PR does not belong in the HR Department
In the latest issue of PRSA’s The Strategist there is an article “Driving Public Relations” that discusses Chrysler’s corporate decision to put PR under their HR department.
Nancy Rae, Chrysler’s human resource and corporate communications executive is now handling PR. According to the article, this move is “part of the cultural transformation—and the search for “synergies and efficiencies”—that Chrysler began in 2007. This new role also gives her additional oversight of employee relations.
I, obviously, can’t site the entire article for you, but the gist is that there were PR professionals like Jason Vines (Chrysler’s former PR VP of corporate communications), John Guiniven, APR, Fellow PRSA (Chrysler’s former director of corporate PR), and Janine Turner (Mandrake Executive Search Consultants) chiming in how this move is wrong for many reasons.
Some of the debate includes: where PR should fit within an organization (and they don’t think it’s under HR); the argument that PR should report to the CEO (and have a seat at the executive table) to ensure that they are part of decision-making and corporate strategy; and the fact that HR and PR are completely different disciplines.
Here are my quick, off-the-cuff thoughts:
- HR has a tendency to keep corporate information close to the vest, you can’t do that with reporters or your publics—especially during a crisis;
- PR is not an “anyone can do this” job. It is a degreed discipline;
- HR typically isn’t involved with product development, marketing and customers; and
- HR focuses internally, not externally—employees relations does not equate to public/external relations.
As you probably can guess, I believe that PR needs to be a function of Marketing. PR folks can debate me (note: I also am a PR practitioner) on this, but PR is promotion. You ARE promoting the company and it’s strategy in one way or another. Whether it’s product promotion, thought leadership, or community relations, the end game is the same—two-way communications and acceptance.
Also, I found it interesting that the article notes that the PR team at Chrysler works 24/7—whether there’s a crisis or not. 24/7? Is that necessary? Perhaps it’s an exaggeration to squelch the perception that being a private company will equate to lack of communication.
I apologize for not having a link to the article for you to read and react to, but there isn’t one available.
Smart PR and marketing folks, in general, what do you think? Should PR fall under HR? What are the ramifications of doing so? And, feel free to provide opinions on PR falling under marketing too.
[Image: goswm.com]
Even More Goodness! Related Posts:
Tags: Chrysler, Chrysler PR, Marketing, PR, Public Relations
4 Responses to “PR does not belong in the HR Department”
The Harte of Marketing by Beth Harte is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs 3.0 Unported License.
Based on a work at www.theharteofmarketing.com. [If you have a question about what you can use from this blog, click on the above Creative Commons link to learn more.]
As a Detroiter, I’ve heard plenty of news as it relates to this particular business decision. Not to mention the fact that my boss used to work at Chrysler under the direction of Jason Vines, who you mention here.
Honestly, I understand the logic behind this move since both are responsible for communicating on behalf of the company, but that’s basically where my understanding ends.
In addition to some of the issues you mentioned regarding privacy -vs- openness, I think the speed with which each of these departments operate must be entirely different.
In PR, people have to be ready to drop everything when a journalist/blogger expresses interest in covering their company. That also means having a direct line to executives and quick access to all background information, images, video, etc. In general, that means having the ability to bend over backwards to make sure every question is answered and every resource is shared — and shared quickly!
I can’t imagine that anyone with a background in HR has ever had to really scramble in the same way. Sure, they have peaks and valleys in their workload — but it’s more seasonal. In PR, changes can happen daily and sometimes hourly. Not to mention that writing employee handbooks and company policy is an entirely different discipline that writing press materials and marketing copy…
However, the Detroiter in me can’t help but remember that we are talking about Chrysler in 2008 — a company that has a product line that is so totally out of sync with what consumers actually want, it’s ridiculous. I keep thinking that maybe this is their way of saying, “why bother?”
Whether it’s intentional or not, the messaging behind this decision only seems to confirm that the leadership at Chrysler really couldn’t care less what anyone outside the company might think.
Continuing the conversation Beth and I had about this over lunch at Panera Bread (free wi-fi, friendly to customers!) I am saddened after spending most of my professional career in corporate communications and public relations that corporate managers still don’t understand that communicating with their audiences and constituencies is a separate discipline. They still think the media can be manipulated by hiding information, by shielding executives, and by misleading employees by burying significant corporate actions in stultifying legally required disclosure documents.
I am pessimistic about the future for anyone contemplating a career in a corporate PR role. Companies are more interested in hiring young people willing to be drones for a (relatively) high corporate salary, read scripts to reporters, know nothing about the business or trends affecting the industry and its customers. And then, when those young people have a few years of experience under their belts (and higher salaries) they will be tossed under the bus and replaced with still younger and inexperienced people.
Continuity and relationship building are the antithesis of what this trend is all about. And the companies who do this (you all know who you are, Chrysler included) will reap what they sow. They have simply concluded that the reputation damage doesn’t matter to them any more.
It’s a lot like China. They don’t care if the Yettumsville Gazette writes about the pollution or oppression in Beijing, as long as Matt Lauer waxes eloquent on the Today Show about how beautiful everything is.
@shannonpaul, you bring up a lot of great points here that I didn’t cover (would have made for a rather long post). You are absolutely right, when a journalist/editor/reporter calls everything else must be dropped and put aside to get the reporter either the details they require or the interview they seek. That said, I am sure Chrysler’s PR folks know that. It’s the upper management that, most likely, doesn’t get the deadlines journalists/editors/reporters have. As well, when there’s a crisis, you can’t wear your HR hat to the scene…it just won’t work.
@stevelubetkin, was that a little word-of-mouth for Panera?!
)
On this point we are in 100% agreement. The trend for hiring drones, both PR and marketing, will come to a head sooner or later because it will eventually affect revenues.
The other trend that I have experienced first hand during my career is executive management putting underlings [or managers like me] out on the front line during a crisis for fear that their personal reputation might be damanged. Nothing says ‘guily’ like putting a non-executive in front of journalists, editors or reporters to discuss the issue/crisis at hand.