Virtual virtuoso

17 May

virtualvirtuosoI picked up a gong last night. Now, bragging’s not charming and two awards in two days might be pushing my luck.

But the inaugural Golden Robes awards 2013 were special: these are awards made by students at an event organised by the students’ union. The loudest applause of the night went to Barry Galawan, a member of the security staff, who won a ‘hidden hero’ award.

I was presented with ‘virtual virtuoso’ in another alliterative category. The citation mentioned a social media stunt in a class before Christmas. It also referred to the opportunities I give for students to get published on Behind the Spin.

All evening, the phrase ‘over and above’ was mentioned in the context of academic and support staff who have done their utmost to help students.

So it’s perhaps unsurprising that no mention was made in the citation about teaching in the area of digital and social media. This year, I’ve shared teaching with Stuart Bruce on one undergraduate and two postgraduate modules. Though I say it myself, I think our teaching is fresh, innovative and embracing of academic and practitioner perspectives. I don’t apologise if it’s also challenging. I think this (not me) is a worthy winner!

Jolly? Good? Fellow!

15 May

So, after fifteen years as a member of the Chartered Institute of Public Relations (MCIPR), I have today been awarded a fellowship (FCIPR).

The CIPR’s letter tells me it’s their ‘highest membership grade’ and that it’s been awarded for ‘the outstanding contribution [I] have made to the CIPR and the PR industry’.

Both claims are open to question.

Chartered Practitioner status is much more deserving of praise because it’s based on attainment, not just longevity (when I first joined as a member, a fellowship would have become mine by right after a mere ten years).

I’ve avoided joining things, so have not gained this recognition through years of dedicated committee work. Others are in a better position than me to judge my contribution to the PR industry, but it’s where I’ve worked and it’s what I’ve taught for some 25 years (so I should have contributed something).

I’ve also been rather a ‘critical friend’ of the CIPR during this time, but have belatedly come to the view that our industry/profession does need a strong body to champion professional standards and to speak up for practitioners and educators. So I have always encouraged students and practitioners to join.

I also feel that one representative body would be better for us than two – or twenty (I’m concerned that there will soon be bodies representing eg internal communicators, public affairs practitioners, those in analyst relations, marcoms etc). We’re a surprisingly fissiparous bunch for people known for their skills in relationship building and practical problem solving.

But that’s for another discussion. Today, I’ll pause to mark another milestone on my journey. Jolly? Rarely. Good? Not always. Fellow? Finally.

Let me also note that I did not seek or pursue this recognition. Had it not been for the persistence of a friend in the business I’d have carried on as before. We can all benefit from some objective public relations advice.

CIPR election

13 May

I’m still sitting on the fence, undecided where to cast my vote – but certain that I should vote in the election for CIPR president. Perhaps this post will clarify my thinking.

There are two strong candidates, yet a vote is a binary choice. By voting for one candidate, you’re in effect voting against another.

Stephen Waddington is the frontrunner (besides which, I’m sure he’s never topped an alphabetical list before this election). Wadds is energetic, likeable and he’s set out a vision that provides clear leadership for the profession. My first instinct was to vote for Wadds. He is well connected and very active online, and will gain overwhelming support from the younger, socially-networked crowd.

Jon White is the outlier. He has been providing a thoughtful challenge to the profession for many decades as a scholar (he was the UK researcher involved in James Grunig’s excellence project) and practitioner. He’s a visionary, and the recent 2020 study of PR’s future was a useful contribution to the debates on PR’s standing. His perspective that public relations is a branch of management consultancy is challenging to all (and perhaps will antagonise some). Though a lower profile candidate, the demography of the electorate (CIPR members are older than typical PR practitioners) may favour Jon White who will be known to many older members. My instinct to vote for White is that he may not stand again (Wadds is younger, and could be persuaded to run again).

While I mull over my personal (and private) choice – here’s my prediction of the outcome. I expect Wadds to win, but by a narrower margin that some would expect (55%-45% of those voting). Whoever you choose, do please vote if you’re eligible as it will give the winning candidate a mandate to provide much-needed leadership.

 

The pattern of life

12 May

Years ending in a three may not sound auspicious; Olympics and world cups happen on even dates in the calendar.

Yet milestone events in my career have happened on the following ten-year pattern (with a keyword to summarise each ten-year phase):

1983: I was completing a Master’s degree (my second History degree) and looking for work. By September I was a history teacher. I did not know it at the time, but this was not a new start, but rather an end point to many years in educational institutions (though I’ve since returned to teaching – see below).

Opportunity (1983-1993)

1993: I tried many things in my twenties. Having been a teacher, I became a writer, publisher, editor and journalist before moving into PR consultancy work. In 1993 a left a consultancy job to become an independent public relations consultant.

Experience (1993-2003)

2003:  The independent role enabled me to take on interim contracts as an in-house PR manager and as a consultancy director, so expanding my experience. It also allowed me to make a transition from being a PR consultant to being a professional trainer in the same field. In 2003 I became a full-time university lecturer.

Education (2003-2013)

2013: I’m certainly feeling restless, and the pattern suggests it’s time for a new direction.

Development (2013-2023)

2023: In another ten years I’ll be approaching normal retirement age, though I won’t be alone in needing to supplement my various occupational pensions with some ongoing paid work.

Extension (2023-?)

As a former roguish teaching colleague put it: ‘do as I say, not as I do’. I don’t claim to be a role model in my career choices, but I do think there’s a lesson for any student in the brevity of a working life: four or five decades is all you get, even if you’re Sir Alex Ferguson.

Young people feel that life is endless – and so their greatest fear is boredom. Older people know how brief it can be, and that the greatest fear is living with regrets.

Looking back, I wouldn’t change any of the major decisions I’ve made. I gained a breadth of experience in my twenties that’s still useful (learning typesetting on an early computer was a good training for the later arrival of the web and HTML). Since my thirties, I’ve gained a depth of experience in public relations (from a practice, professional training and academic teaching perspective).

I recall a friend producing my horoscope back in the 1980s on a primitive Amstrad computer. It predicted among other things that I’d make my living out of ‘writing or teaching’. I may still be sceptical about horoscopes, but it’s proven to be a very accurate prediction of my working life. Whether it’s because of the stars or because of my personality, there certainly has been a pattern to my working life.

My skills (according to you)

30 Apr

LinkedIn skillsI’ve not been a fan of LinkedIn endorsements.

These are the professional network’s equivalent of the Facebook ‘like’ button, taking little time, asking for little engagement and requiring little thought.

(LinkedIn recommendations remain the exact opposite; they are hard won and hard to give, a gold standard.)

And yet, is LinkedIn onto something? Though each individual endorsement means little (though it’s pleasant to know that someone remembers you and thinks highly of you in some way), collectively they add up to something.

They paint a picture of your skills and expertise that’s an honest picture because it’s composed of lots of small votes.

What does this popular vote say about me? That I have expertise in public relations is not surprising as my job title (senior lecturer in public relations) proclaims it, as do my professional experience and memberships.

Next to this, I’m evidently an expert in media relations. If you add press releases to media relations, that’s my main specialism, eclipsing all others including my social media expertise.

How can I be such an expert in a field I’ve not practised for over 15 years? The vote probably comes because of the number of students I’ve taught over the years, and a few may even have read the chapter I wrote on ‘media relations’ in a well-known textbook. I can’t disown my past, and I am proud of the classes and lectures I’ve given in this field.

But is there a problem with crowdsourcing? Does it encourage crowd-like behaviour? Are some endorsing me for skill simply because they’re following the herd and being swayed by the popular vote? In verifying our past, does LinkedIn make it harder for us to reinvent ourselves?

Defending the indefinable

25 Apr

‘Public relations can’t be defined.’

I read this often in student essays. It’s a consequence of teaching that offers multiple perspectives and encourages independent thought on the practice and profession.

But if public relations can’t be defined, then how do you explain the existence of so many different definitions? The evidence suggests that it’s too easy to define public relations, not too hard. It’s so easy you can have a go yourself (many students, practitioners and lecturers do).

Rather than discussing the definitions of PR, let’s consider its purpose. Let’s try to answer the question ‘why?’ rather than the question ‘what?’

If the purpose of PR is to generate publicity, then this simplifies matters. We can scrap the professional bodies, end most PR qualifications and merge the PR and advertising industries.

Professor Tom Watson argues here that there are two industries living unhappily together: a publicity business and a strategic communication business.

So what’s the purpose of strategic communication? Many would argue it’s legitimacy (and I agree): it’s about organisations retaining their ‘licence to operate’ in a complex world in which competitors, customers, politicians, activists and the media can all turn on an organisation in full public view.

This legitimacy business (it goes beyond reputation) sounds important; it should be professional.

This leads us to the intriguing prospect of a high calibre contest for the CIPR presidency between a practitioner who writes (Stephen Waddington) and an academic who talks to practitioners (Dr Jon White). Their discussion, sparked by another blog post by Tom Watson asking if the CIPR isn’t past its sell-by date, already has 80 comments on LinkedIn.

It’s an important debate, and it’s good to see engaged academics mixing it with intelligent practitioners.

Talent spotting

24 Mar

Studying PRThe pace of the academic year quickens as we approach Easter.

Final year students are nearing the end of their time at university – and some are looking beyond their dissertations and contemplating their next moves.

At the same time, PR consultancies are seeking the best talent for their graduate schemes and to fill existing vacancies.

This means there’s some discreet matchmaking to be done. It’s a privilege and a pleasure to be able to help – and I tend to trust my instincts.

Here’s the talent-test I apply.

I’m assuming that all candidates have achieved good grades, have some credible work experience and have strong portfolios. So how to identify the future stars?

I judge my students on their ability to hold a conversation with me. It could be on a topic of my choosing, or it could be on something they know much more about than me (One Direction?). Are they curious? Are they informed? Can they explain themselves?

It’s a very old-fashioned talent test, I admit, but it’s a good indication. Any young person is comfortable in their peer group – but their colleagues, clients and contacts will not all be formed from their peer group. So their ability to relate to others is a good test.

Let’s say the question was about the meaning of Easter.

An answer revolving around chocolate reveals a rather childish self-centredness. An answer about the central events in the story of Jesus is better – but rather conventional. A discussion of the pagan origins of a spring festival more interesting still. And a discussion of the benefits of a fixed date for Easter arguably best of all for a potential PR student.

Does my talent test favour those from middle class backgrounds? Possibly so – but it also seeks out those with divergent views and experiences. Writers such as Jeanette Winterson and Alan Bennett have mined their working class origins throughout their literary careers.

The test encourages difference, not sameness. It’s surprisingly challenging for young people whose efforts up to now have been all about fitting in with their peer group.

← Older Entries

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.