It is an interesting area for PR consultants to get involved with as it provides an issues rich environment for them to really add value through research, insight and execution. 

The best PR practitioners recognise that thought leadership presents an opportunity for their client to add value to its customers and differentiate itself.  In practice, PRs often struggle to find clients that can enunciate and commit to a thought leadership position.  

Organisations encounter a number of issues when it comes to executing against a thought leadership strategy:

1. They believe that thought leadership exposes them to risk – what if people disagree?
2. They’re happy to fly below the radar – no-one else is taking a position so why should we?
3. They don’t have the industry insights required to take a credible position on a topic
4. They don’t have the individual talent to deliver the content or are unwilling to invest in it 
5. They’re focus is lead generation and sales – they don’t see the reputational value in thought leadership
6. They’re not prepared to invest in the necessary research or partnerships required to establish a thought leadership strategy
7. They unable to take an industry view - their industry perspectives are insular, biased and self serving
8. Marketing investments are focused on promotional outcomes, rather than ongoing corporate objectives

Occasionally, you see organisations jumping onto an issue because it has become a business imperative, a good example of this is the Environment where many organisations are keen to be seen to be doing the right thing.  Don’t get me wrong, I believe that most companies are genuine in their intention to reduce their impact on the environment but the adoption of these goals was largely responsive in nature – it become a business imperative.  It was not a proactive altruistic motivation that could be described as genuine thought leadership.

The challenges in this area can be mighty frustrating for the PR agency and in-house team that recognise the opportunities presented by thought leadership to:

1. Build positive brand perceptions
2. Proactively lead the media agenda and add value to media relationships
3. Initiate discussion and generate publicity
4. Provide PR campaigns with a consistent theme or message
5. Raise the profile of senior executives
6. Add value to their industry and been seen as a positive contributor
7. Motivate and engage employees and partner organisations
8. Help drive a shared agenda with stakeholders
9. Engage new audience groups; Government; Industry Associations; Industry Leaders

I think the importance of thought leadership will grow in the future as brands become more attuned to their customers and marketplace.  Brands will need an agenda in order to ensure the sustainability of their online communities.  They’ll need to have opinions and insights in order to drive activity online and empower customer advocates.  They’ll also need to respond to increasing customer expectations about the role that their brand of choice plays in the community.

As a result, we’ll see brands re-assessing their thought leadership strategy and working to identify the relevant opinion platforms for their business.  I think we’ll begin to see support from brands for thought leadership topics that genuinely reflect the interests of their community and, as a result, more credible, personalised, actionable and specific. 

What do you think? Does this also apply to individuals online?  Will it become more important to take a personal position on an issue or are we more likely to exist in communities that reinforce our own world view?

1. With meaningful follow through, crowdsourcing can deliver a specific business outcomes and audience engagement
2. Allow the community to determine success, ensure that you profile contributors and make it fun
3. Crowdsourcing not recommended as a first foray into social media

Telstra were on the bill today.  David Quilty, Managing Director, Group Communications at Telstra shared details of a Telstra crowdsourcing initiative called T [ideas], an internally focussed initiative designed to gather feedback from employees and partners.  Partners and employees can submit ideas to the company, which are then voted on by the community and ultimately implemented by Telstra.  Quilty provided examples of ideas that had been implemented including a contact centre customer callback service and new applications.   

I wrote an article in favour of these guidelines for Mumbrella.

BzzAgent refers to its network members as volunteers.  I thought volunteers worked for not-for-profits.  I think its inevitable that the WOM agencies will have to make full disclosure and transparency core to their service offering in order to stay on the right side of the FTC and similar enforcement agencies in other countries and for the reasons that I pointed out in the article for Mumbrella.

This graphic from BzzAgent provides a neat summary of the obligations under the FTC Guides and the steps that PR professionals and marketers can take to ensure compliance.

Subscribe to Just Another 24 Hours by Email

• Facebook has 250 million active users to Twitter’s 19 million (eMarketer research via Mashable)
• A large number of users quite within the first month (Nielsen)
• Twitter has no revenue stream

So, is Twitter the new attention dashboard? I have my doubts. I think that’s a very limited view of the conversations that are occurring online.

Will the real-time Web be a major influence on communication in the future? Absolutely.

The focus on the newness of things, the tool and its features and the immediacy of information (Twitter beat CNN to the Tiger Woods story this week by 45 mins) is compelling – but only to a point.  Beyond that point, Twitter discussions tend to become rather sycophantic, repetitive, tactical and/or theoretical.

This stuff is important though; The immediacy of micro-blogs like Twitter influences the way that we value information and perceive it.  It speeds up the news cycle and makes information even more of a commodity.

In a presentation at the recent Media140 event in Sydney Barry Saunders spoke about the danger of not considering context when we use the real-time Web as a primary source of information.  This is among the most insightul and interesting things that I’ve heard said about this space.  Its a very valid point, which is – along with others -  being overlooked in a plethora of hype fuelled conversations about Twitter.  Mr. Saunders make some additional points on related topics here.

The Twitter purists consider Twitter to be a conversational tool but many organisations are, in my experience, approaching it is a broadcast medium, as research that we are releasing tomorrow will show.

I will leave you with this analysis from BlogPulse, which shows comparative mentions of ‘Twitter’, ‘Unemployment’ and ‘Iraq’ in all forms of consumer generated media over the past six months:

]]> http://justanother24hours.com/blogging/just-home-much-air-time-does-twitter-actually-deserve/feed/ 0 http://justanother24hours.com/social-media/google-sidewiki-causes-a-pr-headache/ http://justanother24hours.com/social-media/google-sidewiki-causes-a-pr-headache/#comments Sat, 21 Nov 2009 05:59:51 +0000 Daniel Young http://justanother24hours.com/?p=978 Julian Lee at the Sydney Morning Herald interviewed me a week or so ago for a story on Google Sidewiki and the implications for PR advisers and businesses, more generally. The story also ran in the The Age, the Melbourne daily.

Julian posed the question: Is Google Sidewiki a threat or an opportunity? I think that it is both and made the point that active participation in conversation via Sidewiki provided another PR opportunity for organisations to communicate with their customers.

I also suggested that businesses develop a policy for Sidewiki and that they publish this so that customers know what to expect when using this form of feedback. Brian Giesen makes a great suggestion when he says that companies should ‘claim’ their Sidewiki by making the first comment (if possible).

A quick scan of major corporate websites highlights the fact that Sidewiki is yet to take off in a big way. Potential commenters need the latest version of the Google Toolbar and they also need to be aware of the service. The digerati set will be well aware of this but I am not convinced that Joe Bloggs has this on their radar. There is more activity around social media related news sites and social networks, check out Facebook as an example of a active Sidewiki.

Google Sidewiki is an extension of an existing service from Google; which is the ability to place comments on search results.  This didn’t take off or hasn’t taken off as yet (it continues to be available – check out the speech bubble icon below organic search results in Google).

Radian6 announced last week that it now offers the ability to monitor Sidewiki, an important development for businesses that need now to be aware of conversation in a wide range of digital tools.

I think Sidewiki represents a major PR opportunity for small businesses, who may not necessarily want to invest in discussion boards, recommendation and feedback mechanisms for their websites but are provided a free infrastructure for exactly that via Google Sidewiki.

Sidewiki causes a PR headache

ALREADY struggling with the mountain of blogs, forums and social networks, public relations consultants are weighing up whether a new Google tool that enables consumers to leave comments next to a brand’s website is a threat or a challenge.

Google Sidewiki gives a new and very transparent avenue for disgruntled customers to air their grievances against companies.

Travel websites already carry customer reviews of hotels and resorts.

Google says it is all about ”facilitating the conversation on the internet” between general users and experts but the PR industry is watching closely to see if Sidewiki will become as popular and as powerful a tool for opinionated internet users as Twitter and Facebook.

Gabriel McDowell, the managing director of Res Publica, said companies that failed to understand Sidewiki risked damage to their image and reputation. ”This is going to sort out the wheat from the chaff when it comes to managing corporate reputation,” Mr McDowell said.

Although Sidewiki presented ”yet another channel for them [corporations] to manage”, Daniel Young, the digital director of Burson-Marsteller, said it could be a useful tool. ”If one person has a complaint and you respond to it then, in a way you are answering others before the question has even been asked,” he says.

Brian Giesen, who heads the digital consultancy in the Asia-Pacific for Ogilvy PR, says Sidewiki could prove to be a handy way to spot potentially hot issues and the pressure groups pushing them.

”It just reinforces the need for brands to listen to such media. This is also a useful way for companies to find out who are the people who are making the comments and then to reach out to them,” said Mr Giesen, who recommends companies race to be the first to make a Sidewiki comment on a page, a privilege Google extends to website owners.

Mr McDowell said Sidewiki could also provide an avenue of redress by corporations that felt they misrepresented in the mainstream media. For example, a public relations consultant could post the entire statement given to a journalist, rather than the truncated version that might appear in an article. ”One of the major complaints about the media is the time it takes to get a correction up. This could go some way to rectifying that.”

But there are concerns that because Sidewiki is ”completely unregulated and uncontrollable”, as Mr Young put it, it will be harder for companies to sort out the legitimate complaints from the serial sledgers. Deciding on whether to answer was going to be key, he said.

Mr Giesen said Google ”needs to take greater responsibility for the comments that appear on Sidewiki”.

A spokeswoman for Google Australia said it had not received any concerns from Australian publishers. ”Website owners and publishers here and abroad have told us that they see this as another way to connect with their users, similar to conversations they’re already having on their blogs, YouTube channels, Twitter feeds and Facebook pages.”

It’s the question on everyone’s lips: What will media look like in the future?

I was riding the 6:02 from North Sydney to Central station on the way home from work this evening. The girl sitting in front of me was reading two forms of media simultaneously.

In both hands she held The Metro newspaper, a free city newspaper here in Sydney and in her right hand she also held her mobile handset, which was clasped at eye level. She was switching between the two – old media and new.

It was a good metaphor for the forces at play in media. These well reported forces are transforming the media industry and giving media industry moguls like Rupert Murdoch major headaches. Every dogs gets its day, as they say.

I have been thinking about the forces at play on the media industry – it’s relevant to a project I am working on at the moment.

Media in the future won’t necessarily be re-shaped by one  extreme at the expense of another but I think its safe to say that the chips have to ultimately fall on one side or the other, in most if not all cases.

The sooner the better because media is important and sustainable and credible industries need certainty.

So here’s a black and white analysis of some of the forces influencing the future of media. There’s no thinking behind the black and white. The direction that media takes has fundamental implications for the marketing industry but also for our society, communities and families in the future.

It’s with great pleasure that I announce the launch of a new Just Another 24 Hours Series entitled Media Directions. This follows the short and sweet The Microhoo Application series.

The Media Directions series will tackle the forces outlined in this post one by one and seek to pick one winner over another (if possible). The series will capture the characteristics of future media . This analysis will be highly subjective with the occasional statistic and fact thrown in for good measure.

And if you have any suggestions about other forces impacting the media industry then please add them to comments and I will tackle these in due course.

The outcome for Media Directions will be a definitive mind map of the media industry of the future, which will act as a foundation planning and strategy tool.

Watch this space.

Subscribe to Just Another 24 Hours by Email

]]> http://justanother24hours.com/media/media-directions-forces-at-play-that-will-determine-the-future-of-media/feed/ 0 http://justanother24hours.com/public-relations/things-to-talk-about-when-waiting-for-a-journalist-to-arrive-for-an-executive-interview/ http://justanother24hours.com/public-relations/things-to-talk-about-when-waiting-for-a-journalist-to-arrive-for-an-executive-interview/#comments Thu, 08 Oct 2009 11:21:35 +0000 Daniel Young http://justanother24hours.com/?p=920 The members of the press are busy people and they don’t always arrive for appointments on time, God bless them. Any given day could consist of a press conference, editorial meetings, interviews, research, launch events and the unforgiving deadlines of print media or the relentless deadlines of online media.

As a PR person its important to remain cool, calm and collected when sitting with your spokesperson or spokespeople and waiting for your journalist to arrive. You know they were confirmed by phone or email on the morning of or afternoon before the briefing.

Here are some things that PRs can do to fill the time when waiting for a journalist to arrive for a briefing. I am assuming that the executive briefing has been completed and the two or more of you are literally sitting in room waiting for the journalist to arrive.

1. Re-cap over the key messages for the briefing. Ask your spokespeople to repeat – succinctly – the key messages that you want to convey in the briefing.
2. Role play the journalist for five minutes. Ask your spokesperson a red flag question and see how they respond. Advise them on how they might improve the response – if possible.
3. Ask your spokespeople which questions they don’t want to be asked and work with them to develop the appropriate response.
4. Talk about your industry. Use the time as an opportunity to ask intelligent questions about your client’s industry sector and current issues and trends.  Demonstrate your understanding of the industry and your opinions.
5. Provide some insight and information about the journalist that they are about to meet. What have they written about lately, where are they coming from (you may know that they are a specific event). This is a good way to provide your spokesperson with some ice breakers if they have not met the journo before.
6. Put a call into the journalist or his co-workers to try and find out their ETA.
7. Highlight some recent team successes. Talk about something that has gone well recently and provide some suggestions on how you might extend or repeat the success.
8. Remind your spokesperson that the journalist will likely ask if there is anything they want to add at the very end of the questions and provide some suggestions on strong answers, incorporating the key message.
9. Work with your spokesperson to develop some analogies that help bring the story to life or try to tease out some examples (i.e. customer stories) that they can build into their answers to illustrate a point.
10. Ask your spokesperson to explain something about their business that you have never understood.
11. Get Personal. People love to talk about themselves. Use this time as an opportunity to find out more about your spokesperson, their family, interest, hobbies, background.

You’re in trouble if you find that you’ve used up all of these and the journalist still hasn’t arrived. You’ve obviously been trying to reach your journalist throughout this process via text, SMS, email.

Next step:

Apologise on behalf of the journalist and provide a deadline when you will get back to the spokesperson to re-schedule the meeting. Apologise for wasting their time but highlight the fact that you’ve made use of the time and the fact that they are fully prepared for the re-scheduled briefing.

Follow up and demonstrate how you have put the insights and information provided by your spokesperson to good use.

Kraft gave customers the opportunity to vote for one of six names in response to the negative publicity.  We’re told that around 10,000 customers voted for Cheesybite, equivalent to 36% of the total vote making it the most popular name -  just pipping ‘none of the above’.

What seemed like a good idea to involve its customers in the process of naming a new product has turned into a significant issue for the marketing team and senior management.

On the upside, the fiasco has garnered fantastic exposure for the product and extended the lifespan of the campaign (though not by design).  It seems fairly obvious that the Cheesybite name would have generated far less collumn inches had the iSnack 2.0 debacle been avoided all together.

On the downside, Kraft has lost credibility with the media, the blogging community and other influencers.  But does that matter?  The grocery decision maker would probably have discussed the iSnack 2.0 name as a result of the media coverage. I doubt that the name change will have a negative influence on buying decisions, quite the opposite in terms of awareness.

The product has apparently sold in high volume as a result of the ‘name me’ campaign.  The net result  of this is probably increased exposure for the product and some valuable lessons learnt by Kraft.

On the downside, Australian brands will approach any kind of crowdsourcing program with a high degree of caution as a result of these events.  Many will be less likely to involve their customers in product development and branding decisions, which is a shame as it is a proven method of building loyalty and generating word of mouth.

The marketing industry is naturally conflicted when it comes to promoting its own successes.  The digital revolution (if you like) means that many different types of agencies are competing for the same dollars, which makes them very proactive when it comes to finger pointing when things go wrong and less likely to celebrate success when things go well, unless its their own.

The ongoing debate about who ‘owns social media’ continues apace. Here is my pitch for the PR industry, which I believe has a very strong claim.

Ultimately, all of the back and forth is irrelevant. The sector (or individuals) that gets closest to owning social media will be the one that delivers the most value over time.

Here are my thoughts…

1. PR’s heritage isn’t selling. It seeks to influence and build relationships. This makes it more suited and better equipped to initiate, engage and hold a conversation.
2. PR is expert in content creation. They can’t be blamed for trying to get involved with social media but what expertise do media buying agencies have in content creation? Content creation is a central component of marketing and specifically social media.
3. The advertising industry is focused on promotions, launches and campaigns. I heard an advertising executive at a conference last year talk about their ability to ‘turn on’ and ‘turn off’ the community that they had successfully built for an FMCG client. This is a great illustration of the point.  This attitude shows a high degree of arrogance and a low degree of empathy.  The community would quickly see through this kind of approach to managing relationships. The advertising industry isn’t set up culturally or operationally (including its fee structure) to maintain an ongoing or continuous dialogue.
4. The PR industry is subtle. The sector gets a lot of flack for spinning but subtlety is at the core of spin. Digital media requires subtlety, including the ability to understand context and respond accordingly.
5. The PR industry is close to the business leaders. The C-suite calls on PR in a crisis and is reliant on PR when the organisation’s reputation is threatened. PR has a central role to play in educating the C-suite about the benefits of social media and is a trusted advisor on reputation management, unlike other marketing disciplines.
6. The PR industry is something of a sole operator when compared with the other marketing disciplines. Communication often functions as a stand-alone department along side Marketing but is part of the mix. One of the key challenges for the social media strategists is that they are on the outside, they may have deep expertise in their field but few things operate in a vacuum and its clear that social media is most effective when  integrated with offline marketing efforts.
7. Strategy is at the heart of good PR. It could be argued that PR has a been a little slow to come to the  (socialmedia) party. There are lots of reasons for this. PR’s approach is always circumspect, it has to add value when your dealing with corporate reputations otherwise its not worth doing. I think  this will play out well for the PR industry in the long term.
8. The culture of the PR industry is to allow others to create content. i.e. journalists. The industry has been built on this fundamental characteristic. The key message is designed to assert as much control as possible over the process of content creation. The approach changes in the context of social media but I think this is one of the strongest arguments in PRs favour. PR has never had control of the message when it comes to the end result.
9. Search. I think the PR industry has a long way to go in this space but that content is fundamental to search strategy – see point 2. Search seeks to ‘game a system’. The tool of the gaming is content, which has to be of the highest quality.
10. Most (all?) organisations need to adapt culturally to engage their customers in authentic conversations. I genuinely believe that the businesses that most effectively listen to customers and is able to incorporate their insights into product development and services will be the most successful. This requires an organisational change and is not something that a snazzy social media program can deliver. This, for me, is PRs biggest opportunity as the function that advises and implements change management strategies. PR has a great opportunity to take the lead in making this change happen – the outbound social media campaigns will become the natural output and realisation of this cultural and organisational change in business.

As ever, keen to hear your thoughts and disagreements. Here is a good analysis of the debate from the AdAge.

We went live with a new website for Burson-Marsteller Australia. You can find it at www.bm.com/australia.

Its about time that we had a local web presence given the fact that we are advising many clients on digital PR and social media strategy. The site is a starting point, which we will add to and develop over time. The site is based on Microsoft Sharepoint, which I found to be an ‘OK but slightly frustrating’ content management tool.

We are currently working on a really exciting research project for Australia and working with clients on a number of digital projects and some cool new business projects. More on this later.

I am also judging a competition for the International Advertising Association and have a medium sized cardboard box of entries from teams of University students to read through over the weekend.

As a daily habit, I have started reading www.techmeme.com in the morning. I am finding that its a great way to keep up to date with what’s happening in digital and tech generally.

]]> http://justanother24hours.com/life/general-update-this-and-that/feed/ 0