Archive for 04.07.2008.

Government and non-profit public relations (Panel 3)

(This post is part of the series BledBlog, blogged live from BledCom 2008)

chaired by: Krishnamurthy Sriramesh. With: Fraser Likely, Chris Skinner, David McKie.

From this panel I will just blog the key messages as I am already a bit exhausted (due to the fact that I got up at 5 am this morning).

Introduction (Krishnamurthy Sriramesh): PR is not only corporate public relations, but a lot more – examples from the non-profit sector and politics are often neglected.

„Public Relations in Government: Governing Communication or Communicating Government?“ by Fraser Likely

Corporate PR or communications is more unified across the world as corporations work more or less the same. This is different for governments – as there are a lot of different forms of governments: from democtratic to dictatorial.

Unique features of PR in government:

  1. Stakeholder & publics compexity. For governments there are subjects, citizens, clients & customers. Individuals can be and are part of all of these groups at the same time (many hatted individual stakeholders). Publics are part of a „nervous system“. For governments the relationships between the publics are particularely important, too.
  2. Tacit to explicit knowledge: Governments are eager on writing down policies and procedures.
  3. Dominant coalitions: In governments there are a lot of dominant coalitions, which PR professionals must involve themselves with.

Social Marketing & Government PR: Government product marketing makes up 10%. In addition: Government Service Marketing as a PR campaign, no 4Ps – individuals are clients, not customers, no exchange relationship. And government social/policy marketing: public education behavioral-change program (no 4Ps / no exhange either).


Chris Skinner on „The changing role of the public relations practitioner in the NPO sector

Success of PR in the NPO has different 4Ps than marketing:

  1. Perception: vision, mission and value statements must be communicated.
  2. Personalities: personalities and their networks that are running organizations are crucial.
  3. Politics: monitoring and responding to political changes is vital
  4. Priorities: most important tasks must be identified, that is very important due to limited resources.

In NPO PR people learn more than in any other sectors – because success strongly depends on PR.


David McKie with is presentation on „De-colonising PR: Corporate copycats and not-for-profit innovators“

The NPO sector is way bigger than corporate – so PR for NPO is what people need to learn.

(this speech is hard to blog … as it is fast and there are many messages between the lines, so I am trying to follow instead of blogging)

Discussion: (I’m not gonna blog that either, except if there’s something extremely revealing for myself.)


04.07.2008. at 17:19 Hinterlasse einen Kommentar

The Marketing PR Revolution: Progression, Regression or Digression? (Panel 2)

(This post is part of the series BledBlog, blogged live from BledCom 2008)

to follow after the lunch break from 14:15. Looking forward to that.

chaired by Dubravka Sinčić Ćorić. With Maja Makovec Brenčič, Larissa Grunig, Danny Moss.

Maja will start with the topic „PR as a forefront of integral marketing approach: do firms understand its role?“

The more we move toward the real customer orientation the more the stand of PR grows. Increasing marketing sophistication means a shift from product orientation to sales orientation, to marketing and to customer/market orientation. PR values play a key role in this context.

An illustration: Gorenje in France. PR values proved to be valuable for – in the end – increasing sales. What the firm really believes in is finally valued at the market. Integrated communications, including PR, is a major driver for success.


Public Relations as a Strategic Consulting Function, Larissa Grunig.

PR deals with „herds“, groups, publics. They all matter – and their relationships.

Now, Larissa will concentrate on the organizational aspects of PR, where in the organization this function should be located: close to the key decision-makers. PR is an umbrella type of function that shall not be subordinated to other departments. PR departments should be structured horizontally to reflect strategic publics. These are the results of the Excellence Study.

It does not make a difference if PR and Marketing are located in one or separate departments and what size of budgets they have. The ideal scenario is that management equally and heavily supports both functions.

25 qualitative case studies: Excellence was affected negatively if PR was subordinated to Marketing.

Hunter on Fortune 500 firms: PR & Marketing work together well and do not compete.

GAP Studies from USC: results mirror those from Excellence Study: PR function is more successful id it directly reports to C-Suite. Including public relations in organizational strategic management is crucial.

Dubravka Sinčić Ćorić, Larissa Grunig, Danny Moss

Marketing and Public Relations: Challenging the stereotype; re-examining evidence of conflict and collaboration, Danny Moss

Danny starts by pointing out some stereotypical views about marketing and PR. In the 1990s marketing attempted to reinvent itself – MPR-CPR, IMC concelt, relationship marketing. All these efforts tried to challenge the position of PR. Reasons: power-control / strategic choice perspective and contingency perspectives.

Evidence-based perspective: in many organizations a flexible, balanced relationship becomes evident; not integration but cooperation. There is a lot of evidence for close collaboration between marketing, advertising. There is little hostility between these functions. Web based communication (impact of new technologis) has a huge impact on all of these functions.


Discussion: The question „who does the PR function report to“ proved to be crucial in the US-studies and remains to be researched in Europe (Gap 6 will be international). Integration of PR with functions like HR, Finance, Law do not work (qualitative research from the US).

(there was a lot of discussion here that I didn’t blog)

PR perception and its relationship with marketing depends a lot on how we (the scholars) define PR. PR value does not only come from media and publicity – but from relationship and economic input. It is important to define it that way – that is an important perspective to cinsider (Yi-Hui Huang).

04.07.2008. at 12:43 Hinterlasse einen Kommentar

Fads in Marketing and Public Relations (Panel 1)

(This post is part of the series BledBlog, blogged live from BledCom 2008)

chaired by Dejan Verčič. With Sašo Dimitrievski, Francesco Lurati and Simon Torp.

There’s a short break before this next session. So I have the chance to describe the setting of this conference. The room is a little strange because of its shape. There are just 6 rows of tables for the participants, but about 24 people fit in one row. Thus, we also have 2 screens. There are more people here than I had expected, I would say around 120. Many seem to be scholars, but I reckon there are quite some professional PR guys present as well.


OK, the panel has started …

Sašo: will concentrate on Social Media Marketing.

Fads vs. trends: A trend lives for a longer time, fads are short-lived. Trends have deeper cultural roots and are mainstream. Fads are taken up by small groups and can easyly be transferred to other groups.

Web 2.0 is good tool to spot trends.

New 4P’s of marketing: Personalization, Participation, Peer-to-Peer and Predictive Modeling.

My opinion: up until now, I don’t really get the point of Sašo … I guess he is trying to tell us way too much of his thoughts in too little time. So it’s all a little hectic.

New marketing funnel: due to Web 2.0 (friends‘ recommendations, etc.).

BledCom audience

Sašo is now talking about Cannes 08 fads … his own favorite fads: meaningful experiences, engagement, cross-channel integration and Social Media. Social Media is already a trend in marketing.

We’re watching some funny YouTube videos now … what people made out of a Bud-video. The last video was an Obama video, probably produced by Obama’s team. It has a lot more views than the original Bud video. Obama is much more present in blogs and in Twitter than Clinton.


Now, Francesco started his presentation on Public Relations and Corporate Communications – called „Corporate Communication(s) as Fad(s)„. The terms „PR“ and „Corporate Communications“ are used interchangeably. But are they the same?

Characteristics of Corporate Communications: has a focus on bias (external, internal), measurement, multi-functionality, alignment.

It’s the task of Corporate Communications to explore and protect the cultural roots of a company in order to be able to change anything else. It is important to believe in something and not to hyper-adapt.

-> a fad? no, but a long mapping process. People from PR, advertising, organization, marketing, strategy are working together, contributing in different ways, but aiming at the same target (which has many different names). Common ground is corporate communications (Francesco showed a definition). He concludes by saing CC is not a fad but a reality.


Simon, on „Is I(M)C a Fad?

(I didn’t blog this presentation.)


Discussion about the terms/concepts of PR, Marketing, Integrated (Marketing) Communications, Public Affairs and Corporate Communications, etc. and why there’s always a debate about what terminology to use. There seems to be agreement that there is one common goal to all these concepts, but different perspectives e.g. the relationship perspective of PR.

My opinion: Oh my god, still the same discussion? I remember that from university (Communication Sciences at the University of Vienna) in the early 90s. I do have the impression that PR people always have the feeling that they have to „defend“ their profession/discipline against Marketing people. I just don’t get why? (I am a PR person myself, I would say, but don’t feel I have to defend or justify anything).

04.07.2008. at 12:04 Hinterlasse einen Kommentar

BledCom: Introduction, Keynote

(This post is part of the series BledBlog, blogged live from BledCom 2008)

Just made it – directly driving to Bled from Vienna I was just 5 minutes late. Due to a lack of parking lots here …

Important notice: I will more or less quote the speakers of this conference here. If I want to express my personal view of a topic, I will start the paragraph with „My opinion“.

Well, the conference is already on it’s way. The keynote speaker, Anne Lise Kjaer, just started her presentation. About „future thinking“. Her topic is „Society Trends 2015+„.

(I am a little concerned – my laptop will run out of power … haven’t found electricity nearby yet.)

Well, in order to get to the future, Anne Lise started with the past … the last 50 years as era of consumerism – „emotional consumption“. Right now, she sees two trends: budget consumption along with transparency and ethics at the same time. The quest for happiness is one very strong drive for us (as consumers).

Future marketing/communication strategies of companies will cover the whole brain, i.e. address the right and left brain equally.

Trend Atlas
: Demography is something we have to move away from. Other dimensions are becoming more important: scientific, social, emotional and spiritual dimensions.

Many signs of change like convergence technology, co-creation, glocalization. People react differntly: Some building walls, some making windows. There are so many communication tools now that empower the individuals. Strong developments: Social Networks (co-creation) like Wikipedia, Blogger, YouTube. People want co-creation and personal interaction. YouTube is one of the best examples for that. Glocalization: Globalization is not everything, along with it local values become more attractive again.

More trends/changes: Power economies – emerging economies and rapidly growing middle class. Convenience culture – people are fast and efficient in work and want compensation for that in their spare time. This also includes a demand for authenticity and health & wellness (very strong trend).

All those trends show a polarized society – sharing lifestyles and value sets across conventional borders (tomorrow’s people). Anne Liese identifies We-people (gatherers) and the Me-people (hunters).

4 key consumer messages: „meaningful“ and „empowering“ directed towards Me-people and „ethical“ and „interactive“ directed towards We-people.

My opinion: I think, this model for marketing and communication is quite impressive. I am not sure, if people are always me- or we-people but I personally agree with these key messages. I think these are important messages.

(Anne Liese jsut mentioned a project in London by a person from Iceland about „meaning“. But I missed the point of it … anyway I would be interested in seeing it.)

Anne Liese’s summary: you have „to feel“ instead of „to know“ to reach tomorrow’s people.

04.07.2008. at 11:08 Hinterlasse einen Kommentar


Bookmark and Share


Gib deine E-Mail-Adresse an, um diesen Blog zu abonnieren und Benachrichtigungen über neue Beiträge via E-Mail zu erhalten.

Schließe dich 5 anderen Followern an


Interessante Publikationen

Juli 2008
W3Counter Web Stats

Österreicher Blog Verzeichnis

Blogverzeichnis - Blog Verzeichnis