Sunday, December 29, 2013

The First Howl

Currently making the rounds on You Tube these days is a video of a puppy husky howling for the first time. His sound is squeaky and soft, but very adorable and fun. To say the least, it is not a noise that any other dogs would find particularly frightening, intimidating or, for that matter, worth paying attention to. That, of course, will change. It almost goes without saying that within a relatively short period of time as the puppy grows into adulthood, its sound will be the opposite of what it is in this early stage of its life. The sound will be one of note. It will be one other dogs will pay attention to and, quite possibly, even take action on depending on.

That puppy's initial howls are not unlike the noises all of us make when we first begin finding our own voice. In this case, however, I am not talking about the actual sound we make but the substance of what it is we are attempting to say. Finding one's voice is rarely a smooth process. It involves gaining the confidence to speak in front of others, a belief in one's self that you actually have something to say, a command of the facts from which one is speaking, and, of course, an understanding of what it is you want to say. The realty, however, is that even with these elements there is no guarantee people will listen to, understand or agree with your "howl."   

Perhaps it will be the same for that puppy when it grows into adulthood: not all of its fellow dogs will listen to its howls. It is not different for us. Any one can be heard but not everyone is actually listened to. In many ways, achieving that end is a primary ingredient in the act of effective communication. Being listened to suggests respect, acceptance and a level of esteem - all needs scholars have identified as being key to our own emotional well being. Ideally, as we mature we develop a greater appreciation of what is needed if we are to be listened to. It is important, however, that we continue to act on that appreciation and be more than simply content to make noise.

Friday, December 27, 2013

PR Model for the Future

In 1984, when communication scholars James Grunig and Todd Hunt unveiled their four models of public relations, they performed a great service to those either in or looking to get into the profession. The four models  provided clear definition to the different styles in which public relations was carried out. The four models were press agentry (designed to promote), public information (designed to inform), two-way asymmetrical (designed to persuade) and two-way symmetrical (designed to establish partnerships). Grunig-Hunt's insights were as timely back in 1984 as they are today.

Two of the models, in particular, remain especially relevant in current times. These are the models geared toward persuading others and establishing partnerships or alliances. It is these that best encapsulate the two primary purposes of any purposeful communication effort. Looking back through history, in fact, the two-way asymmetrical and two-way symmetrical models have dominated the efforts by communicators - professional and everyone else - either in their work on behalf of others as well as for themselves. The press agentry and public information models have proved to be key supporting players in the world of public relations.

Of the two-way asymmetrical and two-way symmetrical models, up till now it is the one with persuasion as its driving purpose that has been the most practiced. In a free-market society such as the United States, our nation's expansion, innovations, spirit and boldness has been defined by its efforts to persuade others to join in, take action, support, rise up, etc. In this regard, the two-way asymmetrical model has been a near-perfect fit. But as we move further into the 21st century, the question is will or should this two-way asymmetrical model be the one that continues to dominate the practice of public relations? Based on the challenges currently facing the US and much of the world, my sense is it time for the two-way symmetrical model to take center stage. Establishing and maintaining partnerships is the key to the future.

Monday, December 23, 2013

Rush Hour

One of the great frustrations that comes with living in the Washington, D.C.- Northern Virginia region is the traffic. It is hard to find any time of day when traffic is not a challenge. When running errands or traveling from one appointment to another, traffic is a factor that must be weighed, particularly if time is a factor.  (For instance, I had a dentist appointment this morning. Normally, it is a 15-minute drive from our house to the dentist office. But with traffic as a factor, that 15 minutes is at least 30 minutes on the road.) Such is life in this part of the country as well as other heavily-congested regions, too.

Driving to that appointment this morning and watching other drivers jockey for position on the road as they navigated other drivers, stop lights, right and left turns, etc., I was struck not by the inconvenience of rush hour traffic but how, in many ways, it brings out the best in many people. (I just re-read that last sentence and, yes, I do know how insane that sounds.) When it comes to driving in rush hour, commuters are very much in the same boat. For them to get to where they need to be in a reasonable amount of time requires a great deal of cooperation. They need to set aside their own specific needs and work with strangers for the greater good of helping ensure traffic runs smoothly and, ultimately, everyone benefits. 

Sure, there are accidents. Plus, without question there are some drivers that take foolish risks, jeopardizing themselves and others. Fortunately, those folks are in the minority. When one weighs their behavior against the drivers that arrive at their destinations safely and on-time, the scale tips quite heavily toward the great amount of cooperation that occurs during what anyone would consider to be a challenging time. This cooperation is the result of mutual respect and good communication between the drivers.  Those are good things no matter what road a person is on.

Friday, December 20, 2013

The Limits of Advocacy

When one enters into public relations, they are in the relationship business. On some level, any public relations effort or campaign pertains to connecting with others. For some, it is a matter of persuading persons to support a particular cause, buy a product or adopt a certain belief. For others, the effort revolves around establishing an alliance with others to confront a problem or challenge of mutual interest or concern. Also, in both cases the public relations challenge is identifying ways to sustain the initial connection you have made with publics external to yourself or client. None of these goals are particularly easy, of course, but nonetheless they are vital to any successful outreach effort.

One of the growing aspects of public relations is spokesmanship. While it has been around for a good while now, in recent times we are seeing a lot more spokesmen and women than ever before. This is not a bad thing as having a professional communicator on-board to help articulate a position and answer questions primarily from the press is a good thing. This is especially true when it comes helping organizations and other entities maintain positive ties with various publics. A good spokesmen can be a key player in this regard. However, based on many of the spokesmen I see, hear and read about these days, particularly in the political arena, I am coming to the conclusion these representatives are not doing nearly as good of a job as they could and should.

These professionals - and both political parties have them - seem to view themselves as being in the advocacy rather than relationship business. The difference is that when one's sole purpose is to be an advocate for something or someone, their focus is short-sighted. When one seeks to establish and then maintain relationships, their focus is much more long-term in nature. How they present their position revolves more around building on commonalities they share with others. Advocates, on the other hand, tend to concentrate on out-arguing their opponents. This is unfortunate because they tend to do little more than reinforce those who already share their views and contribute little to building  bridges with others.  

Tuesday, December 17, 2013

" Let me tell you about today's special!"

All of us from time to time go out to eat. And I just do not mean places where you drive up to the window, place your order and minutes later are back on the highway wolfing down a burger and fries. I am talking about places where you are seated at a table and are called upon to eat your food with actual silverware. As a treat, this is always fun. At those restaurants, a waiter or waitress will inevitably approach your table and at some point give you a run down of the highlights on the day's menu as well as a description of that day's special. In my experience, I have had servers who recite this information from memory and others who have to read it off some type of small index card.  (If it were me, I would definitely be one of the ones who reads the information.)

In those instances, the servers are attempting to persuade the patron to buy one of the big-ticket items which they have highlighted. I often wonder how many folks actually order one of those food items as a result of how well the server's pitch was. (I never have but then I recognize I may be an exception.) I also wonder during the course of an average shift, how often the server is called upon to repeat that pitch. Whatever the number is, their challenge is to make that pitch sound as fresh as whatever food the patron ultimately orders. Without question, for the server to maintain a certain level of enthusiasm in such a scenario is not easy. (I am not all that sure I could do it.)

This challenge faced each day by those servers is not unlike what any of us, including professional communicators, contend with each day of our lives. If you are a parent or in a relationship, for instance, the chances are great that you reiterate to that special someone your feelings for them. Ideally, you do it with enthusiasm and conviction. Hopefully, those on the receiving end of that "I love you" or other endearment find you convincing. This type of up-close public relations requires a great deal of repetition; yet each time you say it or, in the case of the server, the information from the menu, then it must be shared as if it for the first time. The lesson here is that one of the key ingredients in any successful public relations effort is the energy behind it   

Sunday, December 15, 2013

A New Role For Spokesmen

It is time for all who speak on behalf of others to rethink what they do. I am talking about press secretaries, spokesmen, talking heads and whatever other professionals who speak to reporters as representatives of others call themselves these days. Are they shills or are they proponents of public relations? Is their role to take on all comers who question, challenge or criticize the position of their clients or is to build bridges with members of the public, including those might be critical of what it is they are saying? How a spokesman answers that fundamental question determines how they carry out their role.

Based on what we see on television and read in the print media these days, it seems as if the overwhelming number of active spokesmen views themselves as little more than shills. I base this on the tone of their answers to inquires from reporters. These men and women seem no more interested in genuinely connecting with others than a cobra is in taking a mongoose out to lunch. Their comments/responses are far more riddled with zingers directed toward critics and so-called opponents than they are in extending olive branches or acknowledgements of common ground. The obvious result is greater division, increasing frustration on the part of the general public, and further degradation of the role of spokesmen.   

Those on the receiving end of reporters' questions and comments have such a great opportunity to elevate the level of public discourse to a much higher plain. Instead, more often than not, they choose the low-road. Other than perhaps getting a pat on the back from their client, little good comes from such a posture. Instead of doing themselves and those they represent any meaningful good, such persons do harm to all they profess to help. Even worse, it further disenfranchises the general public. When speaking with the press before a sizeable audience, spokesmen need to remember the purpose of public relations: establish and maintain ties. Hold-off on the put-downs or zingers, Instead, be respectful. Acknowledge the common denominators of all positions - and they are there - and then frame your answers as building blocks toward a greater good. Doing so does justice to the issue at-hand as well as to the role of spokesmen.

Thursday, December 12, 2013

Representing Others

It is not easy representing others. On the one hand, people elect or select you to represent their perspectives, views, etc. to other publics. At the same time, they also agree for you to be their representative because of your own wealth of knowledge, experience  and perspectives. With such criteria comes built-in conflict. For instance, what happens when the perspective of the representative conflicts with the wishes of those they represent? Such a scenario is not unheard of as often times. By the nature of their role, oft-times the representative is privy to information and insight those they represent may or do not have. Elected officials are a perfect example of this. Public relations practitioners have also been known to find themselves in such a precarious situation.

When this occurs, does the rep put aside his or her views and do what the majority of those they serve want? Or does the rep draw from information they have collected in their position and do what they view to be best? Such a choice is made more difficult as the rep, because of their more extensive knowledge on a subject, may literally know what is best. They are then faced with the dilemma that comes with either following or ignoring their conscience. Either way, someone is unhappy. Ether the rep makes themselves unhappy or upsets those they represent. It is a classic no-win situation and one, understandably, most of wish do our best to avoid.

The question becomes:  what can one do to minimize those times when they are in such a dicey situation? The answer begins with recognizing the obvious: such a dilemma is inevitable; perhaps not something that will occur with much frequency, but to pretend it won't occur at all is foolish. Secondly, representatives need to conduct themselves in as open and transparent manner as possible. When facing a tough call such as this, be open about it. Let everyone know. Generally, openness begets understanding, trust and support. People, generally, empathize with that kind of struggle even when they may disagree with the choice that is ultimately made. 

Tuesday, December 10, 2013

Game of Chance

Many years ago there was a comedy skit in which a rube approaches a card shark and innocently asks, "Is this a game  of chance?" As he plays with the cards, the man responds, "Not the way I play it." Moments later, the poor rube finds himself out of a lot of money. In a sad, dark way this funny scene points out the risks of chance, never mind dealing with folks who cheat. All of us, of course, take chances from time to time. Some, for instance, play the lottery in the hope they will become instant millionaires. Good luck to that. Sure, every so often some fortunate soul does find themselves with a winning ticket. The reality is most don't.

Particularly in its beginning years, public relations was very much a game of chance. Designed initially to generate publicity and attention, practitioners would do all they could to reach as many potential customers as they could without making any effort to target or focus their outreach efforts. They launched a shotgun approach in which, for example, they distributed as many fliers to as many people as possible. Their hope was that at least some of the folks receiving the fliers would respond. Not surprisingly, the great majority did not. It was primarily out of economic necessity that practitioners and marketers began devising strategies to target their potential customers. The result was public relations started to become less of a game of chance.

Today those who practice public outreach, including marketers, are much more precise in their efforts. Unnecessary chance is not for them. Thus, we have such things as focus groups, test or sample audiences, and private screenings. While outreach efforts may no longer be as broad or random as they once were, they are much more precise and cost effective. Given the billions of dollars of revenue the advertising industry generates each year, they are much more profitable, too. Money aside, the question now is while we are seeing more successful outreach campaigns, are we noticing any significant drop in rubes?

Thursday, December 5, 2013

Writers: Working Harder Than Ever

Under any circumstances, good writing is a challenge. This is true for folks who are judged to already be good at it as well as those striving to gain such a coveted label as "good writer." And then there are those such as journalists, public relations practitioners and even scholars who write professionally. None have it easy. This reality is even more true today because of our advances in technology and the evolving demands of those for who the professional writers write. Taken together, the profession and market are place are unrelenting in what they require of writers who seek to both inform and entertain. (Entertain, by the way, should not be considered a dirty word in the world of writing.)

Thanks to technology, professional writers are called upon to be a lot more proficient in a greater number of writing styles and formats than ever before. No longer, for example, is it enough for a public relations professional to be able to compose a solid press release. This same person now needs to be able to write engaging tweets, speeches and Facebook postings. Reporters, too, need to do more than simply pen proficient news copy. Now they need to be able to put together readable blogs and other social media announcements. Yes, at least theoretically, their work is getting greater exposure, but they are working harder than ever to get it, too.

As if the technological advances were not enough, the general public is more demanding than ever. Because men and women of all ages have more information at their disposal than ever, it is now more challenging to gain and keep their attention. Consequently, they can be a lot more choosey in what they wish to read. They want their articles to be informative, engaging, relevant and current. This requires writers to do a lot more than simply write well-structured, grammatically correct sentences. To hit all those buttons, a professional writer is required to be "on the clock" more than ever. Make no mistake. The life of a professional writer is more challenging than ever. Thank goodness for those who do it and who do it well.

Sunday, December 1, 2013

Two-Sided is Best

The other day I read an article offering tips on how one can be the better worker at their job. One suggestion in-particular jumped out at me as it had to do with the boss. It pertained to dealing with a boss who is not pleasant. Specifically, how can one be a good and productive employee if their boss is not someone easy to get along with? The suggested answer for workers revolved around looking for ways to like their boss. Workers, so said the article, should identify one aspect of their boss that is likeable or admirable and focus on that. By developing a "like" for their organizational superior, workers will be more apt to feel better about their job and, as a result, be more productive.

No question about it. There is a logic to this thinking. After all, ideally, who doesn't want to be more productive just to feel better about themselves? Of course, such a suggestion especially works especially well for the boss. This is the man or woman with all the power. This is the person with the biggest salary, most perks and ability to make the lives of their subordinates pleasant or not depending upon their own whims, vision or priorities. And now workers, in addition to trying to meet their responsibilities in the hope their job will remain secure, should add finding ways to actively like their boss to their to-do list?  

The problem with this tip, however, is that it is too one-sided. What about the actions of the boss? Should not they too be identifying some aspect of their workers they like or admire in order to have warmer and fuzzier feelings about those who report to them? Would not this help make those organizational superiors be more productive, too? For relationships, even professional ones, to be most healthy and beneficial to all parties, all participants must actively seek ways to bring out the best in the other. A relationship without a mutual commitment on the part of all parties is, at best, weak and on a path to be short-lived. Two-sided is best.  

Thursday, November 28, 2013

Over Communicating

Is it possible to over-communicate? Can one communicate too much? Those questions are inspired by a comment I heard the other day when one person accused another of "talking too much." That particular comment, which we have all certainly heard before, refers to when a person is felt to be disclosing too much information. Rather than simply answering a question with a brief, direct response, they include information deemed extraneous or not germane to what was actually asked or raised. At times, talking "too much" can result in negative consequences such as hurt feelings or breaking a previous confidence.  

But is "over communicating" the same as "talking too much?" I think not. Communicating is the act of establishing a mutual understanding with another and/or sharing information, feelings, perspectives, etc. with another. In this sense, is it possible for a person to "over-share" information as to how they feel about a particular experience, for example? Or what if two people are talking about the history of U.S. space exploration and one of them introduces an over-abundance of information on the topic? While such an act might be overwhelming, is it the same as when one goes even slightly off-topic? No.

While over-communicating might tend to be a tad off-putting, such an act is not negative in the sense it detracts from a mutual exchange. It actually adds to an interaction despite the fact one or more of the participating parties might tend to find the additional information more than they can or are willing to handle. On the other hand, "talking too much" tends to shift the interaction and remove it from its original purpose. While many of us may prefer our encounters with others to be short and to the point, if one begins to over communicating, then take comfort in knowing they actually adding to the exchange. On the other hand, be on guard if they start to "talk too much."

Monday, November 25, 2013

Being Boss

Being boss is not always what it is cracked up to be. Sure, there are perks that come with being in-charge. You get the big office and the big desk. Often times, you get the best parking place, too. On some level, people defer to you whenever you chime in with an opinion or observation as if everything you say is golden. And then there is the matter of getting the highest salary. Everybody likes that. No question about it, there are definitely good things that come with being placed in a position where you oversee others. Being supervisor, however, does have its set of challenges that are unique to this key role.

Being boss means you more than any one has to be an effective communicator. It is your vision, ideas, etc. that drive those that report to you. It is your set of priorities that directly and indirectly determine the course the day for your subordinates. This is no small thing because it means, as boss, you have to be good in both how you formulate your vision, priorities, etc. but in how you articulate them to those that follow you. Failure to properly communicate your goals for the organization can have a seriously negative impact on the company/organization for which each of you work. It, of course, it can also jeopardize everyone's future employment status, including yours.

Another downside to being boss is that it means you work in a fishbowl. Make no mistake, people was watching you constantly. What are you doing? Who are talking with? What meetings are you attending? Are you in a good mood? Even though you may close the door to your big office, as the one high up the office food chain than anyone else, you give up all claims to office privacy or anonymity.  This means even how and what you communicate non-verbally must be taken seriously. While everyone may report to you, it is you, as boss, that operates under the watchful eyes of others. This means you must take all acts of communication ever so seriously.  All the time.

Thursday, November 21, 2013

Bull in a China Shop

One of the most self-explanatory expressions in the English language is the title of this entry. Someone uses "bull in a China shop" and we immediately envision a person out of control causing a great deal of havoc that includes breaking things. Taking that one step further, it also conjures up relief that we are not the ones saddled with the task of trying to reign in that bull. Any time a person is out of control, you can bet those around him or her have their hands full. Thus. these days I am feeling very sympathetic toward the persons working for the office of the mayor in the city of Toronto. Their boss, Mayor Rob Ford, is acting like a bull big-time.

Mayor Ford has confessed to using illegal drugs. Further, his behavior with reporters and in city council meetings - all documented in painfully graphic detail - has been nothing less than bizarre. Hearing of anyone self destruct is sad enough, but to see it played out nearly every night on the national news is nothing less than painful. In terms of communication, when one has a boss who is as out of control as  Mayor Ford, what do they do? What can they do? What are the challenges that office's communication officer faces in striving to contend with the unusual antics of the city's top official?

My advice - if any one is interested - is that the communication needs to let the mayor go. Ford's behavior is so far beyond the pale that nothing can be done to "spin" it. At the same time, the communication office can and should focus on the business of the city council in terms of steps they are taking to contend with the Mayor as well as carry on with important city business. Doing this will help reassure city residents that Toronto will continue to maintain its reputation as a solid and major city. Further, the communication needs to work closely with the media even though they may seem a real bother at such a difficult time. Clamping down on a culture of openness and press access wold only make the situation worse.

Sunday, November 17, 2013

Two Paths

The year was 1920 when arguably Robert Frost's most famous poem, "The Road Not Taken," was published. It depicts the journey of a traveler who comes to two paths, one well-worn and the other hardly tread upon. The traveler decides to take the one "less traveled by." This decision, the reader is told, has "made all the difference" though, interestingly, we are not told whether the decision to go where few had gone before turned out to be good or bad. That conclusion is left to us by Frost. For myself, I choose to believe the traveler's choice was led to positive results.

Finding ourselves near the middle of the middle of the second decade of the 21st century, I find mankind standing in front of a similar juncture when it comes to communication. One path before us is well-traveled. It is lined with press releases, talking points, strategies of persuasion and media kits. The other is characterized by attempted partnerships, social media, and outreach initiatives. The more traveled path has been deemed to be more in-sync with mankind's goals, wishes and ambitions. The other, thus far, has been used only periodically when judged to be of use. Neither is good nor bad. Both have contributed to the current state of communication between individuals and publics; one more so than the other.

The question then becomes: is this current state acceptable? Does it best fit the needs of our society and world? My growing sense is it does not. Communicators, including public relations practitioners, need to begin looking at that path less traveled like never before. It is earmarked with attempts at mutual adjustment, collaboration and sustained partnerships. In a world ever-shrinking due to technological advances, threatened by environmental changes, and stymied by rising conflicts over control and agenda-setting, perhaps it is the path best-suited for our present and future. Possibly the one "less traveled by" needs to become the path of choice.

Friday, November 15, 2013

Timing

Is there a definitive answer to what all of us refer to as "good timing?" I think not. I have known incidents when the timing of something has been awful, yet everything worked out. A simple example would be a graduate class I once took because it was a requirement. The timing of it was not good as I had other plans that were making my schedule busier than I really wanted it to be. Still, I took the class. It all worked out all right, though not without a lot of effort, as I passed it, earned three credit hours more toward graduating, and still was able to take care of the other things to which I had already obligated myself. Bad timing. Positive results.

As I write this, it is mid-November. Already I have been hearing Christmas music being played in various stores as well as seen a number of holiday decorations at various establishments as well as outside a few homes in the neighborhood. Is this good timing? Will these various overtures increase sales and put more cheer into the hearts of people? Or will people continue going about their normal routines without any noticeable change in their buying habits or moods? If that is the case, then perhaps the timing of this current holiday celebrating might not be all that effective. Again, who's to say?

One of the key ingredients into effective communication is timing. A communicator can create a catchy message and unveil it in a powerful way, but if the intended audience or public is not either ready for it or is focusing on something else, then the potential impact of that message is compromised. There is no specific formula for when communication overtures should be timed. Decisions as to when to either launch something or reach out to another is the result of trial and error and instinctual. One collects their data on timing based largely on  missteps and false starts. That may not seem as definitive as we might like, but it is better than making a wild guess.

Sunday, November 10, 2013

The Printing Press Redux

As a card-carrying member of the human race, I can attest to the fact through the years of our existence we have done some pretty bonehead things. At the same time, there are those among us who through their intellect, determination and genius who have brought us great pride, too. In the November, 2013, issue of The Atlantic, 50 examples of such instances were identified. Specifically, the magazine brought together a panel of scientists, entrepreneurs, engineers and technology experts to produce a list of the what they call the "greatest breakthroughs" since the wheel. If nothing else, what these men and women produced demonstrated that despite our limitations and imperfections, at times we humans are capable of being pretty wonderful,   

The list consisted of a wide range of game-changing innovations that ranged from the assembly line, air conditioning and nuclear fission to refrigeration, anesthesia and electricity. Who could or would dare argue against any of those? Of the 50 top innovations, it is interesting that six pertain directly to communication. They are: the telephone, radio, television, the Internet, the telegraph and the printing press. The printing press, introduced in the 1430s and which one of the panelists described as the turning point at which "knowledge began freely replicating and quickly assumed a life of its own," was named the number one innovation.

As I wrote several months ago in an earlier blog entry, the printing press was the great leveler. Prior to its invention, information is not something many people had access to. In fact, in addition to degree of wealth and power, access to information was one thing that largely separated the haves from the have-nots. Whether the information pertained to matters of religion, the arts or political science, not only did a relatively select few have entre to information on these and other fields, but they used their access to wield power and influence over the general population. The printing press shattered that barrier quickly and forever. Information, the printing press seem to shout, belongs to everyone.

Friday, November 8, 2013

A Complete Package

Most every semester I ask students to tell me who they believe to be the best communicator. Thus far at least, their responses have mainly been either famous people such as politicians and celebrities. Every so often a student will mention a parent or close relative. All answers, by the way, are fine.  We all have special people in our lives who strike a chord within us no matter whether it is someone who know or know of. Once the students give their answer, my follow-up question is, from their perspective, what makes that person such a good communicator? Generally, they refer to the person's ability to give a good speech or speak well.

Make no mistake, those are no small talents to have. For myself, I would love to be more articulate than I am and to be able to give a speech that many find motivational and inspiring. But even if I could, would that be enough to make me a good communicator? Perhaps. But what about that other, vital part of the communication process that is just as important as the act of sending a message effectively? I speak of listening, the ability to receive a message in a manner that allows one to hear, understand, and empathize with the sender? Doing this and doing it well is no small talent either. I long for the day when, in answer to my questions, a student mentions someone and then alludes to that person's ability to listen as one of the reasons.

Being a good speaker or sender and equally good receiver or listener represents the complete package of communication. Only by having both skills and actively practicing them can or even should one be given the descriptor: "good communicator." As we assess those in our lives who we deem competent in that area, it is important that we not overlook both skills: sending and receiving. Presently, there seems to be a tendency in our culture to overlook the receiving or listening part of the communication equation. This is unfortunate. Society functions better when people talk with rather than at each other. It is time we begin to recognize the total package of communication.

Tuesday, November 5, 2013

Tourist

Traveling can be fun. Without a doubt, going to a new place, seeing new sights, and interracting with folks from other parts of the world is quite exhilerating. At the same time, traveling, for most, can also be challenging and, in many ways, stressful. Because of the newness of surroundings and a culture different from one many travelers are used to, one's ability to communicate is put to a test in a way few other scenarios do. For instance, assuming for a moment the language is the same, there remains the matter of adapting to how and even when people do things. Generally, what time is dinner? With it, is there a dress code?

When it comes to traveling, the need to communicate is heightened. Perhaps one reason for this is the fact in unfamiliar territory we are a tad more vulnerable. We know less than the folks around us. This is not unlike being the newest member of an office or organization. The lack of knowledge puts us on the defensive, making us more dependent on those around us. We are needy. Consequently, it is in our interest to be more collegial, friendly and cooperative. After all, if we are going to successfully fit in and perhaps gain a sense of independence in a new environment, then it is in our interest to be as  open as we can to what others say and how things are done.

One aspect of communication that being a tourist taps into is listening. When on familiar turf, either physically or in terms of subject-matter, we are more apt to participate in conversation, offer up our own opinions, and even initiate interactions with others. At such times, our sense of security tends to make us more of a sender of a message rather than a receiver. Being the "new kid" tends to reverse such behavior. Despite the stressm, this is a healthy communication challenge. Stepping into a new envirornment as a tourist, among other things, requires us to spread our communication wings. The benefit of such an experience is that we walk away with new memories and ehanced communication skills.

Thursday, October 31, 2013

Lawrence G. Foster

I confess the name Lawrence G. Foster is not one with which I have been familiar. But while I did not know his name, I knew of his actions because what he engineered has made a big impact in classes I and many others have taught for years. It was September, 1982, when police conneted a string of mysterious deaths in and around Chicago to cyanide-laced capsules of Extra Strength Tylenol at various outlets. This news triggerd panic among the general public and, not surprisingly, threatened the very existence of the Tylenol brand. Executives at Johnson & Johnson, Tylenol's home office, were deeply concerned as they recognized the negative consequences of this tragedy could put the company out of business.

Foster, Johnson & Johnson's top public relations officer, was assigned the daunting task of putting together a company response and overall strategy to win back and hearts and minds of the general public. Foster started with the premise that it is the safety and well being of the public that is most important. Profit, he believed, runs a distant second. At Foster's direction, the company suspended all advertising for Tylenol and issued a national recall of Extra Strength capsules (more than 30 million bottles). This unprecidented strategy cost the company an estimated $100 million - a lot of money by any standards.

Foster's plan was incredibly successful. Over the following 12 months, Tylenol introduced tamper-free bottles. Its share of the analgesic market, which had dropped to seven percent as a result of the incident, increased by 30 percent. Foster and Johnson & Johnson were showered with accolades. To this day, how Johnson & Johnson handled this major crisis is used as an important case study in many communication classes throughout the country. I recognize Mr. Foster with this entry as earlier this week he passed away at the age 88. In the world of crisis communication, Foster's legacy is one of openness and honesty. He will remain an inspiration.

Monday, October 28, 2013

Dare to be Wise!

It was almost 240 years ago when the philosopher Immanuel Kant took a stab at defining "enlightenment." Actually, he did more than that. Kant hit a bulls eye as what he articulated in the September, 1784, edition of Berlin Monthly continues to resonate among scholars when they discuss the term with classes and colleagues and ponder the challenges of achieving that state themselves. In a nutshell, Kant described enlightenment as "man's emergence from self-imposed nonage." As defined by Kant, the word "nonage" refers to using one's understanding without another's guidance.

Kant urged people to think for themselves. More to the point, he challenged men and women to "dare to be wise!" It is interesting that as put forth by Kant, he did not mean people should always be correct in their assessments, conclusions or judgments. Rather, to be wise,  he said, was to take what knowledge they have gained and even add input from others, and then make their own determinations. Wisdom comes from demonstrating conviction and even originality of thought. It is no act of wisdom to simply echo another's ideas or thoughts. That can be done by anyone. Sadly, in our current times, we see such unwise acts performed on a regular basis. Perhaps we ourselves are even guilty of that.

How does this relate to communication? Are professional communicators helping or blocking folks from exhibiting wisdom? At best, the answer to this is mixed. Public relations practitioners, for instance, take great pains in devising memorable talking points and in framing discussions in ways that others can both easily understand and repeat. Repetition seems to be their objective rather than instilling wisdom within their targeted publics. On the other hand, journalists are defined by how well they share unbiased information without the fingerprints of others telling them what to say or write. Thus, members of the press seem to be more on the side of spreading wisdom than those who communicate on behalf of others.

Friday, October 25, 2013

Striking a Better Balance

"Never before have so many sought out information yet but been so misinformed." This intriguing and provocative comment was made recently by veteran television correspondent Chuck Todd of NBC at a lecture he gave at George Mason University in Northern Virginia. His audience was comprised primarily of communication students interested in pursuing a career in public relations. Todd's observation has given much food for thought. My first response is: Is this true? Do I agree with his observation? If it is, then how has it come to be and who or what is most responsible for such an unhealthy and unwanted reality?

In terms of the veracity of this remark, while I am not aware of any scientific data to support such a claim, I tend to believe what Todd said to be the case. There are several reasons for this: (1) the steady decline of newspapers; (2) the shrinking news holes in those newspapers that remain; (3) cut backs on news departments in the print and electronic media; (4) rise of social media and the ability of individuals to blast out over the Internet anything they wish without regard for verification or context; (5) the 24-hour cable news networks; and (6) rise of public relations practitioners hired to promote specific, one-sided perspectives on various issues.

This list of trends in the news world is not good for any of us. The result seems to be a society in which citizens have opinions that are stronger-than-ever, yet are less fact-based. As a student, practitioner and teacher of public relations, I am currently struggling with ideas as to what scholars and professionals in this important field do to help reverse such a negative trend? I confess to not having a ready-made answer. While one obvious solution is those in public relations should continue to be credible, ethical and transparent in all they do. The more truth-tellers are engaged in the public forum, the better. Communicators at all levels need to do a better job of balancing the needs of those they represent with what is good for society.         

Monday, October 21, 2013

"The Five Es"

I think we all agree that communication is important. After all, if it is not, then how come everyone tries to do it well every day of  their lives? We may not say so out loud, but we all recognize how vital being able to communicate effectively is to the betterment of our lives. While we want to understand where others are coming from on things, we certainly them want the same in return from family, friends, co-workers, etc. In terms of helping make such mutual understanding happen, communication has a bottom-line role that I call "the five Es." They are: engagement, exchange, enlightenment, experience and esteem.

Following is a brief summation of each aspect of the role of communication: engagement refers to helping bring about meaningful interaction between individuals and/or entities; exchange speaks to the quality of message-sharing; enlightenment addresses how well messages are understand; experience pertains to how well those who are interacting feel about their connection with another; and esteem is about the degree to which people who are interacting feel good about themselves and the effort they made to make an interaction meaningful. Collectively, these five points take communication beyond the mere act of being heard.

Being heard or acknowledged by others is very easy to do. Any one of us can go up to another person and begin to talk. Such an act, no matter how rude or inappropriate, definitely gains that other person's attention. It does not constitute a meaningful encounter or act of interaction, however. Granted, not everything any one communicates is golden or is going to generate much interest from others. But having said that, trying to address "the five Es," will improve one's chances of having and, yes, enjoying meaningful interactions with others. The more encounters of this nature one can have, then the better communicator they are.  

Friday, October 18, 2013

Group Distruptors

What do whiners, martyrs, saboteurs, bullies and deadbeats have in common? They, according to researchers David Jalajas and Robert Sutton, are people who, through their own behavior and attitude, contribute to disrupting any attempts by groups to succeed in achieving their goals. Even though Jalajas and Sutton introduced these classifications of what I call "group disruptors" in 1984 in an article in Journal of Management Education, in many ways their observations remain viable today. In blunt terms, we still have groups today and often the efforts of many of them are compromised by those interested only in their own agendas.

As described by Jalajas and Sutton, whiners feel most everything the group does is very inconvenient; martyrs are certain they are being given the worst assignments; saboteurs often get in the way of progress by initiating on their own what they believe are better solutions; bullies are not shy about telling everyone else how things should be done; and deadbeats simply do not do their fair share of the work. Depending upon the extent of their negative behavior, any one or several of these individuals can totally compromise the work of groups to carry out certain tasks, including advancing the progress of their organization.

The question then becomes: what does one do about these disruptors? Jalajas and Sutton offer up three solutions: group members should make sure everyone knows what they are responsible for; members should speak up if they feel choices made by other members are not workable; and members should focus on treating their partners with respect and openness. While modest conflict within groups is not uncommon and, at times, even healthy as it can stimulate good discussion, following the Jalajas-Sutton solutions groups improve their chances of successfully meeting their goals.  

Tuesday, October 15, 2013

Sweet Tooth

While watching television the other night I decided to chow down on some cookies. Even though I knew and know they are not the most healthy eats in the world, it is what I wanted. The taste was gratifying and they even made the program I had tuned into more enjoyable.  Such a choice is one I suspect many make each day. People want what they want simply because it makes them feel better. On the surface, there is nothing wrong with that. After all, who among us does not want to make our lives a bit better even if that improvement comes in the form of satisfying our sweet tooth for a few minutes?

The problem, of course, comes when we spend too much time devoting our energies to what we want and not enough to what we need. If, for instance, I ate nothing but cookies and did not balance them with vegetables, then health-wise I would soon not be in very good shape. We as a society seem to be suffering from a similar imbalance when it comes to information. This was articulated in the form of what is called the uses and gratification theory of mass communication. With the explosion of communication channels and outlets, like never before members of the public have the opportunity to select their own sources of information.    

No better example of this is found in various cable programs with defined political leanings. Viewers who are conservative tend to gravitate toward one outlet while those with more liberal leanings go elsewhere for their information. Both are seeking gratification because what they tune into tend to reinforce their preconceptions. You might say those biased media outlets satisfy the intellectual sweet tooth of their viewers. This, it should be noted, does not automatically mean the viewers are gaining enlightenment. Rather, it just means they are receiving gratification - just as I did with those cookies. Perhaps one challenge those in the communication industry face these days is to continue to be dedicated to giving their publics greater and healthier balance.

Saturday, October 12, 2013

Making a Comeback

In an effort to better understand and explain the workings of communication and the media, over 80 years ago media scholars introduced what they labeled the magic bullet theory. This theory of mass communication introduced the notion that mass media wields great influence over its audiences. According to the theory, if an entity sends out the right kind of a message, then it will in all likelihood influence the masses who are exposed to it. An example of the magic bullet in-action the scholars at the time pointed to was the great success of the Nazi party regarding their use of radio to generate greater support among the people.

It did not take long, however, before scholars began rethinking this thoery. Their conclusion was that theory was wrong. It, researchers suggested, supposed that people were unable ot resist appeals of high quality, thus making them weak-willed. As a result, the magic bullet theory was replaced by other theories that introduced different perspectives on the workings of mass communication. One of these latter theories, the agenda-setting hypothesis, suggests that the magic bullet theory either may not have been that far off-base or is now making a comeback. This theory, introduced in 1960s, puts forth the notion that the mass media tells people not what to think but what to think about.

Puitting the two theories side-by-side, both depict the mass media as being a very powerful and, yes, influential entity that does hold sway over all of us who depend upon it for information, news, and even guidance. In essence, we place great trust in the media even taking into account certain aspects of the media that may be biased or not of high quality. Does this, then, still present us as being weak-willed when it comes to allowing ourselves to be influenced by the media? If so, has there been a time when we the masses have been not been manipulated by the media? Perhaps we ought to rethink our relationship with the media.

Tuesday, October 8, 2013

Dealing With Traffic

I am certain no matter where one lives, they feel compelled to identify and talk about one or two characteristics of their area that are unique. By saying, "My town is special because....." perhaps it is an indirect way of suggesting that, they, too are special as well. I am no different. As a resident of Northern Virginia, one of the characteristics of our region is the heavy traffic. While other part of the United States and the world, too, have traffic challenges, few, if any, can match ours. A normal rush hour on the beltway that circles Washington, D.C. is one of those things that need to be experienced - at least once - to be appreciated. Warning: this will not be a fun experience.

Unfortunately, as it is in any part of the world with cars and drivers, traffic accidents do occur.The result is usually some type of back-up. When this happens on our beltway, the ramifications are quick and mostly wide spread. Thousands of commuters are affected in big wand small ways. Of course, the worse the accident the more likely it is more people will be inconvienced. Traffic delays can set drivers back literally hours. As frustrating and, at times, tragic as this can be, however, there is a silver lining worth noting. It speaks to the importance of communication and being prepared for times when things do not go well.

In our region a mechanism is in place to contend with accidents that occur on the beltway. A team of traffic workers and road units, including police, converge on the scene of the traffic. In a short period of time, they deal with the drivers invovled, make sure anyone injured is taken to the nearest hospital, clear the damaged cars, and redirect traffic. They are a well-coordinated team, thus representing communication at its best. Each member of the team knows their part in the overall process and carries out their duties with the understanding they are meeting their responsibilities while also serving the greater good that is their unit and the many drivers depending upon them.  

Friday, October 4, 2013

Maintaining Continuity, Creating Change

Let me begin this entry by acknowledging right upfront that some of my best friends are people. In fact, I was even raised by people. I lived among them, learned many of their habits , such as how they dress, foods they prefer, and a number of their recreational activities, and have become so immersed in their culture that often times I am able to easily blend in with them without any fear of being singled out as being different. Perhaps one day I will do some kind of super study on all that I have learned and observed. Until that time, I am glad I made the choice to align myself with people as opposed to, say, moray eels or cockatoos.

One observation of mine is that people like continuity. They gravitate toward routine even though the specifics of everyone's routine is not always the same. For instance, they have their favorite restaurants, television shows and even pattern of getting dressed each day. Those constants, small in the grand scheme of things, often help make the difference between whether a person feels their day has gone well. It is such consistency that provides people with a sense of security and safety. At the same time, these same creatures recognize and accept the inevitability of change and variations of routines they have established for themselves.

One of the groups within the human species - public relations practitioners - have the daunting challenge of helping fellow humans maintain continuity but often doing so in ways that reflect change. People want consistency, yet do not always want it delivered in a constant manner. An example is the consistency of making money. One group of humans - business people - embrace the regularity of profit, yet often want this result to be carried out in ways that vary from effort to effort. It is the public relations practitioner or communicator that plays a leading role in giving them the continuity they crave via changes they want.

Monday, September 30, 2013

Choosing Not to Communicate

I always find it frustrating when two people I view to be at least fairly reasonable fail to communicate. I understand everyone has their own perspective and preference to the point they may not totally agree with where another is coming from on a given issue. Yet when a point of contention arises, literally not being able to find common ground - no matter the passion one carries with them - and, thus, some sort of agreement never ceases to surprise. Perhaps this is me simply being naïve. But the reality of reasonable people not finding that common ground - no matter how small - remains difficult to grasp. I find the concept of "agreeing to disagree" not so much a foregone conclusion but more of an example of two people giving up.

What is triggering this current state of perplexity of mine is the shutdown of the federal government now underway. The primary point of contention revolves around funding the United States federal government so that it may continue to operate. The specific point of contention is the Affordable Care Act, adopted in 2009. (As of October 1, citizens are not free to begin signing up for it.) The divide is largely political and is taking place in the halls of Congress. A vote to keep the government open represents a vote to assure the continuance of the Affordable Care Act. Republicans wish to defund the act and Democrats wish the opposite. As a result of this sharp disagreement, the federal government is currently shut down.

Is what is going on - or not going on - in Congress a failure to communicate or a choice on the part of members of Congress not to communicate? My sense is these so-called reasonable people - our elected officials - are being driven more by principle than they are a desire to identify enough elements on which they agree. Until they reverse their priorities, this roadblock they have created will continue. Thus, what we are seeing is not so much a lack of communication as a choice on the part of the people involved not to agree. This is what happens when reasonable people choose to be unreasonable.

Friday, September 27, 2013

Lawyer or Advocate?

The other day I came across an interesting question regarding the role of a public relations professional. In regard to their client, is this person more of a lawyer or an advocate? It is their job to be similar to that of a lawyer by challenging the person who pays their salary, asking them hard questions, telling them difficult truths and keeping that person and/or their company on a path that is legal, ethical and transparent? Or it is their job to be more of an advocate or cheerleader in which they devote their communication skills to promoting their boss and company in ways that are positive?

My immediate response to this is "both." The public relations can and should fill both of these roles on behalf of their employer. If they are doing their job properly, then both roles should be part of the public relations officer's normal duties. Yes, they need to come up with strategies that best showcase their client. At the same time, when navigating the media terrain in which one must travel if they are to generate greater visibility, then the professional communicator must ensure their client is not or does not behave in a manner that counteracts any steps toward positive exposure. For the public relations worker, this means closely monitoring the actions and communiques of their client.

From the perspective of the client, it means having full trust in their top communication officer. Trust, of course, is not always to attain or give. This is not because one person does not trust another to be honest and truthful. Rather, it involves trusting the judgment of that other person as well as having confidence the communicator has the best interest of the client in mind. This sort of thing takes time as it involves the essence of what makes a relationship between any two individuals succeed. Having these fundamental elements in-place, of course, does not there will not rocky moments between the two. But, then, have there ever been successful partners that do not have times when they disagree?

Tuesday, September 24, 2013

Going Too Far

I have been teaching one form of public relations or another for slightly less than half of my over 40 years in communication. One class I have taught more than any other pertains to the principles of public relations and how it needs to be depicted and ultimately practiced as a values-driven endeavor. In other words, those that "do" public relations for a living should behave ethically and always take the high road in terms of being fair, honest, open and loyal. The textbook I have used is one quite popular in our communication department at George Mason University: . "Public Relations: A Values-Driven Approach" by two respected scholars, David Guth and Charles Marsh, both on the faculty at University of Kansas.

Recently, Prof. Guth got himself into hot water over a controversial tweet he posted. The tweet pertained to another multiple shooting in the United States. In this case, 13 individuals died at the hands of a shooter at the United States Naval Shipyard in Washington, D.C. Guth, like many throughout the country, was outraged at the incident and, in his case, directed his frustration at the National Rifle Association. In his tweet, he said the NRA has "blood on its hands" and that next time let the victims be "your sons and daughters." As a result, University of Kansas officials have placed Guth on administrative leave.

No doubt the university justifies its action on the fact it does not want any of its employees publically wishing ill - or more specifically death - on others regardless of the circumstances. There was nothing wrong with Guth's action of commenting on this most tragic incident. In a free society, he and any of us are within our rights to do so. However, he obviously went too far. What Guth did and the repercussions that followed serve as a reminder that even freedom has certain parameters. The idea of certain action and the actual taking of an action are not one-in-the-same. I support the university's decision, yet hope it allows Prof. Guth to come back out of the penalty box soon.

Sunday, September 22, 2013

Staring into a Mirror


All of us every day spend time staring into a mirror. Sometimes we do it to look at our face . Other times we do it while taking some type of action such as brushing our teeth, flossing, combing our hair, shaving, or putting on make-up. Each of those acts take only a few moments, but during the course of a typical week, I bet all those moments add up to a significant amount of time. In fact, I would go as far to say I bet if one were to share with us the amount of time we do spend looking at ourselves, we would find the total figure to be embarrassing. My unscientific conclusion is that we  humans are a lot of things and vain is one of them.

That vanity, I believe, tends to get in the way of our being better communicators. Staring at ourselves in our own mirror has become such a regular part of our lives that often we do not even think to take the time to gaze at someone else's reflection. This is unfortunate. My sense is if we did make the effort, we would see a face with many of the same characteristics that we have: some nice features, a few flaws, signs of attempted individuality, and indications of conformity as well. We would see areas that need improvement and others that are fine the way they are.  We would see a face both unique and commonplace.

Also, we would see a face which exhibits much feeling when circumstances arise or change. Such a feature, no doubt, would remind us of our own reflection during the course of our own day. From a communication standpoint, what may seem so obvious is actually quite profound. Our faces are much more similar than not. So, too, are we. From that perspective, perhaps communicating does not always have to be as much of a challenge as it sometimes is or feels. The face in the mirror that is our own is just as easily someone else's. Given that we all know how easy it is to communicate with ourselves, then maybe connecting with another is not necessarily that difficult either.

Friday, September 20, 2013

Golden Mean

Practicing public relations is not all black and white. As it involves the intimate act of communicating, more often than not there is much grayness to it. Such a reality was first acknowledged approximately 2500 years ago by the Greek philosopher Aristotle. In wrestling with the ethics of communication, Aristotle attempted to reconcile what scholars David Guth and Charles Marsh called the "extremes of excess and deficiency." Out of his contemplation, Aristotle came upon a point in communication he labeled the "golden mean." Basically, it represents a balance between those two extremes.

Specifically, Aristotle raised the question of whether it is ever right or acceptable to lie. Should one always tell the truth no matter the consequences? On the other hand, is it acceptable for people to take liberties with the truth to fit their circumstances? A classic example revolves protecting another person's life. Is it ok for someone to tell a lie if it means saving another's life, particularly if that other person is not involved in any wrong doing? If one believes it is, then that immediately raises that larger question: under what circumstances is it acceptable to lie? Does this apply, for instance, only those times when a person's life is at stake?

Should public relations practitioners be absolutists when it comes to truth telling? If not, then how can this be reconciled with a commitment they have to being credible and tellers of truth? Under what circumstances is it acceptable for them to lie? And what about those who are not professional communicators, is it all right for them to turn away from the truth? If so, then under what circumstances? Finding the "golden mean" for any of us, professional and non-professional communicators, is not easy. What complicates this issue even more is the fact there is no universal understanding of when lies are acceptable.

Monday, September 16, 2013

Satisying the Reader

A good part of any public relations practitioner's day involves writing.  Whether it is putting together a press release, composing a speech, writing ad copy, creating the text for a brochure or the many other communiques with which a professional communicator is involved, much of their average day revolves around the act of sitting in front of the blank screen of a computer and deciding upon the best combination of words to meet the immediate goals of their words and those of the vehicle for which they are intended. As any one who does this can testify, such an act if never not a challenge. Without question, being able to write well is an important for any communicator to have.
But what about the person for whom the written word is intended? Who are they? What kind of person are they? What kind of person takes time from their day to read? To begin, I view readers as risk takers. They know going into an article, a book of even an email, for instance, there is a chance they may not either like what they are about to read or understand it. Thus, they risk frustration or having to take additional time to re-read the piece. For many, this extra time may not always be a commodity they can readily spare. There is a chance, then, their decision to read something may not be a good choice.

Still, readers are curious, seekers of information, open to the written word as a source of entertainment, and in constant search of expanding their base of knowledge. These are good qualities, of course. Given them, this puts a special brand of pressure on the writer to do all they can to address those internal forces that drive readers. Sure, the writer needs to satisfy the person for whom they are writing a particular communique. This bond is overt. But the one the writer has with the reader is just as important even though it may be less out-front. Readers are a demanding lot. They expect much of writers and rightfully so.  

Friday, September 13, 2013

What About Me?

Perhaps one of the frustrating aspects of being a professional communicator is that one has very little "me time." Everything is always about someone else. First, there is the client. What is their message? What is their goal? How much of their money are they willing to spend on an outreach effort? Are they pleased with the advertising copy? Does the speech hit all the points they want to emphasize? Are they comfortable with the quotes that have been prepared for them? Do they want to speak to the press at all? Those are just a few of a litany of questions that revolve the needs and wishes of one person or a singular organization.

There is, then, the matter of the publics the professional communicator seeks to connect with on behalf of their client or that which they represent. What are their interests? What are their primary sources of information? Do they have any opinions or history with the client or organization previous to this new announcement? If so, was it an experience that was positive to them? What is the level of education, age range and other demographic pieces of information regarding the various publics? As it the case with the client, publics, too, have their own set of questions revolving around their likes and dislikes, interests, concerns, needs and hopes.

At some point in this dynamic, particularly if it is one that repeats itself as the pubic relations practitioner moves from client to client, the communicator has got to wonder, "What about me? Does anyone care what I like or think? When is someone going to try and please me?" Indeed. All the questions listed above represent the lot of that professional. The communicator is the dot-connector, the one to whom people turn to meet their communication needs. In such a scenario, there is no or very little time to ask the communicator about them. Their career is about others. It is not about them, at least not much any one wants to ask about.  

Tuesday, September 10, 2013

The Challenge of Truth

The truth is not always an easy "sell." When one puts forth untarnished facts, then a common result is that sincere and respectful conversation follows. While agreement may not be reached, mutual respect is established and people of honor behave accordingly. As a result, those involved in the discussion are the better for it and so, too, is the topic itself. People of honor recognize facts as undeniable reality that cannot be disputed. However, what can and often is debated is how it is perceived or interpreted. This, then, is what I mean by labeling "truth" a hard sell. While the facts may enjoy universal agreement, how they are interpreted often does not.   

 As I write this, a debate over whether the United States should initiate a limited military strike against Syria for using chemical weapons against its people is dominating the news. This is a most-serious topic worthy of discussion. President Obama is to be applauded for putting the question before Congress and the American public. What we are currently witnessing is the kind of national, roundtable conversation that showcases what is best about our nation. People are engaged over facts: Syrian citizens, including children, were gassed. Thus, we have seen very few examples of disrespect from persons on all sides of the issue.

From a communication standpoint, this debate over Syria showcases an interesting challenge that public relations practitioners often face. Much of what professional communicators strive to do is persuade various publics to take certain action or support particular causes or positions. They try to achieve those goals by putting forth the truth. But what happens when the truth is not enough? What happens when people are presented with unshakable reality and they still are not persuaded? The answer to those questions is often what distinguishes reputable communicators from those who are not. The good ones remain loyal to the truth while the others do not.   



    

Friday, September 6, 2013

"...temporary about myself"

If not the greatest, then definitely one of the greatest plays was "Death of a Salesman." Written by Arthur Miller, it depicts the sad decline of Willy Loman amidst drama surrounding his wife and sons. In it, Loman talks about feeling "kind of temporary about myself." This is a powerful self- description of an individual  - once powerful and vibrant - who recognizes his vulnerabilities and weaknesses are beginning to overwhelm him to the point he no longer has the ability to turn them back or, at least, hold them at bay. His anguish goes beyond recognizing his own mortality. Rather, he is becoming increasingly aware that when he passes he will leave worse than when he began.

Loman's cries are those of a professional who is burnt  out; an individual who no longer feels joy in what he does and sees no hope in regaining it. He is spent. I mention this because such feelings, even to the extreme of Loman's emotional state, happen to real people in the real world, too. Those working in communication are not immune from it. In that profession, there are most definitely elements that can and do contribute to one losing their zest for devising strategies to promote something, helping others articulate their thoughts and messages, and even providing information to those in need of help and guidance.

Striving to be a successful communicator can be a frustrating experience. In any communication effort, there are a ton of variables that can and do get in the way of doing well. The result, missing the mark is a regular part of life as a professional communicator. After awhile, this can wear one down, especially if they have supervisors who do not full understand or appreciate the effort that goes into the implementation of a multi-faceted outreach effort. For communicators, then, the joy must come from the thrill of their chase and those who respect what the communicator strives to do. Otherwise, lacking energy to do one's job to the fullest or derive any satisfaction in the process is not a good place to be.

Wednesday, September 4, 2013

What to Do?

As a species, humans have made an incredible amount of progress. Look at where we were, say, a hundred years ago compared to where we are today. We live longer, healthier lives. Food is more accessible. Shelter is more attainable. In fact, one would be hard pressed to select any field or aspect of life and not see a level of improvement. Good for us. However, as we know, this is not to say life is now rosier for everyone. There are those, even in our country, who have not seen or enjoyed that level of advancement in the same way many others have. Sadly, for many of those viewed as being poor and/or to be living in poverty, it is not their fault.

This, of course, is not new information. We are familiar with the cliché designation of "haves" and "have-nots." Further, any one even halfway following the news over the past 30 years knows the gap between the two has been steadily increasing. Such a trend is not good for a nation such as ours whose economic foundation is built on a strong and vibrant middle class. The smaller that class becomes the weaker the nation's economic foundation. Again, this is not new information. Looking at this unfortunate reality, I look at the field of communication and its ever-growing number of practitioners, scholars and students, and raise the question of the role they can and should be playing in helping reverse this trend.

I confess to not knowing the answer, at least in terms of being able to propose a series of tangible recommendations. At the same time, because virtually all of those who represents the "haves" and those looking to become part of that group utilize and/or depend upon those who organize, author and help distribute information - communicators - then a given connection already exists that can be exploited in a way that helps better educate everyone about this damaging trend and then sets in motion conversations as to what to do about it. It seems there is a key role professional communicators can and should play here.

Friday, August 30, 2013

Public Speaking

There are few things that make many of us more weak in the knees than the prospect of standing in front of a room full of people and speaking. Most of us do not like it, do all we can to avoid it, and would rather face a firing squad than have to do it. Why is this? What is the big deal? Truth be told, public speaking is a big deal and the reason for almost universal reluctance of people of all ages to do it no mystery. None of us want to embarrass ourselves. Standing in front of a bunch of people and trying to be articulate, look comfortable, and appear in total control of our subject is far from easy. Further, making that effort in front of others puts the speaker in a  very vulnerable position. No one wants that.

Yet people do it every day. Politicians, as we all know, seem to hop up from their chairs and speak before others with little provocation. School teachers, of course, spend the bulk of their work days doing it. Performers, including comedians and actors, do it with aplomb. What do they have the rest of us don't? How come they seem so much better at it and comfortable with it than most any of us? It is not because they are smarter or necessarily better than the rest of the population. Rather, the secret to their success is summed up in two words: preparation and repetition. What they do they do often. When it comes to speaking publically, most of us cannot make that claim or come any where close to it.

In terms of those on the receiving end of public speakers, something I have suspected for a good while is that I do not believe audiences expect their speakers to be perfect. Mainly, they want them to be sincere, honest of intent, and engaged in what they are talking about. Speakers who lose their train of thought, struggle with what word to use or take a moment to refer to their notes are all ok to audiences. Instead, what they hone in on is whether the speaker seems to know what they are talking about. If they do not, then it does now matter how smooth or polished the speaker is, they have no credibility and the audience has tuned them out.

Wednesday, August 28, 2013

Good Citizenship

As is the case for other professions, including journalism, public relations has its own set of ethical guidelines and values designed to serve as benchmarks by which practitioners should conduct themselves as they go about working with clients and fulfilling their responsibilities. The most recent set was adopted in October, 2000, by the Public Relations society of America. While they pertain specifically to the PRSA's membership (estimated at being in access of 21,000), the practices advocated certainly apply to those men and women who do not carry PRSA membership cards as well.

One passage of the PRSA's code of ethics particularly striking is called "principles of conduct." They call upon practitioners to support the following: free flow of information, competition, disclosure of information, safeguarding confidences, the avoidance of conflicting interests, and enhancing the profession. More specifically, these elements direct practitioners to be advocates and active supporters of ensuring the free flow of truthful information, healthy and fair competition, open and/or transparent decision making, protecting private information, building trust among publics, and working to enhance a general appreciation of the public relations profession itself. With the possible exception of the last element, all echo fundamental principles of the United States.

By making such a link between the profession and the country in which most PRSA members perform their duties, the organization seems to be suggesting there is a strong overlapping between being a responsible practitioner of public relations and a patriotic American citizen. Is there such a link between responsible public relations and good citizenship?  The PRSA appears to think so. While I tend to agree, I feel it is also important to note that being a responsible and honest communicator should not necessarily be tied to the values of any specific country. Responsible public relations is more universal in that it should cut across national borders rather than be tied exclusively to the principles of one country, even if that one country is the U.S.

Sunday, August 25, 2013

Results

There are so many actions we take that have definitive results. We are out of milk so we run to the store and buy a new carton. Done and done. We like someone so we ask them out on a date. They accept. Check that off, too. Such actions where there is a clear goal and a clear result provide us with a sense of accomplishment and closure. We can move onto the next action with a sense of not having to clean up after ourselves or tie up any loose ends. It feels good. On weekends, for example, I confess to feeling pleased with myself when I achieve all the items on my list of chores. Scratching everything off the list does present its own special brand of satisfaction.

Unfortunately, not every action we take or attempt is so clear-cut. Many do not provide us with the definitive result we seek. Going back to the example of the date, ideally we take such a step with the hope it will go well, that we and our companion will have a good time. Suppose one or both of us don't?  Or suppose both parties do and that each agrees to go out a second time. Either way, the result becomes not quite so definitive. We cannot look back at the experience with a sense of total completeness. What may have begun as a simple, fairly straightforward act has now become more complex.

Given this reality, I say "welcome to the world of communication!" Many acts of communication do not give us the sense of closure that, say, going to the grocery store does. At best, that coveted sense is temporary. For instance, the public relations worker devises a strategy to elicit a strong turnout to a particular event. It goes well, yet there is the realization that a second event must now be addressed. More planning is needed. And so it goes. Professional communicators often do not have the luxury of experiencing a sense of total satisfaction the way most of do with those weekend chores. Results sought by the communicator are more nuanced and elusive.

Friday, August 23, 2013

A Call for Balance

The world, as I see it, is largely dominated by two types of people: those who believe we are connected and those who view life from a "bottom line" perspective. As the first group sees an all-encompassing interrelationship between all people everywhere, they try to conduct their actions and way of thinking toward benefitting the "greater good" of society. The second group, though not without concern for others, tend to be driven by the plusses and minuses of any decisions. One is more heart-driven while the other is comfortable letting their head sit behind the steering wheel. Neither one, I should note, is necessarily better than the other. Basically, it is their approach to life that separates them.

I see these two perspectives driving many communicators as they approach their jobs, assignments, and responsibilities. Each perspective - one from the heart and the other from the head - is important and should play a vital role in how all tasks are assessed and eventually tackled. Ideally, the two should complement each other. I mention this because of a concern that many communicators today are letting one perspective dominate the other. Hired by a client to help them turn a profit, the professional communicator devises strategies designed to achieve that "bottom line" objective. While such a scenario is fine, particularly if success is achieved, the so-called "victory" seems limited.  

My concern echoes that of the little Prince in the famous book of that title by Antoine de Saint-Exupery. "Bottom-line" thinking is something grown-us do. In pursuing actions that are black-and-white in nature, other vital parts of life - happiness, contentment, fun, etc. - tend to get squeezed out. This is not good. Communicators is about human emotion. It speaks to the need we all share of  feeling connected, safe, appreciated and heard. As practitioners approach their many challenges, those aspects of the human psyche should not be overlooked. Thus, the two perspectives need to be co-pilots. 

Friday, August 9, 2013

Doing What We Have To

Recently, in a new book called "Looking Out Looking In" by Ronald Adler and Russell Proctor, I read of an experiment testing isolation. Specifically, five subjects were left alone in separate rooms with the idea of seeing how long they would last. One held out for eight days, three for two days, and one for only two hours. I am not sure how long I would last under similar circumstances. On the one hand, there are times when I definitely could see me being the eight-day-person, while other times I would be pressing the buzzer to be released after two hours.  As is the case with food and water, what this experiment demonstrates is that all of us need some form of interaction or connection with others eventually.

This, then, speaks to the question of why it is we communicate. The answer is because we have to. It is a fundamental need we as humans share. Even if that interaction is only periodic, it is something we have to do because it enhances our desire to survive for as long as we can. Adler and Proctor note that socially-connected people live, on the average, nearly four years longer than those who are not; divorced, separated or widowed people are more likely to require mental hospitalization than married folks; those who are socially isolated tend to be more susceptible to the common cold; and socially active people tend to have better memories.

Given these reasons for all of us to be more active communicators, the challenge becomes how we can be the best we can at it. After all, the above-mentioned facts suggest by being socially active and generally satisfied with our various interactions, we tend to live longer and more fulfilling lives. To that, I, for one, say "sign me up!" This points to the need for people to learn more about the mechanics of communication. Knowledge about this field helps us learn more about ourselves and that, in turn, improves our ability to connect with others.  

Wednesday, August 7, 2013

What is Communication Worth?

In the mid-nineteenth century, an interesting debate on economics took place involving activists Karl Marx, David Ricardo and John Stuart Mill. Basically, the discussion revolved around Mill's theory that the value of a good was set by the amount of labor needed to produce it. A big part of the discussion revolved around the matter of the actual value of labor itself. How could labor, both Marx and Ricardo wondered, be valued as well as serve as a measure of value? This and other interesting ponderings set in motion even more interesting debate as Marx, Ricardo and Mill and sought to reconcile the challenge businesses have of paying people their true worth while trying to generate as much profit for themselves as possible.

The point of this entry is not to discuss economics matters, particularly ones began over 160 years ago. Rather, it is to use it as a lead-in to a conversation about the value of communication - an issue that continues to be the subject of conversation today among public relations practitioners and those that hire them to perform specific outreach tasks on their behalf. I should note the focus of this entry is driven by my current foray into the world of consulting. What should I charge for my so-called expertise? What are my skills and time worth?  Presently, while I do have a set hourly range, attaching a dollar amount to communication is not as easy as it may seem.

What is communication worth? For mid-level managers or directors working in public relations, a few years ago Fortune magazine listed the average annual salary at $84,000. My question revolves around the calculation of such a sum. Communication itself is both a tangible service as well as an act that generates certain emotions and attitudes. Without doubt, feelings are difficult to measure. Their value, of course, when positive is immeasurable. Many rank those feelings as high as any profit that communication efforts might generate. Perhaps this is one reason employers struggle with providing their communicators with adequate compensation. It is not as if they do not want to pay public relations workers a decent salary. It is just they, too, are struggling with the intangible value of communication.

Saturday, August 3, 2013

Batting Practice

One of the things I enjoy most when going to a baseball game is watching the players limber up and take batting practice. As good as these world class athletes are, even they need time to stretch and get their bodies "in the mood" for a new contest. If they had to, of course, I am sure they would be able to run onto the field and play without the benefit of warming up. Still, making a regular habit of that  would no-doubt be difficult and put them all at-risk of injury. This is true of athletes who play other sport as well as people in other professions as well. Professional singers and musicians need time to warm up as well.

Can the same be said of professional communicators? Do they time to warm-up their minds before starting on a new campaign? My sense is, "yes," they do. As someone who has been in the communication profession since the early 1970s, however, I concede I have never seen or even heard of any communication professional who has actually taken their own version of batting practice before sitting down with a client, entering into a brainstorming session with their team, or sitting down to draft copy for a publication or write a speech. This is too bad because our brains, to perform at their best, need time to stretch just as much as the rest of our muscles.

The question then becomes what would be an example of batting practice for professional communicators? What could they do to limber up before embarking on a challenging assignment? Physical stretching is not a bad idea. After all, sitting in meetings or behind a computer all day can be physically taxing. Mental word games, such as reciting the alphabet backwards or trying to identify everyone of our presidents, are also good. Anything to get the juices flowing, as my father used to say.  As thinking and creative beings, those who communicate for a living must do all they can to remain stimulated and be stimulating. In their own way, they, too, are athletes.  

Tuesday, July 30, 2013

What Good Communicators Know

If there is one phrase that should not part of a communicator's vocabulary it is "status quo." Such a phrase speaks to holding fast, maintaining, standing still or passing time but without movement.  People may say things like, "We have to maintain the status quo" or "Let's just stay as we are" and feel as if such goals represent the best way to remain secure and/or safe. This is false. Not moving or freezing in position is, at best, doing just that or, more, realistically, a guarantee to fall behind. Good communicators know this. In a world where change is a constant occurrence, good communicators know that to stay ahead of the curve or, at the very least, keep up demands constant adjustment.

In the nineteenth century, Charles Darwin introduced the theory of evolution. For a species to have any chance of surviving, he said, they must continue to adapt to their ever-changing environment. To not do so puts them on a direct path toward eventual extinction. Survival is not a matter of being the fittest. Rather, the secret is in one's ability to adapt. For instance, when a new boss is hired, how well workers adjust to this person's new style, vision and set of priorities will often determine how secure their own jobs remain. Sure, they may be great workers, but that has little to do with how compatible they are with the new boss.

This reality is a primary reason why communicators are constantly coming up with different strategies to promote a product, program or service that has existed for many years. Good communicators know they do this not because they are bored and want change just for the sake of doing something different. Instead, they know that changes of this kind must be done if what they promote is going to have any chance of remaining viable. One remains strong in the present only when they have first made the necessary adjustments to enjoy such status. Good communicators know thy are not in the status quo business.

Saturday, July 27, 2013

It's All Fake

I concede the cynical part of me may be driving this entry and that on a better day I may not feel quite this strongly on this matter. Having said that, I am becoming increasingly of the mind that all one sees on television these days is fake. The drama is exaggerated. The alerts are unnecessarily hyped. Much of the so-called news is disguised advertising. The talking heads do nothing to add to the national conversation regarding serious issues. The knowledge-base of many of the supposedly respectable journalists is as thin as a slice of butter. And our elected leaders, many of whom are not worthy of the offices they hold, are driven by their own self interest rather than the greater good of our nation.

Television programming seems to be overwhelmed with reality shows. The irony here is there is little, if anything, real about these shows. Whether it is some battle royal between a bunch of cooks who are given one hour to make the best chocolate chip cookies ever or some family of celebrities who we get to watch talk about such critical topics as which health spa to go to or which pair of shoes they should wear to an upcoming movie premiere, it is all trumped-up junk. And do not get me started on the array of dating shows where contestants vie to find their true love. Each of these episodes is more insulting than the last.

The so-called serious shows are the worst offenders. The best thing one can say about many of them is they make lots of noise. It is all show biz and we are the worse for it. I only wish we had someone to apologize to for what we have allowed to happen. Perhaps it is future generations. Television really is a vast wasteland as was once said many years ago. The difference is it seems to be getting worse. Increasingly, this entire medium devotes its energies to appealing to the emotions of the millions of us who watch what it offers. Even though there would no doubt be resistance, we would  all be so much better off if it tried appealing to our intellect instead.

Wednesday, July 24, 2013

1984

Let me say right off the bat this entry is not about George Orwell's "1984." Rather, it pertains to what I am learning was a very noteworthy year in the evolution of public relations. During that particular 12-month span, several scholars put forth significant propositions that continue to resonate in the field to this day. I speak of James Grunig and Todd Hunt's four models of public relations, Brian Spitzberg and William Cupach's definition of communication competence, and M.A. Ferguson's introduction of relationship management as an emerging function of public relations.

In the work by Grunig and Hunt, they encapsulated the primary styles of how practitioners perform the function of public relations. The four models and their primary purposes are: press agentry (generate publicity), public information (share or provide information), two-way asymmetrical (persuade the public), and two-way symmetrical (establish partnerships). Regarding Spitzberg and Cupach, the two identified communication competence as the ability to one has to interact well with others. Ingredients for success include accuracy, clarity, comprehensibility, coherence, expertise and effectiveness. These elements, they said, speak to both how well a message if communicated and how well it is received or understood.  

Finally, Ferguson's insight on relationship management as a function of public relations help set in motion an expanded way of looking at this profession. Prior to Ferguson, public relations was viewed largely as an act of outreach in which organizations focused on improving their image and/or profit-base. It was Ferguson's vision that the establishment and maintenance of relationships between entities and their various publics should be the top priority of communication professionals on behalf of their clients. I do not yet know if it was a mere coincidence that all three of these perspectives were introduced in the same year. Whether it was or not, the fact they continue to be studied says much about the quality of thought behind their formulation.

Saturday, July 20, 2013

Perspectives

I bet if you put ten people in a room and gave them a topic to discuss within minutes what would emerge would be ten different perspectives on it. While some may overlap and even agree in a number of ways, I have little doubt that difference could be found in each. Because everyone has their own history, collection of experiences from which they draw, likes and dislikes, and biases and preferences, their "take" on anything, whether it is a topic considered to be light or heavy, varies. This is one thing that makes us humans so interesting and another that makes the work of communicators such a challenge.

This reality reminds me of quote from Charles Dickens' "Dombey and Son." Dickens wrote, "There were a hundred thousand shapes and substances of incompleteness, wildly mingled out of their places, upside down, burrowing in the earth, aspiring in the air, moldering in the water, and unintelligible as any dream." This points to a level of confusion the often emerges when multiple opinions or perspectives are put forth on any given topic at any given time. What is a communicator to do? How is a communicator to proceed in trying to develop consensus or persuade these people to support something or agree to take certain action?

Upon first glance, no question such a challenge is daunting. But the good news is that often times a thread of commonality can be found in most any set of multiple opinions. Also, because we humans share the same basic set of needs, the origin of our perspectives often derive from them. It is these two aspects of us from which communicators can begin to formulate their own set of talking points or messages when representing a client. Granted, while such a science is far from perfect, more often than not it can be enough to give communicators a chance at being successful in their outreach. Just remember: almost always this is not easy.