I never knew this PR company existed - but then again, I am as far removed from the White House as BP's PR right now! From what I can see, the White House Writers Group is a PR half way house for those released from Presidential detention with a pass to offer advice on corporate affairs.
I have no idea how many White House writers there are - a substantial number I should imagine given the scope of issues coverage from Washington's most prestigious home. WHWG is certainly maintaining the tradition of broad scope with an article currently on its website home page entitled "Analyzing Campaign Speech Writing on Norwegian Television".
White House Writers Group is certainly not a brand name that rolls off the tongue, but I have to say, it's a name that needs no tagline or mission statement to spell out its value proposition, experience or service offer. And their website offers free advice and insights - much better than most PR websites that are no more than online brochures that do the profession no justice.
If you're running a PR company, take a look and learn. The sprinkling of original free insights and advice would encourage me to hire this company ahead of many others.
Saturday, May 29, 2010
Tuesday, May 25, 2010
BP - Trouble in the Gulf between fact and message?
BP is certainly experiencing what it's really like when events stack up beyond petroleum. The company's brand is at risk of drowning in the Gulf of Mexico, with any number of reports like this one sprouting up everywhere about whether the oil disaster is much worse than the company is admitting. The only thing flowing as fast as the oil are the stories and commentary across the internet.
Naturally, whenever these cataclysmic events occur, the first instinct of a company is damage limitation, but in what order of priority? This is the question many residents along the Gulf coast will be asking, as oil seeps twelve miles into wetland areas. Government agencies - from local government all the way to the White House - are starting to question whether BP is doing enough and is what it is doing effective?
For BP, damage limitation extends beyond saving the environment to brand, legal and financial. And the messages the company sends out on its efforts to stem the flow of oil shapes world perceptions about which area of damage it is most concerned about. This is regardless of what its true priorities might be.
There is no doubt that this is an enormously challenging technical problem, which extends into explaining the issues to stakeholders, from local fishermen to the US Government. In the past few days, there have been reports that BP was forewarned about problems associated with this rig. No doubt, when the litigation inevitably starts, the veracity of these claims will be appropriately tested.
Nonetheless, rig integrity or otherwise, the fundamental question is what risk assessment took place before exploration and drilling began and either:
However, I would argue that the measure of damage to BP's brand and reputation ultimately lies in the answer to the questions I posed, because reputation is built on conducting business with integrity at every level and stage of operation.
Naturally, whenever these cataclysmic events occur, the first instinct of a company is damage limitation, but in what order of priority? This is the question many residents along the Gulf coast will be asking, as oil seeps twelve miles into wetland areas. Government agencies - from local government all the way to the White House - are starting to question whether BP is doing enough and is what it is doing effective?
For BP, damage limitation extends beyond saving the environment to brand, legal and financial. And the messages the company sends out on its efforts to stem the flow of oil shapes world perceptions about which area of damage it is most concerned about. This is regardless of what its true priorities might be.
There is no doubt that this is an enormously challenging technical problem, which extends into explaining the issues to stakeholders, from local fishermen to the US Government. In the past few days, there have been reports that BP was forewarned about problems associated with this rig. No doubt, when the litigation inevitably starts, the veracity of these claims will be appropriately tested.
Nonetheless, rig integrity or otherwise, the fundamental question is what risk assessment took place before exploration and drilling began and either:
- Why did it not identify the potential for this problem; or
- If it did, why did BP not have an adequate disaster management plan and facilities in place?
However, I would argue that the measure of damage to BP's brand and reputation ultimately lies in the answer to the questions I posed, because reputation is built on conducting business with integrity at every level and stage of operation.
Friday, May 21, 2010
Tough times shape the thinking of Gen Z
I arose every morning this week to discover that Wall Street had been crunched again overnight with a similar outcome expected for the Australian bourse in the day ahead. It got me thinking about the implications for branding as the punters lose faith in institutions and corporate and economic management.
The underlying economic problem right now is the risk of collapsing national economies - of countries defaulting on their debts. Widely referred to as sovereign risk, this is potentially a far bigger problem than the collapse Lehmann Brothers. I must say that, as they face the bailout of whole nations, I am amazed at the resiliance of the humble taxpayers who - whether they're underwriting sovereign or corporate debt - end up footing the bill somewhere along the line. I wonder what happens when taxpayers default - or revolt?
The fortunate thing for politicians is that we have institutions like the International Monetary Fund (IMF) who appear to magically produce money to bail out cot case economies. Most taxpayers don't realise that the IMF magic pudding actually rises on the back of contributions from member states who, in turn, raise the necessary taxes to cover their contributions. How's that for adroit sleight of hand?
But I digress. As nations grapple to stay afloat, what are the implications for brands? There is a lot of research around that says, for Gen Y, brand loyalty has gone out the window. According to many, this fickle, demanding generation is almost impossible to pin down. But if you think Gen Y's tough, wait until you see the next mob. My daughter is Gen Z. She's gifted with xray vision and bullshit detection capabilities that us boomers can only dream about.
As current events unfold, they are defining the development years of her generation, which must inevitably grow up to question the integrity of institutions, brands and people behind them. While we in the branding community talk about authenticity, the aftermath of our series of financial crises will surely test our capacity to 'walk our talk'.
So if you're company's only paying lip service to authenticity, you'd better lift your game as the Gen Z shoppers are starting to hit the streets now!
The underlying economic problem right now is the risk of collapsing national economies - of countries defaulting on their debts. Widely referred to as sovereign risk, this is potentially a far bigger problem than the collapse Lehmann Brothers. I must say that, as they face the bailout of whole nations, I am amazed at the resiliance of the humble taxpayers who - whether they're underwriting sovereign or corporate debt - end up footing the bill somewhere along the line. I wonder what happens when taxpayers default - or revolt?
The fortunate thing for politicians is that we have institutions like the International Monetary Fund (IMF) who appear to magically produce money to bail out cot case economies. Most taxpayers don't realise that the IMF magic pudding actually rises on the back of contributions from member states who, in turn, raise the necessary taxes to cover their contributions. How's that for adroit sleight of hand?
But I digress. As nations grapple to stay afloat, what are the implications for brands? There is a lot of research around that says, for Gen Y, brand loyalty has gone out the window. According to many, this fickle, demanding generation is almost impossible to pin down. But if you think Gen Y's tough, wait until you see the next mob. My daughter is Gen Z. She's gifted with xray vision and bullshit detection capabilities that us boomers can only dream about.
As current events unfold, they are defining the development years of her generation, which must inevitably grow up to question the integrity of institutions, brands and people behind them. While we in the branding community talk about authenticity, the aftermath of our series of financial crises will surely test our capacity to 'walk our talk'.
So if you're company's only paying lip service to authenticity, you'd better lift your game as the Gen Z shoppers are starting to hit the streets now!
Thursday, May 20, 2010
Gazman and Toyotas
My wife rang me at work yesterday from that bloody Gazman clothing store. It was about a jacket... oh, and by the way... there's also a pair of pants on sale... and a SKIVVY!! sort of thing.
This rang serious alarm bells. A 'Sale' sticker is like the lure on a greyhound track to my wife. She'll chase it all the way to the cash register. Nevertheless, I felt I had to make a stand.
'Unless Gazman agrees to use me in its next male catalogue, I won't be buying any more,' I resolutely responded down the phone, knowing full well there were plenty of more likely candidates. "I'm just about entirely attired in their stuff and I don't want any more!'
It was the return of serve to this comment that really floored me though - especially as I have some respect for brands. "I don't know what's wrong with you. Gazman is one of the best-selling brands in Australia. Everyone buys it."
I couldn't help myself: "Toyota is the best-selling brand in Australia too, but I wouldn't buy a Toyota." The silence was deafening, then: "A Lexus is a Toyota." This would seem a feeble response and would normally prove my point but, instead, it send shock waves through the domestic millpond. My wife has just signed up for a new Lexus IS250 - her new pride and joy - and I had just thumped my volley into the net.
How did I step back from the brink? I agreed to buy the Gazman jacket. If only all purchase decisions were so simple! At least I held ground on the skivvy thing, even though it would look good behind the steering wheel of the Lexus!
This rang serious alarm bells. A 'Sale' sticker is like the lure on a greyhound track to my wife. She'll chase it all the way to the cash register. Nevertheless, I felt I had to make a stand.
'Unless Gazman agrees to use me in its next male catalogue, I won't be buying any more,' I resolutely responded down the phone, knowing full well there were plenty of more likely candidates. "I'm just about entirely attired in their stuff and I don't want any more!'
It was the return of serve to this comment that really floored me though - especially as I have some respect for brands. "I don't know what's wrong with you. Gazman is one of the best-selling brands in Australia. Everyone buys it."
I couldn't help myself: "Toyota is the best-selling brand in Australia too, but I wouldn't buy a Toyota." The silence was deafening, then: "A Lexus is a Toyota." This would seem a feeble response and would normally prove my point but, instead, it send shock waves through the domestic millpond. My wife has just signed up for a new Lexus IS250 - her new pride and joy - and I had just thumped my volley into the net.
How did I step back from the brink? I agreed to buy the Gazman jacket. If only all purchase decisions were so simple! At least I held ground on the skivvy thing, even though it would look good behind the steering wheel of the Lexus!
Friday, May 14, 2010
Collegiate approach to research a clear trend
I've had three marketing / research companies push stuff through the letterbox in the last month offering me - or at least the company I work for - the chance to cough up some dough to participate in industry-wide research projects.
I think pitching into a research 'pool' with competitor businesses isn't a bad idea. I have been doing annual tracking of customer satisfaction for the past few years and I have to say, done in isolation, I'm often left wondering what it all means in terms of our competitive position.
This especially occurs in a low engagement business like retirement savings. I mean, if we didn't have mandatory contributions and big tax breaks on it in Australia, who'd be in superannuation? We'd all just stash our cash where we could get hold of it when everyday matters took priority over saving for the future.
The thing about tracking customer satisfaction on your own, is that you get an absolute score, whether NPS or other. But for better or worse, you don't know how that tracks against your competitors. Sure, there's plenty of secondary research around, but direct comparison is rendered useless by methodology that is not 100% aligned across surveys.
The best you get in annual surveys is a trend line for your business. This is useful for setting and rewarding against organisational KPIs, but a 5% annual improvement off a low base is deceptive if your competitors are achieving an annual 6% off a higher base.
This collegiate approach to independent research, where you have the opportunity to include your own customers assessed as a subset of a broader survey is precisely what's needed in order to gain meaningful insight into your competitive position in the marketplace.
Congratulations to the various companies who are taking this approach. When the time is right for us, I will be participating.
I think pitching into a research 'pool' with competitor businesses isn't a bad idea. I have been doing annual tracking of customer satisfaction for the past few years and I have to say, done in isolation, I'm often left wondering what it all means in terms of our competitive position.
This especially occurs in a low engagement business like retirement savings. I mean, if we didn't have mandatory contributions and big tax breaks on it in Australia, who'd be in superannuation? We'd all just stash our cash where we could get hold of it when everyday matters took priority over saving for the future.
The thing about tracking customer satisfaction on your own, is that you get an absolute score, whether NPS or other. But for better or worse, you don't know how that tracks against your competitors. Sure, there's plenty of secondary research around, but direct comparison is rendered useless by methodology that is not 100% aligned across surveys.
The best you get in annual surveys is a trend line for your business. This is useful for setting and rewarding against organisational KPIs, but a 5% annual improvement off a low base is deceptive if your competitors are achieving an annual 6% off a higher base.
This collegiate approach to independent research, where you have the opportunity to include your own customers assessed as a subset of a broader survey is precisely what's needed in order to gain meaningful insight into your competitive position in the marketplace.
Congratulations to the various companies who are taking this approach. When the time is right for us, I will be participating.
Friday, May 7, 2010
UK election: Recruit your lobbyist now!
The Prime Minister's been hung by the British electorate and so has the Parliament. It's starting to look more like the US democratic model by the day - with no party reliably able to govern and presenting some of the most fertile commercial territory for lobbyists in the world.
A hung Parliament means ruling through arrangements ranging from formal coalition to loose collectives of common ideology and/or special interests. The problem is, of course, that the Government has no clear mandate to do anything. It leads to the gridlock for which Capitol Hill is renowned, and special interest groups running amok lobbying individuals and parties sympathetic to their cause or, worse still, owing them political favours.
For the next 18 months, or however long the new British Parliament lasts, there's probably going to be no faster-growing business than 'Government Relations' more commonly referred to as lobbying. So if you're running a PR agency with aspirations in the UK, I reckon you'd better start recruiting a lobbyist with strong political connections.
The only problem will be selecting one who has connections on the 'winning' side. In the end, that might be the one with strongest links to the Liberal-Democrats because, as I read it now, they're the party in the driving seat.
A hung Parliament means ruling through arrangements ranging from formal coalition to loose collectives of common ideology and/or special interests. The problem is, of course, that the Government has no clear mandate to do anything. It leads to the gridlock for which Capitol Hill is renowned, and special interest groups running amok lobbying individuals and parties sympathetic to their cause or, worse still, owing them political favours.
For the next 18 months, or however long the new British Parliament lasts, there's probably going to be no faster-growing business than 'Government Relations' more commonly referred to as lobbying. So if you're running a PR agency with aspirations in the UK, I reckon you'd better start recruiting a lobbyist with strong political connections.
The only problem will be selecting one who has connections on the 'winning' side. In the end, that might be the one with strongest links to the Liberal-Democrats because, as I read it now, they're the party in the driving seat.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)