding and evading public scrutiny. We all have to admit that he is still the greatest Golfer and has done a huge lot to make Golf popular the world over. He is human after all and how many amongst us would have been able to resist the temptation that was on offer to him? What is his PR machinery doing in this, his greatest hour of Crisis?

Second example I would like to delve upon is more India centric and has to do with the Satyam scandal and the role of PWC. In the whole incident PWC is still smelling like shit. What was the crisis preparedness on their part, especially since they had been through such an incidents in the past not only in India but globally too. In India they were earlier indicted for Global Trust Bank fiasco. In Japan PWC was the auditor in the Book keeping fraud at Cosmetics and Textile maker Kanebo. One would have thought that after a series of such incidents, the Corporate Communication team would have been better prepared. But alas it was not.

So what are the lessons that we can learn from these and other incidents around us? The most important lesson is that most of us consider Crisis as the remotest possibility for our clients and so are not willing to commit resources of time and manpower to a Crisis strategy. The second is that since crisis can be of the most unexpected nature, we tend to argue that it is very difficult to predict the crisis' and hence difficult to be prepared. What is the first response that we as PR professionals advocate? "We will get back to you" or better still "No Comments". Both in my view are the responses that one should take as a measure of the last resort. Ideally immediately as soon as a crisis erupts, there should be a spokesperson from the Client and from the PR agency trying to address the queries of the media and others. We should try to be as transparent as possible in the first 48 hours, when the crisis is at its peak any single irresponsible statement can pour petrol over the fire instead of dousing the fire.

We as PR professionals should act like lawyers to our clients and ask them to trust us with the full facts of the case. We should try and limit the damage and come out with facts that can contain collateral damage. Even if the facts are damning, we should not abstain from giving our point of view and admitting mistakes wherever possible. Ultimately Crisis management is about risk management and containment.

In normal times we should periodically review Crisis Management strategies for our clients, internally as well as with the client. Wherever possible we should try and undertake a mock for any small crisis that occurs at the clients end so that we can see the response to the strategy at both ends.

In short it is better to be prepared than be caught napping. Both for our and clients' betterment.

How to cultivate the Media?

2010-02-04T16:37:00.000+05:30

Media is one of the most important ingredients of a PR exercise. In fact most of the PR agencies devise their strategies around media relations. They tom tom their expertise in handling media and harp on the excellent personal relationships that they share with journalists. Clients have been so sensitised to this that most of them, during a PR pitch ask about this. In fact one of the reasons why clients insist on experience in a particular sector is their belief that having worked in one sector, this agency would have excellent media contacts and would further their cause in the media.

So one comes to the question as to how does one go about cultivating the media? Is it true that if you have not worked on a particular sector before, it would be difficult to do effective media relations? If you see I have used the term effective media relations and not media relations. I will go on to explain what I mean by this later.

Coming to the cultivating part or creating linkages with media, most PR agencies and PR professionals believe gifting, wining and dining to be the shortest and surest way to forging relationships with journalists. One keeps hearing whispers as to how one has to pay the journalists in cash or in kind to get the stories published. But is this really the truth? Is it the only way? True I have also come across journalists who have hinted at such things, but does that mean that all journalists are like that? Isn't this kind of behaviour true of people from other professions as well? As recently as yesterday I came across this doctor who is the head of ENT for a large Government hospital, who had prescribed hearing aid for my father, refusing to verify the bills which were to be submitted for reimbursement. He wanted the seller of the hearing aid to talk to him or visit him so that he could get a commission on this. But does this make all doctors corrupt?

In our dealings with the media, we have come across many journalists who have refused to accept any kind of gifts. Journalists who one has heard of are corrupt, have never asked us for a favour and still done our stories. Clients look at us in dismay, when we say that we do not require any gifts to be handed out during a Press Conference. They scratch their heads and wonder, are these guys for real when we say we will not serve liquor at our Press Meets. Till date we have never had any reason to do so and all our press conferences and press meets have been pretty successful. So much so that in one of our Press Conferences in Delhi, where an adjoining Press conference for the launch of IPO of one of the biggest corporates was going on, the PR head of the agency handling that conference, whom I knew, requested us to lend him journalists so that his client could be happy.

So why is this notion there? I would put the blame squarely on the PR industry, it is we who have propagated this. It is we who ask the clients to dole out expensive gifts and sometimes envelopes containing hard cash. We in order to get people into the press meets have resorted to these tactics. We are in fact shirking our responsibility and encouraging rampant corruption. What started as a practice of gifting at the press meets has gone onto giving cash and other gifts for getting stories. Temptation can make even the most honest amongst us, corrupt. So why blame the media,they are human beings too.

I still remember this instance a few years ago, when we had gone to meet this senior journalist who happens to be a friend, writing on Auto sector in one of the leading Financial Papers. We were generally catching up, when this PYT (Pretty Young Thing) comes upto him, batting her eyelids, at her coyish best asking this friend of our "can we go out for lunch or dinner". The friend looked scandalised as he belonged to the old school of thought where going out to lunch or dinner was to be with someone whom you really knew well and this girl had just met him.

We as PR agencies encourage this practice. We only try and recruit good looking girls. Looks are all that matter. How many guys do we have in the PR Industry, not many I am sure. There is so much gender discrimination of the opposite kind that it is not funny. A couple of years back we recruited this boy who had been to so many PR agencies for employment who had rejected him because he was a male, that he had tears in his eyes when we told him that he had been selected.

So how do we forge our relationships with the media? My firm belief is that we have to create content for the media. Content that is credible and that can add value to the journalist. Content is king and the key differentiator. For this we have to create an environment of learning in our agencies. I firmly believe that we are one of the few Knowledge based agencies.

Knowledge comes from reading and writing, not wining and dining. Knowledge comes from trying to know as much about your client's business as much as the client does. Knowledge comes from creating ecosystems or being part of ecosystems that your client operates in. Try and step into your clients shoes, understand his requirements. Go beyond column centimeters. Try and engage your audience ( the journalist - in media relations) with content and ideation. If you can do this then no wining, dining and gifting is going to replace your relationships with the media.

I had mentioned effective media relations,let me enlarge. As you read this, just sit back and think will getting coverage in Financial Publications for a Beedi launch, going to increase your clients ( a beedi manufacturer) sales. Is getting a half page personal profile of the marketing head of an organisation, going to help the organisation (it will surely earn you brownie points with the marketing head who will suddenly appear on the radar of head hunters). You have to understand the client requirements and undertake media activity accordingly. However the requirements need not be constant, so your media strategy has also to keep evolving e.g. for the beedi client of yours while the Financial media might not make sense if he is looking at a product launch, it will suddenly make sense if he is looking at fund raising. We have to constantly keep analysing our clients business needs to undertake effective media relations.

At our agency we have been constantly practicing this. The credo has always been to enhance the business of our clients through communication.

Today most of the journalists that I have interacted with are friends. It is not because I have wined and dined with them, the friendship is based on mutual respect. Respect can only be earned and not bought. Please understand one thing, howsoever corrupt a journalist may be, he/she still has a job to do. For that job to be done they require content and if we can give them content, then these very journalists who are tagged as corrupt by others are no longer corrupt with you. You have to create a need for your content to such an extent that they come to rely on you.

Dear friends if we can do this, then we can do away with the so called necessities of doing business in the PR industry.

Do PR Agencies encourage professionals from Other Fields

2010-02-04T11:13:00.000+05:30

Recently I saw the website of a leading PR agency in India and saw the profile of one of their heads, whom I knew and had worked with professionally. This person was shown as the head of Investor relations, which set me wondering, since this person though being a good PR professional certainly did not have any Finance background.

It made me ponder as to how we recruit and train our manpower, and how we allocate them job responsibilities. Are the various functions of a PR exercise treated similarly e.g. is Financial PR the same as Normal PR. The problem is that we continue to view any and all PR as media intensive and train and pick up people accordingly.

But PR is not just media relations. Financial PR requires a great deal of interaction with the non media, Financial community such as Analysts, Research Houses, Brokerages, Mutual Funds, Private Equity and Venture Capitalists. This community is looking at things from the financial angle like what are the capex plans, what is the Earning Per share, what are the profitability ratios for different streams of businesses, what is the ROI, EBDITA, PE ratios, how soon will a new project achieve breakeven etc.

Is it reasonable for us to expect that a non - finance professional will be able to cope adequately on his/her own when faced with a barrage of such questions. I would assume that he/she will come up with "I will get back to you with the figures after talking to the Management" or in all likelihoods give the number of the CFO of the organisation. A finance professional in this role would be the most suited.

Similarly in most of the large corporates which are catering to the B2B segment, the trade media is very important. Most of the trade media comprises of people who have loads of experience and are professionally trained or qualified for that trade. How reasonable is it to expect a PR professional to do justice of dealing with such a media. At the max we end up just pushing Press Releases or requesting for interviews and most of this is also a barter against advertising. We also end up complaining that the Trade publications do not do justice to our clients because they are only after advertising.

I believe this is wrong, in nearly a decade of our existence, we have never had to broker editorial content in lieu of advertising. Some of the Editors of the leading trade publications in the auto component sector have relied heavily on us for providing them good content. But how can you generate good content unless you understand the trade.

Do our clients have non-finance professionals in finance roles, non-science people manning engineering sections? No. So why should we not try to hire people on the same lines.

Ultimately what is PR? It is trying to further the business objectives of entities through communication. For this to happen we have to have a thorough understanding of our Clients business. How reasonable is it to expect a person who has done a course in Mass Communication or Journalism to understand the nuances of Finance or Engineering? Imagine trying to teach a mass communication professional, engineering or Finance? On the other hand it is easier to train a person from science background, the requisite communication skills.

We as an organisation have consciously refrained from picking up people with PR background and have always picked up people with backgrounds of Finance, Science, Art etc. It has been our experience that some of the best PR practitioners in our consultancy have had nothing to do with PR before they joined us.

One of them Milton Singh ( who has taken a sabbatical due to family reasons ) is a case study in himself. An MBA in IT systems, he began his career with Airtel and went on to work in the BPO sector before joining us.He was one person who could sell anything to anybody. But was it just his selling skills? No it was his ability to understand the subject on hand and create the need in the buyer to acquire that subject. This all came from his having undertaken the rigors of doing MBA in such a specialised field as IT systems. He is an outstanding PR professional today.

For PR to evolve as an Industry, it is very important that we encourage people from diverse background to enter the profession. It is high time that we dispelled the notion that to get a job in the PR sector, one needs to have mass communication background.

col cm in a PR campaign

2010-02-03T13:34:00.000+05:30

Sharing a personal angst here: Why is that even after more than 30 odd years that the PR industry has been in operations in India, it still is "col cm" that guides any new PR pitch?

Agreed, PR in India began as a subset of Advertising but isn't it time that we moved away from the media-fixation and the "number of clips" to providing total PR solutions???

Be it a small company or a large one, an organisation selling "Gutka" or selling "diamond cuff-links", why is everybody so stuck on media coverage and that too in the top two publications in the country? I mean is somebody going to buy gutka after reading about it in HT/TOI? So why are clients so fixated? Or is it us (the PR guys) who have created the "need" to have media stories as a bench-mark for effective PR?

We tell our new joinees that we are "different" and look at PR holistically and yet most work in office is centred around media - so what is the take-away? Unfortunately, it is a classic case of "Do in Greece, what Greeks do!"

If the rest of the world is offering media clippings as a barometer for efficacy of a PR campaign, do we also follow suit? We have, over the years, met quite a few clients who told us that some of our ilk were willing to commit the "number of clips" that they would give them in the first month / first quarter.

So is a PR campaign justified only by measuring the col cm in the traditional media and other ways to reach out to the target group completely to be overlooked? What about social media, BTL activities, synergistic alliances, relationship management, direct contact programmes, etc.??? What about reaching out to the customer directly???