Published Works

PRWeek 2011 Campaign of the Year Award: "After 125 Careers, Barbie Gets Her Geek On"

admin — Sun, 10 Apr 2011 21:32:14 -0400

Short Description

Ketchum and client Mattel took home the 2011 PRWeek Award for Campaign of the Year for their "After 125 Careers, Barbie Gets Her Geek On" campaign, for which they let consumers, for the first time, select a new career for the doll and supported the choice of Computer Engineer Barbie with a traditional and social media campaign that resulted in a 144% sales increase. The campaign also won the 2011 PRWeek Award for Product Brand Development Campaign of the Year.

Upload PDF

After_125_Careers_Barbie_Gets_Her_Geek_On_PRWeek_Campaign_of_the_Year_Award_Article_4-11.pdf

Tumultuous Year Ahead for the Healthcare Law

admin — Fri, 01 Apr 2011 13:07:49 -0400

Short Description

Nancy Hicks, Associate Director of Ketchum's North American Healthcare Practice, discusses the challenges and opportunities for the new U.S. healthcare law and the important role that communications will play in its success, in a February 2011 byline article for PRWeek magazine.

Upload PDF

Nancy_Hicks_Tumultuous_Year_Ahead_for_Healthcare_Law_Article.pdf

Lessons From the Frontiers of Radical Transparency

admin — Tue, 08 Mar 2011 20:11:22 -0500

Short Description

In a February 2011 op-ed for PRWeek magazine, Ketchum President Rob Flaherty describes how the Middle East uprisings and the WikiLeaks scandals of early 2011 shaped the agenda and output of the 2011 World Economic Forum Annual Meeting in Davos, Switzerland.

Upload PDF

Rob_Flaherty_Lessons_From_Frontiers_of_Radical_Transparency_Article_2-11.pdf

PR News Names Ketchum as Large Firm of the Year and One of the Top Places to Work in PR for 2009

admin — Mon, 08 Nov 2010 13:08:34 -0500

Short Description

PR News selected Ketchum as its Large Firm of the Year for 2009 for "one of the largest PR mergers in history" and "unprecedented, double-digit top-line growth, as well as record revenue growth in terms of percentage and actual dollars"; and PR News also chose Ketchum as one of the 2009 Top Places to Work in PR for recognizing that "engaging its employess has never been more important."

Upload PDF

PR_News_Large_Agency_of_the_Year_Top_Places_to_Work_2009.pdf

A World Without Advertising Value Equivalents

admin — Mon, 08 Nov 2010 09:53:21 -0500

Short Description

In a November 2010 interview with Gorkana magazine, David Rockland, Ph.D., Partner and Managing Director, Ketchum Global Research, and Chairman of the U.S. Agency Research Leaders Group for the International Association for Measurement and Evaluation of Communication, discusses the new Barcelona Declaration of Measurement Principles adopted in June 2010. (This article originally appeared in and was reprinted with permission from Gorkana.)

Full Story

Advertising value equivalent (AVE) has been synonymous with PR evaluation for years, but not for much longer if Dr. David Rockland has his way. Gorkana catches up exclusively with the Ketchum Pleon partner to find out why "silly metrics" like AVEs may soon be a thing of the past.

The Barcelona Declaration of Measurement Principles, the first global standards for PR measurement, were proposed and voted on at a Barcelona summit attended by delegates from 33 countries in June. They were ratified a month later. Since then, the Association for Measurement and Evaluation of Communications (AMEC) has worked to agree new ways of measuring program effectiveness without using AVEs. They will present their proposals at a half-day conference in London on Nov. 17, 2010.

Hi, David. Thanks very much for joining us. Going back to the Barcelona summit, what was the reaction from the industry to the seven Principles and the overall outcome of the meeting?

The feedback was overwhelmingly positive. This industry together adopted standards with a great sense of inclusiveness and advanced the professionalisation of PR. But there have been criticisms. One was that the Barcelona Principles don’t go far enough. The reality is that I and others made a very conscious decision to get as far down the road as possible with 220 people from 33 countries in Barcelona. We could have spent an entire week debating next steps and so on but we were trying to get something.

The comments about the Principles not going far enough are probably justified. But to start a journey you need to take a first step and we did that. The industry had been debating for 25 years whether to take the journey at all. We now are on the journey.

The other comment I heard was how to enforce these Principles. Some seem to think we need PR police or see themselves as the policemen. I believe that the Principles are a kind of self evident truth. The adoption of them doesn’t require some weird kind of PR police to enforce compliancy. I don’t even know how you would go about that!

So what’s been happening since June?

When we left Barcelona last June, there were two big questions left unanswered. One was if AVEs are wrong, then what is right,? The second was how do we get started in measuring social media? Since June, AMEC’s U.S. group has convened two task forces to answer the two questions. Both groups comprised a mix of agency and suppliers and came up with answers to those questions which went out for public comment during October. Now, the CIPR and the PRCA are reviewing them and adding their input. Then, on Nov. 17, there will be a conference in London to present the replacement for AVEs and how you get started measuring social media. What will be presented there is the collective thinking of a large number of groups, including AMEC, PRCA, CIPR, PRSA, and IPR. Hopefully these recommendations will reflect a common view and way forward.

You have been busy. Can you tell us what will be presented?

You mean reveal all the juicy stuff in advance? No way! However, I do believe that this conference is a very good opportunity for practitioners to learn firsthand how to address two of the most difficult questions that face PR evaluation and measurement: how to stop using a silly metric called AVE, and how to start measuring social media.

Well how about just a flavor of what to expect?

OK, let me put it in context first. The thing that we struggle with is that AVEs have been used for so long because they are really simple. You can get the numbers really cheaply, it has a simple dollar/pound value, and, to some, the comparison of the cost of advertising, which is an AVE as the value of PR sort of sounds good, even if you know there is something fatally flawed about it. The danger we have is letting practitioners think that we are just going to give them another simple symbol or metric to replace AVEs that will be theoretically sounder. The reality is, however, that there is no simple, easy, perfect or single metric to measure PR. It really depends on what you are trying to accomplish with a PR program as to what you in turn measure.

So the idea we’re behind is that PR has a whole load of different uses and effects -- one could be selling a product or a brand, another could be measuring a company’s reputation, another could be dealing with an issue or crisis, another is employee retention and so on. For each of those there is a recommended series of metrics depending on what you are trying to do. The complexity is in recognition of the many functions of PR.

So, in partial answer to your questions, we haven’t replaced AVEs with a simple answer or another silly metric. AVEs get replaced by a series of metrics that are dependent on what exactly you are trying to do.

Can you give us an example?

Let’s say your main activity is brand product marketing and you are using media relations to drive increased knowledge of a product. Metrics you might use include the extent to which certain facts were included in the articles; what messages were included in the articles; frequency of articles; and number of people reached through those articles. For example, if your audience is women about a new fashion line to wear to clubs, and all your coverage appears in Fishing & Hunting magazine, AVEs will tell you you’ve done a great job when actually it is very unlikely that you have hit much of the intended audience at all.

So the recommendations are laid out as a matrix. Depending what part of the industry you are in and what activity you are trying to do, you use the grid to find the box most suited to you and the appropriate metrics are there to tell you whether you are having the effect you intended.

If there is an expectation that there is going to be another stupid metric like AVE that somehow singularly describes the overall value of PR, when PR can encompass a whole myriad of different things, then people are going to be very disappointed because it’s not that simple. What this does do, however, is align very much with other marketing and communications disciplines as opposed to the road PR went down two decades ago when it aligned itself with the cost of advertising.

Sounds very interesting. Have you tested this matrix out at all?

We’ve done some focus groups in the U.S., which have been well-received and we are currently working with the CIPR and PRCA to gather their thoughts. A couple of interesting points have already come out of those discussions. For example, during a call with them recently, they mentioned that a lot of their members work for government-focussed organizations and there was no provision for that in the current recommendations. So we’ve developed another grid to encompass that type of public relations. We’ve also convened international working groups to examine how this will translate in Dubai, Australia, and elsewhere.

What would be your ideal outcomes from the conference in London on Nov. 17?

Ideally, I’d like to see us follow Barcelona by continuing to educate our industry about the right way to measure public relations. It is a critical part of how we further professionalise the industry. I’d like to get to the point where if a PR practitioner’s client says "How did that social media campaign go?", the practitioner doesn’t panic. Instead he or she will be able to look at their toolkit and provide an answer to their client.

And what’s next for measurement?

Lots. First is that this series of metrics becomes a part of the industry’s various professional development efforts around the world. It should become a standard part of the curriculum, whether at conferences, training sessions or Bournemouth University. Second would be that every PR awards program that has a measurement component to it, and most of them do, adopts these approaches as a standard by which you qualify for, win or lose awards. And, I’d love to see an award for "Best Application of Barcelona Principles," for example.

I guess fundamentally I hope that one day in the next few years some idiot PR practitioner will stand up at a conference or meeting and say their campaign was a success because they got £X million in AVE, and the audience boos them because they recognise that AVEs are fundamentally flawed and we have adopted a much smarter and honest approach.

Thanks very much, David.

The Small-Ball Elements of Crisis Management

admin — Fri, 19 Nov 2010 19:18:54 -0500

Short Description

In an article from the summer 2010 issue of the Public Relations Strategist, Ketchum Senior Vice President of Crisis Management James Donnelly explains the small steps that go into developing an effective crisis management strategy. (Reprinted with permission from the summer 2010 issue of the Public Relations Strategist. Copyright 2010 Public Relations Society of America.)

Upload PDF

James_Donnelly_Small-Ball_Elements_of_Crisis_Management_Article_10-10.pdf

How Social Media Is Helping Public Relations Sector Not Just Survive, But Thrive

admin — Mon, 20 Sep 2010 12:48:08 -0400

Short Description

Ketchum CEO Ray Kotcher comments on the growing importance of public relations in the age of social media, in an August 2010 article in Advertising Age.

Upload PDF

Ray_Kotcher_Social_Media_Public_Relations_Sector_Article_8-10.pdf

No Place to Hide in Dodd-Frank's New Glass House

admin — Wed, 29 Sep 2010 12:56:25 -0400

Short Description

Ketchum President and Corporate Practice Managing Director Rob Flaherty takes a look at the challenges of the new corporate disclosure and transparency requirements of the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act passed in mid-2010, in an article posted on the CNBC Blog. Click here to view the article.

Full Story

Conquering the Summit: The Barcelona Declaration Measurement Principles

admin — Thu, 12 Aug 2010 10:13:26 -0400

Short Description

David Rockland, Ph.D., Partner and Managing Director of Global Research at Ketchum, discusses the International Association for Measurement and Evaluation of Communication's passage of the Barcelona Declaration Measurement Principles, the first global standards for measuring public relations results, in the July issue of Communicate magazine. (Reprinted with permission from the July 2010 issue of Communicate.)

Upload PDF

David_Rockland_Barcelona_Principles_Public_Relations_Measurement_Article_7-10.pdf

The Role of Communications

admin — Wed, 28 Jul 2010 18:16:12 -0400

Short Description

In a July 2010 article for the magazine Medical Marketing & Media, Ketchum Associate Healthcare Practice Director Nancy Hicks describes the vital role that communications professionals will play in helping Americans understand the particulars of the 2,400-page healthcare reform bill that was recently passed.

The Fate of Marketing in the Age of Social Media

admin — Thu, 09 Sep 2010 17:20:29 -0400

Short Description

Ketchum Partner and Director of Ketchum Digital Jonathan Kopp looks at how social media has transformed the marketing and communication landscape, in a May 2010 blog post for CNBC.

Full Story

Ketchum Partner and Director of Ketchum Digital Jonathan Kopp looks at how social media has transformed the marketing and communication landscape, in a May 2010 blog post for CNBC.

A Cure for a Bad Reputation

admin — Thu, 09 Sep 2010 17:39:25 -0400

Short Description

Ketchum CEO Ray Kotcher offers three steps that Corporate America can take to improve its reputation, in an April 2010 blog post for CNBC.

Full Story

Ketchum CEO Ray Kotcher offers three steps that Corporate America can take to improve its reputation, in an April 2010 blog post for CNBC.

Identity Crisis: What You Need to Know About a Career in Crisis Management

admin — Wed, 30 Jun 2010 13:16:49 -0400

Short Description

Ketchum Senior Vice President of Crisis Management James Donnelly breaks down the pros and cons of a career in crisis management, in an article from the spring 2010 issue of The Public Relations Strategist. (Reprinted with permission from the spring 2010 issue of The Public Relations Strategist. Copyright 2010 Public Relations Society of America.)

Upload PDF

James_Donnelly_What_You_Need_to_Know_About_a_Career_in_Crisis_Management.pdf

PRWeek 2010 Campaign of the Year Award: Dreyer's Beat the Blues With a Taste of Recovery

admin — Tue, 23 Mar 2010 20:40:07 -0400

Short Description

Ketchum and client Dreyer's took home the 2010 PRWeek Award for Campaign of the Year for their "Dreyer's Beat the Blues With a Taste of Recovery" campaign, for which they introduced a new ice cream flavor called "Red, White and No More Blues" to kick off a program to highlight Dreyer's legacy of cheering up Americans during tough economic times. The campaign also won the 2010 PRWeek Award for Best Consumer Launch Campaign of the Year.

Upload PDF

Dreyers_Beat_the_Blues_With_a_Taste_of_Recovery_PRWeek_Campaign_of_the_Year_Award_Article_3-10.pdf

The Holmes Report Names Ketchum as 2009 Large Agency of the Year

admin — Thu, 08 Apr 2010 19:10:00 -0400

Short Description

The Holmes Report, a publication by the Holmes Group, a public relations news and trend organization, selected Ketchum as its Large Agency of the Year for 2009 based on its account work, new business and expanding global footprint, among other qualities.

"Doritos Crashes the Super Bowl" Wins the Holmes Report's Campaign of the Decade Award

admin — Thu, 08 Apr 2010 19:02:10 -0400

Short Description

Ketchum and client Frito-Lay were presented the Campaign of the Decade Award by the Holmes Report for "Doritos Crashes the Super Bowl: How a Leading Snack Brand Put the Power to Its People and Changed Madison Avenue Forever" -- a campaign that pioneered the power of consumer-created content by boldly airing fan-made Super Bowl spots in 2007, 2008, 2009 and 2010.

Upload PDF

Doritos_Crashes_the_Super_Bowl_Holmes_Report_Campaign_of_the_Decade.pdf

An Analysis of Five Commonly Held Beliefs About Managing Crises That Erupt Online

admin — Thu, 11 Mar 2010 18:52:02 -0500

Short Description

Ketchum Senior Vice President of Crisis Management James Donnelly explains the challenges and opportunities associated with five beliefs about managing crises online, in an article from the winter 2010 issue of The Public Relations Strategist. (Reprinted with permission from the winter 2010 issue of The Public Relations Strategist. Copyright 2010 Public Relations Society of America.)

Full Story

By James Donnelly, Senior Vice President of Crisis Management, Ketchum

Reprinted with permission from the winter 2010 issue of The Public Relations Strategist. Copyright 2010 Public Relations Society of America.

Crisis management professionals typically like to operate within protocols that have proven effective over time. Therefore, in the face of revolutionary change, we strive to set early anchors from which we can operate with a degree of confidence. Such may be the case with many of the principles established recently on online crisis management. It might be time to start re-examining some of those foundational beliefs and build additional structure around them.

In 2000, the first printed edition of The Cluetrain Manifesto provided revelations on the Internet’s probable impact on markets and organizations. Most of its “95 Theses” were on target — markets are conversations, hyperlinks (and networks) will subvert hierarchies, connections between new markets and companies will change and companies must connect through the voice of the new marketplace.

One decade later, many organizations are just now catching up with the impact of networked communities on business and reputation. A recent blog post by Tammy Erickson in the Harvard Business Review pegs “last year, around the first of July” as the pivotal moment when social media finally became serious business. Welcome to the party, late adopters.

From the start, the PR profession debated and analyzed the significance of The Cluetrain Manifesto like scientists arguing over the Large Hadron Collider. In practice, however, PR professionals are probably only marginally ahead of the adoption curve — digital/interactive strategists and social networking jobs have grown quickly only during the past two or three years.

Also within the past few years, empowered networks have taught us about the new requirements of online crisis management. What has been learned so far has been quickly codified into core beliefs. Since the networked world is in its relative infancy, we must continue to expand our thinking on each of these beliefs and adapt to the changes yet to come.

Here are the five beliefs:

1. Companies need to prepare for threats that emerge through online social networks.

This is true for most companies, organizations, brands or services. But how should a company prepare? Most dialogue on this topic centers on the required tactics: building static Web pages, creating a YouTube channel, engaging with others on Facebook and Twitter, using search-engine optimization and more.

While these may be the right tactical solutions, they require a strategic framework. For example, before setting the table, you need to have an idea of what you’re cooking for dinner. Likewise, companies need to determine how networked they’d like to be if a crisis strikes and compare that with how networked they are today. Here is a summary of key strategic questions that need to be considered before establishing any dark site tactics:

Is it easy for online audiences to understand our company’s values and philosophies by scanning information that we make available online? Do they believe that we live by our values?
Do we know which online audiences matter to our business and to key stakeholders? Do we have a sense of the prioritization of these audiences?
How is our company currently perceived by online audiences? Do we need to do anything to improve those perceptions before a crisis strikes?
Are we actively connecting and building relationships with online priority audiences? Should we be?
Do we have systems in place to monitor the opinions of the online target audiences? Can we compare these current opinions against any benchmarks?
Do we have executive-level appreciation and endorsement to engage with online audiences if a crisis strikes? Or is it possible that we’ll have all the right tactics in place but will need to struggle to get quick approval to post, tweet, podcast, etc.?

2. Today, online groundswell requires a response in minutes, not hours.

We know that today anyone can broadcast information (and distortions and rumors). This has created the need for more nimble crisis management systems. Speed does matter.

However, perhaps in a rush to be expedient, online groundswell is often misdiagnosed. There’s a lot of noise out there, and the noise is growing exponentially.

“We’re being attacked on the blogs!” may not always necessitate immediate response. Sometimes, it is better to be deliberate. Indeed, we have seen some companies self-sabotage by saying too much at the moment that the negative attention has subsided.

Before cracking open the crisis plan, companies must assess:

What type of scrutiny is this? Is it credible? Is the scrutiny clever enough to gain any traction online?
Are there tangible underlying factors behind this scrutiny? Is it sustainable? Is there misinformation in the criticism?
Is there a significant event that’s impacting your business, reputation or brand?
Do we know how you’ll answer the questions being posed? Does this require any adjustments to your operations?

3. Online social networks are great listening posts and should be monitored.

Every minute, crowdsourced opinions provide lurid feedback that would make a focus group blush. There’s an obvious benefit for companies to stick a stethoscope to a computer monitor and listen to the online pulse. However, it’s easy to get carried away by taking every criticism to heart.

Charlene Li, founder of Altimeter Group and co-author of “Groundswell: Winning in a World Transformed by Social Technologies,” recently promoted the idea of socialgraphics, a discipline to better understand specific behaviors of targeted customers. This approach can also apply to monitoring for emerging crises. It is more efficient to segment audiences and focus on the opinions that matter or those that can gain widespread traction. Thus, when scrutiny begins to rise above the din, ask:

What audience is prompting the attention and velocity of this crisis?
Is this just crowd-kvetching?
Is it a lone-wolf blogger with an agenda? Or a determined detractor, trying to bring attention to his or her own agenda by slinging an arrow at your company?
Will this situation negatively affect the online and offline audiences that are important to your business?

4. In a crisis, companies need to have an online voice that resonates with the marketplace. Corporate-speak and press releases are not welcome on social networks.

How have companies organized around this belief? Unfortunately, some companies are hiring the young, hip and plugged-in to be the direct interface, because that is the lingua franca of social networks. We’ve seen jobs available only to those with large Twitter followings. But that seems more like an attempt to strike the right accent, not the right voice.

Particularly in a crisis, social networks want to hear from an authentic voice — ideally from someone with institutional knowledge to share, or a perspective on if the company is handling the situation in a way that is consistent with its values. In other words, they want authenticity. It’s better to find those people within a company and give them the time and resources to communicate properly with these communities. This may require an orientation or some coaching, but it is a better approach than seeking a virtual hired gun.

5. Addressing your crisis with online audiences is not a one-time event — these are relationships that need to be maintained.

Though conventional wisdom says it is wise to continue cultivating your online relationships after you manage a crisis, this decision depends on three things:

The type of crisis. If the crisis is a finite event — a pencil recall, for example — then it’s possible to build special recall microsites, Twitter feeds and Facebook pages to disseminate information broadly. During that time, the company needs to be active on each of these new channels. But if the recall has been successful, then the company can choose to let those channels expire rather than awkwardly continuing these relationships.
The online audiences’ receptiveness to connect more with the company. Some audiences want to know a lot about a company during a crisis, but their overall interest in carrying on the relationship may wane once the crisis is over. That same pencil manufacturer may continue doodling online, but that doesn’t mean that people will continue to engage.

The company’s comfort level regarding social networks. There are plenty of companies that still have not tried online networking. After they’ve managed a crisis, these same companies may feel compelled to keep connecting in ways that may do more harm than good for their reputations. Like people, organizations must first be true to their tendencies.

The impact of social technologies on reputation management is a story that continues to be written. As such, it’s probably premature to use permanent ink to capture any beliefs about online crisis management. A sharp pencil with a fresh eraser might be the best tool at this stage.

Davos Challenges Our View of a "Stakeholder"

admin — Tue, 02 Feb 2010 11:16:29 -0500

Short Description

Writing in an op-ed for PRWeek from the World Economic Forum Annual Meeting 2010 in Davos, Switzerland, Ketchum Senior Partner and President Rob Flaherty remarks on how this event offers an opportunity for CEOs to consider the dynamics of the multiple stakeholders who play parts in determining corporations' success.

Upload PDF

Rob_Flaherty_Davos_Challenges_View_of_Stakeholder_Article_1-10.pdf

Reputation Capital: Building and Maintaining Trust in the 21st Century

admin — Mon, 04 Jan 2010 19:48:51 -0500

Short Description

In late 2009, Ketchum Pleon's Joachim Klewes, Senior Partner, Ketchum Pleon, and Robert Wreschniok, Business Director, edited a new book that makes the case that strategies for building reputation are strikingly familiar to classic financial investmet strategies.

Full Story

Barack Obama staked his reputation on delivering against a wide range of different concerns – climate change, universal healthcare, reform of the financial markets. The risk was great – but so was the return: he now sits in the Oval Office as one of the world’s most powerful men. The management anthology Reputation Capital: Building and Maintaining Trust in the 21st Century provides some context for President Obama’s success. The main idea set out in the publication, which brings together perspectives from some 30 international authors, is that – as with investment strategies – when it comes to building reputation, there is a relationship between return and risk. Click on one of the bullet points below or scroll down to find out more on this topic.

Reputation Revised
The CSR Myth: True Beauty Comes from Within
How a Good Name Influences Performance on the Stock Market
Who Wants to Be a Millionaire?
Review: ECRS Symposium, Reputation Capital

Reputation Revised

The international economic crisis has put a great deal of strain on the trust between companies and their customers. This precarious economic situation has taken a toll on company accounts, but has had a strong impact upon their reputations. Reputation is among the five most important intangible corporate assets, together with customer and employee satisfaction, brand and corporate culture – according to the results of a recent study by Harvard Business Manager.

In light of this, certain questions have become more relevant than ever: Which strategies can a company use to re-establish its reputation? And how can a good name be safeguarded in the long-term? The authors of the new management anthology Reputation Capital: Building and Maintaining Trust in the 21st Century provides some initial responses to these questions and critically evaluates conventional approaches to reputation.

True Beauty Comes From Within

In their analysis, entitled "The CSR myth: true beauty comes from within", Matthias Vonwil and Robert Wreschniok reach a surprising conclusion: it is not CSR activities that give a company a good name, but, more importantly, reliable and reputable corporate communications. These findings are backed up by recent studies by the European Centre for Reputation Studies (ECRS). They show that 80 to 90 percent of stakeholder evaluations of a company are determined by economic, and not social, factors.

Performance Decisive for a Good Reputation
The extent to which a solid reputation affects the financial performance of DAX 30 companies has been investigated by Manfred Schwaiger and his team at the Ludwig-Maximilians-University Munich. Since 2005, he and his team of specialists have carried out comprehensive stakeholder surveys. The model they developed for their analysis is much more precise than previous reputational metrics and also takes account of emotional components. The conclusion the 25 companies with the best reputation outperform other companies by a long way.

"Companies can invest in machines – but also in reputation", says Joachim Klewes, communications specialist and, together with Robert Wreschniok, co-editor of the management compendium. When developing a strategy, Klewes and Wreschniok find it helpful to draw an analogy with the financial market. "As with investment strategies, when it comes to building up reputation, there is a certain relationship between return and risk."

The CSR Myth: True Beauty Comes From Within

Companies are increasingly investing in Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR). Their aim is to strengthen corporate reputation and to safeguard it in the long term. But how effective are such measures? Are the high costs justified? Matthias Vonwil and Robert Wreschniok have their doubts.

A recent study by the European Centre for Reputation Studies (ECRS) shows that between 80 and 90 percent of a company’s reputation is determined by economic aspects and not by the company’s engagement with society. Most importantly, reliable and reputable corporate communications are the foundation for a solid reputation. The effect of other CSR activities, by contrast, is much smaller than expected.

Risks and Opportunities With CSR

In the worst case, CSR can even lead to additional reputational risks. For, as soon as communicative measures aimed at boosting social reputation are exposed as pure marketing devices, they lose their credibility and the organisation its authenticity.

Still, CSR represents a massive opportunity for every company. For example, CSR is often the best response to challenges within a company, such as fostering teamwork, inter-departmental communication and identification with the company. But for this, companies need to change their approach to CSR. Instead of asking: "Where could we usefully get involved?", the first question should be: "What problems are there within our company that could be effectively addressed with CSR measures?"

CSR, understood this way, is not primarily directed towards the public, but towards the company’s own employees. They are the most important stakeholders in any company and the decisive lever for successful CSR.

How a Good Name Influences Performance on the Stock Market

Numerous scientific studies have found a positive correlation between a good corporate reputation and such business objectives as customer or employee loyalty. But how does a solid reputation affect a company’s financial performance on the stock market? A team lead by Professor Schwaiger at the Institute of Market-based Management (IMM) at the Ludwig-Maximilians-University Munich presents its latest research results.

The comprehensive study by the IMM compared the reputation and stock-market performance of 60 blue-chip companies. The findings: the 25 percent of companies with the best reputation (Top25) considerably outperformed the companies with a poorer reputation. And compared to price movements on the DAX 30 in general, the Top25 return greater yield with lower risk.

Competition for “High Potentials”

The effect of a good reputation on the recruiting market is equally clear: companies with a good reputation are much more sought-after than comparable companies with a poorer reputation. In the contest for 'high potentials', this means that companies with lesser reputations need to pay salaries of up to 19 percent higher in order to win over graduates.

New Methods

The methods for measuring reputation used in the study are based on a custom-designed model. Reputation indices and reputation drivers are measured here much more precisely than in previous designs. For example, in this model, the emotional component also plays a central role in evaluating a company.

Who Wants to Be a Millionaire?

Investment strategies for reputation management in the twenty-first century

Mr Klewes, Mr Wreschniok, how important is a solid corporate reputation?

Joachim Klewes: Now so more than ever. Over the course of our recent financial or economic crisis, many companies have lost the confidence of their stakeholders and must now try to painstakingly renew that trust. The crisis itself has shown how reputation is increasingly becoming a decisive competitive factor. To name just three examples: a company with a solid reputation can, firstly, more easily create loyalty among high potentials and, secondly, expect less regulatory control. Finally, investors also have more confidence, for example, when it comes to injecting capital.

Robert Wreschniok: A recent study by Harvard Business Manager places reputation among the five most important intangible corporate assets, together with customer satisfaction, employee satisfaction, brand and corporate culture – well ahead of patents and licenses.

How can you protect reputation when the economic performance no longer stacks up?

R.W.: Certainly not by then investing more in CSR activities whilst merely affecting remorse. Corporate reputation consists of three dimensions. The first and most important dimension is indeed economic reputation. Here, it is a question of meeting expectations with respect to economic performance. 80 percent of public judgements about a company are determined by this. The second dimension is societal reputation. However, only 20 percent of public judgements relate to societal questions. For this reason, corporate communications that is matter-of-fact, sincere and reliable is often the best means of regaining stakeholder trust.

And the third factor?

J.K.: That is expressive reputation, which reflects the extent to which a company succeeds in establishing a unique identity, setting itself apart from its competitors. Management must continuously perform a balancing act: on the one hand, the expectations of the most important stakeholders must be met – and on the other hand, it must always break with those expectations in order to distinguish itself from other companies.

You compare reputation strategies to classical investment strategies on the stock market. How do these two relate?

J.K.: The principles for successfully building up capital, both financial and reputational, are similar. On the financial market – as with the opinion market – communication and psychology play an increasingly important role. Second, our analogy with the financial market helps us express complex relationships concisely.

R. W.: For example, everyone associates the term ‘hedge strategy’ with a highly speculative investment style that promises high returns, but also carries high risks. A value strategy, on the other hand, stands for sustainable investment. Growth strategies promise controlled growth, while total return aims for absolute security – everything you invest, you get back. And, just as no one any longer believes in total return on the stock exchange, we too are critical of total return strategies in reputation management.

What are the benefits of this analogy?

J.K.: Analogies reduce complexity. They help us perceive problems from different perspectives. That helps a great deal when making decisions and solving problems. The analogy with investment strategies, for example, highlights the idea that every reputation strategy involves choosing a particular risk-return ratio – that is, one must weigh up reputational opportunities and risks.

R.W.: The more aggressive a company’s communications strategy, the greater the expectations it creates and the greater the reputation risk it necessarily assumes. Examples are corporations or people, who in terms of our analogy have chosen a hedge-fund strategy for building up their reputation. One example that has received special attention internationally is the Obama campaign. Here we have extreme success, extremely high expectations – and an extremely high risk of folding if these expectations are disappointed. A certainly somewhat unintended result of this hedge strategy in this case is the award of the Nobel Peace Prize to Barack Obama. It’s hard to imagine greater trust in advance.

J.K.: At the other end of the scale, we have companies who follow a total-return strategy. They consistently attempt to avoid publicity. One can find examples in the B-to-B sector especially. Interestingly, the reputation risk here is particularly high, despite this restraint. Total return strategies today are compatible with neither the scandal dynamics of the global media system nor the new spheres of influence emerging in Web 2.0. Companies that have in the past failed to firmly establish a clear and trusted profile among their stakeholders, will in future more easily become a football for media interests and opinion forums in the internet.

So, those responsible for communications must always choose between the devil and the deep blue sea?

J.K.: No, there are specific reputation risks and opportunities for every company. Before you decide on a particular reputation strategy, you should evaluate the internal and external conditions for your company. Let me demonstrate this using Siemens as an example: when the corruption affair was uncovered in 2006, it created a massive reputation problem for Siemens. This could not be fixed through communications alone. Consequently, Siemens decisively opted for a value strategy and began to change corporate structures and employee behaviours. This process was accompanied by internal audits, and a process for changing corporate culture and values.

R.W.: Only when Siemens began to be perceived as a leader in the fight against corruption did the company increasingly use external communications activities. Through the Siemens Answer Programme, Siemens has actively positioned itself since mid-2008 on certain pre-defined global megatrends, such as demographic change, urbanisation and climate change. In this way, it has been building up its opinion leadership on issues relevant to business. In stock-market jargon we would say: Siemens is now increasingly pursuing a reputational growth strategy.

Review: ECRS Symposium, "Reputation Capital"

by Kristin Köhler (www.communicationcontrolling.de)

The European Centre for Reputation Studies (ECRS) organized for the fouth time an international symposium on reputation studies on Nov. 13, 2009 .

Starting with an academic controversy, Mark Eisenegger, co-head of the Research Institute for the Public Sphere and Society (fög) at the University of Zurich, and Jonathan Silberstein-Loeb, research fellow at the Oxford University Centre for Corporate Reputation, debated in the morning session about the meaning of reputation and the importance of communication in establishing reputation.

Reputation would not just be communication, but sustainable long-term action of an organisation, so Eisenegger. He identifies three reputation dimensions of companies:

functional (related to business performance)
social (related to norms and values)
expressive reputation (related to the emotional appeal by various stakeholders).

Trust and reputation are close related to each other when it comes to reputation management: Reputation creates trust and trust presupposes that expectations are met. The expectations again occur in the three dimensions. Businesses better meet their stakeholders’ expectations to perform well, so his conclusion So far, so good, but how could reputation be managed at all? The current financial crisis shows a great loss of trust and corporate reputation, especially in the financial markets. To retain their scope of action, Eisenegger stated that companies could not reduce their reputation management to mere communication – however corporate realities must in any case be changed. The communicative environment and deficient perceptions would have been the cause of the past reputation problem, but the academic does not see communications to regain trust through honest, meaningful communication about a company’s real situation: On the one hand, communication could prove value when an enterprise is undervalued. But markets’ overvaluation could not be solved with expectation management - corporate reality must be changed in this case, so Eisenegger's conclusion. Being together with communication professionals his statement earned some critics from the participants being confident that strategic stakeholder management, issues tracking, measurement and a dialogic approach of communication could help regain reputation at all.

Silberstein-Loeb opened his speech with a different approach to the concept of reputation: the reputation of a company would be determined by testimonial belief and not stakeholders’ recognition of trustworthiness as it is Eisenegger’s academically opinion. His fundamental question: How does information moves into the market? So Silberstein-Loeb showed just one aspect of what influences reputation and what could be managed by communications: the perception of the media (as an opinion leader). The communicators could not influence stock prices and hard facts, the other reputational bases, so the research fellow from the Oxford University. Therefore, he does not understand Eisenegger’s three reputation dimensions. For Silberstein-Loeb, reputation is based on information; social norms and values are also reflected in a organisation’s reputation but are not really a matter of interest: reputation is not important for enlightened self-interest but to make money! In a world of solely commercial transactions reputation would not be necessary, but in reality all markets consist of social interactions. So reputation could facilitate market function and could be seen as a company’s social capital. But not in the same as Eisenegger’s meaning: a good reputation could limit a company strategically (e.g. Google’s market entry in China), so a good unreliable reputation could be as good as a good reliable reputation – it all has to do with what serves the company best. So for Silberstein-Loeb a company could have a good reputation also when its business model isn’t sustainable. Eisenegger stated that for a good reputation reality must come first: there would be no good reputation without a sustainable business model. So change management always comes before communication management.

The two perspectives provoked a lot of discussions among the audience as one could imagine. The next sessions have been less controversial giving more practical insights in the field of reputation risk measurment and issues management.

Measuring Risks to Reputation

Next, Frank Herkenhoff, head of media relations at Deutsche Börse, introduced his insights in reputation risk management. In his approach, he adapts risk management as a standard procedure in businesses to the corporate communications function. In general, risk management is in place to optimize the risk/return profile in business areas. A risk matrix could serve as a holistic instrument to identify upside and downside risks. The same approach could be used in reputation risk management. His matrix for corporate communications consists of two dimensions:

Is the risk effect- or cause-related?
Is the risk located externally or internally?

So you could identify four different types of risk for corporate communications. The causes of reputational risks lie not in the events themselves, but in the attentive structures of the mass media. So Herkenhoff tried to measure the possibility of events becoming news based on social sciences' framing and news value-theory. For identifying the risk potential two questions must be answered:

How do the reputational scenarios in your company fit into current media frames?
How intense are the news values in the reputational scenarios of your company?

The methodology for recording the probability of publication is arranged by him into four steps:

News factor analysis of the business scenarios
Analysis of frames at the level of the discourse product
Fitting analysis of the scenario and media frame
Risk scoring

In the end, the responsible for media relations has a reputation risk matrix on hand in which the risks are arranged as a risk portfolio in terms of likelihood of occurring and damage/benefit. In a next step, a strategy based on the risk management measures could be selected – according to traditional risk management risk diversification, avoidance, education, transfer, provisioning, or intensification.

Issues Management and Reputation

Jan Müller, Vice President of Issues and Strategy in the Corporate Communications department of EADS, presented his company's issues management system. Issues occur in two spheres of action, the company itself and its environment. Assessing the perception of the company by its stakeholders through opinion polling should identify tensions between expectations of stakeholders and the performance/behaviour of the company. Strengths and weaknesses could be seen and integrated in the communication strategy. The second dimension of the issues management process is the company’s environment. EADS tries to identify changes in corporate environment and their potential impacts on the top and bottom line. The key issues are gathered in four empirical steps:

Quantitative media analysis of the hot topics (present coverage of the established media)
Qualitative media analysis of the emerging issues (online, blogs, opinion leaders) external and
Internal surveys on external/internal assessment, new topics, risks and opportunities.

The quantitative input consists of thousands of articles from 57 international newspapers in eleven categories on a monthly basis. The qualitative input comes from an open media set, is content driven and looks for “future signals”. The internal risk and opportunity survey includes the top management, enterprise risk management and opportunity thinkers; the external participants have to have an university degree, an annual income from + € 50,000 and an interest in politics and economy. The result of the elaborate analysis is a quarterly "Trend & Issue Analysis Brief" sent to companies “Top 50” including the key findings, an issue navigator, and the main analysis with five to seven elaborated topics. The in-depth analysis feeds the communications’ actions afterwards, but serves as a strategic business tool for the whole management as well – following Eisenegger’s understanding from a sustainable and broad reputation management approach.

More Practical Insights

Following this, communication managers from industry-leading companies shared case studies, including brand- and reputation-building campaigns by Coca-Cola Hellenic (presented by Jens Rupp, Sustainability Manager), insights from The Dow Chemical Company's reputation initiative "The Human Element" (presented by David B. Rockland, Ketchum) and Siemens AG (presented by Stefan Denig, responsible for Siemens’ issues management). In the last presentation of the day, Georg Kolb from Pleon’s social media unit showed the growing importance of social media networks and online communities for reputation management and the risks occurring from within. Social media monitoring has to be in integral part of issues management as well - the same also Müller explained in the EADS case. The analysis of the web 2.0 environments is crucial to identify new stakeholders and channels, current discussions or potential future topics of the company. So social media could be the best place to manage smaller pieces of the opinion market and with it improving reputation managment, reckoned Kolb.

In the closing workshop, participants were asked to choose a convenient reputation strategy for a specific company in a case study. The ECRS identifies four reputation strategies that could drive up a company’s reputation capital when fitting to the overall strategy and business model:

The Growth strategy has a focused profile based on careful analysis of reputation drivers and sector related issues.
The Hedge strategy focuses on aggressive target-group oriented communications.
The Value strategy contains of a consciously inward-looking reputation management that focuses on structures.
The Total return strategy simply concentrates on the quality of products an services with little attempt at communicative support.

Performedia: Measuring Return on Investment for Public Relations

admin — Sun, 30 May 2010 18:18:19 -0400

Short Description

Rainer Lang, Director of Ketchum Pleon Research, discusses how Ketchum Pleon's Performedia research tool provides a solution to measuring return on investment for public relations by incorporating PR into traditional marketing metrics to pinpoint the value of media relations against other traditional tactics.

Upload PDF

Performedia.pdf

Man's Report: Redefining Marketing to Men

admin — Sun, 30 May 2010 19:18:50 -0400

Short Description

Ketchum Pleon examines the new rules for marketing to men in the 21st century.

Upload PDF

Mans_Report.pdf

Change 2.0: Changing the Way We Change

admin — Sun, 30 May 2010 19:25:33 -0400

Short Description

Focusing on the ability to respond to changes as the ultimate determinant of evolutionary success, Ketchum Pleon explores the opportunities and challenges of change management and change communications for today's companies.

Upload PDF

Change_2.0.pdf

Riding the Web 2.0 Wave

admin — Sun, 30 May 2010 19:59:53 -0400

Short Description

Ketchum Pleon Senior Consultant Stephanie Altemoeller breaks down the dynamics and ramifications of the new Web 2.0 world for public relations.

Upload PDF

Riding_the_Web_2.0_Wave.pdf

Interview With Ray Kotcher in The PR Strategist: "Agency Leaders on Why PR Matters"

admin — Mon, 18 Jan 2010 21:26:31 -0500

Short Description

In the fall 2009 issue of The Public Relations Strategist, Ketchum Senior Partner and CEO Ray Kotcher is one of five public relations agency leaders who is interviewed on the state of public relations and how it serves as one of the best vehicles to build, maintain and advance the credibility and trust that organizations need to succeed. (Reprinted with permission from the fall 2009 issue of The Public Relations Strategist. Copyright 2010 Public Relations Society of America.)

Upload PDF

Ray_Kotcher_Measurable_Impact_Article_2009.pdf

The Suggestion Box Ate My Idea: Making Crowdsourcing Actionable

admin — Thu, 20 Aug 2009 18:39:11 -0400

Short Description

In an August 2009 article posted on the blog The Huffington Post, Daniel Dworkin, Associate Consultant at Ketchum Pleon Change, Ketchum's employee engagement and change management consultancy, goes over several new social media technologies that enable "crowdsourcing" -- the capability for organizations to sift through numerous ideas and questions to determine what's most important to their employees and customers.

Full Story

By Daniel Dworkin, Associate Consultant, Ketchum Pleon Change

Reprinted with permission from the Aug. 4, 2009, issue of The Huffington Post.

Glenn, a friend of mine from the office, went skiing with his girlfriend in Maine in March 2009. It was 10 below zero for much of the weekend, but the conditions didn't bother him much -- Glenn's from Boston. But paying nine dollars for a greasy grilled cheese sandwich at the slope-side restaurant was another story. The 3,600% mark up for a couple pieces of Wonder Bread and a slice of cheese simply got his goat.

You might argue that crappy, expensive food is just part of the ski trip deal. Not so for Glenn. As he lamented this lunchtime injustice, his girlfriend noticed a table tent featuring an e-mail address where patrons might send comments and suggestions regarding their resort experiences. "If you're so upset about your food, tell them, not me," she said. Glenn, half-jokingly, whipped out his BlackBerry and sent a note off to the digital abyss expressing his sincere disappointment with the price and quality of the said grilled cheese. The following Monday, he received a personal note from the mountain's director of food operations thanking him for the feedback, apologizing for the poor food quality and high price, and welcoming him back to Maine for a free lunch.

Glenn's experience represents truly outstanding customer service -- the kind of thoughtful, personal attention to an individual's needs that powers brand evangelism. Most organizations recognize the importance of seeking feedback from both internal and external stakeholders, but effectively responding to it raises difficult challenges. It's one thing for employees at a small ski resort in Maine to review and reply to the occasional e-mail from an outspoken visitor, but how do you manage that process for global organizations with hundreds of thousands of employees and customers?

Traditionally, the answer has been "sparingly." Particularly PR-sensitive issues might bubble up to find a place on the executive team's agenda, but all too often the corporate "suggestion box" is more a means of psychological appeasement than an actionable tool to facilitate dialogue. I'm not discounting the symbolic power of the "corporate hotline," even if there isn't anyone on the other end. There's something cathartic about articulating what's on your mind. But such gratification only goes so far. At some point, feedback requested but not addressed becomes a frustrating point of contention rather than a potential brand builder.

A number of innovative social media applications have emerged that challenge the notion that crowdsourcing -- tapping the latent wisdom of the masses -- is theoretically appealing, yet realistically untenable. These technologies enable organizations to sift through limitless ideas and questions to determine what's really important to their employees and customers, creating a truly meaningful feedback loop as well as a powerful "idea harvesting machine." However, the crowdsourcing technology market is quickly becoming saturated and each app has its own unique use. Here's a brief overview of the best of what's out there:

Google Moderator:

Google Moderator enables users to submit and rank ideas or questions they think should be addressed by "the powers that be." This allows leaders to tackle those topics the general population believes are most important. The Obama campaign utilized Moderator technology to conduct digital town hall events that enabled thousands of citizens to share feedback directly with the president. On the down side, Google Moderator-hosted forums may be susceptible to hijacking by vocal fringe groups. For instance, pro-marijuana users forced pot legislation to the top of the priority issue list in one of Obama's town halls by coordinating repeated voting for their group's cause. Google moderator is a free service -- all you have to do is sign up for a Gmail account and log in at moderator.appspot.com/.

All Our Ideas:

All Our Ideas, the brainchild of Princeton prof Matthew Salganik, presents users with a series of comparisons and asks them to choose which of two options they prefer. All Our Ideas notes users' preferences and presents two new options to be judged. Participants can also suggest new ideas to be pitted against those previously loaded into the system. The most popular ideas float to the top of the priority list based on how many votes they receive. The pairwise system means all ideas are evaluated at one point or another and that people have to vote without seeing what others have chosen (which may prevent the kind of groupthink and "popularity snowballs" that can occur with some of the other apps like Google Moderator). The pairwise system results in a natural metric that can be interpreted to everyone (e.g., Idea X beat the relevant pool of other ideas 80% of the time). All Our Ideas is based on open source software, enabling organizations to redesign their own comparison sites to serve unique business needs. With a recent grant from Google, All Our Ideas continues to flesh out its design. In true open source spirit, the service is free!

Kindling:

Kindling is collaboration generator that facilitates opportunities for employees to share ideas more effectively with one another. Like Google Moderator, the site offers a system to suggest or vote on the strength of various peer-generated ideas (i.e., new products or services, innovative processes, or strategic shifts). Popular ideas bubble up to the top, enabling easy prioritization. Unpopular ideas are slowly phased out of the system. Individuals are prevented from exorbitantly voting on their favorite ideas, ensuring that votes retain their significance. Employees can also sign up to work on addressing a suggested project, so Kindling functions as a task manager as well. Kindling charges a flat rate of $5 per user, per month, but also offers non-profits and educational organizations a flat rate of $99.

Ideablob:

Ideablob was created by Advanta, one of the nation's largest credit card issuers, to incubate creative small business projects. Participants post their best start-up ideas on the Ideablob site and registered community members can both comment on ideas they like (or don't like) and vote for those they think should be awarded a monthly $10,000 prize. The idea that receives the most votes wins and the lucky entrepreneur collects a small bit of seed money to get the ball rolling on budding business plans. Past winners have included both for-profit and non-profit groups. Even those who don't win receive feedback for how to enhance their ideas from a group of peers across the globe.

Kluster:

Kluster enables organizations to "borrow" ideas their customers and fans suggest. Kluster community members respond to the requests that businesses post -- a new product, a different brand, a creative theme for an event -- in some cases in exchange for cash prizes, in others simply for the joy of creative collaboration. Kluster users may bet on the likelihood of sponsor organizations choosing the ideas they like best with digital poker chips referred to as "watts". Those who submit winning ideas receive at least 20% of the prize offered by sponsor companies. Users who bet on winning ideas earn more watts while those who bet incorrectly lose them. Kluster makes money by collecting 15% of rewards offered on specific projects and charging a fee for quality placement of projects on the Web site.

The key determinant when distinguishing among crowdsourcing technologies is whether you seek the input of internal or external audiences. While each of these applications is based on the same idea of an "open call" for ideas or feedback, some are better suited for employees and others for the public at large. In both cases, users should be aware of the risks associated with this type of voluntary feedback collection. The "squeakiest wheels" are those whose voices will be heard the loudest -- and loud does not necessarily equal brilliant.

Ray Kotcher Selected as One of Top 25 Industry Leaders in PRWeek's 2009 PR Power List

admin — Fri, 17 Jul 2009 13:53:36 -0400

Short Description

PRWeek's senior editors profile Ketchum CEO Ray Kotcher as one of the top 25 industry leaders in PRWeek's annual PR Power List.

Upload PDF

Ray_Kotcher_PRWeek_PR_Power_List_2009.pdf

Listen to the Multi-Minders

admin — Wed, 15 Jul 2009 11:39:34 -0400

Short Description

In an April 2009 op-ed in Brandweek, Kelley Skoloda, Partner and Director of Ketchum's Global Brand Marketing Practice, discusses the ways in which female consumers are starting to take control of brands and provides insights on how marketers and business owners can benefit from giving up control.

Riding the Social Media Wave

admin — Fri, 24 Apr 2009 11:37:02 -0400

Short Description

In an April 2009 article posted on the blog The Huffington Post, Daniel Dworkin, Associate Consultant at Ketchum Pleon Change, Ketchum's employee engagement and change management consultancy, discusses the challenges and rewards for organizations in using social media to engage employees.

Full Story

By Daniel Dworkin, Associate Consultant, Ketchum Pleon Change

Reprinted with permission from the April 14, 2009, issue of The Huffington Post.

For years, forward-thinking business leaders have espoused the virtues of involving employees in decision making as a means of driving engagement. Give them a voice, the mantra goes. Don't talk at them; facilitate a meaningful dialogue.

Then along comes social media (content created by the people, for the people) to share ideas, build communities, and influence one another's actions. It doesn't take long for those of us responsible for driving employee engagement to realize its potential to put the "involvement = commitment" theory into action. We can empower employees across functions, and in some cases across the globe, to share their thinking about how we can make the most of our businesses -- what works well, what we should develop, how we should go about attaining our goals. What's more, the conversation, and thus the feedback, doesn't stop. The elusive "wisdom of the masses" is but a mouse click away.

Then the dream came crashing down around us.

How do we manage the user-generated content of independent-thinking employees? How do we effectively respond to their questions and suggestions? What if we don't have the resources, budget, or leadership alignment to act on their ideas?

They're valid questions. Moreover, implementing social media in the workplace forces us to wrestle with deeply entrenched perceptions of what the roles of "employee," "leader" and "communicator" mean. To empower employees with a voice demands leaders who are willing to be participants in the conversation and communicators who are able to facilitate and influence that dialogue. For some organizations, this evolution is simply the next step in a journey towards flatness that began many years ago. For others, re-imagining how people interact across levels, via social media or otherwise, is a philosophical sea change.

Interestingly, social media raises a similarly scary conundrum for organizations interacting with consumers. To open the door to their input regarding your brand, its strengths, and its deficiencies might be seen as an invasion of your corporate privacy. Sure, effective branding has always taken the consumer's perspective into consideration, but how active a role do we really want the public to play in influencing the future of our businesses?

Despite these parallels, doubt surrounding the benefits of external social media applications has largely gone away. The blogosphere is talking about your enterprise whether you're part of the conversation or not. Consumers are tweeting about how lame (or amazing) your Super Bowl ad was, even if you're not reading and responding to those messages. The point is, we've accepted the fact that our brands are no longer simply the images we project. Consumers' power to shape how their social networks perceive our organizations and what we stand for is far more striking than any ad campaign.

If we buy the idea that there is a perpetual digital conversation happening about our businesses among consumers, and that we have to join that party as much to protect our brands as to influence peoples' perceptions of them, then why don't we extend the same courtesy to our employees? If you're looking to grow brand ambassadors -- employees who can advocate for you on the Web, at the bar, or at the local tabernacle -- why would you deny them a forum to share their perspectives with one another in which you, the leaders and communicators, can be active participants in shaping how they think and feel?

Modern brand-building is a bottom-up affair, and it starts with employees. Social media is an efficient mechanism to connect with employees, harvest their ideas, address their concerns, and begin the process of cultivating an army of brand spokespeople. It won't happen overnight, and in an age where ROI is measured quarterly at the least, the upfront costs of upping your organization's social media game may intimidate the faint of heart. But if you believe that employees are your "most precious resource" and that their engagement is tied to their productivity and thus your bottom line, than you'd be wise to at least explore the digital waves, if not paddle out into the uncharted waters of social media in the workplace. Enjoy the ride.

PRWeek 2009 Campaign of the Year Award: Man Lives in IKEA

admin — Mon, 06 Apr 2009 14:56:24 -0400

Short Description

Ketchum and client IKEA took home the 2009 PRWeek Award for Campaign of the Year for their "Man Lives in IKEA" campaign, for which comedian Mark Malkoff lived in a Paramus, N.J., IKEA store for one week in January 2008 and documented his adventures online and posted webisodes of his time in the store. The campaign also won PRWeek Awards for Best Corporate Branding Campaign and Best Use of Online Media.

Upload PDF

Man_Lives_in_IKEA_PRWeek_Campaign_of_Year_Award_Article_3-09.pdf

In Digital Dialogue, Every Word Counts

admin — Tue, 24 Feb 2009 15:54:18 -0500

Short Description

In a February 2009 op-ed from PRWeek magazine, Ketchum Senior Partner and New York Director Barri Rafferty comments on the opportunities and challenges for PR professionals to maintain a "digital dialogue" with their audiences.

Advertising Age Selects Ketchum for 2009 "Agencies to Watch" List

admin — Fri, 30 Jan 2009 15:49:05 -0500

Short Description

Ketchum was named as one of 10 agencies chosen for Advertising Age's 2009 "Agencies to Watch" list, a list
designed to recognize 10 agencies based on creativity in brand strategies and execution, measurable results, and new-business growth.

Upload PDF

Ad_Age_Agencies_to_Watch_2009_List.pdf

PRWeek Names Ketchum as Its Editors’ Choice, Honorable Mention, for Agency to Succeed in 2009

admin — Fri, 30 Jan 2009 15:40:02 -0500

Short Description

Ketchum was selected for an honorable mention for agency to succeed in 2009 in PRWeek’s annual Editors’ Choice selection, an annual designation bestowed upon the top two PR agencies judged as most likely to succeed by PRWeek's editors.

Upload PDF

PRWeek_Editors_Choice_Agency_to_Succeed_2009_Article.pdf

New Media Terms to Know for a New Year

admin — Thu, 29 Jan 2009 16:27:10 -0500

Short Description

In an article from PR Tactics, the monthly newsletter of the Public Relations Society of America, Ketchum Editor of Online Communications Joseph Priest takes a look at some of today's most frequently confused new media terms and how to correctly write them. (Reprinted with permission from the January 2009 issue of PR Tactics. Copyright 2009 Public Relations Society of America.)

Upload PDF

Joseph_Priest_New_Media_Terms_Article_1-09.pdf

The Second Decade of the Council Brings Great Promise

admin — Fri, 19 Dec 2008 20:38:33 -0500

Short Description

In a December 2008 article from the Council of Public Relations Firms' online newsletter, The Firm Voice, Ray Kotcher, Senior Partner and CEO of Ketchum and 2008-2009 Chair of the Council of Public Relations Firms, reflects on the Council's 10th anniversary.

Full Story

By Ray Kotcher, Senior Partner and Chief Executive Officer, Ketchum, and 2008-2009 Chair, Council of Public Relations Firms

Reprinted with permission from the Dec. 9 issue of The Firm Voice.

The Council of Public Relations Firms turned 10 this year, and I think what this organization has achieved is worth celebrating. I also believe those achievements have fortified us for whatever lies ahead.

In 1998, the Council ended its first year with 39 member firms. Today, firm membership stands over 100, and our members represent some 12,000 employees in more than 40 U.S. cities and in 70 countries. That is a testament not only to the role of the Council in our industry, but also to our industry's role in today's global business world. Since 1998, revenues for PR firms in the U.S. have grown from $2.5 billion to a projected $4.7 billion for this year — evidence of the rising value of the services we provide.

The Council — by pooling all of our strengths and resources — has been an important part of this growth.

Ten years ago, Facebook and MySpace didn't yet exist; today, the popular social networking sites are a primary way that people around the world connect online — and PR is a lead discipline for tapping into this potential.

Indeed, throughout all this change — and, specifically, as one-directional mass communication has given way to multilevel conversations with consumers — PR firms have not only kept pace but often have led the way in shaping how new tools will be used and helping our clients stay up-to-date.

Agencies have taken on ever-growing roles as trusted partners for companies looking to build equity, trust and authenticity. Companies increasingly seek our counsel in managing issues and crises. And more and more, they look to us to help navigate key new concerns around social responsibility and stakeholder engagement. PR firms are making real, high-level contributions to corporations.

While the economy is going to test all industries in the months ahead, I think the public relations industry is in a position of strength.

Public relations agencies will be the most efficient way for companies to access the breadth and depth of communications and marketing expertise that they will need. And I believe the value of public relations will be clearer than ever. In fact, when I became chairman of the Council of PR Firms last year, I said that I didn't think there had ever been a better time in PR — I still feel that way today. We've been through tough economic times before, and we've emerged stronger and better.

So, despite the tough economic times we're facing around the globe right now, I believe the public relations industry — and PR firms, in particular — will continue to grow because of the relevance of the services we provide.

With all of these things, I see great times ahead for both the Council and our industry. Most of you reading this can attest to the growing sophistication of our business. Companies increasingly are turning to communication and public relations functions — and to agencies — for more strategic and higher-level advice. And the current patterns indicate that corporate public relations will have more responsibility for ethics and advocacy in the future. For agencies, that means we will need to provide sophisticated, sound counsel.

At the Council, we are committed to helping member firms find and attract the additional talent we'll need to meet these responsibilities. For instance, we all know that our industry needs more diversity in skill sets, thinking, educational background and experiences. I believe we can achieve this as agencies by doing these things: working more closely with the colleges and universities that train future PR professionals to make sure they understand the evolving needs of PR firms; encouraging mid-career professionals from other industries — business, law, technology (wherever we have needs) — to consider public relations and then helping them with the transition into our world; and providing continuous training of the talent we already have — preparing current PR professionals to be ready to take on expanded counseling roles for our clients.

The Council's leadership training program with Harvard is one example, and as public relations helps navigate the increasingly complex stakeholder "ecosystem," other alliances will occur. And, of course, we will have to be sure our compensation structure is competitive with other industries so that we can pursue top-notch graduates.

A broader role as counselors also will open the door for public relations to lead more integrated pitches. As the value of the services we offer becomes clearer to clients and prospects, our role as an equal contributor in the overall marketing mix will become clearer, too.

The potential that lies ahead is significant. And our industry's advances so far reassure me that it is attainable. Looking back again at revenue growth for a moment, I think it's also important to point out that revenues for PR firms in the U.S. have nearly doubled over the last 10 years. That outpaces the aggregate growth of the marketing agency sector — the agencies in all disciplines — whose revenues increased just 17% over that period. While other marketing communications agencies have a larger share, I do believe our rate of growth is a clear demonstration that the perceived value of what we do is rapidly on the rise.

Labor Reductions: The Communications Gauntlet

admin — Thu, 04 Sep 2008 19:33:06 -0400

Short Description

Ketchum Senior Vice President of Crisis Management James Donnelly breaks down the challenges of and best practices for internally communicating corporate layoffs, in an article from the summer 2008 issue of The Public Relations Strategist. (Reprinted with permission from the summer 2008 issue of The Public Relations Strategist. Copyright 2008 Public Relations Society of America.)

Upload PDF

Donnelly_PR_Strategist_Article_8-08.pdf

Who Am I? Defining and Communicating Your Leadership Brand

admin — Tue, 05 Aug 2008 19:37:51 -0400

Short Description

In an article from the August 2008 issue of PR Tactics, the monthly newsletter of the Public Relations Society of America, Ketchum New York Director Barri Rafferty discusses the importance of articulating a leadership brand to developing leaders and building a business.

Full Story

By Barri Rafferty, Senior Partner and Director, New York, Ketchum

From James L. Heskett to David Maister to Bill George, I have read many authors’ advice on leadership in a service business. One of my favorite quotations from Maister’s book True Professionalism is, “A leader doesn’t build a business — a leader builds an organization that builds a business.” If you believe that premise, read on.

Leaders are people you want to follow. They coach you to success, share your values and bring new ideas to the daily routine. Sounds easy, but can you articulate the traits good leaders in your agency or company have? Is there a clear leadership brand?

Dave Ulrich, author of Leadership Brand: Developing Customer-focused Leaders to Drive Performance and Build Lasting Value, defines the concept of a leadership brand as the “identity of the leaders throughout an organization that bridges client expectations and employee and organization behavior.”

Some agencies want to grow fast and need leaders who are entrepreneurs and innovators. Others want to maintain their size and be known as having the best client service, work atmosphere or niche expertise. Each of these objectives requires different leader behavior. Once your vision and business goals are clear, you can define the types of leaders you need to achieve those goals. They can be written out as a list of traits. The brand should be relevant to internal and external audiences and be easily articulated by both. Over time, your clients should be able to describe your leadership brand based on their experiences with your people.

A leadership brand is only effective if the traits you value are clearly articulated to all employees. For it to really take hold, you must train against those traits and hold talent accountable to those competencies. The idea is not to thwart people’s natural leadership styles, but to blend their leadership traits with those you value as a company. People must demonstrate the traits of your leadership brand while bringing their complete selves to the office. If you hire someone who has to work to demonstrate the attributes you value, she or he is not likely to make it in your culture.

Knowing Your Talent

To effectively manage your talent, you need to identify and develop your stars and emerging leaders. Thus, you should ask yourself the following questions: Who are your “superkeepers,” the cultural role models you cannot imagine losing? Who are your rising stars, those doing extremely well in their current jobs but with potential to do more? Who are the fast-trackers who show a pattern of success and could be ready to advance in the right role? Who are you spending the majority of your time developing?

As leaders, we often spend time with those who are role-mismatched, possible pearls or actively disengaged. For an organization to thrive, we need to get better at isolating those who drain energy and focus on managers whose enthusiasm inspires others. We need to cultivate our leadership and make personal commitments to develop their career plans. At Ketchum we have the Ketchum Leadership Institute, a training program that articulates our leadership brand and populates it with our top leaders around the world. We then provide our leaders tools from human resources that allow them to more easily access and manage talent.

Time Well Spent

We all make leadership choices by what we book on our calendars each day. We choose to spend time with the client, on talent or on the business strategy. Look at the past month on your calendar and see what percentage of your time is spent on each area. Looking at the month ahead, how could you make that time more effective?

How we distribute our time impacts our current and future business results. The best leaders provide fast feedback, create career development plans for their future leaders and think about succession. They can articulate the agency’s desired leadership brand and explain to individuals how they can better deliver that brand promise. They can focus their leaders on common business goals yet give each leader room to bring her or his own personality and vision to the task.

The best leaders focus on the future — it’s not an afterthought. What you do with your nonbillable time is often more important than your billable time. Sound easy? Think again. Sound doable? Yes, with discipline.

As I began, the goal of the leader is to build the organization. Only once you have identified the next tier of leaders and focused them on a common leadership brand can an organization thrive. If you are committed to building a service business, you must unite the agency’s human assets and think deeply about the current and future state of the business.

Profiles of PR Success: Nick Ragone

admin — Mon, 16 Jun 2008 12:39:27 -0400

Short Description

In a 2008 booklet called Profiles of PR Success: Stories of Emerging Leaders in Public Relations, Ketchum Senior Vice President and Client Development Director Nick Ragone is featured as one of 20 women and men, ages 28-40, selected as successful and emerging leaders in the field based on awards or recognition they have received or recommendations of leaders in the industry. The booklet was researched and written by University of Alabama advertising and public relations graduate students, who conducted interviews with each of the 20 professionals.

Upload PDF

Ragone_Profiles_of_PR_Success_Booklet_5-08.pdf

How More Companies Are Embracing Social Responsibility as Good Business

admin — Thu, 03 Apr 2008 10:03:40 -0400

Short Description

In a March 2008 article from The Wall Street Journal Online, Ketchum Senior Counsel John Paluszek talks with the Journal Online about the rising importance of corporate social responsibility over the last few decades and the imperative it has become for today's companies.

Full Story

Click here to view "How More Companies Are Embracing Social Responsibility as Good Business."

CEO Efforts Key to Consumer Trust

admin — Fri, 29 Feb 2008 12:18:59 -0500

Short Description

In a January 2008 PRWeek article, Ketchum North American Corporate Practice Director John Weckenmann explains how the public's opinion of CEOs is driven by their performance with the environment, ethics and employees.

Words to the Wise

admin — Thu, 21 Feb 2008 16:23:04 -0500

Short Description

Ketchum Editor of Online Communications Joseph Priest reviews words that commonly confound business professionals, in an article from the January 2008 issue of PR Tactics, the monthly newsletter of the Public Relations Society of America.

Upload PDF

PriestPRTacticsArticle1-08.pdf

Legacies from Legends in Public Relations

admin — Tue, 20 Nov 2007 11:45:52 -0500

Short Description

In a 2007 booklet commemorating the 40th anniversary of the founding of the Public Relations Student Society of America, Ketchum Senior Counsel John Paluszek and former Ketchum Midwest Director Ron Culp were featured as two of 40 public relations "legends" whose observations of the past and predictions for the future of public relations are profiled. The booklet was produdced by the Plank Center for Leadership in Public Relations at the University of Alabama.

Upload PDF

LegendsBooklet10-07.pdf

Five Lessons for Communicating Change

admin — Tue, 29 May 2007 11:27:40 -0400

Short Description

In a March 2007 article from Management Consulting News magazine, excerpts of Ketchum CEO Ray Kotcher’s speech to the Association of Management Consulting Firms’ 2006 annual meeting at the Harvard Club in New York City were shared.

Full Story

From the March 2007 issue of Management Consulting News magazine.

In a recent address to the Association of Management Consulting Firms, Ray Kotcher, CEO of Ketchum, offered the audience five lessons to help improve communications in times of turbulent change.

Kotcher points out that even though consultants are often agents of change, that doesn’t make them immune to the uncertainties and fear of change they can experience when their own organizations undergo transformation.

Here are Kotcher’s Five Lessons for Communicating Change:

Recognize that change is the ticket to your success. Ask yourself if you and your firm's colleagues are truly behaving as a team. Is collaboration a given? Is everyone ready to tackle the latest period of change with a unified spirit? It pays rich rewards to emphasize collaboration, community, and credibility – and to ensure that this spirit is embraced by your employees, your clients, and others.

Embrace the growth and change within your consultancies. Quickly communicate what any new change means to the entire organization. Many firms are changing rapidly by executing new business strategies, leveraging new technologies, and bringing in new talent.

Understand what the forces of change and growth mean to your organization and its future. What are your goals about your firm and what's ahead? Does everyone in your organization understand them?

Think creatively about how you will communicate to your internal community about growth and change. Employees must be engaged in the programs you devise for dealing with growth and change. They must be ambassadors for it. They must be actively involved in helping develop and cheerlead for the programs. This means they must understand your objectives and initiatives and actively buy into them.

Join the conversation and be ready yourself to faces the challenges – good and bad – of tomorrow. You and your firm's colleagues have your own conversation, but join others and don't be isolated within your particular firm. Broaden your world to make a difference. As Gandhi said, "You must be the change you want to see in the world."

Raymond L. Kotcher is Chief Executive Officer and a Senior Partner of Ketchum, a unit of Omnicom Group and one of the world’s largest public relations agencies, with offices and affiliates in six continents.

Davos Offers Insight on Power Shift

admin — Sun, 14 Oct 2007 17:35:01 -0400

Short Description

In a PRWeek byline article, Ketchum Senior Partner Rob Flaherty shares his observations from his attendance at the World Economic Forum Annual Meeting in Davos, Switzerland, in January 2007.

Davos Puts PR Firmly on the Map

admin — Sat, 13 Oct 2007 18:28:16 -0400

Short Description

In an Op-Ed from a February 2006 issue of PRWeek, Ketchum Global Practices Partner Rob Flaherty and Ketchum London CEO David Gallagher reflect on their attendance at the 36th annual World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland.