[태그] 컨설팅·에이전시

  • PRSA의 윤리 강령 (1999)

    PRSA의 윤리 강령

    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) (1999)

    케네디 Jr.와 Crisis Management (Media Relations를 중심으로)

    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 (1999)

    이래서 PR이 좋다.. 10가지 사실

    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 (1999)

    PR 클라이언트로서의 벤쳐 유형

    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

  • PR의 효과 측정 2 (1999)

    PR의 효과 측정 2

    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 (1999)

    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.

  • PR 컨설팅의 경쟁력에 대하여 (1999)

    PR 컨설팅의 경쟁력에 대하여

    이번 이슈는 약간 일반적이지 못한 이슈입니다.

    국내에서 PR컨설팅을 하시는 극소수의 분들께 국제적인 PR컨설팅의 경쟁력에 대하여 큰 그림을 보여드리려 이 이슈를 준비하였습니다.

    요즘 몇몇 단체에서 PR 과정들을 잇달아 열고 있읍니다. 그많큼 PR에 대한 사회적인 관심이 커지고 있다는 의미겠지요.

    사실 저는 현재가 PR의 Identity Crisis라고 보는 사람들 중의 하나입니다.

    현재 우리 PR인들(독립 에이젼시)이 아웃소싱의 파도속에서 전문인으로 인정받을수 있는 길은 엄청난 자신에 대한 직업적 투자가 있어야 할 것입니다. 그리고 업무상 더이상 보도자료등을 충실히(?) 배포하는 “단순 용역”의 일상업무에 만족해서는 않되겠습니다. 많은 인하우스분들이 일부 PR에이젼시들을 비딩이라는 명목하에 가격 경쟁을 시키고, 그 시도에 또 충실히도 디스카운트 경쟁을 벌이는 우리 에이젼시들을 보면서, 이 PR 산업이 과연 우리나라에서 얼마나 이어질수 있을까 하는 의문이 듭니다.

    요즘에는 PR컨설팅이라는 말이 또 업계에 일반화 되고 있습니다.

    물론 우리 업계가 살아남을수 있는 고부가가치의 비지니스 섹터가 되겠지만,

    우리나라 같이 지적 서비스에 대해 값을 쳐주지 않는 분위기와 그의 빌미가 되는 에이젼시 인력들의 평균적인 비전문성이(물론 저를 포함합니다.) 이러한 업계 비젼을 암울하게 합니다.

    그래도 나름대로 열심히 연구하시고,현 업무에 적용 시도하시는 여러 젊고 패기있는 우리PR적 형제들께 더욱 분발하자고, 지난주 추석 때 유럽의 알프스 근처에서 열린 세계 PR에이젼시 사장님들의 컨퍼런스 중 세계적 PR에이젼시 케쳠의 CEO인 David Drobis씨의 연설을 싣습니다.

    그는 우리 PR업계가 점점더 경쟁적이어만 가는 시장에서 살아 남을수 있는 길을 제시하셨습니다. 인하우스 분들도 귀담아 들어야 하는 부분이 매우 많습니다. 현재 PR컨설팅을 수행하시며, 많은 벽에 부닥치시는 모든 동료분들께 이글을 소개해 드리고 싶어 이렇게 공개해 드립니다.

    힘냅시다.

    PR컨설팅의 경쟁력 편에서 말씀드린 연설문입니다. 홍보~~

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

    Setting Standards to Move Us Ahead – A Significant Opportunity

    Remarks by David R. Drobis, Senior Partner/CEO, Ketchum

    Good morning. It is great to be here in the beautiful Swiss Alps with so many people at the top of the public relations profession and at a time when the public relations business is also moving to great heights.

    I’m honored to be part of this historic meeting certainly the first time so many of the world’s leading consultancies have gathered to assess the state of the business of public relations as we look into the 21st century. For this pioneering meeting I want to congratulate ICO and, particularly, Peter Hehir and Jean-Leopold Schuybroek for their vision, perseverance and hard work.

    As we prepare to enter the new millennium, globalization and technology are changing business and, certainly, the business of public relations. As the digital economy moves into high gear, our businesses are being transformed to the point that today we may not even recognize who we will be tomorrow.

    This Summit gives us the opportunity to work together to shape our future… to determine how our industry will adapt to the world around us… to define our markets and to set new standards for our success.

    There are two reasons why this is so important.

    First, public relations is becoming big business on a global scale at least four billion dollars this year. If we are to continue growing at fifteen to twenty percent, we must learn to interact across our languages, cultures and time zones. We need to move towards more common ways of doing things so that we gain greater awareness and understanding for the universal importance and value of what we do.

    The second reason is that other professional services also recognize the value of communications and relationships in an information economy and are challenging us like never before. Management consultants, accountants, lawyers and even executive recruiters will seek to diminish our role with clients?relegating public relations professionals to implementers of some far removed strategy developed by other business counselors.

    We’re already seeing this in the advertising world. Management consultants have taken over marketing strategy discussions that were once the domain of the agencies. Now we’re seeing firms like PriceWaterhouseCoopers offering reputation awareness services. And the HR consultants like Towers Perrin are building communications strategy practices. All appear to take dead aim at public relations.

    Yes, our industry faces a whole new range of competitors. But, just like us, our competition is equally exposed to shifting business trends. And their threats are our opportunities. We are quite capable of protecting our status and even expanding our sphere of influence with clients. We don’t need to overreact to this encroachment on our business.

    What do we need to do?

    That’s what this summit is designed to do. And I’d like to help set the stage by examining how other business advisors particularly management consultants match up against the public relations business. Let’s see what we can learn from their best practices… and from their failures. And then we have to decide what standards we should set forth to fortify our core business and to expand our market share of the professional services industry.

    For this presentation we looked at four categories of standards critical to successful professional services firms. They are:

    Professional Development. How do others go about attracting and developing talented individuals? And once aboard, what types of career paths exist?

    Business Practices. What is expected by the clients in service agreements in new business engagements? What are they really paying for?

    Process and Measurement. How good of a job do we do at measuring our “success” compared with management consultants? Can we or should we validate our results with more numbers and statistics? How do we standardize our services and still retain our creativity?

    And, finally

    Ethics and Public Service. Do other professional services have different ethical standards, either through regulation or professional codes? Is the public relations industry more susceptible to ethical challenges?

    As we studied these four categories, it became quite apparent that professional development drove the standards of the other three. That’s not surprising because we’re all in the people business. The talents we bring to the client are the real product of professional services. Later several speakers will talk in greater detail about recruiting and professional development, but I want to set the stage with a few observations.

    Qualification standards and recruitment are perhaps the most significant points of departure between public relations and other professional services. All have better defined academic credentials or professional accreditation for entry. Consider, for example, that lawyers and accountants can move into public relations without meeting defined professional standards, which public relations professionals would need to satisfy if they moved in the opposite direction. Even management consultants, who have no accreditation requirements, have made the MBA an essential qualification.

    And the major consulting firms have perfected the art of college and university recruiting. Andersen Consulting will hire roughly thirteen thousand college graduates this year. And McKinsey & Company remains the most preferred employer among business-school graduates, according to a recent survey by a Swedish university research company.

    We’ve heard the stories about how the consultants cater to graduates, wooing them with six-figure salaries and sizable signing bonuses. Some of it is true. Some of it is hype. On average, consultants do offer better compensation packages than public relations. But more importantly, management consultants have made campus recruiting a top priority across the entire organization.

    We may not compete with management consultants on quantity and salary today, but certainly we can compete on quality of life and excitement and creativity of assignments. Consultants are already losing some of their money-motivated talent pool to business start-ups and other “dot com” companies.

    Consider where we are at the forefront of communications and technology. We can offer college and business school graduates equally exciting opportunities the ability to effect change through communications. We are in a terrific position to offer young people opportunities they’re looking for to influence the way companies operate in the public arena, while also satisfying their idealistic nature. Public relations encourages social responsibility and contributions to the public interest in a way management consultants cannot.

    The key is exposing people early to the challenging business of public relations. That means expanding our internship opportunities, nurturing students as they continue their studies, and expanding our visibility on campuses.

    And now our training programs are beginning to rival those of the large management consulting and accounting firms. Within the past five years, most of the major public relations consultancies have made substantial commitments to training. As an industry it would now be useful for us to consider training standards that we can all agree to and then implement as needed within our organizations.

    The next area I want to look at is business practices. This is another defining measure of professional service firms, particularly management consulting which, like public relations, is basically an unregulated industry. The marketplace, not some government agency, defines good business practices. New ideas create new opportunities. That’s the way it should be.

    Like management consultancies, many public relations firms have started to define their services along industry or practice groups that emulate their clients’ business. But we have a long way to go to create the industry and specialty knowledge base of the McKinsey’s and Andersen’s that will give us the authoritative position they enjoy.

    This commitment to research and process gives management consultants tremendous competitive advantages. It promises the opportunity to counsel a broader array of entities within a corporation, choosing the client with the stature, power and budget to work with for each engagement. It increases pricing of services and facilitates selling new business.

    Each of the major management consulting firms and most of the minors ones have invested millions of dollars in knowledge sharing systems. The objective is the same: consultants “dump” core knowledge into best-practice databases. Remember that most of these firms have adopted an industry focus. These databases reflect that same structure.

    The power of such knowledge is far-reaching. Tapping into past case studies allows consultants to “get smart” on different industries quite rapidly professionals are billable from day one and they use their industry knowledge to grow their business with clients.

    In new business development, the major management consulting firms take a very pragmatic approach: thirty percent of new business should come from existing clients what we all call “sell through” business. Another forty percent should come from direct client referrals. The remaining thirty percent can be characterized as true “new” business development. Management consultants rightly believe that concentrating most of their business development on satisfied customers leads to higher profitability. It’s simple but true.

    Cost-of-sale remains the most difficult measure in professional services and most firms will pay an exorbitant price to get new business. But they will not give away strategic counsel.

    PricewaterhouseCoopers has embarked on a “global relationship” selling effort. The goal is to make PwC the professional services firm of choice for Fortune 50 companies. PwC expects at least $75 million a year in fees from these clients. And they’re investing heavily to get it.

    The point is: professional service firms in the future won’t just walk away when an engagement ends. From day one, they will aggressively pursue new opportunities with existing clients.

    We’re now seeing other innovations in selling new services. Ernst & Young launched its popular “Ernie” online consulting service two years ago. The premise is fairly straightforward: Ernie targets mid-sized companies that wouldn’t normally buy E&Y’s higher-cost consulting services. For a flat rate of about $20,000/yr, clients can “ask Ernie” anything about their business or industry: What’s the best leasing arrangement for office space in New York? How do we expand our distribution channels in Germany? The list goes on.

    A core group of consultants use technology to pull answers from E&Y’s existing knowledge base. Tougher questions are posted to 21,000 E&Y advisors accountants, consultants, everybody. Answers are delivered via email in two days or less. Resources on best industry practices are archived on a members-only web site.

    The business generates a few million dollars a year. More importantly, Ernie allows potential clients to sample E&Y’s brainpower. Some Ernie clients will ultimately buy higher-value and higher-margin consulting services. The rest are quite satisfied with their “consultants on call.”

    E&Y has figured out a way of turning some of the marketing costs back onto the client. It’s a novel form of up-selling. Even better, E&Y is able to tap an otherwise inaccessible market mid-sized companies by leveraging technology and knowledge.

    The public relations industry needs to devise more aggressive solutions to deliver value while still maintaining profitability. As we all know, value is perception the “eye of the beholder.” We can increase our value by defining our processes better, showing clients we have a formula for success and a way for measuring our success.

    Management consultants have an advantage in this area. Figuring dollars-gained to dollars-spent is simpler in the cost-cutting business. Consultants wrap results around exclusive processes. Five forces. Re-engineering. Value-based management. Some of the larger consulting firms spend millions of dollars showcasing their processes and thought leadership.

    The McKinsey Quarterly often challenges Harvard Business Review in presenting leading management theories. Seven of the top ten consulting firms publish journals that directly address clients’ needs.

    Public relations can be equally thought provoking. But outsiders perceive public relations as not having a defined process, a commitment to research, or a standard measure of results. We certainly need to correct that perception. We should be promoting our own industry’s ability to solve crucial business problems. Research on management communications needs to demonstrate linkages to business performance and stock price defined by process tools that we brand. This goes to our third area process and measurement. Certainly we need to standardize our measurement processes.

    More importantly, public relations firms must commit to measuring results, whether the client pays for it or not. Despite all the current discussion about measurement, this is not a new issue. My colleague, Dr. Walter Lindenmann, has written extensively on measurement tools for public relations. The highly respected textbook, Effective Public Relations, by Scott M. Cutlip and Allen H. Center first published in 1952 covers the topic.

    In the U.S., the Institute for Public Relations established a Commission on Measurement comprised of the leaders of PR research in corporations, agencies, academia and research firms. Our industry also benefited greatly when the IPR, PRCA and PR Week took the leadership in the U.K. with the public relations research and evaluation tool kit.

    Measurement tools aren’t lacking; commitment is and, so, to a degree, is funding. Many consultancies, on their own, and a few corporations, individually, have already allocated funds to begin to build models for PR measurement. But for greater credibility in our field, this needs to be done as an industry. We, as an industry, need to explore ways to raise funds so we can develop truly credible public relations measurement models that we can all support.

    Calculating success must be meaningful to the client. Management consultants have perfected the art of value creation. My management consulting friends impress clients with heady return-on-investment ratios of one hundred to one for every dollar spent on consulting, clients will realize one hundred dollars in revenue or profitability.

    Ridiculous? Not when you back up your claims with results. The examples are numerous:

    Bain & Company has compiled the “Bain Index,” which measures the stock performance of current and past clients.

    Andersen Consulting delivers nearly a 150% increase in supply chain process improvement for worldwide retailer Best Buy. If Andersen fails, the firm immediately knocks 20% off its fees.

    Cambridge Management Consulting will instantly offer prospective clients at least 32 specific case studiesacross multiple industries that detail millions of dollars in cost savings or revenue increases.

    Public relations should be able to make comparable dollar comparisons.

    Now let’s talk about pricing our services.

    The ability to derive value has a direct effect on pricing for our services. All too often, the public relations industry gives away its most valuable asset knowledge and experience. Our strategic advice shouldn’t be perceived as an add-on to our implementation services.

    We’ve set up our business in a way that clients pay about the same rates for vastly different products. Crisis communications strategy versus product announcements. We charge the same hourly rates yet these are hardly interchangeable services. Executive recruiters grouse about the same problem. Their percentage-of-salary fee for executive placements rewards transactions, not advice. It’s frustrating, particularly for high-end recruiters like Spencer Stuart, who counsel CEOs and senior executives every day.

    To combat the problem, Spencer Stuart recently launched a stand-alone research and advisory service that helps CEOs and boards measure executive leadership compatibility within proposed mergers. It works on retainer.

    We need to take a page from other professional advisors. We should separate our services implementation from strategy, knowledge development, creativity and charge accordingly. Management consultants compete on price for commodity services. But most will not discount for significant strategic advice. It devalues the service ?and the advisor.

    In the Internet age, brands are precious. And we’re at the center of brand management and awareness.

    We help clients sustain their reputation. And we are at the heart of relationship building the foundation of public relations.

    What is the value of the third party endorsement we bring to communications? This is the area of the communications business we own. Our business is built largely on influencing infomediaries so our messages are delivered more credibly.

    What’s that worth? Let’s stop leaving it up to our clients to guess.

    Finally, I want to turn to ethics and the ethical standards that can really define our profession and enhance its credibility. A recent survey by the U.S. trade publication, Inside PR, noted that ethics is being taken very seriously among the major firms with most including ethics training in their professional development programs and with many requiring their employees to sign codes of ethics. There are many ramifications of ethics from client service issues to client conflict issues to human resources initiatives and actions.

    But, as editor Paul Holmes points out, the practice of public relations our goal to help organizations understand their publics and then align themselves with the public good is ethical in and of itself and sets us far apart from other professional disciplines. Our commitment to openness and accuracy in the media is no less high than journalism’s ethic.

    Other professional services are struggling with ethical debates. The executive recruiting industry is a good example. Four years ago, the Association of Executive Search Consultants the headhunter’s best-known trade group set out to rewrite its ethical code. The old charter mixed business practices and philosophies, creating an archaic “do’s and don’ts” list that didn’t reflect the times.

    After an eighteen-month study, the group adopted a separate, high-minded code of ethics, and another, narrowly focused set of “best” business practices. It was a compromise that acknowledged reality. The group lost a couple of members who thought the two-pronged approach skirted firm ethical boundaries. Others wondered how far a trade association should go in telling members how to run their businesses.

    The public relations industry doesn’t even need to go that far.

    Professional services like executive recruiting, management consulting and public relations should be self-regulating industries. No single trade group can or should impose ethical standards or best practices over the entire industry. We’re a business-to-business industry. We have to police ourselves. Our industry’s morality is based on how we operate, not what we say.

    That’s why I’m not advocating a worldwide code of ethics, an accreditation or “quality” program or enforcement “courts of law,” which would be chaotic for the public relations business. What we do need to do as an industry is to agree on the value of promulgating and enforcing ethical behavior within our organizations and making sure that ethical self-regulation is a major differentiator for us. We need to make sure that each of our firms has a written code that our employees know about, understand and agree to. It is not enough just to say that our people all know ethics is important. They don’t know it unless they see it, live and breathe it as part of the culture.

    We’ve talked a lot about other professional services today. How we compare as an industry, how we can learn from others. Looking to the future, we asked our closest competitors the management consultants the same question that we are attempting to answer: What is the greatest threat facing your industry, as well as the greatest opportunity?

    For management consultants, the dizzying pace of technological change is the most vital concern. Three years ago the term “e-business” would draw a blank stare. Now everyone is clamoring to claim the “e-guru” mantle.

    On a grander scale, many consultants agree a sudden drop-off in the talent pipeline concurrent with a drastic increase in size is probably the biggest threat facing their industry. Some of these larger consulting firms rival their clients in size Andersen Consulting will likely surpass $10 billion in revenues next year. Building additional services to drive growth will prove taxing and, perhaps, self-defeating. Sophisticated buyers will demand superior not just adequate services.

    Consulting firms must also like us address work-life issues and develop career paths at all levels to control turnover. Even a five-percent decrease in incoming consultants would severely affect the business. And retention can’t be ignored. Fifteen to twenty percent attrition is healthy ?more than that can be painful.

    You’ll be seeing more consulting firms go public as a way to compete with the dot.coms and investment bankers for limited talent. Stock options may prove attractive, but the quarterly pressures of public ownership present its own problems.

    As far as opportunity, that’s a loaded question. Management consultants thrive on change, and we’re certainly living in chaotic times. As one managing partner pointed out, “we’re in the solutions business; demand is unlimited because there are always problems to solve.” While management consultants see a continuing need for their counsel, they also recognize the requirement to complement that counsel with strong execution. And this is why they are beginning to develop more communications services.

    That’s good news and bad news for public relations. It means we have more competition, but it also means the value of our services should rise as those who are used to far higher pricing structures provide them.

    Our future depends on increasing the value of our services and credibility of our business so we can attract better people, pay them better and keep them in public relations.

    And now is a good time for us to accomplish that. Technology and the Internet specifically offers us unlimited possibilities in the way we run our agencies as well as the way we practice public relations. Communicating during organizational change and crises has become a highly valued management discipline that we own and must continue to own.

    How do we take advantage of this opportunity?

    We need to provide exciting and rewarding challenges for highly talented individuals, develop recruiting programs to attract them, and invest heavily in professional development to help them throughout their careers.

    We need to invest in the development of business processes and consistent measurement protocols and commit to them. We need to be valuing and pricing our services differently. We are giving too much away in the process of generating business. It is devaluing the strategic and very important advice we deliver.

    We should make ethics a competitive advantage, built into the cultures of each of our organizations so that ethical behavior is known as a key value in our business.

    And, finally, we need to understand that our vulnerability lies in complacency, that it’s in our hands to fail꿳ot the market, or the media, or our competitors, or our clients.

    I’ve seen our profession and the business of public relations evolve in many ways over the last three decades.

    Perhaps the lines between professional services were a bit more distinct back then. Maybe we recognized our boundaries too much boundaries between public relations counselors and management consultants, boundaries between international markets.

    This is no longer a U.S. business or a U.K. business or a European or Asian business. It is a global business that can be very rewarding for all of our firms and the people within them. And it is no longer a business that has any disadvantages in competing for a larger share of the professional services market. The 21st century should be an exciting one for all of us if we make it so. And if we do it together.

  • Internal Communications (1999)

    Internal Communications

    지난번에도 말씀드린것 같이 Change Management의 핵심은 Employee Communications 또는 Internal Communications입니다.

    현재 미국에서 널리 공유되고 있는 Internal Communications의 패러다임을 아래글에서 구경하실수 있습니다. PR인들이 이제는 그들의 고유한 업무들을 넘어 더욱 조직 발전을 위한 Momentum이 될수 있다면, 과연 그 같은 PR프로그램의 실행 목적은 무었이어야 하는지, 어떠한 새로운 시각을 가지고 자신을 개발해야 하는지, 또 어떠한 자질이 우리들에게 필요한지를 잘 설명해 주고 있는 아주 깨끗한 글입니다. 문장하나한가 버릴말이 없는 좋은 글입니다.

    바로 이전 글에서 말씀드린 전략적 PR 컨설턴트 Grates씨의 뉴스레터에 들어 있던 글인데, 새삼 그 명쾌한 비젼설정에 감탄하며, 이렇게 여러분들께 나누어 드립니다.

    아래의 글의 깊이와 범위는 대학원 1학기의 강의로도 소화하지 못할 거대한 것입니다. 잘 프린트 하셔서 출퇴근이나 등하교시에 음미 바랍니다.

    어지러운 제글을 읽으시느라 수고들 하십니다. 그지만, Grates씨는 다르더군요..

    그럼 전 “홍보!”

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

    Moving Beyond Employee Communication…

    Making the Quantum Leap from Crafting Messages to Maximizing Organizational Effectiveness

    Internal communication is no longer about monthly newsletters, quarterly update videos, intranets, themes, events and employee suggestion boxes. Internal communication is evolving to a new level, where the focus is on accelerating decision making, challenging people’s knowledge, and providing information that leaders, managers and employees need to make decisions and launch initiatives. Going forward, strategic internal communication will be about improving organizational effectiveness, starting with leadership behaviors and managerial actions, not employee messaging…

    When did the notion of employee or internal communication become “chic?”

    In a recent article, a respected public relations trade publication lamented the fact that the “largest public relations firms have failed to take advantage of the opportunity presented by the burgeoning importance of internal communication.”

    That neglect seems to be waning as evidenced by the recent spate of announcements by large public relations firms that effective internal communication is in fact an important component to organizational success.

    Pretenders vs. Contenders

    Interestingly, this new found “discovery” of employee communication as a critical management tool by large public relations firms has resulted in the formation of a “strata” in terms of type, scope and thinking associated with delivering counsel, advice and services.

    “There is now a strong distinction among the many firms touting employee communication as a practice,” explained Gary F. Grates, President of GCI BoxenbaumGrates, a unit of GCI Consulting, the recognized leader in strategic internal communication and change management. “While we welcome the additional emphasis on internal communication, it is safe to say that what is currently being delivered is, in fact, almost a decade behind the times,” Grates noted. Employee communication has evolved into maximizing organizational effectiveness. It means that professionals in this field need to have a strong knowledge and appreciation of business and organizational behavior including management theory, management models and behavioral psychology. Against this backdrop is an understanding of leadership and its intersection with organizational communication,” Grates stated.

    Grates, who has been personally practicing internal communication since the early 80s, and the firm, which has been at the forefront of progressive internal communication practices since the early 90s, states that savvy clients must discern between those that profess an understanding and expertise in this area (Pretenders) and those that legitimately have the interest, credentials, experience and base of knowledge (Contenders).

    “The litmus test is the firm’s ability to view internal communication as a management philosophy,” Grates concluded. Successful internal communication efforts are focused on management development and attention and integrated with other important functions of the business including marketing, sales, product development and production.

    A Look Back

    First and foremost, internal communication practices within agencies have long been viewed primarily as a stepchild;a view that was repeated at most corporations. With a charter that included “fostering goodwill and creating understanding of leadership’s objectives among employees,” the internal communication function was typically relegated to producing events and parties, distributing trinkets, celebrating anniversaries and other milestones, producing messages, publishing monthly newsletters, writing executive speeches, and implementing other “feel good” activities. In other words, it was the official propaganda machine for the organization.

    This was in keeping with the times. From the 60s to the early 80s, internal communication reflected the organization’s bent on producing enough products to meet demand. As Tom Peters has said, “management during this period could not screw up if it tried.” In that post-World War II environment, the focus was on production, manufacturing, efficiency and distribution.

    Of the same genre, yet on a somewhat different level, was benefits or HR communication. Practitioners of this type of internal communication focused on disseminating specific information, including instructions and updates related to benefits, pension plans, insurance, wellness campaigns and other company-sponsored programs. In both cases, the focus was on distilling information from the top level down and using a variety of vehicles to disseminate it to employees. While these types of communication helped to maintain employee awareness and understanding of certain messages and information, the internal communication function did little to increase understanding, affect behavior or otherwise direct people’s attention to the future.

    For some, this is still the reality. Depending on whom you talk to, traditional employee communication is still being practiced, in more and less sophisticated ways, at many companies and agencies.

    Yet, as today’s savvy business leader now knows, yesterday’s idea of employee communication is no longer plausible in a world where technology and the hectic pace of business are redefining how companies communicate both internally and externally and where people are more sophisticated (e.g., mature and immune to corporate speak). As a result of this pressure, communication has been changing accordingly, particularly during the late 80s and 90s, when communicators began to shift the focus from message delivery to message development albeit against a backdrop of corporate initiatives, strategic goals and financial targets.

    The early 80s have been described as the undoing of the deals which formed the conglomerates in the 60s and 70s. Spurred by the oil crisis, the influx of foreign products, services and investment and a new instrument, junk bonds, which gave rise to a new breed: the raider.

    Junk bonds and leveraged buy-outs provided new financial instruments and strategies that forced poor management’s out and organizations to determine the real value of their enterprises.

    Reengineering, restructuring, M&A activity and the like began to dominate the business headlines as leaders scurried to eliminate waste and improve shareholder value.

    This resulted in the need to recruit, retain and motivate talented employees so as to produce the value inherent in the organization. It is during this time that internal communication began to transform itself.

    Internal Communication as a “Critical Organizational Priority”

    Now, as we stand on the brink of a new century, the true transformation of internal communication &#8211; from necessary function to critical organizational priority is already underway.

    As Alvin Toffler, noted futurist and author has stated, society is moving from the Industrial Age to the Information Age. In this new environment where information is abundant, competitive advantage lies in an organization’s ability to affect the behaviors, attitudes and actions of its employees. The end result is a workforce that can make decisions quickly, accurately and consistent with the business strategy.

    At GCI BoxenbaumGrates, we believe a more accurate depiction of internal communication can be described as the concept of improving “organizational effectiveness.” In this framework, communications is practiced in a strategic manner &#8211; accelerating decision-making, challenging people’s knowledge, and providing relevant and timely information.

    From this perch, internal communication is focused on understanding the true underpinnings of operational and performance including:

    * Through what operations is structure actually designed?

    * Through what operations does a leader impact a manager, employee and customer?

    * Through what operations do rewards and consequences affect change?

    * How are decisions made in the organization?

    * How is strategic planing defined and used in the organization to effect change in operations and behavior?

    * How is risk managed?

    * How clearly is success defined?

    * What are the interactions of individuals within the corporate environment?

    * How is information generated, shared, interpreted and used?

    * How is the organization contributing to self worth, self-actualization?

    * What are the values of employees throughout the organization? How do they match with organizational goals?

    * How much of the marketplace customers is part of the internal dialogue?

    Another characteristic of this environment is that people are constantly reevaluating their skill sets and reinventing themselves. In terms of credibility, it’s experience that counts, not words, and people are judged by their deeds, not just their intentions. Importantly, leadership does not exist solely to lead; rather, leaders are there to assist and facilitate others in getting results.

    Put succinctly, organizational effectiveness, or the institution’s ability to operate profitably, functionally, socially, strategically, innovatively and humanly, is the next management frontier. This new management model brings together the right mix of communication, leadership and team building to create an openness and an exchange that’s fostered by the right technologies and the right skill sets.

    What’s more, organizational effectiveness is a behavioral-based model, embedded in a belief that sharing the right information with the right people will result in decisions being made for the organization. The concept is so powerful, in fact, that savvy corporate managers recognize organizational effectiveness as the foundation for distinct and sustainable competitive advantage of the future.

    Institute for Excellence Think Tank Formed

    In 1998, in an effort to help lead a new generation of communicators, leaders and managers into this new frontier, Boxenbaum Grates, Inc. formed the Institute for Excellence in Employee-Management Communications, A Think Tank on Organizational Effectiveness. The Institute was designed as an umbrella entity for continuous learning, improving organizational effectiveness, and meeting business objectives through strategic internal communication.

    Based on its initial work, the Institute recently reported that organizational effectiveness is a function of eight key considerations, all of which intersect with strategic internal communication:

    Talented employees;

    Motivated employees;

    Sound business strategy;

    Competent leadership;

    Clear-cut decision-making;

    An ability to communicate clearly;

    Customer/marketplace focus; and,

    Progressive systems to monitor the prior seven considerations.

    The key variable in this new model, however, is leadership. Leadership is responsible for ensuring that all considerations are in place and appropriate. Consequently, the linkage between leadership and strategic communication is direct and especially profound. For leaders to be successful, they must build relationships and here is where strategic internal communication can make or break the paradigm.

    A Distinct Difference

    Establishing itself as the leader in this category, GCI BoxenbaumGrates has developed a proprietary methodology for delivering valuable counsel and services to strategic business thinkers seeking unconventional solutions to business issues.

    This methodology comprises four areas:

    Leadership: Through its actions, style and decisions, leadership can instill the appropriate mindset around the organization’s strategy, set the managerial and operational tone and provide continual focus on the future.

    Management: This group is charged with making the organization successful through the behaviors, actions and attitudes of its people.

    Structure: This is the design for the organization’s strategy and the roadmap for employee understanding and decisions.

    Communications: Is the enabler of leadership, the dialogue of management and the oxygen for employee existence within the organization.

    Approaching almost any client assignment from this vantage point provides GCI BoxenbaumGrates with the proper frame-of-mind and the ability to discern between problem and symptom, providing clarity and focus to leadership planning and decision-making.

    New Research: The Missing Link

    While employee opinion studies and internal newsletter readership surveys have long been tactics of employee communication departments, resulting recommendations could only be crafted against what was measured. A key component to practicing strategic internal communication is relevant, targeted research and analysis. It is at the core of leadership credibility, planning and activity.

    Now more, than ever, business leadership must discern between problem and symptom as it relates to organizational performance. Oftentimes, incredible amounts of time, energy and resources are spent dealing with symptoms and never attacking the root cause.

    “Such misguided efforts have plagued managerial effectiveness since many initiatives and communication campaigns were based more on intuition than fact,” said Dr. Robert Berrier, president of Berrier Associates, Inc. (Narbeth, PA) one of the country’s leading research firms. “This laissez-faire approach can no longer survive in today’s competitive environment.” In an exclusive partnership with GCI Consulting, Berrier Associates employs primary and secondary research in order to gain compelling insights, impactful programming and measurable results.

    Through progressive, state-of-the-art proprietary research designed to obtain the deep insights and understanding needed to engage in meaningful communications and managerial behaviors, GCI BoxenbaumGrates has set itself apart from the professional service firms who have claimed to have expertise in this area.

    Strategic Internal Communication & “Organizational Ability:”

    It’s How You Think vs. What You Do

    There’s no doubt about it, strategic internal communication can and does enable organizations to effectively and efficiently deal with a changing environment by engaging a highly-skilled workforce to assimilate and interpret new information quickly for competitive advantage.

    Yet, as we look out today, few professional service firms are practicing this new level of communication. Indeed, most still package their tactical experience under a “strategic” banner in hopes that this one-size fits-all approach will generate the results needed to drive an organization. To move beyond this narrow definition of internal communication and practice this new model, firms must bring a varied and deep understanding and appreciation for a variety of non-traditional disciplines and backgrounds, including business strategy and trends; management theory and models; opinion formation and influence; research; organizational architecture and structure; credibility; relationship building; organizational imprint or genetics; organizational decision-making; power of symbols; behavior; reputation and image-building. But what will it take to create this type of necessary sea change?

    As Peter Drucker, the noted management guru recently observed, “the new information revolution is about…redefining information; what is needed is new concepts. In one enterprise or another, top management people during the last few years have begun to ask, ‘What information concepts do we need for our tasks?’” The implication for public relations, according to Drucker, is that the function must evolve to become the ears not the trumpet of the new organization. In the future, the focus of communication will be on explaining and interpreting and on determining new ways for managers and employees to connect and keep the dialogue going. Instead of worrying about their grasp of the organization’s mission and vision, leaders and communicators will work to ensure employees’ awareness and knowledge of customers, the company’s positioning, the organization’s health and their daily contribution.

    A Look Ahead

    The advent of Toffler’s Third-Wave Information Society has produced an economy that is challenging everything we have grown accustomed to relationships, management models, expectations, services, products, wealth-creation. From a strategic internal communication standpoint, providing context, direction, information and sound management decisions are essential to helping organizations thrive in this ever-changing landscape.

    This means professional service firms must move quickly to understand and apply new thinking to traditional management concepts. New ideas and techniques must be explored and applied to handle today’s and tomorrow’s issues and opportunities created by the information-based economy.

    A glimpse at the organization of the future reveals that strategic communication will facilitate a culture of learning, where people share their best (and worst) practices; performance appraisals are used to assess learning activities; flexibility and risk taking are rewarded and people are encouraged to take responsibility for their own learning, budgets and opportunities.

    Granted, the new frontier may represent a brave new world for the internal communication function, yet only if communications professionals recognize the need and accept the responsibility for making the quantum leap from necessary function to critical organizational priority.

  • Change Management (Transformation Communications)3 (1999)

    Change Management (Transformation Communications)3

    며칠의 휴식을 지내고 다시 이렇게 Change Management의 세번째 글을 올립니다.

    오늘은 연휴중 하루이기 때문에 간단히 하나의 글만 소개 할까 합니다. 미국의 커뮤니케이션 컨설턴트 중에 Gary Grates라는 분이 계십니다. 그는 전략적 커뮤니케이션의 다양한 방면에 대한 전문성으로 “권위”를 인정받고 있습니다. 현재 미국전역에 커다란 컨설팅 펌을 경영중이며, 거대한 기업군들에게 강력한 영향력을 행사하는 저희 같은 조무라기 PR인들에게는 큰 선생님이자 선배님입니다.

    저도 학교에 있을때 그분에게 몇번 어렵사리 연락을 취해 겨우겨우 그의 비서로부터 자료제공을 받아 본적이 있습니다. 저의 Strategic Communications컨셉은 많은 부분이 Mr. Grates로 부터 왔다고 해도 과언이 아닙니다. 저의 글을 읽어 오셨던 분들은 오늘 그분의 글이 제가 주장해 왔던 것들과 얼마나 흡사한것 인지를 아실수 있으실겁니다.

    약간 길지만, Change Management에 관심을 가지신 분은 잘 읽어 보십시오.

    Change Management는 확실히 떠오르는 PR분야의 신천지입니다. 수요도 많고, 그 영향력도 엄청납니다. 관심을 가져보시죠.

    오늘 Grates선생의 글은 Momentum에 관한 글입니다. Change에 있어서 Momentum은 Change의 존재 유무와도 관계가 있습니다. 과연 Momentum은 무었일까요..

    어떻게 우리 PR인들이 조직내에서 변화를 위한 Momentum을 창조할수 있을까요.

    Take a look…

    그럼 “홍보!” in 추석

    *******************************************************************BUILDING MOMENTUM: A PRECURSOR TO BUSINESS GROWTH

    by Gary Grates

    For today’s leading corporations ; and for every would-be leader ; constant growth is imperative. Yet growth can’t be sustained without a deliberate corporate-wide strategy to build momentum. For communications professionals the opportunity has never been greater to link strategic communications to a company’s growth plan.

    It’s the force behind nearly every business decision, from mega mergers like Disney & Capital Cities/ABC to dramatic downsizing initiatives like Sunbeam and headline-making executive appointments, like AT&T’s John Walter. It’s the mantra being chanted in boardrooms, on factory floors and during annual meetings of companies worldwide. “It” is the relentless quest for growth. But while growth may be every company’s number one priority, many chief executives and management teams are still uncertain about how to achieve and sustain the growth needed for leadership ; or even survival ; into the 21st century.

    Consider two specific problems that hamper the corporate pursuit of growth and the leadership position. First, many businesses are still suffering from the effects of the “downsizing decade,” including lost expertise, sagging company morale, and in some cases, customer concerns about the company’s reliability. Second, the increasingly competitive global economy means that growth in itself will not be enough to secure or defend a leadership position. Any company developing a strategy geared to maintaining its current pace will be left behind because the pace is constantly accelerating.

    What many of today’s CEOs are discovering is that growth is merely a measure of where their company is at a specific time in relation to its past performance and the current competition. A more relevant measurement ; what Boxenbaum Grates refers to as “The Momentum Factor” ; helps to determine whether the company aiming to capture or keep the lead position is not only growing, but has the built-in momentum to carry itself to the head of the pack as the pace speeds up. Building and sustaining this momentum is where strategic communications has the greatest opportunity to play a significant role.

    Defining Momentum

    Momentum begins with an attitude. It starts at the top and then spreads throughout the organization to impact everything from product development and employee compensation to customer service and supplier relationships. In physics, momentum is defined as the force of motion. In business, momentum becomes a key measure of whether a company is growing. This key to corporate survival is hard to grasp because it’s a soft concept made up of feelings, beliefs and even perceptions. That’s why momentum is often considered fragile ; it can be created or destroyed by the fleeting thoughts and actions of dozens of different constituencies, from shop floor employees to top management, from suppliers and customers, from the media and the general public to competitors and government regulators. On a more positive note, momentum can also be harnessed and directed by a carefully orchestrated strategic communications program.

    It’s easy to spot companies with momentum ; and those without it. Take for example the case of Coca-Cola and IBM and their sponsorships of the 1996 Olympic Games in Atlanta. Twenty corporate giants, including Coke and IBM, each spent $40 million as official sponsors. Yet, IBM, in particular, very likely lost ground because its widely touted expertise and equipment couldn’t track results and other data as promised, triggering internationally publicized complaints from Olympics officials.

    Many experts believe that this highly visible ; and very expensive ; incident represented a loss of momentum for a company who was on the upswing. Coke, on the other hand, used the Olympics effectively to continue to fuel its momentum. The company’s all-out “fans-oriented” publicity campaign not only sold lots of Coke, it also created the sort of positive experience that helps to build momentum for Coke Chairman and CEO Roberto Goizueta’s commitment to “adding strength to the world’s strongest brand” and “making Coca-Cola the preferred beverage everywhere.” The momentum built by Coke was a result of a fully- integrated, coherent communications strategy that worked together to support Coke’s standing as the world’s strongest brand.

    Creating Momentum

    If momentum is the precursor to business growth, how can a company create momentum? By its very nature, it’s possible to manipulate momentum to achieve the desired effect ; in this case, growth. As many successful organizations have shown, the most effective way for a company to create momentum is to use strategic communications to define and disseminate the core message and then, foster an ongoing dialogue with key constituencies to make sure the message is working and enabling the company to move forward.

    As a company in dire need of a dramatic turnaround in the 1980s, Goodyear provides an excellent example of a company that used communications to build momentum and fuel growth. While Goodyear’s Aquatred tire was a breakthrough product with the potential to revolutionize the marketplace, a closer look reveals that it was the way in which the company chose to market the tire that helped to change the tide for Goodyear. In lieu of a multi-million dollar advertising launch campaign, Goodyear opted to use a strategic communications campaign to create word-of-mouth excitement for the “wet traction” tire among its employees, dealers, automotive manufacturers, the automotive press, the financial community, and ultimately, consumer demand for the tire.

    This powerful strategy enabled Goodyear to increase its brand equity, enhance its reputation with multiple audiences, and best of all, increase sales. As Goodyear CEO Stanley Gault noted during a post-launch debrief, the Aquatred launch helped to prove to everyone from the investment community to the automotive media to the financial press to dealers and competitors that Goodyear was “on the go.”

    For any company poised to move into a “growth phase,” there are several considerations to keep in mind. First, there must be an understanding that a well-designed and carefully managed strategic communications program will be vitally important at all times, particularly for companies pursuing rapid growth and market dominance. Second, even during periods of calm, an effective communications program will earn dividends in the form of knowledgeable, more productive employees and more loyal customers. And finally, communications is essential to creating momentum, which in turn is essential to building and sustaining growth. For companies looking to create a pro-growth environment, top management’s pro-communications stance must be replicated throughout the ranks. This includes taking to steps to re-educate management teams whose mindset and compensation are linked to downsizing and cost-cutting, and instilling the new wave skills of growth management. These leadership-focused skills include a better way of dealing with customers, employees, suppliers, communities, media, and products themselves, and focusing on the positive values of communications, momentum and growth.

    Top-down corporate strategy should include activities that will grab attention, build excitement and commitment, and generate measurable results within the organization and externally in dealing with customers, suppliers, and other groups such as government regulators and the general public. Successful implementation requires a growth plan with measurable goals; a company-wide communications program that aligns internal and external messages with company goals, and a continuous monitoring and evaluation system that incorporates weekly, monthly, quarterly and annual planning, goal setting and results measurement.

    Setting Momentum in Motion

    It may seem spontaneous to some, but momentum is the result of a well-planned and well-focused communications effort. Typically, momentum starts at the top, and if it’s communicated successfully, it permeates every aspect of an organization. The case of the turnaround of Continental Airlines offers a powerful example of how President and CEO Gordon Bethune used communications to fuel momentum and ultimately, growth, when he took over the ailing airline.

    By proclaiming a simple, yet meaningful, message for all target constituencies ; “Continental flies on time,” Bethune was able to reenergize employees and customers and initiate an ongoing dialogue that helped to propel Continental back to the black. As part of his communications campaign, Bethune walked the picket lines to talk to pilots, set up an 800 number for employee complaints, instituted a profit-sharing plan, started paying bonuses based on the airline’s on-time record, replaced the “customer-complaint” department with the “revenue-protection” department, and visited 15 cities to hand-deliver the message. Committed communicator Bethune quickly made it clear that he knows where the buck stops;and where the dollars start. He initiated the process of reviving a moribund Continental by making a personal and corporate commitment to putting the customer first in every way from flying on time and handing out aspirin to delivering bags to the right airport;every time. Just as importantly, Bethune recognized that to generate the ideas and focused energy needed to make this happen, “We have to rely on the judgment of the people who really run this airline;the gate agents, the baggage handlers, the flight crews, the reservationists.” There’s ample proof of the rewards for Continental and its stockholders. An Air

    Travel Consumer Report from the Department of Transportation on the seven largest U.S. carriers ranked Continental #1 for on-time arrivals, #1 for baggage handling and #1 for fewest complaints for both the fourth quarter of 1995 and the first quarter of 1996. A J. D. Power/Frequent Flyer magazine independent survey in June ranked Continental tops among the nine major U.S. airlines in customer satisfaction on flights over 500 miles ;making Continental the first airline to jump from the bottom of the list to the top in a single year. Now earning record profits, Continental has moved from near bankruptcy to posting five straight record quarters and a tidy $750 million in cash.

    Regaining Momentum

    As noted earlier, another characteristic of momentum is its fragility ; for many of the world’s most admired companies, momentum is easy to build and even easier to lose. Take for example the case of the Walt Disney Company. By the early 1980s, the tremendous momentum created by Walt Disney had almost come to a halt. The Disney brand had been allowed to languish until Michael Eisner and Frank Wells teamed up in 1984 and decided to leverage the brand through an aggressive and highly effective communications program ; internally and externally. The effort served to refuel the company’s momentum and ultimately, helped to transform Disney into one of the world’s fastest growing and most exciting business empires.

    When it comes to rebuilding momentum, Coca-Cola’s Chairman and CEO Roberto Goizueta is another dedicated disciple of using orchestrated communications ; and an unorthodox approach ; to fuel growth. Challenged by competition externally and by the risk of complacency internally, Goizueta took the unusual step of bypassing Madison Avenue in 1991 and turning to Creative Artists Agency, Inc. (CAA), the Hollywood talent agency in 1991, in an effort to reenergize the Coke brand and infuse the Coke “experience” with the excitement that had been lacking. Throughout his tenure, Goizueta has been very successful in developing a simple, energizing message and delivering it using a focused, non-stop strategy. According to Goizueta, it’s a three-step approach: State expectations. Meet or exceed those expectations. Repeat.

    Goizueta isn’t alone. Several top executives are using strategic communications to manage change and capture growth. In today’s competitive environment, the formula for a successful growth plan includes:

    Crafting the original vision statement ; such as on-time flights in the case of Continental Airlines ; based on working closely with core constituencies such as employees and customers

    Using a simple message as the foundation for action

    Maintaining open communications by listening and responding to employees and the marketplace

    Creating excitement and energy surrounding new products, new initiatives, new ways of doing business to build the commitment ; and momentum that will fuel and sustain growth

    In terms of regaining momentum, there is perhaps no better example of a company that effectively communicates a simple message than Chrysler. Whatever Chrysler does is designed to be consistent with the company’s desire and strategy to “focus on its core automotive business.” Chrysler’s sharp focus explains the more than $1 billion the then cash-strapped company paid to create the Chrysler Technology Center that was a key to Lee Iacocca’s plan to reinvent Chrysler. The “cars-are-core” focus explains why Chrysler sold off Thrifty Rent-A-Car, Electrospace Systems and Chrysler Technologies Airborne Systems. It’s also the driving force behind Chrysler opening up its previously off-limits Design Studio to show off the cars of the future and position Chrysler as the manufacturer with the foresight and vision to build them.

    But the most important change at Chrysler was attitudinal. Overall direction, in the form of a clearly and repeatedly stated focus, came from the top. And in a move considered radical for the automotive industry, Chrysler instituted a company-wide two-way communications program to ensure that ideas could flow freely and quickly in all directions. The result of this momentum? Chrysler ended the second quarter of FY’96 with $8.8 billion in cash and 16.2 percent of the car and truck markets (up from 14.8 percent the previous year). Industry analysts and car buyers agree that Chrysler simply builds better cars today. Yet at the same time, Chrysler’s success drives home three obvious, but often overlooked, lessons: First, building better products begins with linking communications to a management mindset; secondly, integrating communications to a company’s growth strategy; and third, best products in the world will fail to achieve their full potential in volume and value without a communications program to deliver regular and credible information about them and the organization to the world at large.

    Sustaining Momentum

    Today’s leading companies win because they have successfully integrated strategic communications into their corporate culture. Their leaders realize that there are no longer two separate worlds ; the internal company world and the external customer, investor and supplier worlds. All must be handled as parts of a whole where partnering has become not only a reality, but a necessity for competitiveness and growth. Unless there is an established pattern of excellent communications within the company, there will not be adequate communications with customers, suppliers and investors. The competitive world of tomorrow necessitates an ongoing dialogue involving many people and many interests. This is how great companies create momentum and maintain growth.

    So, how’s your business building momentum?

    ((부록))

    Chrysler’s CEO on Momentum:

    Robert J. Eaton, Chairman of the Board & Chief Executive Officer

    “In 1991, Chrysler Corporation did something no other company has done before. We took the entire company apart from top to bottom and restructured it to focus on one thing;the customer.

    We understand customers will leave for the competition for any number of reasons, big or small. That’s why we started our Customer One Program… Customer One involves training every member of the Chrysler organization about customer focus. The results have been tremendous and continue to form the backbone of our success.

    Another way to hold on to our customers is to offer a superior product. So we got rid of old traditional production methods and developed integrated platform teams. Designers, marketers and engineers work together from the conceptual stage of a new vehicle all the way through actual production. This saves time and money and most important, eliminates mistakes before production. We’re also empowering our teams so they can feel true ownership in their work and be proud of their accomplishments.

    “Customer feedback is also vital. We ask customers what they like best about particular competitors’ models, like trunk space or seat comfort. We then benchmark our cars with the best of the best and then go one step further. In addition, our Customer Advocate Program allows dealers to get in instant contact with engineers here at the Tech Center if any problems should arise. This way problems are addressed quickly and correctly the first time.

    “Don’t get the idea Chrysler is content to be where it is, because it isn’t. In fact, we’re giving employees “stretch goals:” an improvement in some aspect of production by at least 50 percent. This is a huge commitment and, when achieved, adds incredible value by reducing the number of steps it takes to get things done. We’re also working more closely with our suppliers, sharing new ideas, and improving production methods.

    “So, where is all this change taking Chrysler Corporation? Well, if you ask any Chrysler employee, you’ll get the same answer;to the top. That’s right, our goal is to be the number one car maker in the world by the year 2000! We’re on the right track. It’s just a matter of maintaining the momentum.”

  • PR 업무의 禮와 절차에 대하여… (1999)

    PR 업무의 禮와 절차에 대하여…

    지난번 제 글에서도 잠깐 말씀드렸습니다만, 한번 다시 저희가 밥을 버는 이 일이 과연 어떤 일인가 하는 것을 같이 생각해 보았으면 합니다.

    요즘 저는 계속 되는 일과 일들중에 치어 살았었습니다.

    계속되는 일 들속에서 짜증이 있었는지도 모르겠지만, 정말 참지 못할 것 같은 일들이 우리 이 홍보 바닥에서 벌어지고 있어서 이렇게 글을 또 쓰게 되었습니다.

    정말 우리나라에서 누구나 다 아는 큰 회사로 부터의 전화가 있었습니다.

    그 회사 홍보부 차장이라는 그분은 자신의 회사가 현재 큰 이미지 위기에 봉착해 있다면서 전세계를 대상으로하는 Media Relations/ Promotion 전략 및 프로그램과 함께, 동남아지역에 한정된 Media Relations 전략및 프로그램의 Proposal을 제출해달라고 했습니다.

    아마 여러분들이 생각하셔도 이 프로젝트가 얼마나 큰 것 인가는 다 아실수 있으실 것 입니다. 저는 당연히 있을 그 회사의 이번 비딩에 대한 RFP(Request For Proposal)을 요청 했습니다.

    그러나 그분 말씀.. “RFP가 뭐예요?”

    “……………..”

    이건 한 두푼 짜리의 딜이 아닙니다! 외치고 싶었지만 클라이언트가 될수도 있기에 어쩔수없었습니다.

    저는 국내 기업들이 한번도 제대로 된 RFP를 제공하는 걸 본적이 없습니다.

    심지어는 팩스 한장도 생략하고 싶어하는 많은 인하우스 인력들도 많았습니다.

    그래도 국내의 외국 기업계 회사들은 형식을 맞추기 위해 최소 한두장 정도의 RFP 비슷한것들을 만들기도 합니다. 그러나 국내 기업은 그것이 무엇인지 조차 모르는 분들이 많이 계십니다.

    신입 홍보인 여러분, 업무 절차에 대한 예의를 갖추는 것을 먼저 배웁시다.

    비지니스에도 “예(禮)”가 있습니다. 명심하세요.

    저희의 외국 네트워크들에게 이 사실을 설명하엿습니다. 그러자 그들은 우리 에이젼시를 도리어 이상하게 생각하는 듯 했습니다. 그런 큰 회사가 그런 기초적인 것 조차 준비하지 않았을리가 없다는 것이죠.

    어쩝니까, 그냥 우리선에서 무리라고 생각해서 본 비딩에 참가하지 않겠다고 통보 해드렸습니다. 만약 본 비딩이 이미 한 에이젼시를 내부적으로 지명해 놓고 형식적인 비딩을 하는 것이라면 이것 또한 윤리적으로 문제가 있습니다.

    업계의 몇 분들은 그렇게 얘기들 하시더군요, 형식적으로 그냥 Proposal을 받는 척하는 것일거라고.. (저는 믿고 싶지 않습니다..)

    매우 비정상 적이고 웃기는 일들이 많이 일어나고 있는 분야입니다. 이 홍보분야가. 여러군데 에이젼시들의 아이디어들을 PT형식을 빌어 받은후 에이젼시 선정을 포기한다고 말하고, 그 경쟁 PT에서 제시된 프로그램들과 전략적 컨셉을 유용하게 써먹는 기업도 있습니다.

    그래서 독립 에이젼시 업계에서는 이전 부터 Rejection Fee라는 것을 받아야 한다고 주장하는 분들이 계십니다. 시간당 Professional Fee를 청구하는 AE들이 얼마나 많은 시간을 들여서 하나의 정식 Proposal을 만들어 내는지 아시는 분들이 계실겁니다. 이를 형식을 맞추기 위한 장난이나, 아이디어 도둑질을 위한 방법으로 삼으면 않되는 건데도 굉장히 자주 이런 것들을 목격합니다. 슬프죠..

    저희는 일을 하기 위한 준비로 많이 배우고 갈고 닦았지만, 막상 일을 하는 방법은 누구에게도 배우지 못한것 같습니다. 그래서 더욱 착잡합니다.

    항상 홍보인으로서 “끊임없는 회의”를 하시기를 바랍니다. 지금 나의 업무 방식이 정말 정상적인가? 이게 맞는가?

    오랬만에 글을 올리며 이상한 화두로 열을 냈습니다.

    우리 서로 같이 밥 벌어먹고 사는 처지에 인상 쓰거나, 서먹하게 일 하지 않았으면 합니다. 할것 하고, 받을것 받고, 웃으며 같이 술 한잔 하고 하는 멋진 비지니스 맨들이 됩시다.

    내일 부터 저의 글을 다시 올릴 예정입니다.

    바쁜 날들이 끝나기를 기다렸는데 평생 갈것 같아 지겨웠습니다.

    좀더 여러분들께 도움이 되는 글들이 될수 있도록 노력 하겠습니다.

    트랙백 주소 : http://fdu700.egloos.com/tb/629472
    ☞ 내 이글루에 이 글과 관련된 글 쓰기 (트랙백 보내기) [도움말]

    Linked at Micky’s Castle o.. at 2007/08/21 13:53 # x

    … 용민선생님 블로그 포스팅에서도 발견했지만 여러 에이전시에게 RFP를 요청하고나서 이후에 이를 악용(?)하는 사례도 있는 것 같아서 씁쓸했다. PR 업무의 禮와 절차에 대하여…(1999) 한국적 PR에 대한 생각(1999)출처- 정용민선생님의 블로그RFP – Request For ProposalThey are very … more

    Commented by 아.. at 2007/02/25 23:25 # x

    그런데, ‘찹찹’이 아니라 ‘착잡’이지요^^;;

    Commented by 우마미 at 2007/02/25 23:44 # x

    감사합니다. 제가 예전에 취중글들이 많아서 오타가 더 많습니다. 원래도 오타가 많은 사람인데 말이죠…흑

    Commented by junycap at 2007/02/27 00:23 # x

    일부러 잡아내라고 오타 쓰시는거죠?

    Commented by 우마미 at 2007/02/27 10:10 # x

    흠………………..ㅋ

    Commented by 박미희 at 2007/08/20 16:17 # x

    정용민 선생님~ RFP 관련자료를 찾다가 여기까지 왔는데 이 글을 읽어보고서 느끼는 바가 많네요. 지금은 몇 년이 지났는데 그동안 어떤 변화가 있었는지 궁금하네요.^^;

    Commented by 우마미 at 2007/08/20 17:06 # x

    지금도 누가 가르쳐 주지 않으면 RFP를 뚝딱 만들어 보여주는 인하우스가 그리 많지는 않다고 봅니다. 저희도 유럽 본사 차원에서 각 나라의 지사들을 돌면서 에이전시 비딩 프로세스를 교육하는 그룹들이 있답니다. 본사의 시스템이 잘 되어 있는 일부 한국 지사들을 빼면…아직…

    아니 그리고..옛날 글이나 지금 글이나 제 글엔 왜이리 맞춤법 오타들이 많은지…고질병이네요…창피해.

    비공개 덧글

    < 이전페이지

    다음페이지 >