It's time for marketing and communications to take a stand!

One area where marketing and communications has always lagged is that it allows itself to be seen as a strictly tactical tool by the C-level executives. The past recession has made this even worse. The corporate communications function has struck a new low by becoming simply a reactionary tool which has offered hardly any strategic contribution to the organization's success.

2011 should be the year in which we take back our profession and reassert it as the strategic tool that it is. Speaking as someone who works as a free-lance consultant, I have the advantage of offering strategic advice to senior level executives on what to do, and then to go and execute it on a tactical level. My experience with this is that even when speaking strategy, and trying to draw marketing and communications into a larger corporate theme, it is virtually impossible to have the senior level executives see MarCom as anything other than a tactical tool. When it comes to communications all we hear is that the C-level wants more press releases, a new web site, more literature and so on. We rarely hear about using it as a strategic tool to drive sales.

This is really the fault of the marketing managers out there who are more than happy to coast along doing as little as possible and figure that if they go along and get along they will survive. Sadly, this has left our field scattered with a bunch of mediocre managers who lack the courage and drive to challenge management and encourage it to see marketing and communications as a long term tool which, when executed properly, can drive the entire branding and sales function.

One thing we can do as a profession is to drive our field and commit to standards of excellence. How many other fields would sit by and allow anything other than excellence be their guides. Such fields and medicine and law have high barriers of entry and require educated people to make informed decisions. Also, a certain specialty is not only expected but in many cases it's required.

Marketing and communications could benefit greatly by taking on more of trappings of an elite profession in 2011. By doing this, we can establish ourselves as legitimate stakeholders and contributors to the organization's success. By standing up and wanting to be counted as a profession and not just a job, we can have a stronger impact on the entire business community!

Time for marketing to learn from failure!

There is a well known and time worn statement which goes, those who can not remember the past will be doomed to repeat it. The worse are attributed to the poet and philosopher George Santayana. These words are as true today as there were when they were first spoken. In fact they seem to be even more relevant because our periods of remembrance seem to be drawing shorter and shorter with each generation.

I bring this up today because there are direct ties into business and specifically marketing and communications. Another cliche that is often used is that success comes from many fathers but failure is an orphan. Both of these statements define what is wrong about business accountability in this day and age. More often than not if something goes wrong, the first thing organizations try to do is look for a scape goat and eliminate that person to keep the baying of the legal wolves in check. This quite honestly is stupid and in many cases counterproductive. If there is a complete and total violation of a companies policies as seems to be the case with Hewlett Packard, then dismissing the head of the company makes some sense. However I am here to talk about the lesser examples that often times do not make a lick of sense.

Having been around the block in marketing a while, I notice that many times senior level executives will wonder why their initiatives are not producing the desired results. More often than not marketing and communications people will look for an excuse or a reason to give as to why they are not. In most cases there is a simple explanation such as marketing conditions or even lack of support from other elements in the organization. It is not improper or unprofessional to refuse to fall on your sword because some other party has failed to participate in the successful development of marketing and communications strategy.

So what's the point here? That is simple. marketing, corporate communications, PR etc need to OWN the communications function and the message. We need to let the C-level know when they are not being reasonable and we need to both educate other groups in the organization and help them understand what marketing and communications is all about and how to work. What is very interesting is that organizations who view marketing and communications as a strategic tool, similar to finance or sales, find the greatest return on investment for their marketing dollar. They tend to stay the course and spend their marketing dollars wisely.

Organizations who are struggling or failing tend to share a common trait as well. They see marketing and communications as purely tactical weapons. Elements to be used only in reaction to market condition and not as a strategic weapon. A perfect case is how McDonald's reinvented itself to offset negative publicity as well as changing marketing conditions. This required a difficult reappraisal of their operations from top to bottom and included a major revision to how they went about marketing their products.

The lesson to be learned from all of this is that in marketing and communications, as well as in any aspect of business, failure is an excellent teacher. This is not a call for everyone to fail, rather it is a call for us to stop treating failure as something that requires a quick trip to the gallows and then carrying on as if nothing has happened. Use marketing as a tool to build brand and build sales. You will fail along the way that can't be helped. What you can help is taking the setbacks, learn from them, and come back even stronger and assume an even strong position in your market.

And, if failure is an orphan then it can join, Nelson Mandela, Alexander Hamilton , Dave Thomas (who founded Wendy's) and Louis Armstrong. So being an orphan is never easy, but can lead to great things!

Time for Marketing and CorpCom to Grow Up

There is an interesting study out that claims that in a dictatorship, fear is less an issue than greed. What one often finds in this type of regime is that a select few are given access to power and its benefits (privileges, access to leadership, foodstuffs, etc.) that the average person does not have. This works to create a class of sycophants whose loyalty is to the organization and not to doing right.

I think of this because I believe that, unfortunately, there are far too many organizations who play the politics game and respond to lesser party's who act like a spoiled 5 year old rather than make the best decision for the organization. A classic case in point of this very usual circumstance making a rare appearance in the public forum was when AIG tried to justify the payment of large bonuses by saying the people being paid would go to other companies. Given that these people had run the ship aground this was a disastrous statement to make and show a tone deafness that, sadly, is not uncommon in corporate American today.

Now normally during one of my discussions I would offer an insight into how PR, Marketing and CorpComm could help with this. Well, the sad news is that we are actually a big part of the problem. I think I can speak for most of my colleagues who do a good job in saying we have all seen less qualified workers act like 5 year old and be treated like the spoiled children they are. I have a line that I have used many times to these children and will continue to use it. "Drama belongs on the stage, not in the workplace so either grow up or get out."

This is one area that concerns me when it comes to the long term viability of PR and marketing. We are currently fighting the battle of not being valued as true strategic partners. The lack of maturity and undeserved sense of entitlement of a number of PR and marketing people is directly causing harm to our industry. It is up to all of us to act professionally and to realize our profession needs us to act intelligently and maturely in order to achieve something beyond our own little niche.

Why aren't we using social media better than this?

There were a few instances during the past few weeks that had me shaking my head. Now some of you who know me think that I am a completely opposed to social media in any and all formats. That is a total and complete falsehood. I don't fall in love with items because they happen to be new, I become interested in items because I perceive they offer a distinct competitive advantage.

Having said that, I am surprised at the limited or perhaps the miss directed scope we see when it comes to social media. We see people who offer updates on every little element that is going on in their lives with no filter regarding how appropriate or interesting it may be. We see organizations stumbling over each other to be the latest on Twitter or Facebook with no idea regarding why they wish to do so. One thing we do not see, is organizations forming a quick strategy about how to deal with social media for those times when computing will fail them,

Case in point was last week's Facebook outage. While I am sure we would all find it somewhat funny to think of this happening, one of the most sensible things for Facebook to do would be to go on some other outlet, or via e-mail, notify their base that the site was down and would stay down for some time. What they did end up doing is reverting back to the good old days and send out e-mail updates to the news media. While I somewhat chuckle at the idea of Facebook using Twitter to announce they couldn't bring their web site up, it would have been a most most effective way of reaching their target audience and, in my opinion, a means that would not have caused a great deal of long term harm or embarrassment to Facebook.

Social Media is a great tool. The great weakness of social media is that most agencies and communications practitioners are offering poor advice on how to use it. The advice I am hearing is similar to saying, "paint each house purple." When it comes to social media, the need should match the organization and not the other way around. Also some of the great potential for social media is being ignored. Why isn't it being better developed as a crisis communication tool? Given that Crisis Comm is about getting the right message to the right people as soon as possible, the big question we need to answer as corporate communications professionals today is why are we looking at social media as an entertainment tool and not a strategic communications one?

The Perfect information storm

As a TV news junkie, I find it interesting that there seem to be two main subjects dominating the talking heads. The first is what ever celebrity has had a break down, been arrested, etc. The second is the messages regarding the economy. While we can always argue from a political perspective how good or bad it is, the way the message is being delivered is fascinating from a messaging and marketing perspective.

For one thing, the message is being disseminated by various talking heads, each representing not just their own point of view, but also the respective investment house or research institute they work for. This leads to a massive amount of confusing and often contradictory information being passed out. It is not uncommon on CNBC to see person A claim that things are great and the economy is finally on firm footing only have person B claim the exact polar opposite.

While I find this maddening to watch one person tell me that the sun out is a good sign and another tell me that the sun out will lead to more skin cancer it is an interesting view to communications theory. This is the perfect information storm. A lot of it confusing and often completely contradictory. This is where the Corporate Communications plate come into play.

Sadly, while many would like to live in a black and white world, the world is really built into shades of grey. But it is our job as communications professionals to offer the best counsel they possibly can. Yes that can offer mean offering unconventional advice.

Take for example the current year that the Boston Red Sox are having. They are out of running this year but as a true fan I can't say the season was a failure. Yes if you set the bar high (winning the pennant) then they aren't going to have a successful family. But if you look at over all performance, overcoming difficulties and adversity, I would argue they have had a very successful season.

The is much information circling the airwaves these days. In some respects the best talking head is combination of facts and information, but also preparation and skill by their own PR or corp comm people. The fact that a certain person's message is being repeated is a combination of both the right message, but also let's not forget the hard work and skill of the PR person behind the scenes doing the message development and pitching the speaker.

Where are the corporate communications mentors and leaders?

Having been in PR, Marketing and Corporate Communications I have noticed a few things. Usually the best talent are soloist or individuals contributors. The reason for that it would seem is that agencies and in house organs tend to draw careerists who are better at navigating the corporate minefields than at developing a tight and on-target message. Now of course everyone who reads this will think they are the exception and I am sure I will hear how such and such a company is the exception. The sad case is that as a profession we are failing those who are coming up in the ranks in how to do what we do and, by extension, we are damaging both our clients, their brands and our profession.

OK let me throw some harsh reality out to people who seem to think otherwise, especially in the corporate and agency world. People just out of school have NO CLUE about how to work in an office. I don't care if they have done internships all through out school. They have done sprints, now they have to run a marathon, they have done the swimming portion of the triathlon and now have the last two legs to complete. We have an obligation as professionals to take these people under our wing and teach them how to do our profession right. Also, if we can impart in them the need to be forceful advocates for how our profession should be run then we will be taken seriously and seen as a profession.

A good example is what happens to lawyers at large firms. They are worked liked dogs that much is true. But they also have a senior lawyer, usually a partner, who is guiding them along and helping them learn the ropes so they will succeed. Unlike a lot of marketing and PR people, they are not waiting for a mistake to be made so they can destroy their self esteem and reap some petty sense of power and victory, they are working to guide this person through what is best for the firm and ultimately the profession. (Notice I did not mention the client!)

I had the good fortune to train my dog and found it very enjoyable. First, he is smarter than about 95% of the people in the world today. Now get ready everyone because I am about to liken training a dog to dealing with people. Training him worked very well because I taught him how to be a house pet, (no jumping on the furniture, housebreaking, waiting for dinner). In doing so I corrected him when he made a mistake but I also made sure he knew when he did well. Ultimately he did well because he knew it was the right thing to do.

Usually in Marketing or Corp Comm. we see no mentoring or leadership. We see someone assigned as a supervisor who basically sees it as extra work being assigned with no benefits for doing this. We should see this as a great opportunity to share knowledge and impart experience. A chance to offer constructive criticism and teach the person to grow and become not only a better Marketing, PR, Corp Comm person by improving their technical skills and also improving their confidence. Lastly, we can overcome our greatest professional weakness and treat people that by cooperation we secure a great deal more than by petty and needless competition.

If corporate communications, marketing and PR are ever going to be taken seriously we need to recognize talent and nurture it. We need to end the immaturity, the turf wars and the nonsense and present a united front as a mature and credible part of the business community. Once this process is completed, or at least well underway, we can start to be taken seriously as a profession.

Sprinting to the finish line.

Now that Labor Day is behind us we start heading into the time of year when the days grow shorter and the leaves change color and the thermometer drops. In many respects this is my favorite time of year because the air is so fresh and refined that it makes the work process so much more enjoyable. It also is the time of year when we can focus on what is coming up and begin our sprint to the finish line.

Ideally, the summer was spent planning for this sprint. That was of course, in between fantasies of vacations. The fall sprint should be focused on bringing target audiences back into focus and get yourself onto the radar of major stakeholders. This is really the time of year when marketing budgets are being established and major purchasing decisions are generally being reached. This is the time of year when planning turns into execution.

Given that a lot of plans are being made for 2011 we need to make the most of this time of year. This is a great time of year to engage social media and bring your customers and potential customers in at a new level so they can see you as a more concrete partner in their business. It is also a time to use the more traditional methods and try to engage media partners in a business relationship that will result in the previously mentioned complete market penetration. Lastly, it is the time to stop being the wallflower and become the player in the industry you thought you should be all along.

The final third of the year is when you should really shift into high gear. It is the time of year when marketing and communications need to demonstrate what we can really do for the organization and how our skill and success means the organization can and will be successful. It is when our planning and drive will lead to success in the market. Of course if it is not done with the right balance of strategy, execution and team work than we will fall short and the blemish to marketing will be impossible to erase.

Why do crisis always happen when you don't want them too?

Well back from vacation one whole day officially and WHAM, hit with a crisis! Of course no crisis ever comes at a good time and let's be honest, how much of a crisis would it be if it happened when we wanted it to happen and when it was most convenient. But like any crisis, there is also an opportunity. There was an old legend that in Chinese or Japanese the characters which represent crisis can also spell opportunity. I don't know if linguistically that is true but from the standpoint of sentiment it is very true.

The first rule of thumb in a crisis is to maintain a level head. A crisis is obviously a serious matter and can lead to serious if not fatal damage to the brand if not handled properly. Some short term damage may be unavoidable, but the short term damage may result in longer term prosperity like the floods which provide for rich farm land. After calm has been restored, the next step is to get as realistic measurement of the scope of the matter. What happened, who was responsible, how far down the path have we gone? These are some of the questions that should be asked immediately.

At the crisis table should sit the CEO. Sorry folks, the CEO needs to be in front of this. A good CEO will see this as part of his or her job. If you're there for the good, you must be there for the bad. Second to the CEO should be the senior corp comm person. This person should be responsible for handling the day-to-day issues regarding the crisis. The formulation of the strategy, developing the message, ensuring that key stakeholders are all informed should fall to the head of corporate communications. Also at the table for informative purposes should be people like a corporate counsel, perhaps the CFO or maybe a brand manager, or the person who has day-to-day management regarding the issue.

Generally while I am loath to give the lawyers any say in standard corporate communications operations, this is the exception to the rule since there will most likely be identifiable legal ramifications, not only to the event which triggered the original crisis but also to subsequent events. Crisis management is the time when corporate communications assumes control of the ship and drives the organization clear of any harm.

One of the first and most important issues for the Corporate Communications team to do is to ensure that all communications to stakeholders are clear and in line with overall corporate objectives. The potential for distraction and confusion is high. There will be a great number of parties who will need to be communicated too and the more end points there are, the greater the potential for mixed messages and mixed messages can lead to the appearance of a cover up or cloud the facts.

A crisis will never happen when you are ready for it, when it is a good time for you or for what ever reason, when you want it too. The beauty of the crisis is that it is the one, singular opportunity for Corporate Communications to demonstrate its role in the organization and why it should be at the leadership table. Lets also not forget that a crisis often serves to bolster the role of communications by demonstrating that it should be a strategic program, planned in advance and consulted by senior management on an ongoing basis, and not just an afterthought. In this regard, a crisis can be a mixed blessing.

Any organization who values Corporate Communications, values its stakeholders and customers and brand should not only survive, but also emerge stronger than before. A company which sees communications as a task and chore, something to drive stock prices or as an ego platform for senior management will most likely receive a sharp rebuke from the market and learn a painful lesson a la BP.

Are Communications People Tough Enough?

There was a very interesting scene in the season premier of MadMen. Be prepared for a spoiler you haven't seen it yet! During a meeting with a client who was trying to market a two-piece bathing suit for modest people, Don Draper had enough and threw the potential clients out of the office. A lot of my fellow PR and Corp Com friends admitted to enjoying what Don did and wishing they could have done it themselves.

I bring this up because it focuses on the concept of toughness and doing what's right in Corporate Communications. I will also stick my neck out and say hurray for Don Draper. He went to his clients with an intelligent and well-thought marketing campaign. He obviously knew the market better than they did and when they balked at his proposals and he saw they were being stubborn for no reason than to be stubborn and closed minded, so he ended the relationship. Granted, it was for the sake of television he threw them out of the office, but ultimately, he did these people a favor by pointing out how deeply flawed their brand premise was. We can only wonder if they got the message or just went to another agency who was happy to smile, cash their checks and do what they want regardless of how wrong it is.

Now of course standing up to a client, be it internal or external is always worrisome and dangerous. Many people think that by giving us a check we surrender all intelligence and basically become some type of puppet for them to manipulate. Others, think that since they have hired a communications professional or a team of pros, they need not worry anymore about the issue of communications.

Sadly, there are a great number of communications professionals who tend towards being more reptilian than mammal. They will also do what is solely in their best interests and will tell the client what they want to hear and will focus on personal advancement to the exclusion of all else that makes for an effective and dynamic team. For some reason, the communications community focuses on people who make us feel good and tell us what we want to hear than the ones who tell us what we need to know.

Put it into a different perspective, if you're 30 pounds overweight, smoke and eat the wrong things, do you want a doctor who will keep telling you all is well and that you look great. Of course not. Now doctors HAVE to tell you the truth but communications people SHOULD do so. It is interesting when communications are direct and honest because there are two initial reactions generally speaking. The first is that the executive or client jumps back like they have received an electric shock and the look on their face is like they've been given a dose of some terrible medicine. The second reaction is that usually within 24 hours one of the snakes in the grass will offer reassuring words that all is well and try to endear themselves to the client.

We all need to understand and agree that pleasing a client is not the same as servicing their needs. Just as we need to say no to a child to help their growth we sometimes need to say no to a client to help them grow. The stock answer by the appeasers is that clients can always find someone else to do the job if you're too harsh, mean etc. That is true, but if they can find a communications pro who is willing to be bold enough and offer them the honest opinion which will make the brand stronger than the organization will be the better for it.

The question we need to ask as communications professionals is are we willing to do what is right or what is expedient? Are we going to be a profession bound by some type of ethics and guidelines or are we simply going to collect a check and do a job that requires the minimum amount of both risk and morals. These are tough questions we need to think about in our profession because the past ten years have been so brutal that survival skills have trumped good management skills. The next ten years should either be really interesting or quite scary.

How to better use communications as a strategic tool

One of the great weakness of communications is that it is often seen as a tactical tool with very little value. As a result, excesses of quantity often result and quality greatly suffers as a result. The root cause of this is often not hard to find, we try to please the higher ups in the organization and wish to be popular, rather than sticking to what we consider to be best and recommending those tools.

Now of course I have heard the universal cop-out to this claim many times before. If we do not do it, then the CEO, VP whomever will simply go out and find someone who will. Well the easy answer to that threat is go ahead. There are lots of bad communications people out there and there are lots of organizations practicing communications badly. This isn't a treat or a desire to see some group fail, rather it is calling the bluff of someone who presumes to know your job better than you do. If you were undergoing heart surgery would you question the cardiologist on how they will operate or the anesthesiologist on what medicines will be used? Of course not.

The first, and I would argue most effective way of ensuring management seeings communications as a strategic tool is to act like it is. Fulfill your roll with authority and decisiveness and get stuff done that helps the organization! I know that all sounds easy but trust me, it's about expertise and accomplishment and not about smoke and mirrors. The phonies and charlatans who live and die by smoke and mirror only get so far and are exposed for what they are. Still their lack of professionalism causes harm to the rest of us who know what we are doing.

Second, the subject of metrics is always a dodgy one in communications but turn the fear and anxiety about this to our advantage. Put firm goals in place and use them. For example when some VP or even the CEO wants to use communications for some irrelevant task like trumping the latest tiny business deal tell them no. In fact, go one better and put them on a strict regimen of so many announcements during a given period so that a strong strategic evaluation is given to the use of any communications tool and it is not done on a simple whim.

Lastly, keep score of what you have done and let the results speak for themselves. If there is an increase in traffic visiting the web site, sales leads, media hits most, if not all of that can be traced back to a well-run communications program. Remember that it is not about feeding massive egos or making an adult feel like a child by being offered a treat. The goal is to build, secure and communicate about a brand and to help secure more business for it. This beats any and all other reasons a communications program exists.

Being a communications person is not easy. There are a few who do the job very well surrounded by those who are not up to the task. It is for those who do the job well to be the leaders and to set the high standards that the rest of the profession can aspire too. By acting professionally and by letting all around us know that we are the best, and most importantly backing it up, we can ensure communications is rightly seen as a strategic tool. Lastly, and most importantly, don't be smug or dismissive. By doing that, you will ensure that are dismissed as someone who is all talk and can not deliver the good. Be confident but not over confident. Be a teacher but not a lecturer. Most important, do the right thing for the job and the brand first and foremost.

Why can't most communications people communicate?

Being a sole proprietor has one great advantage. Yes the commute is great and all that, but what I am referring too is that I am a review committee of one. There is nothing that destroys a great work worse than the review of dozens of people each of whom wants a change to the document. Often this results in a weak and diluted piece of work, much like a painting, hit with a fire hose.

There is a great story about how when Michelangelo was painting the Sistine Chapel in Rome, one of Pope Julius's Cardinal's told him to paint as if God himself were painting the Chapel. Supposedly, Michelangelo told the cardinal that if the Pope wished for God to paint the Sistine Chapel he should have given him the commission. The point I see in that story is that many of us in communications are used to receiving the input of others, sometimes welcome, other times not. Often the worst type of input to receive comes from those who think they are helping and the worst type of advice to give is to those who we are trying to help.

In my experience working with and for communications people we often see advice presented as fact. For example a document we produced edited as if we didn't know what I/we didn't know what we were saying when in fact it said exactly what the edited copy did but in a different format. Of course this is indicative of another long standing fault with communications people and that is that we do not offer strategic alternatives to senior level executives but rather position communications to meet their expectations which is nearly always tactical. (The news release for example.)

I once had the opportunity to see an advertising team brainstorm and it was a very impressive feat. While it was as far from Mad Men as you can imagine, it was still a very impressive feat. For 30 minutes ideas were freely offered, discussed and debated. No one idea was dismissed out of hand and, in the end, the solution was really a group effort and quite impressive. Sadly, communications people seem to think that they are too busy or, too important, for such niceties. A document isn't considered perfect unless someone higher up has marked it up, changed yes to no and made 100 other unnecessary changes more to appear busy than to accomplish anything else.

Lastly, what's also missing in most communications environment is the idea that once a person has reached a certain level that he or she is now above the nitty gritty world of writing and editing. In certain branches of the military there is the concept that every service man or woman is a rifleman first (forgive the sexist terminology) and everything else second. Besides helping to project a certain esprit de corps, this also keeps people focused on what the job really is about and keeps people's eyes on what needs to get done and how to set proper priorities.

There is a woeful gap of internal communications within the world of communications. Most communications professionals see the profession as back and white and really believe that they know all and there is nothing they can learn. That is sad when you compare it to fields like medicine and engineering which believe the exact opposite. The best way to manage our profession and better guide what the executive levels think of us is by realizing we are a profession and not just a bunch of people fumbling around in dark. By working, sharing and collaborating more, we can actually turn communications, (PR and MarCom mostly) into a real profession.

The loss of communications, in communications

I was working on a project recently with a colleague and was shocked at some of the writing I was seeing going on. While we all understand and appreciate the need to be proficient in all of the social media aspects that are growing rapidly it is amazing how the long term impacts of these changes in our profession is that we are all becoming weaker. Just as the fast food culture tends to lead to obesity, the style of social media writing leads to weaker writing and communication skills throughout the organization.

Where as in the past communications professional generally learned to write from the same base, be it AP Style or what ever, most communications professionals wrote in the same style and learned to write the same way. This was then shared with new entries into the field and while one could argue about the merits of the AP style, there was a certain standardization which led to a level of professionalism.

Now with the influx of social media into the mix, writing skills have declined sharply and we may be facing a long term crisis in communications. For one thing, the art and skill of crafting a story and turning that into a message is eroding faster than an ocean facing beach. One of the downside of stressing Twitter over traditional writing is that we are telling snippets and not delivering messages. A brief character blurb is often not enough to tell a complete story.

Also, as we all know, proper grammar is simply not being taught. I am thinking of asking for future writing and editing assignments to offer me bonuses on the edits I make. If I were to get a dollar for every split infinitive, missing comma or my own personal favorite the propositional adverb, I could be making something in the low seven figures. I would add to this the over reliance on spell check and the lack of a dictionary in offices. Recently I had to show someone how to look something up in a dictionary and was astounded that they didn't know how to use it.

The other area of failure in communications arises from the managers in both agencies and in the corporate world. More often than not, edits to a document are simply marked and e-mailed back. There are no interactions between manager and employee and no understanding is shared in all too many cases. More often than not the document is hacked to death to make it seem to fit the managers view of the message and not only is no lesson learned, but the message is weakened because the staff member will not wish to challenge the boss.

While I am not going to say social media lacks importance and its role should be lessened, I do believe we need to strengthen the training of staff and managers in how to work to craft stronger messages. This means training, time commitment and the desire to make a uniform commitment to excellence. These are areas where, sadly, we as communications professional are lacking and can improve both easily and quickly.

How Communications Can be a Value Add to the Corporate Mix

A common refrain from people in marketing and corporate communications is that we are indispensable when times are good but completely disposable when the fickle winds of the business world change. A part of that negative aspect of our role is the fault of short sighted corporate executives who can only see to the next quarter and lack the vision to build their brands. But we are kidding ourselves as a profession if we think that the fault is in everyone but ourselves. Crying like some grumpy child who believes the world just doesn't get them.

Having the experience of having worked in both the corporate and agency side of marketing and corp comm there is one thing that stands out right away. By and large we take the easiest way out and go down the path of least resistance. There is an old story about an older scientist and his young protege conducting an experiment. At some point, the older scientist turns in amazement to the protege and says, "what did you think of that?" The protegee has no idea what he is talking about so he says "hmm,,,what did you think of it." After the older scientist gives a long winded answer about what a profound discovery he's just made the younger apprentice says with a smile, "yes, I saw it too; we're going to be famous."

The point of the story is that we all too often try and give a client what they want rather than what they need. We want to please when we are really supposed to instruct. Would you feel comfortable with a doctor who seemed dodgy and wanted to know if you wanted surgery or tests? Expertise is something we pay for and it is something that we earn. However it is something we very rarely practice out of fear of stepping on someone's toes.

So many people in communications value the fact that we have the ear of the CEO. But in many cases the CEO is like Cesar of old who claimed he makes the sun rise in the east and set in the west. Cesar could do it the other way he once claimed but the roosters would all die of fright. Well the CEO is not the organization and any half way well run organization has a plan to succeed the CEO so that is another blow to the idea of the CEO as a deity.

So back to the question at hand, what can communications add to the corporate mix? First and foremost we should be the truth tellers in the organization. One term I have used to executives time and time again is that, if you lie, you die. This doesn't necessarily involve some grand conspiracy of competitors out to get you; instead it involves building mutually beneficial and open relationships with key stakeholders. The reason they need be mutually beneficial is that there will be a time when the organization will need the help of a stakeholder or maybe even multiple stakeholders. It's best to have them think kind of you before you ask for help than having to go, hat in hand to someone who is lukewarm in how they view.

The other way that communications can be of value to the overall success of the organization is by being a fair and just counsel. While that may seem obvious, it is very rarely practiced. Too many communications people seem to think that their job is to follow orders without question. If I had a dime for how many times I have been told, well, so and so pays the bills so we do what they say, I could retire now. This is the wrong type of mentality that I am talking about. The fact that we are being payed for our expertise is proof we need to offer opinions which may fly in the face of what the client wishes to be told. It's business, not a nursery school!

Telling someone they are wrong is neither easy, nor pleasant but it is often times necessary. If an organization has any hope of success it will be run by people who realize they do not know everything and who trust those beneath them. Sadly, as we all know, most organizations don't function this way. The best course of action is to fight hard for your view and when it is rebuffed, make it clear that this is happening against your counsel.

The long and short is that corporate communications can add a tremendous value to the corporate mix if we, as corp comm professionals, are willing to be brave enough and bold enough to take a stand. There will always be the shallow careerists who think that by kissing up to the client they will be rewarded. But by and large they damage us and damage the profession. We should try and avoid them. We should offer the value of our expertise and experience and let it be known our views are as correct as those of a doctor or a lawyer. You are welcome to ignore them but you do so at your own peril. After a few experiences being burned by poor judgment, perhaps the decision makers will realize we actually know what we're doing!