The combination of public affairs and media relations is tried and tested, delivering great exposure in the media. It was successful mainly because the timing was good rather than because the approach was creative.
Would a crisis and issue service for members, speaker platforms and case studies have created an even greater impact?
Overall delivery was good. A healthy mix of high-profile print and broadcast coverage was the result of providing journalists with what they wanted when they needed it. Speed of response was well used, and the strategy of pinning stories to high-profile announcements was sound. By owning the issue of UK jobs moving abroad, Buffalo positioned NOA as the voice of the industry, shielding its members from the media and deflecting negative publicity. In this respect the campaign was clever, adding value to the NOA.
PR can drive sales, but it can't make people buy. So was Buffalo fairly remunerated? Payment by results was a brave approach and initially, I presume, attractive. However, by pinning payment to increasing membership - just one of the three objectives and a controversial PR role at that - Buffalo effectively gave away the other two for free, despite the value it added.