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

You can’t forget the past by pretending to be something else tomorrow

We've all witnessed Miley Cyrus very publicly trying to break free from her whiter than white Hannah Montana Disney character image, and her latest antics have sparked yet more controversy. Not only did the 20-year-old pose provocatively for Terry Richardson, she has also hit back at Sinead O’Connor’s open letter, in which she pleads with Miley not to let the music moguls ‘make a prostitute’ of her.

Sinead’s comments were in response to an interview the young pop singer did with Rolling Stone magazine, where she revealed that the video for her latest single, Wrecking Ball, was inspired by Sinead’s legendary video, Nothing Compares 2 U. Ouch.

However, Sinead makes an important point in her (slightly ranting) letter, calling on Miley to ditch the fabricated persona that she has adopted in an obvious and see-through attempt to be recognised as a “bona fide” pop star – simply stating let the talent you have speak for itself.

Trying to engineer something that you’re not, whether it’s a person, brand, product or business is no smart move. It will undoubtedly lead to controversy and break any trust you may once have had.

A business’s reputation is earned through its actions and behaviours; it’s shaped by where it began, where it is today and where it wants to be in the future. It’s our role as PRs to ensure our clients’ talents receive the recognition they deserve, but only authenticity will secure the longevity and growth of their business.

Alexandra Underwood

Account executive 

The Feedback Loop

 Do you give good feedback? Let me re-phrase that.

Is the feedback you give saying as many good things about you, as it is about the subject of your review?

We’re all accustomed to dishing out feedback, whether we’re reviewing a fabulous or disastrous holiday venue, providing a glowing testimonial for a colleague/mate/ex-boss/would-be-client on LinkedIn, or explaining to an unsuccessful candidate why they didn’t make the cut.

Particularly in situations where feedback is published for the world to see, it’s very clear that our expressed view is going to influence the reputation of the person or organisation we’re rating. This is powerful, and brands must have the courage of their conviction to ask questions of their publics, listen and act where necessary on the feedback they get.

Wise businesses understand the value of asking their customers what matters to them; who wouldn’t want to know the ‘secrets’ of winning our customers’ favour? It’s so easy for us to make assumptions on the reasons customers buy from us, but when was the last time you took the time to ask? That’s as true for us as PR consultants as it is for the clients we advise.

Reflected influence

There’s a balance of power when it comes to who gains from the feedback process, in which we tend to attribute all the ‘influence’ (power) to the person or organisation that’s giving the feedback.

Common sense, surely, that when we submit ourselves to the whim of our reviewers – will they love us or tell the world that we’ve failed utterly to meet their expectations – the reviewer has the power to make or break our reputation.

It struck me this week, however, that in a business-to-business scenario at least, the feedback process reflects on the reviewer too.

Here’s an example that will be familiar to many PR agencies, and probably to other sectors besides. We’re invited to submit credentials at the start of a tender review process. They outline a process that leaves some room for interpretation (I’m being nice, it was unclear). We ask for clarification, they reply but don’t answer the question. We submit credentials. They tell us, in a very polite email, that we’re not shortlisted. We ask for feedback. Radio silence.

This prospective client had the chance to impress the pants off us even if we were not destined to work together. We could have fallen a bit in love with them, become regular customers, told our friends and family how this was the one that got away which we’ll always regret…

Instead I find myself thinking they’re a bit amateur, a bit second division, probably would have been a hellish client.

That’s the thing about reputation and influence; it’s not all contained within a PR plan, it’s embedded in the way we conduct ourselves ‘on and off camera’.

So, my parting thought. Next time you’re asked for feedback, pause a moment and just consider ‘the feedback loop’: every action (or inaction) has a not-necessarily-equal-or-accurate reaction.

Sarah Bryars

Chief Executive

Image courtesy of Stuart Miles at www.freedigitalphotos.net

“It is better to be alone than in bad company” - George Washington

So Saturday 27 July was PR National Awareness Day but (yes, you’d be right to sense some irony here) who knew? At least the 127 people who liked its dedicated Facebook page did. 

The other person who knew about our industry’s dedicated day was Benjamin Webb, Managing Director of his own PR agency, who had a (fairly) interesting bylined article in the BBC’s online magazine. Now that’s quite a coup, and I’ll happily put my hand up and admit I’m quite jealous, if that was me I’d consider that a high-point in my career (just me? I don’t think so).

Anyway, my point is that PR National Awareness Day is surely about enhancing the industry’s reputation. Great. Then why must ‘people’ always mention Ab Fab Edina or Malcolm Tucker? Yes I know it’s funny and yes I know most PR professionals will have encountered every type of PR person along the sliding scale between our two most infamous ‘ambassadors’, but surely by their very name-check PR’s reputation continues to be self-perpetuating?

But does it really matter? It’s an interesting debate.

As PR professionals, we can’t all be thrown into the same boat. There are different types of PR and we use many different tactics to engage with a range of media types to enhance the reputation of our clients. That’s what we do.

In his BBC article (yep still jealous), Mr Webb used his piece about the challenges of managing the industry’s reputation to suggest that the writing is on the wall for the traditional consumer-focused public relations model, saying: “The deluge of badly-written press releases, silly events and photo stunts, "news stories" without news value, and meaningless "campaigns" have come to irk journalists and bore an increasingly cynical general public.”

I disagree. Using traditional tactics is not what earns us a bad reputation, it’s using the wrong tactics for the wrong media and reaching the wrong audience that earns PR a bad reputation.

Therefore, I believe enhancing the industry’s reputation can only come from the credible work we do, using the right tools for the job of growing client reputations. Surely it boils down to good old-fashioned hard work and know-how?

Rachel Meagher

Account Director 

It's a dog eat dog world

HMV 1908 – 2013, read it and weep.

But first, let’s rewind some 105 years to the birth of a brand that went on to establish more than 400 stores worldwide and provided a hub for music enthusiasts to unite through their love of lyrics.

The origins of the brand name ‘HMV’ were founded upon the title of a painting ‘His Master’s Voice’ which pictured a dog listening to a wind-up gramophone; it was this image that later became synonymous with the brand among loyal customers who devoted their hard-earned money to purchasing CDs at their local high street store.

Fast forward to the year 2000 and, ironically, it was those customers who became savvy to the cost-cutting ways of online downloads, fuelling a digital music revolution and leading to the demise of the master and his dog.

But why was this allowed to happen? Why didn’t someone take a long hard look at the business model and realise that buyer behaviour was evolving in the same way man has done since time began? With the advent of the internet HMV’s alarm bells should have been ringing as the battle for survival of the fittest had begun.

The downfall could have been prevented with a strong stakeholder management strategy supporting the organisation’s overarching mission to sell music, while creating positive relationships both internally and externally. Unfortunately for HMV, 80% of the public pipped them to the post as customers’ attitudes towards online downloads had made the transition from latent, to aware and then active. The public evolved, while HMV sat and watched.

Just as we highlighted in last week’s Starbucks blog post: the golden rule of reputation management is to always listen to your publics and tailor your message accordingly – the same can be said for any business model.

From telegrams to texts, books to ebooks and blogs to vlogs; the world has evolved and it’s time for brands to listen and adapt or get left out in the cold.

Let’s hope that future business models hit all the right notes.

Zainab Rahman
Account Executive