http://www.metia.com/london/sally-yates Wed, 22 May 2013 06:27:00 +0100 Wed, 22 May 2013 06:27:00 +0100 Sally Yates /london/sally-yates/2013/05/so-what's-pr-thinking-all-about/#number-of-comments An interesting pan-European survey of 2000 marketing students tells us that they (81%) consider great content marketing to be the future of the industry.  They are also channel agnostic and consider social media to be relevant to all marketing disciplines and not standalone. The [long] release also champions the concept of ‘PR thinking’ as being hugely important to the future. So what’s ‘PR thinking’? The survey highlights word-of-mouth and trust for brands as being an important aspect of ‘PR thinking.’ Brand trust is an intangible thing and trust in brands, particularly in areas such as banking and financial services, has suffered acutely in recent times. Facts and figures, content, proof points are all very well but unless the trust is there, you won’t create believers. Making a conscious effort to focus efforts on brand trust is worthwhile – all too often firms do it for a bit and then it drops off the priority list. If you build brand trust, you will be forgiven for the odd mistake, you will be considered more seriously if you enter a new business area or change business model. Customers will also pay more. It’s not about size; it’s about building an emotional affinity with your customers. First you need to find the magic key – it could be how you build personal relationships, the feel good factor your brand evokes, that you consistently deliver on your promise or your unwavering customer focus.  Next, you need to unlock the door – it’s not about marketing spiel or telling people how close you are to the customer but rather the actual customer experience and the affinity it creates. Creating third party brand advocates is also an important part of the PR process. They influence others, are more likely to share, use a variety of channels and are brand loyal. You literally can’t pay good money for that.  So ‘PR thinking’ may well be the way to go. /london/sally-yates/2013/05/so-what's-pr-thinking-all-about/ /london/sally-yates/2013/05/so-what's-pr-thinking-all-about/ Wed, 22 May 2013 06:27:00 +0100 Sally Yates /london/sally-yates/2013/05/naming-shaming-bad-grammar-users/#number-of-comments Last time I wrote about fintech marketers upping their game and talked about the never ending desire by many to see better press releases being produced.  It seems the written word continues to be the subject of much debate and controversy. Take the launch tomorrow of the inaugural Idler’s Bad Grammar Awards. The idea is to name and shame the worst grammar errors in journalism, novels, advertising, etc. It’s an eclectic mix of nominees. Perhaps one of the most unsurprising is from the UK’s largest supermarket chain, Tesco and its slogan Every Little Helps. The value of grammar is much debated. Bad grammar and poor spelling are a turn off in so many ways. One of the most important is how they impact the readability level of anything and everything. It goes back to the amount of content being generated nowadays. It’s the writer’s job to make it interesting for the reader but also readable. The better it flows with as few howling errors as possible, the more likely the reader is to continue. Make it clunky and the reader moves on. Get the content mix wrong and you lose your audience. The rules are there for a reason i.e. they’re tried, tested and work. I’m not sure how many bits of content are nominated for the Bad Grammar Awards from our industry. There surely has to be a few. The Times journalist at the centre of the Vicky Pryce story is up for an award. Oakeshott is charged with being unable to spell licence or jeopardise. I’m sure there are worse offenders on the list. Grammar champions can err. The important thing is they care. Even if you don’t care from a professional stance, what if you knew it might affect your love life? A recent survey tells us 43 per cent of singletons say poor grammar is a turn off. Looking for a richer partner? Apparently they care 10 per cent more than anyone else. /london/sally-yates/2013/05/naming-shaming-bad-grammar-users/ /london/sally-yates/2013/05/naming-shaming-bad-grammar-users/ Wed, 01 May 2013 15:24:00 +0100 Sally Yates /london/sally-yates/2013/04/the-campaign-for-'value-add'-press-releases-launchesagain/#number-of-comments Content, content, content. We get it. The oft notable exception to great content? Still seems to be the good old press release. While the journos may well tire of reading the same old rubbish, those of us on the PR side of the fence aren’t massive fans either. Too often these releases just simply aren’t written with the journos and their readers in mind. Strange but true. Chris Skinner inspired me to write this blog as he’s relaunched his campaign to get fintech marketers to raise their game – particularly around the old press release. He’s floating a good idea – let’s get rid of the standard descriptor where everyone is a ‘global leader, cutting edge, mastermind’ and replace with actual proof points. After all, analysts are only interested in real life proof so why shouldn’t a journalist want to hear the same bold claims? We’re not shy of encouraging a move away from these standard descriptors but there are often many factors at play as to why they remain. For one thing, it can be about who ‘owns’ the final approval process. Many press releases are the product of committees and so everyone becomes a wordsmith, wanting to leave their own mark on the end product. Another reason may be the motivation for pushing out a press release – even if the journos receive it too. Quite often it might just be for SEO and general marketing purposes. The main focus here is keeping up profile so the company are ‘seen’ to have things to say, it’s reassuring for existing clients/investors and so on to see the ongoing trickle/deluge of ‘news’. It doesn’t mean things can’t change though. One idea we try to encourage is, rather than using the standard 20-25 word descriptors, why not go for 3-4 word descriptors? After all if you look at how journos describe firms in their articles, typically they only use that many words. It also means that there simply isn’t the space to add in the world domination claims. This is only touching on the descriptor though. The road to getting 20 worthwhile, high value press releases in Skinner’s inbox is going need more than that. The good news is there are those of us out there trying our best to make it happen. We’re more than happen to join the campaign. /london/sally-yates/2013/04/the-campaign-for-'value-add'-press-releases-launchesagain/ /london/sally-yates/2013/04/the-campaign-for-'value-add'-press-releases-launchesagain/ Wed, 17 Apr 2013 15:29:00 +0100 Sally Yates /london/sally-yates/2013/03/earned-media-social-media-getting-the-balance-right/#number-of-comments The White House press corps has been up in arms this month as they accuse the Obama administration of favouring social media over themselves, the tougher-to-manage earned media crowd that is the hardened reporter. Clearly the Obama team has made fantastic use of social channels during both campaigns and throughout the previous and this term but what is the ideal balance? The simple response is that both deliver significant value and need to be nurtured. By coveting both you get the most out of your content; ergo, we are once again back to content marketing. Influencer engagement is all about response, advocacy and loyalty and that happy trio is generated through the use of both platforms and the various routes that lie within. In some cases, there is nothing better than a write-up or a mention in a well-respected top tier publication, it’s often hard won and worth its weight in gold. Earned media means letting go of control of your message but trusting that what you have to say has enough worth that you get across what you wanted to be heard anyways. At other times, your message could well be better communicated through a thought-provoking blog post, offset by a punchy headline. Using such owned media channels gives you control of your message. You’re taking straight to the people. It’s a fragmented space though and there is still much to learn as to how to get the best out of it. On the B2B side, many firms are still barely toe-dipping. Social channels are exciting and scary at the same time. They inspire conversations and debate like never before. Social also has the ‘viral’ potential. One isn’t better than the other, they’re just different. And if what you have to say isn’t worth it, the channel you try to put it through won’t matter as no-one will be listening anyways. /london/sally-yates/2013/03/earned-media-social-media-getting-the-balance-right/ /london/sally-yates/2013/03/earned-media-social-media-getting-the-balance-right/ Fri, 08 Mar 2013 10:07:00 +0100 Sally Yates /london/sally-yates/2013/03/bank-of-dave-simple-banking,-simple-pr/#number-of-comments The unstoppable and irrepressible Dave Fishwick was back on our screens last night in Bank of Dave: Fighting the Fat Cats. The FSA, it appears, was still unhappy with Dave’s take on banking. Simplistic, it seems, was not the way forward – at least not, at the beginning. So what’s the story so far? Dave’s vision is simple: to build small community banks in the community for the community. The BBA is a fan, it believes competition brings innovation. It is pragmatic too though and offers up these wise words for Dave: “Good luck Dave. You’ll need it.” Dave’s banking model is about as simple as it gets. Pay 5% to savers. Then loan out to local people and businesses. He’s got insurance too. It’s peer-to-peer banking in its simplest form. It makes sense too, as something needs to be turned on its head.  So easy is it to understand, Dave has a two year waiting list of savers who want to give him money (he’s only allowed to accept £100k of savings a month). What other financial institution can say it has a waiting list of savers?! The PR campaign Dave has waged, though, is priceless. The FSA has tried to stop him along the way. This hasn’t deterred Dave, it just spurs him on. He’s got international supporters for his vision (the Germans seem particular fans), he’s lobbied MPs, been to a Select Committee meeting at the Houses of Parliament, been on BBC 1’s One Show to name just a few of his PR successes. Fantastic for a man who a year ago knew nothing about banking and is now seen as the poster child for ethical banking for the community. Dave’s fond of his ‘tiny, tiny bank’ and so are we, can’t wait what else he has up his sleeve. Even the FSA has given it a ‘tiny thumbs up’. /london/sally-yates/2013/03/bank-of-dave-simple-banking,-simple-pr/ /london/sally-yates/2013/03/bank-of-dave-simple-banking,-simple-pr/ Fri, 01 Mar 2013 11:17:00 +0100 Sally Yates /london/sally-yates/2013/01/measuring-the-value-of-pr-making-it-count/#number-of-comments With  programme reviews largely complete, planning begun in earnest, now is the time to set out how we are going to measure success throughout the year. But the PR industry (and therefore its clients) have still yet to agree upon standardised formats for evaluation of PR programmes. In many ways it is understandable as there are various industry bodies throughout the globe, each with their own set of ideas and proposals, and also so many different parameters: traditional & non-traditional industries, B2C, B2B, high budget, low budget, etc. etc. So how far have we got and what have we still to do? Over the past year, the Coalition for Public Relations Research Standards has brought together some of these leading bodies to try and bring about some form of consensus. It's encouraging industry practitioners and clients to contribute at its recently launched microsite. It's very much a work in progress and is still to add some of the big European and LatAm players but it is a solid attempt to bring everyone together and is open to all for comment. One of the key takeaways surely has to be that ALL PR programmes and campaigns need to be measured. At present it is estimated that anything from 50-80% are measured - that's some way off all.  Traditional measures are still about - the infamous clipping books and those that believe size matters in that regard. AVE is also still used by some. Thankfully though, the industry has made big strides to move things far beyond such metrics. PR programmes need to prove their value not only to those in marketing but also to the C-Suite, so this means a mix of measurables. There is still a place for metrics by media hit as this can demonstrate where conversations are being had, what publications are being hit and what is being said but it needs to be more than numbers. Messages need to be tracked - having agreed out topline messages, we need to be incorporating them across all our content and touchpoints. Are they working? Are we upgrading them throughout the campaign? How are we benchmarking our activity against the competition? What's our share of voice? What of primary research? Do we talk to our stakeholders to see where we are at at the beginning of the campaign - indeed do we know where we expect to be by the end of it? Are our external comms efforts increasing the level of trust with our target audience? Or is it limited in its success? We need to know what is, and just as importantly, what is not working. Are we considering all comms channels? In our B2B world, channels have different values to those in B2C, but rarely is there no value. And what of lead generation? How is our PR programme supporting sales? There has to be some measurement here too. So much to be done still but progress is defnitely being made - both by agencies and clients. /london/sally-yates/2013/01/measuring-the-value-of-pr-making-it-count/ /london/sally-yates/2013/01/measuring-the-value-of-pr-making-it-count/ Sun, 27 Jan 2013 07:53:00 +0100 Sally Yates /london/sally-yates/2013/01/brand-value-when-a-takeover-hurts/#number-of-comments Working primarily in the financial services and technology sectors, we've seen our fair share of takeovers and mergers in recent times. Just in the enterprise data management (EDM) space alone last year saw Markit acquire Cadis and Bloomberg buy PolarLake - larger firms picking off the agile smaller firms that take them into a slightly different business. Exchange consolidation is another hotbed of (failed and successful) acquisitions - last year, for example, we had HKEx takeover the LME and ICE buy NYSE, among others. Exchange consolidation is driven by reducing volumes and the increasing burden of regulation, as well as that need to expand the potential customer base. In Switzerland, KPMG tells us that Swiss CEOs prefer acquisitions to dividends and are expecting a 20% surge in such activity this year. But what of post-acquisition? The decision has to made as to whether to retain the brand you've just bought - maybe as a separate entity operating independently within in larger parent e.g. Paladyne and Broadridge or perhaps as a combined brand e.g. ThomsonReuters. Or do you take the decision to get rid of one brand all together  - big firms such as SunGard and Fiserv largely take this approach. No one approach is right or wrong, they are all brave decisions one way or another. From a business perspective, the decision has many consequences - sales often rely on the brand to get a foot in the door. While the company taking over the brand may well be bigger, it might not be that well known across some territories or product areas. So it will impact different parts of the business in different ways.  From a marketing perspective, it's a game changer. But how do you support it best? First off you need to know where you're at. You need a clear idea of what value the brands had prior to the acquisition as well as the relative strengths and weaknesses. It's not a small job by any means but it is well worth it. How else can you determine what progress you are making if you don't benchmark where you're at? That means a brand audit in some form or another. The scale and scope is up to you. A lot of it is subjective. It means talking to various stakeholders - both internal and external. The questions have to be both closed and open. They have to cover both the experience and the promise. It has to be independent too for it to be truly honest. Primarily, you have to be clear on what information you want to get out of it, otherwise how else can you determine a clear strategy going forwards? /london/sally-yates/2013/01/brand-value-when-a-takeover-hurts/ /london/sally-yates/2013/01/brand-value-when-a-takeover-hurts/ Wed, 16 Jan 2013 11:54:00 +0100 Sally Yates /london/sally-yates/2013/01/content-marketing-can-it-finally-demote-the-press-release/#number-of-comments The press release has long been the subject of lively discussion - journos are all too often bombarded with buzzword-happy, promotional diatribe and, while the death of the press release is heralded year after year, it steadfastly survives. The reason for the survival of the press release is simple: people 'know' how to produce this piece of content and where to distribute it. Most journalists will read at least the headline and lede of many they receive, so there is always a hope that it might just get you some coverage. If you genuinely have something newsworthy to say and can write it in a compelling, succint way, then the press release might well be the correct starting point - so absolutely use it if that's the case. Otherwise another medium would probably be better. There is a very real need to demote that press release urge as most press releases just aren't newsworthy. PR has moved on. The smart among us though know that press releases have a very limited role in today's society from a PR perspective. There are so many more exciting ways to get out your content and 2013 should surely be the year where we intelligently choose the best channel - social channels have fundamentally changed the way your audience consume information and how we push out news and views needs to reflect that. Content marketing itself is certainly not new but it defines anything that builds a relationship with compelling content (it still needs to be interesting to the audience). It can mean blogs, opinion pieces, alerts, websites, SEO, tweets, strategy papers, videos, shared PPTs, manuals - anything and everything. There are a multitude of choices. Choosing the right channel with a compelling piece of content has to be the new way forward. /london/sally-yates/2013/01/content-marketing-can-it-finally-demote-the-press-release/ /london/sally-yates/2013/01/content-marketing-can-it-finally-demote-the-press-release/ Wed, 09 Jan 2013 11:46:00 +0100 Sally Yates /london/sally-yates/2013/01/2013-year-of-the-pr/#number-of-comments 2012 was certainly a year where we witnessed some firms taking spectacular hits to their corporate reputations. Starbucks, Quantas, Apple were among them and each handled it differently. There's no reason why 2013 won't also see its fair share of situations needing some PR support but let's finally move on from thinking of PR as a dark art. A recent article in Management Today has an interesting idea that PR is taking over the world - something to make the hacks nervous no doubt. But they make some solid points. The reason there are so many more PRs now than 20 or 30 years ago is simply that communication is much more central to everything we do. The many ways we communicate have also multiplied exponentially. This increase in transparency needs to be proactively managed - clients and customers choose the channel they want to communicate in and firms need to ensure they are transparent and give timely, useful responses.  PR in 2013 will certainly be much more than simple media relations - that's still an important aspect but there's a whole new ecosystem at play. We call it the influencer eco-system - the lines are blurring as to who has the most influence in each sector and each region. This means we have to consider a wider set of players and then determine who are our top targets. Journalists will continue to be an important part of that mix but with industry analysts and others now prolific social media users, we need to be smart as to who really exerts the most influence. What is also essential is that comms is put at the heart of the business and that we are taking into account the entire eco system and all the comms channels, not just a few. /london/sally-yates/2013/01/2013-year-of-the-pr/ /london/sally-yates/2013/01/2013-year-of-the-pr/ Wed, 02 Jan 2013 10:46:00 +0100 Sally Yates /london/sally-yates/2012/12/anything-new-in-analyst-predictions-for-2013/#number-of-comments IDC is typically the first of the big analyst houses to put out predictions for the year ahead. Ongoing themes for 2013 are cloud, social technologies and, the analyst favourite, big data. Of the top ten predictions, one big shout out is that ‘regulation will reduce financial services profitability by a third by 2015 unless institutions implement EDM strategies.’So once again firms are being encouraged to put data management at the heart of their organisations – maybe the tough profit impact will make more firms sit up and listen. Another interesting prediction is that 'financial institutions will get serious about updating legacy systems'. The need for IT updates and health checks are long been vaunted but how does IDC see 2013 being the year it happens? In Asia big banks have agreed to make significant changes to current core banking systems, in EMEA regulators are on the case of reliability concerns and in the US legacy IT infrastructure failures are being blamed for service-affecting system outages. We’ll keep an eye out on these and the other predictions throughout next year and see how they pan out. /london/sally-yates/2012/12/anything-new-in-analyst-predictions-for-2013/ /london/sally-yates/2012/12/anything-new-in-analyst-predictions-for-2013/ Fri, 14 Dec 2012 08:27:00 +0100 Sally Yates /london/sally-yates/2012/06/should-prs-really-back-right-off-from-wikipedia/#number-of-comments Lots of chatter around PR, Lobbyists and Wikipedia this week. The CIPR has put out guidance that the PR community should not directly edit Wikipedia pages they have an affiliation with but rather work with the Wikipedia community. So how will that work in practice for those who see tangible value in their Wikipedia pages? Let’s face it there are always creative ways around such edicts – I’m not advocating them but let’s get them out in the open at least. What of the practice of engaging a member of the Wikicult to edit for cash? Jimbo Wales has always maintained that he will block any such practice should he find out about it but we know it happens and so does he. Back in 2009 a longtime Wikipedia admin was caught editing the online encyclopedia in exchange for cash. There are others still doing it too. Also what of the apparently permanently-banned MyWikiBiz? That was a bit of a bun fight back in 2006 between it and Jimbo but it still exists and is still very active. Proudly so in fact.  Ethics and standards should be adhered to – dishonest editing if you are a lobbyist is not on but that’s not really what most PRs are about. 99.9% of the time PRs want to edit Wikipedia to make fair corrections, adding genuine topics of interest and so on. There is still a place for that. /london/sally-yates/2012/06/should-prs-really-back-right-off-from-wikipedia/ /london/sally-yates/2012/06/should-prs-really-back-right-off-from-wikipedia/ Fri, 29 Jun 2012 13:30:00 +0100 Sally Yates /london/sally-yates/2012/06/keeping-the-volcker-rule-supporters-happy/#number-of-comments With the JP Morgan $2 billion plus trading loss being attributed to inadequate risk controls by the US Comptroller, it has once again proved a useful segue for Volcker Rule supporters to highlight the benefits of its pending introduction. Dimon, JP Morgan CEO, says however it was a trading loss from credit derivatives for hedging that morphed into a speculative loss. Whatever the case, all the big Wall Street banks, who are the biggest and loudest critics, have got exemptions anyways. It does of course demonstrate the blockers this piece of legislation is continuing to face. US Federal Reserve Governor Tarullo says that had the Volcker Rule been in place it would have enabled regulators to get an earlier look (as they would have had to justify its exemption in writing) so it validates the need for such regulation. It looks like the stage is set for the arguments to continue. Simon Johnson’s blog in the NY Times offers one of the best insights including a very interesting meeting he attended recently which the big banks had intended to attend but then decided not to after JP Morgan’s losses, leaving the elephants firmly out of the room. /london/sally-yates/2012/06/keeping-the-volcker-rule-supporters-happy/ /london/sally-yates/2012/06/keeping-the-volcker-rule-supporters-happy/ Fri, 08 Jun 2012 14:07:00 +0100 Sally Yates /london/sally-yates/2012/02/wikipedia-pr-still-not-a-match-made-in-heaven/#number-of-comments With around 4 million edits per month and approaching two million articles, the English Wikipedia site is a hotbed of contention – especially when it comes the PR world. And the raging debate as to whether PRs should edit their clients’ entries shows no signs of abating. Part of the problem in the past seems to have been Wikipedia’s unwillingness to have a proper debate on it. Yes, there have been some abuses by some unscrupulous PRs but that’s by far, far the minority – and they’ve been called out. The majority of us are ethical and want access to right inaccuracies, the same as any other user. Last month Phil Gomes set up CREWE – Corporate Representatives for Ethical Wikipedia Engagement. It’s a brave attempt to get the discussion on the table once and for all. There’s a Facebook page to join as well. Jimmy Wales, Wikipedia founder, last made a comment about Wikipedia and PR back in 2006, where he was clearly anti PRs have any editing rights to corporate pages. The good news is that Jimmy has re-engaged with the PR industry  - see some of his comments in a recent Forbes article. It’s worth us all keeping in the loop on this one as it could bear fruit. /london/sally-yates/2012/02/wikipedia-pr-still-not-a-match-made-in-heaven/ /london/sally-yates/2012/02/wikipedia-pr-still-not-a-match-made-in-heaven/ Fri, 03 Feb 2012 12:24:00 +0100 Sally Yates /london/sally-yates/2012/01/b2b-social-media-from-toe-dipping-to-paddling/#number-of-comments B2B social media 2012: From toe dipping to paddling? Indications from our clients are that B2B social media usage is finally moving on in 2012. Already this year we’ve had a number of inbound queries from our financial services clients to do formal social media audits. It’s not to say that the dabblers don’t still abound but it’s a good sign. It means that clients are ready to invest time and money into their social media strategies and are starting to recognise its value to their business. This is good news and shows there are some key firms out there that want to be ahead of the pack. The naysayers are still vocal though and Circle Research has an interesting diagram (below) showing the challenges marketers face to getting their B2B firms on board. More good news though, there’s nothing really there that can’t be overcome. /london/sally-yates/2012/01/b2b-social-media-from-toe-dipping-to-paddling/ /london/sally-yates/2012/01/b2b-social-media-from-toe-dipping-to-paddling/ Fri, 13 Jan 2012 14:49:00 +0100 Sally Yates /london/sally-yates/2012/01/newsflash-pr-verifies-sources/#number-of-comments Any indication that a journalist has not verified their sources when writing a story and a client is quickly up in arms. And rightly so. But how often does a PR or AR person verify the information they are given before using it in their writing? A PR reading around their topic, verifying the facts as given before putting pen to paper? It shouldn't be news but it too often is. Obviously I'd like to be able to say a PR or AR person verifies the facts they are given every time but I think we all know that would be more than stretching the truth. The fact of the matter is, people working in PR and AR should be checking and verifying their information. Why do we assume our clients are accurate in their summation of regulations or know their dates without checking or that their assumptions are fair and should be repeated without question? I can't abide it when a journalist resorts to lazy one source journalism but why can't PRs or ARs take a leaf out of the journalist best practice book and verify what they are told before putting pen to paper. It's a bit of a rant I know but it's a basic step that should be standard practice. A press release or an opinion piece should have background research the same as any other piece of writing - it's that simple. /london/sally-yates/2012/01/newsflash-pr-verifies-sources/ /london/sally-yates/2012/01/newsflash-pr-verifies-sources/ Fri, 06 Jan 2012 14:57:00 +0100 Sally Yates /london/sally-yates/2011/03/lesson-in-finance-39-the-great-hargeisa-goat-bubble-39/#number-of-comments Financial markets -love 'em, hate 'em, however you feel, there is still a draw to them but few really understand them. Hail 'The Great Hargeisa Goat Bubble' by Julian Gough - read it or listen to it. It's a great story, indeed the first short story to ever appear in the Financial Times. A comic tale of market economics, financial bubbles, boom, bust, profit and loss, it talks about poor regulation, weird incentive structures, securitised debt and the manic pursuit of wealth (any of this sound familiar?!). What could be closer to the truth? And played out in Somlia with a market full of goats. Who would have thought it? An oldie but a goodie. /london/sally-yates/2011/03/lesson-in-finance-39-the-great-hargeisa-goat-bubble-39/ /london/sally-yates/2011/03/lesson-in-finance-39-the-great-hargeisa-goat-bubble-39/ Fri, 18 Mar 2011 12:59:00 +0100 Sally Yates /london/sally-yates/2011/03/what-people-say-vs-what-people-hear/#number-of-comments One thing never changes in PR – say it, say it again and say it again. But what are you saying? I spend ages at the start of the year working with clients to pin down messaging by audience so we can track it throughout the year (tried and tested and keeps it on track).   What remains surprising is how often people go out on a PR campaign without having that nailed down. If you don’t know exactly what you and the rest of your team are wanting to get across – how can you expect anyone else to nail it?   Sure, with social media, it’s less about telling people your messages and more about collaboration but you still have to know your starting point. You also have to make sure you keep coming back to your core mantras. One of the things I do in media training is to do a mock interview and then ask the interviewee to tell me what they think I heard. I then ask others in the room to tell me what they heard  - it’s amazing how different the stories are.   The way around it is simple – keep popping those key messages in there throughout (au naturel of course – another skill, another conversation). What people say vs. what people hear can vary enormously so it’s your job as the spokesperson to make sure you know what you want to say and keep on saying it, day in, day out. Sounds simple, so make it so. /london/sally-yates/2011/03/what-people-say-vs-what-people-hear/ /london/sally-yates/2011/03/what-people-say-vs-what-people-hear/ Mon, 14 Mar 2011 08:30:00 +0100 Sally Yates /london/sally-yates/2011/03/newsflash-2011-is-about-putting-customers-at-decision-central/#number-of-comments Most of my work is in and around financial services and technology and analyst house IDC has just put out a report that talks about 'putting the customer at the centre of all IT and business decisions' as a central 2011 theme. Seems then its taken a long time for us to wise up to that nugget - it goes on to suggest this will be a 'fundamental change in culture'. Culture change is one of the hardest things to shift but the point is a fair one. Finally it looks like the penny has dropped - the industry is irrelevant - today's business needs to focus on the customer and a seamless cross channel experience. Success in those areas translates to customer retention - the ultimate business win. /london/sally-yates/2011/03/newsflash-2011-is-about-putting-customers-at-decision-central/ /london/sally-yates/2011/03/newsflash-2011-is-about-putting-customers-at-decision-central/ Thu, 10 Mar 2011 11:40:25 +0100 Sally Yates /london/sally-yates/2011/01/creds-walking-the-walk/#number-of-comments Delivering credentials are a big part of getting new business in the agency world. Some agencies have a specialist new biz team that swoop in and wow the prospects, get hired, only to never be seen again. Great for the win to-pitch ratio for the agency, not so great for the client who invariably ends up with a bunch of hardworking but unguided juniors running their account. We play the 'who you see is who you get' card - much more honest and sets out our stall for that tranparent/open relationship that's the best footing for any long-term success. Whoever goes, though, believing an agency's ability to deliver is to some extent a leap of faith and one that needs to be based on a number of factors - have they worked for similar clients before? Do they focus on outputs (not lots of nafarious admin or old-fashioned time-consuming clippings books)? Are they au fait with your space and the journos? Will you get enough time from the senior people? Are they creative? Do they want to outshine your competition? Do you like the people stood in front of you? Do you want to put in the time with these people? Remember, as magic and gifted as we are, we need our client's input to this partnership too - that the utlimate key to success.  /london/sally-yates/2011/01/creds-walking-the-walk/ /london/sally-yates/2011/01/creds-walking-the-walk/ Fri, 28 Jan 2011 11:44:00 +0100 Sally Yates /london/sally-yates/2011/01/influence-so-what-is-that-then/#number-of-comments I'm not a fan of traditional PR - you know what I mean - weird PR speak, long sentences, press releases that bore you before you finish the headline, lots of admin and useless clippings from random tier-Z internet sites that have nothing to do with your audience. You've all seen it, maybe even paid for it. What I believe in is results - outputs. This is done by being smart about how you influence those audiences - be they media, analysts, commentators, prospects, clients, investors and so on. You need close client relationships - with marketing and sales, a partnership along with clear agreed messaging, direction, ideas, creativity, passion, results. You should also be working with a team that really understands your vertical to bring it all together. Just to top it all off, as an ex-journo, I'm a bit of a fan of some decent, readable, engaging writing too. So, just for starters, that's what we mean by Influence. /london/sally-yates/2011/01/influence-so-what-is-that-then/ /london/sally-yates/2011/01/influence-so-what-is-that-then/ Tue, 25 Jan 2011 11:10:10 +0100