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.

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.

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.

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.

Consistently Inconsistent

Perhaps one of the most consistent aspects of man's behavior is that we are inconsistent. Do we do everything the exact same way again and again? Given the same or similar set of circumstances, do we make the same choices over and over? I think not, yet even with that answer I need to give a qualifier. It depends upon what we are talking about. For instance, I tend to think people generally go to bed around the same time each night. Generally, they also stick to the same foods rather than try anything that seems too far outside their comfort zone. At least that is how it is with me. But what about matters that are less routine in-nature?  

One example that comes to mind is the professional communicator facing the challenge of  attempting to establish ties with another public on behalf of a client. How consistent are they with strategies they might devise in helping succeed in such a venture? In this case, the response has two faces: one is that the strategies must be consistently creative and flexible to satisfy the comfort level of any external public while inconsistent in terms of what those actual strategies might be. How is that for a confusing answer?

Scholars have identified one particular criteria for being competent at communication is having the ability to manage an interaction with another. This does not necessarily mean controlling the encounter is terms of dictating what each person says or does. Rather, it speaks to how well one achieves the goal or objective they might have going into that interaction. Achieving such an end often requires flexibility and a willingness not to be tied to what has been done in the past - even if what has been done has worked. Thus, for communicators, being consistently inconsistent is not only practical but often-times necessary. After all, communicators deal with people and we all know how inconsistent they are.

Is That All There Is?

I receive a lot of emails and I am sure I am not the only one who can make that claim. It is not because I am all that popular. Rather, much of it is comprised of announcements and/or advertisements about a range of products that I have no interest in (I have no idea how I got on their mailing address) and professional seminars and conferences that do, at least, touch on communication, the field and social science to which I have devoted much of my professional life. Regarding those particular emails, one reason I find them of particular interest is that, collectively, they provide a snapshot into the profession of public relations/communication as it today.

The focus of many of the upcoming seminars and conferences being touted range from ways to write punchier press releases and snappy media advisories to tips on creating more compelling newsletters and giving memorable speeches. On the one hand, all of this is fine as certainly all of us in the field can usually learn ways to improve whatever skills we might have in those areas. But on the other, I am struck by how little new seems to be offered by way of helping practitioners - new and veteran - gain better insight into communication and how to apply it more to everyday lives of themselves and others.

Public relations/communication is a dynamic and ever evolving field, yet one would not appreciate that based on the sameness of seminars and conferences touted year-in and year-out by various agencies. It is time to begin encouraging practitioners at all levels to begin looking at what they do from perspectives that explore how to make communication more meaningful. For instance, how about one that helps practitioners better understand the importance of listening? another that examines ways for professionals to help their clients maintain working ties with various publics? or one that dissects the purposes of public relations itself? There is no time like the present to begin providing practitioners with ways to become more insightful and even wiser about what they do rather than just more skillful.      

The Importance of Preparation

For the past four years my cousin and I go on what we call a hiking adventure. In the past we have hiked the Grand Canyon and mountains in Vermont and Wyoming. This year, we tackled the Rocky Mountain, specifically Flat Top Mountain in Colorado. Over 12,000 feet in elevation, it is one of the 50 highest points in the continental United States. Like those other parts of our country, the natural beauty of the Rockies is breathtaking and deserves to be seen and enjoyed by everyone. As enjoyable as these adventures are, however, they are also quite challenging and are not to be approached lightly. Each requires preparation.

I learned a valuable lesson this year regarding preparation that applies to most everything else in our lives that is important, including communication. I did not prepare as well as I should have (unlike my cousin). We did not quite make it the top of Flat Top because I did not get myself into the shape required not only to contend with the distance and terrain of the trail, but the rise in elevation that was also part of the mix. Consequently, we ended up within a little less than a mile of the top when I simply ran out of gas. On that given day, I did not have the physical reserve to make the full hike because the preparation I did was not good enough. My mistake was assuming what I had done in the past would be adequate for the present.

The key takeaway here was that what works in the past in terms of achieving success does not guarantee similar results in the future. This truism directly applies to communication and public relations campaigns. To make such an assumption is foolish. This not to say we should ignore efforts and result of the past. No way. But each new assignment or challenge we face needs to be viewed on its own merits because the present is never exactly the same as the past. In the case of this year's hike, I was older and the hike itself was a bit more difficult than several of our earlier ones. I failed to give it the respect it deserved. If there is one thing hikes and communication deserve, it is respect. (Author's note: This year's hiking adventure was still as much of a blast as ones in the past have been.) 


    

Information Dilemma

We all have needs. Boy do we ever. We want to feel safe, feel good about ourselves, be accepted by others, have choices on what to do with our lives, and have viable opportunities to achieve goals. These needs are among the ones articulated by Abraham Maslow and others that all of us, no matter our particular station in life, share. The result that every day of our lives we focus on addressing those needs in some direct or indirect way. In my case, for example, even though I am now retired, I am continuing to ensure that I will have money in my pocket to help put food on my family's table, keep a roof over our heads, etc.  

In addition to these needs, we also share a need for information. Not only do we want to know what is going on around us and in the world, but we also need information that we can apply to our own lives in ways that make us safer, happier and generally more satisfied. In its own way, then, the need for information is just as fundamental as such needs as food and water. For instance, not only do we need water but we also need information as to where it is and then how to keep it clean and maintain steady access to it. These two types of needs go hand-in-hand. The result is those who control information find themselves in very important positions.

Those working in public relations are one group of people in such a position. They are hired by clients and organizations to share information with the public. Yet those employers do not want all information about them disclosed. Thus, the public relations worker serves as a gatekeeper as to what information to release and what not. In a society that claims to be open and one populated by people needing information, being in such a position where one determines the flow of information can be quite tricky. Openness, then, can be a difficult dilemma for those in the information business. At times, it can be a matter of having to choose between serving a client versus the general public.  

Success

One of Ralph Waldo Emerson's most famous poems revolves around his definition of success. To have succeeded, he says, is to, among other things, find the best in others, to appreciate beauty, and to leave the world a bit better, whether by a healthy child, a redeemed social condition or to know even one life has breathed easier because you have lived. Those are beautiful sentiments and have certainly proved to be a source of inspiration to many, myself included. Re-reading them recently got to me to thinking that perhaps these words could also serve as what defines a successful public relations campaign or communication effort.

This is all well and good, one might say, but how exactly would that apply to a public relations rep who has been asked to promote a film series at a local community college? Or how does that apply to the spokesman who is asked to talk-up the candidacy of a politician? Those are certainly logical questions. The answer is found in how the professional communicator approaches their job in terms of the big question as well as regarding immediate tasks to which they are assigned. We all communicate but none of us do it very well all that time. When communication efforts fall short, it is often because the elements the define their success have been ignored or not given the attention they deserve.

Those elements include being respectful, open, honest, and providing individuals or publics to whom you are attempting to communicate with the opportunity to participate in a dialog or, at the very least, be heard. Communication is more than just an act of transmitting information or message to another. It is attempt to connect or interact with another. Build a bridge between people and then maintain or strengthen that bridge. The challenge comes in figuring out how best to do that regardless of what task you have been assigned or what the immediate, short-term objective of your plan might be. Thus, in all acts relating to communication, one must never stop considering the big picture or high road.