Communications as Ikor

PRSA의 윤리 강령 < ?xml:namespace prefix = o ns = “urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office” />

이미 아시는 분들도 계시지만, 올해안에 한국 PR협회에서는 한국적 “PR윤리 강령”을 발표할 예정에 있습니다. 유수의 학계, 업계 태두들 께서 관련 업무를 진행 중이신 걸로 알고 있습니다. 저의 집 책상앞에는 미국 PRSA의 윤리 강령이 자그마한 액자에 걸려있습니다. 학교다닐때 거금 23불을 주고 삿던것으로 기억합니다. 그때는 그것이 그냥 일반적인 PRSA회원들의 강령(느낌 그대로 고리타분한)인줄 알았습니다. 그러나, 시간이 지난 지금 그 종목하나하나를 읽어 보면, 정말 “멋지게 일하는 방법과 룰(rule)”을 가르쳐 주는 하나의 계명 같은 생각이 듭니다. 한국의 PR윤리 강령을 준비하시는 분들도 아마 이 PRSA의 전문적 자긍심과 공동체 의식에 많은 감화를 받으신 분들임이 틀림없습니다.

PRSA의 윤리 강령은 한편 독립 에이젼시들의 편에서 PR적 직업윤리를 논했다는 단점(?)이 있기는 합니다. 인하우스에 계시는 분들은 약간 이질감이 계실 것으로 믿습니다. 그러나, 인하우스분들에게는 나름데로 독립에이젼시들에게 업무 의뢰를 하실때 이러한 룰이 있다는 것을 숙지하셔야 할 필요가 있습니다. “사실 우리는 아무것도 (홍보업무 의뢰 또는 아웃소싱) 모른다..그러니 한번 제안서를 가지고 와봐라..” 하는 것 보다, “이런 이런 스타일로 일이 진행되고, 이런이런 룰을 가지고 업무를 하는 녀석들이니 이런것은 요구해도 되고 이런건 좀 곤란하겠구나..”하는 컨셉을 가지시는 것이 앞으로 일을 더 멋있게 하실수 있는 길이라고 믿습니다.

제 개인적으로는 우리나라 독립 에이젼시 시장이 앞으로는 컨설팅 및 고급 PR 전략 기획 위주의 고부가, 고지식 중심시장으로 변화할 것으로 믿습니다. 메이져 에이젼시들과 마이너 에이젼시들의 시장에서의 차별화도 이루어 지고있습니다. 메이져들은 컨설팅 및 고급 PR 전략 기획들을 팔고, 마이너들은 그 기획과 컨설팅 내용을 Implementation하기 위한 전문분야 포지셔닝을 해야 할것입니다. 예를 들면, 특정 기업에 대한 위기관리 컨설팅을 메이져가 하고, 컨설팅에서 제안된 Crisis Audit / Assessment, Manual 제작, 시뮬레이션 대행, 미디어 트레이닝 대행 등등은 각각 전문화된 마이너 에이젼시들이 책임을 지는 형태가 될것입니다.

현재의 보도자료를 보내고, 전화를 걸고, 모니터링을 하고, 클리핑도 하고 하는 백화점식의 고급(?) 용역에서 벗어나서, 좀더 전문적이고, 효율적인 PR업무 패턴이 형성될것입니다. 현재 보도자료 배포를 전문으로 하는 업체도 생겨나고 있는 실정이니 벌써 이러한 변화는 시작되었다고 말씀드릴수 있습니다.

이러한 방향이 진정으로 파이를 키우는 길입니다.

그길을 가기위한 우리모두의 지상 과제는 자신의 업무에서의 “전문성 확보” 일 것입니다. 그래서 우리나라의 어르신들이 우리를 위한 값진 선물- 한국적 PR 윤리 강령”을 준비하고 계신 것입니다. 직업의 종류 중 윤리 강령을 가지고 있는 업종만이 진정한 사회적 전문직이기 때문입니다.

아래의 PRSA 윤리강령(Code of Professional Standards for the Practice of Public Relations) 17개 조항은 커뮤니케이션즈 코리아 김경해 사장님의 “생생한 PR현장 이야기”라는 책에서 제시된 한글역 입니다. 감상하시죠.

홍보….!!

*************************************************************************

1조 : PRSA 회원의 업무수행의 최고 기준은 공익(Public Interest)이다.

2조 : PRSA 회원은 고객이나 고용주를 위해 민주적 절차에 의해 업무를 수행하는 동안 정직과 양심(Honesty and Integrity)을 최대한 입증시켜야 한다.

3조 : PRSA 회원은 자유로운 문의와 타인의 의견을 존중하면서 공중, 현재나 과거의 고객이나 고용주, 그리고 동료 PR인들을 정당하게 다루어야만 한다(deal fairly).

4조 : PRSA 회원은 터무니없는 주장이나 부당한 비교를 하지 않으며, 다른 사람의 생각이나 말을 인용할 때는 꼭 정보원(credit)을 주면서 항상 정확성과 진실성(accuracy and truth)만을 추구하여야 한다.

5조 : PRSA의 회원은 잘못된 허위 정보 (false or misleading information)라는 것을 알고 있는 한 그것을 언론에 절대 배포하지 않을 것이며, 그가 책임져야 할 틀린 커뮤니케이션이 있었다면 즉각 정정하여야만 한다.

6조 : PRSA 회원은 커뮤니케이션 채널과 정부조직의 의사결정 진행 과정을 타락시킬(corrupting) 목적을 갖고 있는 어떤 행위도 해서는 안 된다.

7조 : PRSA 회원은 PR활동을 수행하는 고객이나 고용주의 이름을 언제나 공개적으로 밝힐 (identify publicly) 준비가 되어 있어야 한다.

8조 : PRSA 회원은 대외적으로 발표된 대의를 밝히거나 독립적이고 편견이 없다고 밝히면서 실제적으로는 밝히지 못할 이익(undisclosed interest) 을 추구하는 개인이나 조직을 이용해서는 안 된다.

9조 : PRSA 회원은 자신의 능력 밖의 어떤 결과를 성취하겠다는 보장을 해서는 안 된다.

10조 : PRSA 회원은 경쟁사나 이해관계가 상충되는 회사 일을 할 경우 모든 사실을 다 설명한 후 관련 당사자들의 명백한 동의가 있을 때만 새로운 일을 맡을 수 있다.

11조 : PRSA 회원은 회원 개인의 이해 관계가 고용주나 고객 또는 다른 관련 인사의 이해관계와 상충될 경우, 모든 관련 당사자에게 사실을 다 설명한 후 동의를 얻지 못하는 경우 그 새로운 업무에 개입해서는 안 된다.

12조 : 미리 허락을 받고서 서비스를 제공해 준 고객이나 고용주를 제외한 그 어떤 사람들로부터도 용역 대금, 커미션, 선물이나 어떤 다른 형식의 사례를 받아서는 안 된다.

13조 : PRSA 회원은 현재, 과거 그리고 미래의 고객이나 고용주의 비밀, 개인의 프라이버시와 관련된 사항은 성실히 보호해 주어야 한다.

14 조 : PRSA 회원은 다른 동료 PR인의 전문가적인 평판이나 업무에 의도적인 손상을 끼쳐서는 (damage the professional reputation) 안 된다.

15조 : PRSA 회원은 만약 다른 PRSA 회원이 PRSA 윤리강령의 위반을 포함한 비윤리적이고 불법적이고 정당하지 못한 일을 하고 있다는 증거를 포착했을 때는 부칙 12조에 규정된 것처럼 PRSA의 관련 기관이 조치를 취할 수 있게 보고하여야 한다.

16조 : PRSA의 윤리강령의 집행과정에서 증인으로 채택되는 회원은 PRSA의 사법 위원회가 충분한 이유가 있다고 양해하지 않는 한 증인으로서 출석해야 한다.

17조 : PRSA 회원은 어떤 조직이나 개인과의 관계가 PRSA 윤리강령에 위배되는 행위를 요구할 시 그 조직이나 개인과의 관계를 즉시 단절해야만 한다.

케네디 Jr.와 Crisis Management (Media Relations를 중심으로) < ?xml:namespace prefix = o ns = “urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office” />

종종 PR에 관련한 책들을 읽거나, 잡지 및 보고서들을 읽을 때, “참 말들은 잘한다..”라고 뇌깔일 때가있습니다. 몇몇 선배님들께서도 저의 글이나 다른 사람들의 PR관련 글들을 읽으시며 “말만 잘한다..(경험도 없이..)”라는 말씀들을 하신다는 얘기를 듣고있습니다. 맞습니다.!? (사실 제가 말이라도 잘하고 있는건가에는 확신이 서질 않습니다..)

제가 그런 생각을 가지고 덮어버린 여러 책들을 언젠가 시간이 나서 다시 펴보게 되면, “참, 그래도 보약이 되는 공부거리구나..”하는 변덕스러운 생각이 들곤 합니다. 곰곰히 생각해보면, 그냥 흘러가는 사실들을 PR적인 시각에서 바라보고, 내가 저일을 맡으면 어떻게 어떻게 진행할텐데 하는 머릿속의 Training이 현재 저의 일에 얼마나 많은 도움이 되고 있는지 모릅니다. 많은 영감과 전략적 디자인은 이러한 뇌속의 시달림으로 부터 자연스레 스며나오는 것이 아닌가 합니다.

또하나의 말 잘하는(?) 이가 쓴글을 소개 합니다.

근데 이분은 말만하는게 아니가 봅니다. 실제로 보스톤 지역의 자가비행 운전사이고, 트레이너이구, 주요 직업은 PR 컨설턴트로 에이젼시를 경영하고 있다는 분입니다. 마샤의 농장 근처에서 지난 초 가을 떨어진 케네디 쥬니어의 비행사고를 보고 현장에서 겪고 느끼고 배운 점들을 꼼꼼히 적어 주었습니다.

경험을 기록으로 남기는 미덕 우리나라의 여러 선배님들과 우리 일선 쪼무라기들에게도 절대 필요한 대목이 아닌가 합니다.

현장에서의 위기관리 강의(Crisis Management), 즐겨보시죠..

그럼 홍보!!!!!

**********************************************************************

Kennedy Crash Shows PR Lessons Learned from TWA Flight 800

John F. Kennedy, Jr.’s tragic plane crash turned out to be a case study in proper handling of crisis communications;for the most part, at least.

As a public relations professional, Boston-area general aviation pilot, and flight instructor, I followed the media reporting on the crash of John F. Kennedy, Jr.’s plane with a fair amount of interest. What I saw during the weekend of July 1718 showed that valuable lessons had been learned by governmental agencies since the public relations debacle of TWA Flight 800 three years ago.

I first heard about the accident on Saturday morning, when I received a call from a former flight student of mine who was finishing his Air Force pilot training. Accident analysis always has been an important training tool in aviation, and students and instructors routinely discuss accidents to learn from them. Since this student had received his general aviation training in the Boston area, he was familiar with the general aviation flight environment of Cape Cod and Martha’s Vineyard. Quite coincidentally, I had been doing some routine proficiency flying on Friday morning (the day of the crash) and saw first-hand the weather that Kennedy was dealing with later that evening.

During the weekend, I monitored the major media available in the Boston area and analyzed their coverage of the accident. Overall, I was impressed by the public relations choreography of the various government agencies, the relative accuracy of the information, and how quickly some media were able to tap into informed commentators. As a pilot, I also noticed some “missing parties” and a few clever “spins” put on some of the information. What was abundantly clear was that lessons had been learned from the confusion and poor handling of public relations during the TWA Flight 800 accident.

Here’s a quick review of the major points of the Kennedy accident media relations that were clearly learned from TWA Flight 800:

Don’t leave a news vacuum.

Almost immediately, both the Air Force and Coast Guard District Command in Boston had spokespersons available. Initially, all they could provide were bare details;the plane is missing, it took off at this time and was due in at this time, etc. As the weekend wore on, more information was added, and the Coast Guard upgraded its spokesperson from a Lieutenant to a Rear Admiral. Rather interestingly, there was no hesitation to say, “I don’t have the answer to that question” or “You are asking me to speculate, and I can’t do that,” throughout the weekend. The Coast Guard continued to be the most authoritative source of information as the weekend wore on.

The important point here for anyone involved in a crisis is to be out there immediately with whatever information that you have. Don’t leave a vacuum. This lesson was learned from the mother of all public relations disasters, which was the 24-hour news vacuum after the 1986 Challenger disaster. NASA destroyed more than 20 years of excellent media relations with that information vacuum by frustrating the media’s requirement for information.

Two of the most noticeable players who were absent both from the briefings and any role in providing information were the FAA and Flight Safety International (the flight school that had trained Kennedy for his private pilot’s license). This is somewhat unusual, especially for the FAA, since it is normally the agency that provides the media with information on general aviation crashes and is usually the first to have local district-office investigators on the scene. For Flight Safety International, one can only speculate as to why they chose not to give a press conference (which the aircraft manufacturer did do). Both of these ‘missing’ organizations would have faced some tough questions about Kennedy’s training, common operating practices, and flight procedures, from which causal inferences could be drawn. The media seemed not to notice their absence.

The FAA weighed in later in the week, when it was revealed that a flight briefer at the Bridgeport Flight Service Station had taken a call from a ramp attendant at the Martha’s Vineyard Airport about a half-hour after Kennedy’s plane was expected to arrive. The FAA announced it was considering disciplinary action against the briefer. This is somewhat odd, since the published transcript tended to indicate that the ramp attendant’s hesitant dialogue sounded like a celebrity chaser, and if he knew enough to call Bridgeport, it would have made more sense for him to call the Martha’s Vineyard control tower and ask them. Perhaps the briefer could have suggested that, but they have no idea who is on the other end of the phone. (For example, I was recently flying at Hanscom Field in Bedford, and the President [Air Force One] was due in later that day. Someone called the tower on the radio and asked when the “Big Boss” was due in;as if he expected they would tell him! The tower claimed they didn’t know.) Also, a half-hour differential in flight-plan times is pretty common. Scheduling is not that tight. In fact, a VFR flight plan that is filed remains valid in the system until two hours after your indicated departure time. If you don’t activate (call on the radio after departure and tell the FAA to open the flight plan) in that window, you have to re-file. Many pilots (myself included) add an extra half-hour to the ETE (expected time en-route) on the flight plan to allow for stronger than expected headwinds, air traffic delays, and so on. And Kennedy had not even filed a flight plan (so there would be none in the system to check), and the ramp attendant was unsure of the tail (registration) number of the plane. It sounds like the FAA was looking for someone to hang out to dry.

Have a trained spokesperson;and stick to the script.

It was very obvious that the spokespersons for the government agencies had been trained in media presentation skills. Coast Guard Rear Admiral Larrabee was especially effective in his briefings. The media responded to that and were relatively polite and well mannered in their questioning. The contrast was especially obvious when the Chairman of the National Transportation Safety Board showed up Sunday for a joint news conference. He proceeded to lecture the media like a grade school principal, in a slightly condescending and belligerent manner, and they returned the favor by being noticeably more unruly. When the Admiral returned to the lectern, they calmed right down. The military has mastered the art of the press briefing, as you might recall from Operation Desert Storm in 1991.

Keep it tight, and stay on your turf.

One aspect that was very noticeable during the weekend was how tightly each agency (the Air Force, the Coast Guard, the NTSB, Massachusetts State Police, etc.) stayed on their turf by referring out-of-scope questions to the respective agency. It was like being briefed by Sgt. Joe Friday from the old television program ‘Dragnet’: “Just the facts, Ma’am.” This ‘information discipline’ prevents a speculative remark from one group being played off another group. This was one area where the respective government agencies really got in trouble after the TWA crash.

Control the agenda, and cut it off once you’ve said all that you have to say.

Every press conference had almost a military-style structure that was explained as the briefing started;and rigidly adhered to. After the structured briefing and a routine question-and-answer session, the end of the press conferences were signaled by the ‘two question warning’: Once the questions started to become redundant, it was announced that two more questions would be taken, and that was it. This allowed the briefers to be responsive, yet stay in control of the briefing. At one point, the Coast Guard Admiral’s aide stepped in (possibly by pre-arranged signal) and announced: “There is time for two more questions, then the Admiral has to get on the road.” He wouldn’t have done that unless he had cleared it with the Admiral in advance.

Don’t answer hypotheticals or speculate.

Throughout the weekend and into the following week, the briefers rigidly upheld this mantra. They would not vary from simply conveying the factual information. At one point, one of the briefers jumped into a Q&A and cautioned that a recovered “piece of debris” had been magically elevated to a “piece of luggage.” On other issues, it could walk like a duck, look like a duck, and sound like a duck, but it was premature to call it a duck. For example, the radar traces showed the final descent of the plane to be 4,700 feet per minute. Most general aviation maneuvers are done at vertical speeds (that is, climbs and descents) of 500 feet per minute, and aggressive maneuvers are done at 1,000 feet per minute. The VSI (vertical speed indicator) is “pegged” at 2,000 feet per minute. In other words, every general aviation pilot knows that a 4,700-feet-per-minute descent is an out-of-control airplane (especially at an initial altitude of 2,500 feet);most likely in a power-on spin. But they would not call it a duck. Not that it mattered: Any pilot listening knew what was being described, and the public was reassured that the respective agencies were diligently performing a methodical diagnosis.

My favorite anecdote about the danger of answering hypotheticals is a question that was posed to an Israeli prime minister. He was asked what he would do if he was born a Palestinian. Without thinking, he replied that he would probably be a terrorist. That off-the-cuff remark stirred an outrage;and immediately gave some legitimacy to the Palestinian terrorist movement. I doubt if that result was the prime minister’s intention.

Consider the audience and what they can understand.

General aviation is pretty technical and not easily comprehended by the layperson, who gets most of his/her aviation (mis)information from the entertainment industry. Noticeable in this regard was the CNN commentator, Carl Rochelle, who is both a general aviation pilot and flight instructor. His commentary was both the most accurate and informative of all the media. There was a real effort to avoid terms such as VFR (visual flight regulations), IFR (instrument flight regulations), and a host of other complicated terminology and information that is routine for pilots.

This cuts both ways, however, and there were a few efforts at “spin” (if you will forgive the pun). The New Piper Aircraft Company, which manufactured Kennedy’s Piper Saratoga, gave a press briefing on Saturday afternoon. They rolled out one of the Saratogas as a backdrop for the briefing. I can’t recall ever having seen a general aviation manufacturer give a press briefing that quickly as a result of an accident. During the briefing, the president referred questions about Kennedy’s training and experience to the FAA and Flight Safety International, the neighboring Vero Beach (Florida) facility where he received his private pilot’s licence. When asked what the safety record was for the plane, the president responded by saying that there were 7,500 in use worldwide, and that they flew 500,000 hours each year. An interesting statistic, perhaps, but not an answer to the question. That didn’t really matter, because the media quoted that over and over again during the weekend. Only The Boston Globe called the NTSB and got the actual crash statistics, which it printed on Sunday. The New Piper Aircraft president also was asked if the airplane was too much to handle for a pilot with Kennedy’s limited experience. The president sidestepped the question and referred the reporter to Flight Safety International, the facility that trained Kennedy. He also replied that the airplane had been in production since the 1960s and had docile handling characteristics. True to a point, but not necessarily for a 100-hour pilot, which is what Kennedy is reported to have been. The reporter didn’t know enough to pose the question of how many 100-hour pilots are routinely flying Saratogas. Probably very few, since insurance companies take a dim view of 100-hour pilots messing around with 300 horsepower, retractable landing gear, a variable-pitch prop, and a 166 knot (190 mph) cruise speed. A lot has to be done, in proper order, both to fly and land a plane like that. Those events can gang up pretty quickly on an inexperienced pilot.

Another effort at spin or, more appropriately, omission was a narrative provided by an “aviation analyst” on CNN who happened to be a former vice-chairman of the NTSB. She proceeded to describe how the NTSB collects information and analyzes accidents. What I noticed was notably missing was that the agency usually constructs a forensic “pilot profile” of the judgment and temperament of the pilot. In fact, the FAA and NTSB have identified six or so personality types that have a high probability of being involved in accidents. These profiles are routinely covered in flight instructor training and pilot safety seminars;but were not mentioned at all in the media coverage of the Kennedy accident.

Skip the transparently non-credible statements.

The most obvious of these was the repeated insistence by the government agencies that this crash was not receiving any special treatment, that all general aviation accidents were treated the same way. This was repeated to the media as late as Wednesday morning, July 21.

Please. How many general aviation accidents start with a briefing from the Pentagon and have a keen Presidential interest? Any savvy reporter who knew enough to ask for a list of the last dozen or so accidents investigated and the amount of “assets” devoted to them would immediately notice that the statement was “non-operative,” as Ollie North used to say. Even Boston Globe columnist Adrian Walker commented on this. Walker drew a comparison to the Lear Jet that disappeared on approach to the Lebanon (New Hampshire) airport on Christmas Eve, 1996, and has never been found. Coincidentally, it was reported in The Boston Globe on July 21 the search for that plane had resumed after two-and-a-half years, after a high-probability crash site was determined by some Dartmouth College engineering students who studied the accident for a research project. Consider that it only took two days to pinpoint the area of the Kennedy crash, with the full resources of the federal government. What a difference a name makes.

Even Admiral Larrabee had to struggle when asked about the “special treatment” several days into the search. He paused just a bit too long before answering;and hence indicated the real answer. Not wanting to compromise his integrity, he said, as I recall, that the same “process” was being followed. That’s like saying the same “process” is followed in a third-world clinic for open-heart surgery as is followed at Mass General. Perhaps true, but the probability of the outcome due to the quantity and quality of the resources is far different.

The fact of the matter is that the Kennedys receive special treatment, and that it really surprises no one. If they didn’t, it would probably be demanded. So why the charade? For the benefit of general aviation pilots? They know better. It is simply an example of a positioning statement that was not thought through;and causes more damage than benefit.

Finally, on July 21, the President acknowledged the obvious, that he had authorized the additional resources for the search and recovery operation.

The media coverage and public relations efforts surrounding the Kennedy crash and resultant search and recover operations (the plane and Kennedy’s body had been located as of early Wednesday morning) demonstrate the wide and effective use of what is known as “crisis communications” in the public relations profession. The net result is a better informed public and increased confidence in government agencies and their effectiveness in emergency operations. But what a price that was paid in the initial events.

이래서 PR이 좋다.. 10가지 사실 < ?xml:namespace prefix = o ns = “urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office” />

저는 개인적으로 광고와 PR에 대한 선입견은 가지고 있지 않다고 생각합니다. 광고와 PR을 적대적(?) 비슷하게 비교 하는 입장도 저는 개인적으로 약간 불합리하다고 생각합니다. 물론 저도 광고에 대한 선입견 내지는 편견을 가지고 있던적이 있었습니다.

한국에서 광고업계가 황금 시기를 누리고 있을때 저는 많은 인재들이 그 업계로 몰리는 것을 직접 목격했습니다. 언젠가 저의 담당 교수님과 함께 교수님의 차를 타고 집으로 귀가 한적이 있었습니다. 그 차속에서 저는 교수님께 Corporate Communication인으로서 광고를 어떻게 생각하시고, 어떻게 이해해야 하는냐고 약간 삐딱(?)한 질문을 심각하게 했습니다.

교수님왈 “광고는 Corporate Communications의 가장 좋은 커뮤니케이션 툴들 중의 하나다, 네가 훌륭한 Corporate Communication Practitioner가 되려면, 광고를 포함한 다양한 툴들을 자유롭고 효과적으로 사용할줄 아는 능력이 필요하다. 그래서 우리는 광고를 알고 연구할 필요가 있다..”

그분은 광고를 너무 좋은 툴중의 하나로서 관심을 가지고 계셨습니다.

그러나 아무것도 모르는 학생이던 저는 괜히 삐딱한 선입견으로 “광고는 유치해..”라는 생각을 했던거지요.(지금 생각해 보면, 그당시 한국에서 말총머리에 찢어진 청바지를 즐기던 소위 광고제작인들로 부터의 이미지 때문인지도 모르겠군요..제가 약간 보수적이거든요)

이제 저는 그 교수님의 의견과 같은 생각을 하게됬습니다.

광고는 PR과 경쟁을 하거나 하는 대상이 아니라, 우리 PR인들이 지극한 관심과 연구를 투자해야 하는 하나의 PR적 툴이라는 생각을 합니다.

Ketchum의 도리스 사장님의 지난 연설(자주 언급드립니다)에서 언급하신 것과 같이 차라리 저희의 Competitor라면 경영 컨설턴트나 법률Firm들이 될겁니다. 앞으로는 그런 물결로 흐를겁니다. 이 업계가.

어쨋든, 저의 의견과는 상관 없이 오늘은 PR이 좋은 이유에 대한 10가지 목록을 보여드립니다. 미국에도 물론 광고에 대해 라이벌(?) 의식을 느끼는 분들이 계시긴 한데 그분들 중의 하나인것 같습니다. 왜 PR이 앞으로 좋을까에 대해 광고와 극단적으로 비교를 해 놓으셨습니다. 살펴보시죠.

(참고) 이하와 같은 시각을 가지신 PR인들은 대체적으로 PR을 사업적 측면에서 접근하시는 분들이 대부분입니다. 이미 Advertising industry가 커있으니까, 하나의 경쟁 인더스트리라고 생각하시는 모양입니다. 이해하세요.

오랬만의 글 반갑게 다시시작 했습니다.

그럼 홍보..!!

***********************************************************************

‘GOLDEN AGE’ OF PR IS HERE, SAYS PRO

PR has entered the “golden age,” according to PR consultant Ron Hanser.

Hanser, who owns a firm in W. Des Moines, Ia., believes more companies are using PR for these 10 reasons:

1. “Changing economy and information age”

Advertising is an audio and visual-oriented medium, but PR is about finding, targeting, providing and sharing info.

2. “The Internet”

It is where an organization can establish a proper relationship with its customers, rather than just shouting `buy, buy, buy.’

3. “Cyber-crises”

The demand for PR professionals who can monitor a company’s reputation across all media, including the newswires and the Internet, is at an all-time high.

4. “Media fragmentation”

TV viewership is slipping, yet advertising on TV or in print is not getting any cheaper.

5. “Is it news or entertainment?”

Within a convergence of entertainment and news…there are tremendous opportunities to place products, corporations and even concepts in credible media slots such as news programs.

6. “Branding”

PR is gaining recognition as the most important tool in building a brand.

7. “New wave CEOs”

Many of the leading lights in corporate America, including Jack Welch, Bill Gates, Steve Jobs, and Michael Dell, are espousing classic PR and PA techniques.

8. “Internal communications”

Those same enlightened CEOs have learned it is as important to communicate with your employees as it is with your customers.

9. “IR”

Many CEOs and CFOs look to IR to maintain their stock’s price in the wake of mergers or acquisitions.

10. “Integrated marketing and vision”

Hockey great Wayne Gretzky was once asked the secret of his success. `I skate to where the puck is going to be, not where it has been,’ he said. PR can claim indulgence in a little of the same anticipation and timing.”

PR 클라이언트로서의 벤쳐 유형 < ?xml:namespace prefix = o ns = “urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office” />

얼마전에 저는 한 모임에서 많은 벤쳐 기업가들의 명함들을 받은적이 있습니다. 참 이세상에는 열심히 사시는 분들이 많구나.. 하면서 그 다음 생각은 참 다양도 하다.. 하는 것 이었습니다. 이제 걸음마 단계인 한국의 벤쳐 산업이 더욱 건실해지고 다양화되기를 바랍니다.

오늘은 그런 벤쳐분들의 더욱 멋진 PR 클라이언트화를 추구하고자, 미국 잡지 Upside의 Tia O’Brien이라는 여자가 쓴 미국 벤쳐들의 유형중 PR에이젼시들이 기피하는 대상 유형들을 기술한 글을 소개합니다.

그녀는 이글에서 만약 이런 종류의 클라이언트가 서비스를 부탁하면 정중하게 거절하거나, 맡더라도 위험요소를 파악. 대비책을 미리 마련하라고 귀띔합니다. 그냥 재미있게 보아주시고, 동감이 가시면 적극 피해서 가시기 바랍니다.

타산지석이라는 말이 딱 필요한 시기이기 때문에 한국의 벤쳐를 일구시는 분들에게 이글을 보여드리고 싶었습니다. 또한 한국 PR계의 발전을 위해…

그럼 짧은 글 재미나게 보시고 좋은 하루 되십시오.

저는 .. “홍보!” 입니다…

**********************************************************************

Are You a PR Firm’s Worst Nightmare?

Just as a startup company’s founders should be on the watch for signs that indicate potential problems with a public relations firm, the better spin doctors are on the watch for problem clients. Upside has compiled a list of danger signs that red-flag clients who should be politely rejected or, if taken on, will require serious damage control.

“We’re not really a startup” – (무지막지 투자형)

–This company spends money as though it were Microsoft Corp. Ed Niehaus, co-founder and president of Niehaus Ryan Wong Inc., puts the legendary flameout PowerAgent, a Web and e-mail alert service, in this category. “They spent $18 million and never shipped a product. They had consultants who were hiring consultants. We never launched [the product] because they never lived that long.”

The Trend Chaser – (유행파 형)

–The CEO reads the Harvard Business Review, spots a new category and repositions the company accordingly. Advises Niehaus, “Figure out what [customers] want, describe it and use PR to refine it.”

“We don’t need your advice” – (오만/방자 형)

–These entrepreneurs completely tune out their PR advisers. Paul Franson, who ran his own PR service before becoming an Upside contributing writer, pulled the following quotes from his archives: “I can handle Mike Wallace, much less a reporter from Electronic Buyers’ News,” boasted one cocky CEO. Another overconfident senior executive informed a journalist, “We’re a big advertiser in your magazine, you know.” And then there was the CEO who insisted, “Everyone knows about ASICs [application-specific integrated circuits]. We don’t need to explain what they are.”

The Big Fish Syndrome – (호가호위 형)

–This arrogant, egotistical entrepreneur has usually jumped from a large company into the startup pond. Explains Maura FitzGerald, founder, president and CEO of FitzGerald Communications Inc., “This founder thinks that because he or she is associated with the company, the company’s success is guaranteed.”

Founders in Denial – (미스테리 형)

–When a client wouldn’t let Barbara Kline, founder of San Jose-based Breakthru Communications, talk with customers or business partners, she smelled trouble. But after the founders assured her that these essential product endorsers would talk with reporters, she organized a press tour. Once the tour was under way, the entrepreneurs confessed that they’d failed to line up customer endorsements and still hadn’t closed deals with crucial business partners. “[Founders in denial] don’t tell the truth to themselves,” observes Kline. “But when the rubber hits the road, the truth becomes clear.”

The Quick Exit – (치고빠지기 형)

–These founders are more interested in chasing IPO wealth than in hitting a high-tech home run. “You’d be surprised how many people talk about their entry strategy in the same paragraph with their exit strategy,” complains Niehaus. “Sandwiched in between is, ‘We want to use PR to build a brand over the next quarter and then we plan to [go public]. Could you help us make a lot of noise before the quiet period?'” Niehaus advises these entrepre-neurs that such a greed-driven strategy will most likely backfire with seasoned journalists who “don’t want to be the butt of their joke.”–Tia O’Brien

기업문화(Corporate Culture)-PR메뉴의 고급음식 < ?xml:namespace prefix = o ns = “urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office” />

어제 PR인은 꼭 요리사 같다고 말씀드렸습니다. 오늘도 하나의 이상한 비유를 할까합니다. PR이라는 “메뉴”속에는 많은 종류의 음식이름들이 있습니다. 그중 아마 가장 고급스럽고 희귀한 음식명이 바로 Corporate Culture(기업문화) 일껍니다.

그날 그날의 미디어 관게에만 코를 대고 사는 우리의 모습이 아니라, 먼 미래를 바라보고 자신의 기업문화를 꾸며나가는것, 웬만큼 여유로운 기업이 아니면 꿈도 꿔보지 못할 그런 PR적 작업입니다.

제가 Corporate Culture를 공부할때 이런 생각도 해보았습니다. 만약 내가 다시 태어나서 큰 기업가의 아들이라면 아버지의 기업-곧 자기의 기업이 되는-을 멋진 기업문화를 가진 고급기업으로 만들어 보겠다는 꿈이었습니다.

우리가 PR 및 사업에 대해서 많은 어려움에 봉착하는 이유중의 하나가 기업내에 이상적인 기업문화를 찾아보기 힘든때문이 아닐까 하는 생각도 합니다.

성공하는 기업은 그들만의 공식이 있습니다. 그 공식중의 하나가 멋진 기업문화 입니다. 그 기업문화를 이루는 요소들중 핵심이 예전에도 말씀드린것 같은 Mission, Vision, Value, Belief, Leadership등입니다.

“근데 그 것들의 의미가 뭐야?”하시는 분들은 아래의 글을 읽어 보시면 쉽게 이해를 하실수 있을겁니다.

만약 우리가 매일 접하는 Media Relation이 짜장면이라면, Corporate Culture에 대한 PR적 시각에서의 활동은 아마 스테잌정도가 되지않을까 생각해 봅니다.

한 피자정도 되는 위기관리(Crisis Management)가 요즘 화두가 되곤하는걸 보면 아마 몇년쯤 더 지나야 우리 PR인들이 Corporate Culture를 생각하게 될꺼라는 생각도 합니다.

젊으신 PR인들께서 이 이슈에 많은 관심가지시기 바랍니다. 좋은 기업문화는 좋은 사회를 만드는 초석이됩니다. 우리나라에도 멋진 기업이 탄생하기를 간절히 바랍니다. 우리손으로 그런 기업을 만들기를 바랍니다.또한 현재 벤쳐를 일으키시는 분들도 아래의 PivotPoint의 사례를 본받아 멋진 기업문화를 디자인 하시길 바랍니다. 지금이 그때입니다.

아래의 글이 약간 길어서 안상준님의 수고가 크실텐데.. 전문이 아니라도 요약도 괜찮을 것 같습니다. 안상준님 감사합니다.

저는 “홍보!!”

***********************************************************************

ARTICULATING A VISION AND VALUES AT PIVOTPOINT

At many high-tech companies, the mission is to get the next product out the door as quickly as possible and the vision is the billion dollar pay off that awaits if they do it right. Pivotpoint’s new CEO wanted – and found -something a little more long-term on which to build the company’s culture.

In the realm of high-technology, where engineers rule and the product is king, vision is widely regarded as a luxury, an abstract ideal in a world of very concrete realities. In a universe in which a new product announcement from a competitor can completely revolutionize a company’s business, the definition of a long-term plan is often something the company hopes to do next month.

In reality, however, a vision can be a company’s anchor in this stormy environment. Although every other aspect of a business, from its products to its customer base, may be subject to change, a clear vision of the future can provide a constant reference point, a beacon to help management negotiate many sea changes. That, at least, is the belief of Darryl Wartluft, who joined ERM systems leader Pivotpoint last year amid massive change, and made vision and values his number one priority.

Pivotpoint was founded in 1987 as Spectrum Associates, and began as a service business, delivering customized enhancements to multiple application software packages in the MRPII market. The company expanded into other areas of information technology, from project definition through custom development, system integration and implementation. In 1992, the company acquired a former Powersoft MRPII product called GrowthPower, entering the product business for the first time. Its first in-house product, Point.Man – a dynamic ERP system designed to leverage client/server object-oriented technologies – was launched in 1994.

In November of 1995, three major venture capital groups – Goldman Sachs, TA Associates and Greylock Management – made a $32million cash investment in the company in exchange for majority ownership. As part of that agreement, a board of directors was established by a new CEO, Daryll Wartluft, was brought on board from Legent Corp., where he had been a vice president and general manager of the applications management division. Wartluft’s appointment was followed by other key additions to the company’s management team, including marketing vp Peter Berkel, who followed the CEO from Legent.

“To a significant extent, many of the changes in the way high-tech companies communicate, and in particular in attitudes at entrepreneurial high-tech companies, are being driven by venture capital,” says Maura FitzGerald, president of FitzGerald Communications, which was also hired at the suggestion of the venture capital partners. “Venture capital companies have been through all this before, and they understand the value that communications can add. They also understand how important it is for a company to differentiate itself, to have a vision that sets it apart from the competition.”

Daryll Wartluft had witnessed the power of a genuine vision at Legent, and one of the talents that attracted the venture capital group was his ability as a communicator. He swiftly came to the conclusion that Spectrum was at a critical point in its evolution, and that a relatively narrow window of opportunity existed to redefine the company’s mission and vision.

“There were two major changes taking place,” says Wartluft. “The first was obviously that the company had received an infusion of capital and a new management team, and all of that was fueling significant growth. The second was that Spectrum had started out as a service company, but was becoming more product-oriented. We wanted to become a total solutions provider. So from a cultural point of view, many things were happening at the same time. We needed to have a common view within the company of where we were trying to go, what we were trying to achieve.”

Morale was high among the company’s 200 or so employees, Wartluft says, because most people recognized the market opportunity that Spectrum had and the strength of the new management team. But there was also considerable apprehension about the rapid pace of change and what it meant for people who were used to, and comfortable with, the old paradigm.

Wartluft saw that kind of common vision as important for a number of reasons. It could position the changes as a positive. It could help differentiate Spectrum from other players in a competitive and still wide-open marketplace. It could serve as an aid in recruiting. Most important, however, was that it would bring people together, and in particular foster a sense of teamwork between the new management that Wartluft had brought in and those who remained from the previous regime.

******* 중요한 언급입니다.

Says FitzGerald: “We are in an era where every company has great technology, great R&D, even great people, but not every company has a vision, and it’s one of the things analysts are beginning to look for in making judgments about who’s hot and who’s not. They’re not interested in hearing, ‘I want to be the market leader,’ because everyone wants to be the market leader and they’re certainly not interested in hearing that you want to do $200 million in sales. They want to know why you’re in the business in the first place. Do you have a compelling vision?”***

FitzGerald Communications had just completed a similar exercise itself. Having grown from zero to about 60 people in three short years, the public relations firm had undergone some cultural upheaval, and needed to do something to give its culture some cohesion. Its focus on turning corporate vision in to market value resonated with Wartluft and others at Pivotpoint, and so he asked Maura FitzGerald and one of her senior people, Heather Robb, to help facilitate the process during a two-day off-site management meeting at the FitzGerald offices.

Twelve of Spectrum’s senior management participated in the process, beginning with what was basically a blank piece of paper. Wartluft’s first question to the assembled group was a simple one: “If you picked up a copy of the Wall Street Journal in the year 2005 and saw a great article about this company, what would you want it to say?”

The first challenge was to draw a distinction between mission and vision. Many of the first suggestions focused on the company’s products, its desire to be the preferred supplier of dynamic ERP systems. Wartluft was looking for something more, well, visionary.

To some extent, Wartluft’s thinking of vision and mission echoes that of Stanford University business professors James Collins and Jerry Porras, authors of Built to Last. According to Collins and Porras, mission is the easier of the two to define. It should have a finish line, and that finish line should be attainable within five years or: President Kennedy’s mission for NASA, of putting a man on the moon and returning him safely to earth, is an example frequently cited. Mission, in other words, defines a company’s goals; vision, on the other hand, is a broader examination of why the company pursues those goals, of the values and beliefs of the organization and its guiding philosophy.

***중요”A mission statement is something that can and should evolve,” says Wartluft. “A mission should be flexible enough to change if our product set changes, but a vision should be permanent, an objective you can strive for regardless of the products or services you offer, and regardless of changes in your customer base. It’s the corporate equivalent of what do you want to be when you grow up?”****

The management team split into smaller groups of two or three, each of which came back with its own suggestions. Some were still too narrow, focusing on the company’s existing products. Others were too broad, vague statements about quality and excellence that could have applied to any company. But there was a common thread that focused on customer service. One person suggested that Spectrum should strive to be the benchmark against which other companies measured their suppliers; another suggested the company should be the best. There was some debate over whether it was better to the best or to be the benchmark.

“The important thing was that this was a dialogue,” Wartluft says. “This was not the CEO imposing his ideas, it was people sitting around, discussing ideas, working together. I honestly can’t imagine a better team building exercise.” In the end a consensus was achieved. Spectrum’s vision was: “To be the benchmark customers use to measure all other business relationships.”

Next, the group considered the values by which the organization would live and work as it strove to achieve this goal. It settled on five: teamwork, respect for each other, excellence, integrity and accountability, each of which was fleshed out to make it more tangible, less abstract.

The final challenge was taking the consensus the group had achieved and implementing it throughout the company. Wartluft says Spectrum enjoyed some advantages when it came to sharing the new vision and values with employees because of its size. At Legent, with more than 2,000 people, any change in culture took hold relatively slowly. At Spectrum, with 200, the process was considerably quicker. To ensure employee buy- in, for example, he was able to meet with people in groups of ten or 12, and over a two hour session to explain the importance of the new vision and values and how they would work.

“One of the things that we found to be extremely useful was the use of vignettes,” he says. “I would pose a question, a hypothetical situation. ‘Suppose you met with a supplier in a hotel room for a negotiation and after he left you found he had left behind a brochure with information about his costs, but the brochure is marked confidential. Do you look at the brochure, knowing it will give the company an advantage in the negotiations?’ If you’re being guided by the value about integrity, the answer is no.

“Some others are more complex, they really don’t have a right answer. If one of your biggest clients calls a meeting and demands that a certain individual be there, but that individual has planned to take her first family vacation in three years the same week, what do you do? Hopefully, you try to find some sort of creative solution that balances our accountability to the client with the idea that we must have respect for one another. What that kind of exercise does is help people figure out whether they can live with the values we have set for ourselves.”

Wartluft says it has been gratifying to see how rapidly the values have become part of the decision-making process throughout the company. Problems are now looked at through the prism of the values. Disagreements are resolved by using the values statement as a guidebook. “We had one meeting in which people from two different divisions were at absolute loggerheads, until the member of one team stood up and pointed out that the argument contradicted one of our values: respect for each other. Both sides left the room and came back in and started over in a much more cooperative mindset.”

Selling the vision and values internally was important, obviously, but Spectrum took the process a step further, letting customers know about the company’s goal. Says Wartluft: “Many companies post the vision and values on the bulletin board, and that’s it. We wanted to held accountable.” By explaining the company’s vision to customers, Wartluft expects to get some credit right now for saying all the right customer-focused things, but he also expects to get continual feedback – progress will be evaluated on a quarterly basis – that will tell him whether the company is any closer to achieving its goals.

“We believe clients will work with us,” he says. “We hope they will sense we are working in the right direction, and offer constructive criticism that will help us get there even quicker.”

The vision statement has helped the company come up with a new approach to marketing, one that gets research and development and sales and marketing people closer to the customer than they had ever been before.

“We found that by understanding how companies make and distribute their products, rather than what they make and distribute, we could help our customers be more competitive,” says Paul Hoy, the company’s vp for product management. “A generalized solution won’t work in today’s changing business world, where customers’ needs and wants change almost daily. Companies need a flexible system that can change along with their needs, this year and into the future.”

The final phase in the culture change process involved coming up with a new name. That process was led by marketing vp Peter Berkel. One of the problems with the existing name was the Spectrum was in wide use, both in the IT industry and in other fields. (One similarly named company, which had attracted former Apple CEO John Sculley to join its leadership ranks, was experiencing legal difficulties and the kind of media scrutiny most companies would prefer to avoid.) Says Maura FitzGerald: “Sometimes we would go to trade shows and there would be three other Spectrums on the floor.”

“The name Pivotpoint reflect the business environment of many of our customers, manufacturers and distributors who are at pivotal points in their business development and are looking for a client/server Enterprise Resource Planning system to help them streamline their overall operations,” says Wartluft. “The name Pivotpoint is also very a propos for our company as we go through some exciting changes to support our accelerated growth.”

The name change was formally announced in April. The culture change was complete. Says Wartluft: “We know our success is totally dependent on our customers’ success using our products and services. Over the past four months, we made significant enhancements to our infrastructure to focus on our customers, their specific business, industry and information technology needs. The new name reflects our dedication to their future and the pivotal business decisions our products and services enable them to make.”

VISION

To be the benchmark customers use to measure all other business relationships.

MISSION

To be the preferred partner of intermediate range manufacturing and distribution organizations, helping them achieve greatness by delivering innovative, world class business solutions and support.

VALUES

Teamwork – We work together across boundaries to generate exceptional value for our customers. We celebrate individual and team successes.

Respect for each other – We recognize and value the ideas, contributions, view and cultural differences of all individuals.

Integrity – We operate in an honest, ethical and fair way in everything we do.

Excellence – We always strive to exceed our customers’ expectations.

Accountability – We take ownership of our responsibilities. We meet individual and team commitments.

MPR의 효용성과 MPR의 미래 < ?xml:namespace prefix = o ns = “urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office” />

과연 PR이 광고보다 효과가 있나?

우리 PR인들이 모두 한번쯤은 생각해보거나, 들어본 질문입니다.

아무도 모를겁니다. 너무나 질이 천차만별이라서… 효과측정에 있어서 질적 접근이라는것은 그 차이가 너무 다양해서 객관성이 떨어집니다.

모 일각에서는 몇 배가 더 효과가 있다라는 주장이 있는데, 제 개인적으로는 이해가 되지않는것이 사실입니다.

일반 PR프로그램에서는 이러한 논쟁(광고와 효과를 비교하는)이 일어날 소지가 많이 없는데, 이 MPR(Marketing PR)에서는 종종 그 논쟁이 재연되곤 하지요.

모르겠습니다. “알 리즈”같으신분은 브랜드의 창조는 광고의 역활이기보다는 PR 의 역활이 더 강력하고 알맞다고 하셨습니다. 그러나 이것이 지금 우리가 논하는 논쟁을 잠재울것 같지는 않구요..

아래의 참고 자료를 보시기바랍니다. MPR의 효용성에 대하여 담담히 분석해놓았고, 다음세기를 맞아 MPR의 미래를 예견하신 Northwestern Medill의 토마스 해리스 교수님의 글입니다.

그럼 홍보!

**********************************************************************

Marketing PR- The Second Century

As the millennium approaches, Reputation Management columnist Thomas L. Harris sees more opportunities than threats for marketing public relations, and the potential for MPR to take an even broader role in the communications mix.

Make a note in your calenders! The year 2000 not only marks the millenium but also the beginning of the second century of public relations. If we take public relations historian Scott Cutlip’s word for it, The Publicity Bureau, the first publicity agency in the country, was founded in Boston in 1900. Cutlip fixes the turn of the century as the point when the practice of PR as we know it began in America.

As we approach the second century, the practice of public relations is assuming an ever-increasing role as a vital business management discipline. Top management is recognizing corporate reputation as the most important asset an organization has and is turning to public relations counselors to manage this asset. Simultaneously, public relations is achieving unprecedented attention for the essential role it plays in marketing.

In his foreword to my book Value-Added Public Relations, Philip Kotler, professor of international marketing at Northwestern University, says that of the five major components of marketing, public relations and direct marketing are receiving the most attention and achieving the most growth at the end of the century. He attributes the growth of public relations to its great versatility, its aptitude for drama, and its ability to break through the information clutter to capture attention and interest.

Marketing guru Al Reis, who with his partner Jack Trout authored the landmark marketing books Positioning and Marketing Warfare says that in the past two decades public relations has eclipsed advertising as the most powerful force in marketing and branding. He says the rise of public relations is the biggest story in marketing and is amazed that the media has ignored it. We could, of course, tell him that reporters never reveal the source of their stories, especially if it would require them to admit that their sources most often have the initials P and R. In his latest book The 22 Immutable Laws of Branding, Reis says that the birth of a brand is achieved with publicity, not advertising. Reis declares that “publicity is more powerful than advertising” because “what others say about your brand is so much more powerful than advertising.”

That said, even the most forceful advocates of the role of public relations in marketing cannot claim that PR is the all-purpose solution to every marketing problem or that PR can do the job alone. Public relations is more integral to marketing in some industries than others. There is a reason why technology, healthcare, and entertainment are the fastest growing sectors of public relations. Every marketing situation is unique. There are situations in which public relations drives the process. Conversely, there are others in which public relations plays a less important role and some instances where PR may be inappropriate altogether. In assessing PR potential of a given situation, it is important to realistically assess what MPR can be expected to do and what it cannot be expected to do.

As we enter the new century, it occurs to me that a SWOT analysis would help our marketing clients understand what contribution marketing public relations can realistically be expected to make in helping them achieve marketing goals.

The SWOT analysis is one of the most valuable analytic tools used in business today . The SWOT model enables companies to assess their corporate and/or brand Strengths and Weaknesses, identify Threats, and determine Opportunities. Strengths are what a company does best in relation to its competitors. Weaknesses are restrictions to what can be accomplished. Threats are situations that may adversely impact the company’s ability to address its problems. Opportunities are situations where the company’s strengths can be leveraged to address its problems. By adapting the SWOT model to public relations, we can more precisely redefine the role it plays in the contemporary marketing process.

While our strengths and weaknesses may be self-evident to us, we have all suffered through the experience of working with marketing clients who, for reasons we find maddeningly hard to understand, just don’t get it. Perhaps this scheme will help them evaluate the potential value of PR in context with the other components of their marketing plans.

There are times when we may even need to remind ourselves just what we bring uniquely to the party. Let’s begin with our strengths. Our underlying strength is our ability to bring a unique perspective to strategic marketing planning. This perspective is grounded in our understanding to all of the company’s stakeholders, not just its customers. It is a perspective that takes into account the total business and societal environment that impacts brands.

Our tactical strength lies in our ability to manage the communication process not only through the media but also in cyberspace and by direct person-to-person contact.

Strengths of Marketing Public Relations It is a cost-efficient way to reach target markets. It employs a spectrum of direct and indirect media to reach consumers and influencers. It uses technology to facilitate person-to-person direct communication with target individuals. It makes information available on demand around the clock. It benefits from endorsement of media, analysts, thought leaders, and other independent third parties with no commercial ax to grind. It has a great potential for drama. It achieves credibility through all of the above. It makes advertising messages more credible. It is not perceived as self-serving. It circumvents consumer resistance to salesmanship. It breaks through advertising clutter. Its reach is unlimited by budget constraints.

Weaknesses of Marketing Public Relations You can’t control the media. You can’t control words and pictures. You can’t control placement time and place. You can’t use slogans/other advertising devices. You can be bumped by breaking news. You can’t reach the same consumers in the same media with the same words and pictures. The Net is not as intrusive as broadcast media. Consumers don’t come across information. They must seek it out. There are no standard effectiveness measures.

Threats to Marketing Public Relations

Newspaper readership is declining, especially among younger consumers. The audience for network news is declining. There is declining trust in all news media. The Net lacks credibility as a news source. Consumers must distinguish information from misinformation, fact from fiction, truth from gossip and rumor. Unverified attacks on companies and brands will accelerate. The cyberspace jam will requiring consumers to cut through a chaotic cluttered information superhighway. Public relations could become subservient to marketing and advertising. However, trends in both the media and the practice of public relations are converging, creating exciting new opportunities for marketing public relations to gain in importance in the years ahead.

Media Opportunities for Public Relations

Around-the-clock news coverage optimizes opportunity to reach target audiences. Shift of audience from network to local news expands local coverage. Direct TV will multiply number of cable channels and expand the variety of targeted television programming. Business coverage will continue to expand on television as more consumers become shareholders. Proliferation of specialized print and broadcast media will be directed to special interest audiences. The Internet will grow exponentially as a major information provider. Online media will gain in importance as a supplement to, or replacement for, traditional newspapers, newsweeklies, and network TV. The convergence of computers and television will greatly strengthen the Net as a primary source for information.

Practice Opportunities for Marketing Public Relations

Public relations provides complete information that helps consumers make informed purchasing decisions. It can reach all key stakeholders with consistent complementary messages. It excels in building marketplace excitement, anticipation of products, and receptivity to advertising. It enhances and verifies advertising claims. It is a powerful generator of word of mouth. It can counter misinformation quickly and effectively. It can build relationships by using technology to connect companies and consumers. It enables instant and direct communication with consumers, thought leaders, and media. It can employ database technology to reach targeted individuals through E-mail, voicemail, and direct mail. It combines strategic counsel and crisis communications expertise to control damage and restore consumer confidence. It builds preference for trustworthy brands. It closes marketing credibility gap by substantiating salesmanship with information consumers want and need.

In the next century, a better -educated consumer will reject slick slogans and salesmanship. They won’t want to be sold. They will want to be told. They will have the tools to seek out information that will help them make informed choices. The explosion of information about products and the companies that market them will be driven by public relations .

PR프로그램 플랜및 분석방법< ?xml:namespace prefix = o ns = “urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office” />

제가 일천한 PR 지식을 가지고, 케이스를 모아서 보여드린지도 벌써 두달이 되어가는것 같습니다. 여러분들로부터 많은 피드백을 받으며, 정말 제가 이일을 잘하고 있는 건가에 대한 생각을 해보았습니다.

제가 이 케이스들의 게재를 시작한 이유는 미래의 PR인을 꿈꾸는 무한한 가능성의 후배들과, 현장에서 지식적 정보가 부족하여 고민하는 도전적인 동료들을 위해서였습니다. 얼마나, 저의 케이스들이 그들의 고민을 해결하는 유용한 수단이 되었는지는 영원한 의문이 되겠지마는, 저에게 보여주신 많은 격려와 사랑은 제가 가슴깊이 고마움을 가지고 이글을 계속 하게하는 원동력이 되고있습니다.

제가 케이스들을 이리저리 뒤져가며, 가장 맛깔스러운 케이스를 고르려 애쓴다는 것을 아시는 분도 계실텐데, 이런 맛난 음식을 차려 놓고 여러분이 방문하셔서 드실때, 어떤 방법으로 드시고 계시는지에 대한 의문이 갑자기 생겼습니다.

케이스(영문)의 길이가 너무 길지는 않은지, 내용을 이해하기는 쉬우신지, 또 올바른 케이스 분석방법을 몰라 따분하지는 않으신지…

그래서 저는 PR 케이스 분석방법에 대한 유용한 참고자료를 찾았습니다.

제가 게재한 몇몇편의 케이스도 PRSA에서 개최하는 Silver Anvil이라는 유명한 PR프로그램 시상대회에서 성공적 사례로 뽑힌 것들이 있었습니다. 그 시상대회의 심판으로 계시는 Mr. Larry Chiagouris가 쓰신 좋은 PR프로그램 플랜및 분석방법에 대한 짧은 글입니다.

이글을 읽으시고, 과연 어떻게 세워지는 PR 프로그램 플랜이 완전한 것인가와 함께, 다음부터 계속될 여러 케이스들을 어떤 시각으로 분석해야 하는지에 대한 큰 그림을 얻어보시기 바랍니다. 이와 관련하여 질문이 계신분은 연락 주십시오. 친절히 알려드리겠습니다. Good Luck.. 홍보~!

**********************************************************************

Confessions of a Silver Anvil Judge

By Larry Chiagouris

Reprinted from The Public Relations Strategist, Winter 1998

The Silver Anvil is the most prestigious award a public relations professional can win. But it doesn’t come easy.

This year, I had the privilege of serving as a judge for the PRSA Silver Anvil awards. As a marketing strategist and researcher with more than 25 years in the business, I have judged numerous competitions.

The Silver Anvil award selection process is as good as or better than any other professional awards program. And the winning entries were all worthy of the awards bestowed upon them.

What concerns me, however, is the quality of the entries that did not win Silver Anvils. In some cases, they were so far off in conveying a strong program, that one might conclude that many industry professionals need to revisit what constitutes a successful public relations program.

The entry criteria for the Silver Anvils is very specific, requiring documentation in four major areas -research(연구조사), planning(기획), execution(실행) and results(결과). To win an award, an agency must demonstrate that its entry delivered in all four areas.

WHERE IS RESEARCH?

Many agencies failed to quantify their entry’s contribution to each of the four areas. Research was clearly the area with the most room for improvement. Several submissions stretched the definition and in the process devalued the role that research can play in defining the goals and target audience of a public relations program.

For example, many entries seemed to support the notion that research consists of talking to a few editors about their perception of a company and its products. Other submissions relied heavily on what a top executive said was important to the progress of the product or company. While media soundings and senior executive interviews can be important factors in determining the parameters of a public relations effort, they do not begin to go far enough in terms of research.

A strategic public relations program will address the audience that is relevant to the public relations campaign. Many campaigns have multiple audiences, including endusers, employees, members, investors, suppliers, and government officials. Research, when properly utilized, will define the target audience of the campaign and help set priorities.

It will often delineate the existing perceptions, needs and opinions of the program’s target audience. Research initiatives should link this understanding to the marketing and brand situation of the product or company. In the process, it should provide a benchmark from which to judge the impact of the public relations program.

WHAT ARE THE GOALS?

Not every research effort has to be extensive or expensive. We have developed a number of quick and relatively inexpensive research tools to use when resources are limited. They include qualitative samples, in-house research panels and sophisticated analysis of existing data.

The planning stage is the second area addressed on the entry form.

Here, the most frequent problem was that the choice of goals and objectives was not justified against the client’s business goals. A public relations program should be developed to support the broader needs of the client, with emphasis on corporate reputation and brand building.

The program goals should be articulated in a manner that enables the client to easily evaluate the effectiveness of the program. Many of the entries did not provide any way to quantify progress made towards the program’s objectives – making it impossible to evaluate whether or not the program achieved its goals. The classic example is a statement indicating that a program was designed to “establish the company as a leader.” Again, the lack of documentation leads one to question the relevance of a program based upon poorly articulated goals and objectives.

WHERE’S THE SUPPORT?

The third area addressed on the Silver Anvil entry form is the execution of the public relations program. This was where the real fun began.

Copies of press kits, videotapes, audiotapes, and collateral of all kinds filled submission binders to the brim. The problem for many entries, however, was the lack of information regarding how promotional materials supported the program’s key messages.

Material generated by the creative team often demonstrated a complete disconnection between the creative and strategic elements of a program. The material looked slick but failed to convey key messages to the target audience. Lavish creative efforts on behalf of a low budget campaign points to a lack of planning and poor execution on the part of the staff responsible for the program. It may be hard to imagine, but it is possible overspend on production!

The final area on the Silver Anvil entry form is program results.

Stating that top management “liked the program” hardly constitutes results befitting a Silver Anvil award winner. To most professionals, letters received from the sales force or customers are also insufficient to be considered for an award.

WHAT IS SUCCESS?

After opening several submissions that included clip reports as proof of a program’s impact, I was forced to wonder how some public relations professionals are measuring success? Clips are an indicator of interest on the part of the media, not necessarily of influence on the purchasing behavior or attitudes of the public.

To be considered a successful public relations program, there must be evidence that the goals and objectives of a program have been met. For instance, if the stated goal of a program is to raise brand awareness, the public relations agency needs to provide documentation demonstrating that the goal was achieved. A brand awareness survey conducted before and after the public relations campaign would clearly illustrate whether the brand experienced increased consumer recognition or not.

Some other examples of quantifiable objectives are a 5% increase in sales, 10,000 new hits a month at the company Web site or one million dollars donated to a nonprofit organization. Not every public relations program is well suited to the Silver Anvil awards. Entries are intended to represent the best a public relations program has to offer in a given year. Submissions that are clearly lacking in one of the four entry criteria devalue not only the awards, but also the public relations industry itself.

Programs that win Silver Anvils almost always demonstrate a tight linkage between the goals of the business and the program results. Failing to do that, other efforts will remain nothing more than submissions.

PR Campaign< ?xml:namespace prefix = o ns = “urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office” />

여러분들 중 심리학을 전공하신분은 아시겠지만, 미국에는 APA(우리말로는 아파~ 라고 읽나요?..)라는 유명한 심리학 협회가 있습니다. 이번 케이스는 이 협회의 사회적 이슈에 대한 캠페인 자료입니다. 협회 내부에서도 이러한 캠페인을 벌인 동기가 있었습니다. 미국은 아시다시피 정신질환에 대한 분류 및 영역이 굉장히 포괄적입니다. 약간 술을 많이 마셔도 관련 정신치료 프로그램 타령을 하고, 부인을 한대 치면..(물론 큰 일이지만) 또 이상한 치료 프로그램에 가서 이상한 정신 순화 치료를 받습니다.

한 발표를 보니, 미국에서 1000명당 정신치료 경험자가 한국인 1000명당 정신치료 경험자보다 약 10배이상 많은걸로 나타났다고합니다. 바꾸어 생각해보면 적절한 정신치료 시스템이 부족한 우리나라에서는 많은 (광범위한 의미로) 정신질환자들이 정상인들과 함께 일상생활을 하고 있다고도 해석이 되겠지요. 그래서 서울시내 거리를 걷다보면 그리 이상한 괴짜들이 많은가 봅니다.

아무튼 APA는 사회에서 등한시되는 정신치료에 대한 가치를 개선하고자 전략적인 캠페인을 디자인 했습니다. 이러한 캠페인은 자칫 고루해 보일수 있습니다. 뭐 요즘은 캠페인이 너무 흔해서~, 해봤는데 별로더라구~, 너무 시간도 오래걸리고 돈도 많이들어서~ 등등의 의견들이 계십니다.

그러나 쌈팍”한 PR프로그램도 좋지만 문제의 근본을 바탕으로 한 일반적 접근이 더 효과적일 때가 많이 있습니다. 캠페인이라고 다 같은 캠페인이 아닙니다. 그 캠페인을 누가, 어떻게 운영하느냐 하는게 문제이지요.

만약 Goal을 확실히 세워놓고 전략적인 캠페인을 효과적으로 운영한다면, 그 보다 더 좋은 Issue Management는 없을 겁니다. 이러한 케이스 스터디를 하는 이유도 항상 똑같은 PR프로그램들을 지루하게 감상하는 것이 아니라, 이 프로그램은 이게 잘못됬고, 이게 잘됬고 하면서 감을 잡는거지요. 똑같은 보도자료도 잘되고 못된것이 있듯이 똑 같은 홍보 프로그램도 우열이 있습니다. 쌈팍한 홍보 프로그램을 찾기전에 우수한 프로그램의 운영에 신경써야 할 필요도 있다는걸 말씀드리고 싶습니다.

밑의 APA 케이스도 지루합니다. 일반적이고요.

그러나 APA는 원했던 목적을 달성했습니다. 과학적인 서베이를 통해 사전사후의 목표공중 변화를 체크했습니다. 이것이 효과적인 홍보입니다. 쌈팍해서 할때는 그럴듯 하지만 끝나고서는 아무도 그 효과를 모르는 좀 웃기는 프로그램이 아니었다는 얘기겠지요.

토요일이라 그런지 더욱 글이 오락가락합니다. 이해해주세요.

추워지는데 건강 유의들 하시고 저는 그럼 먼저..”홍보!”

****************************************************************

Talk to Someone Who Can Help

The American Psychological Association (APA)

OVERVIEW

The American Psychological Association was faced with several challenges:

· Americans’ access to mental health services including psychological services was being curtailed by managed care plans.

· APA members were concerned that consumers and other important publics did not understand the value of psychological care.

· Mental health services and the people who use these services were stigmatized.

The Goal: to create more public awareness of the value of psychological services, to decrease stigma, to encourage appropriate utilization of care, and to lay the groundwork for efforts to increase consumer access to psychological services from insurers and employers.

RESEARCH

A five-phase research program was designed to gauge the public’s knowledge of and attitudes toward psychology. It provided the foundation upon which the campaign was created. Research represents 50% of the campaign spending for 1995 and 1996. Research included:

· Town meetings with APA members held in 34 cities to receive a “situational analysis” from the front lines and to earn member “buy-in” for the campaign and their future involvement in grass-roots campaign activities.

· Eight consumer focus groups in geographically diverse cities to explore public attitudes, needs and concerns towards health care, mental health care and psychology.

· A 1,200-household national telephone survey to further test public attitudes, needs and concerns expressed in the focus groups.

· Pre and post-campaign testing in lead cities: Denver, CO. and Hartford, CT.

· Two Final consumer focus groups to test campaign messages and creative materials.

Research showed that while Americans value good psychological health and understand its impact on physical health, they are unsure about when and how to seek psychological services and are also concerned about the costs of such care and whether their insurance would pay for it. Research also revealed that while Americans are feeling the negative effects of the threat of job loss, family pressures and the problems of physical illness, they did not always see psychological care as a potential solution to these problems. These findings built the underlying strategy of the campaign.

PLANNING

Based on what was learned in the research phase, key campaign strategies were:

· Target women as the primary health care decision-makers in most families.

· Use media relations to multiply the message in a cost-effective and credible way.

· Educate consumers about the value of psychological services, define when it’s appropriate to seek psychological care, and decrease its stigma by creating advertising that people could relate to–“real people dealing with real life issues”.

· Create more than one direct response mechanism for consumers to learn more about psychological care; each with direct links to appropriate referral services.

· Include some tactics that APA members nationwide would see and value so that they would be more inclined to support and implement campaign activities at the grass-roots level.

· Make the best use of campaign start-up funds by focusing campaign activities–media, advertising and consumer outreach–in two lead cities to demonstrate campaign effectiveness and build support for increased funding within the association governance and state associations.

· Provide APA members with a free campaign kit, a guide for conducting the campaign at the local level, and training to implement the campaign.

Campaign Objectives were:

1. Expand consumer awareness of the role of psychologists in helping people deal with job stress, health, and family issues.

2. Generate consumer responses to an 800-line and a World Wide Web site for more information about psychological services or a referral to a psychologist.

3. Generate support for the campaign among APA leadership and rank and file members so they would implement the campaign at the local level during campaign years 2-5.

EXECUTION

The campaign included:

· Media Relations –campaign launch press event in New York with satellite link to two lead markets; an audio news releasee national news feature distribution with an infograph.

· Television, radio and print advertising which carried forward the three campaign theme vignettes and told stories about average people finding help from psychologists in coping with real life issues. Ads included a consumer response 800#.

· The Help Center–a consumer information center on the World Wide Web included all campaign consumer information material and special features on campaign vignette themes–job stress, the mind-body connection, and family relationships.

· A consumer information brochure which answered the public’s questions, as identified in the research phase, about psychological services.

· Campaign activities focused in lead cites.

· A campaign kit included. technical advice and campaign materials which could be reproduced.

· Campaign training was provided in central locations across the country.

EVALUATION

· Post campaign survey research found increases in awareness in both lead cities: awareness of psychologists as mental health providers up from 52% to 63%; persons believing mental health coverage is important, up from 75% to 82%; Persons who said they would be likely to seek mental health care for family problems-a key campaign theme-up from 59% to 67%.

· Over 100 million media impressions were generated including AP, USA Today, Los Angeles Times syndicate, the Washington Post, CNN, local newspapers, and numerous health and women’s magazines, between February 1996 and January 1997.

· 223,308 “hits” were recorded by visitors to the campaign consumer help center on the World Wide Web between February 1996 and December 1996.

· More than 7,000 calls to the 800-line by consumers between February and June 1997–the months of most campaign activity.

· In Colorado calls to the state referral service QUADRUPLED during the months of campaign activity; calls to the referral service in Connecticut DOUBLED.

· 27 states have engaged in campaign activities or projects; 2,763 calls were received from APA members who wanted a campaign kit or other information about the campaign; 750 APA members attended grass-roots campaign training sessions.

PR의 효과 측정 2 < ?xml:namespace prefix = o ns = “urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office” />

최근 IABC(Internationa Associate of Business Communicators)와 HR경영 및 커뮤니케이션 컨설팅 펌인 Watson Wyatt의 연구 보고서를 보면, 기업에서 행하는 커뮤니케이션활동(PR포함)의 효과 확인유무를 묻는 질문이 있었습니다. 미국의 많은 경영자들이 이 물음에 답한것으로 되어있는데, 그 한 부분으로 결과는 이랬습니다.

* 당신의 기업은 얼마나 자주 커뮤니케이션 효과 측정을 하십니까?

답변결과)) 계속 21%, 일년에 한번 17%, 가끔 34%, 정식 측정은 해본적 없음 28%.

무척 많은 기업들이 자신들의 커뮤니케이션 활동 자체에만 관심을 두지, 그 효과에는 별 관심이 없다는 얘기인것 같습니다. 이런 경우는 정말 많은 곳에서 그 증거를 접할수 있습니다. 수년간 정기적인 캠페인 광고를 기획하면서 효과측정은 단한번도 없었다는 분도 계시고요. 대화를 하다보면, “그때 그 PR프로그램 진짜 멋졌어요, 뭐 또하나 그런거 없을까요?”하시는 분들도 계십니다.

물론 사람들의 기억에 오래 남는 게 좋은 프로그램일수도 있겠지만, 당시 그 프로그램의 기획시 설정한 목표를 달성했었는가에 대한 의문은 남아있습니다.

PR프로그램을 자기 위안으로만 삼는 경우는 저에게도 무척 흔합니다.

일단 괜찮게 했으니까.., 주요 일간지 몇개에 이정도 나갔으니까..

IPR의 지난 자료를 보신 분은 아시겠지만, PR Output과 PR Outcome은 다릅니다.

그밖에 다른 여러 측정 분야가 있지요. 만약 우리가 애써서 기획 수행한 PR프로그램의 효과가 다양한 방면에 이렇고 이렇게 효과와 영향력을 행사했다”고 수치화된 자료를 윗분들이나, 클라이언트들에게 내놓는다면 이보다 더 우리 PR인들을 신뢰화, 전문화 하는 길이 어디 더 있겠습니까.

보도자료 배포 후 기사 게재량 측정도 물론 중요하지만, 일간지 10개에 기사가 실린것과 일간지 7개에 실린것이 보도자료 배포시 목적했던 결과의 달성에 어떤 영향적 차이가 있는지를 궁금해 하지 않는다는 건 이상한 얘기입니다.

기획 부터 실행, 그리고 효과 분석에 개선안까지 모두 책임지는게 우리 PR 업무 프로세스였으면 좋겠다 해서 말씀드립니다.

또하나의 연구 속 질문에 이런게 있었습니다.

* 무엇이 당신의 기업이 사용하고 있는 가장 보편적인 효과 측정 방법입니까?

답변결과)) 정식 기법이 없다 26%, 커뮤니케이션 오딧(Audit) 31%, 사원 서베이 51%, 경영적 판단 40%, 변화된 행동에 대한 객관적 측정방식들15%.

실제로 우리나라의 경영자 분들도 이와 별다르지 않으시리라 보고 있습니다.

기업의 커뮤니케이션적 활동과 노력에 대한 Visible한 결과 및 영향 제시가 있을때, PR에이젼시들은 진정으로 전문집단의 대접을 받고, 인하우스 인력들은 제 2의 IMF가 와도 “소비성향 분야 인력”들로 분류되지 않을 겁니다.

한번 이에 대한 깊은 전문인들로서의 고찰이 필요합니다.

지난 이슈에 약속 드렸던 IPR의 두번째 보고서는 용량상 게재가 불가능해 보입니다. 4-5개 정도로 나누어 게재도 가능하겠지만, 여러분들이 짜증 내실 것 같아서.. 이에 관심있으신 분들께서 연락 주시면 이메일 해드리겠습니다. 참고하시라고..

PR의 효과 측정 1

이 바로 앞 이슈로 케쳠 사장님이신, Drobis씨가 하신 말씀 가운데 가슴 깊이 남는 것 하나가 (물론 모두 버릴것 없는 지적이셨지만) 바로 PR의 효과 측정에 대한 얘기였습니다.

어떤 기업도 눈에 보이지 않는 것에 아무 의미 없이 투자하지는 않습니다.

그러나 아이러니컬 하게도 많은 기업들이 효과가 측정되지 않는 PR에는 꽤 아까운 돈들을 투자를 합니다. “PR은 가랑비 같아서 장기간의 노력을 해야 겨우 소기의 목적을 달성할수 있다.” 맞는 말입니다. 이는 때때로 우물에서 숭늉을 찾으시는 분들께 적절한 명언이되고 있습니다. 그러나 가랑비도 어느정도 맞고나서는 젖은 옷을 짜내어 얼마나 많은 빗방울을 지금까지 맞았는지 확인할 필요가 있습니다.PR 은 상품이며 과학이기 때문입니다.

Communications은 Art다. 학부시절에 가슴 찡~하게 듣던 말입니다.

PR도 Art입니다. 그러나 그 시행 결과의 올바른 측정이 가능할때 진정한 Art일 수 있습니다.

제가아는 한 교수님께서 이런 말씀을 해주시고는 했습니다.

“Professional Service를 파는 너희들이 성공적인 결과를 달성하도록 클라이언트를 도왔다면 사람들로 부터 “전문가!”라는 칭호를 듣는다. 그러나 비관적인 결과를 초래했을때는 “사기꾼!”이라는 말을 듣는다.”라고 하셨습니다. 저는 이 말씀을 가슴 깊이 새기고 있습니다. 사기꾼이 되지않으려고…

PR인들은 결과의 측정이 없는 상품을 팔고있습니다. 소비자인 클라이언트들도 그냥 그렇게 넘어갑니다. 물론 효과측정을 하려면 참 복잡합니다. 귀찮습니다. 또 어떤 프로그램은 효과측정이 불가능하기까지 합니다. 그렇습니다.

그러나.. 저희가 Professional로 취급을 받으며, 명예롭게 은퇴하기 위해서는 꼭 필요합니다. 항상 하나의 서비스 팩키지 정도로 생각하면 그냥 쉬울겁니다.

앞으로 효과 측정에 대한 클라이언트의 적극적인 투자와 에이젼시의 능동적인 관심이 필요합니다. (경쟁력을 위해서..이전 이슈에서 언급된 것 기억하시죠?)

이번과 다음 이슈는 PR 효과 측정에 대한 이슈를 다루기 위해 미국의 가장 권위 있는 PR효과 측정 연구소인 플로리다의 Institute For Public Relations의 “Guidelines for setting measurable public relations objectives”를 싣습니다. 올해 5월경 쯤에 발표됬었습니다. 내일은 제작년에 발표되어 PRSA랑 도용 시비를 벌이기도 했던 또하나의 명작” “Guidelines and Standards for measuring and evaluating PR effectiveness”를 소개해 올리겠습니다. 기대하십시오.

한국 사회에서 PR인들이 최고의 전문가 집단으로 인정받을 때를 기다립니다.

그럼 먼저 “홍보!!!”

*************************************************************************

PR의 효과 측정 1 (자료)

<<참고자료>>

GUIDELINES FOR SETTING MEASURABLE

PUBLIC RELATIONS OBJECTIVES

c 1999, THE INSTITUTE For Public Relations Research & Education

This Booklet Summarizes The Ideas, Thoughts and Suggestions

Of An Institute for Public Relations Research & Education

Special Task Force Seeking To Set Industry-Accepted

Minimum Criteria For Evaluating PR Outputs and Outcomes

CONTRIBUTORS

Katharine Delahaye Payne

The Delahaye Group, Inc Mark Weiner

MediaLink

Dr. James E. Grunig

University of Maryland Dr. Walter K. Lindenmann

Ketchum

————————————————————————–

This manuscript was prepared by Forrest W. Anderson and Linda Hadley

First Published, May 1999

WHY SET MEASURABLE PR OBJECTIVES ?

The goal of virtually all public relations (PR) is to help an organization achieve its “business or performance objectives.” How does PR do this? It begins by setting measurable objectives.

Measurable objectives in public relations do two things:

1. They facilitate and support business objectives, thus demonstrating that PR activities support the business or performance goals and are thereby “strategic”

2. They enable PR practitioners to show they have achieved what they set out to achieve, and thereby demonstrate accountability

The reason to state measurable objectives is that if you do not, you are likely to suffer the following consequences:

Where the process of goal setting and evaluation seems to have become perfunctory or sporadic over time, there seems to have been the greatest downsizing in [corporate communications] staff and activity. (Barlow 1993, 8)

Only one practitioner – a public affairs advisor for an oil company – said that his department has no written goals and objectives. He described a situation of great instability in which the business units of his organization are driving the goals of public affairs, while corporate public affairs is being downsized drastically. (Hon 1998, 118)

SETTING MEASURABLE PUBLIC RELATIONS OBJECTIVES

Link PR Objectives to Business and Organizational Objectives

Getting a clear understanding of an organizations business or performance goals is the PR practitioners first step in setting measurable objectives for a communications program, yet it is probably the most often overlooked. When management asks what it is getting for its PR investment, it is asking for evidence that communications activities have advanced business goals. If public relations practitioners do not have a clear understanding of what these business goals are, public relations can succeed only by chance.

Business goals might include:

1. Increasing share price

2. Increasing sales

3. Increasing market share

4. Increasing productivity

5. Reducing employee turnover

How do we obtain this information? In the ideal world, senior PR staff has been at the table with the rest of senior management helping to set the organizations objectives. So senior PR staff knows. However, in some organizations, PR has not yet achieved this level of influence. If this is the case, other avenues for determining business goals are to engage senior managers in discussions of the organizations goals and the factors managers think will impact achieving these goals. Ask to see business plans and marketing plans. Talk with those involved in other communications disciplines about what their programs are designed to accomplish. Do your own research into industry issues and trends and your target audiences. Make this kind of situation analysis a routine element of program planning.

Of course, understanding the organization’s business goals is easiest when the public relations practitioners who develop the communications plan take part in setting the organization’s overall objectives as well.

To help ensure that PR objectives are linked to business objectives, ask the following questions:

1. What is management trying to achieve and what will help or hinder its success, from a communications perspective?

2. How are stakeholders likely to respond to management decisions?

3. What response would management like from target stakeholders?

4. How can PR programs help achieve these goals?

5. What is the most effective role for PR in relation to other communications disciplines? What can PR do more effectively than advertising, promotions, management consultants, etc.?

Answers to these questions will help identify business goals and guide PR efforts in the most productive directions.

Tieing Objectives to Measures of Program Success

The foundation for effective program evaluation is setting objectives. Program evaluation is the process of measuring progress toward objectives. If the objectives are unclear, the evaluation will be weak. Further, the creation of objectives is critical to managing expectations for the program, especially where specific targets for outcomes are set (e.g., increase awareness by 20 percent).

Creating Measurable PR Objectives

In the case of objectives, wishing (or simply calling something an objective) won&Otilde;t make it so. An objective must

1. Specify a desired outcome (increase awareness, improve relationships, build preference, adopt an attitude, generate sales leads, etc.)

2. Directly specify one or several target audiences

3. Be measurable, both conceptually and practically

4. Refer to “ends,” not “means.” If your objective outlines a means by which to do something, (often prefaced by the words “leverage” or “use”), you have a strategy, not an objective.

5. Include a time frame in which the objective is to be achieved, for example, by July 1.

In general, process goals, such as “get publicity,” “launch a product” or “create a brochure,” make poor objectives. They do not relate to broader organizational goals and are not measurable in any specific, concrete, or truly meaningful manner. (“I did it”/”I didn&Otilde;t do it.” does not count as measurable.) A useful way to replace these “process” objectives is to ask yourself, “What is the purpose of (insert objective).” The answer to this question is likely to move you closer to a clear, actionable objective.

Examples:

Publicizing A New Line of Women&Otilde;s Clothing

Let’s suppose the purpose of “get publicity” is to help sell a new line of women’s clothing. While PR cannot ensure sales, a sound publicity program can generate the awareness and possibly build the motivation necessary for sales to occur. So, “get publicity” could change into “increase awareness of our new line of women’s clothing within the next six months among women in the top 10 ADIs, between the ages of 40 and 64, with household incomes of $50,000 and up.”

Note: By spelling out the proposed publicity campaign in this very precise manner, all five of the requirements we had listed above are covered, and the PR effort now becomes something that can be specifically measurable.

Informing Motorists About Changes Pertaining To A New Toll Road

When a privately financed and developed toll-road first opened in a given location, it turned out that traffic was far below that which had been anticipated by the developers. The business objective of the agency that was responsible for managing the toll road clearly was to increase traffic as quickly as possible. Research showed that potential users of the toll road — residents of the nearby communities — did not like the look of the existing toll structures and also were concerned about noise and air pollution. The toll road authority immediately took steps to improve the look of the road’s toll structures and also erected barriers as a means of limiting and controlling noise and air pollution. The toll road authority set for itself an objective of seeking to increase traffic to 30,000 cars per week day within a six month time frame. The communications program that was developed and put into place, was directly linked to that objective — that is, within a six month period of time, the aim was to educate and inform a large enough proportion of residents of neighboring communities about the changes that had taken place, that would eventually lead to an increased number of motorists considering the possible use of the new toll way, as an alternate means of travel.

Note: By linking the public education program to the business plan, by adhering to the exact same time frame of six months, and by targeting community residents, a set of measurable communications objectives was put into effect.

Restoring the Reputation of A Distributor Of Computer Products

A distributor of computer products and services had achieved an enviable reputation among those in the financial community and in the business press, chiefly through the successful marketing of its products to four very specific audience segments.

In an effort to expand its market share, the company made a dramatic foray into a sales channel in which it was not at all well known. The venture failed, and this unexpected turn of events had an extremely negative impact on the manufacturer’s overall reputation on Wall Street. Even though the company was continuing to experience success in market areas in which it had dominated in the past, the unsuccessful venture left financial analysts and those in the media with the impression that perhaps the firm was no longer as successful an organization as it had been perceived to be in the past.

The organization’s management regrouped after the failed venture and began to not only meet, but also exceed, its sales goals among the other four target audience segments to which it had been selling its products and services in the past.

What management needed from the communications program was to increase the number of financial analysts with positive attitudes toward the company. Specific media placement and financial community targets were set and a one-year time schedule was implemented.

Note: The PR objectives that were set were very specific, very measurable, and were clearly tied to the organization’s business objectives

Determining The Value Of A Corporate Event Sponsorship Program

For years, a manufacturer and distributor of cellular phones had actively been involved in sponsoring and promoting a local golf tournament, which received national exposure one particular weekend each year. Although the company knew that linking its name to the tourney was generating a good deal of goodwill, the firm&Otilde;s business officers challenged the PR people to link the publicity effort to the sale of cellular phones to golf enthusiasts.

In this case, a long-term PR effort with only limited “business” objectives, suddenly was given a new mission: link the PR to possible sales. To do so, the PR professionals commissioned research “around” the golf tournament — conducting research with a sample of golf enthusiasts who were familiar with and likely to watch the tourney, either in person or on television, prior to the holding of the event to determine their interest in and possible purchase of cellular phone products, followed by a follow-up poll immediately following the event, to determine what impact, if any, the company’s sponsorship might have had in possibly generating sales interest. The before-and-after impact of the company’s publicity and promotional efforts relating to the golf tourney also were measured.

Note: As in the previous examples, the target audience was clearly defined in advance and the data that were collected were quite specific, and directly relevant to the organization’s business objectives

Should A New Product Be Promoted With Ads, Publicity or Both?

A distributor of meat products was planning to distribute a brand new product during a given period of time, but the marketing staff was not certain if it would be more effective to promote and publicize the product only with paid advertising, only with “free” publicity, or with a combination of both.

In an effort to resolve the dilemma, the company’s advertising and public relations departments both were asked to develop materials to be used in the promotional effort. In setting their objectives for their efforts, both departments clearly recognized that they ultimately would be judged not just on how much “exposure” they achieved through their communications dissemination efforts, but also by whether or not what they did actually “moved” product.

To precisely document and measure the effectiveness of their efforts, the departments identified four somewhat similar communities, then introduced the new product in the first community using advertising techniques only – introduced the product in the second community using publicity techniques only – introduced it in the third community using a combination of both – and introduced it in a fourth community with no advertising or PR support at all — in an effort to set up a “control” group.

Before and after research was designed and carried out in all four communities, to precisely measure consumer knowledge of and attitudes toward the company and its various meat products prior to the new product launch, and two weeks after the launch.

Note: This particular effort gave the companys marketing managers precisely what they needed: hard, measurable data pertaining to which approach worked best, which the company could then use for its marketing and communications efforts overall.

Developing A View Book For Use In Student Recruitment

The public relations officer of an academic institution was asked to prepare a booklet that could be used by the college to more effectively market and promote the institution to a certain segment of its prospective students.

Loads of materials about the college already existed — including a catalogue, various brochures that described different curricular offerings, and fact sheets that offered background information about different degree and non-degree programs. The new booklet was deemed necessary to enable the school to reach one special segment of the population with which the college had had only limited success in the past: representatives of a certain racial and ethnic minority group.

In planning for the development of the new promotional booklet, the PR department focused on such issues as the book’s eventual distribution to the audience that was being targeted – the desired receptivity to and interest in the contents of the book on the part of that segment of the public – and on the ultimate value that the book might generate for the school, by resulting in increased inquiries, possible applications (and eventual enrollments) by those in the target audience population.

Note: By specifically defining all of the functions that the new book was intended to fulfill, by focusing not only on its contents, but also on its possible means of distribution, the likelihood of it being received, understood and effectively used by those in the target audience group, and the ultimate purpose of the booklet as a means of motivating those in a particular sector to possibly consider applying to the school, the college public relations officer was able to set — in advance — very specific measurable objectives that the book’s creation was intended to meet.

Be Realistic

Be realistic when you develop PR program objectives. A common problem for PR program goal-setters is the temptation to over-promise or to fix on objectives like “drive consumer sales” or “build awareness of the product” without much attention to whether there is anything in the program that could achieve such an objective.

Proper attention to program evaluation can help ensure that objectives are realistic. Consider, for example, a $50,000 recipe service campaign. If the objective were to build national awareness of the food product featured in the recipe campaign, the most likely means to measure success would be a national survey to track consumer awareness of the product and the campaign. (Build awareness; measure change in awareness.) This kind of evaluation is unlikely to show measurable increases in national awareness simply because we are designating some 200 million people as our target audience. It might be better to promise something that can be achieved with $50,000, such as building the brand’s visibility among key food reporters and editors, a much more limited — and realistic — target audience.

Other ways to be realistic include checking industry benchmarks, comparing notes with colleagues who have done similar projects and reviewing secondary literature. One place to look for comparative benchmarks is in the award application archives of PRSA and CIPRA.