Bad week for both trust and transparency…

Just take a look at last week’s Facebook privacy leaks, when all of the top 10 apps on Facebook were leaking. It turns out that user IDs of six of the most popular apps, were leaked to advertising networks included FarmVille, Mafia Wars, and several card and puzzle games. According to Facebook, it knew nothing about it, and put the blame on the games’ publisher, Zynga who was doing the selling.

It’s not the first time that Facebook’s face has turned red…

It happened last May when the WSJ discovered that Facebook was leaking user IDs through its ad sales on the site. Facebook corrected that problem, albeit too late, of course, for some users. Apparently they never thought to see if its app publishers were leaking or selling the same information, leading us to the Zynga debacle of this week.  What will be the next thing that Facebook discovers?

Each chip dings users’ trust.

And then there was Google that admitted, also last week, that its Street View cars, scooped up emails and passwords from Wi Fi networks as they cruised around. The company is “mortified,” and has implemented changes, but maybe not quite as “mortified” as the people who trusted Google not to snoop in the first place.  According to Google they initially collected only “fragmentary” data, but the true extent of the Wi-Fi snooping was only uncovered recently by regulators outside of Google, in some cases looking into possible criminal charges.

How many dings does it take to lose trust?  Most cheating spouses usually only get one…

As to transparency, one has only to look at the non-transparent Wikileaks, the self-proclaimed whistle-blower’s web site, to know that transparency works both ways.  Under the guise of freedom of information, the site has now released two “troves” of classified military records, an earlier one on the Afghan conflict and the recent one on Iraq, causing vast damage without any attempt at substantiation.  The founder, Julian Assange, now a hunted man, has not found it necessary to reveal who is funding the organization, friend or foe, for what political cause, the source of their information, the process of evaluation as to what to publish, or even to what purpose. So much for transparency…

Transparency needs trust and trust demands transparency. It’s the measure of it that cannot quite be trusted, as in “to what extent is a company transparent?”  Clearly it’s a marketer’s choice as to what information is transparent and what is not, what is made public and what remains within corporate walls. But once parameters are established, transparency is all about consistency and how it is communicated, a formula that will surely elevate trust.

Classified military material, on the other hand, is an antonym to transparency and should remain outside of such a discussion…

We introduce our next guest blogger of our monthly series on the 25th of every month, in celebration of our 25th anniversary this year, Kathy Cripps, President, Council of Public Relations Firms.

Kathy Cripps is president of the Council of Public Relations Firms, the U. S. employer-based trade association. Kathy worked with multinational public relations firms and had her own firm for many years; she and the Council are strong advocates for PR firms and the value they bring to clients around the globe.

In two days (October 27) Marc Pritchard, Global Marketing & Brand Building Officer for Procter & Gamble, will speak at the Council’s Critical Issues Forum. The room will be filled with PR agency executives, their staffs and their clients from many different industries. We are thrilled Marc will address the group because when P&G speaks, people listen. Marketers and their public relations firms care what P&G has to say.

There’s a larger significance here as well. Public Relations is important to organizations like P&G.  I’m referring to the strategic relevance of our industry to organizations, whether in relation to reputation management, employee communications, crisis mitigation, marketing or public affairs. While the continued economic uncertainty has led to slower-than-hoped-for industry growth, public relations is more relevant and integrated than ever.

As the president of the Council of Public Relations Firms, the U.S. trade association for PR agencies, I have the opportunity to speak with firms around the country about what keeps them up at night, and what excites them about the future.  I know public relations is a hard business;  running a firm provides its own set of unique challenges, from servicing clients to managing and motivating talent.  It’s great to see firms like Pollack and others celebrate significant milestones.

The Council of PR Firms’ Q3 Quick Survey (of member firms) revealed some interesting statistics as firms and clients move into 2011 planning mode.  When asked what new business trends firms believe will be most important in 2011,  our members cited “more requests for digital and social media expertise” most often (80%), followed by “more competitive pitches” (57%) “a shift away from traditional media relations toward online influencers”  (56%) and “integrated campaign development “( 54%).  These responses are primarily good news as they represent not only a robust business environment but the expansive platform from which PR now operates.

Twenty five years in business, represents a time to reflect on growth, change and what’s ahead.  I don’t think I need to list the many ways the public relations business has changed since 1985. Suffice to say, staying competitive is one of the biggest challenges a PR firm faces today.

Here’s what I suggest to keep a firm healthy — and moving toward the next significant milestone:

• Don’t give away your thinking. I know, I know, competitive pitches require that you come to the table with creative ideas. Before you get into the trap, encourage the client to select a firm, or narrow the list, using the firms’ capabilities. Clients who challenge the finalist(s) to answer 2-3 strategic questions learn enough about the firm to select a partner.
• Don’t be afraid to ask for fair compensation. This applies not only to new business, but ongoing client work. Help your staff understand why it’s more than OK to be paid for work outside the agreed upon scope, and equally important to be paid in a timely manner (you are not a bank, right?)
• Help your staff get excited about public relations, especially working at a firm and making it a long-term career.  There are so many opportunities with the right public relations firm. With proper training and career guidance, today’s account executives can be tomorrow’s CEOs.
• Diversify your firm. Staff differences in experience, ethnic background, gender and skills will make your firm a richer source of ideas.
• Really listen to clients (and their competitors). Knowing your clients’ business will help you get new assignments because you will be an invaluable resource.
• Learn to say no. If your firm doesn’t have the required expertise, invest in it, partner with a firm that does or don’t accept the work.
• Be ethical. Following a moral compass is good business; it’s important to your clients and your employees.

As an industry we’re poised for growth – in size and responsibility.  Let’s go for it.

Following is the next video as part of our year-long celebration of The Pollack PR Marketing Group’s 25th Anniversary. Happy Halloween!

It’s finished.  It’s over.  Gap has retracted the new logo and put back the old one  – for now.  The company has acquiesced to a consumer outcry that flooded the Internet with derisions, mockeries, parodies as well as amateur re-design suggestions, as the new logo rolled out. The whole journey, from new logo roll out to retraction, took just a few days.

But it took two years for the company to develop a new logo earmarked to better represent the evolving Gap brand, one that is “more contemporary and current and honors the heritage of the Gap brand with the blue box but takes it forward” according to Louise Callagy, a Gap spokeswoman — plus an untold sum of monies spent.

The social media frenzy that followed Gap’s new logo roll out, could probably have been predicted, given that the brand is such an iconic one and so beloved by the very generation that view themselves as bona fide, self-proclaimed and self-appointed critics and use social media as their main communication tool.

As a matter of fact, had Gap’s recent logo change been based on a social media experiment strategy, it would have been brilliant, for the unplanned rapid fire online reaction has all the elements that would make any marketer salivate. The problem is that it wasn’t planned and it seems to have caught Gap by surprise, causing them to scramble in response with knee-jerk reactions.

Initially, the hastily made-up response came from Gap’s president and its corporate communications VP, who spoke of the logo as only “starting a conversation,” although clearly after the fact and not the original intent.  Then the company opened up this “conversation” by indicating that it would be pursuing a “crowdsourcing project” in the near term. Whether that project was earmarked for a logo or not, time will tell, but the timing of it is certainly coincidental.

Based on the Gap case, marketers would do well to consider as to who owns their brand and who decides a brand’s corporate identity – the corporation or its mass audience? Or better yet, who leads it, the corporation or the crowd? Can a brand’s identity even be Crowdsourced?

Brandchannel commentor Gunter Soydanbay notes that, “without any kind of even mildly specific strategy or direction, crowd-sourcing anything is a futile exercise. Unless Gap is actually suggesting that the brand is crowd-sourcing a business plan.”

In the end, it is a game.  Look, it’s not critical whether a logo is blue in one corner or the other, or whether the font is Helvetica or another.  What is critical is that consumers today want a say as to what ensues with their beloved brands and corporations of such iconic brands and will need to be aware of this and find a means to be inclusive, well before a logo change is planned, implemented and monies are wasted.

It might be smarter to choose to CrowdSource a logo, or have a social media competitive design competition with input by brand advocates who are not necessarily design professionals (but can be also), and then take it all back to the drawing board and come up with a look that “feels” inclusive, assuages the masses, but still has the corporation in charge of their own brand identity. Or have a well-prepared plan in place to better prepare consumer advocates for a coming change.

The Gap case feels like a chicken and egg story. What comes first?

On Saturday 10/2/10, The Pollack PR Marketing Group participated in PRSA Los Angeles Chapter’s annual Quality Time with PR Minds event. The entire agency staff supported the event as part of its commitment, during its 25th anniversary year, to support the community in which it does business.  Staff professionals broke out into separate groups and worked with a variety of non-profit organizations individually, counseling them as to what tools, mechanisms and strategies to use to expand  their communications efforts.

Non-profits could take advantage of different perspectives, creative ideas, and candid snapshot analyses of their situation and ways to improve their situation through strategic redirection, tactical ideas, or tips and tricks on how to get a message out. Simply having a fresh perspective can go tremendously far with a non-profit who is too often strapped for time and resources.

The agency was able to meet with many non-profits on Saturday and deliver an exchange of ideas, along with other professionals, that contributed to the expanded success of these needed and highly-valued community organizations.