Capstrat.com | Insight Articles

Brand engagement

Capstrat — Mon, 26 Jul 2010 17:09:31 -0400

Organizations spend considerable amounts of money, time and energy to promote and protect the value of their brand, and rightly so. A company’s brand carries a big load. It’s not only an indicator of the origin or quality of an offering; it’s personally meaningful, providing emotional and social value for customers. To get full value from your brand, keep in mind that a big part of it walks out the door every evening and returns the next morning. Employees bear the torch for your brand. It’s up to you whether they carry it proudly, or drag it behind them on the ground. Follow these guidelines to keep employees holding the torch high.

Brand engagement is a marathon. Too many organizations launch a short-term promotional campaign to excite and energize employees around brand and think the results will be long-lasting. One and done is not enough. True brand engagement requires organizational change, where the brand culture is ingrained in the organization’s systems, behaviors and symbols. Consider how you can infuse your brand into daily organizational life – meeting agendas, PowerPoint decks, performance management, rewards and recognition – anything that touches your employees.

Brand engagement must be internalized. Posters, videos and other communication channels help convey the brand and culture, but they’re not enough. Real brand engagement comes from within an employee. If your employees don’t identify with the brand and feel like they’re a part of it, how can they convince customers to believe your brand has value? Ongoing engagement data through vehicles such as employee engagement surveys, culture audits and employee input sessions signal where your brand is resonating with employees and where it’s falling short.

Brand engagement starts at the top. Employees closely watch – and mimic – their leaders. And they sense hollow talk pretty quickly, so executives from the CEO on down need to be walking examples of what your brand means. It’s great when leaders naturally adopt their role as brand poster child, but even top leaders can benefit from coaching. Invest in regular executive and manager training to keep brand behavior and culture top of mind.

Sounds easy, right? Of course not. Brand engagement takes time, energy and commitment. But your efforts will pay off in spades in terms of employee productivity and retention, satisfied, loyal customers and a healthy bottom line.

Media relations

Capstrat — Mon, 26 Jul 2010 17:08:38 -0400

Challenge

Workplace Options, a global provider of work-life benefits and employee support services, helps companies increase employee productivity, reduce absenteeism and retain top talent by helping implement work-life programs. Their challenge? In a tough economy, companies are looking to reduce rather than add employee benefits. Workplace Options needed to remind employers of the often overlooked business benefits associated with offering employees work-life and other wellbeing services. To increase awareness within the C-suite and drive sales, Workplace Options sought media coverage beyond the usual trade journals reaching human resource managers.

Our Thinking

To earn the attention of mainstream news media, Capstrat recommended a series of branded Workplace Options polls on work-life service topics such as child care, wellness initiatives and employer-sponsored training to gain insights into employee sentiments. Using statistics from the monthly polls, Capstrat turned data into coverage with targeted pitching to mainstream media.

As economic woes reverberated on Wall Street, Capstrat further leveraged Workplace Options’ polls by publicizing the personal and professional tolls of the economic crisis. Workplace Options produced several polls focused on economic concern, its effects in the workplace and on employees’ sense of job security. Capstrat researched national media coverage trends on the economic crisis and determined which reporters were covering the issue and also potential gaps in coverage. Our analysis informed Workplace Options’ poll topics.

Results

Workplace Options’ polling series gained coverage in top-tier news outlets including The New York Times, The Los Angeles Times, Inc.com, MSNBC, CNBC, Information Week and Crain’s Business. In total, WPO earned nearly 70 media placements in one year. In addition to detailing the challenges employees across the nation were facing in the workplace, the polls helped build the case for how work-life benefits, such as Workplace Options’ programs and services, could help increase employee job satisfaction.

Several top-tier clients and potential clients referenced the positive coverage in discussions with Workplace Options. The company anecdotally cites the coverage as a part of the increase in business. Based on the success of this program, Workplace Options has now expanded the Capstrat’s media outreach scope to the United Kingdom and Canada.

Evoking “sense of place” in web designs

vingram@capstrat.com (Virginia Ingram) — Mon, 12 Jul 2010 17:33:13 -0400

I started with three schools: UNC Asheville (UNCA), Appalachian State and UNC Greensboro (UNCG). I went on a road trip with my parents to visit UNCA and Appalachian. I took a formal tour of both schools, met with students informally and discussed my options with my high school counselor. I liked both universities a lot, but in the end I chose UNCG even though I never took a formal tour of the school. UNCG was an easy choice for me. My sister went there and I was pretty sure I knew what I was going to get in. How could UNCA or Appalachian ever compete with that?

It was 1994; I did not have the luxury of using the web. Now schools can create a site that evokes a sense of place. Most people are initially adverse to change and want to know what is going to happen next. Creating a website that accurately shows the environment and the experience can help students prepare for a new experience.

Prospective audiences don’t like seeing images that look like they were purchased through an image stock house. Almost any college can have a picture of a group of students walking through campus in the fall. An image like this does not say anything special about your campus. If you decide to use a fall image, it better currently be fall. And you must be able to see something uniquely distinctive about your campus or have a unique perspective to the photography.

I tested this out and did a Google image search of “Fall” + “Walking through campus.” On the first page I got four images. Interestingly enough, the only shot that had a distinguishing landmark in the image was taken for a news article about a school. The three schools that were using fall images on their sites were missing the mark. They did not identify the names of any of the students and there were no distinguishing characteristics present in the photos. It was also summertime in all of the locations when I did the search.
How do you avoid the generic look?

You’ve got thousands of subjects you can use for your site. They usually want to affiliate. Current students, faculty, staff and alumni are all potential subjects. Use social networking sites to collect stories and images. Make it a requirement that individuals tell you the story behind the image.
Give individuals a discount to the school store if they submit an image with someone wearing a school sweatshirt.
Expand upon stories in your printed publications. Show additional images and expand the story. This will give your publications a cohesive story.
Once you have an image of someone specific, tell the audience about that person. Your users will connect if they know a little bit about those individuals. Where are they from? What subjects are they affiliated with? I want to determine how I can relate.
Rent out digital cameras with video and let students record their daily lives.
Show what life on and off campus is like. Are students able to walk to a grocery store? What are the restaurants on campus? Are there restaurants within walking distance? What makes this experience unique to your university? Do you have any traditions with spots near campus? Do the students?
What is your campus personality? Does your student population like to ride bikes? Cheer for the basketball team? Is your campus greener than others? Does your student population like to travel on weekends? How can this be visually represented on the site? How can your culture influence the navigation?
Make your navigation clear. If you vary from standard navigation, it needs to be very clear and have a good reason for doing so.
Make your photography unique. Bridgewater does a great job of taking photos from
interesting angles. Cornell makes the photo live beyond the frame — a breakdancer’s foot will extend beyond the frame of the featured image on the homepage.

You get the idea. Embrace your culture online. Make it shine through to prospective students. They want to know what their experience will be like and you have a lot of competition. You can’t afford to look like everyone else.

Branding universities

tcoats@capstrat.com (Todd Coats) — Mon, 12 Jul 2010 17:32:52 -0400

This tournament for talent has rekindled interest in marketing strategy and branding. It has also relit conflicts that higher education institutions have with telling their story.

Why the interest now? I recently read a study from 2004 that suggested universities’ reluctance to mainstream branding was the mainstream media itself. It was intrusive, expensive and sales-y. But today, with more media choices than ever, universities are well positioned to tell their stories through diverse, user-generated and targeted ways. Improving a school’s image without appearing to squander patron dollars should make the chancellor’s job easier. Being the sum of ideas, emotions and associations for the university, branding is a logical starting point to improve competitiveness for the future.

Competition has also dictated a smarter approach to the whole recruitment experience. Granted, factors like location, type of institution, ranking and credentials are major influencers. But the clincher is emotional. Prospects want to know how they’ll feel about being associated with an institution for the rest of their lives. This is where brand scores big with two major points. 1. People make buying decisions based on emotion, then rationalize them based on logic. 2. To differentiate through branding, the entire organization must work to make the branding a promise they can keep. It’s about having an emotional connection and ensuring it stays consistent. Recent studies say that consistency is the real struggle. More on that in a minute.

People need trust to believe in a higher purpose and to belong. You’d think the hallowed halls of intellectualism would welcome this idea for promoting their mission. Not really. The idea of branding higher education institutions has met huge resistance and has been vigorously questioned by well-meaning academicians. Here are the few points I’ve seen most often.

Branding is either superficial spin or hollow deception.
Not so. Brand-building exercises are a way for universities to examine who they are and what they stand for. In the age of complex stakeholder matrixes, new demands are being put on universities. Branding is a way of prioritizing objectives to help institutions remember their mission.
Branding is alien to the culture of higher education.
Maybe promotion is foreign to universities but as long as there’s choice, there will be brands. The unified university message may overshadow the individualism that institutions work so hard to promote. In doing so it dictates how this entity acts and interacts. But what is brand if not simply a sense of place? Isn’t that what all of us want? Twenty-five years after leaving college, I still get all tinglely on crisp September mornings. Tell me that’s not an indelible brand.
Branding is indulgence that squanders resources better invested in learning and research.
While “brand” is a dirty word in some institutions, “reputation” is more accurate and authentic, reflecting the well-earned merits of an institution. If branding is understood to mean merely a cosmetic change, without reference to a deeper meaning, it’s no wonder the academic community is against this concept. Clearly a better understanding is needed. It takes a great partner to navigate the process with clarity and precision.

Coherence is perhaps the most useful contribution branding can make to higher education by promoting focus and efficient resource management in an ever-demanding world. The more focused the proposition, the more control an institution has over its image, the more its expenditure on marketing becomes an investment rather than a drain.

Universities didn’t start as businesses but often have to act like them. They can believe this is empty hucksterism, or they can build on opportunities of branding in their unique sector. Trust me, their audience will help them decide what’s most unique for them. After all, branding isn’t simply about being competitive, it’s about being distinctive. There’s a difference.

Using crowdsourcing to get the right answer (not the most watered-down)

Capstrat — Mon, 12 Jul 2010 17:30:21 -0400

I am not going to debate this isn’t true. One of the greatest strengths of a university is that its path isn’t dictated by one individual, but governed by many. However, when creating strategy and thinking creatively, how do you get from step 1 to step 2, and eventually a finished product, with a variety of input?

For the answer, you look for the tools a research student would use. By combining polls and surveys with Internet users you get a fast, cheap and effective way to gain mass response. And at a university you will get plenty of feedback, some good and some bad. But more times than not, it isn’t clear which to tune out and which to apply to your strategy.

Sometimes you realize it’s important to look at more than just numbers and to get creative with your research. Using other tools like brainstorms and blogs can help gather unfiltered comments. Combining the two gives both quantitative and qualitative insight. Now you are faced with spreadsheets and charts — but can you really calculate creativity? And if you did, would your university audience be pleased with the results or find a watered-down Frankensteined version of what you started with?

Solutions can come in the form of finding common voices and focusing your feedback. Each research tool has a common ability to present trends. Taking those trends and turning them into themes will shape your strategy.

However, one solution often creates another problem. Some outliers’ feedback hasn’t been taken into consideration, but you haven’t lost them yet. Layering your feedback and outreach to the audience helps reach them at varying points in your process. Using a blog can allow a university audience to do what they do best: discuss. Giving everyone full access to your strategy, creative assets and next steps will permit everyone to get thoughts “off their chest.” And, more importantly, to participate in the future of what they care about the most — their university.

University crowdsourcing doesn’t present cut-and-dry answers and to assume that it would will lead you down a long road. A road that sometimes can result in rework — opinions will always surface. Let the crowd give its opinion, but don’t let it dictate the direction.

Crowdsourcing has been receiving positive and negative press since Wired first introduced the term in 2006. Some designers say it’s the end of the creative process and others see it as an economic saving grace. But more and more universities are using services that specialize in crowdsourcing. Wisdom of the masses can be overwhelming, but accept it and give your academic audience every opportunity to give you their thoughts. With balance can come one conclusion, strategy and a strong solution. A solution that has the spirit of the university present throughout it.

You made the first cut. Now what?

aadlard@capstrat.com (Anna Adlard) — Mon, 12 Jul 2010 17:29:51 -0400

In many ways, the hardest part of branding starts when your college has gained entry to the considered set. You made it into a prospect’s “top five” and now she has to make the hard call: Which one do I choose? At this point, the conversation has to move beyond the nuts-and-bolts criteria like curriculum, cost and size. Because, on paper, you look a lot like the competitors on her short list.

At this stage in her decision process, research and experience tells us that the clincher is culture, experience and fit. You’ve already checked out on the basic criteria. Now the decision becomes emotional, and a prospect is wondering: Can I see myself here? What’s the campus really like? Will I like the people?

That means your marketing and advertising have to convey much more than a message point about rankings or academics. At this stage in the game, you have to give prospects an inside look at your campus experience. And most importantly, your communications must impart a sense of your campus’ distinctive culture.

So, how do you go about it? Here are a few thoughts:

Do it differently. Take a look at your peers’ branding, and you’ll see a lot of the same. Requisite classroom photos. Glowing student quotes. Pretty campus shots. Canned faculty profiles. All wrapped up in a conventional design package. When you look the same on paper, your levels of distinction hinge on personality, culture and creative format. So, get creative. For example, offer up student profiles that go beyond stats to include what’s playing on their iPods and their favorite place in town for late-night food.

Amp up the personality. Think about how you can impart your brand personality across communications and mimic an in-person experience of your campus. For example, if your brand personality is all about being approachable and down-to-earth, make sure your copy is conversational, your images are friendly and your designs are casual.

Tell real stories. Bottom line — your brand personality really comes down to people. The students who put their own mark on your campus culture. The professors who craft the academic experience. The alumni whose post-grad ventures speak volumes about where a student can take their education. So, tell real stories — or better yet, let your students, faculty and alums speak for you.

Get prospects connected. Social media presents a completely new platform for giving recruits an inside look at the campus experience. Take advantage of social networks to connect prospective students with current students, faculty and alumni. Get them engaged in conversation that sheds an authentic light on the campus experience. Or use the web to mimic the campus experience by letting recruits attend a webcast of an interesting course or lecture for a true inside look.

Higher experience

ecarroll@capstrat.com (Evan Carroll) — Mon, 12 Jul 2010 17:24:03 -0400

No other institution provides that same experience — the one that is created when you blend academic pursuits with a culture of openness and collaboration. It’s an open marketplace of ideas where anyone is allowed to peddle their thoughts. I think this experience is what invigorates people with a deep passion for their college of choice.

When designing for colleges and universities, it’s that same passion that we seek to evoke. Every communication from brochures to websites should echo that experience.

So, how is it done?

First you have to gain an understanding of that experience. Immerse yourself in it. Talk to students and faculty. Tour the campus. Drop in on lectures. Ask questions.

Now you need to take that experience and boil it down into one compelling statement that captures the essence of the school. This isn’t easy, but you must get beyond the obvious. Saying that you’re the best at something or the first at something isn’t enough. It won’t be about the beautiful campus or the academic rigor.

You’ll find it in the emotions that people share about the school. Figure out why people feel that way and you’ll be on to something.

Then with every tactic you recommend, think about that essence and make sure it’s evident. If it isn’t there, go back to the drawing board.

For a recent project, we boiled this experience down to one statement:

Preeminence minus the pretension

The students, faculty and alumni shared a sense of pride about their university, yet a spirit of openness permeated the campus. It wasn’t about being great; it was about letting everyone have a chance to be great.

We translated this to the web using an optimal mix of functionality and narrative. Often universities make the mistake of creating a website that is too functional. The site provides good information, but there’s no substance or heart. We strive to create an experience where users can find the information they need but also hear the story of the university. It isn’t as simple as saying things like, “We have a vibrant arts community.” We needed to show that through examples and personal stories, and we needed to provide timely, relevant content simultaneously. We created pages at the top level of the site dedicated to each of the university’s focus areas — arts, public service and research that provided just that mix.

Is it as simple as providing the right balance of content? Certainly not. While content is important, our visual design has to strike the right balance as well.

We eliminated designs that were too plain and functional because they didn’t tell a story. We rejected those that were too modern because they lacked personality. And we trashed those that were too traditional because they were pretentious.

This approach shows preeminence by highlighting the vast and superior work that the university is doing. It lacks pretension because it shows a human side and allows prospective students and faculty to envision themselves a part of it. It succeeds because the visual style is perfectly in sync with its content.

It boils down to that one single statement, the one that captures the essence of the university. It’s why remembering the collegiate experience evokes passion for a lifetime.

Hey world, take your medicine

tcoats@capstrat.com (Todd Coats) — Wed, 16 Jun 2010 09:49:56 -0400

You didn’t hear about it, but up until about two months ago U.S. bioscience innovation was looking at a near death sentence.

When a company creates a new bio product, it holds exclusive rights to that creation – a patent – for a defined number of years, As part of the wrangling that led to the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, Congress considered drastically shortening that window, or even eliminating it. If that had happened, countries like China and India – already successfully wooing U.S. biotech investments – would have found their jobs a lot easier.

The stakes are high. Last year, America’s bio and pharma companies led the world in investing a record $65.2 billion in R&D. Fortunately, Congress settled on 12 years of patent protection before makers of “follow-ons” or “biosimilars” can legally borrow intellectual property from the companies who pioneer new treatments. Know how drastically this would have changed our world? Imagine this…

First off, research-intensive bioscience companies would have severely cut research investment if they’d known the results would have gone straight into the public domain. Potential cures for Alzheimer’s, AIDS and cancer? Kiss them goodbye.

That’s because discovering new, marketable science is highly inefficient. Only one in 10,000 new compounds ever gets FDA approval. By the time that happens, its creator has spent around $1.2 billion without making a cent. The makers of biosimilars don’t face that R&D cost, so their products come to market more quickly and are cheaper when they get there. There is definitely a place for that savings in curbing health care costs, but if it were to kick in on Day One, dollars for research would dry up fast.

Secondly, investment follows more favorable regulatory environments. In Europe in the late 1980s, strict government pricing collided with a difficult regulatory system. That chilled innovation across the continent, raised doubts among private investors and allowed U.S. innovation to flourish. The same can happen here. In 2009 alone, capital investment in the sector declined by 75 percent.

Third: You guessed it. Jobs. We have already seen cost-cutting measures send U.S. pharma jobs to China and India. Paying that cost to stay competitive on a global stage is one thing, but shooting ourselves in the other foot by gutting patent protection would make no sense.

Lastly, people would die earlier. Since 1960, innovative treatments have increased global lifespan by nearly 20 years. Those improvements have been sharpest in the poorest countries, where people benefit from you and me paying full price for medicines in the U.S. If we were to abandon our innovation agenda, those poor countries would have no hope. And given our lifestyle choices, it wouldn’t take long for the effects to hit Americans too.

Bio products are expensive here because they can be. It may not be fair for a few countries to fund the burden for the rest of the world – but neither is dying from a simple, preventable disease. We need patent protection for all intellectual property. But other countries need to do more, too.

Former FDA Commissioner Mark B McClellan put it this way. “If we do not find better ways to share the burden of developing new drugs and biologics, all of us will suffer. The benefits of these treatments are global, and so if we think only of the short-term interest of our own country, we all lose the opportunity for a healthier world. The heart of this problem is that we are not all paying our fair share of the costs of bringing new treatments to the world. And this problem is getting worse.”

The clock starts winding down on a patent early in the process, as soon as a new compound shows promise – not when the medicine is ready to be marketed. By the time a bio product is ready to begin earning back the millions a company spent to create it, much of its patent protection may already be used up.

So think twice before you chalk up patent protection to corporate greed. We’ve come to expect miracles from our bioscience industry. Expecting them for free, which is what a weaker patent system would amount to, is hardly realistic.

Preparing for Twitter’s new advertising model

aconnor@capstrat.com (Angela Connor) — Mon, 24 May 2010 17:34:34 -0400

In a new report, “Twitter Usage in America: 2010,” Edison Research provides new data on awareness and usage of Twitter, along with user demographics, and information on status updating behaviors and brand following practices of 1,753 Americans. The study found that awareness has grown from 5 percent of Americans in 2008 to 87 percent in 2010, and 51 percent of active Twitter users follow companies, brands or products on social networks.

After years of speculation on how Twitter would monetize its wildly popular, increasingly mainstream micro‐blogging social network, the company has finally unveiled an advertising model.

Promoted Tweets is a combination of paid and organic media that will allow brands to advertise on search pages. The initial rollout will be made available to a select group of businesses equal to roughly 2 percent to 10 percent of Twitter users, according to The Wall Street Journal. Considerable expansion of these offerings is expected at a later date.

Twitter co‐founder Biz Stone wrote on a company blog that their new "Promoted Tweets" program will enable marketers to “prominently insert their own messages in the back‐and‐forth between users.”
Initial advertisers in the program include Starbucks, Best Buy, Bravo, Red Bull, Sony Pictures and Virgin America.

What to expect: There is a great deal of speculation on how this new model will be received by Twitter users. Capstrat expects challenges that may arise with the introduction of “sponsored messages” into the Twitter ecosystem. We’re betting that the broad familiarity we all have with sponsored search results on Google will mean that this approach won’t be too jarring to the Twitter experience, a huge plus for Stone and company.

What makes this organic? With Promoted Tweets, resonance is key. It is by this new metric that Twitter will factor in numerous user behaviors. If you are at all familiar with Twitter, you know that recommendations and endorsements are known as “retweets.” When content is “retweeted” or shared by other users, the effects can be extremely beneficial and quite dramatic. Twitter is tapping into that dynamic by allowing only tweets with high user resonance to be available to advertisers as promoted Tweets.

How we think promoted Tweets will work. Here is a sample of how a promoted Tweet would appear in search results as envisioned by Web strategist Jeremiah Owyang:

Twitter users will continue to interact with each other, and popular tweets will receive a high ‘resonance’ score from Twitter. Some of these Tweets will be created by brands, and some by the users themselves.
Tweets with heavy resonance will be sold to advertisers on a CPM basis as ‘sponsored’ Tweets
on search term results. They will be clearly labeled and have a highlighted background color.
These promoted tweets will only stay at the top if users continue to resonate with them. Nonresonating Tweets will disappear and be replaced by ones that do resonate. Capstrat believes that this crucial resonance metric is only loosely defined at this point, so we can only speculate that scenarios like that outlined by Owyang are likely. Some members of the Twitterverse suggest that brands will only be able to select from their own, existing Tweets as opposed to those of other users, which is the case in the above scenario. We have also heard speculation that promoted Tweets will appear in other locations beyond search; there has been no confirmation of this by Twitter. We will continue to follow the evolution of Twitter’s monetization strategies and provide updates and more directed guidance when Twitter has more precisely defined how resonance will work.

Challenges: This new advertising model does not come without challenges. Our biggest concern is that searches represent only a small portion of Twitter activity. Of the 80 million users visiting Twitter in a month, fewer than 3 million use search, compared with Google’s 300 million. Another challenge is the evasive “resonance score,” which will prioritize the position of promoted tweets in search results. And of course there is a long history of backlash to the first appearance of advertising in a new medium.

What this could mean for you: People use Twitter search to discover real‐time updates they can't get anywhere else. When someone searches for a brand, specific hashtag or keywords that you have purchased on twitter.com, they will see your Promoted Tweet ahead of anything else, including the conversational Tweets that meet the search criteria.

This could be a real game‐changer for product launches, customer relationship services, event marketing, local elections, crisis management advocacy and much more.

Next steps: Work with Capstrat to create a Twitter presence, or develop a Twitter strategy and timely campaigns of Promoted Tweets. If advertisers can initially promote only their own Tweets or those from related accounts (which we believe will be the case), companies with an established Twitter presence will be positioned for success. If you have no presence on Twitter, promoted Tweets simply may not be an option for you. If you have been unsure about the benefits and potential of Twitter, now is the time to reassess your position.

Twitter acknowledges that the company will learn a lot as the program grows and that changes to their processes are likely. Our guidance will surely change as the program matures. It is likely that Twitter will roll out additional features based on feedback from users, and you can count on Capstrat to monitor the latest developments and help you craft strategies accordingly.

Google second only to doctors as source of health information

Capstrat — Mon, 24 May 2010 17:34:25 -0400

A national survey finds Americans rely highly on Google searches as a source of health care information. The survey, conducted in April 2010 by Capstrat and Public Policy Polling, finds 22 percent of respondents consider Google searches “influential” in seeking health information. The search engine ranked second only to doctors (44 percent) in reported influence and was named more than twice as often as nurses, pharmacists, advocacy groups and friends or family members.

After asking where people turn to for health information, the poll asked which sources they trust. Health advocacy groups emerged as a particularly trusted source of online health information: 71 percent judged Web content of such groups “somewhat reliable” or “extremely reliable,”considerably higher than the 59 percent who felt that way about organic Google searches.

Online communities aren’t yet a major influencer in health care. Only 12 percent of respondents used online forums in their last search for health information, and only 37 percent considered forums “somewhat reliable” or “extremely reliable.” Of those who did look to online communities, the number one reason was their around-the-clock availability.

The survey revealed significant differences in the way various segments of society use online communities. African Americans and Gen-Xers are significantly more likely to consider them reliable sources of information. Younger respondents were also much less likely to see pharmacists as reliable sources of information, perhaps reflecting the more impersonal relationship they have with chain pharmacists compared to their parents’ long-standing reliance on the mom-and-pop operations that used to dominate the landscape.

“We found it interesting that popularity and trust don’t always go hand-in-hand,” said Karen Albritton, Capstrat president. “People are quick to search the Web for health information, just as they use it for most other questions today. But when it comes time to make a decision, their trust resides where it always has – in people. This insight can be instructive to organizations working to combine health expertise with new strategies for communication.”

Other notable findings:

32 percent of African Americans cited Google as the most influence source for health decisions, compared to only 15 percent of Hispanics who found Google influential
63 percent of women considered Google reliable on health, compared to 53 percent of men
53 percent of respondents ages 30 to 45 found online forums to be reliable, compared to only 37 percent of respondents ages 46 to 65
65 percent found a phone conversation with a nurse to be somewhat or extremely reliable

For a white paper on these results, please visit http://o.capstr.at/t. To view complete survey results, visit http://o.capstr.at/x.

About Public Policy Polling

Public Policy Polling has conducted regional and national surveys since 1991. The firm employs Interactive Voice Response or IVR methodology. Just as polling evolved from mail-in surveys and door-to-door interviewers to live telephone interviewers, the polling industry is evolving into automated telephone surveys (IVR) and internet polling. An analysis by The Wall Street Journal of swing state polls in the 2008 presidential campaign concluded that Public Policy Polling was among the two most accurate survey firms.

About Capstrat

Capstrat is a communications agency based in Raleigh, N.C. The firm specializes in communications for complex issues that health care, technology, energy/infrastructure and financial organizations face at critical moments. Capstrat provides counsel on public relations, marketing communications, interactive communications and public affairs. Visit Capstrat at www.capstrat.com.

What’s the best way to zig while everyone else is zagging?

Capstrat — Mon, 24 May 2010 17:34:07 -0400

UNC-Chapel Hill is the nation’s first public university and a top-ranked research institution. But in the top tiers of higher education, it’s a challenge to stand out. UNC-Chapel Hill’s academic and athletic reputation gave the University a national stage to do – and say – something dramatically different. They asked Capstrat to go beyond the expected.

Capstrat developed a brand television spot that positioned the University as a problem solver of global proportions – in a tone true to the UNC-Chapel Hill brand: visionary but approachable. We set out to not just declare the values of UNC-Chapel Hill, but demonstrate them with examples of the University at work around the world.

We turned to students and professors for inspiration and created an imaginative concept to do their work justice. The result: a distinctive 30-second spot that uses stop-motion animation and handmade objects to represent real UNC-Chapel Hill projects happening in every corner of the world. The spot positions Carolina as a forward-looking and exciting place to be – a place where real problems are solved and the future is full of possibilities. The spot recently aired to hearty accolades from students and alums and received national industry recognition from the Summit Awards, winning gold and silver. Above all, it distinguishes UNC-Chapel Hill from the crowd.

View the award-winning spot.

Let’s take a moment of silence

aconnor@capstrat.com (Angela Connor) — Tue, 13 Apr 2010 09:30:03 -0400

The method by which the vast majority of Americans consumes news has undergone a dramatic shift. Once received solely by the big three: newspapers, television and radio, news consumers are no longer loyal to a specific technology as six in 10 Americans get news from a combination of both online and offline sources.

The internet has surpassed newspapers and radio in popularity as a news platform on a typical day and now ranks just behind TV, according to a recent study conducted by Pew Internet Research. With its new status as the second most accessed platform for news consumption, it is increasingly important to understand the habits of online news consumers and to develop strategies to reach them.

A key factor in reaching the online audience is social media. Seventy-five percent of online news consumers say they get news forwarded through email or posts on social networking sites and 52 percent say they share links to news with others via those means. This information should not be taken lightly.

News organizations are well aware of the impact and benefits of this new “sharing” culture and have acted accordingly. It is common to find numerous options for sharing news across a multitude of social networking sites and via e-mail embedded to news stories on national news sites, such as CNN.com, the Wall Street Journal, the New York Times, CBSNews.com and WashingtonPost.com. Local news organizations are encouraging the same level of sharing on their websites with similar tactics, including user-submitted comments. News sites that do not offer these types of functionality are quickly dismissed by readers who expect information to be portable and easily shared. For every story written in a newspaper or broadcast over the air that is subsequently placed online, its reach extends exponentially. On the contrary, content that isn’t shareable across social networks has a very limited shelf-life.

This is why having an online presence is crucial to anyone with an interest in news coverage and receiving maximum exposure to news consumers. Participation in social media creates new avenues for that exposure and can even decrease dependence on traditional news media.

Consider this: the news of the U.S. Airways plane that landed in the Hudson River was first shared by a passenger on the plane through a social networking site. The first photo was shared through the same social network by someone on the ferry while en route to rescue the passengers.

We cannot ignore the changing patterns of the news consumer. This is why a comprehensive, detailed online strategy that incorporates social media is a must. It is the only way to extend your reach in an environment that has become much more participatory. News is now omnipresent. It is a social experience and largely distributed by its consumers.

Candidate filing ends - change on the horizon

ameehan@capstrat.com (Andrew Meehan) — Wed, 10 Mar 2010 15:45:42 -0400

Candidate filing for the 2010 elections to the North Carolina General Assembly ended on February 26th. With an increased number of contested races, it’s going to be a busy election cycle. The majority party next year will control legislative redistricting, and both major political parties recognize the high stakes of this election. The Democratic and Republican party organizations are expected to commit massive resources to retaining or gaining control of the Legislature.

It’s hard to imagine Democrats improving on their already impressive 30‐20 majority in the North Carolina Senate and 68‐52 majority in the House. And if they can’t go up, there’s only one direction to go. By switching just six seats, Republicans could gain control of the Senate. The voting trends of the most heavily contested seats makes a party switch in the Senate possible. The House will likely have a narrower partisan divide but a switch in control is less likely.

Filing by the Numbers

From the top of the ticket to the bottom, the number of candidates has increased compared to two years ago. A United States Senate race at the top of the ticket will likely pit incumbent Richard Burr against whichever Democrat can survive a brutal primary. There are also 66 major party candidates for 13 U.S. House seats. These Congressional races will significantly impact turnout in many legislative races.

As the party in control of the Legislature, Democrats have benefited from a significant fundraising edge in recent elections. That fundraising will be put to the test as Republicans have recruited significant numbers of candidates, including a candidate in every state Senate district. Both parties see opportunities in the open seats. There are 19 open legislative seats (eight in the Senate, 11 in the House) with no incumbent. There are also six representatives and three senators who were appointed during the current term and are running for the first time in their new districts.

The number of candidates across the state reveals the increased interest in this important legislative election. Eleven incumbent senators and 28 incumbent representatives have competition in their May primary elections. Primaries are a particular concern for incumbents because voter turnout is typically low, and anything can happen.

There are also fewer candidates running unopposed. This year, eight Republican senators, eight Democratic representatives and 22 Republican representatives will have no primary or general election competition from the other major party. The number is a significant reduction from 2008, when a whopping 19 Senators and 50 House members ran unopposed.

The Political Outlook

Looking at the politics and demographics of the state, this election year is the potential beginning of an extended period of uncertainty in the Legislature:

2010 Short Session – With the retirement of Senate Majority Leader Tony Rand before completion of his term, the 2010 short session will see the first significant change in the Senate’s leadership structure in nine years. While the House leadership remains intact, the practice of having all bills travel through multiple committees creates more challenges for any issue in a short session. Although there is an opportunity for several issues to be considered in 2010, budget challenges will again take center stage.
2011‐2012 Session – The national census takes place in 2010, and the Legislature will redraw districts in 2011 based on the census results. Both parties are desperate to control at least part of the redistricting process, which will shape legislative elections for 10 years. It’s possible that each party could control one legislative chamber, creating a major showdown on districts.
2013‐2014 Session – In 2013, there will be a new crop of legislators coming from newly drawn districts, creating another possible leadership shift. Following the census, the urban and suburban counties are poised to gain more legislative seats – and legislative power.

In addition, legislative economists are already bracing for a potential $500 million shortfall in the current budget. Legislators will have a couple of choices this May – raise taxes or make additional cuts. It’s hard to see many taxes going up in an election year. This year’s potentially epic budget debate will play out with several groups of legislators taking completely distinct views of the November elections:

The Lame Duck – Several legislators have already announced their retirements following this year. Several more legislators in both parties might come to Raleigh on May 12th having just lost primary elections.
Looking to November – As both parties have an eye on redistricting, some incumbents who have not seen November opponents in recent years will be forced to defend their seats in 2010. Before these legislators cast key votes, they will pay even greater attention to constituent groups in their own districts.
Safe for Another Two Years – Candidates will tell you they take all challengers seriously, but there is a group of legislators who have no opposition in November, or only a token challenge in a seat that leans predominantly toward one party. These legislators might consider their party’s statewide prospects a bit more than their own electoral chances when making tough votes.

What does it mean for you?

In other words, North Carolina’s political stakes in 2010 can’t get higher for a mid‐term election. A business or organization will fall behind if it does not plan now to raise its profile over the next three years. Some groups will likely wake up after Election Day in November and realize they lack legislative supporters. Now is the time to lay the groundwork using social media, traditional media and good old fashioned one‐on‐one interaction with legislators.

With a mix of personalities, agendas and electoral prospects, navigation of the Legislature just got even tougher. And no matter which party controls the Legislature, a change is coming in the next few years. The smart businesses and groups will start preparing now.

To view the listing of candidates (organized by District) who filed for party primaries during the 2010 filing period, please click here.

North Carolina 2010 Election Candidates

ameehan@capstrat.com (Andrew Meehan) — Tue, 09 Mar 2010 15:58:47 -0400

N.C. SENATE

District 1

Marc Basnight (i), Dem, Manteo
Hood Richardson, GOP, Washington

District 2

Barbara Garrity-Blake, Dem, Gloucester
Jean R. Preston (i), GOP, Emerald Isle

District 3

Clark Jenkins (i), Dem, Tarboro
Frankie L. Bordeaux, Dem, Greenville
Florence Arnold Armstrong, Dem, Tarboro
Henry Williams, GOP, Tarboro
C. B. Daughtridge, GOP, Rocky Mount

District 4

Edward (Ed) Jones (i), Dem, Enfield
Tee Ferguson, Dem, Ahoskie
Warren Scott Nail, GOP, Roanoke Rapids
Rich Halbert, GOP, Edenton

District 5

Don Davis (i), Dem, Snow Hill
Louis M. Pate, Jr., GOP, Mt Olive

District 6

Harry Brown (i), GOP, Jacksonville

District 7

Doug Berger (i), Dem, Youngsville
Ronald R. Alligood, Dem, Butner
Michael Schriver, GOP, Youngsville

District 8

David Redwine, Dem, Shallotte
Bill Rabon, GOP, Southport
Bettie Fennell, GOP, Rocky Point

District 9

Jim Leutze, Dem, Wilmington
Michael Lee, GOP, Wilmington
Thom Goolsby, GOP, Wilmington

District 10

Gordon E. Vermillion, Dem, Kinston
Dewey Hudson, Dem, Clinton
Brent Jackson, GOP, Autryville
Chris Humphrey, GOP, Kinston

District 11

A. B. Swindell (i), Dem, Nashville
Dennis Nielsen, Dem, Red Oak
Donnie Weaver, GOP, Rocky Mount
E.S. (Buck) Newton, GOP, Wilson
Randy J. Johnson, GOP, Bailey

District 12

Jody McLeod, Dem, Clayton
David Rouzer (i), GOP, Smithfield

District 13

Michael Walters (i), Dem, Fairmont
R. Benjamin Clark III, Dem, Raeford
Marc Boudreau, GOP, St Pauls

District 13

Dan Blue (i), Dem, Raleigh
Geoffrey M. Hurlburt, GOP, Wake Forest

District 15

Charles Malone, Dem, Raleigh
Neal Hunt (i), GOP, Raleigh

District 16

Josh Stein (i), Dem, Raleigh
Michael Beezley, GOP, Cary
Stephanie E. Watson, Lib, Raleigh

District 17

David Donovan, Dem, Raleigh
Richard Stevens (i), GOP, Cary

District 18

Bob Atwater (i), Dem, Chapel Hill
Roger Gerber, GOP, Chapel Hill

District 19

Margaret Highsmith Dickson (i), Dem, Fayetteville
Wesley Meredith, GOP, Fayetteville

District 20

Floyd B. McKissick, Jr. (i), Dem, Durham
Laney Funderburk, GOP, Durham

District 21

Curtis Worthy, Dem, Fayetteville
Eugene Stackhouse, Dem, Fayetteville
Eric L. Mansfield, Dem, Fayetteville
Robert Lee Evans, Dem, Fayetteville
Lula Crenshaw, Dem, Fayetteville
Wade Fowler, GOP, Fayetteville

District 22

Richard Timothy Morgan, GOP, Eagle Springs
Harris D. Blake (i), GOP, Pinehurst

District 23

Ellie Kinnaird (i), Dem, Chapel Hill
Ryan A. Hilliard, GOP, Chapel Hill
Jon Greg Bass, GOP, Roxboro

District 24

Tony Foriest (i), Dem, Raleigh
Rick Gunn, GOP, Burlington
Barry Coe, Lib, Haw River

District 25

Bill Purcell (i), Dem, Laurinburg
P. Jason Phibbs, GOP, Albemarle

District 26

Philip E. (Phil) Berger (i), GOP, Eden

District 27

Donald R. (Don) Vaughan (i), Dem, Greensboro
Jeffery T. (Jeff) Hyde, GOP, Greensboro

District 28

Gladys A. Robinson, Dem, Pleasant Garden
Evelyn W. Miller, Dem, Greensboro
Trudy Wade, GOP, Greensboro
John Wayne Welch, GOP, Greensboro
Robert Brafford, Jr., GOP, Jamestown
Jeffrey A. Brommer, GOP, Jamestown

District 29

Jerry W. Tillman (i), GOP, Archdale

District 30

Robert Nickell, Dem, Westfield
Ric Marshall, Dem, Ararat
Paul M. Johnson, GOP, Pilot Mountain
Don W. East (i), GOP, Pilot Mountain

District 31

Peter Samuel (Pete) Brunstetter (i), GOP, Winston Salem

District 32

Linda Garrou (i), Dem, Winston Salem
Edward (Ed) Hanes, Dem, Winston Salem
Brian C. Miller, GOP, Winston Salem
Nathan Jones, GOP, Winston Salem

District 33

Stan Bingham (i), GOP, Denton

District 34

Robert Dale Stirewalt, GOP, China Grove
John H. Ferguson, GOP, Advance
Andrew C. Brock (i), GOP, Mocksville

District 35

Ed McGuire, Dem, Waxhaw
Tommy Tucker, GOP, Waxhaw
Fern Shubert, GOP, Marshville

District 36

Mike Helms, Dem, Concord
Fletcher L. Hartsell, Jr. (i), GOP, Concord

District 37

Daniel (Dan) Clodfelter (i), Dem, Charlotte
C. Morgan Edwards, GOP, Charlotte
Vince Coscia, GOP, Charlotte

District 38

Charlie Dannelly (i), Dem, Charlotte
Cedric Scott, GOP, Charlotte

District 39

Robert (Bob) Rucho (i), GOP, Matthews

District 40

John Montgomery, Dem, Newell
Malcolm Graham (i), Dem, Charlotte
John Aneralla, GOP, Huntersville

District 41

Mark Richard Vanek, GOP, Troutman
James (Jim) Forrester (i), GOP, Stanley

District 42

Austin Allran (i), GOP, Hickory

District 43

Annette Carter, Dem, Dallas
Wil Neumann, GOP, Belmont
Kathy Harrington, GOP, Gastonia
Ken Bowen, GOP, Cherryville
James (Jim) England, GOP, Gastonia

District 44

Heath Wynn, Dem, Hudson
Beth Jones, Dem, Lenoir
Warren T. Daniel, GOP, Morganton
Richard C. Evey, Lib, Morganton

District 45

Steve Goss (i), Dem, Boone
Dan Soucek, GOP, Boone
Jeffrey C. Elmore, GOP, North Wilkesboro

District 46

Debbie Ann Clary (i), GOP, Cherryville

District 47

Joe Sam Queen (i), Dem, Waynesville
Andy Webb, GOP, Marion
Ralph E. Hise, Jr., GOP, Spruce Pine
Tamera Frank, GOP, Burnsville

District 48

Chris Dixon, Dem, Arden
Tom Apodaca (i), GOP, Hendersonville

District 49

Martin L. Nesbitt (i), Dem, Asheville
R L Clark, GOP, Asheville
Don Yelton, GOP, Weaverville

District 50

John J. Snow, Jr. (i), Dem, Murphy
Jimmy Goodman, GOP, Franklin
Jim Davis, GOP, Franklin

N.C. HOUSE

District 1

W. C. (Bill) Owens, Jr. (i), Dem, Elizabeth City
John J. Woodard, Jr., GOP, Elizabeth City

District 2

Timothy L. (Tim) Spear (i), Dem, Creswell
Bob Steinburg, GOP, Edenton

District 3

Alice Graham Underhill (i), Dem, New Bern
Norman Sanderson, GOP, Arapahoe
Herb Sobel, Lib, New Bern

District 4

Mott Blair, Dem, Wallace
Jimmy Dixon, GOP, Warsaw

District 5

Annie Ward Mobley (i), Dem, Ahoskie
Matthew (Matt) Peeler, GOP, Hertford

District 6

Arthur Williams (i), Dem, Washington
Bill Cook, GOP, Chocowinity

District 7

Angela R. Bryant (i), Dem, Rocky Mount

District 8

Edith D. Warren (i), Dem, Farmville

District 9

Marian N. McLawhorn (i), Dem, Grifton
Gordon Hart, Dem, Ayden
Stan Larson, GOP, Greenville

District 10

Van Braxton (i), Dem, Kinston
Stephen LaRoque, GOP, Kinston

District 11

Efton M. Sager (i), GOP, Goldsboro

District 12

William L. Wainwright (i), Dem, Havelock
Mark W. Griffin, GOP, Dover

District 13

Craig K. Hassler, Dem, Morehead City
Wyatt Rike, GOP, Morehead City
Patricia (Pat) McElraft (i), GOP, Emerald Isle

District 14

George G. Cleveland (i), GOP, Jacksonville

District 15

Phillip Shepard, GOP, Jacksonville
Tracey Louise Miller, GOP, Sneads Ferry
Martin Aragona, Jr., GOP, Jacksonville

District 16

Franklin (F. D.) Rivenbark, Dem, Burgaw
Carolyn Justice (i), GOP, Hampstead

District 17

James A. Knox, Dem, Leland
Leonard Jenkins, Dem, Leland
Mac Tyson, GOP, Shallotte
Frank Iler (i), GOP, Oak Island

District 18

James L. Utley, Jr., Dem, Wilmington
Susi Hamilton, Dem, Wilmington
J. Michael Hutson, GOP, Wilmington
Beth Dawson, GOP, Wilmington

District 19

Danny McComas (i), GOP, Wilington

District 20

Ken Waddell, Dem, Chadbourn
Dewey L. Hill (i), Dem, Lake Waccamaw
Tristan V. Patterson, GOP, Tabor City

District 21

Larry M. Bell (i), Dem, Clinton
DeAnn G. Poirier, GOP, Mt Olive

District 22

William Brisson (i), Dem, Dublin
Robert Jacobs Brooks, Dem, Council
John Szoka, GOP, Fayettevlle

District 23

Joe Tolson (i), Dem, Pinetops
Garland Shepheard, GOP, Tarboro

District 24

Jean Farmer-Butterfield (i), Dem, Wilson
Claiborne R. Holtzman, GOP, Rocky Mount

District 25

Randy Stewart (i), Dem, Rocky Mount
Jeffrey L. (Jeff) Collins, GOP, Rocky Mount

District 26

Leo Daughtry (i), GOP, Smithfield

District 27

Michael H. Wray (i), Dem, Gaston

District 28

Brian Allen, Dem, Roseboro
James H. (J.H.) Langdon, Jr. (i), GOP, Angier

District 29

Larry D. Hall (i), Dem, Durham

District 30

Paul Luebke (i), Dem, Durham
Randy Stewart, GOP, Durham
Jason Chambers, GOP, Hillsborough

District 31

H.M. (Mickey) Michaux (i), Dem, Durham
Patricia Ladd, GOP, Durham

District 32

Jim Crawford (i), Dem, Oxford
Barbara Howe, Lib, Oxford

District 33

Rosa U. Gill (i), Dem, Raleigh
Doctor K. Aal Anubia, Dem, Raleigh
Bernard Allen, Dem, Raleigh
Paul Terrell, GOP, Raleigh
Susan Byrd Leventhal, GOP, Raleigh

District 34

Grier Martin (i), Dem, Raleigh
Brian Tinga, GOP, Raleigh
J. H. Ross, GOP, Raleigh
Steve Henion, GOP, Raleigh
Jamie Earp, GOP, Raleigh

District 35

Jennifer Weiss (i), Dem, Cary
Don Frantz, GOP, Cary

District 36

Robin Anderson, Dem, Cary
Nelson Dollar (i), GOP, Cary

District 37

Debra McHenry, Dem, Garner
Paul Stam (i), GOP, Apex

District 38

Deborah K. Ross (i), Dem, Raleigh
Madison E. Shook, GOP, Raleigh

District 39

Darren Jackson (i), Dem, Raleigh
Jeanne Milliken Bonds, Dem, Knightdale
Duane Cutlip, GOP, Wendell

District 40

Violet Rhinehart, Dem, Raleigh
Marilyn Avila (i), GOP, Raleigh

District 41

Chris Heagarty (i), Dem, Raleigh
David Sloane, GOP, Raleigh
Tom Murry, GOP, Morrisville
Todd A. Batchelor, GOP, Raleigh

District 42

Marvin W. Lucas (i), Dem, Spring Lake

District 43

Mary E. McAllister, Dem, Fayetteville
Elmer Floyd (i), Dem, Fayetteville

District 44

Diane Parfitt (i), Dem, Fayetteville
Brian Kent, GOP, Fayetteville
Lois A. Kirby, GOP, Fayetteville
Johnny Dawkins, GOP, Fayetteville

District 45

Tina Odom, Dem, Hope Mills
Rick Glazier (i), Dem, Fayetteville
Jackie Warner, GOP, Hope Mills
Patrick Mitchell, GOP, Hope Mills

District 46

Douglas Y. Yongue (i), Dem, Laurinburg
Gaston (G. L.) Pridgen, GOP, Lumberton

District 47

Ronnie Sutton (i), Dem, Pembroke
Charles Graham, Dem, Lumberton
Brawleigh Jason Graham, GOP, Lumberton

District 48

Garland E. Pierce (i), Dem, Wagram
John F. Harry, GOP, Shannon

District 49

Lucy T. Allen (i), Dem, Louisburg
Glen Bradley, GOP, Youngsville

District 50

Bill Faison (i), Dem, Efland
Rick Smith, GOP, Blanch

District 51

Jimmy L. Love, Sr. (i), Dem, Sanford
Michael (Mike) Stone, GOP, Sanford

District 52

Jamie Boles, GOP, Southern Pines

District 53

Abraham Oudeh, Dem, Dunn
Thomas E. Ellis II, Dem, Dunn
David Lewis (i), GOP, Dunnc

District 54

Joe Hackney (i), Dem, Chapel Hill
Cathy Wright, GOP, Chapel Hill

District 55

W.A. (Winkie) Wilkins (i), Dem, Roxboro
R. Miles Standish, Dem, Durham
Fred Foster, Jr., Dem, Durham
Larry Yarborough, GOP, Roxboro

District 56

Verla Insko (i), Dem, Chapel Hill

District 57

Mary Price (Pricey) Harrison (i), Dem, Greensboro
Wendell H. Sawyer, GOP, Greensboro
Jon Hardister, GOP, Greensboro

District 58

Ralph C. Johnson, Dem, Greensboro
Alma Adams (i), Dem, Greensboro
Olga Morgan Wright, GOP, Greensboro
Darin H. Thomas, GOP, Greensboro

District 59

Maggie Jeffus (i), Dem, Greensboro
Theresa Yon, GOP, Greensboro

District 60

Earl Jones (i), Dem, Greensboro
Marcus Brandon, Dem, Greensboro
Lonnie R. Wilson, GOP, High Point

District 61

Georgia Nixon-Roney, GOP, Jamestown
Paul Norcross, GOP, High Point
Gerald T. Grubb, GOP, High Point
John Faircloth, GOP, High Point

District 62

Michael K. Garrett, GOP, Greensboro
John M. Blust (i), GOP, Greensboro
Jeffery Simon, Lib, Greensboro

District 63

Alice Bordsen (i), Dem, Mebane
Roger Kirk Parker, GOP, Mebane

District 64

Dan W. Ingle (i), GOP, Burlington

District 65

Nelson Cole (i), Dem, Reidsville

District 66

Ken Goodman, Dem, Rockingham
James Haywood Parsons, GOP, Candor

District 67

Kevin Furr, Dem, Albemarle
Justin P. Burr (i), GOP, Albemarle

District 68

Craig Horn, GOP, Matthews
Jeff Gerber, GOP, Monroe

District 69

Pryor Gibson (i), Dem, Wadesboro
John L. Barker, GOP, Marshville

District 70

Pat B. Hurley (i), GOP, Asheboro
Fred Burgess, GOP, Climax

District 71

Larry Womble (i), Dem, Winston Salem

District 72

Earline W. Parmon (i), Dem, Winston Salem
Gardenia M. Henley, Dem, Winston Salem
John Magee, GOP, Walkertown

District 73

Larry R. Brown (i), GOP, Kernersville

District 74

Cristina V. Vazquez, Dem, Winston Salem
Dale R. Folwell (i), GOP, Winston Salem

District 75

William C. (Bill) McGee (i), GOP, Clemmons

District 76

Fred Steen II (i), GOP, Landis

District 77

Lorene T. Coates (i), Dem, Salisbury
Harry Warren, GOP, Salisbury
Lauren Raper, GOP, Spencer

District 78

Arnold Lanier, GOP, Denton
Harold J. Brubaker (i), GOP, Asheboro

District 79

Julia Craven Howard (i), GOP, Mocksville

District 80

Dick Johnson, GOP, Denton
Jerry C. Dockham (i), GOP, Denton

District 81

L. Hugh Holliman (i), Dem, Lexington
Fred D. McClure, GOP, Lexington
Rayne Brown, GOP, Lexington

District 82

Larry G. Pittman, GOP, Concord
Jeff Barnhart (i), GOP, Concord

District 83

Linda P. Johnson (i), GOP, Kannapolis

District 84

Phillip Frye (i), GOP, Spruce Pine

District 85

Aaron Bradley Scott, Dem, Connelly Springs
Beth Ostgaard, Dem, Marion
Mitch Gillespie (i), GOP, Marion

District 86

Jim Cates, Dem, Morganton
Walter Church, Jr., Dem, Valdese
Hugh Blackwell (i), GOP, Valdese

District 87

Edgar V. Starnes (i), GOP, Hickory

District 88

David Munday, Dem, Taylorsville
Mark W. Hollo, GOP, Taylorsville

District 89

Mitchell Smith Setzer (i), GOP, Catawba

District 90

Randy Wolfe, Dem, Mount Airy
Sarah Stevens (i), GOP, Mount Airy

District 91

Ed Gambill, Dem, King
Bryan Holloway (i), GOP, King

District 92

Darrell McCormick (i), GOP, Yadkinville

District 93

Cullie Tarleton (i), Dem, Blowing Rock
Jonathan C. Jordan, GOP, Jefferson

District 94

David H. Moulton, Dem, Millers Creek
Shirley Blackburn Randleman (i), GOP, Wilkesboro
John Reavill, GOP, Wilkesboro

District 95

Grey Mills (i), GOP, Mooresville

District 96

Gary Lafone, Dem, Hickory
Mark K. Hilton (i), GOP, Conover

District 97

Johnathan Rhyne (i), GOP, Lincolnton

District 98

Jackie Smith, Dem, Cornelius
Thom Tillis (i), GOP, Cornelius

District 99

Nick Mackey (i), Dem, Charlotte
Rodney W. Moore, Dem, Charlotte
Michael T. (Doc) Wilson, GOP, Huntersville
Gwendolyn D. McGowens, GOP, Charlotte

District 100

Tricia Cotham (i), Dem, Matthews
Joe O'Neill, GOP, Charlotte

District 101

Beverly Miller Earle (i), Dem, Charlotte
Rocky Bailey, Dem, Charlotte
Rebecca H. Steen, GOP, Charlotte

District 102

Kim Ratliff, Dem, Charlotte
Ken Davies, Dem, Charlotte
Becky Carney (i), Dem, Charlotte
Matt Miller, GOP, Charlotte

District 103

Ann Newman, Dem, Charlotte
Bill Brawley, GOP, Matthews
Lloyd Austin, GOP, Charlotte

District 104

Frank Deaton, Dem, Charlotte
Ruth Samuelson (i), GOP, Charlotte
Jerry Drye, GOP, Charlotte

District 105

Ric Killian (i), GOP, Charlotte

District 106

Martha Alexander (i), Dem, Charlotte
Michael Cavallo, GOP, Charlotte

District 107

Kelly Alexander (i), Dem, Charlotte
Debbie Ware, GOP, Charlotte

District 108

John Torbett, GOP, Stanley

District 109

William A. Current (i), GOP, Gastonia

District 110

John Eaker, Dem, Cherryville
Kelly E. Hastings, GOP, Cherryville
Pearl Burris Floyd (i), GOP, Dallas

District 111

Mary S. Accor, Dem, Kings Mountain
Tim Moore (i), GOP, Kings Mountain

District 112

Jim Proctor, Dem, Lake Lure
Alan Toney, GOP, Bostic
Jim Wayne Newton, GOP, Ellenboro
Mike Hager, GOP, Rutherfordton
Dennis Davis, GOP, Lattimore

District 113

W. David Guice (i), GOP, Brevard

District 114

Susan C. Fisher (i), Dem, Asheville
John Carroll, GOP, Asheville

District 115

Patsy Keever, Dem, Asheville
D. Bruce Goforth (i), Dem, Asheville
Mark Crawford, GOP, Montreat

District 116
Jane Whilden (i), Dem, Asheville
Tim Moffitt, GOP, Asheville

District 117

Chuck McGrady, GOP, Hendersonville

District 118

Ray Rapp (i), Dem, Mars Hill
Samuel L. (Sam) Edwards, GOP, Waynesville

District 119

Phil Haire (i), Dem, Sylva
Bruce (Avram) Friedman, Dem, Sylva
Dodie Allen, GOP, Sylva

District 120

Randy Hogsed, Dem, Andrews
Roger West (i), GOP, Marble
Tim West, GOP, Andrews

OTHER RACES

U.S. Senate

Marcus W. Williams, Dem, Lumberton
Ann Worthy, Dem, Gastonia
Elaine Marshall, Dem, Raleigh
Ken Lewis, Dem, Chapel Hill
Susan Harris, Dem, Old Fort
Cal Cunningham, Dem, Lexington
Larry Linney, GOP, Charlotte
Brad Jones, GOP, Lake Toxaway
Eddie Burks, GOP, Asheboro
Richard Burr (i), GOP, Winston-Salem
Michael Beitler, Lib, Oak Ridge

U.S. House District 1

Chad Larkins, Dem, Macon
G. K. Butterfield (i), Dem, Wilson
Ashley Woolard, GOP, Washington
Jim Miller, GOP, Kill Devil Hills
Jerry Grimes, GOP, Goldsboro
John Carter, GOP, Wilson

U.S. House District 2

Bob Etheridge (i), Dem, Raleigh
Todd Gailas, GOP, Morrisville
Renee Ellmers, GOP, Dunn
Frank Deatrich, GOP, Louisburg
Tom Rose, Lib, Benson

U.S. House District 3

Johnny G. Rouse, Dem, Winterville
Craig Weber, GOP, Morehead City
Walter B. Jones (i), GOP, Farmville
Bob Cavanaugh, GOP, Newport
Darryl Holloman, Lib, Goldsboro

U.S. House District 4

David Price (i), Dem, Raleigh
Frank Roche, GOP, Apex
William (B.J.) Lawson, GOP, Apex
George Hutchins, GOP, Raleigh
David Burnett, GOP, Cary

U.S. House District 5

Billy Kennedy, Dem, Vilas
Keith Gardner, GOP, Hickory
Virginia Foxx (i), GOP, Banner Elk

U.S. House District 6

Sam Turner, Dem, Salisbury
James Taylor, GOP, Pinehurst
Jeff Phillips, GOP, Greensboro
Jon Mangin, GOP, Stokesdale
Cathy Brewer Hinson, GOP, High Point
Howard Coble (i), GOP, Greensboro
Billy Yow, GOP, Greensboro

U.S. House District 7

Mike McIntyre (i), Dem, Lumberton
Ilario Gregory Pantano, GOP, Wilmington
Randy Crow, GOP, Kelly
Will Breazeale, GOP, Wilmington

U.S. House District 8

Nancy Shakir, Dem, Fayetteville
Larry Kissell (i), Dem, Biscoe
Harold Johnson, GOP, Concord
Hal Jordan, GOP, Charlotte
Lou Huddleston, GOP, Fayetteville
Tim D'Annunzio, GOP, Raeford
Darrell Day, GOP, Hamlet
Thomas Hill, Lib, Concord

U.S. House District 9

Jeff Doctor, Dem, Charlotte
Sue Myrick (i), GOP, Charlotte

U.S. House District 10

Jeff Gregory, Dem, Shelby
Anne N. Fischer, Dem, Morganton
Vance Patterson, GOP, Morganton
Patrick McHenry (i), GOP, Hickory
Scott Keadle, GOP, Mooresville
David Michael Boldon, GOP, Maiden

U.S. House District 11

Aixa Wilson, Dem, Asheville
Heath Shuler (i), Dem, Waynesville
Kenny West, GOP, Hayesville
Gregory A. Newman, GOP, Hendersonville
Jeff Miller, GOP, Hendersonville
Ed Krause, GOP, Marion
James (Jake) Howard, GOP, Franklin
Dan Eichenbaum, GOP, Murphy

U.S. House District 12

Mel Watt (i), Dem, Charlotte
William (Doc) Gillenwater, GOP, Greensboro
Greg Dority, GOP, Washington
Scott Cumbie, GOP, Winston-Salem
Lon Cecil, Lib, High Point

U.S. House District 13

Brad Miller (i), Dem, Raleigh
William (Bill) Randall, GOP, Raleigh
Bernie Reeves, GOP, Raleigh
Dan Huffman, GOP, Wake Forest
Frank Hurley, GOP, Chapel Hill

Supreme Court Associate Justice (Brady Seat)

Barbara Jackson, Raleigh
Robert C. (Bob) Hunter, Raleigh

Court Of Appeals Judge (Steelman Seat)

Sanford Steelman, Weddington

Court Of Appeals Judge (Calabria Seat)

Mark E. Klass, Lexington
Jane Gray, Raleigh
Ann Marie Calabria, Morrisville

Court Of Appeals Judge (Elmore Seat)

Steven Walker, Raleigh
Rick Elmore, Raleigh
Leto Copeley, Hillsborough
Alton D. (Al) Bain, Lillington

Court Of Appeals Judge (Geer Seat)

Dean R. Poirier, Mount Olive
Martha Geer, Raleigh

*Source: North Carolina State Board of Elections

Can Toyoda save Toyota?

kalbritton@capstrat.com (Karen Albritton) — Thu, 04 Mar 2010 00:00:00 -0400

Some might say a similar performance was on tap last Wednesday morning when Toyota's chief executive, Akio Toyoda, is set to testify before the House oversight panel. The news media are setting high expectations for his testimony, saying his remarks are critical for confidence among current customers, the future of the brand and even the reputation of Japanese products overall. It's a high bar for any executive, but one that will be especially difficult for the Toyota chief executive for a number of reasons.

Mr. Toyoda will have handicaps that Mr. Woods did not face in his remarks. He'll be testifying before a congressional committee of representatives eager to build their reputation. They're tired of getting beaten up in the polls and want to demonstrate their value to the American public. No one can argue with taking Toyota to task on safety. Mr. Woods, by contrast, was able to orchestrate a tightly controlled environment for his remarks.

Mr. Toyoda has to consider the legal and financial ramifications of every word he utters. He has to strike a balance between responsibility and blame. It's doubtful he'll deviate much from what has been approved by a team of lawyers. While Mr. Toyoda has an obligation to the brand, his obligation to shareholders is of a higher order and that will dictate what he's able to say.

Finally, even with all the media coverage of the Toyota case, it's unlikely that the congressional appearance will attract the same audience as Mr. Woods. It seemed everyone stopped on Friday to watch. Sadly, we Americans are much more interested in athletes, infidelity and destructive addictions than in safety, engineering and jobs. So Toyota will have to continue to mount its own education campaign.

With all that's at stake for Toyota, I do hope that Mr. Toyoda learned from the mistakes of the US auto executives and arrives in a modest sedan instead of taking a private plane and limo. Maybe he should consider a Toyota pick-up. Those haven't been recalled, have they?

Karen Albritton shares her thoughts with Leslie Levine from AllBusiness.com on the PR nightmare becoming known as Toyotagate. That article can be accessed here .

Conquering social media fear

aconnor@capstrat.com (Angela Connor) — Thu, 04 Mar 2010 00:00:00 -0400

I am fascinated by social media guidelines. The whole process of getting the stakeholders around the table to discuss strategies for creating a document that usually makes employees cringe or rejoice is a challenge I welcome. The conversations that ensue are thrilling, and the fears that are uncovered can be real and raw.

The social media purists might say that the fears are unjustified, and in some cases they may be. But I can't tell my four-year-old that her fears of a monster coming out of her closet while she's asleep are unjustified when they are real to her.

What I can do is discuss her fears, try to understand the root of those fears and work to understand her pain point so that I can make it better by talking her through it.

I spent some time reading through the BBC's new social networking policy today and their fears are evident. But there's nothing wrong with that. They've clearly identified those fears, thought through the process and put together a document that will guide employees on how they should conduct themselves across social networks.

I am sure there will be critical blogposts about this new policy. Remember the shredding ESPN received across the twitterverse and blogoshpere when it released its social media guidelines last year? They even issued a response to the criticism.

But back to the BBC....One thing I found very interesting is what they call their "Linking Strategy," which states that links should be editorially justifiable. I agree with that as a former news manager. They have their credibility to protect and what they're saying is if they're going to provide a link, it needs to make sense and add value to the content. I also found another passage rather interesting. It characterizes on-air mentions of social networks. It seems that the BBC won't go on and on about their Twitter accounts or their Facebook pages without good reason, like CNN does.

(This is not to bash CNN but there is a constant scroll of twitter handles on the bottom of the screen, and Rick Sanchez lives by Twitter on his news program.)

So they've put a lot of thought into what level of importance social media will play in their editorial content, and that should be applauded. I think that employers owe their employees guidance in this area.

Does your company have social media guidelines? And what do those guidelines say about the company? Angela Connor is a seasoned journalist with 16 years of experience in broadcast, print and online news and author of the book, "18 Rules of Community Engagement: A Guide for Building Relationships and Connecting With Customers Online."

Angela most recently launched and managed an online community for WRAL.com growing membership to 15,000 members in less than three years. She has developed successful social media strategies for news organizations and small businesses as well as best practices for incorporating user-generated content. You can read this article originally posted on Capstrat's blog .

Featured Project - American Institute of CPAs

Capstrat — Thu, 04 Mar 2010 00:00:00 -0400

Among students, dated stereotypes about accounting are common, so we had to debunk the "colorless number-cruncher" perception immediately. Second, we needed to open students' eyes to the world of opportunity provided by the CPA credential.

FutureMe ^TM — the central feature of the site — lets students assume the persona of a CPA complete with the job, salary, location and perks of their choosing. Students build a FutureMe^TM by navigating a rich Flash interface and identifying their likes and dislikes. Behind the scenes, the site builds a custom personality model that delivers a shortlist of jobs they are best suited for. Potential FutureMe ^TM jobs range from CFO for Tiffany & Co. to special agent for the FBI. Students save their FutureMes ^TM in the form of a customizable profile.

Besides allowing students the opportunity to explore careers, the project provides analytical data to the AICPA that helps them track and communicate with students, building relationships that will last beyond their high school years.

StartHereGoPlaces.com was formally announced to students with a bang: The Start Here, Rock Out Sweepstakes. Running from October to December 2009, this contest encouraged students to explore the site and build their FutureMe ^TM profiles for a chance to win one of 120 customized iPod touches.

True to our spirit of data-driven analysis, we monitor the site for performance, investing the most time and effort on sections that draw the most visitor attention.

In February 2010, for example, we updated the home page to entice even more users to create FutureMe ^TM profiles. To mitigate risk, we are running this as an A | B test — randomly serving either the old or new version and assessing which performs best with visitors. The updated homepage is 70 percent more likely to convert visitors into account holders.

In addition to the website, Capstrat has extended this campaign into other media: a magazine, teaching materials, a poster series and giveaways.

We're on the way to our goal of getting tens of thousands of students registered on the site, inspired by the opportunities in accounting and the CPA profession and looking toward future membership in the AICPA.

A Lesson in Crisis Communications

Capstrat — Wed, 30 Dec 2009 00:00:00 -0400

In a year of reports about public figures behaving badly — think John Edwards, Chris Brown and David Letterman — the Tiger Woods scandal is hands down the biggest crisis communications story of 2009. The Woods scandal started with a minor car crash and could end with his complete undoing. The professional golfer, husband and father behaved badly — really badly — and in a way completely contrary to his public image of a man of discipline and integrity. So, could he have lessened the media bloodletting? Was there a way to save his image? Did the story cycle need to dominate the headlines from the day after Thanksgiving until the New Year? No amount of media outreach could have saved Woods from himself, but he made several media relations missteps we can learn from.

First Silence ...

Woods is known for guarding his privacy, so it was not a surprise to anyone that he was not calling Oprah or lining up a press conference following the car wreck. But Woods needed to talk. Woods (obviously) and likely his handlers knew about the years of secret affairs, and according to The Wall Street Journal , had taken steps to kill a National Inquirer story on an affair two years earlier. The ugly story of his infidelity was beginning to seep. It was inevitable that this was going to be a big scandal, and people with as much media experience as Woods and his team should have seen it coming. It was time for Woods to take control, make a strong statement, come clean and apologize.

Then Denial ...

But as we all know, Woods did not immediately admit his mistakes and apologize to his family, team, fans and sponsors. Instead, the golfer posted a statement on his website "about the false, unfounded and malicious rumors that are currently circulating." Woods was likely referring to the rumors and reports that his wife hit him with a golf club. But for Woods to accuse the media of being wrong, he needed to be above reproach, and as we all know by now, he was not. The core of the story — his affairs — was correct, and in the public's eye, that's all that mattered.

Woods knew he had affairs, he simply thought he would never get caught, and when he did get caught, he thought he could cover it up. Clearly, no one in his inner circle had the gumption to tell him that the media does not have a hands-off policy for any public figure — if not for a sitting president, then certainly not for an athlete. That also raises questions about what kind of counsel Woods was getting from the people he trusts with his public image. Before the dust began to settle on the bed-hopping scandal, news reports linked Woods to a Canadian doctor, Anthony Galea, under a joint U.S.-Canadian investigation for possibly providing performance-enhancing drugs to athletes.

When The New York Times asked about the golfer's involvement with the doctor, Woods' agent Mark Steinberg made the critical mistake of writing an e-mail to the paper saying: "I would really ask that you guys don't write this? If Tiger is NOT implicated, and he won't be, let's please give the kid a break." This is surely going to make public relations textbooks for what not to say to a reporter. One never asks a reporter not to write something — it only makes them want to write it more. Also, on the heels of Woods' sex scandal, Steinberg must be completely arrogant, have zero judgment or be incredibly stupid to think one of the nation's leading newspapers would give Woods a break. This is an excellent example of an agent who can't see past the hype he has created.

Finally, contrition (maybe)

As the number of women with whom the golfer allegedly had affairs began to rise into double-digits, he admitted to "transgressions" and finally to "infidelity." If Woods had immediately admitted to the affairs, the announcement and the coverage would have been painful, but quicker. He also would have looked like a man who was truly sorry. His silence and then denial prolonged the story, and left reporters looking for other sources to talk about the scandal.

The best public relations move Woods made was his decision to take time off from golf indefinitely. In a crisis situation, the people at the center of it need to develop a plan to fix the problem. For Woods, taking a break from golf gives him the time and mental energy to work on putting his personal life back together, and it gives the public impression that he is working on his marriage. It also gets him out of the public eye, and gives the story an opportunity to fade.

Lessons Learned

Have a Plan

Companies and individuals need to establish a process for how to work with the media in a crisis, including identifying spokespeople who have been media trained and are available for print, radio and on-camera interviews. Whether a company is dealing with a crisis surrounding worker safety, product quality or employee misconduct, companies need a flexible crisis plan that can be adapted to the situation. With a sensational story like the Woods scandal, it's inevitable the story is going to run, even if the person or company at the center of the controversy refuses to comment. So, avoiding reporters is never a good strategy. Generally providing your point of view is better than leaving it up to others.

Respond Quickly

In all crisis communications situations, journalists will want information — and they will want it fast. The company or person at the center of a crisis should react within three hours — 24 hours at the most — and the situation will dictate if an interview, news conference or a statement is the best way to respond.

Take Responsibility

Most importantly, if there is a problem, take steps to fix it, and let the public know about the plan to make things right. Also, know when to say you are sorry. The public is amazingly forgiving and has a very short memory. A sincere apology will go a long way. Even for Tiger Woods.

Featured Project - American Cancer Society

lcoman@capstrat.com (Leslie Coman) — Wed, 30 Dec 2009 00:00:00 -0400

Each year thousands of North Carolinians die or suffer from debilitating illnesses resulting from secondhand smoke. The health care costs for treating these illnesses total nearly $290 million in our state. But the roots of tobacco are long and deep in North Carolina, and for many years political leaders were hesitant to support any measure that would challenge the industry so deeply rooted in North Carolina's cultural and economic traditions. Tobacco's clout was also strengthened by the state's fierce regard for personal liberty, including the right to smoke and the freedom to make decisions involving property rights.

The American Cancer Society engaged Capstrat at the start of the 2009 legislative session to provide media and public relations in support of legislation banning smoking from indoor workplaces. Our challenge: help change public opinion, counter opposition, use the media in our favor and gain legislative support for a smoking ban.

Just two years prior, the public health community suffered a difficult defeat of similar legislation. This time, we advised turning the state's respect for personal liberty against the opposition. Doesn't the right to breathe safe, smoke-free air trump the right to smoke? And shouldn't business owners put the health of non-smoking workers and patrons ahead of the convenience of smokers?

The public health community coalesced under the banner of the N.C. Alliance for Health, which included the American Cancer Society, the American Heart Association, the American Lung Association and other health advocates. Capstrat supported the Alliance education and grassroots advocacy through media relations, advertising and message development.

To start, we helped refine messages to resonate with the general public and differentiate the current campaign from past efforts. Common sense tells us nobody has the right to harm another's health. From the outset, the campaign was focused on this doctrine of fairness and the right of all North Carolinians to breathe safe, smoke-free air.

We communicated regularly with health and political reporters on the complex legislation, building relationships that would pay dividends later in the campaign. Rather than pitching pointed advocacy, we made the N.C. Alliance for Health available as a resource to reporters attempting to navigate the nuances of the bill and its circuitous procedural path through the General Assembly. Highly credible data and ready access to our cadre of respected health leaders blunted the impact of pro-smoking forces and their often-flawed arguments.

At each step in the legislative process — through every committee, vote and amendment — we provided reporters with no-spin updates on the evolving legislation. Coalition partners were provided messages and talking points, as well as all the tools needed to easily submit opinion pieces to newspapers in key legislators' districts. Supportive editorials appeared in newspapers around the state, including cities like Greensboro and Winston-Salem, with long-standing ties to tobacco even among the local media. In the weeks leading up to critical votes, editorials featured quotes and data supplied through our efforts, and on numerous occasions our leaders were invited to submit their own opinion-editorials. In just more than a two month period, more appeared in North Carolina newspapers.

In two instances before significant votes, the Alliance ran ads in the hometown newspapers of undecided legislators. The ads successfully convinced constituents to make their support known to legislators in advance of the vote.

In the end, the N.C. Alliance for Health and its partner organizations built public support for strong, comprehensive smoke-free legislation and scored a resounding and historic win. The legislation banning smoking from restaurants and bars throughout the state was signed into law by Gov. Bev Perdue on May 19, 2009, taking effect on January 2, 2010.

Confidence in Institutions

Capstrat — Tue, 29 Dec 2009 00:00:00 -0400

The continuing economic downturn may be taking a toll on the confidence Americans have in corporations and the government, and there may be a certain "kill the messenger" message that Americans are sending to the media, according to a recent Capstrat-Public Policy Polling nationwide survey.

Only five percent of the 568 respondents in the recent survey said they have "a lot of confidence" in the media, compared to half of the sample who said they had "little confidence."

That compares to eight percent who said they had a lot of confidence in corporations. And 52 percent said they had a lot of confidence. U.S. banks track the confidence ratings of corporations in general, coming in at 13 percent who said they had a lot of confidence in banks, and 51 percent who said they had little confidence.

"This certainly is a time of economic and social disruption. Many Americans don't know who or what they can trust," said Capstrat CEO Ken Eudy. "Now is the time for businesses and the media to make sure their business practices with customers, employees and other stakeholders are straightforward and transparent."

The media, Eudy said, are grappling with a poor economy plus transformational change in media consumption habits. "Some of this low confidence rating in the media may well reflect the fact that some news media outlets are retrenching, reducing staff or even going out of business. But it's also been true through the generations that some consumers blame the messenger for bad news."

Other notable Capstrat-Public Policy Poll results included:

Half of the American voters polled said they had a lot of confidence in churches.
Government fared better than corporations, with 23 percent of poll respondents saying they had a lot of confidence in government, while 50 percent said they had little confidence.
Compared to corporations (8 percent reporting a lot of confidence) small business enjoyed a high confidence level from 40 percent of poll respondents.
Some 57 percent of Americans said they have little confidence in labor unions.

Find the survey questionnaire and results at publicpolicypolling.com.

About Capstrat
Capstrat is a communications agency based in Raleigh, N.C. The firm specializes in communications for complex issues that health care, technology, energy/infrastructure and financial organizations face at critical moments. Capstrat provides public relations, marketing communications, interactive communications and public affairs.

About Public Policy Polling
Public Policy Polling has conducted regional and national surveys since 1991. The firm employs Interactive Voice Response or IVR methodology. Just as polling evolved from mail-in surveys and door-to-door interviewers to live telephone interviewers, the polling industry is now evolving into automated telephone surveys (IVR) and internet polling. An analysis by The Wall Street Journal of swing state polls in the 2008 presidential campaign concluded that Public Policy Polling was among the two most accurate survey firms.

Sincere Survival

Capstrat — Sun, 01 Nov 2009 00:00:00 -0400

Trust is one of the hardest business resources to measure - and one of the hardest to do without. A difficult economic climate raises the stakes on trust, because there are more questions in the air. Will you make payroll? Cut product lines? Be there to pick up the phone this time next week?

With the tone of the business news lately, it's hardly surprising that trust in business itself is at a low ebb. The worldwide PR firm Edelman has just published its 10th annual "Trust Barometer," and the numbers are striking: In the United States, 77 percent of people trust corporations less than they did a year ago. Only 38 percent trust business to do what's right, a 20 percent drop from last year. And only 17 percent say they trust what a CEO says.

In an environment like that, even the most forthright and respected enterprises risk being tarred with the brush of widespread anti-business sentiment. How can you redouble your efforts to win trust from your customers, suppliers, investors and business partners? How can you set yourself apart?

At Capstrat, our CEO, Ken Eudy, has a saying: "You can't communicate yourself out of something you behaved your way into." And a failure of honesty is one of the hardest behaviors to live down. In every scandal, from the Oval Office to the baseball diamond, it seems people end up suffering less for what they did in the first place than for trying to cover it up. And in business, you don't even need to have done anything wrong for even the appearance of double-talk to erode public confidence.

To make sure your communication plan is always building and strengthening trust among the audiences you depend upon, keep these tips in mind:

Clarity. Transparency is always a foundational principle of business. Avoid the temptation to be transparent only when it's convenient or when the news is good. Some organizations refuse to acknowledge difficult news. Good or bad, be honest.

Open channels. If you don't think people will feel better just hearing "boring" updates from you, imagine the alternative - a silence they're left to interpret on their own. Imagine your messaging not as a one-way pipeline, but as your end of an ongoing conversation. Consider using social media tools to energize the exchange.

Look inward. External stakeholders aren't the only people whose trust you rely upon. Your employees have concerns too, and being honest and comprehensive with them is essential to preserving morale, retention and productivity.

Right hand, meet left hand. The employees who receive your internal communications see the same outside newspapers, websites and news broadcasts that everyone else does. And messages you consider "internal-only" will eventually find their way beyond your walls. Don't get caught trying to sell internal and external messages that don't align with one another.

Manage the medium. Consider the information you need to deliver, and then decide the best vehicle for communicating it. Sometimes - and, in employee communications, often - this means doing it face to face.

Remember that transparency isn't just for crisis situations. It should be a watchword for everyday messages - things you consider positive and negative, important or mundane. Every time you give someone the unvarnished truth, you earn a grain of trust. Over time, they pile up.

If you want to see what everyday transparency looks like in action, consider this: You just did. We opened this article with a reference to original research done by one of our competitors, a major player in the public relations industry. Why? Because we knew the news was out there, and that if you were interested in this topic you'd find it anyway. By engaging the subject head-on, we didn't detract value from what we had to say; we added to it. No matter what business you're in, you have opportunities every day to apply the same principle.

Employee Morale

Capstrat — Sun, 01 Nov 2009 00:00:00 -0400

Workers' confidence in their employers is high, despite a down economy. Poll results from a recent survey conducted by Capstrat and Public Policy Polling find 53 percent of respondents have "a lot of confidence" in their current employers.

When asked to rate current benefits, 79 percent of respondents say their company benefits are "good to fair." Eighty-one percent report "very good to good" morale at their company.

In addition to a strong benefits package, employees report receiving fair salary increases, despite the rough economy and rumors of layoffs. Pay increases in the last nine months were judged "very to somewhat fair" by 49 percent of respondents.

"Smart businesses work hard to retain talent even in a tough economy," says Ken Eudy, Capstrat CEO. "It's important for businesses to monitor the mood of their workforces and take appropriate steps to keep employees happy."

"If employees sense a sinking ship, they will run for the nearest exit," Eudy said. "From the latest poll results, it seems employers recognize the importance of company morale and employees' job satisfaction."

Other poll findings include:

Job satisfaction most important factor for company morale. When asked to rank several choices, 29 percent of respondents chose ‘job satisfaction' as the most important factor for good company morale.

Quality of supervisor least important for company morale. Ranking last, only four percent of respondents chose ‘quality of supervisor' as the most important factor for good company morale.

To view complete survey results, visit www.publicpolicypolling.com .

Featured Project - AllOne Mobile

Capstrat — Sun, 01 Nov 2009 00:00:00 -0400

Our Thinking

AllOne Health provides occupational health, employee assistance and productivity programs to employers and health plans to help employees and their dependents get and stay healthy. In early 2008, the company began its foray into mobile health technology with AllOne Mobile. AllOne Mobile is a cell phone application provided primarily by health plans and employers to allow individuals to better manage their health and well-being no matter where they are, what time it is, or how complex their medical problems.

Media Targets

By pitching mobile health and technology reporters, we targeted an interested media audience and, ultimately, health IT executives and other C-suite decision-makers, with a finely-tuned message.

Strategy and Tactics

Our strategy takes both a relationship-building and an opportunistic, quick-hit approach to media relations. Here's how we do it.

Cultivate relationships. We begin by proactively becoming a resource for reporters who cover health and technology, especially mobile technology. Even if we're not pitching a story, simply keeping in touch through phone calls or e-mails is effective.

Know their stuff - and yours. Before we speak with reporters, we research their recent work and the news they typically cover so we can offer story ideas they'll - hopefully - appreciate. We also ask our client the tough questions so we can provide insight and value once reporters start asking us questions.

Be accessible. With a new product or service, being accessible can be more important than being the biggest, best or well-known. Since reporters live and die by deadlines that would make most people crazy, we meet their needs by quickly offering concise information tailored to the story angle.

Be persistent. We pitch everything from new business wins and service offerings to event sponsorships and speaking opportunities for AllOne Mobile. And, we don't give up.

Results

We've generated more than 50 media hits for AllOne Mobile with trade magazines, newspapers, business publications, blogs and television. This includes a placement as the lead subject in a recent InformationWeek story on smart phone health care applications, as well as inclusion in a BusinessWeek story on cloud computing that also featured industry giants like Google and Microsoft.

This steady drumbeat of positive - even national - media exposure for AllOne Mobile has increased its credibility and visibility, and opened doors for additional media and business opportunities that may not have otherwise been available to a new, early-adopter product.

Can good design treat a major health dilemma?

tcoats@capstrat.com (Todd Coats) — Mon, 19 Oct 2009 00:00:00 -0400

Unfortunately the most at risk don't know it.

The National Assessment of Adult Literacy has found about 36 percent of adults - 87 million people - have ‘basic' or ‘below basic' health literacy skills. A few years earlier, the Journal of the American Medical Association released a study finding between 26 and 60 percent of hospitalized patients could not understand medication directions, standard consent forms or basic health care materials. How did we create such a divide?

The difficulty in understanding health terms has its roots in other recognized forms of literacy: 1) fundamental literacy, or reading; 2) scientific literacy; 3) civic literacy; and 4) cultural literacy.1 Whatever the root cause, health literacy causes poor communication between patients and providers, increasing the risk of medical error. It also reduces the success of treatments and results in less frequent screenings and disproportionately high rates of disease and mortality.2 All this bad health adds up to a whopper of a medical bill. Poor health literacy attributes to increased hospitalization rates, overuse of emergency rooms3 and lost productivity. This stresses our already overtaxed health care system and costs an estimated $106 to $236 billion annually.4 That's close to the annual income of the entire country of Mexico.

Do we need a major investment to help treat this issue? Not really. Just a deeper understanding of good design principles.

Adults with low literacy skills are more likely to get information from simple images, comparison infographics and uncluttered illustrations. Principles of good design help simplify complex information into easy-to-understand visual bits. Good, creative design thinking also allows for information to be tiered, helping the reader go deeper as his or her skill level permits. This is particularly important when explaining tests, treatments and medications.

But good design isn't exclusive to visuals. To effectively communicate, the oral and written words must be simple, jargon-free and clear. Experts recommend writing at around a fifth grade level. When I began following that advice, it felt like pandering. Now I realize the importance of the simplicity. High-dollar words like "antihypertensive" and "hypoglycemia" should be replaced with "blood pressure pill" and "low sugar." Instead of saying, "Take on an empty stomach," add clarity by saying "Take one hour before breakfast." Instead of "Let me know if you have questions," we say, "What questions do you have?"

From Conversations to Signage to Brochures to Websites

A U.S. Department of Health and Human Services teach back program - in which patients tell providers in their own words what the providers have told them - was designed to bring public and physician attention to this issue. The program gives patients three questions to ask each time they talk to a doctor, nurse or pharmacist:

What is my main problem?
What do I need to do?
Why is it important for me to do this?

At Capstrat, we and our clients spend a lot of time and money trying to improve the delivery of health care. And there's value in the sophisticated models, memes and themes we use in our work. But we should all keep sight of the most fundamental moment in a doctor-patient relationship - What's wrong with me and how can it be fixed? - and use our talents to make sure it always goes smoothly. After that, everything else gets a lot easier.

Zarcadoolas et al. 2005, 2006
(Baker et al. 1998; Berkman et al. 2004;Gordon et al. 2002; Lindau et al. 2001; Rudd et al. 1999;Williams et al. 2002).
(Baker et al. 2004).
Low Health Literacy: Implications for National Health Policy, John A. Vernon, PhD, Department of Finance, University of Connecticut

Marketing Health Care to the New Older Generation

Capstrat — Mon, 19 Oct 2009 00:00:00 -0400

Baby Boomers will redefine how we think about "old age." Joseph Coughlin, director of the Age Lab at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology - and a Baby Boomer himself - says, "We will not be like our parents or grandparents. If we are tired or suffer from a little bit of pain, that's not what we're going to accept as a natural part of aging. We're going to have a higher set of expectations. And the expectations are going to be driven by our aspirations and our money to be able to go after what we want."

This shift in attitude has huge implications for health care for this new older generation.

This growing demographic will live longer than past generations and will need health care services for more years. The American Hospital Association reports that 62 percent of 50-64 year olds are living with at least one of six chronic conditions (hypertension, high cholesterol, arthritis, diabetes, heart disease and cancer), and as the Boomers age, the number with multiple chronic conditions will grow.

Because Boomers tend to be better educated than previous generations, they will be more involved in their medical care and will seek options that work with their needs and lifestyle. Their first stop for medical information will likely be the Internet, whether it's checking a symptom on WebMD, or visiting an online health community to exchange information with other Boomers who have similar health issues. When they do visit a physician, they will expect individualized attention and will be quick to challenge the notion that "doctor knows best."

In addition to challenging their health care provider's advice, this generation will challenge traditional health care practices. Complementary or alternative medicines ranging from massage therapy and chiropractic to meditation and acupuncture will be used alongside traditional medicine to treat conditions and improve overall wellness.

Technology will allow Boomers more medical independence. They will be able to monitor their own conditions and can communicate with their physicians remotely. Technology that enables less invasive procedures and shorter recovery times will make elective, quality-of-life surgical treatments more attractive.

The new world order offers myriad opportunities for health care marketers who know the right ways to engage with this audience. Lesson number one is that a one-size-fits-all marketing strategy will fail. Boomers can be parents, retirees, caregivers, grandparents, single - or some combination of the above. Tailor your messages to the life stage of your market to show you understand their needs.

Second, empowered Boomers don't want to be told what to do, so give them the tools to understand why your service or product is better and give them the opportunity to make their own choice.

Above all, remember that Boomers are not the health care consumers of yesterday. They are active participants at every level, so engage them in the process and seek to become a partner with this new older generation.

While Washington Talks, Health Care Changes

pmahoney@capstrat.com (Paul Mahoney) — Mon, 19 Oct 2009 00:00:00 -0400

Lost amid the confusing and confused arguments in Washington - death panels, socialism, villainous insurers and the "keep government out of my Medicare" crowd, is the fact that our health care system has already changed in significant ways.

No one tell Glenn Beck, but the majority of care is already paid for by the federal government - including Medicare, Medicaid, CHIPs and the COBRA subsidies in the stimulus bill. It's been 50 years since the U.S. health care system has been driven by the supply-and-demand forces that allocate resources in other sectors of our economy.

And that's how Americans have wanted it.

In the late eighties and early nineties, employee health costs became the largest overhead cost after salaries. Businesses turned to managed care organizations to proactively manage workers' health and negotiate better prices with doctors and hospitals. Health care costs actually did go down, briefly, for the first and possibly the last time in U.S. history. But patients rebelled against the bureaucratic aspects of managed care. Doctors joined the revolt to defend the doctor-patient relationship - and their own wallets and autonomy. In the end, most of the restrictive forms of managed care were regulated out of existence. Like a vestigial leg on a whale, only the flat copayment - the one aspect of managed care that Americans really loved - remains from that era.

Few Americans understand that what replaced managed care was not unfettered access to services, but the dubious privilege of paying a much greater share of a still-uncontrolled and inefficient system. This is true for virtually everyone, not just those with high-deductible plans linked to HSAs. (How much do you want to bet that your health coverage has copayment for hospital stays that could cost your family $5,000-$10,000 a year?)

Politicians gearing up for arguments for and against "reforming" health care don't seem to understand how much the system has changed already. Because consumers now have serious skin in the game, health care is actually flirting with something like a retail orientation. The system is moving slowly, clumsily and with much gnashing of teeth, but it is moving.

Here's a road map for navigating this brave new world:

1. Patients

Get used to spending more of your own money on health care. Baucus bill, public plan, doesn't matter - if you're covered now, your premiums will go up when coverage is made universal (or nearly so). Your taxes will go up, too. And there may be new taxes on your premiums. You simply must take advantage of tax-sheltered savings plans like HSAs.

Also, be responsible for making better decisions by asking questions about cost up front. Do I need this? Are there more conservative approaches? Where is the most cost-effective facility? Of course this can be difficult if you're dealing with a serious health condition. Go ahead and blame your insurer about this if you want (yes, you hate having to ask what things cost; no, there's no way around it). But put your energy into coaxing cost and value information out of a health care system that is still not very good at providing it.

2. Doctors

For decades, costs were a minor factor in your decision-making process. That approach is over, O-V-E-R. Comparisons to peers' performance in both effectiveness and cost will eventually become important. An announcement by a local insurer that Zagat patient evaluations would be available online was greeted by a letter to the Raleigh paper that said, in essence, How Dare Anyone Rate Me? Such harrumphing just won't prepare you for the emerging health care marketplace.

Imagine that you run a business that is in competition with other businesses providing similar services - because, well, you do. You can pine for the days of Marcus Welby if you want, but put resources into making your practice more efficient and your pricing more transparent.

Efforts to define and promote evidenced-based treatment will inevitably prompt many doctors to mount a spirited defense of physician autonomy. But resistance to quality standards won't guarantee a free hand for doctors - it's more likely to bring about a rigid rationing of care that no one wants. Don't fight quality standards, shape them.

One bright spot for primary care doctors: you will be more in demand than ever before. Be sure that you get paid for taking on the inevitable crush of new patients once everyone has insurance.

3. Hospitals

A tough business that will only get tougher as more people lose jobs and employer-based coverage. A possible bright spot is federal money aimed at improving health information technology. The government wants interoperable systems that can talk to each other; hospitals need to speed up their revenue stream and reduce administrative costs. Federal stimulus money could possibly float both boats. But be sure to get early input from staff and physicians so you don't create something that's worse than what you have now.

In the near future, you'll need to stop looking shocked when patients ask in advance of treatment how much a procedure will cost. If you can't provide rational estimates, it will eventually cost you business to competitors who can.

4. Insurers

And you thought you weren't beloved before? Americans blame you for giving them the less-managed health care they demanded. They also seem to think that health care costs are synonymous with premium rates. (That's why President Obama can shift from health care reform to health insurance reform, with no one noticing.) Forget about low-cost, thin-coverage products that will be the next cost-cutting tactic to be regulated out of existence. Invest instead in helping consumers evaluate cost and quality. Real price transparency will create big headaches for your network people (providers will likely seek the highest reimbursements paid anywhere in your system), but it's the only way to bring market forces into play.

Make it easier for your customers to get comparative quality information from credible third-party researchers or academic medical centers. Sorry, but no matter how good your information, many consumers dismiss you as bean counters. It's much more important that consumers get good quality information than that they get it from you. But be sure that consumers understand the role you play in negotiating lower fees. Consider calling provider discounts "the whopping bill you would have to pay if you weren't lucky enough to have our coverage." (Needs some editing before you print the t-shirts, but you get the idea.)

5. Government agencies

The stimulus bill funds research into the comparative quality of various treatment methods. In theory, that's a fabulous thing. If only such research had any impact on how care is actually delivered. For twenty-five years, the Dartmouth Atlas Studies (and many others) have extensively documented how huge variations in care persist despite research identifying better, cheaper approaches. This won't change until the government and third party payers actually base reimbursement on results - or at least on conforming to evidence-based approaches. Research is great - but if you continue to pay as much for mediocre care as optimal care, expect to get lots of it.

Arguably, insurers can and should pull an oar in the evidence-based race as well. The problem is anything they do to cut costs leads to screams that they're sacrificing quality on the altar of Wall Street profits. Though Big Government may scare some people even more than Big Insurance, government has the clout to inside on at least some pilot projects that link reimbursements to results rather than volume.

6. The news media

Who DO you put the black hat on these days? It is certainly fun vilifying insurers again, but more and more, the federal government is calling the shots. The Wall Street Journal reports that the government is changing how it pays for durable medical goods. Instead of being able to choose any supplier, Medicare plans to cut costs by paying only approved suppliers selected through competitive bidding. Maybe it's me, but that sure sounds like network discounts and managed care. Supplier and patient advocacy groups are already gearing up for a fight. Hope you saved all the old managed care stories.

Social Marketing and Patient Recruitment Trials

cmartin@capstrat.com (Christina Martin) — Mon, 19 Oct 2009 00:00:00 -0400

That's part of the reason that enrolling patients in U.S. clinical trials is an ongoing challenge. Depending on the type of product and stage of development, investigators generally seek healthy volunteers, patients with a specific condition or both. Attracting healthy volunteers is proving to be harder than enrolling patients with specific ailments, but both groups play a critical role in the advancement of medicine.

Why aren't people inclined to participate in trials that could help change the future of medicine? Could our communication strategies be a part of the problem? Traditionally, patient recruitment has relied heavily on radio, TV and newspaper advertisements. These ads typically include a straightforward listing of qualifications, compensation, contact information and legal points. No reminder as to why the trial is important; no call to action. People aren't moved to help.

Everyone is quick to extend a hand in times of need and most of us have a natural desire to do good. But when it comes to advancing medicine, there is a greater reluctance to get involved. Most of us are busy with our day-to-day lives, keeping our focus on the here and now. Could social marketing - using marketing principles to address social and health problems - be the key to convince patients and volunteers that participating in trials is time well spent?

A more compelling argument about the important role of clinical trials in medical advancement is needed. Researchers seeking to broaden participating in trials need to tap into existing knowledge about what types of communications get people's attention and really motivate them to participate in trials. Perhaps it is this point: in no other way can the average person contribute more significantly to the discovery of new cures and treatments than by participating in a clinical study. Isn't advancing the frontier of medical knowledge worth a few hours of your time?

Patient recruitment should take into account what demographic information tells us about the tone, channel and theme most likely to move a targeted group. But messaging to all potential participants should tell a broader story of the vital role these trials play in advancing the health of the community. Information about financial compensation, an important motivating factor, is fine. But outreach to potential trial participants must also elicit real passion if it is to attract sufficient numbers of healthy individuals.

The next time you hear about a clinical trial, think about this. One day, your life or that of a friend or loved one, may depend on a new drug or treatment. Clinical trials are a chance to "pay it forward" and play an active role in medical advancement.

Poll Shows Commitment to Sustainability Still Important to Consumers

Capstrat — Mon, 28 Sep 2009 00:00:00 -0400

RALEIGH, N.C., July 24, 2009 - A recent Capstrat-Public Policy Polling survey shows that Americans continue to place a high value on a business' commitment to sustainability, despite their concerns about the economy. Eighty-three percent of respondents said a company's commitment to sustainable business practices is very or somewhat important in their purchasing decisions.

But the poll of 923 adults also suggests that many businesses are not yet associating their brands with sustainability. Nearly half (46 percent) of respondents said they rarely or never hear their employers talk about sustainability even though nearly a quarter (24 percent) say that sustainability is a top priority in their company’s business decisions.

"It appears that many businesses are missing an opportunity to tell customers and employees about their own commitment to sustainability," said Capstrat CEO Ken Eudy. "While there have been questions about corporate 'greenwashing' where companies are overstating their true dedication to green practices, this poll indicates that many businesses have a bona fide commitment that they aren’t communicating clearly to customers and employees."

Eudy says this is a missed opportunity—especially considering that even amid an economic turndown, a majority of poll respondents (60 percent) said they would pay more for what they consider to be a green product.

Other notable Capstrat-Public Policy Poll results include:

Seventeen percent of poll respondents said their employers report on sustainability efforts to employees frequently.
Fifty-four percent of poll respondents believe their companies' recycling programs are their most important green activity.
Ten percent of Americans consider environmental friendliness the most important factor in purchasing decisions.

The national survey on corporate social responsibility, conducted by Public Policy Polling on July 6-7, 2009, polled 923 adults. The survey has a margin of error of plus or minus 4.1 percentage points.

Find the survey questionnaire and results at www.publicpolicypolling.com.

About Capstrat

Capstrat is a communications agency based in Raleigh, N.C. The firm specializes in communications for complex issues that health care, technology, energy/infrastructure and financial organizations face at critical moments. Capstrat provides public relations, marketing communications, interactive communications and public affairs. Visit Capstrat on the Web, www.capstrat.com

About Public Policy Polling

Public Policy Polling has conducted regional and national surveys since 1991. The firm employs Interactive Voice Response or IVR methodology. Just as polling evolved from mail-in surveys and door-to-door interviewers to live telephone interviewers, the polling industry is now evolving into automated telephone surveys (IVR) and internet polling. An analysis by the Wall Street Journal of swing state polls in the 2008 presidential campaign concluded that Public Policy Polling was among the two most accurate survey firms.

Open Link in New Tab
Download

Reports of Old Media's Demise May Be Exaggerated

Capstrat — Mon, 28 Sep 2009 00:00:00 -0400

Tough times are nothing new for the news business. Long before the economy tanked, print publishers already knew times had passed them by. Consider their business model: an army of reporters funded by expensive retail advertising read by a rapidly-dwindling base of hard copy subscribers. In recent years, the same content they sold at a premium on paper has also been given away for free online, and pricey classified ads compete head-to-head with sites that let sellers post color pictures and unlimited descriptions for free. Radio and broadcast outlets have had similar struggles with new competitors who offer better audience targeting at much lower cost.

The downturn has certainly accelerated traditional journalism's problems. When newspaper publisher McClatchy announced 1,600 layoffs on March 9, it highlighted troubles on a much grander scale than we saw even six months ago. Consider Twitter's blackly comedic TheMediaisDying, a continuous elegy to journalism that tracks the latest closings, layoffs and firings in the news media. Watch it for a day and you’ll be convinced that soon the only place to find reporters will be in museums (presumably sporting crumpled fedoras adorned with oversized "press" cards).

As professionals at an integrated agency, my co-workers and I have been trying to puzzle out how all this changes communications, brand building and public affairs. Amid the gloom, we see plenty of reason for optimism — and plenty of new strategies.

The Shifting Balance of Expertise

When specialized "beat reporters" get fired or furloughed, those of us with long-standing relationships with journalists bemoan the loss of expertise. When we're pitching stories these days, it pays to assume the reporter on the other end of the phone line is young and green. This means not only more work, but also a greater opportunity to influence the story. Often a short, cogent backgrounder is essential to providing context and showing why a client's product, program or research is newsworthy. This is particularly true in complex industries where debates can progress slowly over decades, as in energy, health care, insurance and pharmaceuticals.

The good news is that industry insiders will continue to want the deep technical analysis and insight that mainstream papers are cutting back on. These specialized audiences will continue to support trade journals and subscription websites, so PR pros may find the reporters they’re familiar with forging new careers at these publications.

Featured Project: Name Your Dream Assignment

csilverstein@capstrat.com (Cord Silverstein) — Mon, 28 Sep 2009 00:00:00 -0400

Our Thinking

Lenovo and Microsoft had a wonderful new product on their hands that no one knew about: the ThinkPad W700 notebook with Microsoft Vista ^® . While the computer and software had advanced technology to satisfy a photographer's every need and want, few photographers were aware it existed. Even so, our savvy target market was biased towards Macs and predisposed to using Adobe software.

We had to find a way to tap into photographers' creative energy while credibly exposing photographers to this fantastic new piece of technology. It couldn't be another typical awareness campaign. We had to think big to reach this finely-tuned audience.

Read on to discover how Capstrat helped two technology giants credibly reach out to one of their most tightly-knit markets.

Research

We needed prosumer photographers—knowledgeable, but amateur photographers—to take a second look at the W700. Through our research, we narrowed our photographer target to the prosumer group based on key findings:

The prosumer group was attracted to the professional quality features of the W700. Although classified as amateurs, many have a sharply trained eye for photography. In their mind, it is only fair they purchase software that makes the most of their hobby.
Prosumers were more likely to test out new products with advanced technology. Many in our target group reported using their 'free time' to play around with new software and gadgets. But since they weren't 'professional hobbyists', they didn't need all the features of the professional Mac units currently on the market.

Before we executed any aspect of the contest, we first sought out this target market online. They talked; we listened. We made sure we understood their passions, interests and online behavior. These insights informed a successful two-way conversation. We identified the key photography influencers and reached out to them from day one to get their help in engaging online photography communities. Our open communication gave them a sense of ownership in the promotion of the W700, so they felt vested enough to speak out on our behalf.

Planning and Implementation

We created a promotional contest to attract and get prospects to check out not only the promotion but also the product. Name Your Dream Assignment called for photographers of all abilities to submit their ideas for the ultimate dream photo assignment—engaging them through the one passion they all shared: their art. The winner would receive $50,000 to shoot their assignment anywhere in the world, plus the Lenovo ThinkPad W700 to help along the way. The winner was selected based on a combination of votes plus a review of top vote-getters by a panel of experts.

Social media was a natural vehicle for encouraging voting. The promotion appealed to the aspirations and interests of our audience. It was irresistible. And, we structured the promotion to both engage our audience and also encourage them to share it with others. The contest rolled out in two phases. Phase I, the initial seeding, focused on raising awareness and interest among photographers in the month leading up to the contest. We wanted to create a buzz impossible to ignore. Using our research findings, we purposefully engaged with photographers where they were already spending time online, in places such as Facebook, Flickr, Twitter, photography blogs and forums. Since we had already established relationships with influential bloggers, they were helpful in promoting the contest based on the value it promised their readers.

And it worked. The photography world buzzed with more than 55,000 conversations and energetic speculation—before anyone could even submit an idea. We supplemented the social media strategy with traditional online banners on niche photography sites to raise even more awareness and drive traffic to the Phase I site at NameYourDreamAssignment.com . Here, users could sign up to receive contest updates and insider information, provided in a series of e-mail blasts in the weeks prior to the contest. Over 8,500 signed up to receive pre-contest information from Lenovo and Microsoft. After four weeks of excitement and anticipation, launch day finally arrived. The Phase II site allowed contestants to enter up to three dream ideas, while anyone could vote and add comments. Users could download badges to post on their blogs or websites in order to drive traffic to their own Dream pages. The site also featured Lenovo and Microsoft as joint sponsors, with promotional areas for the W700 displayed on every page.

Results

Photographers immediately proved they were serious about winning. Within the first 12 hours of its launch, NameYourDreamAssignment.com saw more than 2,000 entries. And as the weeks of voting went on, it drove more than 122,000 unique visitors to Lenovo.com . We made sure to back up every social media effort with real metrics, monitored in real time.

Name Your Dream Assignment by the Numbers

Total registrations - 38,319
Dream Assignment ideas posted - 2,194
Total votes - 37,623
Total comments - 17,327
Total users driven to W700 landing page on Lenovo.com - 122,598
Total unique visitors on Dream Assignment website - 167,345
Total separate websites discussing Dream Assignment - 20,145
Total separate online discussions talking about Dream Assignment - 55,676
Total Facebook fans - 1690
Total Twitter followers - 752
Total Flickr members - 507

From the day we first pitched the idea to the day we launched the Phase I site, a mere six weeks went by. By investing in a non-traditional idea, Lenovo and Microsoft now know the target market inside-out. Name Your Dream Assignment's social media focus allowed us to conduct a thorough analysis of the target's conversations, yielding endless information about their brand perceptions, usage habits and opinions on the competition. This information will prove priceless in future marketing efforts for the W700.

In the end, a whole lot of dreams came true.

Americans report low confidence in government, the media and corporations, more in churches

keudy@capstrat.com (Ken Eudy) — Wed, 20 May 2009 00:00:00 -0400

Only five percent of the 568 respondents in the recent survey said they have "a lot of confidence" in the media, compared to half of the sample who said they had "little confidence."

"This certainly is a time of economic and social disruption. Many Americans don't know who or what they can trust," said Capstrat CEO Ken Eudy. "Now is the time for businesses and the media to make sure their business practices with customers, employees and other stakeholders are straightforward and transparent."

The media, Eudy said, are grappling with a poor economy plus transformational change in media consumption habits. "Some of this low confidence rating in the media may well reflect the fact that some news media outlets are retrenching, reducing staff or even going out of business. But it's also been true through the generations that some consumers blame the messenger for bad news."

Other notable Capstrat-Public Policy Poll results included:

Half of the American voters polled said they had a lot of confidence in churches.
Government fared better than corporations, with 23 percent of poll respondents saying they had a lot of confidence in government, while 50 percent said they had little confidence.
Compared to corporations (8 percent reporting a lot of confidence) small business enjoyed a high confidence level from 40 percent of poll respondents.
Some 57 percent of Americans said they have little confidence in labor unions.

The national survey on financial stress, conducted by the Public Policy Polling April 24-26, 2009, polled 568 adults. The survey has a margin of error of plus or minus 4.1 percentage points.

Find the survey questionnaire and results at Public Policy Polling .

About Capstrat

Capstrat is a communications agency based in Raleigh, N.C. The firm specializes in communications for complex issues that health care, technology, energy/infrastructure and financial organizations face at critical moments. Capstrat provides public relations, marketing communications, interactive communications and public affairs.

About Public Policy Polling

Public Policy Polling has conducted regional and national surveys since 1991. The firm employs Interactive Voice Response or IVR methodology. Just as polling evolved from mail-in surveys and door-to-door interviewers to live telephone interviewers, the polling industry is now evolving into automated telephone surveys (IVR) and internet polling. An analysis by the Wall Street Journal of swing state polls in the 2008 presidential campaign concluded that Public Policy Polling was among the two most accurate survey firms.

2009 Trends: Staying On Track with Health Consumers

Capstrat — Thu, 05 Mar 2009 00:00:00 -0400

Just some of the stats:

Sixty percent of respondents want online access to their doctors, to medical records, test results and to same-day appointments
One in four said they would pay more to physicians for such digital amenities
Forty-six percent say they'd be interested in keeping an online or software computer program personal health care record
Gen X and women are most likely to want online access to medical records and test results
One in three consumers consult health-related websites and pharmacists
Gen X and Baby Boomers are the most likely to use health-related sites
More than one in four has used a health plan website for information on the quality of a physician or hospital

The move toward digital connectivity demands a different mindset for how the health care industry perceives and communicates with its customers. And, it offers myriad opportunities for forward-thinking organizations. Here are several points to consider: Use your website as an extension of your customer service or office staff. Make it easy for your customers to do business with you by offering tools like online FAQs, contextual help, forums and online classrooms. If they need to access help, give them choices for how to contact you such as e-mail, phone or chat.

Turn your site into a virtual showroom. Provide interactive ways to help your customers understand your services and your expertise. Help consumers manage their health information with opt-in alerts or reminders via e-mail, RSS, IM and voicemail. And offer online communities where your visitors can share experiences and opinions. Health consumers are a primed and ready audience, so take advantage. But be smart about it. Think first about what your audience is looking for, and then engage with them on their terms, not yours.

2009: Changes the Face of Media

eperez@capstrat.com (Ely Perez) — Thu, 05 Mar 2009 00:00:00 -0400

The rise of Web 2.0, combined with new priorities for marketers, has resulted in a profound shift in the way marketing is done. Advertisers continue to use online marketing to get a better ROI for their campaigns - especially as the cost-per-thousand of online mediums continues to decrease. Advertisers are now focusing on marketing campaigns that engage the user by providing additional benefits through added video, mobile and social media elements.

Because of these new tactics, marketers have become more aware of how powerful social media can be in influencing and enhancing customer satisfaction. In addition, social media can increase conversions, retention rates and the building of brand awareness. Rather than the traditional marketing model of relying on demographic-based outreach, marketers are now focusing on consumer behaviors as a way of reaching a tightly-defined niche market. Social networks and social media promotion provide marketers and advertisers with powerful tools to offer more personalized solutions that emphasize product appropriateness, as well as build brand loyalty and awareness of quality.

Principals from companies including American Express, Eastman Kodak, IBM and Siemens will all be using these strategies to drive marketing efforts in 2009's tough economy. As Motorola global marketing and communications VP Eduardo Conrado said at the BtoB's Best Luncheon on top trends for 2009, "We will be increasing interactive, coupled with strong analytics for database marketing and better segmentation."

To engage consumers more effectively, it is imperative to use proper analytics to better understand data and consumer behavior. According to Gartner Research, the need for advertisers to improve the effectiveness and measurability of their advertising spending will become more acute in 2009. It is essential to learn how visitors locate, interact with and even leave your site. Analytics has thus evolved into marketing performance management - giving a consistent measure to any marketing campaign's effectiveness. As 2009 marketing budgets are being finalized, ensure proper analytics tools are in place. These metrics will allow companies to make informed, relevant decisions that not only show quality, but also engage customers.

Our Economic Future — from a Millennial’s Perspective

milardi@capstrat.com (Melissa Ilardi) — Thu, 05 Mar 2009 00:00:00 -0400

Articles have stated that a Millennial's perspective on how 2009 will play out is more positive than any other generation group. I believe this is a direct result of never previously going through a serious economic downturn as working adults. Most of us were not part of the working world in 2001 when the economy fell - many of us were still in college. We were blissfully unaware of anything going on outside of balancing good academic standings and not missing a keg party - the real issues in our lives.

In 2009, we will all see more job losses, more business closings and more economic instability. In the world of advertising, this translates to smaller budgets. As a media buyer, I am always looking to get the most bang for my client's buck. With smaller budgets forecasted for clients this year, I feel that we can still meet expectations, despite the challenges ahead. Staying positive and keeping our clients satisfied with their investments will be a trend we'll see in 2009.

Stations are already willing to offer a lot more value this year, based on sheer inventory. We typically go multiple rounds with stations, ensuring the lowest possible rates and the maximum in value added. This year, stations will be serving up their inventory on a silver platter, and we will gladly take it!

Working with smaller budgets and encouraging our clients to continue advertising will take some creativity. We welcome the opportunity to be creative for our clients and feel that this is the best year to do it! Social platforms will continue to be a viable part of the marketing mix, with the ability to create low-cost viral opportunities. Other mediums such as outdoor, are seeing big price breaks this year. Clients may be able to experiment with different mediums and other promotional opportunities associated with value added that may not have made sense before. Staying optimistic in 2009 will allow us to be more creative in fulfilling our clients' needs. We'll seek out new opportunities. We'll be challenged in our jobs to do more with less. I'm confident that this challenge will only better us in our jobs, and I look forward to seeing how it will play out.

Thanks for Listening

tcoats@capstrat.com (Todd Coats) — Thu, 05 Mar 2009 00:00:00 -0400

Some agencies are facing irrevelance by not knowing where to turn next. Nothing new there. "What's next" has always been a moving target. Now that moving target is taped on a gnat's wing inside a rocket...zig-zagging...in the dark.

In 2009, let's stop yakking about what the future will hold and do something bold to realize it. Something forthright. Something that shows consideration. Something of real worth.

Let's listen.

More than ever, clients need us to listen. Actively listen to them, their stakeholders, their customers, their public and their community. Business concerns and challenges are becoming more nuanced. They require deeper, more original insight to deliver smarter communication solutions. I believe original insight leads to original inspiration, which leads to original work. What do consumers really need from our client? Let's ask. And keep asking in different ways ‘til we listen AND hear them. That's how real innovation happens - by fully immersing in the problem at hand.

As professionals we must also listen to each other. The communications complexities of 2009 will require a diverse environment of experts bringing a wider perspective to delicate issues. There are so many considerations about everything that we must have experts to guide us. Listening will broaden our view.

Listening takes discipline. It's a lost art, and we're dumber because of it. Recently, I was stopped several times in a meeting by random remarks - proving others stopped listening after ten seconds. Maybe I'm a blowhard. But if I say, "Paint the house blue. Start Tuesday and work three days to completion," then someone's first question shouldn't be, "What color do we paint the house?" Simple things like that reduce confidence fast.

Have we Tweeted and blogged ourselves into believing we always have something important to say? I know I'm guilty. So, in 2009 I've committed to listening more and thinking more thoroughly around an issue. Oh, I'll talk too, when I have something valuable to say. I hope this year makes power-listening a trend we can all appreciate.

User-Generated Content

Capstrat — Thu, 05 Mar 2009 00:00:00 -0400

These are just a few of the stats. The fact is, if you don't capitalize on social media in 2009, your brand will be paying the price.

Like all new advertising avenues, UGC is intimidating. Many advertisers don't have experience in this realm. Even for those that do, there are no definite rules that ensure success. But UGC provides opportunities that traditional advertising doesn't. It allows brands to build credibility, awareness and trust. Plus, it engages the consumer more willingly than an unwelcome commercial, print ad or a sparkly flash banner.

So what exactly is UGC? Technically, it's defined as any information created and uploaded on a website by the end user. It comes in the form of blogs, wiki pages, product reviews, video reviews, YouTube uploads, MySpace pages, etc.

UGC creates brand credibility, engages consumers by relying on their contributions, permits them to feel a degree of ownership over the brand and subjects the brand to candid online scrutiny - pressuring it to provide products and services of real quality and value.

A textbook case of UGC success is RayBan's YouTube video "Guy Catches Glasses with Face." RayBan's agency, Cutwater, posted a home video of a man catching a pair of sunglasses on his face as his friend throws them from different heights, speeds and angles. Fascination with the video generated thousands of comments from viewers debating whether or not the video was real and how it worked. It was viewed 17 million times in its first week on YouTube and was passed around virally online for weeks after. The key to RayBan's success was offering its audience compelling, engaging content that challenged them to think.

UGC provides infinite possibilities for brand building. Some of the more popular implementations include brand wrappers or skins that transform an Internet page into branded wallpaper. Brand profile pages are also popular - milk has its own MySpace page and 20,673 friends. Some advertisers capitalize on UGC to strategically place advertising messages. For example, when a user types "pizza" into a Google search box or sends a friend a message on Facebook about skydiving, relevant ads will appear next to the user-generated content. Other brands, such as Adidas, have created "online communities" where members interact with each other. And recipe-sharing sites like allrecipes.com create the perfect forums for companies like Williams-Sonoma to reach a specific audience with relevant product information.

As consumers become more and more involved online, the possibilities for branded UGC may increase exponentially. So if you haven't already, in 2009 you better get with the pixels.

Sources:

"User Generated Content, Social Media, and Advertising - an Overview." Interactive Advertising Bureau. April 2008. www.iab.net/media/file/2008_ugc_platform.pdf

"Online Marketing Trends in 2009". November 5, 2008. Strange Corporation. www.strangecorp.com/news/view/online-marketing-trends-in-2009

Buying Real Estate in the Clouds

Capstrat — Thu, 05 Mar 2009 00:00:00 -0400

You buy software the same way you buy a novel. When you buy a book, you're not just paying for the glue, paper and ink. You're also buying the right to read it - sort of like the way you'd be "stealing" if you stood at the news stand and read an entire newspaper, then walked away without paying for it.

Similarly, when you buy software, what you're really buying is the right to run the software. It took time for us to get used to the idea of buying music at iTunes and not getting some tangible object (CD, tape, LP) to mark our ownership. I have yet to grow any more comfortable with the idea of buying a book as ones and zeroes. But I think in 2009, we'll see a lot of folks begin to lose even more of their inhibitions around buying software that runs "in the cloud" - that runs somewhere in, and is accessed through the Internet.

We get invested in our software. We use it to create things we don't want to be without, and that tends to make us want to keep our software close. In the same way that having a CD ensures that we will not lose access to our tunes, we tend to want to have the install discs for our software and run it on our own computers.

Practicality is taking hold, however. Personal, business and enterprise software that is location, platform and device independent is simply more practical than software that isn't. It's more social, scales better and is more (not less) reliable. Most importantly, in 2009, lower up-front and ownership costs and smoother upgrades will appeal to budget-conscious consumers and organizations.

Just remember, you still need to make backups.

Marketers Should Think Twice About Trade Show Spending

kalbritton@capstrat.com (Karen Albritton) — Thu, 05 Mar 2009 00:00:00 -0400

If you're putting the final touches on your 2009 budgets, here are three areas to reconsider:

1. Take a hard look at trade shows and events

As marketers firm up 2009 plans, it's a good time to take a close look at trade show spending. Research from Ipsos shows the economy has drastically affected business travel in 2008 - a trend likely to continue in 2009. In the last economic downturn, we saw trade show attendance decline as companies opted to send fewer representatives or stay home altogether. We also saw some regional trade shows pick up as a lower-cost alternative.

We expect to see Webinars and online conferences substitute for some conference and trade show attendance. As this occurs, we are encouraging our clients to take a hard look at their trade show investment to make sure that they are spending money wisely and have mechanisms in place to capture, track and close leads generated through events. It's also smart to make trade shows do double duty as a platform for media relations and customer bonding.

2. Expand brand media buys to include digital

Many marketers have long looked to online advertising to drive Web traffic and generate sales leads. These same marketers may have concentrated their media buys in traditional branding media like TV or magazines. Thanks to expanded digital video capabilities and continued increases in online program viewing, advertisers have more options for getting branding messages communicated. Online advertising networks are able to package video ads on groups of websites to deliver to sizable audiences as well as desirable target demographics. Any TV buy in 2009 that does not consider an online component would be like not considering cable TV.

3. No plan is complete without a social media strategy

Marketers should avoid the social media hype in 2009 and develop a thoughtful social media strategy. We encourage clients to avoid implementing disconnected social media tactics like random executive blogs, YouTube video postings and Facebook pages in search of a strategy. We work with our clients to treat social media like other media channels and start with a plan.

The first step is determining what role social media should play in your organization's business strategy. Every organization should be monitoring social media and have a plan for managing the conversations that are relevant to its success. Beyond this basic requirement, organizations may choose to use social media as part of customer service, employee recruitment, brand building or product development.

The possibilities for social media may seem overwhelming, but there's no need to get overwhelmed or feel pressured to launch a tactic just because everyone else is. Start with your goals and understand what social media can do to move your organization forward in 2009.

The Changing Face of the Interface

wlangley@capstrat.com (Will Langley) — Thu, 05 Mar 2009 00:00:00 -0400

At the end of 2008, BlackBerry finally unleashed its latest mobile device to the market - raising the number to three viable multi-touch handhelds available to consumers. A few months ago, HP took a calculated half-step in releasing their initial foray into the world of multi-touch - a single-point touch-screen laptop. For more than a year now, Apple has been squeezing the spots off a patent for a true multi-touch laptop. The drumbeat of multi-touch is growing ever louder. The market is ripe and ready...but is the consumer?

My fellow developers and I have been following the progression of the multi-touch wave for several years now. The R&D multi-touch community is, as is typically the case, far ahead of the marketplace. Countless YouTube and Google videos showcasing the multi-touch creations of geeky weekend tinkerers are just a few clicks away. Until Apple's iPhone finally hit the streets in early 2007, the world of multi-touch existed pretty much as a collection of Spielberg effects and gimmicky tradeshow teasers. There was plenty of interest, but the real excitement was remanded to small, chirpy clusters of technophiles. The acceptance of the iPhone by - if not the masses, certainly the disposable income-laden trendies - has changed the game completely. What we are, in fact, witnessing is the slow and inevitable death of the mouse.

2009 will almost certainly usher in a new wave of multi-touch devices available for mass consumption. The consumer has bitten and bitten hard. Continued reprogramming will be necessary - we have relied on the mouse and stylus for more than a quarter-century. As personal computing goes, it is pretty much all we know. Thankfully, we have the Gen-Y's, the Millennials and an army of forward-thinking marketers and CTO's to steady our hands as we venture into the bold new world of multi-touch.

Confessions of an Online Skeptic

Capstrat — Thu, 05 Mar 2009 00:00:00 -0400

I'm starting to see (and yes, I may be the last) that we've only scratched the surface of social capability in the online world. As we speak, the companies that own the future - Google, Yahoo!, Facebook - are implementing applications that make the Internet more mine and yours than ever, allowing us to take our friends with us wherever we go. These tools, such as the already-launched Facebook Connect, do so by enabling us to log on to any third-party website, using one universal identification. No more long lists of different user names and passwords; now we can journey from site to site with just one login. And as we move around the Web under this one ID, our friends, our history and our data follow. When we log into a site via Facebook Connect, for instance, we can see which of our friends have also visited and what they've done there, and we can broadcast our own activity back to our home base on Facebook.

In essence, we can walk into any online party and instantly know someone! For us Web wallflowers, that's incredibly comforting. We and our clans can form our own private water coolers around pop culture stories, share and compare running routes or recommend downtown hotspots for one another, all with the greatest of ease. While yes, you could do all that without the Internet, would you? Or is the Web actually showing us how to be more social with each other than ever before?

There's a catch, of course. By carrying our personal information around with us from site to site, we make ourselves targets for personalized advertisements. As an ad woman, I feel pressure to be thrilled by this concept. We can talk directly to our customers in ways they've never been talked to before. However, as a ‘net user, I am admittedly skeptical. How much do I want brands to know about me? It's taken me long enough to accept the idea of sharing my info online with friends, let alone brands.

I'll accept that personalized ads may be the wave of the future.

But what will they do to win me over?

Can Good Design Treat a Major Health Dilemma?

Capstrat — Mon, 02 Mar 2009 16:00:52 -0400

We have a hidden health crisis on our hands. Like a virus, it's widespread. Like the issue of access to treatment, it's divisive. And it’s as financially damaging as any health epidemic. Fortunately, the treatment is within reach if we act quickly and creatively.

Unfortunately the most at risk don't know it.

The National Assessment of Adult Literacy has found about 36 percent of adults – 87 million people – have 'basic' or 'below basic' health literacy skills. A few years earlier, the Journal of the American Medical Association released a study finding between 26 and 60 percent of hospitalized patients could not understand medication directions, standard consent forms, or basic health care materials. How did we create such a divide?

The difficulty in understanding health terms has its roots in other recognized forms of literacy: 1) fundamental literacy, or reading; 2) scientific literacy; 3) civic literacy; and 4) cultural literacy.¹ Whatever the root cause, health literacy causes poor communication between patients and providers, increasing the risk of medical error. It also reduces the success of treatments and results in less frequent screenings and disproportionately high rates of disease and mortality.⁵ All this bad health adds up to a whopper of a medical bill. Poor health literacy attributes to increased hospitalization rates, overuse of emergency rooms⁴ and lost productivity. This stresses our already overtaxed health care system and costs an estimated $106 to 236 billion annually.² That's close to the annual income of the entire country of Mexico.

Do we need a major investment to help treat this issue? Not really. Just a deeper understanding of good design principles.

From conversations to signage to brochures to Websites

A U.S. Department of Health and Human Services teach back program – in which patients tell providers in their own words what the providers have told them – was designed to bring public and physician attention to this issue. The program gives patients three questions to ask each time they talk to a doctor, nurse or pharmacist:

What is my main problem?
What do I need to do?
Why is it important for me to do this?

At Capstrat, we and our clients spend a lot of time and money trying to improve the delivery of health care. And there's value in the sophisticated models, memes and themes we use in our work. But we should all keep sight of the most fundamental moment in a doctor-patient relationship – What's wrong with me and how can it be fixed? – and use our talents to make sure it always goes smoothly. After that, everything else gets a lot easier.

References:

Zarcadoolas et al. 2005, 2006
Low Health Literacy: Implications for National Health Policy, John A. Vernon, PhD, Department of Finance, University of Connecticut
Inpatient Satisfaction Questions, Iowa Heath System, October 2003-May 2006
(Baker et al. 2004).
(Baker et al. 1998; Berkman et al. 2004;Gordon et al. 2002; Lindau et al. 2001; Rudd et al. 1999;Williams et al. 2002).

Getting the most from in-house, insource and outsource creative

tcoats@capstrat.com (Todd Coats) — Tue, 10 Feb 2009 00:00:00 -0400

All businesses depend on standout creative work, even ones that aren't in the "creativity" business. But producing good creative often seems to involve a choice between uninspiring outsourcing experiences and inefficient in-house headcounts. Many are looking for a "third way," but the answer may instead lie right down the middle — in a carefully managed "insourcing" arrangement that combines the right kind of internal structure with smart use of outside resources.

There are advantages and concerns with all models. In exploring this challenge, I reached beyond my own experience to read several case studies. I Googled, e-mailed, discussed, and observed the way non-creative companies get creative done. What I've come up with is a short compilation of pros and cons, value propositions, leadership insights and best practice recommendations.

Generally speaking, there have been two historical reasons for using in-house agency functions like creative.

1. To save money. The simple, traditional in-house view: value = cost

2. To better control an organization's image… and to save money The insource perspective: value = cost + brand + expertise + familiarity

The point is that no matter what your approach, cost-saving is always part of the equation. The question is what other factors you value. Successful insourcing requires far more expertise and responsibility, while the only purpose of a traditional in-house group is to spend less. A recent Unisys survey suggests cost is now less important compared to increased effectiveness, improved quality and overall business value. That doesn't mean costs are not important to business — but it suggests that a broader focus is the order of the day.

This creates an opportunity for in-house creative groups. Why? Because most have yet to embrace their full potential. Too many of them function simply as a cheap alternative to external creative resources. This type of organization struggles to matter in a company where creative isn't the core product. They survive by doing work that’s good enough, not by raising the bar. They generally have little access to executives. And they find themselves squeezed, because they continue to increase salaries and overhead with attractive benefits while competing with external firms that have freedom to adjust headcount. You can never win on price alone — not even in-house — so why try? You'll always be seen as a vendor. Someone will always come in cheaper. The answer? Be better.

I grew up in ad agencies. At one point I left agency life to join a respected in-house creative group. My agency creative director at the time said, "Are you crazy? They don’t make creative for a living." His implication was clear. If companies make money from your work, you’re valued. If not, you're overhead. He was right, too.

Creative services groups functioning like internal catchall vendors have three vulnerabilities:

They usually don’t create needle-moving work. These groups are asked to do everything from a single slide to time-consuming books, and "no" isn’t in their vocabulary. So they aren’t known for any particular expertise.

They struggle to attract and retain good talent. It’s a deadly cocktail: one part "not having challenging work to keep superior talent engaged," one part "dealing with clandestine internal political issues." In a fog like that, talented people struggle to see their relevance.

Their only success measure is cost-to-completion. Obviously, measuring cost-to-completion is easy. Measuring superior work quality with ROI requires more work, deeper integration with other internal stakeholders and (above all) the willingness to admit the group could be better. Because of the short-order mentality that governs their work, most in-house groups aren't privy to the ultimate results. Showing cost savings is easy, but in the end, good cost-to-completion numbers just substantiate the theory that "good = cheap."

Well-respected companies like Target and Apple build their cultures around innovation, and it shows in everything they do. Simple ROI metrics are put in place to measure the programs; creative leaders are part of important company decisions; and creative staffers are kept clear of company politics. This provides a clear mission — the ultimate goal for creative thinkers. It also creates a definitive scale for areas of improvement.

The new alternative: brand owners

A new type of in-house creative department owns the creative function while making smart decisions about where work is actually done. Key accomplishments that would be too costly (and too hard to control) externally stay inside the walls. Mind-numbing production is outsourced to vendors that must remain competitive.

According to PR Web, "insourcing" — the delegation of jobs to internal, specialized, stand-alone entities — is gaining popularity to control critical productions or competencies. Insourcing demonstrates value by embedding creative thinkers in the company's business. All internal organizations are expected to be cost effective, but progressive companies now see creative and design thinking in terms of overall value.

Insourced employees create value because they:

Have a personal commitment to the greater purpose of the organization
Earn the trust and confidence of executive decision-makers
Understand key business drivers
Know the culture and can facilitate faster decision-making
Aid in speed to market

Business publications are tripping over each other to declare creative thinking a viable business tool and brand differentiator. The perfect insource creative group will thrive if management challenges and treats it as a valued consultant. But the elephant-sized caveat cannot be ignored: The right talent has to be in place. For a creative group to be most valuable, each employee must know and live the company’s mission, brand, goals, structure and culture. Leadership is key, and sometimes those perfect traits are difficult to find in an archetypal "creative."

The perfect internal creative leader:

Fosters a safe creative environment.

In-house groups have been saddled with a bum rap of not pushing themselves, and rightfully so. They often create environments that feature little boat-rocking and plenty of kowtowing to internal politics. Their lives can sometimes seem to revolve around keeping a VP happy. Laziness can easily set in. Animation pioneer Pixar employs 3 principles for fostering a creative environment ⁴ :

Everyone must have the freedom to communicate with anyone.
It must be safe for everyone to offer ideas.
Stay close to innovations happening in the academic community.

Knows when to take risks.

If you aren’t at least a little scared, the creative team isn’t doing its job.3 Risk is absolutely necessary for innovation. Management’s job is not to prevent risk, but to build the capability to recover when failures occur. In order to maintain original work, you have to accept uncertainty, even when it’s uncomfortable. ³

Has a sense of urgency

The perfect leader always sees an opportunity to prove worth. This often requires jumping on a problem with little lead time or protocol. This trait fulfills two goals: It puts the group front and center in solving company issues, and it portrays the group as proactive in caring about the company. The perfect leader should never say, "That’s not my department." They know how to execute projects efficiently, on time and cost-effectively.

Is a spotlight-shunning consigliere.

This is a toughie. By nature, superstars love the spotlight. But to succeed, they must let their executives be the stars. Every executive wants to know they have a valued creative thinker at their disposal who cares about them and the company. Sure, Steve Jobs at Apple is a great celebrity CEO. But without the help of his Design SVP Jonathan Ive, would we still perceive him and the company as innovators?

Has high standards and a strong moral compass

Keeping the company's reputation is the mission every day. Is it coincidental that some of the most widely respected brands also have widely respected insourced creative teams? The making of a great brand, product, reputation and set of values is no accident. Companies like Target, Apple, Nike, Disney and Herman Miller control everything they do.

Is a tireless evangelist.

A lot of senior in-house leaders come from an age of doing, not leading. They grew up as designers and still lean on tactical execution for problem solving. In contrast, the contemporary group leader is a generalist with broad-based knowledge and command of process, procedure and time management. This person elicits the most creative thinking from employees to fulfill the company’s mission and objectives. These leaders don’t get bogged down in nuts-and-bolts production that keeps them from focusing on creating strategy. By outsourcing certain creative and production functions, they free themselves to concentrate on marketing direction and product development. Outsourcing non-core competencies can also provide better results and lower overhead costs. ¹

When a creative leader works to remain an expert in the company's products, services and the primary audience, he or she can be a better steward of the business and its reputation in the market. The leader will also inspire an environment of continuous creativity.

To ensure a creative environment is maintained, animation giant Pixar has incorporated a "dailies" process. This is a group meeting held daily to give and get feedback in a positive way. Once people get over the embarrassment of showing their work in progress, they become more creative. People learn from and inspire each other. Additionally, employing this method helps garner a checks-and-balances approach along the way to keep each project on target.

Pixar also integrates different departments to allow relationships to flourish. With that comes a better understanding of the company’s products. Pixar prides itself on getting talented people to work effectively with one another. This takes trust and respect. Managers play a critical role in making this happen.

During times of economic downturn, like now, the value proposition of internal groups will be under extra scrutiny. Both in-house and insource shops offer value to businesses, and both have challenges demonstrating that value. They’re challenged to be creatively great and business-smart at the same time.

Case study ² of XYZ Investment Group

Following is a short case study. Although the name is made up, the data and information is real.

Problem: Determine whether or not the in-house creative services at an investment group were high-quality, cost effective and results-oriented

Method: A cost analysis method was performed to determine if internal costs were leveraged by ROI

Results: This cost analysis showed that current internal department costs were 40 percent below market. For the sake of ROI, the internal creative team proved an efficient resource for the company. However, interviews showed some internal clients weren’t impressed with design quality. They believed that working with outside agencies provided "fresher" designs, more cutting-edge solutions and outside-the-box thinking.

Cost analysis chart

Is that result pre-ordained? Can you really cultivate great in-house talent that compares to outside agencies? Can business-minded people really be good judges of design? It's certainly debatable, and there are plenty of critics in a company. Having strong talent helps.

XYZ's consultants found the problem wasn't the quality of design that was frustrating to internal clients; rather, it was inconsistency. Greater discipline over in-house design was needed. The best designers will excel in an environment that provides creative tension. The lesser designers will not survive — not necessarily a bad thing.

Following the cost analysis, client interviews and benchmarking against other in-house agencies, XYZ's creative group demonstrated its real value to senior executives and continues to maintain an internal design group with full functionality, including client service and project management expertise. Through this analysis they also developed new best practices for workflow, design disciplines, brand management for design vendors and client service models.

Introducing outsource into the mix

Even the most efficient internal creative groups need external support. Smart internal groups leverage agency resources to get the best work and the best relationships. The rule of thumb is to narrow the number of external suppliers based on talent and capabilities. Each agency has a core competence. Sure, there needs to be overlap for scalability, but each internal need (whether function, brand or department) should match the talents and skills of the agency. ³

Some useful guidelines for outsourcing include:

Use the same supplier for similar projects, so they can deliver consistent work. You want to work with companies that know your product and your mission — this helps guarantee a better execution.
Using fewer suppliers will cut down on the overall costs and learning curves that arise when new teams work on new projects. This also eliminates the need to provide detailed background work for every project.
Fewer vendors equal stronger working relationships.
Output should be outsourced, not owned. This will free the internal team from time-consuming materials.
Only work with good agencies that push themselves to do good work. They must always be reliable and have a deep understanding of your company’s industry.

Conclusion

In-house creative groups can save money, but those cost savings are meaningless if they come at the expense of quality or responsiveness. Focus on providing great work that shows industry knowledge along with great customer service. Lastly, look for external agencies that attract good, talented professionals with complementary skills. Partner with them and consistently employ efficient processes. Do this and your organization will enjoy the best of both worlds: agency-quality work at in-house prices. ⁵

References:

How to Accomplish In-house Marketing Goals by Outsourcing. Credit Union Times. February 2005.
Brandli, Lynn. Viewpoints: In-house Creative Services vs. Total Outsourcing. DMI e-bulletin. August 2003.
Zyman, Sergio. The End of Marketing as We Know It. November 2000.
Catmull, Ed. How Pixar Fosters Collective Creativity. The Harvard Review. September 2008.
Grant, Matthew. High Quality, Low Cost: 3 Keys to Successful Creative Services Management. Aquent Talent Blog. September 2007.
Longenecker, Clinton O., Mead II, William K. Marketing as a Management Style — Improving Internal Customer Service. Business Horizons. July-August 1995.

Now What? Perdue's Administration

lcoman@capstrat.com (Leslie Coman) — Mon, 02 Feb 2009 00:00:00 -0400

In November, the Capstrat Public Affairs team prepared a summary document about the 2008 elections in North Carolina and how the outcome might affect public policy decisions as we begin 2009. The document gives a brief overview of issues we expect to be hot topics and some of the challenges state leaders will be facing as they take office. This addendum provides updated information regarding Governor Bev Perdue’s major appointments.

Download the full report.

Open Link in New Tab
Download

Ten Social Media Trends for 2009

Capstrat — Mon, 19 Jan 2009 00:00:00 -0400

I’ve made a few predictions for social media trends during 2009. Of course, some of these will be wrong, and I’ll end up missing others. But from a general perspective, it’s clear that social media is going to be changing fast. It’ll remain a moving target for marketers, yet an exciting technology for developers and users.

Here are my picks. What are yours?

Twitter will be more fully integrated with mainstream social networks (MySpace, Facebook, etc.).
More Fortune 500 businesses will set up Twitter accounts and C-level blogs.
More social networking consolidation tools will emerge for one-stop profile and posting management.
Marketers will explore novel approaches to advertising strategies on social networks.
Advertisers will implement improved tools and metrics to gauge the ROI of the social media advertising spend.
Political campaigns will follow Barack Obama’s model in marketing through social media channels.
Multi-media press releases will integrate more fully into social media channels.
Advertisers will increase use of viral video as a standard ad strategy.
Methods and techniques will evolve to integrate social media experiences into real life.
Fortune 500 companies will increasingly adopt internal social media for management efficiency gains.

Keeping the Faith: The Power of the Press (kit)

Capstrat — Mon, 19 Jan 2009 00:00:00 -0400

I’m not sure exactly when I abandoned this old standard. It may have been after I sent my five-millionth packet of information to reporters and got the usual response — silence. Or it could have been the eager push to replace the “old ways” with the flashy, digital-age, Web-based communications so prevalent today. Or maybe it was when a well-meaning client insisted on including 50 pages of information about the company, its leadership, its customers and their plans for world domination.

Looking back, it’s easy to see how my faith was tested.

It returned — not as an earth-shattering revelation, but more of a gradual realization. It all started when we developed the plan for launching HemCon’s new consumer bandage, KytoStat. To communicate to consumers through the media, we produced a media kit that contained standard press materials as well as images and samples of the product. We created an eye-catching box that included compelling copy encouraging the recipient to open and discover the latest in “blood-stopping” technology.

We sent the press kits to reporters who covered health, outdoor recreation, sports, parenting, and even woodworking and culinary beats. We followed up the delivery of the kits aggressively with phone calls and e-mails. The initial results have been outstanding.

Since we launched the campaign, at least a dozen reporters have called for more information, and ultimately, written about the product. Many commented on the quality of the press kit and its contents and actually thanked us for sending it (never heard that before from a reporter). We quickly followed up, usually within hours of being contacted. In fact, we were thanked for our rapid responses to their requests.

While I have to admit, I’m a little ashamed of my temporary loss of faith in one of the bedrocks of media relations, I’m thrilled to report that I am once again a believer. Here’s what makes a press kit campaign effective. Try it and believe:

First and foremost, a compelling product. You can’t control the product — but everything, no matter how mundane, has a relevant and gripping story. Discover who will be most affected by the new product and focus on telling them the story.
An engaging delivery medium. Don’t overshadow the product, but make sure you deliver something that demands to be opened.
Aggressive and pro-active follow-up. The walk back from the mailbox should not be your last step. Follow-up not only ensures receipt, but also builds valuable and lasting relationships with reporters.
Conscientious responses to reporters’ requests, good reactive follow-up. Be able to add additional insight and value once the reporter starts asking questions.

*This article was originally published in the May 2008 issue of PR Tactics.

In Crisis, Will You Sink or Swim?

chall@capstrat.com (Christine Hall) — Mon, 19 Jan 2009 00:00:00 -0400

Sec. Paulson may not be named Time’s “Person of the Year,” but he has to be applauded for knowing the No. 1 rule in crisis communications — be available.

In times of crisis, companies often switch into panic mode and shut off lines of communication. Spokespeople are suddenly unavailable, and the words “no comment” get translated into “guilty as charged.” But if you’re not keeping an open line with the press, they are going to find answers elsewhere. Then you’ve lost control of the message.

Sec. Paulson didn’t have many answers that day, but by being available for questions, he took command of the situation and demonstrated that he was committed to correcting the issues at hand.

Remembering the basics of crisis communications will help you navigate through troubled waters and get back on solid ground.

Be Available. To emerge with your reputation intact, you’ve got to communicate quickly and effectively with the media. The story is going to be written whether you talk or not. Do you want to control the message or have it control you.

Be Responsive. When under fire by the media, it’s easy to get overwhelmed and lose confidence in your ability to respond effectively. Communicate commitment to your audience by delivering crisp and confident key messages.

Accept Responsibility. If you’re responsible, admit it. The public will respect your honesty and that will help you re-establish credibility more quickly. Rebounding may take time, but not nearly as long as being caught in a cover-up.

Make it Personal. Nothing says “I don’t care” like an emotionless tone or face. Keeping your cool is important, but balance calmness by showing that you’re human. Although the situation is unsettling, your empathy will be appreciated

Be Proactive. Don’t wait to be hit — strike first. Anticipate negative media coverage by working with reporters as they develop their stories.

Crisis communications is a critical element of every PR toolkit. And if you play by the basic rules, you can turn a crisis into an opportunity to strengthen your reputation.

Reporters: Friend or Foe?

mwoodlief@capstrat.com (Meghan Woodlief) — Mon, 19 Jan 2009 00:00:00 -0400

The idea of being interviewed by a reporter sends some people into fight-or-flight mode. Others get too cozy with reporters, treating them like trusted confidants instead of people who buy ink by the barrel or videotape by the crate.

If you need the media to help tell your story, there are a few things you should consider.

Who are reporters? Reporters are good storytellers whose glory comes from
recognition for breaking the big story. Reporters are not your friends, but they aren’t
your enemies either.

What do reporters want? Above the fold. Front page. Top of the evening news broadcast. Reporters want to break a story that will earn prime real estate in their news medium. These stories are what earn reporters a job in bigger markets or with more prestigious media outlets.

Big stories often spell controversy. But what makes news worth reporting is a timely hook and a subject that covers broad interests. Sometimes having a personal angle on a story makes a big difference in getting media coverage.

How can we all benefit? Begin by developing mutually beneficial relationships with reporters who cover your space. If you can be a resource to help reporters do their jobs faster, it will be easier for both parties to get what they want.

Cultivate relationships. Get to know journalists before you expect to be in an interview with them. There are formal ways to do this, such as media tours. But sometimes casual relationship building, through a simple phone call or e-mail, is just as effective and less intimidating. It’s also helpful to have already laid the groundwork of a good relationship when potentially negative stories surface.
Know their stuff. If you know what is going on in a reporter’s world, you can more effectively communicate with them. Before you speak with a reporter, know their recent work and what news they typically cover. If you know what is going on in the industry they cover, you’ll be better able to offer story ideas they’ll appreciate.
Be responsive. Reporters live and die by deadlines and pressure that would make most people crazy. Not making an effort to respect these deadlines is an easy way to strain a good relationship. Return calls and e-mails promptly. Even if you don’t have any information to share, give a simple call to let the reporter know when you will update them again.
Tell the truth. Be honest with reporters, but don’t ever assume that you can let loose and be completely candid. There’s a good chance you’ll say something that will come back to haunt you. It’s okay to say, “I’m not sure. Let me find that out for you,” or “I think so-and-so would be a better person to answer that question. I’ll tell him to give you a call.” And remember, “No comment” translates to “I’m guilty.”

There may be some shady reporters out there, but there are many more that are responsible and professional — all just trying to do their jobs. Knowing how to work with reporters and be a positive resource will not only make your experiences positive, but it will make it more likely that the results for everyone will be positive as well.

All the World is a Twitter — Especially for PR Folks and Reporters

lhester@capstrat.com (Lilyn Hester) — Mon, 19 Jan 2009 00:00:00 -0400

Twitter is a free, microblogging service that allows its users to send and read other users’ updates (or tweets), which are text-based posts of up to 140 characters.

Reporters need sources, human ones, and they need them fast. PR folks need results and opportunities for their clients’ voices to be heard.

For reporters, Twitter has received a preliminary stamp of approval from highly respected publications, such as the American Journalism Review (AJR).

According to the August/September 2008 AJR (1 http://www.ajr.org/Article.asp?id=4601) , Daniel Victor (@bydanielvictor), a reporter at the Harrisburg Patriot-News, was once a Twitter skeptic, but is now a fan. Daniel uses Twitter routinely to find stories and people from Harrisburg and Hershey through a combination of TwitterLocal and Tweetscan, third-party applications that allow searches of Twitter by topic and geographic location.

On the other side of the coin is Sanchez, a pioneer for using Twitter both as a source and as a broadcast medium. During his coverage of Hurricane Gustav, Sanchez sent his followers this tweet: “Going on air at five, need you guys out there, especially around New Orleans, what’s going on? What’s the mood?”

Sanchez received eyewitness accounts and was able to make direct contact with those in New Orleans who decided to ride out the storm.

PR folks use Twitter for everything from pitching story ideas to meeting journalists to researching ways journalists like to receive information. I find Twitter a valuable resource for learning more about current topics like social media trends.

According to the October 2008 issue of PR Tactics ( http://www.prsa.org/supportfiles/news/viewNews.cfm?pNewsID=842347614 ) , social media tools such as Twitter are now essential tools for doing business. The days of communicating via a single news release are long gone.

As PR professionals, our strongest talents are our ability to listen, be observant and offer counsel. In Twitterland, these skills are essential, as we respond to tweets from journalists whose calls for information and sources can easily be addressed by a PR person on a mission.

But enough of this talk, I’m off to Twitterland to make some more connections and meet some new people. BTW, I’m @Lilyn on Twitter.

SEO Must Serve The Real Master

mlance@capstrat.com (Mindy Lance) — Tue, 30 Dec 2008 00:00:00 -0400

SEO or search engine optimization is my kind of writing challenge. Give me a list of words to work into my copy, and I’m like a kid looking for the perfect spot for that piece of sky in the jigsaw puzzle. But how can I make a sentence sing and still include a phrase like higher education procurement? Sometimes it feels like the keyword is more important than the content itself.

Wait a minute, isn’t content supposed to be king? Of course, I understand the purpose of SEO is to get more hits on Google when folks are searching online. One of the things I appreciate about SEO is it forces me to think like the user and write in terms that people actually use. It’s possible to dwell too much on positioning and differentiation. And while differentiating points may help folks make their final choice, that’s not what they’re putting into the search engine. They’re thinking in general terms, even when they add specifics to their search. So they key in poodle grooming services rather than your trademarked Pampered Poodle Package.

I’ve known clients who balk at using a generic term for their special product name. But no one is searching for a product/service that they’ve never heard of. So the client is missing out on capturing that new business. For example, if my website promotes Pampered Pretty Poochies, but I don’t include a generic descriptive phrase, how will anyone searching for holiday dog grooming find my service?

Here are some of the easy rules I follow to make Web content SEO-worthy yet persuasive reading:

1) Use the keyword in my headline (also known as the H1 tag).

Too many times headlines on Web pages are clever but don’t even mention the product/service or benefits. But it’s one of the first places a search engine checks. Don’t be afraid to expand the navigation label in your headline — they don’t have to be exactly the same. If you clicked on Grooming Services on your specialty poodle care site, the page headline could say Poodle Grooming Services.

2) Use the same keyword in the first paragraph.

SEO experts say it helps to repeat the exact same keyword in both the headline and the first paragraph. Some even say the first sentence. That’s tricky if you don’t want copy to sound repetitive or awkward. But it can be done. Your first line could read: “Look no further to find the ultimate in standard and miniature poodle grooming services.”

3) Work in other keywords throughout the page.

While repetition is good, it’s ok not to use poodle grooming services every 10 words. But you might also want to include dog grooming equipment. You can find many possibilities when you check a keyword tool (example: Google AdWords ).

4) Use different keywords throughout the site.

A breadth of keywords keeps your content from sounding repetitive and gives you more chances to capture Google hits. As you drill down into your site, your internal pages can have more specific or longer keywords (often called the Long Tail — no, it’s not about poodles. Here's Wikipedia’s explanation. ). For example, you might use toy poodle toenail polish . A good SEO firm can help you determine the right words for the higher level pages on your site vs. the lower level pages.

5) Never forget you’re writing for readers.

Keywords may help direct people to your site, but once they get there, they want content that makes sense and is engaging. So don’t sacrifice well-written copy on the SEO altar. Great site content excels in both ways. That may take a little more creative writing, but as any good writer knows, there’s always more than one way to turn a phrase.

And no, I don’t use every last keyword I’m given. That may sound like heresy to SEO enforcers, but content is still king. And SEO is just a vassal, sworn to a life of service to the ultimate master.

Predicting What’s Next

kalbritton@capstrat.com (Karen Albritton) — Tue, 16 Dec 2008 00:00:00 -0400

In communications, we forecast consumer trends, media audiences and client spending. But it’s getting harder to predict what’s next in our industry, because few things change faster than how we communicate. Instead of incremental changes that take years, we see changes in months or even weeks.

With all the recent changes in the communications industry – media fragmentation, the Web, social media and consumer journalism – perhaps the one that is most profound is the pace of change. Everything simply happens faster.

As we look to what’s ahead, I don’t think it matters what the next communications tool or channel is. Will it be digital? Will it be mobile? Will it be more intuitive? Probably all of the above, but that’s not the point.

What will matter most is that it’ll be here before we know it – and before we’re ready. And existing communications channels will continue to evolve at a much faster rate than we’re accustomed to.

Success for corporate communications teams, marketing departments and their agencies will hinge not on predicting change, but rather on their ability to embrace the pace of change.

Adaptability and responsiveness will be all-important qualities for communicators. The ability to quickly access and synthesize information will rival experience as a critical decision-making skill. Agility will be as essential as creativity in problem-solving.

So don’t worry if you aren’t very good at predictions. Instead, pay attention to how responsive you are to change, opportunity or crisis. That may be your best litmus test for surviving whatever comes next.