Rescuing Long-Term Planning

Long-term action is in trouble. I came to this conclusion recently as a result of a conversation I had with a new parent. She talked of wanting to begin taking concrete steps to begin putting away money toward a college education for she and her husband's newborn child. But the desire to do this, she said, was being compromised by the realities of their current economic challenges: house payments, rising cost of living, little or no increases in their salaries, etc. The result is they are being forced to postpone and possibly even caste aside their commendable and even wise desire to begin saving for their child's college education.

The plight of this couple is not unique to them. More and more people and even organizational entities are being forced to make choices where they are replacing long-term planning with short-term or even immediate action. Ideally, long-term planning and action should not become a euphemism for fantasy or a pipe dream. Instead, it should be as much apart of our daily to-do lists as are the actions that largely define our present days. Sadly, the current state of our country and world is making it ever-so difficult to balance the immediate with the long-term.

I understand the logic we follow that dictates addressing challenges in front of us before getting to ones not quite so immediate. But future challenges are a lot closer than we might realize. A new born child's college education may seem like a long way off, for instance, but reality says differently. A role communicators can play in this situation is to continue educating their publics on the importance of preparation. One major component of crisis planning is risk communication. By following many of the same elements that comprise effective risk communication, including creating awareness among the public, providing them with helpful information and outlining the consequences of being unprepared for the future, communicators can slowly help all of us, including the organizations and businesses many of work for, create a sensible balance between immediate action and long-term planning.

Social Media Means Less Scrutiny for PR Types

Before social media came into our lives, public relations professionals were highly dependent upon traditional media, namely newspapers, television and radio. While direct mail was a tool of outreach for communicators, it was expensive and, statistically, not all that effective in terms of generating concrete results. But traditional media had the eyes and ears of the general public. To reach them, communicators needed to cross over a bridge that was controlled largely by those same forms of media. Whether communicators purchased advertising space who successfully pitched stories, they had to do two things": develop positive ties with reporters and editors and work within guidelines established and enforced by journalists.

This meant public relations professionals were not always free to send out whatever messages and/or information they wished. Their communiques had to pass the close scrutiny of members of the press. To add to that challenge, the press could afford to be very picky about PR communiques they accepted or reacted to. After all, they were the primary game in town, so they could afford to be strict with the PR professionals. Thus, the press served as a check and balance against irresponsible public relations efforts. By adhering to high ethical standards, journalists forced public relations professionals, in large measure, to do the same.

That dynamic is almost entirely gone now. Public relations professionals no longer need traditional media nearly as much as they used to. Social media enables them to communicate directly with the public with no pre-journalistic review or editing. This change places public relations professionals much more in a self-regulating mode. They are more free to take liberties with accuracy, logical claims and responsible outreach. While I do not bemoan the rise of social media - I actually applaud it - it does cause me concern that such a major communication industry as public relations is now more free to operate without as much scrutiny as it used to have. The honor system is not good enough when it comes to professional communication.

Big Changes, Big Questions

What I am going to try and touch on is a topic with which I am currently grappling. It is something I am not going to pretend I fully understand. Still, it is weighing heavily on me these days. I am talking about change; not necessarily with me as an individual, but within our country and throughout the world. Like most everyone else, every day I read reports and view stories of people struggling to hang onto or find jobs, movement in the ecology of our planet due to changes in climate and natural disasters, power shifts within and among nations, alterations in the balance of cultures, and the struggle within and between economic classes. And these are only some of the more significant areas of conflict that I see.

What does it all mean? Why is this happening in virtually every major category or part of our world? Further, is this new? Has it ever before been this intense or all-encompassing? What does it all mean? What can be done to help us as individuals better understand it, deal with it, and help ensure where we are headed is better than where we have been and where we are? From a selfish standpoint, I wonder if anyone else is grappling with these kind of questions, too? If so, then let's talk. If not, then I think they are worth considering. I firmly believe we are living through a time of seismic change. Our world and the planet are undergoing profound shifts in balance in most every area that we know.

One reason people are struggling as much as they are is because they do not understand or even recognize these changes as being as profound as I believe them to be. Take the fundamental topic of employment as one example. People lose a job and immediately begin seeking another. They find it difficult and frustrating, but their focus remains on the need directly before them: get a job. Never mind that many current are disappearing due to advances in technology. Employment opportunities, as we now see them, are shrinking. Consequently, our leaders need to put on their communication hats and begin national and even international conversations about this. The same holds true for many other areas in the national and international community. Until people better understand the shifting landscape before them, the more they will struggle without a proper contextual vision and direction.

The Fox and the Hedgehog

Recently I came across fragments of a poem by the Green poet Archilochus in which he wrote, "The fox knows many things, but the hedgehog knows one big thing." The more I read and reread this line, the more intrigued I am in terms of its application toward communication. I think it says much in terms of defining choices people make in how they seek to communicate with others. But before I expand on that, it is important for me to explain what "fox" and "hedgehog" to mean to me in this context. And to do that, I will borrow liberally from historian Isaiah Berlin who described the fox as a being that pursues numerous ends, many of which are contradictory, while the hedgehog seeks to relate everything to a single vision.

Given those descriptions, which one - the fox or the hedgehog - makes the better communicator? Which one would any of us hire to direct or oversee our communication efforts? Which one would we rather be as we seek to communicate and/or connect with others in the course of our everyday lives? Can or even should one be both a fox and a hedgehog? Is that even possible or, to a lesser extent, advisable? Both, it seems, have strengths and weaknesses. The fox is more apt to be flexible in addressing an array of topics or issues, yet in doing so give the impression they are without an internal compass. The hedgehog, without question, would be easier to understand and, if one buys into their vision, easier to embrace. But if one does not see eye-to-eye with that vision, then the hedgehog risks becoming a communicator without an audience.

Life is nothing if not situational. Each of our days finds us in multiple situations: alone, in meetings, walking to our cars, speaking with our children, tackling homework, enjoying a movie, etc. Each situation is different and requires communication strategies that speak to what makes them unique. If one believes the manner in which they contend with those situations should be linked by the commonality of our own values and core beliefs, then it would seem it is better to be a hedgehog. But if one believes each situation requires a different message that may not connect with previous messages, then being a fox seems to be the way to go. I confess to not having a firm answer to my questions. However, given the complexities of life, in terms of communication, perhaps it is best to combine the best of the fox and the hedgehog. Life is ever-changing, thus requiring us to be flexible as we contend with it. At the same time, the more firm our feet are planted on the ground, then the better able we are to successfully navigate our daily challenges.

Dancing and Communication

Perhaps one reason I admire dancers as much as I do is because it is one of those things I do not do very well. I am not just talking about trained, professional dancers but also people with no particular talent but who are not afraid to get out on the dance floor and move to the music. It is fun to watch and fun to join in. But what I find particularly noteworthy is a certain skill that good dancers possess that can and does apply to communication. Good dancing is not an act of isolation. It requires collaboration and sensitivity to another. Even dancers who are without partners are moving in harmony to music, so, in that sense, dancing is never purely solo.

Watching two dancers dance, one can see several decisions being made by the partners: how closely should they be together, how closely aligned should their movements be, should the movements themselves be lively or more subtle, and how often, if at all, should the two dancers actually come together or touch. All of this is influenced by their environment in the form of the music itself, other dancers and their own past experiences with and knowledge of dancing and the music being played. This dynamic is not all that dissimilar from what communicators work through when they attempt to connect more than one public.

One can easily make the case that effective communicator is a specialized dance. It involves helping more than one public move in harmony, making choices as to how they will move, and working with an array of outside triggers or elements that comprise the environment in which such a connection is being attempted. Communication is a dance and, conversely, dancing is communication. Further, if one possesses the sensitivity and desire to effectively link to another, then not only are they are on their way to becoming an effective communicator, but they are also their own to becoming a successful dance partner.

Personal Reflections

A big part of what makes life what it is is the fact it is constantly changing, evolving and full of unexpected twists and turns. As was once written in a song, "The only thing to be sure of is there is nothing to be sure of ." For me, each passing day reaffirms that truism. I am feeling that particularly today as I make this entry because it is my birthday. Number 61. I know some would interpret that as being old, while others would not. Either way, I am fortunate enough to be in good health, so I am choosing to be happy where I am in my life. And, as always, I continue to look toward tomorrow with the highest of hopes.

Just in the past few months my life has taken some interesting turns. I became a PhD and then a few weeks after that a grandfather. And, the other day, my daughter called to tell me she is getting married. My head and my heart are still spinning from it all. But, overall, in a good way. In addition, I am now assessing my own professional plans and, for the first time, am even beginning to contemplate retirement coupled with trying to devote more time and energy to teaching. Whether that happens remains to be seen, of course, but the fact I am weighing these scenarios as serious options is another new development for me.

With the various developments of the past months and possible new ones that are beginning to appear over the horizon, they all bring their own set of particular communication challenges. As a PhD, for instance, do I focus more on communicating via professional journals or lectures? If I do, then I had better do a good job if anyone is going to want to read or hear what I have to say. As a grandfather, how am I going to connect with my granddaughter in a way that is meaningful and lasting? And then there's my future son-in-law. What will the dynamic between the two of us be in the the years to come? At this point, I do not have answers to any of these questions or musings. But as I come to grips with them, I recognize the communicating I do with myself and with others needs to be on-target. It just goes to show that communication challenges are not just issues that professional communicators deal with. They belong to everyone.

Reality Over Perception

It is an age-old rivalry: reality versus perception. Which one is better? Which one do people prefer? Which one do people believe? Conventional wisdom today suggests the contest between these old foes and thus the answer to those questions is not even close. Perception wins. Nowhere is this driven home on a more regular basis then in the currently maddening and disheartening world of politics. Take former governor and Republican candidate for president Mitt Romney. In her recent column in Newsweek, columnist Robin Givhan noted how in his current campaign Romney rarely is seen wearing a tie, thus giving him the appearance of being a man of the people. Apparently, one "mistake" he made when he was a candidate in 2008 is that he did wear a tie and, thus, reinforced the notion that he was just the opposite of what he appears to be now.

I think one reason for much of the negative feelings toward President Obama these days is that the reality of him is not corresponding with how he was perceived when he was candidate Obama back in 2008. Consequently, people are feeling disillusioned, betrayed, and rudderless. My sense is many of his supporters are thinking if he's not "the one" who is going to be fighting for us "little people" against the corporate fat cats as we thought he was several years ago, then who is? My point here is not to dissect the Obama presidency or even Romney's decision to forgo ties, but instead use these as lessons as to why none of us should be so quick to embrace perception no matter how appealing it might seem.

Of the two, reality is the least attractive. It represents in a raw and unapologetic way how people and/or things really are. Perception, on the other hand, represents how we'd like them to be. We embrace perception and then, some point later, see it turn into reality with little warning or heads-up. That is very sobering. Communicators, particularly those who come up with clever campaigns to sell various products, including candidates, know this. This is why they focus on perception much more than reality. Their goal is to get us to buy their product or vote for their candidate. What happens after that is not their concern. Communicators who focus on selling or marketing perception are very creative and talented. Perhaps their skills would be better served if they were directed more toward promoting reality. Their publics certainly would be.

Active Engagement

The other day I listened to two friends talk about their involvement with fantasy football leagues each was in. I am not going to pretend I understand precisely how this activity works as I have never participated in one. However, I do know a wide number of fantasy leagues pertaining to many of the major sports exist. They attract a great many sports fans who take these enterprises very seriously. Even though I did not completely understand all my friends were saying, I found the conversation fascinating because of their passion and wide range of knowledge. Each seemed to know what they were talking about and did so in a way that made me ponder actually joining one of these leagues some day.

But whether I do or not is beside the point here. These two people were and are actively engaged in their relationship with their teams, their leagues, other participants, and the overall activity itself. The result is their level of enjoyment is exceedingly high and the "sport" itself is the far better for it. This is a good lesson for all, including those of us working in the communication field. For years I have considered communication to be a relationship science. It revolves around connections. As communicators, we strive to create them and then seek ways to keep them strong and lasting.

My question is this: what can we, as communicators, bring to the table to help make us as successful as we can be and to be the greatest help to those we represent? The answer is found in the conversation between my two fantasy football league friends. Active engagement is the key. While I have no doubt my two friends make mistakes in the course of their team's season, I also am quite certain their sense of fun and level of commitment also makes their efforts successful. If the two were real owners of real teams, I am sure their teams and players would come out ahead regardless of how many games they won or lost each season. Effective communication is more about passion than it is about perfection. For inspiration, look no further than my two friends.

Avoiding Chaotic Communication

One of the great obstacles to effective communication is when the parties involved play by different sets of rules. No more was this in evidence than the recent debate involving the executive and legislative branches over raising the national debt ceiling. One side only wanted to raise the debt ceiling if the increase was counterbalanced by cuts in the national deficit. The other side primarily wanted to raise the debt if ways to generate greater revenue were part of the solution. For much of the time, even though both sides shared the same goal, it did not detract from the debate's ugliness, nor did it reduce the length of time over which the verbal head-butting, jousting, posturing, and game-playing that occurred before agreement was reached.

From my perspective, the so-called different rules under which the opposing sides played was very simple: one side preferred reaching agreement through compromise while the other side did not. One side seemed more interested in reaching a consensus while the other seemed more interested in getting their way. Even though an agreement was eventually reached, the fact is it could have been reached much earlier than it was and in a way that was far less acrimonious. The bickering that took place for several months did no one any good, including those involved, our nation, the financial world or even the actual issue itself. One could even argue that the verbal hostility that did occur actually made things worse on a number of levels.

My objective is to not to comment on the merits of the issue and the points that were eventually agreed upon. Instead, it is my intent to use this matter to illustrate the importance of establishing and honoring rules of communication before actual discussions occur. What all of us observed were representatives of both sides bad mouthing each other to the media and at various public forums. This made their face-to-face encounters more difficult. Assuming both sides shared a desire to reach consensus, then the vital step of agreeing on how they were going to communicate with each other throughout their discussions should have been nailed down. Because it wasn't, the so-called communication process that followed was chaotic and hindered the overriding objective all sought to achieve.