PR Firm / Client Collaboration Break-Downs

Yesterday's rant covered some of the common characteristics of underperforming PR firms (from the frustrated client's point of view).

As kstarrpr (from Larkin Communications) commented, sometimes PR firms do indeed "[e]xpect the internal manger [on the client side] to do the heavy lifting with the agency's duties ending up being extremely tactical, non-creative and reactive."

However, kstarrpr notes, "[i]t is also important to point out that the most successful program is collaborative in nature. It requires a push-pull approach on BOTH sides. This means that in order to maximize effectiveness, the PR team does need referencable customers, newsworthy announcements (i.e. - not just "Barney" deals) and ongoing strategic discussions with the client to drive new trend ideas and opportunities. Either side, working alone, will not generate results."

I couldn't agree more that collaboration is the key ... but both sides (PR firms and clients) often miss opportunities to collaborate on a richer level.

One area where I think the collaboration is compromised early on is in the creation of goals / metrics. Within PR firms, "managing client expectations" is generally encouraged / applauded. PR firms don't make good profits if one or two needy clients hog all their staff's time ... so account managers are typically taught to sandbag when the client asks for specifics on the types of results (amount of publicity) they can expect ("better to under-promise and over-deliver").

But doesn't it make more sense to put a stake in the ground and define some exact ways that the success of the relationship is going to be assessed? Whether it's a percentage increase in the client's publicity from the previous year, the extent to which they out-pace their competitors' publicity, or simply evaluating the known universe of journalists that cover the given subject matter (and setting a target percentage of how many of those journalists will write about the company in the next year) ... client / agency relationships are always more productive when the goals have been agreed to (by both sides) at the onset. Unfortunately, it's a very small percentage of PR firms and clients that reach consensus about any sort of scientific performance measurement. And it's tough to collaborate with a partner who's very non-committal about specific goals (as a number of vendors find their PR firms to be).

Another area where I see less collaboration than there should be (just to elaborate a bit on a point from yesterday) is in the definition of the pipeline / progression of "news." For many vendors that engage a PR firm, a major "announcement" (new product or otherwise) is the gaiting factor that triggered the need for publicity. But in the hustle to get that out the door, very little thought is given to "what's next?" All of the great publicity around that single big "event" quickly becomes yesterday's news, a couple of months pass without significant publicity and momentum is lost.

So who owns the process of deciding "what's next?" Both sides. The PR firm should understand the flow of industry news well enough to anticipate / recommend the general types of follow on announcements that are sellable to the press ... giving the client the parameters / context to retrieve those proof points (referenceable customers, new product or service enhancements, et al). It's incredibly frustrating to be on the client side and to keep hearing "what's next" from a PR firm that you're paying richly to help you solve that very problem.

At the same time it's unreasonable to expect a PR firm to continuously pull rabbits out of hats for a client that isn't giving them anything to work with. One of the worst types of clients to have -- in my opinion -- is the one that's always bracing you for "big news" that never actually materializes. In your weekly call, they describe a major new customer / partner / product that's just around the corner ... but then when you ask them for an ETA, it turns out it's been severely delayed (or fizzled altogether). In that scenario, it's impossible to maintain any sort of calendar of announcements -- or to take stock of what you have to work with. You're continuously re-hashing plans and wasting your time and their money in these scenarios.

Btw: I stumbled across a "Top Ten Reasons Why PR Doesn't Work" list by Margie Zable Fisher. It has some additional, interesting commentary about the finger-pointing that tends to go on b/w firms and clients when things aren't working out.

Image courtesy of the paradigmshifter's photostream from flickr creative commons.