I’m going through this process right now, trying to decide if our financial model makes sense for the future. I feel like billable hours is so archaic, but I also think we need to track time in order to be profitable. We are paid for our time so some sort of tracking mechanism is a necessary evil.

I’ve always been of the belief that you would never go into a restaurant, eat a meal, and at the end say to the chef, “That meal was fantastic – thank you so much! I’ll tell you what; if I don’t get heartburn tonight, I’ll send you a check in the morning.” So why do people always want to do that with our invoices, AFTER they’ve negotiated a program, the fees, and paid a couple of previous invoices?  Rather than be stubborn about it, though, I’m on the look-out for new ideas.

Therefore, I was interested to read “Coke Pushes Pay-for-Performance Model” in AdAge and “Changes Afoot in Professional Billing Rates” in The Australian Business.

The genesis of both articles is that clients want to know how advertising, PR, social media, marketing…all communication methods translate back to results. It’s the day old question, but now instead of shrugging our shoulders and saying, “But your brand awareness is off the charts!” we’re being held accountable for true bottom-line results.

So, you say, who determines the value? What do we do about the time it takes to ramp-up with a new client? Does this offend the PRSA Code of Ethics? Do you think we’ll try this and go back to the way things are now? Or will we do it only if forced by our clients?

I love Sprint’s new commercial for the 3G “Now Network”.  I’m a sucker for a good factoid — there is something about it that draws me in.  And I especially like the call out to Twitter … and the reference to dippers made me laugh.

The campaign is produced by Goodby, Silverstein & Partners in San Francisco and they stand by the statistics being real.  Which of course makes me appreciate it even more.

What’s even more fun is the new Sprint Web site with more in the “now” facts.  ADWEEK points out that you can actually download a widget offering a selection of data and that we can soon see this campaign in print.

So you know I love it, but looking online it seems as though consumers don’t find it as thrilling as I do.  What do you think?

According to Advertising Age, the top HR executive of media agency, Carat Group, recently sent an e-mail with job-cut talking points to all employees. Directed solely at senior management in preparation for restructuring and downsizing, the memo also made its way into the mailboxes of those being fired.

Continue Reading »

Blog written by Sydney Ayers, APR

A recent column by Maureen Hall in Ad Age discussed the fact that the words “public relations” had, unfortunately, lost their meaning.  I would pose that they didn’t so much lose their meaning as we haven’t really safeguarded it.

Too frequently a client prospect will come to us and say, “We need some PR” when what they really mean is, “We need some media relations.”  Instead of taking the opportunity to fully educate these prospects regarding the full depth and breadth of public relations, we say, “Sure.  We’ll leverage our contacts and get you great coverage we’ll measure in impressions and ad equivalency.”

When are we going to stop letting everyone else – from Washington lobbyists to Hollywood publicists, ad professionals to interactive specialists – define our job? 

Our friends Cutlip, Center and Broom tell us, “Public relations is the practice of building and maintaining mutually beneficial relationships between an organization and its various publics.”  Nothing in that definition says the only accepted tactic for achieving this is media relations. You know why?  Because it just isn’t.

Is media relations important?  Yes, it is.  But so are community outreach, special events, employee communications, issues management, crisis communications, word-of-mouth marketing, social media and other public relations tactics that enhance brand and protect organizational reputation.

When prospects come to us, we should not be afraid to help them broaden their definition of public relations.  It certainly would go a long way to helping us better position our clients, our profession, our firms, and ourselves.

According to a new poll, one in four consumers is willing to pay to speak with a customer service person.

Are you kidding me?

I call customer service when I’m having problems with a product. Last time I checked, it’s the company’s responsibility to make sure their products are usable. Not mine. So if I can’t figure out the directions to put together an IKEA console or my new software won’t load properly, I expect the company who developed the product to make it clear.

Ad Age goes on to report that consumers have high expectations. We’ll speak up about poor service or “walk out of a store even if it offered exactly what they were seeking if treated badly.”

Yeah, pretty much. When I buy a product, I’m supporting the paycheck of the person that sold it to me. Why would I fill the wallet of a jerk or support a company that takes its customers for granted? I’d rather go next door, to a company with customer service reps that are…nice. Courteous. Helpful, even.

Companies can use spin to trick consumers on a lot of fronts, but I thought they couldn’t talk consumers into accepting poor treatment. But apparently the spin is working on the 27 percent of consumers willing to pay for service. — Brigitte Lyons