Is there anything left to say about the technology decline? Last year was brutal for most firms and tech practices - even those that had revenue growth. The closure of Niehaus Ryan Wong was emblematic of the industry's rise and collapse; layoffs were ubiquitous, and competition for new business became ferocious.
Talk of recovery focused on the first quarter of 2002, then the third quarter, and now, who knows? Tech PR practitioners have thrown away the Ouija board, and are focusing primarily on maintaining existing clients and winning new accounts.
More than halfway through 2002, the PR industry is shaking off that sense of overwhelming negativity and concentrating instead on how to better meet client expectations. Technology PR, like the industry it serves, must never stop innovating.
Big drops in revenues characterized the results for many agencies in 2001. Only three firms in the top 10 showed growth last year, including Waggener Edstrom, Porter Novelli, and Ketchum. Weber Shandwick Worldwide topped the table, even with its 27% drop to $90.6 million. Fleishman-Hillard, second in the rankings, fell almost 20% to $88 million.
Independents like The Hoffman Agency and Applied Communications managed to hold their own, as did FitzGerald Communications, which next year will be reported as part of Brodeur Worldwide following their merger. Brodeur itself dropped 25% to $39 million. Gallagher PR, which reported 49% growth, will also look different in the 2002 table, as it split into two separate agencies earlier this year.
Ogilvy PR experienced the biggest drop in the top 10, falling almost 50% from $57.2 million in 2000 to $28.6 million last year. A few standouts saw dramatic growth, but they were rare, and tended to be on the smaller side. Greenough Communications boosted its revenues by 114% to $6.1 million.
A&R Partners shot up 37% to $12.3 million.
No one was sorry to see the end of 2001, but 2002 is proving to be tougher than some thought it would be. The slowdown seems to have leveled off for many firms, so next year's figures may not show such a dramatic change.
But many in technology PR have stopped watching to meter and have started to focus instead on developing new ways to meet client needs. This means more than repackaging of traditional offerings (although that certainly does happen), but actually taking a hard look at offerings and processes, and adding value to every dollar the client spends.
Of course, much of the effort is geared at winning new business. But innovation also serves to keep staff engaged, creative, and motivated, and provides opportunities to test new tools that can ultimately be integrated across practice areas. "The good thing about this period of recession is that innovation has become non-negotiable, says Chris Lewis, CEO of Lewis PR. "Companies don't innovate in a boom time - they don't need to."
Innovation in technology PR takes many forms, from new billing models to partnerships to applications of research. Many new ideas and formulas are starting to show themselves now, and some may not appear to be revolutionary.
But the point is that tech PR pros are not just hiding under their desks, but are trying to help clients better meet their shrinking budgets, and increasing expectations of internal audiences.
"We have to reassess every aspect of what we have done, says Tim Dyson, CEO of OneMonday Group. "The predisposition of tech PR to recommend the well-worn idea is something that needs to go. Technology needs to get more creative as a concept, needs to get in touch with the real customer more, and be open to the kinds of concepts that have been used in other areas of PR for decades. Dyson believes that working closely with clients on ways to generate sales is one key to new processes.
"You can't do business as usual anymore, agrees Ray Kotcher, CEO of Ketchum, explaining that innovation is a discussion that is happening across all the firm's practice areas. Ketchum recently announced a partnership with International Data (IDC) to launch ChannelEdge, a communications and intelligence strategy aimed at helping companies develop better relationships with sales partners. The program, created by global tech director Paul Rand, is a first for IDC in partnering with a PR firm, and represents the kind of strategic thinking about real client needs that is happening across the sector.
"You have to continue to innovate, to move forward, Kotcher explains.
"When the dust settles, the people who continue to innovate, to question and move in new directions, those organizations are going to be positioned to take advantage of the upturn when it happens."
Ketchum's alliance with IDC is just one example of how the industry is creating greater value for clients by partnering with other companies.
New alliances have been created to bring a full range of marketing capabilities to clients, identifying firms beyond just PR.
MSR Communications partnered with McArthur Design in June to address needs of its smaller, VC-funded clients to launch a branding campaign without a huge investment in a PR relationship. The alliance has created a package called The Basics, offering marketing tools, positioning sessions, and boilerplate materials for around $10,000.
Some partnerships are designed to shed light on corporate management issues. Neale-May & Partners has allied itself with research firm The Sausalito Group to help companies analyze their corporate structures.
The team did a survey of 150 different business managers for one organization to find out how effectively the organization was meshing together. Another agreement with Buzz Metrics provides clients with tracking data on online communities.
Agencies are investing in ways to reach across the marketing mix. McGrath/Power devotes one-third of its monthly budget to "alternative strategies, which could be a seminar series, a conference, customer panels, or CRM programs.
"We are actually sort of drifting more into the marketing side of things, says CEO Jonathan Bloom.
Ogilvy has also created networking opportunities, inviting clients, top-tier media, and analysts to come together in small groups with no agenda or press kits. Additional gatherings are planned in cities across the country, and as subsets of existing technology conferences.
Research projects are becoming more and more targeted to the information that clients need to reach their internal and external audiences, not just analyses of historical campaigns. Phil Greenough, president of Greenough Communications, spent years working on the corporate side for such companies as IBM and Lotus. The firm recently completed a research project to assess where marketing budgets had been cut, and how companies suffered from pulling back on that kind of investment. The information was designed to give clients and prospects the tools to make their case to CEOs about the importance of investing in PR.
"Having spent a long time as a client, I know that people need information from which to make decisions about the marketing mix and investment, Greenough explains. The firm also produced a mailer offering the research to thousands of marketing executives across the country, and has already had a few hundred requests for information in return.
A full range of services
"The biggest innovation in technology client service today is that we are doing a lot more than just product publicity these days, says Sheri Benjamin, president of Weber Shandwick Worldwide's US tech practice. "The unfortunate environment right now is giving us a very good opportunity to introduce the true nature of PR."
Benjamin and others note that as technology companies have matured, what they seek from PR firms has also evolved. Increasingly, she says, companies are looking to agencies to provide counsel on everything from IR to government relations to corporate reputation. Tech companies are still learning how their PR firms can help them manage these issues.
As a result, PR agencies have had to make sure that those capabilities are available to tech clients. Benjamin says that her job is to ensure that the agency's leading practice specialists are available to the tech clients when needed. This demands a greater level of collaboration within the agency, Benjamin says, because sometimes it takes expertise outside of the tech practice to identify opportunities.
Providing ongoing access to non-tech expertise reflects the changes in priorities for many technology companies. "We made a really conscious effort to provide clients with the full scope of services that we offer as Porter Novelli, says Steve Jursa, the agency's senior partner and global practice leader.
As part of Porter Novelli's "insights, ideas and impact approach, the firm looked for ways to provide greater value to existing relationships.
"The biggest example of that would be Hewlett-Packard, Jursa says. "We shifted several parts of that business from the technology sector to the consumer sector in New York. What they want is everything that you would expect from a consumer item sold in Wal-Mart."
The trend is also apparent in firms that are not global. Applied Communications launched what it calls "practice networks, allowing clients to access experts in IR, media relations, or analyst communications as needed, rather than having to keep them on an account team full time.
Some agencies, like Edelman, have reorganized internally to streamline processes and build direct client relationships regionally, by replacing its hierarchical structure with a global steering committee. The goal is to build a more open point-to-point network, so whether clients are tapping Edelman domestically or internationally, their accounts will be coordinated through the key person in each region. Carlo Crighton was hired in April to head up international operations and develop strategy across the network. Harry Pforzheimer, president of Edelman's Western region, says, "Every company or agency has to reinvent themselves every six months or every year."
Companies are also increasingly asking agencies how they can help drive sales. Five years ago, according to Jeremy Hartman, VP of corporate positioning with Citigate Cunningham, research focused on products. "Research five years ago was helping them understand what impact their product would have on the world, he says. "Today, research is based on existing customers."
In order to prove its commitment to and comprehension of sales challenges, LaunchSquad has pitched new clients by surveying 100 of the company's customers and prospects to find out how they are spending their money and why.
Schwartz Communications has created programs and networking opportunities for smaller clients through the formalization of its government relations practice. "Larger clients and companies that are leaders in their respective industries already have effective internal government relations apparatuses supporting their efforts, explains Jim Weinrebe, SVP. "But for emerging technology companies, there is clearly an educational process required so they are better aware of government relations and outreach as a key element to their business."
Value for money
Technology budgets continue to contract, and PR firms are finding ways to deliver more targeted services without overselling. "Some of the things we've ended up doing have a much tighter focus, says Neil Myers, president of Connect PR. The firm has structured billings to meet more restricted budgets, but it requires its clients to help out by being absolutely specific in their goals. Rather than trying to have meetings with 30 publications during a media tour, the firm will now develop programs to meet six or seven key media contacts - the ones that will drive sales.
Text 100 and parent OneMonday Group try to strike a balance between managing budgets and expectations. "We've had to try to budget relationships with clients and focus them much more on the actual deliverables from the programs, Dyson says. "You don't want to get into paying by results, but we want people to be much more focused on the outcomes."
Beyond the financial issues, agencies are challenged to take a fresh look at existing clients, to thwart the kind of staleness that could make a good client look elsewhere. Brodeur Worldwide has charged president Janet Swaysland with managing the agency's renewed focus on client service.
Since January 1, Swaysland has been auditing every account and team to evaluate the positive and negative components of each, as well as assess how the demands of clients reflect current trends.
"Looking across all clients, we could quickly spot patterns and see emerging trends, and innovate more quickly, Swaysland explains. Much of what companies want to know these days is how other companies are coping with issues like structure, measurement, and staffing. Brodeur's analysis gives them insights they can give clients, while maintaining confidentiality. "It's been a way for them to get a window into one another, she says.
As technology continues to innovate, so too must the PR practitioners that serve it. "And in good times or bad, the scientists, investors, engineers, and entrepreneurs - the beating heart of the technology industry for decades - are still in the game, read a July 2002 article in The New York Times.
"It is such people who push the technology ahead on its uncertain but inexorable journey towards a few, often unanticipated, markets that prove to be lucrative - despite the inevitable failures along the way."
1. WEBER SHANDWICK WORLDWIDE $90,613,120 - down 27%
Three words sum up Weber Shandwick Worldwide in 2001: Integration, consolidation, and reorganization.
Last year was a major test for WSW, a year after the merger of Shandwick International and The Weber Group. It's hard enough knowing all eyes are watching after a merger of that magnitude. But in such a depressed hi-tech PR environment, the stakes were even higher.
Led by Sheri Benjamin, the tech practice president in the US, the firm sought to help its clients get through the downturn while maintaining a level of breadth and depth - and intellectual capital - that cemented its position as hi-tech PR leader, at least in terms of revenue. WSW added new divisions of Agilent to its client list, along with Brocade Communications Systems. But it ended work with Kodak's information imaging division in 2001.
To cope with the weakness and uncertainty of the sector, WSW is addressing a broader array of client needs, including corporate reputation and issues management, crisis communications, branding and positioning, thought leadership, and competitive research. Now that corporate reputation bests hype more than ever, the firm is working to help its clients recognize the difference, and ensure that they achieve their business goals, and not just amass press clippings.
2. FLEISHMAN-HILLARD $88,020,000 - down 20%
As dot-coms started going the way of the dinosaur, Fleishman-Hillard sought to diversify it client base away from start-ups. And while its technology client base shrank by one-fifth due to the loss of internet start-ups and PC market leader Dell, Fleishman worked hard to strengthen relationships with other clients.
The agency, led by technology practice chairman Michael Busselen, worked harder to protect the reputations of top-tier tech clients such as Intel, Sun Microsystems, and Yahoo! Thanks to a variety of services, such as financial crisis counsel and support, public affairs, sales force communications programs, and internal communications, those and other companies were able to navigate the choppy waters of shrinking demand and capital investment.
Due to the lack of IT investment these days, Fleishman's next moves are predicated on what could be a very slow recovery. But the agency sees light at the end of the tunnel.
The adoption of next-generation technologies, such as new handheld devices, fuel cells, and broadband standards like WiFi, opened new client opportunities.
But the firm knows that the next wave of technology will build slowly, and while tech will always remain a vital industry, it won't revolutionize the way it did in the 1990s.
3. WAGGENER EDSTROM 56,685,000 - up 1%
For Waggener Edstrom, 2001 was a banner year. The firm signed more than 20 new clients, including Vignette and MasterCard, opened new offices in London and Austin, TX, and hired four new executives - all of which took the sting out of losing SAP.
The firm also moved into a new market: biotech. CEO and president Melissa Waggener had been exploring the possibility of getting into biotech and healthcare for the past few years, says VP Jenny Moede. After a year devoted to researching how best to jump into this emerging market, and not wanting to just apply its tech practice to biotech, the agency decided to start chasing drug companies, and has signed clients such as Biolab and Cortex Pharmaceuticals.
"It would have been a bit misdirected to go after the tech side of biotech, says Moede. "Right now, the hot spot is the drug side. We were more interested in the solutions being offered, and that's the drug side. It's what is closest to the patient."
And if the first half of this year is any indication, the rest of 2002 will bring more good news. The firm opened another office, this one in Stamford, CT, and signed new clients, including OutlookSoft and Applied Discovery.
4. HILL & KNOWLTON (BLANC & OTUS) $47,357,000 - down 13%
Blanc & Otus, the technology practice of Hill & Knowlton's, started off 2002 with the same problems it faced in 2001: budget reductions among clients, increased competition for new businesses with lower average monthly billings, and the decimation of the telecommunications sector that thrived in 2000 and early 2001.
But by focusing on business fundamentals such as cutting costs, streamlining operations, and consolidating offices, Blanc & Otus was able to minimize its contraction.
"I think we were fairly successful, although the economic situation made it all the more challenging, says president and CEO Greg Spector. "We hit all the challenges on (cutting costs and streamlining). And our focus on educating ourselves and keeping an eye on our industries was designed to help penetrate new markets. I think we did a good job there.
"And on increasing our productivity, it was just the nature of the work last year. We moved in new directions, made client extranets the standard, and encouraged our clients to adopt multimedia news releases."
And while the firm lost the business of E.piphany in the US, and TiVo, it has made up for that with more than a dozen new clients, including Sony Computer Entertainment America and Alphabox.
5. PORTER NOVELLI $41,862,000 - up 5%
Porter Novelli knew something wasn't quite right when other PR firms started chasing dot-coms like groupies. Under the guidance of Steve Jursa, senior partner and global tech practice leader, Porter Novelli recognized the risks, and took steps that enabled it to survive the hi-tech downturn.
"We were cautious about taking on dot-coms or venture-funded companies that did not have a sound business plan, says Jursa. "Lots of agencies repositioned themselves as dot-com agencies. But that's not to say we didn't have dot-com clients."
And while the firm saw a few companies such as Novell and Polycom take their business elsewhere, it picked up new clients in 2001, and this year added some more, including Peoplesoft and Plantronics. It also strengthened relationships with clients such as Hewlett-Packard, EMC, and Qualcomm by focusing its PR efforts globally, and providing brand and reputation management, investor relations, crisis management, and lead generation.
And while economic confidence and the stock market have seen better days, Jursa said Porter Novelli's tech practice remains focused on providing services its clients need, including stronger investor relations, and corporate and employee communications.
18. A&R PARTNERS $12,350,475- up 37%
As the frenetic pace of hi-tech PR slowed, A&R Partners used that as an opportunity to invest in training, process improvements, professional development, and new services. One new service the firm found particularly gratifying was demand generation.
"This is not something we were directly involved with in the past, says president and managing partner Bob Angus. "But our clients were working hard to generate sales, so we focused on how we could help. One area where we had success was radio promotions. These were particularly popular around the holidays, and helped with market positioning efforts.
They were regional in nature, so we were able to use radio promotions, such as product giveaways, and see how that impacted sales. Because at the end of the day, PR programs have to help the bottom line, and help your clients do business."
A&R Partners lost clients such as Epicor and Latitude, but made up for it with higher-profile accounts from Adobe Systems and Interwoven.
The agency intends to stay essential to its clients' marketing needs by building its training programs in market context and other skill areas.
20. APPLIED COMMUNICATIONS $10,379,000 - up 7%
The loss of Oracle's business is not the blow that many think it to be. Applied Communications was extremely open about Oracle's decision to move its PR in-house, and worked hard last year to replace that loss with top technology companies, and to refine its communications research offerings.
The firm, led by president and CEO Alan Kelly, did just that. BEA Systems and VeriSign signed on, while Applied also rolled out a number of new practice networks focusing on policy communications, and analyst and media relations. The agency pooled together a team of staff members skilled in specific practices - such as media and analyst relations - to make their expertise available to all accounts. This group complemented the account teams already in place. So an account team working with a client who has little need for AR can call upon the AR expertise of the cross-client team when needed.
But Applied recently lost one of its top executives, SVP and partner Tim Marklein, who went to Hewlett-Packard as its new director of corporate media relations. Replacing Marklein's expertise will be on the firm's list of challenges for this year.
As with most hi-tech PR firms, the downturn remains the biggest challenge.
But with clients such as HP and Veritas, Applied believes it is well positioned to ride out the downturn, and end 2002 on a positive note.
65. ATOMIC PR $1,712,000 - up 35%
Last year was a mixed bag for AtomicPR. Because of the economic downturn that is pummeling hi-tech companies, the San Francisco firm had to shutter its fledgling offices in the Pacific Northwest and Southern California. AtomicPR also saw the loss of accounts such as Sigaba and Generic Media, both of which decided to bring their PR efforts in-house.
Yet despite those hurdles, Atomic met its goal of growing revenue by a third in 2001, which it did, from $1.3 million in 2000 to $1.85 million in 2001. Seven new client wins, including Hitachi Data Systems and Actional, helped make that goal a reality.
But whether that goal is reasonable or reachable this year remains to be seen. This year "has been erratic, with monthly revenue swinging more dramatically than last year, and unpredictable client budgets across the board, says CEO Andy Getsey. "PR budgets at the vast majority of technology companies are significantly down, if not slashed. The present conditions pose a serious challenge for all tech PR firms, as well as opportunities for firms that can produce significant business-driving results at reasonable costs, and still generate profit."
67. ARMSTRONG KENDALL $1,692,154 - up 32%
Armstrong Kendall managed to ride out the dot-com collapse by not chasing dot-com clients in the first place.
"We chose to stay out of the dot-coms, says principal Abbie kendall, "because if they couldn't explain to us how they were going to make money, how could we explain that to the media? So she and co-principal Jean Armstrong focused on attaining new clients and maintaining its three-year record of growth. The firm also moved into the design-for-test and charge-couple markets. With new clients such as Teseda and SITe, and no client losses to report, that strategy appears to be paying off.
"Knowing the economy was the way it was, we've been pretty aggressive in managing our expenses, says Armstrong. "Some of our competitors are in very fancy digs, and that costs money. So before we spend money on something, we make sure we need it.
We just moved into new offices, but we put off remodeling. That has really helped us maintain our bottom line."
Now, Armstrong Kendall is expanding strategically. The firm recently opened its first office in Silicon Valley, in anticipation of future growth stemming from that region.
107. LANE MARKETING $804,690 - up 58%
Despite a tough year for tech PR firms, Lane Marketing's technology practice grew by nearly 60% in 2001, thanks to a delicate balancing act.
"We've always been a diverse agency, says president Wendy Lane. "We're one-third b-to-b, one-third consumer, and one-third hi-tech. When tech got so hot in 1999, we wondered if we could keep the balance. But we did keep it, which in hindsight was a good idea. Through an aggressive marketing campaign, the firm made a concerted effort to win business outside of the Portland, OR region, where it is headquartered. New clients included CashTech in LA.
But the tough times are not over, despite new accounts like SAS Performance Management. Lane predicts that the agency will continue its history of consistent growth, albeit smaller this year (about 10%), since it did break into new markets such as telecoms and wireless with Cricket Communications, Encompass Teleservices, and EEI Solutions. However, Houston-based Encompass brought its PR in-house, and EEI also withdrew its business as its parent company consolidated PR firms.
Lane compensated by strengthening its consumer practice, and by moving into the government sector.
TOP HI-TECH AGENCIES
Rank Agency Name Healthcare Income (dollars) Change
2001 2001 2000 %
1 Weber Shandwick Worldwide 90,613,120 124,123,327 -27
2 Fleishman-Hillard 88,020,000 109,551,000 -20
3 Waggener Edstrom 56,685,000 56,162,000 1
4 Hill & Knowlton 47,357,000 54,350,000 -13
5 Porter Novelli 41,862,000 39,940,100 5
6 Brodeur Worldwide 39,600,000 53,500,000 -26
7 Edelman Public
Relations Worldwide 37,646,937 56,522,835 -33
8 Ketchum 31,545,000 30,323,000 4
9 Schwartz Communications 30,375,804 33,185,571 -8
10 Ogilvy Public
Relations Worldwide 28,678,821 57,220,000 -50
11 Burson-Marsteller 28,083,000 43,742,000 -36
12 Golin/Harris International 26,620,590 45,716,742 -42
13 FitzGerald Communications 22,829,998 21,441,162 6
14 Ruder Finn Group 19,821,000 26,155,000 -24
15 GCI Group/APCO Worldwide 15,755,601 20,857,652 -24
16 Text 100 Public Relations 15,004,479 13,003,773 15
17 MS&L 13,765,470 20,297,669 -32
18 A & R Partners 12,350,475 9,000,300 37
19 Publicis Dialog 12,119,745 11,532,939 5
20 Applied Communications 10,379,000 9,695,000 7
21 The Hoffman Agency 10,300,000 10,300,000 0
22 Neale-May & Partners 9,651,765 15,044,000 -36
23 Horn Group 9,557,000 10,082,000 -5
24 Morgen-Walke Associates 8,155,000 N/A N/A
25 KCSA Public Relations 8,000,000 9,000,000 -11
26 Cohn & Wolfe 7,691,000 7,714,000 -0.3
27 Phase Two Strategies 6,811,865 8,096,732 -16
28 PR21 6,327,346 9,630,823 -34
29 Greenough Communications 6,114,000 2,850,000 115
30 Access Communications 6,070,000 8,014,000 -24
and Associates 6,021,364 N/A N/A
32 The MWW Group 6,005,003 16,453,208 -64
33 Gallagher PR 5,853,795 3,920,911 49
34 Magnet Communications 5,705,000 10,864,000 -47
35 Eastwick Communications 5,700,707 6,928,338 -18
36 Sterling Communications 5,600,000 6,700,000 -16
37 Pan Communications 5,470,620 6,672,000 -18
38 Stanton Crenshaw Communications 5,160,000 4,383,068 18
39 Middleberg Euro RSCG 4,865,145 10,513,230 -54
40 Connect Public Relations 4,427,525 4,847,188 -9
41 Merritt Group 4,400,000 4,300,000 2
42 Walt and Company Communications 3,974,408 4,932,925 -19
43 Outcast Communications 3,900,000 4,700,000 -17
44 Bohle Company 3,848,020 6,533,012 -41
45 O'Keeffe & Company 3,653,387 4,148,940 -12
46 Shelton 3,603,226 2,796,362 29
47 Metzger Associates 3,160,136 4,740,972 -33
48 McGrath/Power Public Relations 3,080,003 4,022,279 -23
49 The Bernhardt Agency 2,880,000 N/A N/A
50 Voce Communications 2,861,736 1,841,109 55
51 Duffey Communications 2,809,865 2,701,793 4
52 Dittus Communications 2,670,500 N/A N/A
53 Switzer Communications 2,607,534 2,546,460 2
54 MPRM Public Relations 2,506,000 2,722,931 -8
55 McClenahan Bruer Communications 2,500,000 2,300,000 9
56 Spring O'Brien & Co. 2,451,045 2,127,376 15
57 PepperCom 2,347,658 3,710,182 -37
58 Carter Ryley Thomas 2,239,136 2,526,939 -11
59 Big Sky Communications 2,202,742 1,657,931 33
60 Makovsky & Company 2,166,000 2,665,000 -19
61 Bender/Helper Impact 2,104,031 2,669,952 -21
62 Paine PR 2,100,026 3,187,703 -34
63 Pierpont Communications 1,795,277 1,341,842 34
64 Gogerty Stark Marriott 1,718,309 1,629,358 5
65 AtomicPR 1,712,000 1,270,000 35
66 Ashton Partners 1,698,030 1,277,636 33
67 Armstrong Kendall 1,692,154 1,277,177 32
68 Qorvis Communications 1,652,233 N/A N/A
69 Padilla Speer Beardsley 1,555,861 2,239,315 -31
70 M Booth & Associates 1,542,249 1,899,922 -19
71 Marenghi Public Relations 1,500,500 1,941,000 -23
72 Gibbs & Soell 1,477,300 1,856,100 -20
73 Morrissey & Company 1,475,055 944,843 56
74 CKPR 1,468,000 710,000 107
75 Rowland Communications
Worldwide 1,454,600 4,479,000 -68
76 Thorp & Company 1,414,231 1,020,321 39
77 Eric Mower and Associates 1,400,000 150,000 833
78 Airfoil Public Relations 1,312,865 N/A N/A
79 Ackermann PR 1,300,588 2,534,701 -49
80 Jasculca/Terman and Associates 1,289,304 1,226,434 5
81 Cone 1,276,947 2,768,639 -54
82 Creative Response Concepts 1,265,150 1,215,609 4
83 NYPR Marketing and
Public Relations 1,262,428 1,420,281 -11
84 Sacunas & Saline 1,259,103 367,220 243
85 BRW LeGrand 1,220,810 900,000 36
86 INK inc. Media Relations/PR 1,197,588 N/A N/A
87 The Rasky/Baerlein Group 1,154,519 939,673 23
88 Vollmer 1,129,471 2,600,149 -57
89 Corporate Ink Public Relations 1,095,193 1,107,910 -1
90 HLB Communications 1,060,735 1,572,956 -33
91 Triad Communication 1,037,592 1,379,556 -25
92 Bite Communications 1,033,980 676,608 53
93 Sawchuk Brown Associates 1,010,000 N/A N/A
94 G.S. Schwartz & Company 1,000,000 2,400,000 -58
95 Lewis 981,261 N/A N/A
96 Dome Communications 980,000 845,000 16
97 Michael James & Co. 961,245 1,071,518 -10
98 Schenkein 922,742 280,350 229
99 Bates Churchill
Public Relations 881,515 705,000 25
100 MSR Communications 876,788 771,919 14
101 TateAustin Public Relations 875,000 N/A N/A
102 JMC Marketing
Communications & PR 856,316 520,999 64
103 Catapult PR-IR 848,000 800,000 6
104 Kupper Parker Communications 847,199 764,608 11
105 Cushman/Amberg Communications 825,000 N/A N/A
106 Dovetail PR 822,899 874,548 -6
107 Lane Marketing Communications 804,690 509,758 58
108 Saphar & Associates 779,026 709,542 10
109 Bader Rutter & Associates 750,000 832,197 -10
110 CooperKatz & Company 713,458 N/A N/A
111 LaunchSquad 678,000 622,000 9
112 PRX 668,300 903,631 -26
113 Nichol & Company 660,406 N/A N/A
114 Optimum Public Relations 654,000 886,000 -26
115 Maxwell PR 650,000 N/A N/A
116 Techcom Partners 635,113 618,759 3
117 Marx Layne & Company 613,301 N/A N/A
118 Vorhaus & Company 588,326 N/A N/A
119 Patrice Tanaka & Company 579,208 649,000 -11
120 Equals Three Communications 552,565 328,139 69
121 The Kamber Group 520,000 N/A N/A
122 HSR Business to Business 517,200 481,300 7
123 Strategic Objectives 515,735 595,866 -13
124 The Weiser Group 510,000 875,000 -42
125 Morningstar Communications
Company 501,313 89,800 458
126 LandersMadden 500,000 N/A N/A
127 Conkling, Fiskum & McCormick 494,720 337,517 47
128 Stratacomm 470,451 287,007 64
129 The Ruth Group 440,500 N/A N/A
130 Barkley Evergreen & Partners 433,442 356,538 22
131 Imada Wong Communications Group 430,000 250,000 72
132 McNeely Pigott &
Fox Public Relations 422,525 594,584 -29
133 McKie-Headstrom PR 419,000 203,000 106
134 Plesser Associates 415,500 324,807 28
135 DCS Group 411,847 499,191 -18
136 Andrea Obston Marketing
Communications 400,000 300,000 33
137 Schneider & Associates 387,557 781,984 -50
138 The Bivings Group 386,500 547,800 -29
139 Hope-Beckham 386,484 1,083,671 -64
140 Edward Howard & Co. 382,600 705,000 -46
141 Lovio George 375,886 422,009 -11
142 Jack Horner Communications 369,756 339,932 9
143 IMRE Communications 369,437 N/A N/A
144 DW Turner Public Relations 363,710 32,680 1013
145 Rogers & Associates 351,242 1,237,890 -72
146 Linhart McClain Finlon PR 317,214 796,835 -60
147 Bishoff Solomon Communications 307,788 457,123 -33
148 Fletcher Martin Ewing PR 300,000 300,000 0
149 The Headline Group 276,214 521,711 -47
150 Siddall Matus & Coughter 269,488 N/A N/A
151 Carmichael Lynch Spong 263,000 883,000 -70
152 Collins & Company 256,042 N/A N/A
153 John Bailey & Associates 240,000 620,881 -61
154 Katcher Vaughn &
Bailey Communications 232,000 223,000 4
155 Emmanuel Kerr Kilsby 200,000 400,000 -50
156 Southard Communications 200,000 N/A N/A
157 Richard French & Associates 193,818 222,897 -13
158 Bliss Gouverneur & Associates 193,000 N/A N/A
159 Bianchi Public Relations 191,956 131,863 46
160 Thomas Rankin Associates 191,796 N/A N/A
161 Jacobs & Prosek Public Relations 191,273 407,963 -53
162 Durazo Communications 182,855 N/A N/A
163 MGA Communications 172,996 219,059 -21
164 Caponigro Public Relations 164,879 145,250 14
165 Jackson Spalding 163,980 N/A N/A
166 PRStreet 160,000 180,600 -11
167 The Standing Partnership 148,793 267,908 -44
168 Valencia Perez & Echeveste 143,050 192,000 -25
169 Scott Peyron & Associates 142,815 169,161 -16
170 LaBreche Murray 141,000 N/A N/A
171 Levenson Public Relations 136,730 273,906 -50
172 Ward Creative Communications 136,459 N/A N/A
173 Paul Werth Associates 122,410 N/A N/A
174 The Phelps Group 120,000 952,000 -87
175 BCF&M 116,494 N/A N/A
176 Rossman Martin & Associates 113,104 N/A N/A
177 Zeppos & Associates 102,820 214,165 -52
178 Berry Associates
Public Relations 98,825 117,509 -16
179 Slay Public Relations
(formerly Martin Public Relations) 90,465 N/A N/A
180 Goff & Howard 90,000 62,000 45
181 Praco Public Relations &
Advertising 90,000 30,000 200
182 Dublin & Associates 82,366 146,638 -44
183 Toplin & Associates 69,000 210,000 -67
184 Dye, Van Mol & Lawrence 65,755 171,644 -62
185 Gerbig, Snell/Weisheimer 60,000 200,000 -70
186 Marcus Thomas 59,233 268,632 -78
187 Rosica Mulhern - Strategic
Public Relations 55,570 55,550 0.04
188 Brotman Winter
Fried Communications 42,000 42,000 0
189 Millennium Communications 41,201 N/A N/A
190 Public Relations Network 35,464 211,691 -83
191 L.C. Williams & Associates 35,320 N/A N/A
192 Tellem Worldwide 35,000 N/A N/A
193 Widmeyer Communications 30,000 N/A N/A
194 Seyferth Spaulding Tennyson 29,730 2,694 1004
195 Smith & Harroff 26,360 N/A N/A
196 The DeMoss Group 21,000 N/A N/A
197 Hyde Park Communications 17,000 N/A N/A
198 The JB Cumberland Group 10,970 59,494 -82
199 Reputation Management
Associates 10,000 N/A N/A
200 Anne Klein & Associates 5,800 20,400 -72
SOURCE: PRWeek/Council of PR Firms Agency Rankings 2002
DISCLAIMER: No audit was required for inclusion in the rankings. While
every effort has been made to ensure the accuracy of these figures,
PRWeek cannot accept liability for, nor make financial guarantees based
upon, the information in these charts.