EDITORIAL: If you aren't being strategic, why not?

PR has gone through more makeovers than Madonna. It's switched from

publicity to PR. In an effort to distance itself from the perceived

negativity of "PR," it's often called "communications" or "public

affairs." And it's been rebranded as "perception management" and

"reputation management." But there's a new buzzword that's crept into

the vocabulary of agency PR. And the word is "strategic."



It's appearing everywhere. There are 25 PR agencies who use the word

"strategic" in their names. Several more have the word "strategic" in

their marketing straplines and taglines. And one hears countless

references to "strategic" counsel; and "strategic" consulting.



In our feature ("Selling Strategic," p. 19), we look at what "strategic

PR" is and how it's seeped into the popular PR lexicon. But we think the

development of a "strategic" distinction is extraordinary. What is the

alternative being offered? It's a sad indictment on the standard of PR

agency work in general because it implies that the majority are offering

and receiving "unstrategic" advice. And who could possibly want

that?



Of course, it's not all the fault of agencies. There are some clients

who want implementation only: they figure that they know what they want,

and they need lots of warm bodies to execute their plans. But why should

a client want to cut themselves off from other viewpoints? Can a client

seriously run their operations well if their peremptory manner does not

allow their plans to be subject to question?



At the same time, you've got to ask why so many agencies are happy to

pay lip service to client instructions. As journalists, we see it in

micro form in the slavish "chase" calls that follow up press releases,

accompanied by an apologetic shrug. "The client asked us to do it. We're

only doing our job." When people are doing things that they don't even

believe in, it's not a happy state of affairs.



There's a danger that the word "strategic" is being overused and

undermined by people who don't know its true meaning. But the far more

serious concern is that not enough people are evidently practicing

"strategic" PR. It's time to go back to school.



Media clippings still have a role



One of the 10 telltale signs that you're being "tactical" rather than

"strategic" is if the only measure of your PR program's success is

determined by media clippings. While we wouldn't disagree, the conundrum

over media clippings is worth further comment.



As everyone who exists in the real world knows, there are a myriad of

factors that can affect share prices, product launches, brand

recognition, sales performance and other indicators. So the idea of

setting up a program that is measured by, say, "share price" is not only

risky; it's naive (and that won't come across as very strategic). PR

exists for the most part in a complex mix. Only in rare (and usually

award-winning) cases can the exact effect of the PR element be isolated.

This doesn't mean that PR should comfortably fall back on clippings

books, but it doesn't mean that clippings books should be ignored

altogether either. Other measures and tools should be investigated and

used; but the old-fashioned clippings book - particularly when subjected

to relative evaluation - is still a "strategic" device.



Have you registered with us yet?

Register now to enjoy more articles and free email bulletins

Register
Already registered?
Sign in

Would you like to post a comment?

Please Sign in or register.