Facebook
Linkedin
RSS Feed
Twitter
YouTube
Understanding PR 1.0 Before You Can Consult on PR 2.0
Martin Waxman, Joe Thornley, and I are finally getting our chemistry down (it only took something like 12 weeks) and we’re having a blast recording InsidePR! Well, I’m having a blast because I get to make fun of Joe’s slight accent (aboot instead of about) and Martin’s “step forward” when he delivers a punch line. They might not appreciate it, but you are sure to enjoy it!
On today’s episode, we received a question from Jody Koehler, a PR pro and agency owner in the Netherlands, who asks whether or not you need to really understand PR 1.0 before you can consult on PR 2.0.
You can listen to the episode and our debate by clicking here. Be sure to listen to episode 2.14 for July 28, 2010.
What we didn’t discuss on the podcast, but what I’ve been thinking about since we recorded (we always record on Monday nights), is this is becoming the age old question about whether or not you let interns run your social media program.
I know a lot of people still in college and newly graduated students read this blog, and I hope you know I mean no disrespect when I say this, but until you have at least five years of PR 1.0 experience, you should not be counseling clients on PR 2.0 strategy. I’d prefer 10 years of experience, but there are some exceptions to the rule as some people pick up strategy more quickly than others. PR 2.0 is not about setting up a Facebook account, integrating YouTube with your website, or gaining followers on Twitter. PR 2.0 is about integrating the web and technology with some of the more traditional methods to achieve a business goal. And, I’m sorry, until you understand PR 1.0 at a level that you can do some of it in your sleep, you cannot consult on PR 2.0 strategies.
A good rule of thumb? If you can demonstrate how PR 1.0 INTEGRATED with PR 2.0 drives sales, acquisitions, subscriptions, or traffic (depending on the company’s business goals), then you’re ready to consult on strategy. For those of you who are business leaders looking to hire someone internally or to hire an external firm to drive PR 2.0, make sure you’re asking the demonstrable questions: Show me a time when a program you did drove revenue or give me a client who can tell me about the work you did to drive traffic. If the person or firm you’re interviewing cannot show you how they integrate PR 1.0 and PR 2.0, they’re not the right fit for you.
Your turn…what do you think? Can you consult on PR 2.0 without first understanding PR 1.0?
RSS feed for comments on this post. TrackBack URL
July 28th, 2010 at 7:57 am
[...] This post was mentioned on Twitter by Gini Dietrich and jon gatrell, Petya N. Georgieva. Petya N. Georgieva said: Cool post
@ginidietrich Understanding PR 1.0 Before You Can Consult on PR 2.0 | The Fight Against Destructive Spin http://ff.im/-opzH8 [...]
July 28th, 2010 at 8:51 am
Maybe I’m not ENTIRELY clear on PR 1.0 vs. PR 2.0, but one of the things that has always irked me about requiring “experience” for anything is that often, “experience” just means time spent getting stuck in one’s ways.
Not sure exactly the point I’m trying to make here, but I hate to see natural savvy and inclination toward good, professional communication ignored for the number of years on somebody’s résumé.
July 28th, 2010 at 1:35 pm
Answering your question here would make a great post, eh Gini & Dan?
July 28th, 2010 at 1:46 pm
Yeeeees, yessssssss…
July 28th, 2010 at 2:28 pm
Who’s doing the writing???
P.S. Paige, I think what Gini is trying to say is that social media has become a great tool for PR professionals, but just having the hang of social media alone doesn’t make you a PR professional.
Of course, I’m sure she’ll speak for herself when she gets a moment…
July 28th, 2010 at 2:31 pm
Consider me soapboxing out of turn, then. That being said…I still don’t even think a lot of FORMAL PR experience is necessarily …necessary…to do a good job. 1.0 or 2.0!
Looking forward to Gini’s response as well.
July 28th, 2010 at 8:55 am
Gini,
Could not agree with you more completely. PR 1.0 is a prerequisite for PR 2.0. You will not be able to provide much in the way of competent strategy for a client if you can not integrate the lessons learned in PR 1.0. To put it into the relevant context,can you really take Algebra II before you take Algebra I? Not sure I would hire that person, unless of course they were a genius. Demonstrate that you are a genius, and maybe then I would consider hiring them.
July 28th, 2010 at 9:12 am
I agree with the basic message. Yes, in general, you need to understand PR 1.0 prior to consult successfully on PR 2.0. That said, with exceptions, more often than not, it is members of younger generations who tend to “get” PR 2.0. Perhaps the best test would be to team a PR 1.0 expert with a novice. While I have not seen this tested, it is intriguing.
July 28th, 2010 at 9:30 am
I like the way you think, Dave. It could be a mentoring situation that goes both ways.
July 28th, 2010 at 9:41 am
I really like Dave’s idea. Having some kind of mentor program is always a good idea for interns; it creates a sense of belonging and interns get hands-on experience rather than the cliches of getting coffee, etc.
I think interns are perfectly capable of at least helping with social media with the proper training, guidelines, and direction. In the first couple of months, a mentor who is well-versed in PR 1.0 could watch the intern’s back, teach some lessons in PR 1.0, and maybe even learn something from the intern at the same time.
Tom
July 28th, 2010 at 10:00 am
This note reminds me a bit of reading job descriptions for internet marketing positions when I graduated business school in Boston in 2000 – “10 years internet marketing experience required”. Being the geek that I am, I was kind of there in 1990 on the userboards. But it’s a ridiculous request. Social media is only a couple years old, and still undeveloped and models are changing quickly. Yes, experience required; but not necessarily direct experience. Good people work in all environments.
July 28th, 2010 at 10:36 am
Well… This is about the best guidance I’ve seen posted – as far as my review of similar subject matter content shared throughout the social media jungle anyway.
July 28th, 2010 at 10:51 am
I really love this post Gini.
July 28th, 2010 at 11:12 am
Amen! Social media is a tool — if you don’t have a strategy, what’s the point? Yes, you have to understand and DO pr 1.0 before you can understand and DO pr 2.0.
July 28th, 2010 at 1:42 pm
The salient point here for me is always cool tools and tactics can be a distraction to even the savviest and most experienced amongst us. It’d be relatively easy for recent college grads to become experts in the exciting 2.0 tools for PR. Anyone could throw up a shingle and dive in to the deep end of the 2.0 playland and have plenty to say in a short amount of time.
But business strategy, PR strategy, and consulting strategy can’t be learned in school. It takes time in the real world to get this very valuable experience. It’s why I always encourage college kids to work in real business environments in the summers. That kind of experience definitely counts. I’d never hire a college grad without real world experience.
So I’m squarely in the column of agreeing with the meta point in Gini’s post.
July 28th, 2010 at 2:34 pm
Gini -
You’ve touched on this here, but I’d love to see another discussion on the “experience” issue more broadly.
This is something that has always stuck in my craw a bit (I think it all started when I was 5 years old and skipped kindergarten)… I can’t help but think that experience in and of itself doesn’t necessarily have inherent value.
Sure, there’s a positive correlation between experience and insight/competence/confidence/flexibility/quickness, but it’s up to the individual to make those actual qualities take shape. And I have to believe that rates of learning – that is, the degree to which we maximize the experience we’ve had – varies enormously from person to person.
Clearly, experience isn’t sufficient to establish competence (we all know someone who’s been in the field for 20 years but appears not to have learned much) – but to what degree is experience necessary? If someone can clearly demonstrate the skills and personal characteristics required for the job, does it really matter how long it took for them to develop those skills?
(I suggest that a blog post on this topic be accompanied by a photo of Doogie Howser, BTW).
LC
July 28th, 2010 at 2:43 pm
Can you please write it, Liz?
This is a fabulous comment. And kind of…what I meant to say. Only far more eloquent.
July 28th, 2010 at 4:13 pm
I definitely agree with this, especially in a job market where there’s a Catch-22 of “need experience to get experience.”
If you look hard enough, you can gain experience everywhere. Think of all of the conflict mediation and communications skills you learn from simply being in college. The ability to create and manage relationships is just something you pick up as time goes.
However, I completely understand why formal work experience is necessary. Everyone needs some hands-on time at a real agency to learn PR in the “real world.” I majored in marketing, and I learned very few practical concepts in school that translate to actual success in a business. I assume a Public Relations major would say the same thing. Experience (as an intern or entry-level employee) definitely has value. I still think a mentor program of some sort is the best way to go, though, and would be most beneficial to both parties.
Tom
July 28th, 2010 at 4:40 pm
This is an excellent topic, and I agree with you — conditionally. If you are defining PR 1.0 as the understanding of how communications can drive results, absolutely (which is what I think you mean). But I don’t believe traditional media outreach, etc, is necessarily the right approach for every business. Through my blog, I meet a lot of artists and shop owners, and I think they would be better served optimizing their Web presence for bloggers than by building media kits, etc. But that belief is rooted in an observation of the power in generating sales that some of the top bloggers have — and an understanding that these entrepreneurs have very limited resources that need to be directed in immediate action and result.
July 28th, 2010 at 5:08 pm
Just to play devil’s advocate here I do think there is something to be said taking a fresh approach and not being weighed down by previous thinking. We’re kind of schooled into thinking that we must first review and learn previous generations knowledge before being “allowed” to have our own ideas. Personally, I think there’s room for throwing out the baby with the bathwater from time to time. Just to see what ideas and praxis can come from it. As part of a team where both PR 1 and 2.0 are covered I think creative juice and strategy could come from the sparks.
Just sayin….
July 29th, 2010 at 7:55 am
And I totally agree with what Jon is saying here…that creative juice can come from the sparks. This post is less about great ideas and implementing a program that works for many years and more about having an understanding of how both work, in an integrated fashion, first.
July 29th, 2010 at 4:12 am
Thanks all for your contributions. Great to read your thoughts and suggestions! It’s not an easy question to answer and I believe that the best answer is probably : ‘it depends’. And that’s very often the case in PR 2.0 or social media. It all depends.
Again.. thanks so much for sharing!
July 29th, 2010 at 7:53 am
Okay…this is what I mean by experience. In order to be able to consult on PR 2.0, you have to have a basic understanding of how PR 1.0 works. Brigitte is right – not all PR 1.0 works in every instance, but you have to understand how it integrates with the newer technologies in order to drive business goals before you decide which tactic (or tool) will work best.
The bigger issue here is strategy. Men tend to have a better understanding of strategy (naturally) than women, but it takes many years of work experience for all to understand how strategy fits into driving business (and some never get it). The point of this post is that, in order to consult on driving a company’s business goals, from a PR perspective, you have to understand both PR 1.0 and PR 2.0 from a STRATEGIC standpoint first.
I remember I was shooting right up the ranks at FH. I was getting phenomenal reviews. They were giving me great raises. And then I went into a review and the partner of my practice area said, “If you don’t get strategy, you’re going to stall here.” Granted, she didn’t explain what that meant, and left it up to me to figure out, but I was 27 (and a little too big for my britches) and I couldn’t figure out how my career was going to stall after I’d been rising so quickly.
Turns out, until I started my own business, I didn’t really understand how PR strategy fit into business growth. But you can learn it, through experience, without starting a business. Find a mentor who is willing to teach you how it works and what it means, from both a PR 1.0 and PR 2.0 perspective. THEN you can consult on both.
July 30th, 2010 at 11:02 am
Gini,
Again I think you are on the mark. You inspired me to blog on this http://ow.ly/2iT1X I hope it answers some questions posed here as well as raising some additional. Thanks for reminding me of the importance of a team approach