Archive for the ‘communication’ Category

I’ve finally arrived!!!

Monday, April 12th, 2010

Yes, it’s finally happened.  I’m now on YouTube.  I was recently part of an amazing evening at Ignite Bristol – an import from the Ignite concept that first happened in Seattle in 2006.  As anyone who has been through any Net.Mentor training will know, I hate PowerPoint with a passion.  However, the concept of a timed 5 minutes with 20 slides in quite a buzz and some of the presentations on the first evening were stimulating, moving, funny or just completely off the wall.  In the end, I went for the serious topic of handling crisis, but I hope it was light enough to be all of the above.  You be the judge…

  • Share/Bookmark

Crisis and the power of social media

Thursday, March 25th, 2010

There have been plenty of examples recently of the power of social media and the internet in creating and overcoming corporate crisis.  Most recently the Greenpeace and Nestle spat demonstrated more than just the development of the original issue itself  (the environmental effects of the palm oil manufacture).   The handling of the initial feedback by Nestle showed that if you are going to get involved in the debate, you need to keep your cool and stick to the issues – as highlighted by this excellent presentation from Scott Douglas.

The result of nestle’s fan page moderator getting personal went way beyond the original issue and became the story in itself. It reminds me of the classic West Wing episode where Josh Lyman decides to comment personally on the Lemonlyman website, only to wonder why he suddenly turns from hero to villain and CJ threatens personal injury with a motherboard.

The lesson? Stick to the issues; stay focused on the facts and look for the collaborative option. The best communication is two-way and changes behaviours on BOTH sides. This is a prime example of how to get the balance completely wrong and pay the corporate consequences. Ironically, KitKat was originally a Rowntree brand – the organisation that was set up by staunch Quaker, Joseph Rowntree.  Interestingly, they were equally censorial back in the early ’80s when I was a Student at York University – York being Rowntrees’ home.  Whiel News Editor of the student mag, Nouse, we decided to run a fairly derogatory front page about Kitkat and Rowntrees latest union activities in South Africa.  Strangely, Rowntree asked us in less than polite terms to pull the publication.  Clearly we were being more than provocative and now, with corporate communication experience under my belt I can appreciate the issues of brand and reputation management.  However, a collaborative approach would have had a far better impact on student and company behaviour than heavy-handed corporate ‘big brother’.   Joseph Rowntree must be rotating gently in his grave.

  • Share/Bookmark

Trust and social media – Mashable stylee

Wednesday, February 24th, 2010

I’ve been following Mashable for a while now, having discovered them via Twitter.  As with the likes of Guy Kawasaki, the Mashables keep unearthing a wealth of stuff that makes me wonder how they have time to make any money…except by continuing to unearth a wealth…..

Anyway, like so many articles and items that I’m lead to by the Twitterati, I occasionally have time for the briefest glance before I realise that I need to be focusing on what pays the bills chez Net.Mentor.  However, this particular Mashable article on trust and social media really caught my attention.  It is fascinating from a psychology perspective as well as from so many other angles relating to presentation skills, response times in the social media arena, trust and brand, etc, etc.  In particular, the Domino’s Pizza believability graph – although whether the graph can be believed is questionable in itself – and the relationship between body language, content and belief in the message.

Having just completed handout notes regarding feedback for a communication workshop I’m running next week, it is good to know that my recommendation of responding quickly to feedback, even if it’s just to say ‘thanks’ in the first instance, appears to be supported by a top psychologist.

  • Share/Bookmark

Does my head or my heart rule my feelings over Toyota?

Wednesday, February 10th, 2010

In 1989 Toyota ran an advert with the headline “Why We’ll Never Make the Perfect Car”.  It was an ad accepting the fact that perfection can never truly be achieved, only strived for – and led me to an exchange of views with the then boss of Toyota (GB) that turned out to be a career changing one (for me at least!).

Sadly, Toyota’s brave statement is all too real as its goal of near perfection fades a little further into the distance with more than 8 million of its vehicles being recalled and questions being asked by world leaders of our supposedly super-ethical governments.

Trust me, this is not “I told you so” time!  With experience in crisis management, my head says I should feel angry that road users have been put at risk by another corporate giant trying to cover up its mistakes.  My heart is in an entirely different place.  As a former member of the Toyota (GB) PR team I can only marvel at the way Scott Brownlee and his colleagues have taken on an extraordinary task as they struggle to keep up with the deluge of information and meet the requests that face them in the battle to provide accurate information to the UK’s media.

The issue has allowed the world’s media to hunt down another global corporate giant – strangely the one which has recently become the world’s leading automotive producer with accelerated (sorry) growth at a time when the world’s economy is going to hell in a handcart (or GM vehicle); turning its insatiable search for “public interest” and the next moral panic into a feeding frenzy of high-handed hysteria.  Oh, and now the bandwagon (manufactured in America) is well and truly rolling, with news that apparently Corollas veer to the left.  I’ve been there and worn that t-shirt too in the late ’90s  -  BBC Watchdog’s Ford Sierra steering problem garbage anyone?

So is my sympathy out of misplaced loyalty, a subconscious twitch from my PR ’spin’ muscle, or something more tangible?  From experience, the public and media fantasy completely overwhelms reality and irreparable short, and possibly medium, term damage is being inflicted on Toyota’s reputation.  Sure, they have had quality issues – when you are mass producing that number of vehicles for owners who want to continually pay less and get more for the price, what do you expect?  But they admitted they had quality issues, in their starkly contrite way, nearly two years ago.  Whatever they say or do now, they can’t win.

But let’s just look at the numbers for a moment.  More than 8 million Toyotas are being recalled.  8 MILLION.  The number of worldwide reported serious incidents relating to the alleged problems will be a fraction of one percent of that figure.  Yet Toyota are recalling 8 million vehicles , with all the related costs, because of a problem that may never affect many of those cars.

As Head of Public Relations at RAC Motoring Services I was frequently under pressure to reveal the ‘most reliable/unreliable vehicle’ data.  It just doesn’t work like that!   Reliability, like car technology and the automotive industy in general, is a complex issue.  A point eloquently made by Heather Yaxley, another Toyota PR alumni, in explaining the frustrations facing the current Toyota  PRs. I can also report first-hand that, as pointed out by fellow RAC communicator Edmund King – now President of the AA – there are millions of vehicles recalled every year and many millions more that are subject to component replacement during routine servicing to rectify minor faults identified by manufacturers.  Very few motorists,  and only the better informed journalists, are even aware this happens.  It’s certainly no big deal, even if it’s a big cost for the carmaker.

In reality, regardless of how much testing is done in the lab or in quality control, some faults will only appear once a vehicle is on the road.  The good news is that almost all of these faults are picked up early – often by RAC, AA and other roadside technicians -  and manufacturers take action quickly.

In this case, Toyota have unquestionably been too slow off the mark to deal with an issue that has now incubated into a crisis.  They’re certainly not alone – look at Cadburys in 2006 with a Salmonella scare that took too long to report.   But again, look at the Toyota timeline.

While they have clearly been aware of the issues for some time, an 8 million product recall is not something that any right-minded organisation will undertake without irrefuteable evidence.  Add to that the heirarchical, procedure-driven,  and generally inflexible culture of Japanese corporations (something I’ve witnessed first-hand).  Combine it with hyper-litigious American culture fuelled by insurance urban myths, and you have a crisis waiting to happen and a virtually impossible mission for the communicatiors.  But once the tipping point of evidence plus pressure was reached, Toyota initiated a global recall and repair programme in a matter of DAYS.

But most important of all, with 3,500 road deaths and 65,000 injuries  daily on the world’s roads, it’s time to stop worrying about possibly faulty accelerators, questionably dodgy car mats and mildly inconsistent brakes.  The biggest technical threat to all of us, and the real reason people should be forced to stop driving cars whoever makes them, is the nut behind the wheel.

  • Share/Bookmark

Baby Peter – public interest or moral panic?

Friday, August 14th, 2009

The social work view of the latest media frenzy around Baby Peter once again raises the spectre of the media’s motivation for using the defence of  ‘public interest’.  The release of the names of those convicted of the murder of this child was driven primarily by a range of media claiming that publication was in the public interest.

Predominently the ‘interested’ are:

  1. those whose primary job it is to line the pockets of their billionaire proprietors or cling on to their audience ratings
  2. the ignorant minority who has nothing better to do than reportedly demonstrate their ‘interest’ on Facebook  with calls to persecute, torture and kill those who are no longer afforded legal annonymity following pressure from… see 1. above.

Let me state, very clearly, that I carry no torch for child abusers or abusers of any kind.  Net.Mentor is involved in the training of foster carers and other adults who devote themselves on a daily basis to working with vulnerable children who have suffered abuse in their formative  years; abuse which – even if non-physical – can lead to physical changes in the brain.  Recognising and understanding the issues surrounding these children, and the people that have abused them, will positively transform the lives of both the children and their carers and properly protect others that may be at risk.  Firebombing people’s houses will not.

I have also worked as a journalist and in media relations long enough to understand what makes a ‘good’ story.   However,  I have witnessed first hand the devastation caused to individuals and their families ‘identified’ by the media and/or  ‘interested’  neighbours as being connected with child abuse.  The News of the World naming and shaming campaign in 2001, which used indistinct (and often out of date) images,  led to many completely innocent victims of lynchmob hysteria.

I spent three depressing days working with a crisis management team to help one of those victims as they were hounded by both media and neighbours bent on misguided ‘revenge’, based on wrongful identification from an image that bore no possible resemblence to the individual concerned.  All, of course, in the name of ‘public interest’.

Those involved in the tragic Baby Peter case have been found guilty of their crimes – fact!  They face long prison sentences – almost certainly in isolation – I hope they are never allowed out.  But what benefit, or interest, is there in publishing their details?

Moral panics are nothing new – Stan Cohen first coined the term in 1972, refering to the Mods and Rockers battles in the 1960s when reaction by Brighton’s chattering classes developed into government debates and mass, UK-wide hysteria.  Asking the media to act responsibly to prevent fuelling, or even starting, the fires of moral panic is like asking them to stop breathing.  Witness the recent coverage of the credit crunch and swine flu.

So what hope?  It can only be the small voice of informed reason continuing to shout as loudly as possible in the vain hope that mawkish, voyeuristic  ‘public interest’ might turn into better informed audiences demanding better reporting standards from its media and better trained professionals to prevent cases like Baby Peter being allowed to happen in the first place.

Peter Brill

  • Share/Bookmark

Push on!

Friday, May 29th, 2009

Push/pull communication is a subject of regular debate amongst my CIPR students, but a blog post by Jeremy Porter in Journalistic about this subject and ‘interruption marketing’ set me thinking about a current strategy I’m using with a client which combines both push and pull.

Porter’s premise is that push and pull, when used strategically, can both work, although pull is preferable.  But, most of all, that content is king – a point I made in a recent post and have been banging on about in our business for some time.

But Porter also raises the issue of interruptions and how this form of push can be offputting unless used strategically.  My recent experience would also suggest that a combination of the two can work powerfully.

Experts in their field of online learning, Akamas have recently started to address social media and web 2.0 for their own marketing communication.  Helped by the fact that they have in-house, recognised experts who are also excellent writers, blogging is likely to become a positive aspect of their communication.

However, as we all know, there are millions of individuals and organisations already out there and cutting through the noise to get noticed can’t just rely on Pull.  A strategy of writing for their own blog or business articles, but then notifying key online media editors seems to be paying off.   The push approach is interruptive, but only as far as saying – “we’ve written something that’s interesting and relevant to you, it’s posted on our blog or an in-house article, but please feel free to use it as an article or blog post yourself.”

The response, on the whole, has been very positive so far.  Let’s face it, an editor isn’t going to turn away relevant, well written content that may in itself create more traffic for a site that already has pulling power.

Eventually, any well written, relevant and engaging blogs should have enough of their own pull to make it onto the RSS readers or blogrolls of their key target audiences.  But in the meantime, the power of push and pull in two-way communication clearly has its benefits.

  • Share/Bookmark

PR in a recession podcast

Tuesday, April 21st, 2009

The Net.Mentor Podcast

Simply click the play button to hear the podcast  

The Net.Mentor Podcast

Simply click the play button to hear the podcast  

Today was spent training a group of PR professionals on behalf of Talking Heads in the South West.

The theme is “PR in a Recession” and as the delegates learnt the art of podcasting, we also gained some insight on how the consultancy, commercial and public sectors are viewing public relations in times of credit crunch.    The delegates also created blogs to match!

  • Share/Bookmark

“Sorry” still seems to be the hardest word

Friday, April 17th, 2009

Interesting article in Advertising Age by Abbey Klaassen about weathering a Twitterstorm.  She uses the recent Amazon cataloging crisis as yet another example of poor response to a crisis.   Much closer to home, Gordon Brown has finally decided to use the “S” word to make amends for yet another internal e-mail debacle.  Despite the fact he’s said “sorry” (he may even have meant it), it all seems to little too late and he’s now accused of spin.

Whenever we undertake crisis management training, there are two messages we try to get across to people at the very start.

1.  There is nothing wrong and everything right with saying “sorry”.  It doesn’t mean you’re liable, it doesn’t even mean you did it, it just means that you are capable of showing some humanity about a bad situation.

2.  Perception is reality.  It doesn’t matter that right is on your side (or not), what matters is what your publics believe is right and how you address their perceptions. But as Klaassen points out, you need to be sure that the crisis commentary is coming from your publics and not a group of people who have little or no impact upon your business, its status and reputation.

In a crisis,  kneejerk strategic reactions are the worst possible course of action.  However, making a statement quickly is a positive first step.  You don’t actually have to say anything other than “we are very concerned about the situation and are taking action to investigate it”.  Coming over all ‘corporate’, self-righteous and defensive is not the language to use unless it’s in line with every other piece of your external communication (in which case maybe we can give you some advice about your general communication)!

Early communication makes you visible, gives you some breathing space and offers you a chance to direct people to more factual information as soon as you are able to release it.  Hiding isn’t a solution – if you don’t talk, other people will do the talking for you.

One other piece of advice that is emerging from the development of social media and ‘groundswell’,  is to listen carefully to the ‘buzz’ and see just how balanced it is.  As Klaassen points out, it is important to know who is actually doing the talking and just how influencial they actually are as core customers/clients/audience base or brand champions.   It’s human nature to immediately focus on the the negative comments, but if you take a step back you might find that the feedback is self-balancing and that you have allies prepared to jump to your defence without you having to prompt them.

But most of all,  in a true crisis be yourself and be sincere – if you get it wrong,  saying “sorry” might be the hardest word but it’s a good one to start with.

  • Share/Bookmark

Meerkat magic

Tuesday, March 24th, 2009

I hate spam, and I’m getting increasingly wary of badly written newsletters and e-marketing.  So, my finger was hovering over the delete button when comparethemarket.com sent me an unsolicited e-mail (although I had used the service recently).  But just before hitting the big button, I noticed the e-mail was actually from comparethemeerkat.com and is a brilliant example of viral marketing at its very best.

I’m generally very cynical about advertising (no really), but this one definitely works.  I was up for renewing my car insurance a couple of weeks ago.  I’ve found comparison sites a complete waste of time, but the meerkat thing just nagged away in the back of my mind.  I couldn’t resist.  In fact, I did save money, but more importantly chose that site over the various others simply because of the advert that makes all of our family laugh.

As the meerkat says…”simples”

  • Share/Bookmark

Strangely compelling transition

Thursday, January 15th, 2009

There’s something strangely compelling about Barack Obama’s Change.Gov website which includes video updates of his meetings with various key target audience groups and some fairly democratic posts at the bottom of the page.  We’ve all known for a while that the President elect ‘gets’ new media and web 2.0 – or at least his advisors do – but with just 6 days to go before he gets his feet on the rug in the Oval Office, the administration to be continues to project the image of momentum, dialogue and desire for change, as well as a bit of excited new puppy.

I can’t help but compare this with our own government’s You.Tube site  where the use of technology allows a question from a member of the public followed by an video answer alongside by the PM.  It’s clever, it’s certainly democratic, but sadly I find the compulsion to view less about the PM’s clearly rehearsed and political answers, than waiting to see what’s going to be in the background of the next questioner’s living room.

Yes, No10.gov  does all the right things, it’s easy to navigate and there’s all the right social media bells and whistles…but,  and maybe it’s just my West Wing brainwashing and my rose tinted spectacles getting misted up again, I look at the dynamic energy of the Obama administration’s communication and wish for something a bit more dynamic in my own back yard.  I’m not naive enough to believe the PR or expect any massive, world-shaking changes to occur in 6 days, or even 6 weeks, but looking at Change.Gov, you do get a feeling that there is something that might induce a slight tremor in a few months.

Sad to say, maybe we can still learn something from those damn Yankees!

  • Share/Bookmark