For the past few months, there have been discussions in various PR communities regarding defining public relations and it seems to be a continual challenge. If PR theorists throughout he decades have different definitions*, it makes sense that the industry as a whole might be challenged to operate in one cohesive fashion.

Part of the challenge in defining PR, it seems, is that most companies, agencies and their practitioners consider PR the art of getting ink. Ink slingers, if you will. With such a huge misperception, we should be curious as to what other misunderstandings might be out there.

For this post, the working definition of PR will be:

Public relations is a management function that establishes and maintains two-way, mutual relationships and communications between an organization and the publics and stakeholders that often determine their success or failure. PR management includes on-going research, analysis, planning, and evaluation in order to understand, develop, and nurture strategic relationships.

Stakeholders are Publics, But Not All Publics Are Stakeholders

When PR is looked at as media (or blogger) relations only, a funny thing happens… Every reader begins to look like a potential customer (or donor, etc.). More ink equals more impressions equals more potential customers! (That philosophy usually adds up to a big ‘ol nothing if the only goal is revenue generation.)

It’s key in PR efforts to understand that not all publics are stakeholders. Stakeholders are the groups that have an actual stake in the organization: customers, donors, employees, students, shareholders, investors, etc. Publics are any group that might have a common interest or values in a given situation, but they do not have a stake in an organization. That certainly does not mean that other publics are not powerful groups.

With this in mind, the question is:

Who wields more power to determine the success or failure of your organization… stakeholders or publics?

Getting Closer To Publics

Let’s take a look at typical groupings of publics.

Latent, Aware, Active

Latent publics are the trickiest. They might be aware of an organization’s values (i.e. implicit brand), but they are not aware of the relationship they might have with the organization. Aware publics understand their own values and how they intersect with an organization’s values. Active publics recognize the relationship between themselves and the organization and they manage that relationship on their own terms.

Intervening Publics

This public will work with an organization to send a message to another public. For example, the media or a non-profit group that might work closely with your organization’s industry.

Primary and Secondary

Any public that directly affects an organization’s goals and holds the resources the organization requires, it’s a primary public. Secondary publics don’t really affect an organizations goals, but they shouldn’t be ignored.

Internal and External

This one hopefully doesn’t require explanation. The trick here is to understand that some external publics feel closer to the organization (or a right to be involved) and therefore the line between internal and external gets a little thin. Just take a look at college alumni sports fans, private investors or donors/benefactors and you get the picture.

Domestic and International

Again, this should make sense. However, keep in mind that just because the organization might be domestic, it doesn’t mean that international publics might not have a hand in the success or failure of the organization.

Stakeholders Already Have a Stake

If stakeholders already have a stake or interest in an organization, does that put them in a position of more or less power? Is it conceivable that some stakeholders, like employees, actually have less power? Do we assume customers and investors (or donors) have more power than other publics because they hold the purse strings? Would we ever consider that groups of stakeholders would ban together in an action? We see it with labor unions.

Getting Blindsided by Chasing Ink

If PR practitioners are out chasing ink, they might focus on the publics that can do the most damage to impeding your organization’s ability to achieve its goal. It happens all the time. How many times have we watched a situation build to the point of explosion? Yet the organization seemed relatively unaware that there was even an issue.

Timberland vs. Greenpeace

What does a CEO do when a public becomes a very active one? Active in setting out to tarnish other publics’ views of your brand, that is. That’s exactly what happen to Timberland’s CEO, Jeff Swartz.

Unbeknownst to Mr. Swartz, Greenpeace had produced a report that stated Timberland (among other companies) as being “of supporting slave labor, destroying Amazon rain forests, and exacerbating global warming.”

As Timberland was bombarded with e-mails from concerned publics, they were trying to figure out what had happened and how to best respond to the grassroots effort. In doing so, Timberland and its supplier weren’t even sure that the Greenpeace report wasn’t valid. They needed to review their entire supply chain to determine specifically where their leather source, which was going to take time.

Lesson learned? If an organization does not have an understanding of their all publics or have only focused on a few, they may be caught off guard by not only how the public taps into every tool available to spread its message across the Internet, but how they will control your business as well. Timberland did what they should have done from a PR management perspective and in working with Timberland, they were able to meet in middle ground.

So back to the question…

Who wields more power to determine the success or failure of your organization… stakeholders or publics?

Is this something you’re even thinking about?

[Image Source: PURObueno.com

*Be sure to check out this wikispaces project to review all of the definitions of PR.

I’ve always wanted to use that for a post title! But to find out why, you’ll have to make a trip over to Communications Overtones…Kami Huyse’s and Lauren Vargas’ wonderful & insightful blog.

While Kami is taking time off to enjoy her new bundle of joy she’s ask Lauren, Shonali Burke ABC, Kellye Crane and me to guest post. Be sure to check ‘em all out! From stinging bees to sweating the small stuff to getting the message, there’re a lot of though provoking ideas and great conversation for sure!

Okay, now that I have your attention…

Yes, there’s another PR upheaval going on folks. By now I am sure you’ve heard about Michael Arrington’s Death to the Embargo post over at TechCrunch.  If not, go take a read…I’ll still be here, pacing around while waiting to hop on my soapbox.

And after reading Valeria Maltoni’s post The Break up: PR and Media on News Embargoes and Jason Falls’ post Is the Future of Advertising Public Relations? (BTW, both excellent reads if you haven’t already), I felt the need to jump in and share my opinion.

The Problem.

What, you may be wondering, has me deciding to be vocal? Well, these two comments for starters:

Michael Arrington: “Tech companies are desperate for press and hammering their PR firms for coverage on blogs and major media sites. That in turn means that PR firms hammer us to get us to write about their clients.”

Jason Falls: “I say new-fashioned because old-fashioned is sending blast emails to hundreds of media outlets or bloggers and calling it a day. New-fashioned is reaching out personally to individuals to build a relationship and working with them to meet their needs and yours in symbiotic fashion.”

Fail! As in F-.

It’s the PR agency’s or internal PR person’s job to educate and advise the client or company on how to best reach any media outlet whether it’s print, on-line or a blogger. And this includes being able to stand up and just say no. If you don’t have the courage it takes to say no to pitching the wrong publications or outlets, to say no to CEOs and VPs who want to see their name in print for no other reason than vanity, to say no to spamming anyone, anywhere… you really need to rethink your career. You ARE the trusted advisor and you ARE the voice of the client/company and you ARE tarnishing both by not saying no (within reason and when it’s most important, of course).

It’s the PR agency’s or internal PR person’s job to build the necessary AND trusting relationships with journalists, reporters, blogger, etc. This isn’t anything new. This is, um, public “relations.” How difficult is it to understand YOUR audience/community? To read their articles or blogs? To learn how they think, understand what makes them tick? Know the industry and respect that they are stretched way thin and always awaiting a pink slip. How about giving them what they need so they might return the favor one day? Really, you don’t have an hour or two a week for relationship building? And if you work for an agency or company that won’t let you take the time to build relationships or understand the people you need to reach out to, you need a new job.

I should point out that the ‘fail’ isn’t reflective of Michael or Jason…just the notion of the comments. I know, trust and highly respect Jason. These comments are just symptomatic of what’s going on in our industry.

PR people, please step up and stop the madness!

Do you know how many years I have been hearing these complaints from journalists, reporters, etc? Seriously, Michael Arrington isn’t new to the complaint department; he’s just overly vocal because he has a line of people willing to take a ticket and listen to him. And this certainly isn’t a new challenge because of the advent of social media or blogger relations. Ask any print or online journalist and they’ll tell you the same thing. They have had this same issues for years. How have they responded? By deleting your e-mails, ignoring your calls and throwing out your packages. (Oh, and now, those on Twitter want a pitch in 140-characters a la TwitPitch. How’s that for pressure?!)

Oh yeah, and remember Whack-a-Flack (circa 2001)? I am sure anyone who’s been in this business longer than a blogger does (seriously it was all the buzz!). In case you aren’t familiar with it, here’s the introduction:

Tired of pushy PR flacks and overzealous young account execs huffing breathlessly over the virtues of the next Useless.com? Feeling bombarded by inane hype? Here’s your chance to give them a taste of their own… media kit.

Choose the PR agency that you’d like to give some comeuppance to. Let us know why they’re being whacked. Then have at ‘em with our Whack-a-flack Shockwave game.

My, how nothing has changed.

What are your credentials Beth Harte?!

Yeah, I know what some of you might be thinking. Who is Beth Harte and who the hell is she to tell the PR industry what to do?!

I’ve never worked for an agency. I’ve always been on the corporate side (until now). I’ve worked for companies where I was the PR lead (i.e. pitching, developing relationships, and writing all by my lonesome) and I’ve worked for the companies where I managed PR agencies and internal PR processes (private, public and a Fortune 500). I also teach PR at Immaculata University.

In case you are wondering if I can walk the walk, well, let’s just say I’ve almost lost my job twice for saying no on more than one occasion. In fact, given that I was eventually laid off from both those jobs, I’d venture a guess to say it had something to do with it. And I am okay with that…it’s called having professional integrity (and I take the PRSA Code of Ethics seriously).

I’ve carried media relationships with me from job-to-job and well, for obvious reasons, it’s very helpful. I’ve also been at the end of a journalistic rifle more than once. Having relationships in place helped neutralize potential crisis situations and spared me from being shot, fired or both.

Last thoughts while on the soapbox and before I duck flying arrows…

Folks, bad PR practices spread like a virus. And make no mistake our industry has always been infected…it’s just a virus under a giant microscope now and that’s not going to change.

And before you start loading the bow, let me just say that there are A LOT of agencies and PR people who are doing it right, they understand and respect the importance of relationships. (Example, Tim Hurley of Blue Point Venture Marketing who pitched me on his client’s latest news. Tim sent me a TwitPitch followed up by an e-mail.) As well, there are bloggers who don’t skewer PR folks for that day’s shish kabob lunch. The challenge is that we all need to work together to change the industry.

I know it’s a hard pill to swallow, but journalists and bloggers need to educate PR folks on how to get it right. And PR folks need to listen to them, HEAR what they are being told, and put it into practice (immediately, if not sooner).

Jumping off the soapbox for now, but sticking around to hear your thoughts. Can we pull this change off together?

P.S. Oh yeah, please don’t tell me what an arrogant ass Arrington (alliteration not intentional, it just is) is. Really. Pretty please? This isn’t about him. This is about opening up a conversation to make the PR industry, hopefully, move in the right direction. Maybe I’d have better luck with an ocean liner…

[Image: e-tractions]