Public Engagement in the Conversation Age Vol. 2 (2009)

EDELMAN IN THE CONVERSATION AGE

PUBLIC ENGAGEMENT

VOL.2

EDELMAN

CONTENT

2

FOREWORD/FUTURE ECOLOGY: A NEW ERA OF PUBLIC ENGAGEMENT 3

IN AN ENGAGED WORLD, LISTENING IS MORE IMPORTANT THAN EVER 4

THE SEVEN BEHAVIOURS OF PUBLIC ENGAGEMENT 5

THE POWER OF EMPLOYEE ENGAGEMENT. THE AGE OF PERSONAL SOCIAL RESPONSIBILITY 6

WHY IT’S TIME FOR THE AD AGENCIES TO ADMIT DEFEAT 8

EMBEDDING SUSTAINABILITY INTO BUSINESS AND BRAND: MAKING SENSE OF THE UNKNOWN UNKNOWNS 10

PUTTING CREATIVITY FIRST 12

IT’S POLITICS, JIM, BUT NOT AS WE KNOW IT 14

SOUND BITE OR SOUND INSIGHT 16

DEMAND DRIVEN DIALOGUE: DESIGNING DEMAND IN THE IT WORLD 18

PUBLIC ENGAGEMENT IN A REGULATED ENVIRONMENT 20

LISTENING FOR RESULTS 22

EDELMAN TRUST BAROMETER 2010 23

ONE WORLD, ONE AGENCY: PUBLIC ENGAGEMENT MAKES YOU THINK 24

CONVICTION OR CONVENIENCE: IS NOW THE TIME FOR BUSINESS TO LEAD? 27

PR CONSULTANCY OF THE YEAR 2009

ABOUT THIS PUBLICATION

This is the second volume of Edelman’s annual publication, Public Engagement in the Conversation Age. It is a collection of thought pieces written by the UK team about the communications challenges facing brands, corporates, politics and NGOs – as well as our own industry, as we evolve from Public Relations to Public Engagement.

3

active citizenship, as calls for transparency intensify and as transparency itself is further empowered by the digital world. Citizen politics now demands that governments and business Act and Tell. Storytelling alone is just not good enough – and an evolved form of communications is the obvious result.

Public Engagement is the codification of where we are today – a recognition of the new order that is emerging from the continued chaos. Public Engagement embraces the current reality and faces the future, safe in the knowledge that waves of change will inevitably come again. The PR agency which sits back and watches the chaos unfold is the one which will play no part in the future ecology of communications. Which is why we, at Edelman, continue to think, write and debate these new truths and why we are re-shaping ourselves to deliver in a world of cross-influence. We do not have all the answers. Nobody does. But, as these Public Engagement essays demonstrate, we will both stimulate and participate in the conversation.

Robert Phillips UK CEO

[email protected]

FUTURE ECOLOGY:

A NEW ERA OF PUBLIC ENGAGEMENT

PUBLIC ENGAGEMENT VOL.2

This all has profound implications for the communications world. In a parallel trend, corporate reputation and brand marketing are converging at speed; we, the people, have become media in our own right; and everyone – from citizen to brand to corporation – now has the ability to participate in the conversation, anywhere and at any moment in time. Opinion is becoming increasingly democratised and media increasingly socialized. None of this should surprise us – it is the reality of the everyday.

Immediacy is everywhere. We no longer wait more than minutes for our news, in a world where the story of an earthquake breaks on Twitter before it reaches the newswires. Newspapers have become ‘Viewspapers’. The old rules of audience cannot apply and the conventions of advertising are understandably crumbling. The 30-second spot has become the short-form film… and it is all content for the conversation anyway.

This is not merely a tale of technology, however, nor is it just about the internet. Technology has begat behavioural change and introduced the new norms. Reform is unlikely to stop here. This is an unfolding story of society and people – how we interact, what we prioritise and where we come together in active coalitions. Recent Edelman Trust data (July 2009) ranked the interests of the employee and the customer alongside those of the shareholder, while supply chain ethics, Directors’ pay and responsible governance have suddenly become genuine influencing factors in purchasing decisions. Governments are increasingly held to account by a digitally-

PR is changing. Driven at pace by the democratizing power of digital and the continued shift from a shareholder to a stakeholder society, we are witnessing the emergence of a new model of Public Engagement. Networks have replaced channels; influence has supplanted audience; shared interests are moving us beyond dogma; and multilateral connection is the new dialogue. We are faced daily with a chaos of news and views. The golden age of broadcast is finally over.

4

By listening with new intelligence, we can identify the key idea starters and amplifiers. Idea Starters are the ones who will spark the conversation. Amplifiers can be anyone. They are the ones who will continue the discussion and advance it through their networks.

Listening can also impact a business beyond communications.

Starbucks (an Edelman client), for example, has created My Starbucks Idea, a platform for listening to, and co-creating with, its customers that has yielded important suggestions for improving the company’s business. Ranging from product ideas to operational improvements, Starbucks’ commitment to listening has driven results straight to its bottom line.

Similarly, by listening to its customers wherever they were talking – in this case, Twitter – U.S. cable giant Comcast improved its customer service and, according to its CEO, changed the culture of the company, making it more responsive and engaged.

The risks of failing to listen are massive. In a world where everyone is a publisher and compelling content always manages to find an audience, a crisis can appear from anywhere. Failing to listen can leave us ignorant and impotent.

So if we commit ourselves to listening, how should we do it?

To be sure, some people will listen for a few moments, then make their excuses and drift away. But many will be (at best) annoyed and the outcome will be unsatisfactory for everyone. Brilliant grandmothers the world over have made a cliché out of the notion that we were given two ears and one mouth for a reason. But those who practice ham-handed attempts at engagement behave as if they have a very large mouth and no ears at all.

Successful engagement must begin with a realization that might at first be uncomfortable: as communicators and marketers, we no longer control the terms of engagement. The decision to interact is necessarily one of mutual consent.

So before we can engage, we need to take the time to understand the answers to several key questions:

• Whomightbeinterestedintalkingwithus?• Whataretheyinterestedintalkingabout?• Whereandonwhattermswouldtheyliketoconnect?

Answering these questions ensures that when we do engage, we will approach the conversation with content that is relevant, timely and interesting.

Effective listening also provides a roadmap for deploying our resources and ensuring that whatever approach we adopt is practical and realistic by helping us prioritize the influencers we might want to engage.

Consider a moment we have all experienced. Standing at a party, chatting amiably with a friend, an interloper arrives, interrupts our conversation, seizes control and turns it in an unexpected and perhaps unwelcome direction. Too often, this is the approach that communicators and marketers label ‘engagement’.

EDELMAN PUBLIC ENGAGEMENT VOL.2

IN AN ENGAGED WORLD

LISTENING IS MORE IMPORTANT THAN EVER

5

Listening with new intelligence is a uniquely human skill. Discerning sincerity, subtlety and emotion are all instinctive human abilities that no machine or artificial intelligence has yet mastered – in spite of the countless over-marketed claims to the contrary.

Technology can and must provide assistance, but at its core, listening is more art than science – more a personal exercise than a computational one.

The countless platforms for listening are useful for gathering together elements of the conversation that are relevant. But once gathered, real understanding only comes from immersion in the content and an in-depth understanding of the context. And real success only comes from a commitment to act on what is learned.

Over the last few years, social media and similar technological changes have made the world more connected, interactive and dynamic. In short, the world is a conversation.

So at its core, the imperative to become better listeners rests on a simple, human truth: We cannot join a conversation without listening to it first.

Are you listening?


IN AN ENGAGED WORLD

LISTENING IS MORE IMPORTANT THAN EVER

Marshall Manson Director

Marshall is Edelman’s EMEA Director of Digital Strategy. He has a diverse background in communications and lives in London.

[email protected]

The Seven Behaviours of Public Engagement1. LISTEN WITH NEW INTELLIGENCE

2. PARTICIPATE IN CONVERSATION: REAL TIME/ALL THE TIME

3. SOCIALISE MEDIA RELATIONS

4. CREATE AND CO-CREATE CONTENT

5. CHAMPION OPEN ADVOCACY

6. BUILD ACTIVE PARTNERSHIPS FOR COMMON GOOD

7. EMBRACE THE CHAOS

Public Engagement: ADVANCING SHARED INTERESTS IN A WORLD OF CROSS-INFLUENCE

LISTEN

6

work they do. It is about establishing mutual respect in the workplace for what people do and can be. But it goes beyond this: to engender pride to work for a company not only drives motivation and productivity but creates ambassadors for your business who in turn help attract the best and the brightest to your organisation.

The recently released MacLeod report ‘Engaging for Success: enhancing performance through employee engagement’, commissioned by the UK Government, states that employee engagement practices can actually help a company deal with the impacts of recession and emerge stronger. It reveals that employees are often a source of knowledge and ideas which lead to operational efficiencies and, by providing employees with a platform for sharing these ideas, a company will establish trust and loyalty. These are two qualities that it is critical for a company to foster, particularly when there are difficult decisions to be made that impact the workforce. Recent Trust Barometer data show that employees and customers should rank as the CEO’s most important stakeholders when making business decisions (July 2009).Yet employers still have work to do when it comes to meeting these engagement requirements. The Trades Union Congress surveyed 3,000 workers in 2008 and found that almost one in three (30%) felt that their organisation does not fully engage

We can hardly question the deep rooted effect that events of recent times have had on us all and one thing is clear: if business is to rebuild trust, this must begin with employees. As employees, we want our employers to communicate and engage us with greater transparency and authenticity. Moreover, the licence to operate for business has changed, our perspectives as individuals have changed, and, as a result, we expect business to recognise its role in driving greater socioeconomic development in a new era of what we call ‘mutual social responsibility’.

So, if we expect a higher level of social and environmental engagement from employers as well as from ourselves as individuals, is there any merit in bringing these two things together? And can business genuinely improve employee performance and motivation by harnessing a shared responsibility for doing good?

In order to try to answer these questions we must first look at the evidence for prioritising effective employee engagement, and then the case for creating effective engagement to drive performance – what engages and motivates employees today?Employee engagement strives to create an emotional connection that an employee feels about the organisation which influences him or her to exert a greater effort in the

‘I don’t like Mondays’ may have been a hit single for The Boomtown Rats in 1979, but one can’t help wonder if the sentiment reflects the feelings of much of today’s workforce following months of challenging business conditions and continued uncertainty.


THE POWER OF EMPLOYEE ENGAGEMENT

THE AGE OF PERSONAL SOCIAL RESPONSIBILITY

7

continuing education. Today’s workforce, and particularly the younger generation of workers, look for personal relevance in the fabric and meaning of their jobs. A sense of personal responsibility for the state of the environment, the state of our finances and retirement options, the state of our health and education systems is increasing.

Business must move beyond these traditional models of corporate responsibility to a more strategic and integrated approach based on sustainability across social, economic and environmental parameters. It must be driven from the core of the business and commitment must come from the top of the organisation. It must transform the values of the organisation into programmes that employees will be inspired to participate and engage in and ultimately engender a sense of pride and purpose in working for that organisation beyond simply taking home a salary every day, week or month. Perhaps in understanding our own personal role we can learn from Sir Winston Churchill who said “We Make a Living By What We Get, We Make a Life By What We Give”.

them and less than half (46%) of those questioned felt that their employer deserves their loyalty.

Perhaps part of the reluctance to address this situation is due to the fact that meeting these aspirations seems so daunting. It can’t be ignored that, with fast changing technologies, the immediacy of communications, and the rise of Citizen Journalism, many employers are cautious of committing to open channels of communication and true dialogue with employees. But, for those that do, the benefits can be seen well beyond loyalty and employee retention.

So, what should we be engaging employees with and how do we motivate them? The result of the recent crisis has meant that conventional rewards such as pay rises and bonuses are either simply not there or perhaps, more importantly, as we return to the point of our individual and collective need for business to drive mutual responsibility, do not go far enough to drive loyalty. Sylvia Ann Hewitt, economist and member of the World Economic Forum Council on the Gender Gap and founding president of the Center for Work-Life Policy, has published research which shows that high potential employees are motivated by a desire to give back to their communities and these employees are seeking out employers that allow them to do so ‘on the job’.

Traditionally, companies have viewed employee engagement in terms of corporate social / environmental responsibility programmes, such as allowing employees time off work in order to get involved in community initiatives, or encouraging

Pamela Fieldhouse Managing Director

Pamela leads Edelman’s corporate reputation team. She has been passionate about understanding how to influence behaviour change since studying psychology at university.

[email protected]


THE POWER OF EMPLOYEE ENGAGEMENT

THE AGE OF PERSONAL SOCIAL RESPONSIBILITY

8

and fuelling discussion, driving participation and enjoying the momentum of sharing, while nailing publicity, fame and sales. This is what PRs have always done, being agnostic in our choices of channel but greedy in our desire to deliver.The X–Factor phenomenon shows how entertainment and content can work beyond broadcast. It is all about participation and even lack of control, as the production company themselves load excerpts onto YouTube, understanding that they need to play freely in the digital space in order to command the control (and money) with the phone voting when they do broadcast. They will make £20million on this series (Broadcast, 30/10/09) and are nailing over 20 million viewers.

But X–factor aside, the entertainment industry is in trouble. The loss of audience figures means advertising revenues are smashed, so production budgets get slashed and the content is diluted or programming gets cut completely. In September 2009, the government announced it would review legislation around product placement allowing brands to become inte–

This is an age where appointment to view is dead, where viewers are in control and someone broadcasting from their front room can reach a global audience. In the world of public engagement, a brand, product or service can and must be a media channel in its own right, in order to have ownership and to start – and keep – the dialogue. This means authoring content, embedding the message and/or the ethos within the actual content – and not in the zappable space around it (and that includes bumpers and sponsorships).

Exclusive content is the fuel for engagement and the opportunity to gain audience participation and traction. But to get that engagement, you need experts. And they are not 30 second ad creatives. And they are not media buyers. They are the professionals of the entertainment industry – production experts – together with those (yes, people like us!) that understand that the campaign does not live only by the content itself. Expertise that works on the distribution, the conversation, amplification and exploitation online, in media, on networks – pulling eyeballs back to the content

When ad agencies are rebranding themselves as “short form content agencies” and media agencies are suddenly sprouting production arms, you know the jig is up. You can’t rename a 30 second spot a viral, or seed an ad online, pretending it’s pure content and then bump it onto TV and expect no one to notice. The very ethos of a piece of entertainment that audiences self select is that it is MADE to engage, to be relevant, to provoke conversation – not to sell, not to shout. It has to be entertaining first and commercial second to court and invite participation – that way lies proper loyalty from the audience.


WHY IT’S TIME FOR THE AD AGENCIES TO ADMIT DEFEAT

9

that is priceless. The time for commercial selling and dubious product claims are over – audiences expect companies to interact with authenticity and transparency. Companies need engagement. Both will only achieve these if driven by compelling content that courts, plays and engages with credibility and professionalism. As Peter Whitehead wrote in the FT “...Web 2.0 is a world in which anyone can have a go at generating content; Web 3.0 is where professionals take the lead in shaping that content”. And those professionals are the production experts and the multi–channel, multi–media engagement experts. A new world, needing a new marketing offer. It’s all for the taking...

grated into existing TV shows. But we know from the US experience that this is a weak alternative, accepted from a position of financial stress and where creative delivery is often compromised by commercial pressure, leaving neither partner satisfied.

However, what the production company really wants is brand relevant partnerships that can take their content and build it online, in–store, in media, via downloads and on new influencer platforms with new consumer experiences beyond the TV screen – and the money they will accept for access and exploiting exclusive content is not that expensive. This approach is way beyond product placement, bumpers or name checks – more intelligent, more integrated, more shared. And it builds audience, loyalty and revenue for the brand and the networks, and is a new model for working that can replace the ad agency relationship.

A consumer brand recently paid £500k to sponsor a TV broadcast film – but the deal allowed the film to be released in weekly 10 minute segments for 9 weeks, airing the entire film at 10 weeks. After only 2 weeks, the film was nailing an audience of 5 million. The online power of garnering audiences before a programme airs traditionally (or instead of) is immense. Networks will kill for this. And brands enjoy audiences that positively replace the centre breaks of old, and add value to the consumer experience. The time has come for corporations and brands to have the belief and vision to make the leap and break out of the marketing silos of old and embrace an opportunity that allows them to play on the screens of their target influencers in a way that is multi–platform, multi–experience, driving loyalty and participation


WHY IT’S TIME FOR THE AD AGENCIES TO ADMIT DEFEAT

Jackie Cooper UK Creative Director

Jackie is Creative Director & Vice Chair and has spent nearly 30 years in brand marketing. She established the (already award winning) Edelman Content offer to deliver a unique combination of contacts and expertise in the entertainment, production and digital space. Her passionate belief is that stellar clients deserve world class production and exploitation collateral.

[email protected]

David Fine Director, Content

David Fine, Director of Content joined Jackie on her quest to identify and realize new opportunities for brands to reach and motivate audiences in the non-zappable space after 15 years in consumer, entertainment and endorsement PR.

[email protected]

10

• whatacompanysells• howitoperates• whoitis.

At its heart, sustainability is about meeting the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs.

Can a company really have a ‘green’ product line if it doesn’t have a grip on employment practices in its supply chain? Is a CEO a climate change hero because he tells the world his firm offsets its carbon emissions but does nothing at all to quantify the impact and actually reduce them? Is a firm really ethical if it donates millions to charity every year but continues to develop products whose raw materials deplete the rainforests at ever increasing rates?

Does that mean a CEO should abandon any attempt to conduct his business in a more transparent, accountable and responsible manner? Not at all. But it does mean that we need to be very clear on what we mean when we talk about sustainability, corporate social responsibility, or sustainable development – and their limitations and genuine opportunities for systemic change.

Most laughed out loud at the time, but somehow the words still resonate. And perhaps none more so than in an age when we hear endless warnings of climate change and we try to comprehend the abstract consequences of what action (or inaction) today will mean over the next 40 years.

As businesss and brands grapple with their commitments to sustainability, a survey by PwC of 140 chief executives of US-based multinationals found that 85% believed that sustainable development would become increasingly important to their business models. Despite this, a recent MIT Sloan Review and Boston Consulting Group study highlighted a lack of understanding of what sustainability is and a growing disconnect between corporate sustainability concerns and actions. As a result, many organisations perpetuate a superficial model of corporate responsibility as some kind of salve to those they think are paying attention. Increasingly, it backfires. And a new activist is born.

So what are we talking about when we say ‘sustainability’?

Sustainability, in so far as it can be universally defined, is measurable and effective strategy in execution at the intersection of three domains:

I never thought I would find myself recalling Donald Rumsfeld’s infamous words: “There are known knowns. These are things we know that we know. There are known unknowns. That is to say, there are things that we now know we don’t know. But there are also unknown unknowns. These are things we do not know we don’t know”.


EMBEDDING SUSTAINABILITY INTO BUSINESS AND BRAND

MAKING SENSE OF THE UNKNOWN UNKNOWNS

11

ii. Measurable outcomes for business, policy and public – that incorporate social, economic, environmental and ethical equity and justice at local, domestic and international levels for enterprises of all sizes and ownership structures.

iv. Innovation: Thinking the unthinkable. Sustainability is about deep, long term transformation. Let us not accept anything less as corporate reputation becomes the democratised brand.

v. Public Engagement as role model – Systems cause their own behaviour. The very substance and function of communication must evolve to make engagement more sustainable and meaningful.

PwC says responsible leadership means integrating ethical considerations into company decision-making, and managing on the basis of personal integrity and widely-held organisational values. And here’s the crux – the rules of the game have changed since Milton Friedman wrote about the ‘social responsibility of business’. Social, environmental and ethical issues are not so much tangential to the business of business as fundamental to it. This year’s Edelman goodpurpose study found that more than half of consumers (56%) believe the interests of society and the interests of businesses should have equal weight in business decisions.

We don’t quite know what governance models will shape business of the future, how convergence will shape conversation and debate, what consumer habits and expectations will drive product innovation or what the leaders of tomorrow will learn in the hallowed halls of our great learning establishments. But engagement will be responsible for the success or failure of conversation and debate.

We must all develop what, author and psychologist, Daniel Goleman, calls ‘ecological intelligence’. It is about our ability to accept that we live in an infinitely connected world with finite resources. If we knew the hidden impacts of what we buy, sell, or market, we could become shapers of a more positive future by making our decisions better align with our values. We as communicators must make sense of and mainstream this nascent ecological transparency for our collective future.

And that would make those unknown unknowns just that little bit more familiar.

We must exhibit what Lord Browne of Madingley called “clear-eyed realism” at what can be achieved in the face of the known unknowns of climate change and world poverty. Coherence in four areas will drive strategic change towards sustainability – domestic regulation, industry standards, capital markets and consumer behaviour. Navigating this journey will require courageous leadership, clear measurement and the continuous engagement of all stakeholders.

And this will have a transformational impact on the role and responsibility of communications.

Robert Phillips has said elsewhere that the PR industry stands at the threshold of achieving what it has always aspired to. Through the elevation of strategic insight and content expertise, we need to adopt a ‘systems thinking’ approach to communication that starts with a fundamental re-evaluation of the structures and behaviours inherent in the discipline.

The new model of Public Engagement (PE) can clarify and amplify the most important and far reaching conversations that business, government and citizenship need to engage in to make sustainability mainstream. This model of PE for Sustainability has five dimensions:

i. Mutual responsibility & accountability – a better alignment with business, civil and national objectives and values, communicated with integrity and honesty.

ii. Platforms for shared conversations – they are happening everywhere, all of the time. PE can become the network in a world of abundant cross influence.

Anne Augustine Head of Sustainability

Anne joined Edelman in November 2009 to spearhead its Sustainability practice. She was previously EMEA director of corporate sustainability for a global IT services business. Anne thinks John Peel Day should be a national holiday.

[email protected]


EMBEDDING SUSTAINABILITY INTO BUSINESS AND BRAND

MAKING SENSE OF THE UNKNOWN UNKNOWNS

12

including The Science of Sexy, an online film featuring Dita Von Teese discovering the formula for sexy. This was then seeded online via partnerships with various sites and bloggers such as Perez Hilton. The on-going social media outreach, print, radio, TV editorial coverage and experiential campaign saw brand collateral disseminated to influencers online and offline to drive real brand awareness and engagement. Dita appeared on TV and radio as well as print and magazine interviews and the viral became the most viewed entertainment film on YouTube in the UK. The results spoke for themselves. With no traditional advertising, the product had sold out as it hit the shelves.

Look at the ‘Bring Back Wispa’ campaign that relied on Facebook, Bebo, MySpace and You Tube and a social media outreach campaign to galvanise support. The activity was backed by a heavy-weight press, TV and radio editorial campaign to encourage influencers including journalists, DJs and TV presenters to back the campaign. 14,000 Facebook fans and a photocall with Rula Lenska sparked a two year campaign culminating in the recent, and more traditional, TV advertising campaign ‘For The Love of Wispa’ featuring a cast of hundreds of real people. The re-launch via social media and editorial activity boosted Cadbury’s sales by 5%.

Measuring these sorts of campaigns is getting more sophisticated. Edelman is already creating a series of sophisticated algorithms, such as TweetLevel, and

So, based on where we are now, whether agency or client, imagine the next integrated agency planning meeting. The brand challenge for 2010 is set from above: find the next creative idea that’s going to propel the brand to No 1 in the category... see sales rises of 25% and make it the nation’s favourite. However, here lies the dichotomy. With the channels often already selected, the constraints to creating that big idea are already in place. A case of tail wagging dog that restricts creativity and the opportunity to capitalise on what is now a complex network of cross influencers – much of this through social media. But that’s what we’re trying to do... around that table, come up with the killer idea and get the target demographic to buy.

Some of the most recent marketing successes started online through social media, in partnership with print, radio and TV editorial coverage, and then called on advertising at the tail end of the campaign – simply as a reflection of the views of those who started the conversations. In other cases, advertising has been ignored all together and the brand still managed sell-out activities. So why do brands still insist on shouting at people via the old model when we’re now in an age of conversation and engagement?

The award-winning Wonderbra campaign to launch Dita Von Teese’s limited edition range is an excellent example of breaking traditional boundaries in a world of public engagement. JCPR created a unique integrated campaign,

It’s a tough job as a brand or marketing manager. The fast pace of change in the communications world is clearly outstripping the marketing model of years gone by – the one that manifests in a prescriptive, traditional ATL and BTL split. Yet there is little room for manoeuvre for marketing teams. Where online conversations shape brands, and with communication as much from the bottom up as it is top down, new approaches, strategies and skills are required. However, as long as brand managers are still accountable to the old ROI marketing measures and channel planning models, the freedom to create genuinely innovative solutions that drive positive brand engagement via the new world order are a long way off.


PUTTING CREATIVITY FIRST

13

ideas... free yourselves from the shackles of prescriptive marketing models and media buying agency channel plans. Let your creative agencies (and not just the ad team) lead the way here and throw the gauntlet down to them. You might be surprised.

Forget the money at the idea stage– much creativity and idea development is constrained by talk of money at the brainstorm stage, and also the fight between the agencies for their slice of the pie. Start with the position of ‘the sky’s the limit’ – it will pay dividends and will enable you to assess true value for money when you’ve developed the concept.

Marketing is not an exact science – predicting a success is virtually impossible. Whatever happened to gut feeling and risk? Who would have thought that the meerkats for confused.com would build a brand profile and position the comparison site at the top of the nation’s mind? After all, we are all consumers. The best marketers instinctively know when something will work. And it’s based on their instinct. The new world order of public engagement requires marketers to be brave, so take the leap of faith – it might just work!

measurement tools to go head-to-head with the traditional advertising measurement models used by media buying agencies. With a fast-moving communication climate and this complex network of cross-influence, the challenge is now to keep up with these rapid changes and measure accordingly. And fast they are. According to new insights, teenagers apparently reject advertising, particularly digital, as well as sites such as Twitter (Morgan Stanley’s How Teenagers Consume Media Report). Research from AdWeekMedia and Harris Interactive back this up and show that 46% of US net users ignore banner ads. It’s clear therefore that fresh thinking is required to reach the brand’s key demographic – especially when it comes to creating online momentum.

Furthermore, with AVE falling rapidly, marketing budgets being cut and consumer behaviour changing when it comes to how they receive information, the time is right for the bold and adventurous marketing teams to harness the opportunity. So for all those brand and marketing managers wanting to make a real difference, and be known for creating that one memorable campaign... what’s the advice for the advent of Brand Bravery?

Talk about ‘channels’ in a different way – the new era of public engagement relies on a complex web of influencers. Challenge agencies to see if they truly understand how to layer a campaign effectively to create bottom up dialogue and conversation.

Explore and encourage creativity – use your agencies effectively and efficiently and regularly develop creative


PUTTING CREATIVITY FIRST

Emma Nicholson Director

Emma heads up the Leisure & Lifestyle team in Edelman’s consumer division, JCPR. She has been creating consumer campaigns for leading UK and international fmcg, retail and service brands for the past 15 years.

[email protected]

14

John Prescott tweeted at the time: “It will be the son, daughter, uncle, mother and friend wot will win it in 2010. Endorsements from ordinary people NOT media barons.” It will be the endorsement of these ordinary people (peers with a small ‘p’), who are shaping and influencing the debate through niche networks, that political parties will increasingly seek. Party leaders are already beginning to recognise the influence of sites such as Mumsnet (http://www.mumsnet.com), a parenting forum that attracts over 800,000 unique users. Both David Cameron and Gordon Brown fielded questions on the site in 2009.

3. The continuing decline of two Party Politics. The new world of public engagement will see yet another nail hammered into the coffin of the traditional two party system. While back in the 1950s, 95% of votes cast went to one of the two main political parties, by the last general election in 2005, they were only receiving 69% of the vote – today that number is only in the mid 60s. This decline is set to continue with the demoncratising power of the web and the rise of single issue groups. People no longer see themselves as a lone voice protesting about a particular issue but rather part of a group who are no longer catered for by the traditional two-party model – and whose shared interests can be advanced through the power of the web. The rise of resident associations, of extreme groups at local government level or UKIP at a European level, are manifestations of the changing nature of the Party system.

4. A Manifesto for the people by the people. While Tony Blair’s Big Conversation initiative was widely criticised as

Here are four trends for what this new era of communications means for political parties and, as we look ahead to 2010, future general election campaigns:

1. The rise of the ultra micro-group. All three main political parties employ the Mosiac marketing system which divides Britain into 155 types of individual, 67 different households and 15 other groups as a way of targeting different voter types (remember Mondeo Man and Worcester Woman). However, the rise of social media, which creates both small and large online activist communities - usually based around just one single issue, that don’t conform to traditional demographics - means that political parties will have to rethink how they target the voter.

Brockley Central (http://brockleycentral.blogspot.com/) – run by an Edelman colleague – is one example of an online network that demonstrates these shifts. The site appeals to a wide cross-section of voters who are not necessarily connected by demographics, but by local community issues. Parties who offer a one size fits all model, and don’t take account of these networks of influence, will simply not survive in the new world of public engagement.

2. It won’t be the Sun wot won it. While people will debate whether it was The Sun’s endorsement that won the 1992 General Election for the Conservative Party, the continuing decline of traditional media and the rise of online networks and influencers mean that print newspapers’ endorsement will no longer be the holy grail for any political party. As that sage of the internet

The new world of public engagement in which we have witnessed an explosion in new networks of influence; the emergence of new influencers and niche online forums (such as ConservativeHome, Guido Fawkes); the continuing decline of traditional media; and a move away from a top down approach to communication to a world where anybody can be an influencer via their blog, Facebook or Twitter account, has profound implications for the main UK political parties and our political system as a whole.


IT’S POLITICS, JIM

BUT NOT AS WE KNOW IT

15

The MPs’ expenses were a painful example of this new era of transparency and accountability but this is just the beginning. Soon, the public sector will be forced to reveal the detail and value of its contracts and another bout of soul searching will begin and questions will be asked about how the body politic can regain trust.

The new Speaker and some enlightened thinkers from both sides of the House of Commons have begun to talk about how Parliament and the wider political system needs to change. However, none has yet grasped, or perhaps even fully understood, the magnitude of how society is changing, brought on by the rise of new technology, the empowerment of the citizen and the thirst for transparency and accountability.

Alex Bigg Managing Director

Alex is Managing Director of Edelman’s award winning Public Affairs practice.

[email protected]


IT’S POLITICS, JIM

BUT NOT AS WE KNOW IT

nothing more than an election gimmick, the collapse of top down communications, the fragmentation of the media, the empowerment of the voter via the web (digital democracy) and the rise of consumer politics mean that any Party that adopts a strategy that sees an election manifesto emerge from on high and expects it to excite and engage the voter is surely a strategy doomed to failure. Empowered citizens will expect, if not demand, an ability to help shape and influence the content of any manifesto. While political parties will no longer be able to count on the reach of traditional media to communicate their policies, they will need to use the principles of public engagement to reach out and engage the voter.

So there you have it. Four trends for what the changing communications landscape means for political parties and any future General Election campaigns. However, it’s not just the parties who will have to adapt, change and embrace this new reality if they are to survive and prosper. The political system itself will also need to change or face a crisis of confidence – more traumatic than the recent expenses scandal.

It’s a new world in which transparency and accountability are central. The democratising power of digital means that citizens will no longer tolerate advice being kept secret or decisions being taken behind closed doors. Indeed, one only needs to look at the increasing demands for independent inquiries across a broad range of issues and incidents to gauge the mood of an increasingly sceptical public when it comes to believing what they are told by Government.

16

• welltrained–theyknowhowtousesmallgestures,voiceintonation and pauses for maximum effect

• wellrehearsed–theyneverleaveanythingtochanceandhave well prepared answers for difficult questions

• charismatic–onthewholetheyprojectpersonality• engaging–theydeliveraspeechthataudiencesfeel

drawn to listen to• speakingwithfewnotes–veryfewaredistractedby

shuffling of their notes• usingfew,ifany,visualaids–you’llseeveryfew

PowerPoint slides!

In a controlled profession like ours, the basic rules of presentation and communication still apply. However, the industry often falls into the trap of relying on presenting large volumes of data and slides without thinking about audience engagement – this can do a disservice to the doctors that we work with and become a barrier to open debate. As impressive as it might be, the data will not always speak for itself – it must be supported by clear messages, suitable platforms and compelling delivery to meet the company’s objectives.

It is incumbent upon us, as medical education professionals and communicators, to develop more engaging programmes and think more insightfully about how we truly engage with our audiences. Should it be a traditional passive style or

In the world of medical communications, we are constantly on our guard to ensure that we work within strict guidelines, do not make unsubstantiated statements, ensure that the data support our arguments and operate with full transparency with our clients and the doctors and other health-care professionals that we work with. It seems unfair at times that we cannot spe-culate on the data too far, we cannot criticise competing drugs because they haven’t delivered on all of their endpoints when ours have – after all if our politicians can, why shouldn’t we?

Well, obviously, there are big differences between political rhetoric and scientific accuracy. Medical communications professionals aim to prove their points through evidence; politicians, more often than not (particularly on the Today programme!), tend to beat down an opposing view based on who can shout the loudest and for the longest without giving in to another’s perspective. In medical communications this should not happen; sure, there are disagreements about study design, data interpretation and statistical validity but the majority of scientists and clinicians generally have an appreciation for what the data reveal and of their limitations.

Nonetheless, can we learn anything from the political speech meisters? On the whole, the notable speech makers have several attributes that can be applied more thoroughly in medical communications; more often than not they are:

I am often struck by just how close to the wind some high-profile political speakers can sometimes sail. It seems rather unfair that our political masters – or those who would aspire to be so – can make what appear to be rash statements and claims based on little more than the failure of another group of politicians to deliver on a manifesto promise and the fact that the speakers’ party would somehow ‘do it better’ with little substantiation of how.


SOUND BITE OR SOUND INSIGHT

17

Now what I am not suggesting based on my comparison with politicians is that we dumb down medical communications to a few sound bites – clearly key messages need to be communicated around the therapeutic value of a drug, but sound bites should never replace real insight about the benefits of the drug, its place in clinical practice and the difference it could make to patients. Broadening our world view to engaging with audiences beyond our immediate community of physicians also provides an opportunity for pharmaceutical companies to demonstrate a responsible attitude towards patient education and a commitment to engage.

We have to acknowledge that medical communications is something of a conservative discipline, but perhaps the time has come to move forward confidently and invest in opportunities that provide clients with the most important return on their investment in a medical communications programme – a high profile for their brand through genuine engagement with their target audiences and, importantly, with a broader audience than they might be used to. Now that would be a real innovation for medical communications.

should we be looking for opportunities to open up discussion? Perhaps we should even get perspectives from other groups that we might not normally reach. Our audiences might traditionally be a closed group of professionals, but the principles of public engagement apply to them as much as any other group – something that can sometimes be overlooked in order just to continue the churn of data.

At BioScience Communications – Edelman’s specialist medical communications group – we believe that the principles of public engagement that we apply across the Edelman business to audiences of all types do also apply fully to doctors and scientists in health-care. The value of true engagement with our audiences can be impactful for pharmaceutical companies, such as:

• profilingtheorganisation’swillingnesstoopenup findings for discussion and critique

• demonstratingopennessandtransparency• seedingdebatethatcanprovidevaluablecustomer

insights• potentiallyexposingthedatatoawideraudience

through ongoing debate

These might seem very obvious points to make, but in order to increase the levels of transparency in the communication of medical data, engaging with, and listening to, audiences is critical. Ultimately this will begin to increase the levels of trust in the pharmaceutical industry – the reputation of which has suffered in the wake of a number of poorly managed drug failures and issues around clinical trials in recent years – much of which has been due to lack of debate – and the apparent lack of willingness from the industry to engage in discussion.

David Noble Managing Director

David is Managing Director of BioScience Communications – Edelman’s specialist medical communications group. David has two children who ensure that his debating and influencing skills are tested daily.

[email protected]


SOUND BITE OR SOUND INSIGHT

18

The growing impact that the internet and the current economic climate are having on the attitudes and behaviours of all users of modern technology is not in doubt. In maturing markets, where products are becoming more commoditised, customer groups are fragmenting into communities which share common values and idea. For those of us selling technology it means traditional sales techniques are insufficient, because these groups are emboldened to demand more from vendors.

priorities and interests. This can be conducted even before a product exists, or can be used to help a company entering a new market to understand how it can marry its offering with the needs of the market. This process should be seen as a way to refine traditional marketing techniques. By giving greater access to information, the internet enables companies to be more precise in their assessment of and engagement with key influencers –the individuals who crucially will help to make marketing events more enticing to customers and prospects.The Demand Driven Dialogue model follows four stages, which are split into two parts. Phase one (Stages One and Two) is about designing demand for a product or service. Phase two (Stages Three and Four) is about driving demand.

PHASE ONE – DESIGNING DEMAND

Stage One – Understand the Conversation and Identify the Influencers: Others have written elsewhere about the importance of listening with new intelligence in a world of cross-influence. Identifying the most important conversations and who is having them, where, is a critical starting point for companies because (even though some IT companies still believe it) most customers do not spend their entire time talking about their products.

Stage two – Engage the Influencers and Build the Conversation: Influencers range from producers of content to commentators and sharers, as well as watchers, who simply want to understand what is being said. The key group at the

The ultimate goal for boardrooms across the IT sector does not change – the chief executive still has to prove two things to shareholders. Firstly, how the company can sell more to existing companies and secondly how the company can credibly convince new customers to buy their products.

But given the landscape, there are two deeper questions that the chief executive must answer:

1) How do I talk differently to existing customers in mature markets to sell more?

2) How do I talk credibly to a prospect who does not know me?

For the technology industry it means communicators can act as powerful catalyst for change, because vendors must find new ways to engage and compelling storytelling is the tool to achieve this goal. Edelman has developed the concept of Public Engagement, which at its highest level, advances shared interests in a world of cross-influence. In the enterprise IT market, this can be specifically focused on helping companies to design a conversation that will appeal to stakeholders and, more importantly, drive demand for products/services.

This is what we call ‘Demand Driven Dialogue.’

At its heart, this process is about helping companies to better understand the genuine interests of their audiences by engaging with those people to build a clear picture of their


DEMAND DRIVEN DIALOGUE:

DESIGNING DEMAND IN THE IT WORLD

19

iv) Act: be seen to respond to feedback that is received, such as adapting product roadmaps or adding functionality

Stage four – Go to Market – and embrace the chaos: Armed with the knowledge of the key influencers and confident of the demand in the market, all that is left is to announce the product or service to the wider market. In a complex world of multiple stakeholders and networks, this is not always as simple as it sounds. Throughout the market roll out, on-going interaction with the influencers and constant re-evaluation are needed – but above all, a commitment to participate in the conversation.

With a willingness to participate in dialogue, companies can open doors to engage differently – more meaningfully – with their customers and influencers, resulting in excitement, brand loyalty and fresh demand from unexpected quarters.

It really is good to talk.

heart of any debate are the curators and they perform a vital role. Often they have no allegiance to one vendor, and are prepared to manage content as an amateur pastime, purely because they are passionate about a subject or product. Companies must participate in the conversations – in real time and all the time. By engaging these individuals in dialogue, and then working with them to have conversations with a wider network of influencers, it is easy to quickly reach an understanding of the on-going debates and more importantly how your company can fit into these discussions.

PHASE TWO – DRIVING DEMAND

Stage Three – Test and Evaluate: Once a company is confident of its story it needs to be tested in the market place. Targeting a smaller sub-set of prospects and existing customers, a company can engage these influencers to co-create products and services. This is a consultative process and should be seen as an ideal opportunity to test proof-of-concepts so that suppliers can create a strong picture of the features and functions their customers really need. Based on our experience there are some key principles to remember:

i) Be brave: do not duck controversy and learn to embrace the chaos

ii) Be frank (and transparent): transparency and open dialogue must be the default - eg a bank should be upfront about why it is handing out bonuses

iii) Listen and participate: but do not expect the discussion to be all about you

Cairbre Sugrue Managing Director

Cairbre is Managing Director of the UK’s Technology practice and is an unashamed champion of all things IT. Particularly pleasing to him is the growing acknowledgement (and some envy) among his non-techie colleagues that there is nowhere more exciting than the tech industry today.

[email protected]


DEMAND DRIVEN DIALOGUE:

DESIGNING DEMAND IN THE IT WORLD

20

The pharmaceutical industry may wonder if this is necessarily a problem; after all, companies know their own treatments and disease areas – so surely they know what they need to communicate? This no longer holds true; it is not acceptable to just tell the world what we think it wants to hear. If we don’t know what people want, we cannot respond to, or deliver against it. Pharmaceutical companies can produce great medicines that appeal through their functional benefits to expert consultants and early adopters but without understanding and engaging with the broader group of end-users, there is every chance the brand won’t ever reach its full potential. And in an industry with a limited window of opportunity to recoup the substantial investment in getting brands to market and, more importantly, maximise the number of patients reaping the medical rewards, the stakes are considerable.

But how is the new world of democratised information relevant to health audiences specifically? There is a palpable sentiment in the industry that doctors do not participate in the new world of online communication. Not only is this not true, it is no longer relevant; the key opinion leaders with whom the industry is used to having contact are only one of many influencers which it now needs to engage with, including ‘rank and file’ physicians, regulators, governmental payers, advocacy groups and, of course, patients.

These questions make it tempting to excuse heavily regulated sectors from the new world order. “It doesn’t apply to us” was the essence of the health industry’s early response to the ascent of bloggers, tweeters and other social networkers over the last few years and, on first glance, it seems easy to agree. As well as the restrictions set by governments and independent regulators to control communications by healthcare companies about their treatments, external communication is restricted even further by the industry itself, both in terms of internal legal and regulatory experts and competitor companies keen to use the stifling regulatory environment to remove any advantage.

All of which can lead to the perception of an industry which is out of touch and unwilling to listen to its end users. But we would suggest that the problem is not so much that the pharmaceutical industry is unwilling to listen, rather that due to regulation it is wary of truly engaging. The pharmaceutical industry has always been a big advocate of listening to the marketplace; however, it can be over-reliant on listening to sources, such as traditional market research, which relies on one-way expressions of opinion in a highly controlled environment. Market research can be valuable for providing a snapshot of opinion at one moment in time, but it cannot meaningfully engage with stakeholders in a two way dialogue and, without this, one is not really listening, but rather under-taking a process designed to deliver what one wants to hear.

If we accept the hypothesis that we now live in a world of democratised cross influence where public engagement should be the mantra for meaningful communications, where does this leave highly regulated environments? How can companies meaningfully engage with their publics without incurring the wrath of industry watchdogs?


PUBLIC ENGAGEMENT IN A REGULATEDENVIRONMENT

21

pharmaceutical industry to truly engage with its stakeholders in respectful ongoing relationships which will help companies to tell a story that is heard, believed and has resonance with the communities they want to reach. Public engagement in a regulated industry isn’t the challenge it first appears to be; if the industry is prepared to look forward and understand this new environment, the opportunities far outweigh the disadvantages of engaging.

This brings us back to where we started. How can the pharmaceutical industry realistically hope to engage with its publics, such as patients, in the face of the strict regulatory landscape? The answer partially lies in a fundamental rethink of what constitutes successful messaging. In today’s environment, separate messages for separate audiences do not work; peer-to-peer communication leaves companies that continue to do this looking manipulative and untrustworthy. All types of stakeholders have the potential to be opinion formers for brands and they will seek validation from a wide range of sources before the information provided by companies is validated.

In today’s world, the role of public engagement is to be the facilitator and creator of a central narrative, joining the pieces together to ensure the company and stakeholder can engage in a meaningful way which is mutually beneficial and builds trust and ultimately equity for the brands and company. This can be done without broad communication about brands; indeed, the days of being entirely reliant on carefully worded brand key messages are over.

It is of course fine for companies to convey their point of view, but it should be aligned to what the market and individual stakeholders want, and should always be transparent. Brand building still exists but the context in which it occurs has changed; first we must understand environments and then interact with them to convey our point of view and forward a mutually advantageous proposition to advance shared interests.

External communication will always be curtailed for the pharmaceutical industry to a certain extent and this is necessary, but it does not mean the industry cannot listen to, and participate in, the conversation. It is our job to help the


PUBLIC ENGAGEMENT IN A REGULATEDENVIRONMENT

Steven Spurr Managing Director

Steve is Managing Director, Health. He read economics at the LSE and it was here that he became fascinated with the concept of perfect information and how it influences every choice and decision in our lives.

[email protected]

Ross Williams Associate Director – Editorial

Ross leads a new editorial offer in Health, created to provide dedicated editorial counsel, guidance and content development for Edelman’s Health clients.

[email protected]

22

what actions companies are taking to show they are good global citizens or employers of choice.

Public engagement is about advancing shared interests. This requires us to find new ways of observing and measuring those interests. It is imperative that, as an industry, we evolve the way that we listen to conversations and measure the impact of our communications so that they properly reflect the new world order. The age of top down, command and control messaging is over and the decline of advertising overthrows AVE-centric measurements. There is still space for activity tracking, media coverage or direct response but we need to go further to understand with greater reach and finesse the outcomes and impact that those programmes have on all stakeholders. Results-based measurement requires asking hard questions. Have we moved the needle on how people think, speak and act about the company, brand or issue? In the age of public engagement, no one person has all the answers.

Surrounded by this cacophony of sounds, voices and messages, how we can properly tune into what is being said, where and by whom? Listening with new intelligence means focusing our attention on three things:

• whatpeoplethink• whatpeoplesay• whatpeopledo

Some of the tools we need to use are tried and tested, while others are evolving to reflect the fast-paced changes to the new ecology of media and influencers:

What Do They Think? – Use primary research to understand people’s awareness, interest, attitudes and ideas. We need to engage influencers and customers on topics of their interest – not just ours.

What Do They Say? – Go to where the dialogue is happening – online and offline. Be in the conversation to listen and understand, as well as talk. Use media monitoring tools and RSS feeds to cost-effectively capture conversations across channels and networks, from print and trade press to social media such as blogs, twitter and forums. Another route is to tap into new research tools like hosted online communities. These are recruited communities of brand aficionados who help companies like Procter & Gamble or Unilever to co-create new products, or provide feedback on brand actions or communications.

What Do They Do? – Be a people watcher and a trend watcher. Observe what consumers are spending their money on, what their media or entertainment viewing habits are and where they are going for information. For business, observe

As Marshall Manson wrote at the start of this publication, in an evolving world of cross-influence, listening is more important than ever. Genuine, compelling and transparent engagement can drive brand awareness, customer loyalty and, ultimately, sales. Our listening, however, can be easily subsumed by the constant barrage of messages received. In today’s world, we need to listen to more stakeholders more often than ever – not just tune in to one voice. There is a whole echo chamber of influencers around our brands, businesses, issues and communications to consider, such as the media, NGOs, policy makers, opinion elites, employees and consumers, all of whom have strong opinions.

EDELMAN

LISTENING FOR RESULTS

Laurence Evans President, StrategyOne

Originally from New Zealand, Laurence has lived in 5 countries and worked in 23 countries in 27 years while staying married to Rochelle. He has licenses to drive on both left and right hand sides of the road so now he drives down the middle.

[email protected]

Edelman Trust Barometer 2010•Anannualglobalreviewof

the state of trust in Business, Government and Media.

•Ananalysisoftheimplications for leadership in addressing the big issues of our time

•10yearsoftrends,published inJanuary2010

•www.edelman.co.uk/trustbarometer

24

of the peer, the employee and the customer has confirmed the shift from a shareholder to stakeholder society, there are just certain parts that advertising and other ‘old’ disciplines cannot reach. The urgent need to Act and Tell demands a mix of policy and communications skills; digital outreach and content development; a new kind of intelligence and insight altogether. Communications firms today must be able to embrace the regulatory, government, employee and NGO agendas with equal and balanced aptitude. It is no longer a simple issue of customers, consumers and consumption (if it ever was). This, fundamentally, is where the current ad agency model falls woefully short.

Third, because the myths of advertising have been exposed by this enforced new age of austerity. What started as an inquisition over total cost has thankfully evolved into a more rigorous questioning of the role of advertising itself. Sure, this is not un-connected with Point 1 above – but some of the mythology around agency supremacy has been properly laid bare. The One Agency Solution will indeed emerge in the next five years – but it will be content, conversation and influence-led and not by those insistent on producing a 30-second film at any cost and simply calling themselves ‘the agency’. ‘Right’ must start with Insight, Planning and Strategy – and no one discipline or agency, properly constructed, holds the monopoly here.

What started as a re-alignment of spend in difficult times has inadvertently accompanied a fundamental shift in the wider agency landscape. The convergent agency is the necessary reality now. It is, at heart, a manifestation of the one world of cross-influence which we all inhabit. As we emerge into a post-crisis world, we would do well to heed our own advice to clients and re-consider where we stand in our own industry landscape.

Why?

First, because the digital revolution has driven profound and permanent behavioural change. Of course, we all know this. The new ecology sees a hard re-alignment of interests and a far less stable (and less easily identifiable) set of influencers. Old agency models (including advertising, DM, Media and others) historically relied on this stability to both target audiences and sell to clients. We can no longer be in the audience business; we all have to learn instead to ride the ripples, waves and occasional tsunami of influence.

Second, because only an evolved form of PR can deliver against corporate and brand needs across this new sphere of influence. In a hyper-connected world where citizen activists and/or NGOs can hold both businesses and governments to account and where the continued rise

Twelve months ago, a number of us argued that this would be a ‘good’ recession for PR. Advertising monies seemed set to migrate towards the more engaging and relevant of the two disciplines. Marketers began to realise that, to borrow from Lord Lever’s famous phrase, a lot more than half their monies was simply being wasted in a world of ‘continuous partial attention’, where social media had entered the mainstream.


ONE WORLD & ONE AGENCY

PUBLICENGAGEMENT MAKES YOU THINK

25

mess. Too much was taken for granted; not enough questions asked. We sleepwalked into disaster. Real reform has to start here and now if we are to evolve with the new ecology of influence and interests. PR firms have to re-consider their own structure and purpose, to re-configure as vociferous leaders and champions for what we are calling Public Engagement. This will require adding new skills and changing working practices, for sure. We must do this with speed and with relish.

The alternative is to sit tight, pretend the moment will pass – and behave like smug dinosaurs at the centre of a rapidly changing ecology. And we all know what happened to them.

Fourth, no client should afford the luxury of multiple agency partners. In one world of cross-influence, why on earth are clients paying for five (advertising, PR, Media, CRM, Digital) agencies, five teams, five programmes etc? ‘Holistic working’ is nothing more than a buzzword reflection of companies trying to stitch together their own silos and inefficient corporate structures. We should be giving clients best advice. And the best advice is that reform needs to start from within the client organisation as well as from within the agency itself. It is not merely a question of reducing spend; it is about finding efficiencies and building future-facing communications teams that are multi-skilled, not expensively and silo/ discipline/ audience focussed. Planners and Creatives are available to all. Production is easily outsourced – and can be more competitively partnered and priced. The ad industry has hidden behind a certain mythology for years. We know we can all create and co-create content. So, the model is already there in the making.

The symbolism of the global financial crisis should not be lost on the Communications sector. Living on the luxury of Wants Not Needs was one of the reasons we all ended up in this


ONE WORLD & ONE AGENCY

PUBLICENGAGEMENT MAKES YOU THINK

Robert Phillips UK CEO

Robert is the UK CEO of Edelman. He is also the co-author of Citizen Renaissance (2008) and a frequent contributor and columnist on issues facing the communications, corporate and brand worlds.

[email protected]

Listen with new

intelligence

Participate in

the conversation:

realtime/all

the time

Socialise media relations

Champion

open

advocacy

Embrace the chaos

Build active partnerships for common good

Create and co-create content

Consultancy of The Year 2009

If you’d like to have a chat, please contact

Jodi McLaren for New Business: [email protected] Rebecca Hall for Talent: [email protected]

+44 (0)20 3047 2000 www.edelman.co.uk

Proud of our peopleProud of our independence

Want to join the family?

Daniel J Edelman Inc. is the world’s largest independent PR agency

27

CONVICTION OR CONVENIENCE:

IS NOW THE TIME FOR BUSINESS TO LEAD?

is how we interpret the data and work with clients to address the most urgent issues of our times. Can PR really change its traditional mandate and, wearing the new clothes of Public Engagement, step into the historical domain of management consultants and accountants – engaging, modeling and planning, rather than just broadcasting and storytelling?

In an evolved form of Public Relations, my personal belief is that we can step forward and lead. But we must acquire new skills; and our own industry leaders must work with the Mayfields and the Abberleys to confront change. Together, we can shape a new business and communications ecology which, to paraphrase Danone’s CEO Franck Riboud, should serve as both a social and an economic project. Profit can be maximized and used in active partnership for common good - as we embrace Schama’s monstrous moment and step into a more powerful and exciting future.

Robert Phillips

[email protected]

As 2009 came to a close, Simon Schama described the year as ‘the most grisly, powerful, monstrous moment in the history of capitalism’. During the course of 2009, Charlie Mayfield, Chairman of John Lewis, called for new models of business ownership, while economist Noreena Hertz argued that business can supplant government and enjoy a mandate to lead in the post-crisis age. Aviva Investors UK CEO Paul Abberley, speaking at the UN, urged Global Stock Exchanges to take real action on Corporate Responsibility: his rallying cry to promote ‘a global listing environment that requires companies to consider how responsible and sustainable their business model is, and encourages them to put a forward-thinking sustainability strategy to the vote at their AGMs’. The FT’s Stefan Stern meanwhile asked poignantly whether companies are speaking such language out of ‘conviction or convenience?’

Almost forty years since Milton Friedman published that article in the New York Times Magazine – arguing that the social responsibility of business is to maximize profit – communications industry leaders must today ask questions of ourselves. Are we advising clients out of conviction or convenience? Do we have a responsibility to lead, or should we merely serve as collaborators in compliance culture? Are there cynics among us who are monetizing this moment of responsibility, or should we be transformative and future-shaping? Is this even our place?

Edelman Trust and goodpurposeTM surveys reinforce the pre-eminence of the stakeholder society and the centrality of Mutual Social Responsibility to business. The real challenge

PUBLIC ENGAGEMENT VOL.2

Edelman|Southside|105VictoriaStreet|LondonSW1E6QT|+442030472000|www.edelman.co.uk