Maria Miller, authenticity and the PR pitch

The resignation of Maria Miller, the former Culture Secretary who ‘stepped down’ over an expenses row a few days ago, just goes to show that saying sorry isn’t always enough.

While there are bigger issues in play regarding the structures and processes of policing MPs’ behaviour, there was much made of the ‘inadequate’ nature of Maria Miller’s apology to the House of Commons.

For many, her ‘32 second apology’ (as it’s pointedly dubbed in multiple news references) appeared hollow and insincere. The brevity of the apology – which was along the lines of ‘I’ve been asked to say this, so here I am’ – on the back of allegations that her attitude to the investigation had been unhelpful, left a poor impression. Did we believe that Ms Miller was sorry? Did her actions match her words?

Authenticity – as individuals, as business leaders, as brands and as organisations – is essential if we expect to be trusted by others.

What makes a voice authentic? I think it’s where our words and our behaviour are evidently in tune. It’s how we live our values in action, as individuals and as companies.

Authenticity matters for many reasons, not least because we all make emotional judgements about others; call it ‘gut feel’ or intuition, but it’s almost impossible to remove it from the way we make decisions.

Which brings me to PR pitches. I attended Adrian Wheeler’s thought provoking PRCA workshop the other day on ‘Pitching to Win Business’, and we discussed the subject of ‘chemistry’. Research among clients has shown that chemistry is in the top three most important factors when selecting an agency, alongside track record and creativity.

Adrian points out that this is hardly surprising, when you consider that personal relationships are essential to successful business relationships, although most procurement and pitch processes endeavour to be based on rational criteria and evidence.

He suggests that an explanation for this apparent conflict between the cold, hard, analytical process of choosing one agency over another, versus the ‘touchy feely’ sentiment of ‘I just like them’, may be found in Daniel Kahneman’s ‘Thinking, Fast and Slow’. Kahneman describes two distinct ‘systems’ of how we think. System One is what we consider instinct, it’s subconscious, whereas System Two relates to our conscious thought process.

Kahneman’s research shows that nearly all our decisions are made quickly using System One, and we then use System Two to rationalise a decision we’ve already made, without being aware that this is what’s happening.

So, if it’s an emotional response that guides our thinking, then it follows that personal rapport, chemistry and authenticity are crucial; whether facing the Commons or a client pitch. Personally, I’ll stick to pitching.

Sarah Bryars

Chief Executive

11 years in power; one tremendous divide in opinion

It seems most appropriate to use that somewhat overused and infamous brand strapline to sum up the nation’s divided opinion of the late Margaret Thatcher – ‘you either love it or you hate it’. Not a fan of using such a strong word as hate, but her death has certainly conjured up reactions resembling the uproar she caused during her time in power.

I should really state at this point my first hand experience of Mrs Thatcher is hugely limited, having been born in the late 80s (I was a bambino of the John Major era). Therefore my musings are simply a view of the nation’s reaction. It’s great to see younger generations discuss, engage and debate politics, but rioting, jumping on the download bandwagon to ensure a certain song  commemorates her passing and publishing poorly formed tweets are pretty despicable acts and certainly something this twenty (something) year-old cringes at.

Throughout history there have been notoriously loved and hated public figures...Richard III, Robin Hood, Jeremy Clarkson, (Damien Hurst, Bansky, Tracey Emin, Germaine Greer, Jade Goody, Russell Brand, list could continue). The two things that make me sit on the fence about Margaret Thatcher, are firstly, she was a woman, our first lady Prime Minister; although I’m pretty sure she wasn’t a bra burning women’s libber, there is a great deal of respect to be had for someone who achieved such a historic landmark in a time when “equality in the work place” was far from common practice. Secondly, this iron lady served and stood as Britain’s PM for an impressive 11 years, winning three general elections. Talk about stating the obvious here, but to win a general election you have to be voted for.

You don’t receive the title the ‘Iron Lady’ for being a pussy cat, from my understanding Lady Thatcher knew what she wanted and indeed how she was going to get it, regardless of who may have been standing in her path, which is where the divide appears - those who fell fowl to the changes she implemented and those who believed the changes were for the greater good of the country. Perspective and experience is everything.

There will undoubtedly be conflicting views and opinions on any public figure that is charged with representing the interests of all of us, despite the way we vote. Tough choices will bring hardships, often to those least equipped to deal with it. But what is central at times when these tough decisions have to be made, is the buy in of trust. Trusting an individual in power - much like the reputation of a business – can take years to gain and build upon. However, all that hard work can come crumbling down in a split second – especially in today’s world, thanks to our ever evolving social media habits.

Like her or loath her, Margaret Thatcher left a legacy that changed Britain forever.

Alex Underwood

Account Executive