Marketing Craftsmanship

August 21, 2012 · 10:08 pm

Augusta National Throws Women a Bone. Should Condi and Darla Return the Favor?

Darla and Condi Have No Reason to Celebrate

Augusta National Golf Club, long revered by the golfing world as the Sistine Chapel of their sport, announced with great pride (a “joyous occasion,” according to Augusta Chairman Billy Payne) that it had invited bureaucrat Condoleezza Rice and financier Darla Moore to join the club as its first female members.

For decades, Augusta National has defiantly withstood public criticism and pressure to admit female members on the basis that as a private institution the club is under no obligation to accept anyone – regardless of sex, race, religion or sexual preference – who does not pass muster with the boys who hold the keys to the front door.

Ever since golfing legend and bona fide Southern gentleman Bobby Jones co-founded Augusta National some 80 years ago, the club has served as the stage for the Masters Tournament, considered by many as golf’s most important international competition, perhaps with exception of the Ryder Cup. And it’s Augusta National’s association with the history and tradition of the Masters that provides the club with a level of prestige (and arrogance) that exceeds St. Andrews and Pebble Beach combined.

During his days as Microsoft’s CEO, Bill Gates faced Augusta National’s arrogance first-hand when denied club membership for publicly stating that he wanted to be a member. As punishment, Augusta forced Gates to eat crow for several years before he was allowed to wear a member’s green jacket.

But Augusta National’s bullying isn’t limited to their admission process. A little known fact is that once admitted to the club, a member is not assured of continued membership and may be dropped at any time for any reason with no explanation. In fact, the only way Augusta National members know if they are still members is by the arrival of their annual dues invoice in Spring. No invoice means your invitation has been withdrawn.

Augusta National is not about golf; it’s about power. It features a golf course that’s closed for a good part of the year to protect the pristine fairways and sacred greens that its well-heeled members rarely play on. Augusta National is not about golf; it’s about prestige. The club bestows membership to America’s corporate royalty the same way the Queen of England awards knighthoods and MBE titles…but with far less intelligence and transparency than the British monarchy.

The sad truth is that women have nothing to cheer over the “joyous occasion” at Augusta. This publicity stunt does not represent a meaningful change in the club’s policy of exclusion, and provides Augusta National with convenient and high profile validation that it will continue to exercise its right, as a private club, to do whatever it wants whenever it wants.

If Condi and Darla are serious about playing golf, there are scores of world-class private clubs that have been accepting women as members for many decades. And if Condi and Darla are serious about advancing the cause of women’s rights, they should decline Augusta National’s invitation. And they should make a lot of noise in the process.

Leave a comment

Filed under Uncategorized

Tagged as #brand management, #brand risk, #craftsmanship, #media placement, #media relations, #PR, #PRfirms, #public events, #public speaking, #publicity, #thought leadership, Augusta National, Bill Gates, Billy Payne, Bobby Jones, British monarchy, Condi, Condoleezza Rice, Darla, Darla Moore, discrimination, event marketing, golf, marketing communications, MBE, Microsoft, Pebble Beach, publicity stunt, Queen of England, Ryder Cup, sex discrimination, Sistine Chapel, St. Andrews, The Masters, top-of-mind awareness, women's rights

August 9, 2012 · 9:11 pm

PR Lesson from the Lolo Jones / New York Times Controversy

Did Jere Kill Lolo’s Mojo?

On August 4^th, New York Times sportswriter Jére Longman – who has been covering the Olympics under an “Inside the Rings” column – wrote an article on American hurdler Lolo Jones that was considered by many readers to be overly harsh and entirely unnecessary. In his piece, Longman characterized Jones as a self-promoter who is more flash than substance, and he appeared to go out of his way to discredit Jones’ athletic credentials; ignoring her long list of athletic achievements, as well as the fact that Jones had qualified for the Olympics in spite of spinal cord surgery a year ago.

Four days following Longman’s hatchet job, after a disappointing fourth-place finish in the 100-meter hurdles, in a tearful interview on the TODAY Show, Jones expressed her frustration, telling Savannah Guthrie: “They should be supporting our U.S. Olympic athletes and instead they just ripped me to shreds. I just thought that that was crazy because I worked six days a week, every day, for four years for a 12-second race and the fact that they just tore me apart, which is heartbreaking.”

The public appears to agree with Lolo regarding Longman’s attack. In a highly unusual column entitled, “Lolo Jones Article is Too Harsh,” the New York Times public editor Art Brisbane acknowledged the volume of reader pushback the Longman piece has created, and noted that, “In this particular case, I think the writer was particularly harsh, even unnecessarily so.”

Putting aside Longman’s opinion or Jones’ reaction, and discounting speculation that Jones’ spokesperson made a serious tactical error in declining to participate in the story, there is a simple but valuable PR lesson in the New York Times coverage of Lolo Jones, which is:

MEDIA RELATIONS 101

It is not a journalist’s job to make you look good. In fact, journalists are always more likely to make you look bad…because it suits their temperaments, pleases their editors and attracts more attention.

We’ll never know Longman’s motivation for trashing Jones. He might have eaten a bad hot dog that day. He might have placed a small wager against Lolo, and was hoping to kill her mojo. Or perhaps his rant was based on moral grounds, exposing the hypocrisy of self-proclaimed virgins who appear nude in sports magazines.

Several years ago I brought a Forbes magazine reporter to meet with the CEO of a major grocery chain. The interview went very well. Or so I thought…until the story was published, which turned out to be a devastating attack on my client. After being summarily fired by the CEO for arranging the public debacle, I called the reporter to ask why she had written such a damaging piece. Her response was simple: “I didn’t like the way he treated his secretary, and he needed to be taught a lesson.”

The CEO and I learned very different lessons that day. He is unlikely to have changed the way he treated his secretary. But I changed the way I treated journalists.

Leave a comment

Filed under Uncategorized

Tagged as #brand damage, #content marketing, #craftsmanship, #media placement, #media relations, #Negative Publicity, #PR, #press release, #PRfirms, #publicity, #reputation management, Art Brisbane, Forbes Magazine, hatchet job, Jere Longman, journalism, journalists, LoLo Jones, marketing counsel, mojo, New York Times, nude, NY Times, Olympic hurdles, Olympics, PR lesson, PR strategy, public relations, public relations firms, public relations strategy, Savannah Guthrie, spinal cord surgery, TODAY Show, virgins

July 18, 2012 · 12:51 pm

Boy Scouts of America and the Naked Rambler

Stephen Gough a/k/a the “Naked Rambler”

As reported today in The Scotsman, after spending six years behind bars for walking around Great Britain with no clothes on, 53 year-old Stephen Gough – known as the “Naked Rambler” – was released from prison in Perth, Scotland. Mr. Gough, who left the facility naked, vowed to continue his “vocation in life,” which involves not wearing clothing to demonstrate his non-conformity with social norms, and to prove that people are prejudice. To make his point, Gough has spent most of the past decade in prison, and much of it in solitary confinement.

Yesterday, after a two-year evaluation of its current policy, the Boy Scouts of America reaffirmed its position to exclude openly gay individuals from membership; stating that “it remains in the best interest of Scouting.”

In truth, Scouting’s “extensive research and evaluations” that were used to support its position provide a convenient smokescreen for the real reasons why the Boy Scouts will continue to ban gays from the organization.

In his 2004 book, Scout’s Honor: A Father’s Unlikely Foray Into the Woods, New York Times reporter Peter Applebome explains that religious organizations represent the largest number of chartering organizations of Boy Scout troops across the county, and at least two large religious sects have threatened to pull all of their charters (and ultimately put Scouting out of business) if the Boy Scouts of America do not maintain a hard line on gay membership. Additionally, many large corporations with non-discrimination policies have withdrawn funding as a result of Scouting’s ban on gays.

So…who is more deserving of our respect?

The loony, naked Scotsman who’s willing to give up his freedom to maintain his ideals.

The respected youth organization that’s willing to compromise its stated underlying values to ensure its own existence.

It’s time for Scouting to man-up; to refuse to be blackmailed by its chartering organizations and financial supporters, regardless of the consequences. Time for Scouting to determine its own future. Time for Scouting to walk the talk…with or without its uniform on.

Leave a comment

Filed under Uncategorized

Tagged as #content marketing, #PR, #publicity, blackmail, Boy Scout troops, Boy Scouts of America, character, discrimination, gay membership, gay rights, homosexuality, human rights, marketing communications, marketing counsel, Mormon Church, naked, Naked Rambler, New York Times, Perth, Peter Applebome, PR strategy, Scotland, Scotsman, Scout's Honor: A Father's Unlikely Foray Into the Woods, Stephen Gough, The Scotsman

July 12, 2012 · 1:20 pm

Do Most CEOs Lack Social Skills?

Do CEOs need charm school, rather than business school?

According to a new study sponsored by Domo and CEO.com, CEOs at Fortune 500 companies are participating in social media channels significantly less than the general public. The study claims that 70% of them have absolutely no presence on social media.

On the major social networks, including Facebook, Twitter and Google+, the participation of Fortune 500 CEOs was minimal, with only 7.6% on Facebook, 4% on Twitter, and less than 1% on Google+. In comparison, more than 50% of the U.S. population uses Facebook and 34% uses Twitter. No Fortune 500 CEOs are on Pinterest.

LinkedIn is the most popular social media site among Fortune 500 CEOs, with 26% on the network, compared to just 20.15% of the U.S. general public. Of that group, ten Fortune 500 CEOs have more than 500 LinkedIn connections, while 36 CEOs have 1 LinkedIn connection or none.

Six Fortune 500 CEOs (or more likely, their PR departments) contribute to blogs, and only one of the six CEOs, John Mackey of Whole Foods, maintains his own blog.

Given the demographics of Fortune 500 CEOs, none of this news is jaw-dropping. Older, well-established corporate guys (and gals) in the business world’s stratosphere are not wired for social media.

But here are some potential take-aways from the research:

The propensity of C-level executives at companies of all sizes – well below the Fortune 1000 level – to invest time on social media outlets is extremely low. Top decision-makers spend most of their day dealing directly with people within their own sphere of influence. And most C-level execs still are not convinced that social media is anything more than a technology hula-hoop that will eventually run out of steam.

Marketers attempting to reach and influence C-level decision-makers are still best-served by leveraging the channels that are used and respected by that target audience…including traditional business media sources and professional forums; and by seeking to influence the 2^nd and 3^rd tier corporate executives who provide insight and guidance for C-level decision-makers…which may involve selective use of social media tools.

Aspiring CEOs may still be more likely to reach the top of the corporate ladder by joining the right country club, rather than by having 500 connections on LinkedIn.

Leave a comment

Filed under Uncategorized

Tagged as #content marketing, #LinkedIn, #marketing, #media placement, #media relations, #PR, #PRfirms, #publicity, #SEO, #social media monitoring, #socialmedia, #thought leadership, B2B communication, B2B marketing, Blogs, business schools, C-level executives, career advancement, career strategy, CEO, Chief Executives, corporate decision makers, Facebook, Fortune 1000, Fortune 500, marketing communications, marketing craftsmanship, New Jersey PR firms, social media, social media marketing, top-of-mind awareness, Twitter

June 20, 2012 · 8:30 pm

A Road Rage Lesson from my Dad

Faster is not always better.

Yesterday I buried my Dad: 87 years-old, of Scottish descent, first generation American, decorated war hero, husband of two deceased wives, sibling to two brothers he outlived, father of 4, grandfather of 16, great-grandfather of 7, Cubmaster, Scoutmaster, hospital administrator, sail-boater, dog lover, cigar smoker and certified duffer.

The gathering to mourn Dad’s passing provided a rare opportunity to reconnect with friends and family. To reflect on a life well-lived, to measure one’s own failings and accomplishments, to think about years remaining, and to remember what’s important.

It may be no coincidence that three days prior to Dad’s burial a related point was delivered to me in a mini road rage incident on the back roads of New Jersey. Coming home with friends late that night on an unfamiliar, winding country road, deer lurking at every turn, I hovered a bit below the posted speed limit to avoid putting antlers through the windshield.

My concentration on the road ahead was broken by a fast approaching set of headlights from behind that for several hundred yards remained no more than 5 feet off my rear bumper. I tapped my brakes and the car backed off momentarily, only to return to a position even closer to my trunk. In no mood to play chicken, I signaled right, pulled off to the side of the road, and waited for the driver to speed past me.

Instead, when I looked out my side window, the young driver pulled up next to me and rolled down his passenger-side window. I rolled down my window to hear what he was yelling. “Why were you brake-checking me?! Why were you brake-checking me?!” he screamed.

Although I was unfamiliar with the term “brake checking,” I yelled back, “Well, moron, maybe it’s because you were riding 3 feet off my bumper.”

I waited for his response, expecting a tirade of Jersey Shore profanity. Instead, the driver stammered for a moment, and then yelled, “Well….GO FASTER!!!!” With that, he laid down a 6-foot patch of rubber and sped off down the road. My passengers and I spent most of that ride home laughing off the incident.

Nothing happens by accident, and there’s a lesson to be learned in every encounter, positive or negative. Coming on the heels of my Dad’s passing, I feel there’s some special meaning for me in the driver’s peculiar “GO FASTER” directive.

My Dad was telling me to SLOW DOWN. To spend more time with the people I love. To pay closer attention to their lives. To listen more carefully to what they’re saying. To be more selective in how I spend my time. And to savor every day and every year that remains.

So thanks for the farewell gift, Dad.

I got the message.

Leave a comment

Filed under Uncategorized

Tagged as Dad, father, Jersey shore, legacy, life lessons, memories, New Jersey, New Jersey PR firms, road rage

May 31, 2012 · 5:21 pm

The Dirty Secret Behind Sir Richard Branson’s Attack on the Suit and Tie

Joseph Stalin Refused to Wear a Tie

For Sir Richard Charles Nicholas Branson – the English business magnate known for his Virgin Group of more than 400 companies, his daredevil exploits, his humanitarian deeds, and his estimated net worth of $4.2 billion – nothing is more important than brand image.

Largely because Virgins are always in short supply, Branson serves as the personification of his brand, and works hard to nurture the image of a counter-culture, free-spirited, creative thinker who’s always ready with new solutions to old problems, eager to challenge the status quo. The public’s role is simply to accept the underlying notion that Branson’s companies all embody the same sort of energy and positive thinking that he exhibits, and to ignore the fact that several of his ventures have gone belly-up over the years.

So it’s no great surprise for Branson watchers to see him crank up his PR machine to attack formal business attire – specifically the suit & tie – as the greatest threat to capitalism since Joseph Stalin (who, ironically, was never photographed wearing a business suit.)

Evidence of Branson’s well-managed crusade to disparage the defenseless suit & tie can be seen everywhere. He’s in London snipping off $125 silk ties from people he meets. He’s in Entrepreneur Magazine extolling the virtues of the open collar workplace. He’s on CNN, with his toothy smile, explaining why it’s impossible to be creative while wearing a business suit. Here’s a sampling of the Branson propaganda:

“Suits and ties in an office are just another type of uniform, but in an arena where uniforms no longer serve any useful purpose. At one time they probably showed that the wearer was, at the very least, able to purchase and maintain a fairly expensive piece of fabric. Now, however, in an individualized, interconnected culture, your achievements speak for themselves. The suit and tie is an anachronism.”

If businessmen believed that not wearing a suit & tie would make them more creative, move them up the corporate ladder faster, or get them closer to earning their first billion dollars, they’d all be on the Branson bandwagon. If casual wear was the proven secret to success, they’d all wear pajama bottoms, tank tops and Crocs to work (which happens to be the official uniform of everyone who works from home.)

But suit & tie wearing business professionals all know two important things that Richard Branson is never likely to understand or to acknowledge:

Throwing on a suit and tie at 6 o’clock in the morning requires very little time or effort, and involves zero concern that what you’re wearing will be the butt of jokes at lunchtime, and…
Rumor has it that Virgin Menswear LLC – a new concept in men’s fashion – is currently under development by Sir Richard.

Leave a comment

Filed under Uncategorized

Tagged as #brand management, #CNN, #marketing, #media placement, #media relations, #PR, #PRfirms, #publicity, #SEO, #thought leadership, B2B marketing, business fashion, capitalism, Crocs, Entrepreneur Magazine, Joseph Stalin, marketing communications, marketing craftsmanship, men's wear, PR strategy, Sir Richard Branson, social media, suit and tie, top-of-mind awareness, Virgin Group

May 4, 2012 · 9:46 pm

The Power of Insulting Customers: Confessions of a Vacuum Cleaner Sales Rep

The Rolls Royce of Vacuum Cleaners

My connection with advertising legend David Ogilvy is that, early in our careers, we both sold consumer appliances door-to-door. Long before he founded Ogilvy & Mather in 1949, and following a short-lived career as a chef in Paris, David Ogilvy sold AGA cooking stoves to housewives in Scotland. Long before I founded Highlander Consulting, as a college student seeking money for gas and beer, I sold Fairfax vacuum cleaners to housewives in Connecticut.

Ogilvy claimed his door-to-door sales experience provided insights into the mind of the consumer that earned him acclaim as an advertising wizard. I credit my door-to-door experience with an appreciation for the power of insulting people as a sales tactic.

Created long before Star Wars, Fairfax vacuums looked like R2-D2, were priced at several hundred dollars and equipped with a motor so powerful it could nearly – to borrow a phrase – suck the chrome off a trailer hitch. Although my recollection of how I first became associated with the Fairfax Company remains fuzzy, I can recall every detail of my first home demonstration, given to an unsuspecting housewife by my sales trainer, a seasoned vacuum cleaner salesman straight from Glengarry Glen Ross.

Here’s a replay of our sales visit:

Sales Trainer:    Thank you, Mrs. Jones, for allowing us to demonstrate the power of the Fairfax vacuum. Before I do that, would you kindly show me the vacuum cleaner you’re currently using to clean your beautiful house?

[Mrs. Jones brings her vacuum out of the closet. The Sales Trainer plugs it in and then pulls out a glass jar full of dirt, hair, dust balls and other unpleasant items.]

Mrs. Jones:         Oh, my!

Sales Trainer:      Now I don’t want you to be upset, Mrs. Jones, I assure you that no permanent damage will be done to your rug.

Mrs. Jones:         Well, I’m not sure that…

[The Sales Trainer opens the top of the glass jar, and dumps the entire mess on to a portion of the rug.]

Mrs. Jones:         Oh, my!

[The Sales Trainer smiles at Mrs. Jones while he steps into the pile of dirt and grinds it into her rug with his foot.]

Mrs. Jones:         [Visibly upset.] Oh, my!!! How will I ever get that dirt out…

Sales Trainer:      Let’s see how well your vacuum cleaner handles this mess.

[The Sales Trainer vigorously vacuums the rug for several minutes with Mrs. Jones’ vacuum until no dirt is visible and the rug’s original appearance is restored. Mrs. Jones now appears more relaxed.]

Sales Trainer:      Would you say that this area of your rug is clean now, Mrs. Jones? Why don’t you get down and take a closer look, to check for any dirt?

[Mrs. Jones reluctantly agrees, bends over to take a closer look and runs her hand over the carpet.]

Mrs. Jones:         You seem to have gotten all of the dirt out. You really scared me for a moment.

Sales Trainer:      Well, let me give it a couple more passes with your vacuum, just to be sure it’s clean.

[The Sales Trainer begins to vacuum the area again. Mrs. Jones looks at me. I look down at the floor until he stops the vacuum…The Sales Trainer sits down and directs Mrs. Jones’ attention to his new Fairfax vacuum which features a clear plastic fitting in the middle of the hose (for demo purposes only) containing a white, porous paper filter designed to collect any dirt before it enters the vacuum canister.]

Sales Trainer:      As you can see Mrs. Jones, my Fairfax vacuum is equipped with a special paper filter that will show us how much dirt is being collected. So let’s go back over that spot we just cleaned with your vacuum.

[With great fanfare, the Sales Trainer begins to vacuum the rug. As he does, he points to the white filter in the hose, which immediately begins to collect debris and turn black in color. Mrs. Jones stares at the filter. She looks quickly at the Sales Trainer, then at me, and begins to mutter something to herself as the Sales Trainer shuts down the Fairfax.]

Mrs. Jones:         That’s amazing…I never…

Sales Trainer:      As you can see, Mrs. Jones, your vacuum appears to have missed quite a bit of dirt and debris that was in your rug.

Mrs. Jones:         It certainly did.

Sales Trainer:      Mrs. Jones…may I ask you a personal question?

Mrs. Jones:         Well, I guess so…

Sales Trainer:      Mrs. Jones…Do you care about the health and safety of your family?

Mrs. Jones:         Why, of course I…

Sales Trainer:      Mr. Jones…Is this really the way you want your family to live…[long pause as he points to the black filter on the hose]…in a dirty, germ-filled house?

[Having just suggested that Mrs. Jones is an unfit housekeeper, she is clearly shaken and unable to respond. She looks at the Sales Trainer, and then at me. Expecting the worst, I shuffle my feet, planning a rapid retreat from the house. The Sales Trainer remains frozen in position, during a very long silence, staring at Mrs. Jones, waiting for her to answer his question.]

Mrs. Jones:         [Clearing her throat.] How much will your Fairfax vacuum cleaner cost me?

[The tension in the room evaporates. The Sales Trainer sits down, pulls out a contract from his valise, and proceeds to sell Mrs. Jones a new Fairfax vacuum.]

My tenure as a Fairfax vacuum sales rep was short-lived and highly unsuccessful, never having found the courage to ask Connecticut housewives the insulting question that would initiate a sale. However, to this day I continue to apply the important lessons in sales craftsmanship taught to me by my Fairfax vacuum sales trainer:

Know what’s important to your customer.
Be straightforward in pointing out a problem (or opportunity.)
Demonstrate a viable solution.

3 Comments

Filed under Uncategorized

Tagged as #craftsmanship, #marketing, AGA cookers, B2C, consumer behavior, customer abuse, customer expectations, customer experience, David Ogilvy, door to door sales, face to face sales, Fairfax vacuum, Glengarry Glen Ross, household appliances, marketing strategy, Ogilvy & Mather, R2D2, retail sales, sales demo, sales rep, sales strategy, sales tactics, sales training, Star Wars, vacuum cleaners, vacuums

April 19, 2012 · 4:24 pm

Should Companies Manage Their Employees’ LinkedIn Profiles?

Everything Counts in Brand Management

LinkedIn has become an important business channel, not only for individuals to showcase their professional credentials, but also for companies seeking to promote their value proposition and to establish or manage brand awareness.

LinkedIn is no longer simply a social media tool that enables corporate executives to put themselves in play for a better job under the guise of “networking.” LinkedIn also is no longer just a digital marketplace for consultants, freelancers and agencies seeking new clients. For better or worse, LinkedIn has become part of the world’s due diligence process: a public resource that enables employers, customers, regulators, competitors, prospective employees, referral sources, vendors, creditors, shareholders, research analysts and journalists to look beneath the covers, and to establish an opinion (or decision) not only regarding individuals, but also the companies they work for.

Although LinkedIn provides companies with an opportunity to present a basic or enhanced (for a hefty fee) corporate profile, what most businesses either fail to recognize – or are reluctant to address – is that the content, quality and consistency of individual and collective descriptions of the company embodied within their employees’ LinkedIn profiles can have a significant impact on brand perceptions. (These brand implications are less significant on Facebook, which is not generally viewed as a business channel.)

To illustrate the point, simply in terms of brand clarity and consistency, here are 5 different ways (grammatical shortcomings and typos included) that High Street Partners – an 80-person Boston-based consulting firm – describes itself through various LinkedIn profiles of its employees:

“High Street Partners is an international business services firm. We simplify the management and control of international operations, empowering our customers to capitalize on their growth opportunities in foreign markets.”

“High Street Partners (HSP) is the leading professional advisory firm in the international expansion space. We offer a range of cross-border finance and administrative services to organizations with new or existing global operations, including entity set-up, payroll, accounting, tax compliance, advisory and HR services.”

“High Street Partners provides international business services to companies operating overseas. These services include international accounting, tax, global cash management, HR and compliance solutions that mitigates a Company’s risk when operating in foreign markets (www.hsp.com.)”

“Our cross-border solutions enable the HQ finance and HR teams to quickly and efficiently implement expansion plans, establish appropriate entities, get overseas employees paid, and navigate unfamiliar overseas tax codes and compliance regulations.”

“Providing financial, tax and compliance services to companies in their international explansion.” (sic)

There are (at least) two fundamental issues involving LinkedIn:

The employees’ right to describe themselves any way they see fit on social media sites, and
A company’s right to protect its brand reputation through accurate and consistent descriptions of the enterprise that are posted on social media sites by its employees.

Although the underlying issues related to freedom of expression and corporate intrusion frequently serve as catalysts for heated protests and endless debate, there is really no good reason why both employee and corporate interests cannot both be served, if the process is managed in a reasonable, respectful manner.

At the risk of over-simplifying an issue that can quickly escalate to union grievances, CEO town hall meetings, picket lines and national media coverage, perhaps the company’s Chief Marketing Officer can initiate the change process with an internal memo along these lines:

Dear Valued Employee:

We are encouraged to see that so many of our staff members are using LinkedIn to develop professional networks. Increasingly, social media tools like LinkedIn are playing an important role in personal and corporate life.

While we recognize and support your personal right to participate in social media sites, we would like to ensure that the descriptions used in your LinkedIn profile to describe our company are consistent with the guidelines we’ve established to enhance understanding and appreciation of our corporate brand.

Toward that end, we would greatly appreciate your cooperation in using only the approved description of our company for your LinkedIn profile. This company description is located on Page 3 of our Employee Handbook. In fact, we have recently added some additional suggestions regarding LinkedIn profiles, which you may find helpful.

Thanks for your support on this important issue. If you have any questions or concerns on this topic, please let me know.

Your Friendly CMO

An alternative approach regarding brand presentation in employee LinkedIn profiles is to do nothing. Maybe it’s an issue that’s too insignificant or considered not worth the time. But companies with enduring world-class brands understand that everything matters. That’s one reason why you never see a dirty UPS or FedEx delivery truck.

3 Comments

Filed under Uncategorized

Tagged as #brand damage, #brand management, #brand risk, #CMO, #content marketing, #craftsmanship, #FedEx, #LinkedIn, #marketing, #PR, #press release, #PRfirms, #publicity, #UPS, B2B marketing, digital marketing, due diligence process, employee communications, Facebook, graphic identity system, High Street Partners, internal communications, marketing craftsmanship, marketing ROI, public relations firms, public relations strategy, social media, social media marketing, top-of-mind awareness

March 20, 2012 · 4:45 pm

Did The New York Times Purposely Fuel the Goldman Controversy?

A Compromised Value Proposition?

If the biggest loser in disgruntled employee Greg Smith’s recent OpEd piece was Goldman Sachs, then the apparent winner in this high-profile media sideshow was The New York Times. Rarely has an opinion piece on any topic, published in any major newspaper or periodical, attracted so much attention and controversy.

The veracity of Mr. Smith’s opinion and the timeliness of his topic notwithstanding, is it ever appropriate for a publication as widely read and long-respected as The New York Times to provide a platform for one disgruntled employee? In publishing Mr. Smith’s description of Goldman’s shortcomings, and his heartfelt reasons for quitting the firm, did The New York Times supply an inherent level of credibility and endorsement of Mr. Smith’s position?

If The New York Times was genuinely interested in presenting its readers with a balanced viewpoint – traditionally a fundamental responsibility of the Fourth Estate – would it not have given Goldman Sachs an equal editorial platform to present the firm’s response to Mr. Smith – ideally in the same issue and on the same page as Mr. Smith’s OpEd piece? Or was the element of surprise part of the publication’s marketing strategy?

In the Greg Smith / Goldman Sachs matter, The New York Times appears to have borrowed a page from the playbook of now defunct Jobvent.com, a website that pioneered a viral platform for anonymous employees to post their titillating rants on real and imagined injustices by their employers.

As the line separating bona fide news reporting from entertainment continues to erode, and as advertising revenues disappear, in its decision to print Mr. Smith’s largely unsubstantiated viewpoint, The New York Times may be complicit in trading in its legendary journalistic standards for a temporary spike in brand recognition and readership.

By delivering self-serving content of this caliber, the Gray Lady likely revealed more about its own integrity than that of Goldman Sachs.

Leave a comment

Filed under Uncategorized

Tagged as #brand damage, #brand management, #content marketing, #Goldman Sachs, #Greg Smith, #marketing, #media placement, #PR, #press release, #PRfirms, #publicity, #the fourth estate, #the gray lady, #The New York Times, #thought leadership, disgruntled employees, editorial opinion, jobvent.com, journalism, journalistic integrity, marketing craftsmanship, marketing strategy, PR strategy, social media, top-of-mind awareness

March 16, 2012 · 10:59 am

Avoid the Carnival Barker Approach to Publicity

Publicity Must Be More Than Noise

Companies of all sizes believe that more publicity is always better, as a means to raise brand awareness and drive business results. But there are several reasons why this noisy carnival barker publicity is a losing game. For starters:

There are too many distractions within traditional print, broadcast and digital media channels to ensure that target audiences will notice your company’s brand exposure, remember seeing it, or be influenced by the coverage;
Many types of media exposure have very little marketing value. For example, having your CEO quoted in a story that also includes quotes from competitors will do little to distinguish your company’s brand, or to make the phones ring;
Publicity (also called “earned media”) is a beast that must be fed consistently. This effort requires that a company either engage an outside PR agency or employ dedicated staff members who are skilled at pitching stories and nurturing press coverage.

So, if media placement is both an inefficient and costly marketing tactic, then why do large, sophisticated companies continue to use it? Big companies use PR because they can afford to. They have the financial and human resources not only to be consistent in its application, but also to be sloppy in requiring a reasonable return on investment.

Conversely, because resources are limited, small and medium-sized companies cannot play the same publicity game; to survive, they must demand that PR tactics be cost-effective and accountable. Unfortunately, SMBs across all industries that attempt to go toe-to-toe with deep pocketed competitors by emulating their “more publicity is better” approach are often disappointed with the results of PR over time. Although they may succeed in generating some media exposure over a 6-month or one-year period, many companies eventually drop the tactic altogether. Other than a pile of press clippings or some online content for their website’s “In the News” section, business owners are hard-pressed to draw a connection between their publicity campaign and tangible business results, such as lead generation or increased revenue.

If the bad news for SMBs is that they lack the financial resources to maintain a consistent brand presence using publicity, then the good news is that “more publicity is better” is a losing game that no company should play, regardless of the size of its balance sheet.

Companies seeking to leverage publicity to drive business results in a cost-effective manner need to play a very different game, using the following rules:

Generate credibility tools, not placements. The underlying marketing value of publicity lies in the inherent 3^rd party validation provided by the media sources that create exposure for your brand. Your goal is to generate media exposure that will yield a credibility tool for your business; telling clients, prospects and referral sources that you are a “safe choice.” Your media exposure must shine a light on your company’s value proposition (addressing why people should buy your products or services) in order for that publicity to serve as an effective credibility tool. More bluntly, if your publicity doesn’t make your firm’s sales collateral more believable, it’s a wasted effort.

Seek only high-value exposure. Contrary to conventional wisdom, less publicity can be better…if it is high-value media exposure. No publicity has the right to exist without a specific business purpose, and not all publicity is created equal. High-value exposure puts an exclusive spotlight on your company’s intellectual capital, underlying values or narrative, and typically allows you to control all or most of the content. On that basis, certain types of publicity – such as an exclusive company profile written by a “friendly” journalist; one-on-one interviews on relevant topics; bylined articles, blog posts or OpEd pieces that you’ve authored – are far more valuable than simply being mentioned or quoted in a news or feature story.

Plan media solicitations last. Under pressure to produce media exposure of any kind, PR firms or corporate publicists sometimes generate a placement first, and then attempt to figure out a way to leverage (or “merchandise”) that publicity. Too often, publicity with or without merchandising potential is simply hung on a company’s website like a hunting trophy. As a marketing-savvy company, you must work backwards…by first defining what specific behavior or opinion you’re attempting to influence, and then by determining how you’ll apply media exposure to accomplish that goal. Only at that point, are you prepared to solicit specific media placements that have a purpose, editorial focus and the potential to drive a measurable business outcome.

Build an internal merchandising system. If you’re creating effective credibility tools using publicity, it’s essential that you establish an internal discipline to ensure that your current and prospective investors, referral sources and other key audiences receive those tools on at least a quarterly basis. Many RIAs fail to understand that the ROI of publicity is based, in large measure, on the depth and reliability of their firm’s CRM system. To maintain top-of-mind awareness with your target audiences, and to benefit from the media’s 3^rd party endorsement of your business, you must take steps (in a manner that’s not overly self-serving) to see that whatever publicity you generate is directly applied to remind people of who you are and why they should do business with you.

Slice and dice for additional ROI. In this digital age, there are opportunities to gain additional mileage from the publicity you generate, in terms of search engine marketing (SEM) potential, and exposure to audiences that may not be covered by your CRM system. These efforts should supplement, rather than serve as an alternative for, your internal merchandising discipline. For example, if you’ve scored a bylined article in an industry trade publication, initiate a discussion on the article’s topic within appropriate LinkedIn user groups, and attach a link to the published piece. If you use Twitter to promote the article’s link, extract a provocative observation or quote from your piece, rather than tweeting: “Read my article that was published in Widget Manufacturing News.” If you’ve been interviewed on CNN or the local news, post that video on YouTube, and be sure to include a written commentary that gives your video additional context and marketing value.

Changing the way you think about and apply publicity – primarily by abandoning the notion that the discipline requires a carnival barker’s approach to capturing marketplace interest – will allow your company to gain a powerful marketing capability. If publicity is designed and managed in a strategic manner, your small business can compete effectively against companies of any size.