Why are Indian companies not getting the ‘Trust’ they deserve?

Trust is a very emotive issue, subject to interpretation. The closest definition of trust in business would be that one should have the confidence to partner with another party whereby one shares his/her proprietary information, intelligence and practices.

As per the 14^th Annual Edelman Trust Barometer, Indian institutions rank second from the bottom among 27 nations on the basis of being trusted by other nations. The annual survey captures trust levels in four key institutions globally and for each of the 27 countries. The institutions surveyed are Government, Business, Media and Civil Society (Non-Governmental Organizations). China is just one percentage point ahead of India which is insignificant, if that helps Indians draw some solace. But the point remains on why Indian institutions (companies headquartered in India) are not worth trusting or is it that they’re not getting the trust they deserve. I’d like to believe the latter.

Courtesy Edelman Trust Barometer 2014

 

The fact that many Indian brands figure in the most valuable brand, according to 2014 Brand Finance Global in the world effectively does away with the argument that Indian companies aren’t worth trusting. No brands can attain such value without being trusted.

Then why are most Indian companies not getting the trust they deserve?

Conduct

One reason is clearly owing to the conduct of some Indian corporates that has earned Indian businesses and indeed the country a bad name – Satyam Computer Services (wherein its promoter B. Ramalinga Raju is serving his jail sentence in a multi-million dollar scam, arguably India’s biggest corporate fraud), several telecom companies involved in the notorious 2G spectrum scam are just a few examples.

To an extent, our tarnished image is the doing of our own brethren. Of course, one can argue that even America has had its fair share of corporate fraud with Enron, MF Global, WorldCom among others. So, the question should be whether Indian corporates have put in place the necessary checks and balances to avoid such occurrences. Time will tell.

The second reason could be many questionable corporate practices of Indian businesses. While it would be incorrect to paint all Indian businesses with the same brush, many companies do remain predominantly family-run with promoters ruling by fiat. Indeed, the erstwhile Roman Emperors would feel quite at home at many of our corporate houses. Industry forums are buzzing with discussions on corporate governance but when talking to investors and employees at these companies, the usual response is that the pace of reform is too slow to have any positive impact.

Courtesy Edelman Trust Barometer 2014

The Values v/s Valuations Debate

Many Indians tend to opt for white-collar jobs in MNCs, not just for the prospects of better remuneration (which isn’t always the case as salaries in Indian companies have caught up) but for better corporate practices and more conducive work culture. The Edelman Trust Barometer validates the fact when it shows that Indians trust companies from America, U.K. and many western markets more than Indian companies. The fact that Indians don’t trust the Chinese companies is no surprise. This clearly indicates that while valuations do matter (considering some BRIC-headquartered companies have very high valuations), the discussion is increasingly on the values of doing business.

Courtesy Edelman Trust Barometer 2014

 Staying with the Romans, many Indian corporates would argue that Rome wasn’t built (or rather reformed) in a day. Yes, but we’re in the twenty-first century, aren’t we, so perhaps the speed of reform should be a tad faster. Or does this sound like time travel for the old school corporate managers?

The third (and every Indian’s favourite reason) is that of rampant corruption in the government where rules are framed in a way to let those playing dirty get the edge. The 2G scam, coal scam (fondly referred to as Coalgate) are glowing examples. One tends to wonder what the Ivy League educated ministers in the Government were up to if they couldn’t get the basics right. A plausible answer seems to be as Arvind Kejriwal put it- the problem is not lack of capability of government ministers or bureaucrats, it’s the lack of intent. And that’s why any external reform effort is destined to fail.

So, is the end of the tunnel near? Hopefully, India Inc. has been through the worst and learnt its lessons on the way. Let the corporate bigwigs start by taking measures that would help in trust-building within each economic sector. It is when such an atmosphere is created that like-minded companies begin to work together. For instance William Procter, a candle maker and James Gamble, a soap maker realized that if they stopped competing with each other for their common raw material (wax) and formed one company, they would be far more successful.  That meant trusting each other. Thus was formed Procter and Gamble (today known as P&G) and the rest is history. Indian corporates need to realize that instead of fighting with one another for the limited pie, they’re better off working together to grow the pie. And this co-operation should not be limited to a transactional level but on a long-term basis. Reputation building, be it for a brand or an industry, is a long-term play and consistency is key - Consistency in conduct and in communication of the values. So, communication professionals have an important role to play. 

When Indian businesses usher in this atmosphere of trust, leaving corporate rivalry and egos aside, the trust of international companies towards India is bound to grow. The fact that Indian businesses are more trusted by India’s ‘aam aadmi’ (common man) than NGOs, Media and Government should be a good omen. Let’s hope the goodwill is strengthened lest the halo slips.

Lessons for PR professionals from the Kejriwal phenomenon

Yes, there’s lots to learn from the Arvind Kejriwal phenomenon that has stunned not just the state of Delhi but the entire nation. Born on August 16, 1968 he sure missed that year’s Independence Day by a whisker, but the spirit of freedom seems to have own grown stronger over time. While listening to Kejriwal’s speech post the swearing in of the first Aam Aadmi Party (AAP) government at Ramlila Ground in New Delhi, it was clear that this achievement is as much to do with a fantastically executed communications strategy as it is to do with shrewd political strategy.

The AAP performance in Delhi is a case study for all in the area of mass communications particularly for public relations students and professionals. While a lot has been said about Kejriwal's political strategy and unrelenting conviction, for the sake of this article, I would want to limit myself to analysing the salient steps of his communications strategy and its execution.

Step 1: Leveraging audience insights

At the heart of any communication strategy lies indepth understanding of target audience’s emotions and hot buttons. While corruption is a nationwide issue, not specific to Delhi, Kejriwal maintained a razor sharp focus on establishing and reiterating the link between corruption in state government to the day-to-day problems faced by Delhi’s poor and middle class citizens – irregular water supply, high electricity bills and sky-rocketing food prices. Add to the list, the appalling state of women’s safety in New Delhi which has been a burning issue in the last one year, and the audience connect couldn’t be more complete for a party that claims to represent the common men and women.

On all these issues, the ruling Congress Party scoffed at AAP’s criticism by providing counter arguments such as our performance speaks. Well, it didn’t and the result is for all to see. The Congress in Delhi couldn’t understand what hit it as its popularity came crumbling down like a house of cards. Poor communication had much to do with the defeat.  

From the very beginning of his election campaign, Kejriwal leveraged symbolism to ingrain his message in the minds of the audience – the broom as a symbol of cleaning the society of corruption, the white Gandhi cap which symbolized India’s freedom struggle and even after the victory, using public transport to reach the venue of his swearing in ceremony.

Lesson for PR professionals: Based on insights, the strategy must clearly identify how every message has a direct connect with an existing audience need, value or belief. Prepare for the counter arguments or as we say ‘rude Qs’. Use relatable symbols to strengthen the connect. Call out key differentiators that clearly set you apart. Most often, it is these audience insights and differentiators that make or break a communications strategy.

Step 2: Crafting credible messages and validating them time and again

Messaging was Kejriwal’s strongest area. Having worked extensively at the grassroots, he was fully aware of the pulse of the poor. Kejriwal and his team pre-empted the fact that the messaging had to address two key questions or doubts that would emerge in the minds of the voters.

1. How serious is his rookie party, AAP in delivering where the other two rival parties, BJP and Congress had failed, considering the others have a sizeable governance record while AAP has none? 
2. Will the vote for AAP be a wasted one since the party may end up winning just a few seats and is primarily aiming to divide votes?

The party addressed the first doubt by taking a tough stance on most of the issues. While Kejriwal was blamed by opposition and some sections of the media for being rigid and self-righteous, his unflinching stance seemed to demonstrate a steely resolve to address the people’s issues. Kejriwal ensured that his allegations against the government were backed by facts/ evidence of some sort. For instance in January 2013 he claimed to have a confidential letter by State Electricity Board stating that the private power distribution companies did have the headroom to reduce tariffs but chose to make huge profits instead. 

To address the second doubt the party conducted surveys on its own which claimed that Kejriwal was the most popular choice for Chief Minister by the people of the state. The raw data of the survey was put on the party’s website for verification. Having a credible and respected psephologist and political commentator as Yogendra Yadav incharge of the surveys, meant that the results were being taken seriously by some media and audience segments.

All documents from the manifesto to the pamphlets reinforced the same messages. To top it all, each and every party leader walked the talk during and after the campaign period.

Lesson for PR professionals: Ensure that all messages are validated by referenceable proof points. If proof points do not exist, use audience surveys to create credible evidence. Always get your facts right and be anal about it if needed. Credibility and transparency are at the core of message acceptance. And most crucially, ensure that the spokespersons walk the talk.

Step 3: Focus on message delivery and swiftness of response on all platforms - traditional and social media

Once AAP got its messaging in place, it went for the kill with all guns blazing. As a PR professional, I could well imagine how effectively its media cell was being managed with the party spokespersons being allocated for high-impact TV debates and print media interviews while its candidates went on a door-to-door campaign in their constituencies. The flow of information to the media was uninterrupted. The calmness and confidence with which most of AAP’s spokespersons (Shazia Ilmi, Rahul Mehra, Manish Sisodia, Prashant Bhushan) fielded questions on TV channels showed the level of preparation, aided by the fact that they all have a media or law background. The party’s lightening fast response to the alleged sting operation blunted the opposition’s attack.  

Well sure, some key media persons were clearly supportive of the AAP cause which showed in the debates but that doesn’t take way from the fact that the media cell was well managed.

Another commendable effort was its social media outreach aimed at the youth led by Ankit Lal, AAP’s social media strategist. Considering the high number of first time voters between the age group of 18-22, social media formed the best means to reach them. An additional message for this audience was on the significance of exercising one’s the right to vote since once they get to the polling stations, they were far more likely to vote for AAP than for any other party.

Most key party members were active on Twitter during campaigning period from @shaziailmi to @msisodia. The number of Hindi tweets showed the attempt to keep the Hindi speaking audience engaged. On reviewing @ArvindKejriwal twitter handle with over 990,000 followers (as on Jan 1, 2014), its following list of 72 consisted primarily of media houses, top political journalists and spokespersons of rival parties, apart from close aides. Similarly the @AamAadmiParty twitter handle with over 290,000 followers, follows 377 comprising a mixed bag of party supporters, rival candidates notably Dr. Harsh Vardhan who is the BJP's CM candidate and top political journalists. The importance being given to media and rival comments was amply evident. In comparison, Sheila Dikshit of the Congress is not present on Twitter whereas Dr. Harsh Vardhan of the BJP has only 32,000 twitter followers.

The Aam Aadmi Party Facebook page had over 200,000 people talking about it any given time while the BJP Facebook page which happens to be older and with over twice the number of likes had on average 160,000 people talking about it. The graphics and visuals, taken from various sources, being posted on the page evoked a high degree of audience interest. Most graphics had a link to party's owned online platforms such as the website particularly to the donations page since a significant part of the party's funding came from Non-Resident Indians (NRIs) who donated online. Online and offline campaigns were synchronized. Kejriwal became one of the five most mentioned Indian politicians on social networking sites such as Facebook and Twitter in the run-up to the assembly elections.

Lesson for PR professionals: In the age of constant media and audience scrutiny, swiftness of response is as critical as authenticity of message. However, this can only happen when Steps 1 and 2 have been thoroughly undertaken. Many PR professionals rush to Step 3 which fails to achieve the desired impact and can backfire during a crisis if the proof points are not in place. On social media platforms, listen carefully and thereafter let each spokesperson engage with the audience directly rather than routing it through the company page/handle. That said, do set the engagement guidelines and train the spokesperson if needed, but don’t restrict people-to-people engagement. Also, the visual element is crucial considering the short attention span of online audiences. 

Day 1 as Chief Minister of Delhi at CM's office
 Courtesy: Post.Jagran.com

As public relations professionals, we have grown richer by studying the experience of Arvind Kejriwal and his party. As we enter another election year, the communication strategy would be a decisive factor for who gets to wear the crown in 2014 general elections. So, exciting times ahead for those in the business of public relations…

January 2014 marks the completion of one year of my blog. Would like to thank all those who have encouraged me during this period and would appreciate feedback on the existing content as well as any other aspects that you’d like me to cover. You can also reach me on @tarunnagrani. Onward with my passion for PR...

Forgiveness: My compulsory lesson from Mandela’s life

While reading an article by Nobel laureate Archbishop Despond Tutu titled ‘Prison became a crucible’ paying his tribute to Nelson Mandela, I couldn’t help but think of a lesson in leadership which no management institute has ever taught nor can ever teach. The lesson of unconditional forgiveness to one’s detractors.

I see this as a common trait in all the people who I regard as leaders and idols– Mahatma Gandhi, Jesus Christ and Swami Vivekananda.

All great nations, communities, societies have been built through reconciliation. The path of reconciliation begins with and must have Forgiveness at every step. And with a nation as diverse as my own, India, the fact that it continues to stand as a single nation since independence could not have been possible without a spirit of forgiveness.

Some people point out to the Partition of India in 1947 to say that we did have our black spot but my answer to them is that had it not been for the spirit of forgiveness (inculcated painstakingly by the Mahatma), pre-independence India would have divided into, not two, but 20 nation states post 1947.

So from the life of Madiba, I take back this crucial and compulsory lesson in life. Time will tell how much I’m able to live up to it. 

In Search of the Formula for Communications Measurement

I utter the word measurement with a degree of trepidation. The word can mean many different things depending on who we talk to. To many it’s a perfect way to put a Communications/ PR person in the dock since they argue that the results of communications are not directly measurable in terms of business results. And that which can’t be measured stays at the periphery.

What set me thinking on this topic was when a senior marketing executive at a forum commented that Communication practitioners seem to be scared of being measured on ROI. What does he mean by that, I said to myself. And so began the quest to find the formula for communications measurement.

Unfortunately, many communications practitioners have heard similar criticism from clients/ stakeholders so often that they’ve begun to dislike the word ROI. But is it really such a dreaded thing? Can communications be measured in business terms? And what’s the most acceptable methodology?

Before getting into the method, let’s understand the context. Till any function is measured with regard to business impact, it is a tendency to look at it as a cost centre which needs to be closely scrutinized, and more so in times of margin pressure. An apt example is that of the HR function. Isn’t it ironic that in PR and advertising firms where talent is the primary resource, HR teams have an average size of less than 2% of the total headcount. In fact, most PR firms with 50-100 people have a one-member HR Team with the KPI defined primarily as recruitment and back-filling. One would think the role of HR would be more expansive in a people-centric business such as PR and so HR departments would be better staffed. But that has rarely been the case despite the healthy growth seen by the PR industry during the last decade.

PR and communications departments face a similar situation in the corporate structure where sales teams tend to be more powerful. It is a fact that most CEOs have a sales background. So, it becomes even more crucial for the communications team to show measureable business results if it wants to have a seat at the business decision making table.        

So, what's the ROI of Corporate Communications

Even if we acknowledge that the results of communications efforts at reputation management cannot be directly correlated to quarterly sales targets and bottomlines, no-one can and should deny or belittle the long-term impact of this effort on a company’s overall performance. Companies that have measured corporate communications through tactical short-term metrics have seen their brand values erode in the longer term. The best examples are many Japanese brands that have built their communications campaigns primarily focusing on product visibility in the short-term - a very transactional approach to communications. While immediate visibility for product may be needed during market entry, it cannot remain the sole driver of communications efforts. With the onslaught of the more nimble Korean brands, those Japanese brands are today fast losing the audience mindshare.

As per the Interbrand best global brands, only two Japanese brands are in the current top 20 namely Toyota and Honda. Most brands that have endured over time are American ones because they understood the value of long-term reputation building early on. Reputation is a brand’s most powerful defense to crises and competitor onslaught. So by that analogy, reputation management is as important to a brand as its defense forces are to a nation. Can a nation ask its defense forces for a Return on Investment?     

Measuring Marketing Communications

Marketing communications, which is primarily aimed at supporting marketing efforts, can be measured by understanding the impact of communications on specific marketing campaigns that directly impact sales of a product or service offering. One such method uses regression analysis which is a statistical process for estimating the relationship amongst variables. The measurability increases significantly in the case of social media promotions particularly in measuring efficacy of message delivery on a real-time basis.

Many companies particularly those in the consumer space use audience audits as a means for measuring the success of communications and marketing campaigns. The logic being that if the audience does not associate the brand with the key messages or ‘terms’ that the brand aims to stand for, it defeats the purpose of the communications and marketing effort. This has its clear merits. 

The other methodology includes a weighted average of multiple factors such as media circulation/viewership of coverage, number of social media mentions/ comments, tonality, share of voice and key messages/terms captured to arrive at a score. These have their merits too just that it doesn't necessarily show how the audience reacted to the messages.

At the end of the day, its all about the target audience and whether they absorbed the message which the brands tried very hard to deliver.

So is there a formula?

For those readers who believe the argument is endless, here’s the simplest answer for any communications measurement to be successfully applied.

The key lies in goal setting. The metrics must be agreed during the stage at which goals are being set. Each goal must have a clearly stated and agreed success criterion. What’s also important is to agree on the assumptions being made, the limiting factors and where one stands on the goal at the beginning of the period. If the probability of occurrence of any significant limiting factor is high, it is imperative to have a Plan B. One may argue that when a client hires a strategy advisory firm such as McKinsey, does a strategy advice always fit into an ROI metrics? Not necessarily. The thing that the strategy consultants get right is the assessment of the client’s market dynamics at play, the risk factors and their impact which is used to arrive at a highly measurable plan of action. And they are paid basis hours spent not on ROI. So, we needn't get caught up in the ROI model.

The disconnect actually lies at this juncture since many in-house communications teams have not taken the pains to discuss and agree on the success metrics and assess limiting factors with the senior management. Everyone loves ambiguity since it gives them the space to present results in their favour. Similar is the case with PR firms. And when the desired results are not achieved, the blame game begins.

The greatest enemy of measurement is improper goal setting. Most communicators tend to believe that they know the goals so why spend so much time in goal setting. The broad brush approach is what sets them up for failure. 

So folks, that’s as close as I could get. Love to hear your thoughts. As I said, the search is on for that ever elusive formula…And when we get it, we wouldn’t be too far from communications’ very own God Particle!

Who wants to be a thought leader?

In over a decade as a communications professional, I can’t remember having dealt with an organization that does not list thought leadership as one of its communications objectives, if not the primary one. It makes me wonder that if every company becomes a thought leader, then we would soon be entering the most ‘divine’ phase in corporate history. However, the state of the global economy and the unenviable balance sheets of many corporates, paints a rather grim picture, quite the opposite of what we would expect from a world filled with self-proclaimed thought leaders.

In a study by Forbes magazine conducted in 2010 of 1,452 diverse professionals with a variety of industries ranging from investment advisors to attorneys and from accountants to life coaches and security specialists, 78% of them wanted to be thought leaders. However, only about 5% say they achieved this goal. Similar results have been seen time and again.

In order to understand this phenomenon, let’s start by trying to define the phrase. Forbes, in an article titled, ‘What is a Thought Leader?’ gave the following definition from a business perspective -

A thought leader is an individual or firm that prospects, clients, referral sources, intermediaries and even competitors recognize as one of the foremost authorities in selected areas of specialization, resulting in its being the go-to individual or organization for said expertise.

So, the moot point is that an individual, firm or organization being a thought leader is determined by how others (its clients, prospects, employees etc.) perceive it based on its expertise and/or benefits to the audience. One can become a business leader by showcasing better financial results but the approach does not apply to thought leadership.

Many companies look at thought leadership as the icing on the cake. Failure to understand this aspect is the crux of the problem owing to which most organizations would never be perceived as thought leaders no matter how much they spend on the so-called ‘thought leadership campaigns’.

What amazes me is the misconception that exists among some corporate managers that public relations/ communications is the silver bullet to the coveted thought leader status. PR practitioners can help articulate and provide counsel on an existing opinion of the client and communicate it to the desired stakeholders. To think that the communications team/consultant can take sole charge of transforming the company’s image to that of a thought leader is the biggest bluff that can ever be played. Any company or its leader that lacks substance, may see some short-term accolades owing to the efforts of his public relations team but is destined for failure. And any PR practitioner who claims to deliver it is trying to mislead a rather uninformed business leader.       

  

So does it mean that communications has no role?

The point being made is that over-dependence on communications to deliver on thought leadership is putting the cart before the horse. A communications counsel can surely help a business leader in articulating his/ her thoughts and providing sufficient proof points, provided a strong and relevant opinion exists just as a legal counsel would help a client build strong evidence only and only if the case has merit. It is not mandatory to hire a legal counsel to fight one’s case (a plaintiff is free to fight his/her own case in court) and the same applies to using the services of a communications counsel. That said, the value of the legal counsel or of communications counsel can be significant if the case or content has substance.  

Among individuals, there is an ever blossoming group of wannabe thought leaders who think that by simply regurgitating the same points to suit various contexts, they would stay on top of every discussion. Unfortunately, for them, most people see through these attempts. At a recent so-called thought leaders conference, barring some speakers, most were using the platform to wax eloquent about their individual achievements in the garb of social service. It’s a tad disturbing to see people doing good for the sake of looking good. So, is this one of the milestones in the journey to thought leadership? One’s credibility definitely plays a role but it doesn’t need to be reinforced at every possible opportunity. It may be a foundation but what matters is the structure built on top of it.     

These days, every time I attend an industry event where a speaker utters the blessed words, a thought rushes through my mind. How about exploring a TV show titled ‘Who wants to be a thought leader’ on the lines of ‘Who wants to be a millionaire’. With so many aspirants around, I’ll surely have no dearth of sponsors and participants. The only glitch may be getting the viewers. Hey, what the heck, let me leave that to YouTube. After all, with so many high priests of thought around, need I do all the thinking!

The changing relationship between public relations and marketing

I’m often questioned by my peers in marketing on whether public relations is essentially a function or a branch of marketing. Many marketers would like to believe so, in fact while they may not say it explicitly but PR is viewed by some as the poorer cousin of marketing. In contrast, most PR practitioners consider the profession to be a management function whereby PR rolls up to the CEO/ MD or to the Head of Corporate Affairs. This line of thinking, in essence, suggests that PR runs as a parallel stream to marketing, connected yet independent. The irony is that many organizations agree to the latter argument in letter but not in spirit. The resultant ambiguity gives rise to a tussle on ownership of brand campaigns, communication platforms (particularly social media) and sharing of resources between marketing and PR teams within an organization.    

The debate needs to be seen in a broader context. At a fundamental level, every organization needs to be clear about the core purpose that PR is expected to serve. Is the role of PR merely to support marketing campaigns i.e. marketing communications? Or is PR aimed at corporate brand building and issues management? While the significance of PR may vary depending on where the organization stands in its lifecycle and the external issues it faces, it is primarily up to the CEO/MD to define the purpose of PR. The reporting structure is secondary. In absence of a clear purpose, PR teams usually grapple with hierarchy and ownership issues.

If the role of PR is marketing communications then it is fair for the PR team to work very closely with marketing and may even report to the Head of Marketing. But if PR is expected to play a more strategic role, then it needs an independent reporting structure. In line with this thought, several leading global companies have a separate reporting structure for PR with the Head of corporate communications having a seat on the company’s senior leadership team alongside the Head of Marketing.

However, there is another line of thought that believes that the PR team must be flexible enough to manage both corporate and marketing communications depending on where the need arises. In such cases, in-country PR teams have a dotted line reporting to in-country marketing. Such a reporting structure requires the PR team to support the priorities of corporate communications/ corporate affairs along with those of in-country marketing, both of which can be very different. So, PR teams need to invest in understanding the marketing approach, yet deliver on corporate messaging in order to be able to maintain the fine balance. 

With the conventional ROI-driven approach to marketing, PR is essentially measured by the number of impressions, placement, tonality and readership, in essence, breadth of coverage. The depth aspect, based on corporate messaging, third-party endorsement and advocacy, tends to become secondary. Many marketers take a cookie cutter approach that primarily looks at output (essentially coverage) as opposed to outcome (which could be influencer relationships). This is owing to the fact that conventional marketing tends to veer towards a more transactional and easily measurable approach to communications.

On the other hand, the PR approach is more focused on driving conversations with or without a transactional engagement with audiences. Owing to this difference of approach, the yardstick used by conventional marketing often fails to measure the results of PR in its entirety. While the ROI approach for PR may not be completely out of place since PR does deliver a far better ROI than advertising, events etc. but aspects such as message delivery and advocacy must be key components of any PR measurement tool. In essence, for marketing and PR to share a healthy relationship, it is essential that both streams graduate to a more outcome-based measurement approach without subjecting one another to their specific output metrics. Neither of these streams can act as a substitute for the other.

Advertising fell into the trap of being categorized as a demand generation activity. PR must be careful not to be led onto the same path.   

With a growing understanding of PR’s deeper role in corporate brand building, its stature has gradually risen in the corporate hierarchy. That said, PR will have to earn its position and respect within the corporate set-up by aligning itself to strategic management goals. This is the key to the PR profession gaining its rightful place as a management function.

Poor internal communications is the bane of the P.R. profession

At a public relations conference, a senior professor commented that public relations is yet to be seen as a management function. Some key requirements from a management function are multi-disciplinary expertise, leadership capabilities, collaboration with other functions and the ability to make a measurable impact on various organizational goals.  Advertising professionals failed to show these capabilities and therefore, could not gain a seat within the management team of clients. 

On the other hand, one can clearly see some serious rethink on the role of public relations in the overall communication matrix within organizations. As public relations evolves into a multi-disciplinary profession that has direct engagement with multiple stakeholders be it consumers or with the company boards, there has been a perception shift where in-house public relations professionals are being recognized for making an impact on business as well as exhibiting leadership abilities. As a result, increasingly, companies are delinking in-house P.R. teams from marketing teams and assigning clear goals and targets that are tied to organizational goals. This signifies that the discipline is required to collaborate well with other functions to deliver the desired results.

In-house P.R. teams rely heavily on P.R. agency teams to deliver results. This in-turn broadens the role of P.R. agency teams. They are expected to advise clients on every possible means and channel of communication, be it internal or external. So understandably, P.R. agency professionals are assumed to have the requisite system and structure in place that helps integrate their own teams and align them to client’s structure and goals. Surprisingly, that’s where many P.R. teams exhibit glaring gaps. 

I have seen many P.R. agency teams failing to deliver owing to ineffective internal collaboration within the team especially when team members are spread across various locations, work on different client campaigns and/or belong to various practice areas (digital, public affairs). The fact is that P.R. agency teams are still coming to terms with a matrix structure of client servicing. While I don’t mean to say that in-house corporate communications teams have mastered the art of collaboration, I would like to keep that aspect aside since it is highly dependent on the size and nature of business of the client organization. P.R. agencies tend to have similar structures.

So let’s try to understand some concerns and misconceptions that hinder effective collaboration within P.R. teams.

• I can’t perform in a matrix structure. Yes, the statement sounds familiar. When each horse is out to prove that he’s better than the rest of his fellows pulling the same cart, it is a fiasco in the making. Of course individual performance matters and there can be ample scope to show it even in a matrix structure, but if one believes that by working in isolation one can outshine the rest, the person is grossly mistaken. A team member is better off working in sync than trying to stick one’s neck out.      

• If I’m the best individual performer, I’m most eligible to lead the team. Not necessarily. Leadership is not about doing the best work yourself, but about helping others (which includes peers, subordinates and even seniors) to put in their best and achieve a common goal. I have come across people at various levels who believe that by not sharing their knowledge and skills with others, they maintain their prominence in the team. What they fail to realize is that most team members can see this shortsighted behavior and tend to resent it. Such persons end up losing the team’s trust and even if they do eventually manage to become team leads, they achieve very little. After all, how much can a team lead accomplish if he/she isn’t trusted by fellow team members?

• My opinion isn’t sought prior to important decisions. Addressing this concern of team members, in no uncertain terms, is the job of the team lead/s. They must ensure that important decisions are taken through consensus. The practice of taking key decisions in isolation can play havoc with team morale. In addition, the consensus-building process helps neutralize vested interests in the team who believe they have the authority to take a decision owing to their seniority or longevity in the team. This is, by far, the biggest test for the team lead.

• Why should I be sharing most of the information when others don’t? Well, if a person is more resourceful and the team looks up to him/her for information, isn’t that a strength that can work in the person's favour? No-one stands to lose by sharing more.

• I’ve shared knowledge but never got enough credit. That’s the pet peeve for most. From experience, I can say that credit is one of those things which the more one gives away, the more one gets. While it is definitely the role of the team lead/s to try to ensure that due credit (and I use the word ‘due’ since the degree is highly subjective) is passed on to each member of the team, the best results are achieved when every team member feels the need to acknowledge each other’s contribution. The more one tries to keep credit to oneself, the lesser credit he/she gets from the rest of the team.     

• The client can’t see who’s doing what internally so how does it matter. You bet the client can. Teamwork and team chemistry are evident during client meetings and even on calls. In fact, I’ve had clients who would discuss individual strengths and weaknesses of team members with me and would oppose important work being given to a team member who they believed did not share a good rapport with others. Nothing could be more telling of a P.R. team’s inadequate internal communication than when various campaign teams sitting at a client meeting are clueless about the other campaign’s key initiatives and stare at each other when asked by a client how one campaign can leverage the initiatives of the other. While it reflects poorly on the team members, and particularly on the team lead, above all it damages the credibility of the firm.

Time and again, there have been several instances to prove that teams which collaborate effectively deliver far better results and exhibit a greater degree of confidence and bonding. Even situations of immense work pressure and uncertainties can be managed. On the other hand, teams that share little with each other in a misplaced notion of guarding their turf, deliver far below their potential. The result is often, frustration and attrition.  Putting in place a matrix reporting structure or providing the teams with tools to collaborate does not guarantee that they would do so. The crux is demonstrating the intent to collaborate which needs to percolate from the top, down to each and every layer of the team.  If P.R. practitioners want the profession to be viewed as a management function, they must behave in a manner that is commensurate to management practices such as effective internal collaboration.

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

Bitter truth for the youth – women and children’s safety is impossible in a society that eulogizes aggression!

Having lived in Delhi for over a decade, I have grown to love the city’s heritage, diversity and quality of talent. If there is one aspect that bogs me about this city, it is the fact that despite having one of the highest levels of per capita literacy and per capita income in India, Delhi remains among the most unsafe places for women not just in India but in any metro city in the world. This aspect coupled with the high incidence of road rage and child abuse, signifies something much deeper. Has aggression become a way of life in Delhi?

While it is great that the forest cover in our city has increased to almost 20% of the city’s land in the last decade (making the natural environment better), the irony seems to be that the city’s culture is turning into a jungle, quite literally. The unsaid rule clearly is that if one is physically stronger, the others must be subservient to his will. I often find the so-called elite and educated youth, who travel in big fancy cars and bikes, flouting traffic rules and if they are ever to be questioned, a brawl is almost certain.

I see children being employed in almost every mom and pop shop in Delhi and as domestic help in homes. They are denied education in the name of giving them a livelihood. It is these children that face abuse and violence. Yet I see very little conversation on these atrocities till extreme incidents occur.



Familiar sight in shops and homes?



How can women and children ever be safe in a society where aggression is a way of life? Holding the police and politicians accountable is the easier option but cannot be the panacea. There has to be change of mindset and behaviour. Aggression, whether at home or on the roads, must be denounced in every possible way. The change has to start with each one of us.

Are we ready to obey traffic rules and not to engage in any form of road rage either individually or as a group? Are we prepared to boycott any shop that employs children and oppose employing any child as domestic help? Are Delhi’s young ‘Daredevils’ ready to stand up for a woman when she objects to being stared at/abused on the road or while using public transport?

While it is heartening to see the youth pour on the streets to protest, that alone will not solve the endemic problem of a growing culture of aggression in Delhi.

For those of us who still do not feel the sense of responsibility and pain at the state of things, the most apt comment would be (quoting President Obama’s words) ‘Shame on us’.

For those of you who are wondering what this post has to do with public relations, I’d like to clarify that P.R. practitioners are as closely aligned to what happens in society as their counterparts in journalism. Anything that impacts society is as and more relevant for P.R. professionals. I’ve written about similar social issues in the past and one of them was titled Modern public relations owes its success to women leadership.