Why are we so afraid of failure?

I had the chance to speak to an agency big wig at a recent networking event and shocked her when I told her about the question I love to ask agencies during the screening process. It doesn't matter because her agency is not in a field that I would hire but she proved the point I was trying to make. People have an irrational and complete fear of failure and it drives them to distraction.

We are set up to believe that there is success, from which all good and bounty flows, and there is failure which is where all failure goes too die! Sadly this is not the case. To get back to my original question, I had asked this woman how her agency deals with failures when they are the ones responsible. Sadly the response I saw was all too typical. Fear of showing weakness seemed to trump any desire to be an open and honest vendor rather than putting on the typical facade that in the end makes them look silly as if they have never made a mistake.

Failure is one of those things that happens in the client relationship. It is not desirable but it does happen. Mature people and agencies make mistakes, deal with it and move on. Immature people and agencies act like it never happens and when it does seek to find people to blame. They never learn from their mistakes because they are too busy ducking blame and aren't interested in assuming responsibility.

I have found that by asking people to tell me about a time they have failed I get a really interesting response. First of all, most people are floored by it. The truth is that there is no right answer. Some will give a specific example, some will will try and turn it into a learning experience. Either way both are right, and both are wrong, but the question really turns on how someone tries to answer the question. Do they try try to evade it or do they stand up and admit to having failed in the past and having learned from it and moved on.

The simple fact is that failure is a part of our lives as professionals and while no one strives for failure nor should it be a goal it is something to be managed and controlled. It becomes a big issue when we dodge the issue and try to convince the world that we have not failed. Failure is a learning tool when it occurs. It is fuel to the fire of ignorance when it is ignored.

Using Marketing to Lead the Way to Better Times

All we need to do is to turn on the TV and see that the recession is lingering and how poorly we are all doing. Yet a quick look at corporate earnings tells us that companies are booking record earnings and profits. This seems to be a disconnect in this aspect and it makes me wonder what the heck is going on. While one answer to this question is certainly cost-cutting and keeping costs low, the other aspect is just as clear, there is zero marketing going on. People are being fed a message that feeds upon itself and discourages people to make any decisions that may help boost the economy.

Let me address the issue of cost-cutting first. Tom Peters is attributed as saying either "you can't grow by shrinking," or "you can't grow by cutting costs." What ever the correct statement is, the sentiment is true. If you think strategically and invest in market growth and market your product appropriately, you product will take root in the market place and revenue and, if managed intelligently, profit will follow.

The other mentality is that of the C-level. As usual they see no benefit in marketing and choose not to market their way to prosperity. Instead they choose to entrench and try to survive, not realizing that a downturn or recession has been shown to be an exceptional opportunity to seize advantage in the marketplace. It is telling that Apple, Google, Coca-Cola and Procter & Gamble have all increased marketing spending by at least 10% during the past few years. As a result, they have increased market share and have successfully launched new products.

It can't be said that only consumer companies have been successful doing this. The marketing arms of a number of tech companies such as TI have done great things and are reaping vast rewards. Sadly, these companies seem to be an exception and not the rule. Most companies are taking on a bunker mentality and live in fear of tomorrow which in a sense means they are tying their own noose and will be completely unprepared to take advantaged of a new burst when the economy resumes humming.

The conclusion that can be drawn here is that some companies are choosing to take the lead and market their products to their customers. These companies are the ones who will be uniquely positioned as the next wave of market leaders and some may continue brand leadership, others may sit on their hands, focus exclusively on the near term and lose any market advantage. Investment in marketing and communications will result in brand leadership and market growth if not now then in the future. The question is if you are an entrepreneur and see marketing as an investment with low to moderate risk or if you're completely risk adverse and are willing to sacrifice future growth for short term satisfaction.

Where is the leadership in Public Relations

A friend sent me an interesting article showing that a Chief Petty Officer in the Coast Guard who was responsible for crafting the government's message about the BP spill also worked for BP's PR agency. While the article was unclear regarding the exact role of this person and if they worked on the BP account it did raise some distributing questions about the roles of public relations, ethics and leadership.

One issue PR people deal with is the concept that we are nothing but spin masters. Basically, many people both outside and, quite sadly, inside the organization, think it is our job to take manure and turn it into lovely fertilizer. The sad fact of the matter is that the PR profession and many of its leaders are the greatest factors in ensuring this is not simply a stereotype, but, sadly the state of affairs in PR.

Going back to the case of the Chief Petty Officer I was reminded of an ethics question posed to both doctors and lawyers in law and medical school respectively. They are basically told that if they need to ask themselves, "is this ethical?" comes up, then it is most likely unethical, or at best a gray area and they should avoid it. While lawyers are hardly seen as the paragons of ethics and doctors can be compromised, the fact is they have a set of rules in their professions which say what is and what isn't wrong.

What's also missing in PR that is found in both professions (legal and medical) is that young professionals entering the field are thrown into the field where they are required to make decisions, act professionally and deliver results. In this respect, PR is quite similar, where we diverge is that the doctor or lawyer is also given the benefit of constant feedback; good, bad or otherwise.

Sadly, in public relations, and marketing too, we see virtually no mentoring like what is seen in most professions. Rather we see an assumption that the person who has been hired at an entry level knows what they are doing and it is up to them to do it right. There is also what I would call a twisted sense among senior levels that this is how they learned it and if you can't swim you shouldn't be in the pool.

This all circles back to the issue about the Coast Guard CPO and BP. No one in an agency setting I have seen conducts anything even approaching real training for their staff. Very few people give honest and educational feedback to a junior PR person so they may learn. Senior PR people do love to bring junior people on the carpet and dress them down and self serving lectures are all a part of office politics but genuine and true leadership that challenges PR people to be critical thinkers and to engage in dialogue is very rare indeed.

I do wish to be clear this is not simply an agency problem. In some respects, the corporate PR world has a greater leadership gap than agencies. For one thing, they are usually held responsible for stroking the ego of a CEO or some other senior executive and telling them what they wish to hear and not the truth. Corporate PR tends to be about turf and privileges and not about doing the best job possible. It does mirror agency life in that junior people are expected to not make any mistakes but, at the same time, avoid asking any questions, even if they may learn from it.

The sad fact of PR is that there is a vacuum of leadership in the PR industry. Yes, that's a broad brush statement and I know personally there are very good leaders in public relations today. But compared to other professions we lack leaders who are willing to be mentors, teachers and to lay down a series of rules that will help define us as a profession. Would you trust a lawyer who wasn't a member of the bar? Would you trust a doctor whose license to practice has been revoked? Then why do we trust PR people who owe their positions to being able to survive the various business cycles. Remember the old story about what survives a nuclear war? Cockroaches and Twinkies? Well PR deserves to have its leadership be true leaders and not just cockroaches and Twinkies.