Why Public Relations must reinvent itself, or else R.I.P.

Many of us recall instances of repeated calls by insurance agents out to hard-sell a newly launched insurance policy, claiming to make our families ‘even more’ proud of us after we depart for heaven. The intense cajoling makes it seem as though the insurance policy is an eligibility criterion for entry to the heavenly abode. The divine discussion finally falls to the earth with a single question – what’s the lowest possible premium? Insurance is clearly the least valued investment option, rather, a necessary evil. Many Public Relations practitioners like to position P.R. as insurance against risks to corporate reputation from external factors. While that analogy may have some solid reasons, it is not surprising that the P.R. business in many parts of the world, stands commoditised as is the case with insurance.

Intense competition has meant that P.R. billings in hyper-competitive markets such as India are at their lowest. Faced with this scenario, it is only plausible to ask whether this low billing model is sustainable. Low billings would mean that growth in employee remuneration in the P.R. business would fall behind other key service industries. Moreover, the investments in training and development would continue to languish. In such a scenario, how can the business of Public Relations expect to attract or retain top talent? And without good talent, how will P.R. ever deliver results that will help it take centrestage in the communications strategy of clients?

P.R. is definitely not the first services business to be facing this situation. So, what is the solution? 

I certainly do not claim to have an answer but see no harm in trying to take a leaf out of the book of the insurance industry. Insurance now comes bundled with most financial instruments which seem to be far more amenable than standalone insurance. Perhaps it’s time P.R. is integrated with like-minded offerings – in other words its time to look at ‘Public Relations Plus’.

Till a few years ago the additional offering was primarily Public Affairs. However, that didn’t solve the problem of measurement. The new service offering, with a promise, is digital. As standalone, digital is heading for a similar cycle of commoditisation. But as part of P.R. Plus, digital gives P.R. teams the power to customize the message for each audience and deliver it directly with real-time measurement of audience receptivity. In culturally diverse countries such as India and the United States where marketers grapple with audience segmentation, the situation is set to get more complex with the growing penetration of the digital media. This complexity, in essence, has given P.R. its biggest opportunity.

If P.R. teams (comprising the PR firm and the in-house PR department) work in complete sync with a single-minded focus of showing the value of P.R. Plus to the C-suite in the backdrop of the increasingly complex external communications environment, there is a strong case for greater budgets being allocated and therefore better billings.

And it is this very message of P.R. Plus setting new benchmarks in communication that must be delivered to marketing and communications students. If setting new standards in communications is a student’s impression of success, then P.R. should be the career of choice. On the other hand, if PR teams continue to undercut each other and as a result fail to focus on demonstrating the strategic value of integrated campaigns, the community will do a great disservice to the P.R. discipline. Top talent will look elsewhere and the PR community will have only itself to blame.

On the digital front, while the debate continues to rage between marketers and P.R. teams as to who owns digital, the more plausible approach comes with understanding the purpose of the digital campaign for the company. Where digital is aimed at driving conversation with the audience, in other words the engagement is more social, it is up the alley of the P.R. team and where it is advertising-led or aimed at lead generation, marketers can take ownership with P.R. playing the supporting role. As companies gain clarity on the role of digital in their communication matrix, the differences are expected to be ironed out in due course.

We must remember that P.R. professionals would have to earn their place at the high table of strategy. The other option is to be prepared to get sidelined. We don't have much of a choice, do we?

This is an adaptation of an earlier post by me titled ‘Its time for public relations plus’

Job hopping: Why crash a promising P.R. career even before it takes off

In the past few weeks, I’ve met many young P.R. professionals who have made two or more job switches in the early years of their career. When I asked them about it, the usual answer is in search of a better opportunity. So, my obvious next question is what they want to achieve from this opportunity and from the career. And that’s where the hollowness of the decision begins to show.

The real problem is that most of them don’t know what they want to achieve in their careers. So money and designation become the obvious baits to lure them into a new job. The new employer, in most cases, has already guessed this weakness and couldn’t care less about their growth. They are thrown into the sea – if they learn to swim, they move ahead else they are left to drown.  As a result, the persons find themselves in the same old state a few months down the line in the new job – frustrated, stressed out and vindictive.  In the end, the once promising practitioner feels disillusioned barely 2-3 years into the profession.

The ways to avoid such an early setback to one’s career are to ask the following questions before deciding to switch:

·         Will I learn any new skills or will I just be doing the same things but for a new set of clients/ stakeholders? The plausible reason to switch a job in the first two years of one’s career is if a significant learning opportunity awaits you at the other end. A candidate with one year’s experience once told me during the interview that she didn’t really have a reason to move and was just exploring any new opportunities with my firm. My response was that if she wasn’t clear about what she wanted to learn in her new role, I saw no reason to hire her. Be very clear about why you need to switch your job. Learning should be the foremost reason.

·         Could there be a problem with my attitude? At college, I asked my professors what they sought in candidates during the entrance interview. The unambiguous response was attitude. Skills can be taught, attitude comes from within. For instance, if one is not able to get along with most teammates in the earlier firm and that is the reason for a change, there is a very high probability of the scenario being repeated in the new firm. It’s better to introspect than to be shown the mirror and thereafter, the door. In such a closely knit industry as public relations, it’s almost impossible to hide one’s behavioural attributes. Many of us have been through situations where a new employee’s attitude is known to teammates even before the person joins the firm. Always keep in mind, wherever you may go, your reputation is likely to precede you.    

·         Am I prepared to start from scratch? In most firms, persons with less than three years of work experience are expected to prove their competence at press office reporting before being assigned client-facing work. I remember having done press office work in addition to other responsibilities even at a manager level. If you switched jobs thinking you’ll be free from reporting tasks, prepare for a rude shock (no matter what you have been promised during the job interview).

·         Am I ready for the role that I’m getting into? This is primarily for those who are moving into corporates at a very early stage in their careers. Corporate culture can be ruthless. So, unlike P.R. firms where seniors are ready to mentor/train employees, in corporates the difference in experience between the senior and subordinate is usually so large (7- 10 years or more) and the corporate communications team is so small, that the senior hardly has the time to spend on bringing someone upto speed. Also, PR & Communications is a support function in a corporate so they would not be too keen to invest in training the PR team. So the subordinate either uses his/her experience gathered at a P.R. firm or learns the tricks on his/her own. If neither of these work, a pink slip is on its way, particularly if the company is not doing well.          

The apt testament is to analyze the career path of most successful P.R. and corporate communications professionals wherein it becomes clear that staying power is a common attribute. For most senior-level positions particularly in corporates, a job hopper is likely to lose out to candidates whose career graph shows stability. So, short-sightedness may seem to be working in the short-term but it is bound to wreck long-term career prospects for any aspiring public relations and communications professional.       

The blogpost was also published on thepromisefoundation blog