The Ideal Donor, Really?

Category: Pro Bono | Author: Janis Burenga | October 15, 2009

We all get solicitations from charities and, I suspect, we give to those most closely aligned with our personal philosophies. And from time-to-time those causes that we feel inclined to support may result from a heart-wrenching story we’ve seen on the news or an affliction that’s come too close to home.

With the economic situation being what it is, I think we all have to dig deep knowing worthy causes are probably suffering deeply. Hell, Bernie Madoff alone has wreaked havoc on the non-profit sector.

Who can argue that charity is a good and blessed thing?

The expression “charity begins at home” is certainly true in my home. My husband is a fine artist and ever since we’ve been together I’ve been amazed how often he is asked to donate work to a worthy cause that’s holding an auction. Monthly would be a conservative estimate.

I realize that artwork is visceral and a tangible expression of beauty that’s readily marketable in an auction setting. But I am nonplussed that artists are at the top of the list as donors to every possible cause under the sun.

Have you ever heard of the expression starving dentist? Of course not. So why do charities prey (I know it’s a strong word) on the very individuals in society who have the toughest time making a living?

I can tell you that if you pose that question to the ones with their hands out, invariably you’ll hear that “it’s great exposure.” Right. The bidder at the charity auction no doubt never heard of the artist, is not particularly enamored with the piece on the auction block and is motivated to bid primarily out of guilt or largesse. Tell me again why this helps the artist?

I once read that most professional fine artists in the country made $2,500 per year from their art. (That was quite some time ago, so let’s be liberal and say $10,000 per year to adjust for inflation.) Yeah, they’re the perfect candidates to donate to charity.

And from a practical standpoint, one could argue that the artist could spend all of his creativity on charity. My husband works in oils and it generally takes him about two months to complete a painting. At the rate of requests he gets, that’s six paintings short each year to meet charitable obligations.

Fortunately, my husband’s reputation and success have grown to respectable proportions and he has enough published reproductions to make donations that do not impinge greatly on his income. But he is in the tiniest minority.

I can see why art and Caribbean trips and spa treatments make the far more appealing items on the auction block. Who would bid on a free tooth extraction from the starving dentist, after all.

Don’t get me wrong — we are happy to help, especially when we have a relationship with the charitable organization or the cause being championed. This is not often the case, however. I want charitable organizations to acknowledge that they’re reaching out to donors who are often being painted into a corner. Free root canal, anyone?

Social Media Phobia: Killing the Messenger

Category: Agency Life,PR | Author: Karyn Price | October 1, 2009

I have a client with a “twitic.” A customer who, on Twitter, will criticize and say absolutely vulgar things about the company and his dealings with it. A customer that refuses to consider limitations of contracts and instead resorts to blameshifting and voicing of unrealistic expectations. Some of my contacts within the client organization considered “blocking” this Twitterer – taking him off of their corporate Twitter feed so they would not see the critical postings.

There are a lot of companies that, for one reason or another, choose this path of avoidance when it comes to social media. The mindset seems to be that if they don’t see the negativity about their company, then it’s not happening, or it’s not so damaging. Or perhaps that if the organization is not giving the Twitterer (or blogger, or Web site commenter, forum participant – really the concepts remain the same for any social media platform) the “time-of-day,” that others in cyberspace won’t either. I think that, when put into black-and-white and read on a page, nearly everyone can see the problems inherent in such an approach: not only is an opportunity to provide enhanced customer service squandered, but an opportunity to engage in true conversation with customer – to learn their wants and needs; to become involved in education; or to shift mindsets to increase brand awareness or product adoption – are missed.

As a PR person, I find such missed opportunities among the most egregious oversights that companies, or agencies on behalf of companies, can make. Let’s face it, technology makes the possibilities to interact with our various and sundry stakeholders available as well as easily accessible and downright cheap – there’s no reason not to get involved. If public relations is truly “management of communication between an organization and its publics[1],” then what better tool to employ than one that lets organizations speak directly and in real-time to the publics they are communicating with?

So what stops organizations – as well as some, ahem, seasoned PR folks – from embracing the possibilities that social media present? Fear.

Ah yes, the great de-motivator of society. But what really, is there to fear from talking – be it directly or indirectly via an electronic channel – having a simple conversation with people you do business with? If you’re an honest businessperson and treat others with fairness and respect, there should be no hesitation in engaging with people directly – whether using technology or not.

The bottom line is simple: we’ve all read the marketing statistics that say it costs seven times more to acquire a new customer as it does to retain an old one. If social media platforms will help keep consumers informed of key business news and information more quickly, and can help resolve issues more quickly and effectively, there’s not much to fear and far more to be gained. Let’s embrace what technology can offer and use it to our best advantage.

In the case of my client’s Twitic: we resolved his issues to his satisfaction and offered Twitter as another avenue to try when he needs service. He’s piped down and hasn’t mentioned my client in a negative light since. Chalk one up for Twitter.

[1] James E. Grunig and Todd Hunt, Public Relations Techniques (New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston, 1994), p.6.

The Fair and the Unfair Inequities of Business

Category: Agency Life | Author: Janis Burenga | September 25, 2009

I have operated my own small businesses for nearly 25 years and I have a theory: the problems remain the same, only the amounts get bigger.

I am a small business professional working, in many cases, with the largest businesses in the country – FORTUNE 500 territory.

Our small business is buying the same products and services that the big guys are, only we’re paying more. And I’m fine with that. My Fedex rates, my technology costs, my long-distance – you name it, I am fine with paying the going rate, because I know most of my suppliers give us modest discounts off our modest purchases, in an effort to command my modest loyalty.

After all, I extend volume discounts to my best clients and would expect all vendors to do the same. It’s a sound capitalist principle, in my view. So there are inevitable inequities to the system that I understand and even support.

But there’s one major inequity that I find disturbing and would like to know how it evolved. Putting “Net 30 days” on an invoice has become almost as quaint as my Dad’s old 30-pound Borroughs adding machine. While I am expected to pay my credit card bill upon receipt, my largest clients — to a company – make no apology for a 55-60 day payment schedule. Some even proudly proclaim they pay within 55 days. And alas the all-too-frequent snafus can delay that schedule to 75 or even 90 days.

Now I know bureaucracy and the time it might take to receive, process and prioritize payables. But I also know that electronic transmissions have sliced the manual handling by days, if not weeks. In other words, that’s not a plausible excuse.

Nevertheless, while I struggle – and never more so than in the present economic climate — to pay all of our payables within 30 days, my large corporate clients continue to adhere to the arbitrary 55+ day schedule of payment. If I don’t meet the deadline, I hear about it instantly – usually from the Big Business vendors rather than the small ones. The Big Boys are also the one that are quick to tack on a late fee, at the very same time they are delinquent in their payments to us.

I contend that if these big boys decided – in the interest of national fiscal health – to issue payments to their small business vendors within the old-fashioned 30-day window, the economy would see an immediate improvement.

Aren’t we always hearing how small businesses are the backbone of our economy? Well let’s quit breaking the back of small business by forcing them to borrow money to meet their own obligations.

Purge those Peeves, We’re Listening

Category: Agency Life,Just for Fun | Author: Janis Burenga | September 11, 2009

As marketing and public relations counselors, we have the opportunity to get close to client representatives and sometimes one of our most valuable services is to let them vent about their frustrations with the job, sometimes the spouse or even the country.

We’d like to extend this service to the blogosphere by letting you vent about your pet peeves. You’re sure to get a sympathetic ear from us – and scads of others who share your angst. To help you get revved up, I’ve included a few of my own all too common annoyances.

Bookworm – and I do mean worm. You’re in a bookstore avidly perusing the titles when you reach the shelf where someone has picked up a volume and turned the shelf itself into a personal recliner.  Engrossed in his reading, he makes no attempt to move, obscuring your view of authors M-P and totally oblivious to your sweeping detour around his person. Okay, it’s not the end of the world, but what are all those chairs for? And besides, I obviously need that self-help book you’re blocking from my view.

I have a hang-up. You’re driving along within the speed limit, thank you, and you come upon a car that is moving slower than the thoroughfare demands. You immediately surmise “elderly driver”– you nefarious profiler, you – only to realize when you get around the offender that it’s someone chatting on his or her cell phone. I suppose you think you should get points for being more careful while talking-while-driving, eh? Not so fast. Your selfish – and probably nonsensical – conversation is holding up a line of commuters behind you, who now have to use their cell phones to tell workmates they’re running late.

When did you arrive in this country? You have been in line at the drive-thru or on line at Starbucks for a good five minutes now.  But you wait until you’re at the window or register to contemplate the full dizzying array of menu options. Glazed or cinnamon, grande or vente, mashed potatoes or fried– these are all difficult choices that you should have decided before you got to the order taker! How many times have you been here?

Everything Old is New Again – an editorial

Category: Just for Fun | Author: Janis Burenga | August 21, 2009

If you had occasion to read my post on railroad buffs, you’ll know that I have a long personal connection to the railroad industry, albeit of the short-line variety.

Over the decades I have watched our nation’s shortsightedness vis a vis the railroad industry, which seems today even more dismaying for having gone on for so long. But I’m hoping our newfound energy and environmental consciousness will renew our understanding of, and enthusiasm for, the advantages of rail travel and transport. 

I am impressed with the television spots being aired by CSX Corporation – one of the seven major carriers that have emerged from past industry upheavals — as much for their timing as their content. And the content is simple and compelling: you can move tons of goods hundreds of miles on a single gallon of fuel. Who can argue with that?

With energy dependence a buzz-phrase, the railroad’s ability to transport goods so efficiently seems like the magic of new technology – except that railroads have been around for more than a century, adopting new technologies to improve their already impressive value.

I am by no means an expert, but I do know that resurrecting railroads to a new heyday will not be easy. Railroad infrastructure and maintenance are expensive. Thousands of miles of track that were torn up in the ‘70s when railroads fell out of favor and were struggling under the weight of regulation and economics, are not easily re-laid. 

But we hear about our equally pressing need to upgrade our infrastructure and what makes better sense than to funnel public funds into a mode of transportation that is highly efficient than one that encourages more vehicular traffic spewing more CO2, consuming millions of gallons of fuel to move exponentially fewer goods, and adding traffic to one’s daily commute. I hope this time we “get it. “

And railroads’ people-moving aspects? Anyone who has traveled through Europe by train knows that comfort and the convenience of train travel is possible. In America, you’re lucky if you can travel by train between major cities. I’m told that when Amtrak was introduced in 1971 with such high hopes, Congress nixed adequate funding, in addition to the onus of regulatory issues weighing down the industry. Amtrak built demand and then couldn’t meet it and both the traveling public and policy makers lost their zeal to support it. An overly simplistic characterization, certainly, but all the more reason to look at the landscape and change it to work for us rather than against us.

Perhaps you feel our individual relationship to railroads is too far removed to get involved,  but we are, after all, a democracy where public support for policies has impact. If you go online and research some of the projects being advocated for and by the industry – the ARC Tunnel project, the National Gateway partnership and the OneRail Coalition to name a few – some may have directly impact your daily lives, others will have impact for the entire nation for years to come.

And in the microcosm, just as locavores advocate diets of locally grown food, you can ask the retailers you patronize how your favorite goods arrived on the store floor. Did the refrigerator come from the manufacturer to a rail siding where store trucks brought it the last few miles, or did tractor-trailers bring it several hundred miles via interstate highway? It makes a difference to the environment, the cost of gas at the pump, America’s dependency issues, and wear-and-tear on infrastructure. Become a locaport!

Pitching versus Spamming

Category: Agency Life,PR | Author: Karyn Price | August 7, 2009

Everywhere I have turned in recent weeks and months when it comes to PR publications, blogs, articles, etc., there’s talk of the growing problem of PR “flacks” who “spam” journalists with bad pitches. Entire blogs are devoted to it, webinars warn against it, and avid Twitterers tweet about how not to do it. There’s even been recent heated discussions about the role of PR management software in the spamming of journalists. Journalists have recently pondered being removed from PR software databases as a result of the number of bad pitches received via such software.

There’s an inherent problem, though, with the assumption that removal from PR software will stop bad pitches. We need to stop bad pitches. We don’t need to withhold the information that can help prevent it. When used appropriately, PR management software can provide several valuable services to PR practitioners that can actually help them to target better pitches to journalists willing to accept them.

I have two distinct thoughts about what brings so many journalists to the point of great frustration about the spam received from PR management software platforms, as well as about bad pitches in general.

1)      Secondary PR educators, as well as business/marketing educators and perhaps even English professors (in the context of business writing courses) need to enhance education around written and verbal PR pitching. As one of the primary sources of frustration for so many journalists who, on a daily basis are overworked, stressed about job security, and trying to turn out a quality product despite these obstacles, young professionals and those who educate them need to do a better job of being prepared to “hit the ground running” in terms of dealing with the journalists in today’s age of shrinking newsrooms and publications. Not doing so tarnishes the sterling images that those who do their homework and genuinely attempt to do the job justice.

 

2)      Journalists need to set aside prejudices and gross generalizations about public relations as an industry, and accept that once in a while we might have information pertinent to what they are writing.

I recently had the great misfortune of speaking live to one of those journalists that has been so “put out” by irrelevant pitches that he seems to rarely listen when he does get a pitch. I somehow managed to get this reporter live, asked if he had time for a quick pitch, and upon getting the go ahead, gave what I felt to be a concise pitch on behalf of a client. After acting like I was a complete idiot that doesn’t read the paper (which isn’t the case – I do read his publication fairly regularly – at least a few times a week), he turned the pitch down flat. A few days later (three, to be exact), his publication – in fact, a member of his editorial team – wrote a large feature article about the exact industry and topic I had pitched, featuring major, direct competitors of my client. Had it not been for the dreaded PR management software that so many journalists despise, I wouldn’t have record of my conversation (with an automatically noted date and time) to prove that I had indeed pitched the reporter – and been turned down flat. But the net result? The editor’s team missed key market facts and new product availability offered only by my client, and we missed good ink. A definite lose-lose situation for all involved – all because of poor pitching and spam related to some practitioners’ usage of PR management software.

So what’s the bottom line? I think each group involved needs to be a part of the actual PR process. Public relations can be defined as an organization and its publics mutually adapting to one another. I think that PR practitioners at every level and the journalists that they pitch to need to adapt to one another. Practitioners need to better understand the journalists they are pitching to, be careful to target pitches appropriately and be considerate of the journalist’s time. Journalists, on the other hand need to be open to the fact that not all pitches are bad, not all flacks neglect their homework, and not all PR management software is useless. It’s all in how you use it …

Buffs …

Category: Just for Fun | Author: Janis Burenga | July 31, 2009

I grew up in a railroad family – but certainly not a conventional railroad family. Our railroad is the Black River & Western Railroad, a short-line tourist excursion line that runs between Ringoes and Flemington, NJ – and on to Lambertville on rare occasions.

As a teenager, my summer and weekend job was tending the concession stands at the station in Ringoes or selling tickets in Flemington and the experience brought me into close contact with a not-so-rare breed of enthusiast: the rail buff.

I learned to spot rail buffs by their unmistakable accoutrements. Buffs were often typified by a phalanx of expensive cameras hanging from their necks. Or in those days it might be the reel-to-reel tape recorder ingeniously strapped to their chests – not unlike a Snuggli baby – ready to capture the chugging of a locomotive. Or perhaps it would be the Samsonite briefcase full of snapshots of very particular railroad arcana: in one memorable case it was semaphores – those signal posts along railroad rights-of-way — from everywhere in the Northeast. (Mind you, these were just thrown into the satchel willy-nilly without even the benefit of labeling. Yet, the buff in question could tell you whether the photo had been taken in Hoboken or Harrisburg.)

Railroad buffs are a well-known strain to anyone who actually works around railroads and many of them are even recognized for their sub-specialties – a certain type of diesel engine or a fascination only with steam — or semaphores, evidently. Some are so ubiquitous around rail yards, they’ve acquired not-so-flattering nicknames like Diesel Dan or Willie-Lump-Lump.

When right out-of-college, I had the great good fortune to work for the American Freedom Train Foundation, the only Bicentennial project of a national scope. As an advance person, I traveled the 48 contiguous states planning for exhibitions in major markets. To say the Freedom Train was a buff-magnet is to understate it by several degrees of magnitude. When I received my first letter from a famous Washington, DC buff whose communications were single-spaced, manually typewritten missives on onionskin without the benefit of any punctuation, I was told “I’d arrived.”

The point of this polemic – and there is one – is that I find the enthusiasms of the human race fascinating. When in my dotage – and some would say I’m getting dangerously close – I imagine writing a book about buffs. And to start my research, I am hopeful I’ll hear from you. I have no doubt that many of you will know of rail buffs yourself, even if not extreme ones like the ones I’ve described. What I’m interested in learning a about are buffs with other equally esoteric interests.

For instance, I’m sure all modes of transportation attract their share of buffs. I know there are those who are courtroom junkies or are never far from their police scanners. I have heard of people who collect barbed-wire specimens – who knew there were so many varieties? And I almost consider the collectors of glass insulators from telephone poles a step-cousin to the rail buff.  Do you know of other unusual hobbyists – those who have a single-minded devotion to an obscure collection or interest?

Please let me know – I plan on becoming a buff of buffs!

Working with Graphic Designers: Get the Most for Your Money

Category: Agency Life,Marketing,PR | Author: Janis Burenga | July 23, 2009

As professional marketers, we work with many different graphic designers based on their individual strengths matched to the client project. Most of our clients – as marketers themselves – are well aware of the “rules of engagement” and have learned to rein in impulses that can lead to high costs. But from time-to-time, however, we will work with a client unaccustomed to the design process and invariably inexperience leads to unnecessary cost.

If you’re new to graphic design, here are some basic tips to help you get the best design value for your money.

1.          Finalize copy before handing it over to the design team.

Designers charge by the hour, so once they have your material, every tweak to the copy costs money. You may need to edit copy to better suit the design layout, but if you enter into the design phase with final revisions behind you, you’ll save money.

2.          Do not make changes piecemeal.

You’ll absolutely want to make changes. But do so all in a single session, if possible. Every time you “Make the logo bigger on page 4” or “Make a page break before that subhead,” the designer must assemble the digital files, style sheets, scans, photos and fonts that make up your piece and open everything onscreen to make changes. Each time you do this, the designer is incurring hourly charges to accommodate you. Changes are fine; piecemeal changes are more costly. 

3.          Be specific about what you’re seeking in a design.

Design is a very subjective thing. Giving a designer directions like “Make it look hot” or asserting “I’ll know it when I see it” is a recipe for difficulties, if not disaster. If you want your material to resemble another piece that you’ve seen, share that piece with the designer. Words like “hot,” “cutting-edge,” and “cool,” are mostly useless in a pre-design discussion.

4.          If you’re uncertain about what you want, trust the designers.

Sometimes you may not have a clear idea about what might work best, so trust the designer to interpret what the approach should be. Second-guessing can add up. Worse, maybe you have a notion of what you want, but don’t communicate it. When the design is presented, you declare “That ain’t it” and the entire process starts over, a frustrating and potentially costly exercise.

5.          Identify your audience and your objective.

These are crucial bits of information to share with the designer. Designers can “speak” to your audience if they know who they are. And, if the objective is to shock, soothe or sell, the designs can reflect these moods.

6.          Collaboration is great, confusion isn’t.

Let’s face it: for many people, the design phase is the “fun part.” Everyone wants to be part of the team because everyone has an opinion about a design. The adage about design-by-committee resulting in a camel is based in fact. No offense to dromedaries, but your public image is riding on the professionalism of your materials and their design. Chances are, if there’s a six-member team, there’ll be six different opinions on what should be tweaked. If it’s your responsibility to oversee creative services, trust your instincts on purely design issues. If you don’t trust yourself or if everyone wants to get in on the act, let the final decision rest with the person with whom the buck stops.

7.          Let the professionals do their job.

Unless you’re a professional designer yourself, you should ask yourself if changes you’re about to make better communicate your message, or just cater to your own (subjective) preferences. If the ultimate “client” is someone else in your organization, you may end up making design changes only to have them changed back. This costs money, so resist the urge to act as designer.

8.          The design process should not cause angst.

Your materials are important to everyone involved including the designers. But keep your perspective. Every piece cannot be all-things-to-all-people. Hopefully, the piece you’re working on now will be followed by another and another and another, each helping to burnish the brand you’re trying to create. The longer you agonize over a piece, the less likely your changes will appreciably change the strength of it.

Most of us who work with designers day-in-and-day-out make quick decisions regarding a particular design. Because we know and trust the designers with whom we work, it’s very rare we literally “go back to the drawing board” because we know a brand is not won or lost on the basis of a single piece of collateral, or PowerPoint or even annual report. When we’ve done our homework before we’ve send it off to the designer, the designer has taken our words, our concepts, our color schemes and our brand attributes into consideration before showing us how mock-ups of the design.

Pitching is like choosing a wedding gown …

Category: Agency Life,PR | Author: Karyn Price | July 15, 2009

 I remember the first time I went to look for wedding gowns. As an excited, newly engaged young woman, I wanted to find the perfect dress – to suit the occasion, my personality … and yes, even my figure! Walking into the bridal store I realized the daunting task I had in front of me. But with some research, patience, and willingness of some kind store owners, I found the right dress for me.

I think that pitching to the media is a bit like choosing a wedding dress: the possibilities to pitch to seem endless at first, but with careful research and a little guidance from both your client or organization AND the journalists you’re pitching, any PR person worth his or her salt should be able to craft a credible, cogent and convenient pitch that will help in developing both good relationships with writers and editors as well as great stories placed on behalf of clients.

The first key to a great pitch is research. Would any bride in her right mind just walk into any bridal salon and expect to find a dress off the rack with ease and success? No way! First she works her way carefully through recent bridal magazines, dog-earing the pages with dresses and designers she likes. Then she might check out designers she likes online and see what salons carry that designer and style. Finally, she goes to salons, having made an appointment first, to try on dresses to find the one of her dreams.

It’s much the same with a pitch. You might first start by searching your pitch topic through a news search engine online. Who’s covered it recently? Who’s covered ancillary spaces? Where has your customer and their main competitors been profiled before? All are important initial considerations when planning a new pitch to gain customers coverage.

After targeting some key publications to pitch your customers’ news to, it’s also important to find the right contact within the publication you’re targeting. Who at the publication covers the beat that your customers’ news falls within? Have they covered the topic recently, and if so, from what angle? What new facet of the topic can your customers’ subject matter experts speak to, and how might they further a “conversation” started by a particular journalist? It’s critical to consider all of these components, and factor them into a concise, compelling pitch. By showing the journalist that you’ve done your homework, you show respect not only for the writers, publications, and for the journalism industry in general, but you also show respect and integrity that reflects well upon all those in our industry.

And you might also get some great ink to add to your portfolio … and impress your clients with.

 

© Copyright 2012 The Bailiwick Company. | Log in | Website design: River Graphics