Get results from a PR firm: Fees
Source: http://www.tvkc.co.uk/site/index.php?start=63
We just read an article with some great advice on hiring a PR firm. We recommend the entire article, but this section on fees is especially worth a read.
Phase in the fees.
Retainers for smaller agencies run $2,000 to $5,000 or so per month. But don’t begin on retainer. Set up a specific project with a price tag attached so you can evaluate results.
Paying for customized services is another option. For instance, hire a publicist to write press releases on an hourly basis for about $100 to $250. You can also contract with a PR pro to work in-house for you. Rates vary with experience, say, $50 to $200 per hour. Some PR companies, such as Pinnacle Worldwide, provide a network of international independent agencies, so you can contract for services in any country or city.
We totally agree with their stance on retainers. AlexanderG PR welcomes the opportunity to show what we can do on a single project or closed-ended time period before we “earn” a retained relationship.
And yes, the retainer fees mentioned in the article are industry standard. We get paid for our work like any other professional. Most reputable PR firms and consultants can command every penny of that retainer because they offer a great ROI.
Project fees are also a good way to go, too.
Here are some warning signs that usually indicate you will not get what you pay for:
A firm promises “guaranteed results.” No one can ensure press coverage or other specific outcomes. (Editor’s Note: emphasis ours)
A firm does too much research. “There should be a balance between planning and doing,” says Dave Kowal, whose agency is based in Northboro, Mass.
There are proposals with no specifics. You should know exactly what’s planned.
You’re charged an unusually low retainer. This probably means you can’t expect much work.
We hasten to add, however, that an unusually low retainer is often accepted–and plenty of work is done–because many clients will not or cannot pay more. Not all firms that accept a low fee are dodgy; many do it in hopes of establishing a longterm relationship.
That’s tricky, though. Once a PR firm gets into a “lowball” situation with a client, they may never get paid what they’re really worth and end up losing money in the long run.
Be advised…you get what you pay for. If you pay a PR firm a non-professional wage, you’ll likely get non-professional results.
Best PR Advice…Ever
The Cover-Up was Worse Than the Crime
“When you’re in the mix of these really obtuse situations where nobody really knows the facts, in some sense the facts are less important than your posture toward the facts,” says Mr. Reeves, the former Merrill Lynch media relations executive.
“People are reasonable. They know companies make mistakes, and people will forgive an honest mistake. They will not forgive a dishonest cover-up.”
via P.R. Missteps Fueled Fiascos at BP, Toyota and Goldman – NYTimes.com.
Ignorance isn’t bliss. It’s expensive. Invest in Online Brand Protection
Source: http://www.sanfranciscosentinel.com
The internet can be either a boon or boondoggle to companies when it comes to the monitoring of their online brand presence.
For companies that pay little attention to their online storefronts, the rewards are continual brand hijacking, abusive pay-per-click tactics and outright attacks on brands.
MarkMonitor, an enterprise brand protection firm, offers solutions and services to safeguard brands, reputation and revenue from online risks. In their white paper “Online Brand Protection: A Step-by-Step Guide to Creating a Proactive Strategy” MarkMonitor recommends a series of protective measures, including:
- Identifying all domain names in your portfolio
- Manage your portfolio proactively
- Monitor for potential abuse
- Respond to abuse
Great paper–in particular, we recommend you take a look at the section on monitoring for potential abuse. You can do this inside your company, or there are several online services that offer affordable methods to do this for you. No matter how you do it, the key is never-ending vigilance.
Creating an ideal domain portfolio is a good start to establishing and protecting your corporate brands online. However, it is just the beginning. While defensive registrations enable you to own and control the domain names that may be abused by third parties, it is simply impossible for any corporation to register every potentially harmful domain name. Therefore, the next critical step for defending your brands online is to establish a strategic monitoring program that constantly searches the internet for potential abuses, including:
- Cybersquatting
- Domain kiting/tasting
- Trademark infringement
- Traffic diversion schemes
- False associations with unrelated third parties
- Pay-per-click abuse
- Sponsored in abuse
- Logo/image abuse
- Offensive content
- Channel non-compliance with brand guidelines and/or pricing
Many small–and even larger–companies cannot afford to hire a person devoted to these critical tasks. This is what the bad guys count on. Again, a monitoring service is worth the price if it can save you the damage of brand equity loss, not to mention real money gone forever due to internet banditry. (They can also help you identify new customers–but that’s another post).
A comprehensive, proactive social media monitoring and interactive strategy is also a hedge against bad actors, as your customers will be in regular communication with you and often tell you when they spot a spoof site or a shady deal involving your brand.
Brand managers should assess the degree to which website traffic is diverted to sites that abuse its brand and the amount of lost advertising revenue that is diverted to fraudulent pay-per-click sites, You should look at quantitative and qualitative indicators, including:
- Degree of fewer “negative impressions” due to successfully shutting down web site which degrade your brand
- Improvement in website traffic due to successfully shutting down traffic diversion tactics (Cybersquatting, pat-per-click sites, paid search ads)
- Better quality response rate to online advertising due to successfully shutting down fraudulent pay-per-click sites
- Productivity gains and/or hours saved per week in detecting and responding to infringement by leveraging available technologies and solutions
From the public relations perspective, monitoring is critical in protecting your brand’s reputation and credibility. One of the services we provide at AlexanderG Public Relations includes online brand monitoring and image management. This helps us head off potentially bad PR by identifying and addressing problems before they become full-blown crises; it also helps our clients determine where best to apply their messaging and online resources–often increasing market share in the process.
Nasty stuff outlined in this post is happening to oblivious companies everyday. The message is simple: if you don’t know what’s going in your online storefront, it’s the same as someone setting up a fake store just around the corner from yours in real-life –selling low quality goods and ruining your good name.
Ignorance isn’t bliss. It’s expensive.
The Lawyer Vs. P.R.
Credit: http://pharmamkting.blogspot.com
This week we’ve looked at some of the most wretched P.R. crises, spurred by a comprehensive article in the New York Times. Today, we look at the fight behind the scenes to minimize P.R. and legal damage:
In times of crisis, communications professionals and lawyers often pursue conflicting agendas. Communications strategists are inclined to mollify public anger with expressions of concern, while lawyers warn that contrition can be construed as admissions of guilt in potentially expensive lawsuits.
For BP, this tension burst into view in May, when executives went to Capitol Hill with officials from two of its contractors: Transocean, which owned the offshore rig that exploded, and Halliburton, which aided BP in drilling. Executives from the three companies each disowned culpability while pointing fingers at one another.
“What that screamed is the lawyers are in control,” says Mr. Reeves. “All it did was get everybody all the more peeved at them.”
It’s a tough call. Legal is trying to keep you out of court–or worse jail. P.R. is trying to save your credibility, and by extension your business. Based on my experience, I believe honesty is the best policy. Transparency is critical.
Of course, I also believe BP would have fired me on the spot, because I would’ve recommended we throw ourselves on the mercy of public opinion–ala Tylenol.
If there is no doubt mistakes were made–if you’re caught dead to rights–then your appeal to the Court of Public Opinion (not to be confused with The People’s Court, though a bailiff named Rusty is always cool) should go something like this:
Scenario: ABC Company has been accidentally dumping factory greywater into river tributaries that feed stock ponds. There’s no wiggle room–they’re busted on 60 Minutes.
Here’s the statement I would recommend:
“ABC Company admits and takes full responsibility for our mistake. We take our commitment to the environment very seriously. This event has not only been embarrassing but an inexcusable violation of the trust the public has bestowed upon us. Our usually reliable safeguards and policies were not followed and we are taking measures to discipline those who caused this failure. We will also work with the community to undertake reasonable measures to clean up the leaked water and make whole those damaged economically by this incident. It is my sincere hope that we can regain the trust of our community and strengthen that trust as we move forward. Thank you. My chief engineer and I will be happy to take questions about our next steps.”
I can hear some of you now: “Dude, that’s nuts! Never admit guilt!” True, you have to protect your company and its assets; this is a statement of last resort. However, plenty of people will disagree with our strategy of telling the truth even as a last resort.
To that we say this: if you’re caught by 60 Minutes, do you really want to be the guy sweating under the grueling geriatric grilling of Mike Wallace? You won’t win.
Mistakes owned-up to quickly are a matter of forgiveness. Drag your feet, dissemble or lie and it becomes a matter of corruption, criminality or mistrust. Ducking or covering up and apologizing only after you have nowhere else to hide–or under court order–will effectively destroy your reputation and cost you in money, energy, time and brand equity.
In another life I was Vice President of a $70 million healthcare management firm. We made some mistakes from time to time. As a rule, we told the truth and did our best to make it right (at least anytime I had any say in it). It wasn’t always profitable. I wasn’t always popular with the management team. I have no regrets about that policy.
I have no idea if there were intramural arguments between BP legal and P.R.–but if there were, it looks like legal won. Hmm. After being obstinate, disingenuous and a total PR failure, you have to wonder what BP’s management thinks in the dark midnights of their souls. Do they admit–if only to themselves–that they made a bad situation far worse?
Did the money they thought they were saving by reducing lawsuits outweigh the complete meltdown of their brand–thus hindering future profits? Or was the fact that their profits would far outweigh relative short-term damages the controlling factor?
Did they stay up nights worrying about this? I doubt it.
Kansas City’s Art for Arthritis 2010 Set for Sept. 23rd
AlexanderG Public Relations founder and Principal Alex Greenwood is proud to emcee the Arthritis Foundation’s annual Art for Arthritis event on Thursday, September 23rd, at 6 p.m. at Studio Dan Meiners. Tickets are $50.
When Cassie Schmidt was diagnosed with juvenile rheumatoid arthritis at only twelve months old, her family had no idea that in spite of her diagnosis, Cassie would one day use art to serve as an inspiration for children struggling with the same disease. Now ten years old, Cassie has been a participant in Art for Arthritis for six years and spends the months leading up to each event excitedly discussing what her next masterpiece will be.
Her mother and Art for Arthritis partner, Amy, says that the event has been extremely validating for her daughter by allowing her the opportunity to fight back against her arthritis. Amy says, “Art for Arthritis has become the most important thing in Cassie’s life after her family and her faith.”
“I’m thrilled to be asked back to emcee this wonderful event,” said Greenwood, who has emceed the event twice before. “I live with arthritis and have several family members and friends who deal with its effects on a daily basis. I’m happy to help out in any way I can, and challenge the Kansas City business community to support these great kids.”
Most people don’t think about children having arthritis but more than 3,000 children in the Kansas City and Western Missouri area have some form of this painful disease. Our Art for Arthritis event teams 17 local children affected by juvenile arthritis with area artists to spend a summer together creating unique pieces of artwork. The artwork is auctioned off at the end of the summer our gala fundraising event in order to raise money for nationwide arthritis research, as well as local programs and services.
This event, however, is much more than a fundraiser. Art for Arthritis empowers participants by introducing them to children with similar circumstances who can work together to fight against arthritis by raising awareness about their disease and supporting an agency that advocates on their behalf. It also exposes children to alternative forms of expression through granting them access into the local Kansas City arts community.
A Preview Party showcasing the children’s work will take place on September 16th, 2010 at One Park Place from 6 to 10 p.m., in order to generate excitement around the event and to allow the children and artists spend time together with friends of the Foundation.
Arthritis is the leading cause of disability in the United States. The Arthritis Foundation is the only national not-for-profit organization that supports the more than 100 types of arthritis and related conditions. In its 61st year, the Arthritis Foundation has funded more than $380 million in research grants, and provides public health education, policy and legislation and evidence-based programs to improve the quality of life for those with arthritis.
To learn more about Art for Arthritis, to donate to the Arthritis Foundation or to register for this year’s event, please visit http://artkc.kintera.org or contact Annie Noonen at anoonen@arthritis.org.
Can the P.R. Crisis Be So Bad You Can’t Fix it?
Our look at P.R. missteps continues, inspired by an article in the New York Times about recent P.R. disasters. Today we look at the question posed early in the article:
Are some crises so dire that public relations victory is simply not on the menu? And, if so, what’s an embattled company to do?
Yup. There are times when no amount of good P.R. advice will make up for lousy decisions, a lack of planning or just plain evil-doing. Read on:
Eric Dezenhall, a communications strategist in Washington who worked in the White House for President Ronald Reagan, argues that the standard playbook is useless when the facts are sufficiently distasteful. (He would know. He once represented Michael Jackson after allegations of child molestation.)
Mr. Dezenhall is particularly scornful of the classic imperative to “get out in front of the story,” as if swift disclosure provides inoculation against all ugly realities. When the facts are horrible, he argues, the best P.R. fix may simply be to absorb the pounding and get back to business, while eschewing the sort of foolish communications gimmicks that can make things worse.
Consider Tiger Woods. His now-infamous fondness for women other than his wife enthralled the nation, all the while torturing corporate sponsors who paid gargantuan sums to associate their brands with his winning image.
“What was Woods supposed to do?” Mr. Dezenhall asks in an essay in the publication Ethical Corporation. “Call an immediate press conference and rattle through a list of lady friends declaring, ‘Tiffany, yes; Trixy, no, Amber, don’t remember …’? And if Woods had pre-empted with a confession, would this have caused the news media, bloggers, pundits, Hooters waitresses and everyone else to collectively reward him with their silence? Not a chance.”
Our take on Mr. Woods and others caught with their…ahem…hands in the cookie jar:
What I’ve learned after nearly fifteen years as a crisis communications consultant and practitioner informs my recommendations on how to save your rear end when the effluent hits the rotary oscillator:
1. Tell the truth (or as much as you can without getting yourself thrown in jail–ask your lawyer if this is applicable.) This rule is a little different for celebs who wreck their cars and/or marriages than it is for a company caught cooking the books or polluting the water table; but the essence of it is the same: don’t dissemble, don’t lie. Here’s a pretty good statement for a celeb/politician who did a bad thing that hurt no one but himself and/or family:
“I have made a terrible error in judgment that has unfortunately hurt my [spouse, kids, significant other]. I have let my family, friends and supporters down, and there is nothing I can do at this moment to fix that. Though this incident is certainly of interest to those who have [followed my career, supported me, bought my albums, seen my movies, etc.], I would appreciate some time and space so I can work this out with my family. I would also ask for restraint from the media and remind them that there are real people caught up in this situation through no fault of their own who deserve as much privacy as possible. If we get to a point where we would like to share more, I assure you I will contact you. Thank you for your consideration, good day to you.”
[If you are crying, wipe your tears with a handkerchief. Walk away from the mic. Now. Take no more questions. NO MORE QUESTIONS. No rambling, Governor Sanford. ]
2. Shut up. You’ve made your statement. You’ve either said you are going to work this out privately with your family or your company has laid out what it is going to do to make the situation right (or you’ve lawyered up and said you have nothing to say due to pending legal action). So shut up about it and get busy. Resist the urge to use the media as a confessional. Save that for when your marriage/company is cleaned up and solid again.
The article shifts gears from personalities to corporations:
Much the same can be said for BP, Toyota and Goldman, he suggests, with attempts to win public affection almost certain to be viewed as insincere so long as real problems persisted — oil spilling into the ocean, cars crashing, Wall Street profiting while ordinary people suffered.
We’ll look at that in our next post. Stay tuned.
Power Outage No Outrage
Heavy thunderstorms knocked out the power at AlexanderG PR HQ last night. As I lit candles I thought of the ways I had been burning the candle at both ends.
After a long week with more than 70 hours of work (most of them billable!) I frankly welcomed the lack of electronic communication.
Admittedly, I did Tweet a little from my cell to my Tweeps in the local news media to get the info on how long the outage was anticipated to last; but after that I settled down to an early night of blissful, much-needed sleep.
This morning I awoke before seven and have already completed a pitch for a client and re-arranged an account in my billing software.
Were the electricity on last night I’m sure television, the internet or work in general would have kept me up late, and I’d be snoozing instead of writing this. Not saying one is better than another, but it was certainly nice that Mother Nature put the brakes on work and other distractions and gave me no other option than to get some rest.
It’s a good reminder–work will always be there, and no matter how hard you shovel you’ll never fill the hole in one night.
Maybe next time I have a crazy week I should just trip the breakers?
EAVB_DOQWVMHPZU
Keep It Simple, Stupid
Simply, sir. Simply.
You can learn valuable lessons on ways to implement your own communications strategies by observing current events. A perfect example of poor messaging strategy is playing out right now in New York City and the White House.
There’s a political firestorm over the proposed Islamic community center near “Ground Zero” in New York City. One side believes the community center is an affront to the people who lost their lives in the 9/11 attacks; another side believes it is within the rights of American citizens of all faiths to build a place of worship and community on private property.
President Obama has taken the latter position on this issue, but he’s having some serious trouble with his messaging:
President Obama’s comments on a plan to build a mosque in the shadow of ground zero are not only giving opponents an opportunity to attack him but also reveal a messaging problem from the White House, a communications expert said.
“The danger here is an incoherent presidency,” said David Morey, vice chairman of the Core Strategy Group, who provided communications advice to Obama’s 2008 campaign. “Simpler is better, and rising above these issues and leading by controlling the dialogue is what the presidency is all about. So I think that’s the job they have to do more effectively as they have in the past [in the campaign].”
Obama has faced a torrent of criticism for what was called mixed messages on the controversial plan. On Friday, Obama said Muslims “have the same right to practice their religion as anyone else in this country … That includes the right to build a place of worship and a community center on private property in Lower Manhattan, in accordance with local laws and ordinances.”
The following day, Obama told Ed Henry, CNN’s senior White House correspondent, that he was “not commenting on the wisdom” of the project, just the broader principle that the government should treat “everyone equal, regardless” of religion. Then a White House spokesman clarified those comments.
[...]
“Communicating as a law professor does not work as president. It’s not worked,” he said. “You’re drawing fine distinctions and speaking in long enough paragraphs that they can be misconstrued and taken out of context and frankly, handed to your opposition to exploit. And that’s clearly what’s going on here [with the Islamic center/mosque comments].”
[...]
While many poked fun at former President George W. Bush for mispronouncing words and stumbling through sentences, observers note that he rarely had to backtrack on his answers because he employed a simple and direct messaging approach.
(Emphasis ours)
Like Morey, we believe you can be too smart for your own good. The president is indeed an intelligent man who appears to be struggling with having to pare his policies, opinions and arguments down to a simplistic statement.
We don’t see the president as cynically trying to have it both ways; we see him struggling with his professorial need to be intellectually evenhanded. That doesn’t work in a sound bite media culture. Of course, it also leaves you vulnerable in a “gotcha” political climate.
We’ve said it before; keep it short and pithy. The news media–whether it’s TV, print or online–prefer brevity. They love the sound bite. If you’ve prepared a few good, juicy sound bites you will likely have a positive effect on the story.
KISS, or “Keep It Simple Stupid” is an apt strategy. The same can be said for your communications: whether it be internally to employees or externally to the news media, simplicity is rarely misconstrued. Nuance and shading–even in the interests of being intellectually honest and evenhanded–leaves too much room for misinterpretation and damage to your brand.
President Obama may be getting this message now, if he doesn’t overthink it. Respectfully, Mr. President, you need to Keep It Simple, Stupid.
As a service to our readers, we discuss topical issues in a way that we hope will instruct their own communications strategies. In that vein, we welcome your comments about the communications aspect of this subject, but will not post comments about the controversy itself or the president’s politics.
