Are You Making These Common Mistakes in PR Management? - Part 2

Three Mistakes That Can Make Your PR Less Effective – and How to Avoid Them

In my last article, I talked about why leaving your PR firm alone – on its own, with no ongoing input and direction from you – is a common and costly mistake.

Here I talk about a second common mistake that businesses make – treating PR as an afterthought – and how to fix this mistake.

The Mistake

Great news! Your company has just signed a new partner or closed a big sale to a customer, or maybe you have a special sale or promotion you are running. Or perhaps you have tentatively agreed to be acquired. In any case, these events are important for your company and the people who do business with you, and some events may be important to the world outside your company.

Many businesses crank up the marketing machine – ads, direct-response letters and so on – but “remember” to call their PR firms only at the very last minute.

The Fix

Do yourself a favor: when you begin planning something important, let your PR firm know as soon as possible. PR can lead and almost always can amplify your other marketing activities, contributing to a highly integrated campaign that gets better results.

Good PR people can and will also tell you – honestly – how important your news is to the outside world. Good PR people also monitor your industry as part of their jobs, and they may know trends to which they can link your event to make it more newsworthy. Finally, good PR people almost always can recommend creative and effective approaches – such as using social media, bloggers and direct-to-consumer news releases to “narrowcast” your news to the people who are most interested, instead of just doing the standard dialing-for-dollars pursuit of major news outlets. In short: good PR people can almost always add a lot of value.

If you are hesitant to share confidential information with your PR firm, have them sign a non-disclosure agreement (if they haven’t already). Or ask them to document their procedures for protecting confidential information. If you still don’t trust them, then get another PR firm.

Next: why it’s a bad mistake to treat your PR firm like an adversary instead of a partner.

Are You Making These Common Mistakes in PR Management?

Three Mistakes That Can Make Your PR Less Effective - And How to Avoid Them

During my long career working in marketing and PR (as a client and an outside consultant), I have watched companies repeatedly make three common mistakes in how they manage PR.

These mistakes almost always make the PR program much less effective and therefore more expensive for the client. And they can usually be fixed easily and inexpensively.

The three mistakes are:

Leave your PR firm alone.

Treat PR as an afterthought.

Treat your PR consultant as an adversary instead of a partner.

I will address these mistakes one at a time, in this article and my next two articles.

Veteran PR people will have their own work-arounds for addressing these mistakes made by clients. But you as the client can help them by investing in small adjustments to your own behavior - and in the process, get more efficiencies and effectiveness from your PR consultants.

These common mistakes - and my suggestions for easy fixes - may be particularly important knowledge for smaller businesses that are hiring their first PR consultants.

The Mistake

The first common mistake is to leave your PR firm alone.

You've located and hired your PR firm - check. You've given them a brain-dump on your business - check. Now, it's their job to "make news." Wrong.

It's their job to increase traffic to your web site, acquire more sales leads, obtain donations, get you votes and so on - in short, help you meet your marketing and business goals. Your PR people can't do this effectively if they don't know your goals, your target audiences, and other basics about your business - and when these basics change.

The Fix

First, start with a firm foundation. Give your PR firm a thorough briefing at the beginning of the relationship. Have them prepare a plan - this can be as simple as a few PowerPoint slides - that lists your goals, target audiences, key corporate and marketing milestones for the next three to six months, the PR program(s) with intended results and roles & responsibilities (including how much time you, the client, will invest in the program), and a quick accounting of how they plan to spend your budget, with any anticipated outside expenses.

Second, work out a process for keeping your PR firm updated. This can be anything from a quick weekly call, to a customized intranet or internal social network that's run by your PR firm. It does not matter what the process is - just have a process and stick with it.

Third, working together, update the plan every quarter as necessary.

With this framework in place, you can then let your PR people do their jobs. But they will not be truly effective if you (1) do not approve the plan and (2) do not keep them apprised about what's happening with your business.

Good PR consultants have best practices and can help you set up a working relationship that meets the needs of your business - including making the best use of your limited time. Take their advice - or, if they do not have any advice or best practices, get another firm.

Next: why it's a bad mistake to treat PR as an afterthought.

Fear and Loathing in Social Media

Will the tragedy of the commons destroy social media?

In a previous article, I wrote about how certain types of antisocial behavior are harming social media. I called these characters The Blammer, the Drive-by Shooter and the Hitchhiker.

Today, I am adding one more character to my list: the Hijacker.

The Hijacker is a more intense, annoying and destructive version of the Drive-by Shooter. This person typically starts a discussion or discussion forum on a topic, then immediately hijacks it for other purposes (personal or professional).

Recently, I have seen this happen on LinkedIn, where some unqualified, marginally qualified or just plain disturbed people start Groups or join Groups then subvert them with out-of-context commercial content, off-topic discussions, and inappropriate comments - including personal attacks and romantic overtures (some alcohol-fueled, I am guessing).

For example: recently a member* of a Professional Group on LinkedIn posted what seemed to be a good question, although poorly structured and worded. Other members started responding in earnest – many with very useful, thoughtful comments, others with less-useful, off-topic comments. The discussion soon degraded into an unintelligible, off-topic mess with personal sniping between the person who posted the original question and several other members of the discussion. The discussion eventually got back on track – until it was derailed again by a long, off-topic comment and flirtatious overture to a female group member by the person who posed the original question. I left the discussion and deleted all my comments. I am now wary about participating in any discussions in this Group.

In another group, the CEO* of a large company posted a question that was naïve and confused –completely at odds with his industry stature. I read the question three times before I understood what was going on. He was overtly baiting people. Several people responded in earnest to his question. He then proceeded to excoriate and taunt those who responded for their naiveté. He dangled offers of work, asking people to respond privately; then later revealed parts of those private conversations in the discussion. This whole exercise was obviously a ham-handed attempt to promote his company’s services – products that replaced the type of people that he was trying to “hire.”

This is sad. LinkedIn is a great place for professionals to connect, collaborate and learn from each other. It is based on free-market principles. LinkedIn’s operator provides the framework, but LinkedIn members shape the content with their mutual interests. Members also shape the community by following unstated but mutually understood rules of etiquette.

Unfortunately, I fear that LinkedIn is falling victim to the tragedy of the commons. A few people are hijacking Groups and Discussions – the commons, or shared resources – and using them for their own self-interest. By putting their self-interest above the interests of the community, the hijackers are over-using and depleting the resources. The behavior of a few will eventually make the resource less valuable for all.

LinkedIn has established some basic controls and guidelines to help ensure the integrity of the community, such as the ability for Group administrators to pre-approve members and delete comments. But, at least in my recent experience, these basic controls aren’t universally applied.

As a professional, the best I can do is manage my own behavior so that I contribute constructively to LinkedIn and get the most benefit for my personal brand. This includes not participating in Groups and Discussions that have turned destructive.

My advice: If you really care about your personal brand and reputation, don’t try to fake your motives or your professional credentials/expertise. Many people do start Groups that are specific to a company or have a commercial goal, but they usually they state their objectives publicly.

If you want to participate in a Professional Group to learn the profession – admirable – do so – but listen, learn and contribute honestly. Before contributing, watch how others behave and get a feeling for the tenor of the Group or Discussion. There are a number of people on LinkedIn who do a great job of balancing self-interest (self-promotion) with the interests of the community – find some and learn from them.

Most people on LinkedIn are honest and helpful – which is what makes the service so valuable. Return the favor by not wasting people’s time and good will by injecting false motives or credentials into the system. Just because the bits are free doesn’t mean you should eat them all.

* I am avoiding real names here because lawyers have apparently identified social media as fertile ground for defamation lawsuits.