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.

A simple shift in thinking can have amazing beneficial results for customer and company.

The first time I heard of this story was from PR and communications expert and good friend, Leigh Fazzina. The lesson she shared is a poke between the eyes:

“Sometimes we need to change our strategy. If we always do what we’ve always done, then we will always get what we’ve always gotten.”

What’s holding you back from change?

In a recent BNET post “Lying to Your Customers? Come on, Everyone’s Doing It,” author and customer advocate Christopher Elliott shares six companies who have lied to their customers: Tavern on the Green, Ford, Microsoft, Office Depot, Cablevision, and Apple.

Lies or Business As Usual?

The chef at Tavern on the Green lied about gluten free pasta. What is the big deal, right? If a diner has food allergies, it is a huge deal. While Chef Damian Cardone may not have thought too much about the “white lie,” those with gluten allergies likely suffered the consequences of their meal. Tavern on the Green’s reputation is known far and wide—making it an iconic brand. Now, it’s doors are closed after filing for bankruptcy.

A Ford engineer told NPR that the gas tanks in Ford cars register full when they are not actually full. We are currently living in a depressed economy and gas prices are soaring. With all of Ford’s efforts to be social and bring customers to the center of their organization, how does this admission affect their brand? Is stating that the gas gauge’s purpose is “giving a customer ‘a prediction’ of what will happen” enough to protect the reputation they have worked so hard to preserve? If all car manufactures have this same challenge, is it a lie or a limitation of technology?

Due to pressure, Office Depot sales people lie about stock in order to upsell customers. There is just one little problem with this sales philosophy: customers have changed. They are more likely to have done their research, reached out to friends and experts, read all of the reviews and calculated the level of risk they are comfortable with. The days of thinking customers do not know what they want are over, they know want long before they walk into a store. Upselling them from their needs will most likely make them walk on over to the competitor.

Cablevision lied to its customers about an FCC ruling allowing them to earn potentially millions in additional revenue. According to The Consumerist, the FCC is well aware of the lies. Is lying acceptable in regulated industries? Are consumers so addicted to TV that they’ll just pay the price?

Apparently, Apple employees lie to customers all of the time about things like why they shouldn’t unlock their iPhones. However, this is just one employee’s “inside scoop.” Does one bad apple mean the whole company lies? Of course not. It does indicate, however, that a larger issue might be brewing inside of corporations today. Employees can be just as much a threat to your brand reputation as customers.

The Benefits of Lying

• Sick Customers
• Reputation Challenges
• Lost Sales
• Indentured Customers
• Rogue Employees

Not to mention everything that comes along for the ride… like negative word of mouth, blog posts, tweets, reviews, etc.

Not Lying—Easier Said Than Done?

Is a little white lie—or even a big one—okay when it means more revenues? The obvious answer would be no, one would hope. But perhaps there are times when lying is a necessary evil of doing business. Who is to decide what is ethical and what isn’t?

How does a marketing or PR professional handle this internal conflict?

Additional considerations: Do you do as told to keep your job? Is counsel regarding what could go wrong enough when money is the shiny object in management’s eye? Who is the customer advocate?

[Image source: toptenz.net]

You may have heard around the social media water cooler that I am looking for a job. It’s true!

The economy is in the tank and jobs are limited—especially marketing, PR and communications jobs. Thankfully, I have been able to tap into a network of friends and colleagues that have been supportive, generous, and helpful.

People have been asking me “What are you looking for?”

One can hardly provide a smart response in 140-characters, no matter how many years they have been on Twitter.

Marketing, Communications & Public Relations – Not ‘Just a Job’

For the past 16 years, I have successfully led integrated marketing, communications and PR—traditional and digital—efforts for companies of all sizes (start-up to Fortune 500) and global reach.

This isn’t ‘just a job’ for me. It is my career and a passion that gets me up in the morning and keeps me up late at night. I have worked diligently to become a nationally recognized authority, writer and speaker on integrated marketing & communications that not only bridges traditional and digital media, but does so in a customer-centric, data-driven manner.

I also teach graduate level PR and marketing at Immaculata University, PA and Rutgers University, NJ.

Integrated Marketing & Communications—The Gift That Keeps on Giving

The economy has decimated many marketing budgets. Now, every dollar spent must do double duty, provide results and get customers to take action. A scrutinized budget also requires employees that think both strategically and tactically.

Are you worried? I’m not. You’ll be amazed what I have accomplished with so little budget.

It all starts with planning and understanding the market (that means listening to and understanding what your customers really need & want). Tactics can be cool and fun, but if they are ignored or don’t deliver they are a waste. When you see the bottom-line results of integrated marketing & communications, you’ll wonder why you ever did it differently.

What Can You Do For Me, Beth Harte? Glad You Asked.

This is just the short list. For an in-depth look at my career, review my profile and recommendations on LinkedIn.

Integrated Marketing:

• Strategic Planning, Execution & Measurement
• Marketing Return on Investment (ROI)
• Customer Research & Competitive Analysis
• Branding & Identity Management (Specializing in re-branding)
• Digital Marketing (Website, SEO, SEM)
• Product Development & Marketing
• Channel Development & Distribution (Domestic & International)
• Pricing

PR & Corporate Communications:

• Strategic Planning, Execution & Measurement
• Analyst, Media, & Blogger Relations
• Customer Relations
• Social Media
• Reputation Management
• Crisis Communications
• Advertising (Offline/Online)
• Trade Show & Event Management

Click here to download my resume.

Speaking of Customers…

Integrated marketing & communications is customer-centric. That means being comfortable with working with customers and really listening to what they are telling you they need to solve their challenges. Doing so allows a marketer to meet customer needs as well as corporate objectives.

A lot of companies have trusted me to work directly with their customers to grow their business and bottom-line. You can too.

What I am Looking For

I am looking to secure a position with a company located in the Philadelphia, Pennsylvania area that is financially stable; fiscally responsible; values marketing, communications and PR; and more importantly—respects their customers.

Depending on the company size, I would be interested in any of the following positions:

• VP or Director of Marketing
• VP or Director of Marketing Strategy
• VP or Director of Marketing & Communications
• VP or Director of Communications
• VP or Director of Public Relations (real PR, not solely media relations, publicity and getting ink)

(This list is in no particular order of ranking!)

If you are okay with virtual work, so am I (I worked virtually for Serengeti Communications and Marketing Profs). You only need to provide a laptop and phone.

You Should Hire Me Because I…

• Deliver results without wasting budget
• Provide strategies that are measurable (ROI)
• Work best when challenged (Read: Lots of fires to be put out!)
• Enjoy working with cross-functional teams
• Focus on data and analytics to tell me what’s really going on in the market or with publics and stakeholders
• Have worked with management teams and boards of directors closely

Are you in need of a strategy & results-driven VP or Director of Marketing, Communications, or PR that can bring you closer to your customers & stakeholders while delivering value to your bottom-line? Or know of a position? Let’s talk. You can reach me via:

• E-Mail
• Cell: 610.864.0175
• Twitter: @BethHarte
• Facebook: www.facebook.com/bethharte
• LinkedIn: www.linkedin.com/in/bethharte

[Image source: iStock.com]

I was originally going to write a post about a business owner who has recently written two blog posts in the New York Times about what is wrong with PR (You know who I am referring to. If not, click through the some of the links included in this post to find out. I do not want to give him anymore “publicity”).

I promised Kellye Crane that I would write a post about what’s wrong with said person’s ideas of PR, but then I read a post by Heidi Cohen, 31 Public Relations Definitions, and was once again reminded that there is a larger issue within our industry.

It is not the first time we will be having this conversation, nor will it be the last. Shel Holtz and Neville Hobson discussed the issue of defining PR in regards to the relationship between PR marketing back in January 2010. (If you haven’t listened to this podcast, I promise it will be worth your time. Included in the debate is Shel Holtz, Neville Hobson, Valeria Maltoni, Bill Sledzik, Deirdre Breakenridge, Mitch Joel and me.)

What The Heck Is PR?

31 Definitions. Really! 31.

Does anyone else see anything wrong with that?

Heidi asked me to send her my definition of PR, but didn’t exactly say how it would be used (now I know why!). Trying to be a diligent PR professional, I did what I always do—I referred to my collection of PR textbooks that I have accumulated throughout the years to see how they had defined PR within their pages. I also referred to the books my students are currently using this semester for our “Issues in PR” class (does anyone else see the irony?).

Here’s what I shared:

“Public relations is a management function that establishes and maintains two-way, mutual relationships and communications between an organization and the publics and stakeholders (i.e. those who have a stake, such as employees, shareholders, etc.) 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. Areas of PR specialization include Investor Relations, Lobbying, Public Affairs (Government & Community), Publicity & Media/Blogger Relations, Employee Relations, International Relations and Crisis Management. Often, PR and Publicity are used synonymously, which leads to a misunderstanding of the field of PR.”

Since this definition was culled from PR textbooks, does it make it the most correct or does it make it the least correct given that theory and reality aren’t always the same? Is it okay to provide a definition of PR based on one’s own opinion and experience?

PR is Publicity, Right?

When I read the 31 definitions, I did a mental check for each: PR or Publicity. It seemed that the publicity checks added up rather quickly. Are we caught up publicity spin? If so, why have we allowed it to happen? Is it because it is what our employers and clients want? Is there less perceived value in establishing and maintaining mutual relationships and on-going research and planning?

A Call to Arms

I don’t know about you, but I think it’s time to take back public relations. If we do not, there will be an on-going misperception of what “real” public relations  is as a management function and more people will have a legitimate reason to ask “what is wrong with PR?”

If we can’t answer that question among ourselves, who will answer it for us? I am not so sure I am willing to accept that answer.

[Image source: Jaxxshirts.com]