It should come as no surprise to hear that Google, one of the most potent organisations in the world, has trust as one of its positioning lynchpins…yet in a (business) world still coming to terms with the fact that those defining a brand are more often its stakeholders than the brand itself, this is still close to being revolutionary, especially if it is being effectively put into action, rather than simply being pontificated on.

Lucinda Barlow, Google Australia and New Zealand’s Head of Corporate Communications and Public Affairs, put forward this premise at Frocomm’s 2010 New Media Summit. “We all work for and represent brands and brands are all about trust,” Lucinda said. “People have certain expectations of a brand and that’s what we have to portray.”

Lucinda Barlow

But are all brands about trust? I don’t think so. Australian Wheat Board? Rio Tinto? Westpac? Not exactly high-performing brands in the trust stakes.

Google are a fascinating entity in many ways, but their confluence of the dimensions of communication, products and societal centrality is one aspect of this. As a result of this it possesses an enormous amount of power:

• The power over people’s ability to access information (including information being organised in a manner customised to people’s varying ‘niche needs’)
• The power over people’s means of accessing information
• The power of influencing government and regulatory regimes.

In summary, this means the company is playing a significant role in shaping society itself.

NB. A full and comprehensive PDF report on the New Media Summit can be downloaded for free.

The power of giving away control

Lucinda (@lucindabarlow) describes Google as having collaboration at its heart and giving up power to its stakeholders. What a breath of fresh air for a public relations professional!

“Google’s mission is to organise the world’s information and make it universally accessible and useful,” said Lucinda. “This means giving our users around the world access to the information they want, from the widest variety of sources, wherever they are.”

And it is interesting to note that, despite its competition being, “one click away,” Lucinda said Google’s policy is not to lock people into utilising the products it develops, but to, “allow customers to move their data out of Google’s services easily.

“We have a dedicated engineering team, working across all products, called the ‘Data Liberation Front’ to make this happen. To keep you coming back, we have to keep innovating to create great services that are important to people and change their lives.”

Making it easy to not use Google has a number of implications for a professional communicator:

• It gives more power to consumers to set the terms of the relationship. In fact, with products like Google Maps, consumers have the power to actually change the parameters of the product itself
• It is empowering the consumer to be a participant in the brand, not an observer
• The numerous listening and interactive posts it has in the online environment reflect the way its business model is profoundly influenced by its stakeholders’ knowledge, views and behaviour.

Analogous to this is the approach that Lucinda said Google takes to its stakeholder communication: “We need to be fast, responsive, open and transparent in our communication.”

Eavesdropping for insights

“There is a large and growing audience of people who actively listen to, distribute and publish their opinions online,” said Lucinda. “This gives real power to the vocal minority. According to Nielsen, in Australia 45% of people online publish their opinions specifically about products, services, and brands online and a massive 86% read them. It’s such an influential space.

“When you probe what the most trusted sources of information are, word of mouth comes out tops followed by online…because online is seen as a way to scale ‘word of mouth’ and tap into it en masse.
“And you’re not just about managing what gets said about your brand in order to effect sales directly. It’s also about consumer insight. It’s like being permanently tapped in to the world’s largest focus group. Our users decide what’s popular and what they want to watch. They talk about it. They debate with each other. Those comments are gold. Just ask United Airlines…”

Social responsibility

The power of Google means it has a more profound, socially pervasive social responsibility than most organisations. Its enormous global reach (i.e. all stratas of virtually all societies) make this more challenging for Google than most, as different societies and their various elements all have differing expectations of organisations.

As long as trust remains central to its business model, however, it has a reliable compass with which to steer itself. Communication, and public relations in particular, is the ideal mechanism to facilitate this journey occurring.

What are your thoughts on this post? What are your perceptions of trust in the business world? Are organisations working harder to earn it form their stakeholders? Are they sincere? Are Google sincere? What impact are public relations professionals having on organisations’ trustworthiness? Is social media making a difference to our ability to make organisations behave in a manner that makes them more trustworthy? It would be great to hear your opinions.

PS: I’d welcome you joining networks with me through my LinkedIn profile. Send me an invite! PPS. And don’t forget you can subscribe to this blog via email or RSS at the top of the blog’s page, or Tweet about this post using the handy RT button, adding your own editorial two cents worth!

PPS. And don’t forget you can subscribe to this blog via email or RSS at the top of the blog’s page, or Tweet about this post using the handy RT button, adding your own editorial two cents worth!

Related posts

• Free report: PR at war – opinion explosion at social media summit
• Strategic communication with Facebook
• Online content helping public relations manage reputation

Tweet This Post

David Park is the author of a change manifesto for corporate affairs managers, Reputation Renegades, which is a free, downloadable e-Book. Renegades addresses many issues, but chief amongst them is the fallacy that corporations have control of their reputation. In this guest post, he provides answers to three pivotal questions that shaped the resource.

Why did you use the opening line – ‘Does Your Corporate Reputation Have New Owners?’ –  for Reputation Renegades?

It was my personal wake-up call for corporate affairs. I thought:  if I was a crazily overworked corporate affairs exec, I’d like someone to draw this stuff to my attention.

It bubbled up from my own professional epiphanies over the past few years in seeing the influence of web-based communities grow: observing virtual tribes incrementally increase their impact on corporate reputation.

 So this influence is still seen as trivial by many corporations. The funny thing is that it was – and still is – bloody hard to define and target influencers in the ‘real’ world, let alone online.

Now that the e-Book has been published for about a month, I’m more satisfied that it wasn’t too far out-there. It’s had good feedback.

Pleasingly, I saw it reflected in the recent Boss magazine in the opening line to the article, ‘Brand We.’

It reads: “Forget brand management – it’s no longer in your hands. In the future, your customer community will control your brand.” For brand – read ‘corporate reputation.’ It headed a great story by Rachel Botsman about her new book ‘Collaborative Consumption’.

The pivotal message in Renegades is control. Corporations are all about keeping control: as they’ve done since corporations began.

But they aren’t. Control and ownership of brand/reputation is changing hands.

Just ask BP.

The issue is not that corporate affairs exec are sticking fingers in their ears and yelling ‘not listening.’

It’s that those who own and run corporations don’t feel the need yet for change: especially in response to invisible stakeholder groups hidden on the internet.

Let’s face it, corporations are quite odd entities. We retain expectations that they will behave in some humanised way. The sad fact is that they were never created with such empathy in mind. They are legal constructs: defensive enclaves with regulatory moats and thick walls of limited liability. Behind this fortress the aim is simply to meet profit targets.

But times change. “These fortresses are under siege,” as the bible, ‘The Cluetrain Manifesto’ says.

‘Renegades’ is divided into sections titled Ready, Aim, Fire. In ‘Fire’ you use the term ‘reputation’ as a 10 lettered mnemonic call-to-action. Tell me more about these three: –

1. Allies
   The tactic here is for corporate affairs to recruit in-house cadres: allies. While the C-suite and Board may not want change when it comes to comms, within the company there will be many who do. They will likely be passionate users of social media too. So create an army of partisans: quietly – up in the hills. Don’t try and do it all on your own. Magic some critical mass for in-house momentum to include, rather than exclude, when it comes to comms.
2. Tell tales
   Simply, this is about humanising. We love stories. Wherever you can, drop the use of polished corporate speak. (Take a lead from Don Watson’s ‘Bendable Learnings’ in this regard.) Allow internal corporate communications to be as natural as you can. Allow us, please, to tell our stories in our own words. Social media is not just about the web; it’s a state of mind that’s about warm, humane, empathic communications.
3. Trust.
   This big warm and fuzzy is often overlooked. The issue with most corporations, as the Edelman Trust Barometer shows, is that trust has evaporated. So the recommendation here is for corporate affairs execs to tackle this head-on. To purposefully (and probably awkwardly and painfully) ask difficult questions at meetings that seek ways to bring back trust. Not easy. But you have to start somewhere, so get it out on the table.

Corporate affairs has a tough job. They have to toe the corporate line because.. well .. they wrote it.

Reputation Renegades acknowledges this and details some tactics whereby enlightened professionals might consider bringing about change: hopefully without calls by the CEO for an inquisition or worse: the burning of a heretic.

What inspired you to write it?

At parkyoung over the past year we have studied the impact of the web on societal communications. During this review it struck me that corporations, which lead our society in so many important ways, were really dragging the chain in responding to the hyper-connected market.

The fact that most corporations remained unenlightened – and were comfortable about it – was a real epiphany for me. I was encouraged, however, that deep inside these big organisations there’s a growing number of enlightened ‘guerrilla’ PRs who are becoming ‘reputation renegades.’

The kick-start came when I attended one of Jen Frahm’s workshops featuring the guru David Meerman Scott.

I was really not that familiar with the e-Book medium at all. He was such a passionate advocate for them. I really took to the informality of e-Books: his especially.

At this business workshop, business colleague Yvonne Adele, nudged me and said: “Betcha you can’t write one in a month.”

It took six.

David Park

David Park

Author of corporate affairs manifesto Reputation Renegades, David Park (a.k.a. Parky) has over 20 years experience in corporate affairs in both in-house and consultancy roles. He entered PR via an urban planning background that gave him a strategic approach which he has applied to comms ever since. He describes his in-house career as very ‘beery’ with 11 years with Lion Nathan and over 5 with Foster’s. He runs Melbourne-based strategic communications advisory firm, parkyoung, with PR Warrior Trevor Young.

Tweet This Post

This is the second part of a two-part series on social media’s impact on the practice of PR and the profession itself. The thoughts in this mini-series were articulated in response to an interview with British uni student Hayley McDonald (@HAYCMAC).

In the 21^st century, PR should be leveraging its logical leadership of social media for all its worth and use it as an opportunity to position itself more favourably as a management discipline that delivers business-relevant results.

The most potent and potentially meaningful characteristic of public relations remains its ability to transform organisations so that they are more aligned with their stakeholders’ needs and wants.

No other business discipline has this capability. Social media can help it achieve this goal and it is already – partially because it is inherently a dialogic communication mechanism, rather than a broadcast one like traditional media, direct mail and sponsorship – doing this. It is in this area of transforming organisations that PR must shine and provide business worth, or else it will become marginalised.

The social media tools I use and ‘rate’

On a professional and personal level I am very comfortable with, and pretty knowledgeable about, blogs. I contribute to a couple of professional blogs, Public relations and managing reputation and Blueblog, the home of the public affairs and corporate communication consultancy, Bluegrass, I work with. I also use Twitter on a professional and personal basis, but keep Facebook pretty much for fun and personal uses.

All of these tools have professional ‘world’ potential, depending on the business objective, the target audience preferences and what you are actually communicating about. I don’t think any one of them is necessarily any more important than the other.

If you want to generalise, however, Facebook is the medium going ballistic. I am not sure why anyone would want to use Facebook to become a fan of a service or product provider, however. That seems pretty superficial to me, other than on a fun level. I can’t see how communication for a product or service on this platform can really engage and turn people into advocates, but perhaps I am being a snob. I can see its utility for the arts, cultural and sporting entities, however.

As content is really a very important issue in this Google-censored world (if you are not ranked by Google, then you may as well not, in many senses, exist – in fact, you don’t exist!), I think blogs are extremely important. They are the quickest and easiest way to update content and by doing so this means the Google spiders love you! They provide a great platform on which to exhibit thought leadership, which helps with organisational POD and reputation enhancement.

I am also a big user of LinkedIn.

Why I use LinkedIn for strategic communication

• I promote my blog posts there
• I engage in conversation with more people here than on my actual blog
• I have started using it to try to generate new business for the public affairs and corporate communication consultancy I work for, in tandem with interpersonal contact (check back with me later 2010 to see if I have any success!)
• I ask and answer questions to enhance my professional knowledge and to help out others
• I think it’s a wonderful way to make contacts, learn and to have fun with peers all over the world
• It enhances my reputation: by having others visibly associated with me; by having recommendations from peers visible; by providing a platform through which I can exhibit my experience, qualifications and thought leadership
• I have used the input of many global peers in posts I have created for my blog, enriching the content and, hopefully, making it more attractive for professional communicators
• One day I may try to leverage it further to promote any free or paid-for books or e-books/e-reports I produce.

I find it interesting, if not surprising, that many of my blog posts create more extensive conversations on LinkedIn discussion groups than on my blog. I guess LinkedIn provides a huge chat room-like environment that cuts straight to, probably, the biggest global aggregation of its blog’s target audience: PR and marketing professionals.

(I have already written about why I think why LinkedIn is a must-do for PR and marketing pros.)

Making comments in LinkedIn discussion groups is possibly more convenient than making them on my blog, though I don’t know why. If you read the post, then you have to go to the blog. Could it be that many people are making comments based on the excerpt I provide on LinkedIn, or on other people’s comments alone rather than reading the full post. Surely not…?

The main reason I think it occurs is for a mix of ego, grandstanding and networking. By commenting on LinkedIn it is more likely their peers will note their existence than if they make it on my ‘outpost’ blog. I don’t mind – many of the discussion group participants add a lot of genuine value – but of course it would generate a greater momentum and profile for my blog if the comments were primarily there and not on LinkedIn!

PR practitioners dealing with social media successfully

Students yet to enter the profession yet need to skill up in a big way whilst you are at university. Immerse, experiment and learn. Get as much practical internship experience in this area as possible.

The most important thing for any emerging professional is to get as much hands on experience as possible. Sure, get an understanding of two-way symmetrical communication and its importance to the discipline and society, but get your hands dirty and have fun.

Also, remember whatever goes online stays online. PR people need to be more careful than most to manage their professional and personal brands. If you don’t want your girlfriend’s or boyfriend’s mother reading it, don’t put it up or don’t let it be put up.

What role do you think PR will play in the 21st century?

Because of the synergy between social media and two-way symmetrical communication, public relations is the logical owner of social media from a strategic and tactical perspective, not least because dialogue and accommodation are essential to both. As such, if the profession has a gram of sense and capability, it will leverage this for all its worth and use it as an opportunity to position itself more favourably as a management discipline that delivers business-relevant results.

The underlying characteristics of PR mean that it can make a profound difference in helping society become more equitable and help protect the natural environment. We should be more assertive in claiming this ground, this opportunity and this responsibility.

Social media and CSR, two of the most important aspects of public relations, are helping to give us this opportunity.

Sally Falkow has a really useful presentation on Slideshare called Social media: the future of PR. Obviously, quite in sync with the discussion on this post, so I encourage you to check it out.

Public relations’ most potent and potentially meaningful characteristic is its ability to transform organisations so that they are more aligned with their stakeholders’ needs and wants. At the end of the day, no matter whether it is lobbying, events, community liaison, sponsorship, website content, digital and social media communication, or any of the other dimensions of public relations, transforming both organisations and their stakeholders is what PR is about.

We can always help sell more product and services, but as a profession we have the capability to leave a much greater legacy.

What use do you get out of LinkedIn? What role do you think PR will play in the 21^st century? What social media tools offer the best ROI?

Tweet This Post

Whilst I don’t pretend to have any great insights on this matter, I was recently interviewed by British uni student Hayley McDonald (@HAYCMAC) on how social media is impacting on the practice of PR and how it is changing the way PR pros work, with the critical upshot being that making the right strategic decision, on a variety of levels, is more important (and, yes, more challenging) than ever.

Having more tactical choices (i.e. opportunities) at our disposal means more potential mistakes occurring, which means the basics of using evidence-based market research to underpin communication strategy, identifying and leveraging thought leadership insights, setting objectives and measuring (and exploring) the impact of communication remains crucially important.

So in that sense, the more things change, the more important the strategic fundamentals have become.

I have divided up my responses to Hayley’s questions into two posts. This first post talks about the impact social media has had on PR and, in a more granular sense, how it has changed the way PR pros work. The following post talks about social media tools I use and ‘rate’, how PR pros should deal with social media and the role I think PR will play in the 21st century.

The impact social media has had (and is having) on PR

1. It has accelerated and intensified the public relations and two-way symmetrical communication process.

2. It has made the notion and conceptual underpinnings of two-way symmetrical communication clearer to PR and non-PR professionals even if they don’t’ recognise the term itself.

3. It has made life harder for PR professionals because it is requires a diverse and ever-expanding collection of skills and tactical proficiency. Ironically, perhaps, I actually think social media is easier to comprehend on a strategic level than a tactical level. This is partly because social media is so reflective of the essential tenets of two-way symmetrical communication.

4. This increased knowledge that social media has forced PR pros to acquire is not stopping anytime soon. This means if professionals haven’t been educating themselves on the field then they had better get a move on. In turn, this means more of our time needs to be spent on self-education, putting more pressure on us.

5. We have to start managing our time and prioritising more effectively due to the burden of needing to be knowledgeable about an increased array of communication tools. This is the case even if a professional decides to stay tactical (and not operate at an overarching/strategic/leadership level) and focus on a limited array of communication mechanisms.

6. With the huge importance social media plays in the tactical communication mix, not to mention SEO, it may well mean that knowledge in areas such as traditional media relations is not focused on so much.

Changing the way PR pros work

Hayley postulated that, “the impact of social media upon corporate communications is changing the role of the public relations practitioner.” She then asked me what changes has social media made to the way I work as a PR practitioner compared to the old methods of PR?

1. The whole area of website content strategy, SEO and social media optimisation is really forcing us as a profession to reprioritise and reconfigure our approach. People in western countries (and many others) use the internet as the Bible, Encyclopaedia Britannica and the Idiot’s Guide to Everything. This is where influence is occurring, both through the (partially) mechanical means of directing web searches to certain sites, to who is influencing who from a thought leadership perspective on the web, to what media outlets are lifting their game to compete in this dimension.

 Further to this, check out this very useful, very relevant and just posted Slideshare deck by Rick Allen:

2.Interestingly, the emergence of social media is giving young practitioners (and I mean straight out of uni in many cases) an opportunity to become more influential and advance their careers faster than ever before. This is because (and I have seen this occur on many occasions) the older PR bosses are deferring to their younger counterparts due to their facility and experience in, and passion for, social media.

3. The increasing amount of social media avenues is underpinned by an increasing desire for content, thought leadership and perspectives that facilitate POD and competition cut-through occurring. Thought leadership we are familiar with, but the increasing demand for quality content, and its close cousin SEO, mean we have to write more (especially keyword-rich content) than ever, placing more pressure on what continues to be the most important skill of a PR pro: writing. And don’t forget, online writing demands a different approach to hard copy writing.

4. Social media obviously presents another topic to talk to clients and/or in-house management about. This is an opportunity to grab their attention with ways to help achieve organisational objectives, but it is also a challenge because generally you are talking another language to senior, and often battle weary, soldiers of contemporary business (including PR bosses). At the end of the day, the quickest route to approval is illustrating impact on the business and ROI. How do you achieve that? Measurement. Evaluation. Old school tools…

What impact do you think social media is having on PR? How is it changing the way you work, whether you are a PR pro or not, and in both your professional and personal lives? Do you think, to be a true PR leader, you need to be familiar with the strategic and tactical elements of many social media options – or can you do without this knowledge? What is your rationale for your position on this?

PS: I’d welcome you joining networks with me through my LinkedIn profile. Send me an invite!

PPS. And don’t forget you can subscribe to this blog via email or RSS at the top of the blog’s page, or Tweet about this post using the handy RT button, adding your own editorial two cents worth!

Tweet This Post

In this, the third of a series of posts on aspects of working in public relations, Stephen Sinclair, a very experienced PR professional, currently in-house Investor Communications Manager at Perpetual, shares his views on what it takes to carve out a successful career in public relations.

Working in a PR agency often grabs the headlines, but my guess is there are far more public relations positions working in the in-house environment – and, also, there are plenty of those who believe it is a far more satisfying milieu in which to work.

Perhaps the agency PR pros are best at getting the marketing media headlines for themselves because they work harder at it. It’s amazing how many PR-related stories in Australian marketing media relate to new business wins (I mean, someone cares, I guess – but it ain’t me!). My hunch is there are a lot more of these sorts of stories in our media than those that talk about best practice communication.

After attending a recent Frocomm social media PR conference, it was even striking to me that there were far more agency, rather than in-house, presenters. Now, I know for a fact Frocomm mogul Glen Frost always seeks a balance, but at the end of the day it comes across looking like the sharpest PR minds and the majority of high quality PR work is undertaken by agency professionals.

I don’t subscribe to this view at all. Agencies have a stronger vested interest in promoting their work as they need the in-house crew to seek them out. Otherwise they are out of a job! But this is a topic for another day.

In this post, Steve Sinclair, one of the most respected PR professionals in Australia (he is one of a select group of Public Relations Institute of Australia Fellows, for instance), points out some of the positives and negatives of working in-house. He also delves into the murky waters of social media and its relevance to building a career in PR.

What characteristics does it take to work in PR?

“A good nose for issues and people’s expectations (whether that is the broad public or particular interest groups), excellent business writing skills and good general business knowledge.”

What are employers looking for when hiring public relations professionals? What are the key technical skills (e.g. media relations) that experience is most highly valued in and what strategic mind-sets are coveted?

“In corporate, there is a very fair expectation that you have a really good understanding of the business and industry in which you are working, or can very quickly get up to speed. You also have to be able to understand and quickly respond to a brief or breaking issue, no matter how complex.”

What skills, attributes, knowledge, attitude are needed for working in-house, compared to the PR agency environment, and vice versa?

“Being on the inside you are part of the business and expected to really understand it. However, there are dangers that you can become absorbed into internal group-think. Some people find it difficult in this environment to stand up and challenge the prevailing view and the senior management who work down the corridor, whereas an agency at arms-length can be expected to provide impartial advice.

“However, if you develop credibility for sound advice and judgement within a business, you can have a strong strategic input when initiatives are being developed and issues first start to break. It is never worth just telling people what they want to hear if you don’t really believe it, because you’ll have to face the consequences the morning after and will lose credibility.”

What role does a PR professional’s presence in social media have in getting them a job? For instance, how important is it to have a good profile on LinkedIn? What value to a PR career is there in being engaged on Twitter? Does it give those who are more engaged an advantage?

“It’s probably becoming more important, in the same way as much recruitment is now done on-line. I think it’s just a matter of visibility and networks to become aware of, or be considered for, job opportunities. However, serious corporate employers should be more interested in your track record, your proven capability and real life referees. After all, they are looking for your ability to promote them, not yourself.”

Once a person has posted information on the internet, is it ethically fine for employers or recruitment agencies to check it out?

“Yes. If it’s on-line, it’s on-line. Personally, I don’t think employers have any business poking their noses into people’s private lives. But if you really want something private, keep it private.”

Since the emergence of social media, have expectations of public relations employers changed? How? Is it expected of every PR practitioner to have had some experience in social media, even if only on a personal level?

“I think it depends on the company, the agency and the role; but given it is becoming such a powerful force in human communication and how public issues play out I think anyone working in PR needs to understand how it is developing. However, there is a danger that young PR people focus too much attention on the medium rather than the message.

“It’s still what you say, not just how you say it, that’s important.”

What did you think of what Stephen had to say? Have you been pressured to comply with internal group-think? How did you respond? Have you worked both in-house and in an agency – what can you tell us about the differences between the two?

Stephen Sinclair has spent over two decades managing media and corporate communications in investment, superannuation and insurance. After managing ING Australia’s corporate and media communications from 1992 to 2007, he has spent the last three years managing investor communications for investment and trustee group, Perpetual.

In previous posts in this series, Graham White gave an PR agency perspective, whilst Richard Whitington and Di Treble gave a PR recruiters’ perspective, on working in PR and the impact of social media on developing a career in PR.

PS. I’d welcome you joining networks with me through my LinkedIn profile. Send me an invite!

Tweet This Post

In this, the second of a series of posts on aspects of working in public relations, Graham White, joint-managing director of leading Australia’s technology and business PR consultancy, Howorth, shares his views on what it takes to carve out a successful career in public relations.

Experience and literacy in social media, passion and an ability to take it on the chin are all attributes a public relations professional needs to cut through the competitive clutter of a career in PR, according to Graham White, who also emphasises the importance on attending to your ‘personal brand’.

PR opinion leader, Graham White

In this post, Graham talks at length about the challenges and rewards of working in public relations, with an emphasis on life in an agency. It’s a less lonely option than working in-house, he suggests. Reading between the lines he seems to suggest that agency operatives need to be on their toes and ready to evolve, adapt and capitalise on opportunities more than their in-house cousins.

One dimension Graham didn’t discuss is the need to constantly generate new business when you work within the agency environment. Generating new business is hardly public relations, or is it? Thoughts on this and dealing with the triumphs and defeats are welcome.

What characteristics does it take to work in PR?

“PR can be fun but it can also be an intense and difficult job. That means one day it can be very rewarding, yet another disappointing. Having worked in this industry for many years, I know it is often misunderstood by many people outside the sector.

“To be a PR person, you need many different skills on both the technical side and on the softer human side. On the technical side the skills are broad: a good writer, a confident speaker, the ability to understand what’s news, a talent for capitalising on the news cycle, creative, able to turn ideas into action, etc.

“On the human side you have got to be very patient, friendly, confident, calm, able to take a few hits on the chin and not react, nerves of steel etc.”

What are employers looking for when hiring public relations professionals? What are the key technical skills (e.g. media relations) that experience is most highly valued in and what strategic mindsets are coveted?

“I think it will vary from employer to employer, depending on the role you are seeking. In many sectors like government, finance, technology, employee communication, you will need to have specialist skills and a passion for that sector. In fact, passion is critical.

“Media relations is key. That said, you need to be a good strategic thinker, be well organised, be tough (no room in this industry for yes people and popularity). It’s all about setting realistic expectations.

“You have got to think on your feet, able to pull a discussion into an action plan and turn conversations into crisp, meaningful messages.

“And now you have got to be a digital expert. Whether it’s social media, search, or using the web to engage directly with your stakeholders, you cannot afford to be ignoring this world. If you do, you will be irrelevant as a PR practitioner. It’s that simple.”

What skills, attributes, knowledge, attitude is needed for working in-house than in a PR agency and vice versa?

“I haven’t worked in-house in PR, so tough for me to say. However, I have worked with many talented in-house PR people and they display similar skills – great strategists, great planners, thoughtful, honest, tough counsel, can handle the internal politics, and the list goes on.

“I do feel it could be quite lonely on the inside, so I have for the moment, stuck to agency, where I am surrounded by like-minded people.

“In agency you have to be resilient, creative, able to multi-task almost all the time, quick in thought and quick in action. Be prepared to change your mind, be collaborative, be open-minded. I also believe we all have much to learn, regardless of our experience. A 22 year old graduate can have great ideas, so be inclusive, remove hierarchy. My motto is simple, “The more I listen the more I learn; the more I learn, the more I listen”.

What role does a PR professional’s presence in social media have in getting them a job? For instance, how important is it to have a good profile on LinkedIn? What value to a PR career is there is being engaged on Twitter? Does it give those who are more engaged an advantage?

“Your personal brand should always be attended to.

“Social media gives you the opportunity to reach people with more content and to a much broader audience. Personally, LinkedIn is the most important business social media tool. Facebook gives a sense of your personality and social networks and, for me, is more about the individual at play than the individual at work, although increasingly the lines get blurred. Twitter is a great business tool, too.

“At the end of the day, what you put in you will get out.

“Use the tools smartly and in the manner they were designed, and it can be very rewarding and advantageous, especially if you are looking for work.

“We look at applicants’ social media profiles when recruiting, not necessarily to see what they have been up to (although for a cultural fit, this can be useful), but also to see if they are social media users, as that bodes well for their ability to think about social media in our clients’ communications programs.”

You say LinkedIn is the most important social media business tool. Would you mind explaining what the benefits to business are of LinkedIn?

“Its importance as a business tool is largely due to its size (it has 60 million members globally and in Australia the membership base has now passed the one million mark). That’s a big community within which you can network and connect with.

“For those involved in B2B transactions, this community clearly provides a platform within which you can connect with people that may share a similar passion or interest, or you can tap into people’s opinions on a broad range of topics and issues. But like most tools, it’s only as good as the effort you put into it. That means you need to ensure your personal profile is up to date, which will ensure great visibility in searches by other members that may be looking for your expertise and experience.

“Company profiles should also be kept up to date. You should join groups that are relevant and contribute content too. The reality is that you have a tool you may just be one click or search away from a great and relevant opportunity. At Howorth, we have had potential clients contact us through LinkedIn, as well as potential employees. That is powerful and these are inbound enquiries without any direct outreach ourselves.”

Once a person has posted information on the internet, is it ethically fine for employers or recruitment agencies to check it out? How has the notion of privacy changed in the internet age, as to what it is permissible for employers/recruiters to examine as part of a candidate checking methodology?

“Definitely there are no ethical issues. Just like we say to our clients what you control is what comes out of your mouth, it’s the same with social media. What you control is the content you decide to put in them. At the end of the day, only put out there what you are comfortable being out there. If you said it, stand behind it. If you don’t want to see it, then don’t say it. It’s simple really.”

Since the emergence of social media, have expectations of public relations employers changed? How? Is it expected of every PR practitioner to have had some experience in social media, even if only on a personal level?

“I think it has. You need to understand social media and how it works, how individuals use these platforms to engage, etc.

“Human beings love to connect with other human beings that may share similar passions or interests, whether we know them or not. That is why these platforms are so powerful and attracting millions of users every year. We are social animals and it’s now so easy to connect with people and express an opinion, which removes the barrier of entry, especially for those that are perhaps a little more shy in real life situations.

“Virtual networking is very popular. It’s also a great platform for people who are opinionated, the exhibitionists, the people who love the sound of their own voice and so on.

“Given this is where communications and conversations take place, it’s critical for PR people to know how to participate and navigate this world. It requires openness, it requires transparency, it requires effort and it’s long term. You have to be prepared to take criticism, enjoy the praise, listen to the community, etc. It’s a great feedback channel for a brand, so use it. It is also critical from a search perspective too.

“As James Grunig said in his earlier theory on PR, the fourth model was two-way symmetrical communication with our stakeholders – two way, participatory conversations. That’s so true today, and perhaps a fifth model has emerged which is two-way asymmetrical in the favour of the consumer, as with social media they can say what they like, when they like. If it is negative and organisations don’t like, they can chose to ignore it, but at their peril, hence the consumer has more power.

The most obvious option is to engage with them, listen to them, act upon it, and turn the negative to neutral or even positive advocacy.”

What do you think about what Graham has said? Did you compare it to what leading PR recruiters said in a previous post? Is the task of developing new business in an agency environment a pleasure or a pain? Is it PR? In future posts, an in-house communicator and a young practitioner at the beginning of her career will provide their perspectives on what it takes to excel in PR.

Graham White is managing director of Howorth, Ogilvy PR Australia’s specialist business and technology communications consultancy. He also plays a leadership role in Australia for Ogilvy 360 Digital Influence, Ogilvy’s specialist social media practice. Graham moved from England in 2000 and joined Howorth after more than 12 years’ management and communications experience with Yellow Pages and CC Group, a specialist technology PR consultancy. Under his leadership, Howorth has enjoyed strong growth and won many industry awards. Graham is also an Ambassador for Starlight’s IT Fund for Kids, a charity that unites the Information Technology and Telecommunications industry to help raise funds to assist children living with serious illness, disability and autism through technology.

PS. I’d welcome you joining networks with me through my LinkedIn profile. Send me an invite!

Tweet This Post

The defining theme that, arguably, characterises the world’s leading authority on public relations, Professor James Grunig, extensive, career-long discussion of public relations is this: organisations that proactively create mutually meaningful and mutually beneficial relationships with their stakeholders, including anticipating issues and actively communicating with them during crises:

“…should be more likely to develop relationships with their publics that make it possible to achieve organisational objectives, develop a positive reputation, and reduce the consequences of poor relationships on the implementation of management decisions.”*

“In some ways,” Grunig says, “Public relations has not been changed by the revolution in digital media.” The illusion of stakeholders being controlled existed before and it still exists now. Stakeholders create their own reality. The only way to impact on this reality is to engage and share information, to evolve based on this sharing and to enhance the meaning that relationships bring.

He made this comment in his recently published article, Paradigms of global public relations in an age of digitalisation (Praxis, a digital PR resource centre.) The article had as its central point the potential that social media has to, “truly revolutionalise public relations – but only if a paradigm shift in the thinking of many practitioners and scholars takes place.”

Global public relations in an age of digitalisation: the story so far

This post is the final of a three-part series that discusses certain elements of the article. In the first post (featured on Trevor Young’s PR Warrior blog, as was the second), the following elements were explored:

• how social media has complicated stakeholder targeting and communication
• the notion of ‘giving’ that characterises both public relations and social media
• the lack of control that organisations have over their stakeholders.

In the second post, key elements included:

• the participation required to utilise social media to its full effect
• the dialectic between reputation and engagement for organisational stakeholders
• social media as an issues management activity.

What social media can do for public relations

Social media, Grunig says, has “the potential to make the profession more global, strategic, two-way and interactive, symmetrical or dialogical, and socially responsible.” This will not occur, he warns, if PR pros use it as a means of “dumping messages”, however. Rather, he counsels professionals to interact with stakeholders and bring information, “from the environment into organisational decision-making.”

Social media, if not the ideal way to create this meaning (surely it is direct, interpersonal, face-to-face interaction which still rules here), is clearly becoming more and more influential in this regard.

Human beings are increasingly relying on these forms of communication. For some, social media/digital communication dominates their reality. And, certainly, the information they receive through these mediums, has a considerable degree of credibility. It has been argued that this is due to much of this information coming from individuals, rather than organisations.

Information that enters the social media realm and receives either a deliberate and strategised – or a non-designed organic – impetus from the solar systems of Facebook, YouTube, Twitter and their ilk can also have a cumulative, snowball-building ‘word-of-mouth’ effect that the planet has not experienced to this degree before.

Organisations can contribute to this multi-connected and multi-source generated and accelerated dimension. But they sure as hell can’t control it.

Social media is providing public relations with an opportunity to reinforce its importance to business and society. The profession is, in many cases, trying to take advantage of this opportunity. The question is, will it succeed?

The answer, according to Grunig, is only if we institutionalise public relations as a strategic management discipline, one that provides a vitally important element to business strategy and organisational culture.

“I have long provided evidence that public relations has greater value both for organisations and society when it is strategic, managerial, symmetrical, integrated [but not sublimated], diverse, and ethical,” summarised Professor Grunig. “Public relations, when practiced according to this global theory, helps organisations to achieve their goals, cultivate relationships in societies and globally, and reduce conflict.”

In the first post of this three-part series, issues discussed included how social media has complicated stakeholder targeting and communication, the notion of ‘giving’ that characterises both public relations and social media and the lack of control that organisations have over their stakeholders. In the second post, issues discussed included the participation required to utilise social media to its full effect, the dialectic between reputation and engagement for organisational stakeholders and social media as an issues management activity

What are your thoughts on Grunig’s thoughts and on this series of posts? Did you find them of value? Were there any aspects, arguments or thoughts you disagreed with? How can public relations enhance its professional standing and achieve its potential? What role or opportunity does social media have to play in this?

PS. I’d welcome you joining networks with me through my LinkedIn profile. Send me an invite!

*[Note that I am not differentiating, as Grunig does, between ‘stakeholders’ and ‘publics’. I am using the terms as synonyms.]

Tweet This Post

One of the most interesting, thought provoking and humorous Australian public relations blogs is justanotherpr, the product of the wild, fearless and intelligent Karalee Evans. I say one of the best Australian PR blogs, but really it’s one of my fave blogs on a global level.

One of the most notable characteristics of Karalee’s writing is its forthrightness. You won’t die wondering what her opinion is on any of the topics she covers. You get it right between the eyes. Public relations professionals included. Read the serve she gives the profession when she writes that we have a responsibility to be the guardians of authenticity (i.e. truth/reality) rather than arbiters of spin.

Taking responsibility for public relations

You get the idea – loud and clear – that Karalee wants the profession to take responsibility for its own development. This will only occur when it provides counsel in the best interests of an organisation, which means that it needs to take into account the best interests of an organisation’s stakeholders as well. What works for all parties? Without addressing and working with the potentially conflicting needs and wants, the relationship – the relations – will not be meaningful or sustainable.

Marketers, and those who espouse an inaccurate and outmoded perspective of what constitutes PR (you the type, media relations = PR), also get a drilling. As Karalee rightly surmises, what a load of bollocks. But each of her posts exhibits a wry sense of self-deprecation, as well. Karalee and I both fight the good fight on the ‘PR is a strategic business discipline’ front, but we realise it’s a Sisyphean challenge at worst, and a long, slow haul at best.

The forensic detail Karalee attacks some of her topics with is positively, um, media-like. Well, in the days when Rupert etc provided their flacks with resources, anyway. I don’t have the patience myself, but read the way she talks about the evils of public relations astroturfing or her discussion of iSnack public relations ‘disaster’. I ‘apostrophise’ disaster because I am pretty sure Kraft went on to make a motza from the product anyway and at the end of the day why would it care about anything else?

Reputation? Sales? You pick the KPI its executives and shareholders are most concerned with.

Strategic thinking

Inherent within each of Karalee’s posts is a strategic public relations/communication management aesthetic. You can almost hear the gears clanking. Even her superficial-type rants are clearly underpinned by big picture thinking. This is articulated more transparently in posts where she talks about strategy being the most important part of public relations.

She says that, ‘A good strategy seeks to preempt your tactical failures.’ It’s an illustration of that holistic thinking I mentioned. Most strategies are focused on success, but without considering the alternative possibilities occurring as a result of best intentions, has the situation being fully, and ‘strategically’, considered? A further implication of this is the flexibility and fluidity that should be inherent within any strategy.

Research, conceptualise and plan, by all means. Everybody needs to have a direction and responsibilities. But the world is a surprising, delightful and quirky place. Message: get ready to go with (and respond to) the flow!

Karalee is a social media devotee. And no, just because you run a blog it doesn’t mean you know what you are talking about social media-wise. But whilst she recognises and espouses the force of the medium(s), she also writes about it not so much changing what best practice PR is, so much as being an acceleration and almost ideal manifestation of it.

I like the social awareness and corporate social responsibility principles which inform Karalee’s professional stance and writing as well. She is no wowser, but organisations and communication professionals have a responsibility to society as a whole. And as marketers seem to have a HUGE problem with incorporating a social responsibility into the work they do and advice they give, it looks like its left up to the saintly PR folk to deliver!

I was going to tell you something of Karalee’s background, but you can read that for yourself. More important is what she writes about, what she delivers. In summary, these are two things:

• An extremely important contribution to the public relations profession through her tireless, thoughtful examination of issues, trends and case studies. PR folk who don’t read her posts are missing out (on professional development AND fun). She is helping public relations ‘get’ strategic
• An enhancement of Australian culture. She frequently writes on Australian issues and, sometimes, icons. Her work is in Australia. Her humour is Oz-larrikin. Her rapier is pure Antipodean. She does not suffer fools gladly (but she will allow them to buy her a drink).

justanotherpr: spread the word.

Have you read Karalee’s blog? What do you think? Which of her ideas and opinions do you agree or disagree with? What other PR or marketing bloggers do you rate highly?

PS. I’d welcome you joining networks with me through my LinkedIn profile. Send me an invite!

Tweet This Post

There are a number of contenders for the most eye-rolling, can-you-believe-it dumb marketing and/or PR moment of 2009: loser marketers, the GFC and social media amongst them . But, thankfully, there have been plenty of inspirational examples of best practice professional communication too. Most importantly, what have we learnt during the year and how will it make us better communicators?

This post explores these dimensions with the input and assistance of two of the globe’s most astute public relations minds, Craig Badings and Sean Williams, both of whom provide plenty of insights on their own estimable blogs.

The ugly communication canards

Starting with the eye rolling, it never ceases to amaze me what some wankers in the advertising/marketing world come up with and their justifications for it. Australian readers will be familiar with the Toyota debacle, where a sexist, incest-implying entry into an advertisement competition was repeatedly justified by marketers, then needed to be pulled out of the fire by public relations experts.

Arguably even more devastating due to the impact it is literally having on people’s lives, is how one of Australia’s largest banks, Westpac, raised home loan interest rates way in excess of our Reserve Bank’s guidelines (unlike some of their competitors). This was bad enough (avarice, completely contradictory to the Westpac’s supposed – and now obviously shot to pieces – CSR positioning) but it was made worse by an ill-judged video using banana smoothies as an analogy for the excessive interest rate hike…unbelievable.

Craig Badings found the GFC tiresome (hey, and who can blame him! It got me retrenched, so I know what he means). “The impact of the GFC on communication service companies has had a profound impact in many respects,” he says.

“I am nervous that some of these will become de rigueur moving forward. For example, some companies have become extremely process driven in their approach to comms. This is all well and good when used to measure outputs and impact on ROI but when it comes as the expense of innovation and creativity I start fearing for the relationship. These approaches, if taken too far, inevitably kill the passion.”

Sean Williams, on the other hand, took the other major elephant in the room over the past year to task. “Crap social media claptrap. There is a ruling class in social media consulting who regurgitates the same old, tired canard of gobbeldy-gook that makes social media out to be the reinvention of the structure of society itself, declaring the End of News Media and accusing anyone who disagrees of being stupid, corrupt or worse.”

Examples of best practice public relations

On a more positive note, Craig looked back with satisfaction on a campaign he had worked on with law firm Henry Davis York. This…“resulted in the government of New South Wales settling with a family whose home was situated on an old radioactive waste site.”

Sean pointed out an excellent campaign by The Federal Reserve Bank of Cleveland, called ‘Drawing Board’. “They are my client for measurement, so I can’t take credit for the single best and simplest explanation of financial regulation I’ve ever seen [unintentional banking and video connection noted...!]. They’ve also done a follow up video on the consumer price index…”

Getting better (at communicating) all the time

There is nothing that we all can’t get better at, but Sean and I would love to win more new business for our consultancies and I am sure Craig empathises with this as well. I question whether really profound, organisation-changing work can be done from the consultancy position, as opposed to working in-house in a PR capacity, but there are certainly plenty of exceptions to this position.

Sean, like most of us, had a big social media learning and ‘doing’ time in 2009. “Twitter and blogging make up a huge part of my day/week,” he says. “And the amount of information (some good, some not) I’ve gleaned from reading others in our field has been great.”

Plenty of us would have the tools to get better at our jobs by reading Craig’s book, Brand Stand; seven steps to thought leadership, which was published this year, whilst professional communication blogs by the likes of Karalee Evans and Trevor Young make an ongoing contribution to professional PR learning.

Incorporating the perspectives of others into my work and approach is always one of the more interesting and enriching dimensions of a professional life. Of course, embracing the views of others is analogous to public relations so it’s hypocritical not to bring such a mindset to our work.

And for 2010?

“I think more and more executives and communication professionals are beginning to understand the true power of good thought leadership and, if done properly, it’s ability to impact sales,” postulates Craig. “The biggest battle, however, is getting some people to understand that the focus of thought leadership doesn’t have to be on the product or service and that it is perfectly OK to ‘give away’ or share information and insights.”

The ‘giving away’ of information is similar to social media best practice. But social media still remains a war zone, according to Craig. “Many of the large corporates are still battling with the concept of engaging online. Speak to Dell, Walmart, Kryptonite locks, Pizza Hut and a host of others to find out just how important it is, if only as an early warning device for issues and a way to help manage crises.”

Sean says, “2010 could well be the Year of Measurement – that means doing long-delayed internal comms research, reducing dependence on ‘more more more’ in media relations in favour of better targeting and generally looking critically at how communication affects the business.”

It was reinforced for me during 2009, and I’ll be applying this in 2010 and beyond, how important flexibility and believing in yourself is. I was retrenched during 2009, I started my blog, I was forced to start my own business and now juggle a permanent role, my own business and this demanding blog baby.

An upside out of this was meeting, networking and collaborating with a wide range of public relations professionals, many of whom provided me with a great deal of support, inspiration and professional education. It reinforced to me what a rewarding, worthwhile profession I work in.

 So tell me, what were the highs, lows and ‘learnings’ of 2009 for you – and what do you think the professional business communication world will bring in 2010?

Tweet This Post

Strategically, social media offers immense utility for public relations professionals when it comes to crisis management but, conversely, it also opens up organisations to immense risk.

On the upside, said James Griffin of SR|7 at Frocomm’s Crisis Communication & Social Media Summit 2009, an example of the positive power of social media is the over $3 million US dollars of revenue that has been generated by Dell through its Twitter platform engagement. “This has created a new asset for Dell,” said James, “Allowing the company to build trust, revenue and its brand.”

And organisations need all the help they can get, it seems, if the findings James cited from AON’s  Australasian Risk Management Benchmarking Survey are anything to go by. “Brand and image have been ranked above corporate governance and other risk categories including legal, human resources and information systems as the number one risk concern since 2007.”

But the “wild wild web”, as James calls it, has a set of risks of its own. “It is a world where people are largely anonymous,” he said. “People feel empowered to say anything regardless of the truth. It is a world where blogs, videos and Twitter broadcasts are more powerful and faster than bullets.”

James quoted Deloitte findings that 58% of executives agree that reputational risk and social networking should be a boardroom issue, but only 15% say it actually is. “Staggeringly, Deloitte also found that only 17% of companies had any form of program to mitigate risks associated with social media.”

An opportunity for communicators? It certainly looks like it.

James said that critical to understanding the importance of social media, and an insight into where social media is heading, is that both Bing and Google will be integrating Facebook status updates and Twitter posts into public search results. “This means a standard Google search for a company is as likely to bring up the official webpage as it is the live feeds of customers, suppliers or employees who happen to comment on that brand and organisation.

“In addition, it will make it faster and easier for the media to source negative or sensationalist stories about goods, services and individuals. The flipside is that there will increasingly be more opportunities for organisations to leverage and use social media as a means for positive brand engagement.”

A powerful strategic point is that 60% of Australians trust the recommendations of their peers. And with the prevalence of social media as networking tool for peers, the importance of the mediums to public relations professionals and marketers is clear.

“The key is knowing where the positive content exists and developing strategies around maximising authentic brand advocates, said James. “These are critical in times of crisis.

iSnack. iFail? Or eyeballs = iWin?

The KRAFT iSnack 2.0 campaign is a very good illustration, said James, of how the integration of social media platforms makes it critical for your organisation to have a presence on each one.

SR|7 was commissioned by the Sydney Morning Herald to provide data and analysis of the KRAFT iSnack 2.0 marketing campaign as it unfolded. Central to the drama around the branding of the product was a very funny but subversively critical YouTube video which, James said, “featured heavily in the majority of traditional news articles both online and offline was linked to, and from, a variety of social media platforms.

“The Kraft experience highlights the power of social media in shaping perception about goods and services. It is clear that Kraft did not have the tools in place to counter arguments and discussion online about iSnack 2.0”

Counting and caring: monitoring results

YouTube video:

• Monday 10am 1,110 views
• 1 day later #1 most watched video – Australia
• 3 days later 45,956 views

Views were accelerated by these sources:

• First referral from YouTube – Homepage 9,391
• Other / Viral 17,581
• First embedded on – www.facebook.com 10,414
• First view from a mobile device 5,703
• First referral from – www.facebook.com 4,722
• First embedded on – www.thepunch.com.au 4,324
• First embedded on – www.crikey.com.au 1,780
• First embedded on – www.defamer.com.au 1,590.

James made the following further points:

• Collecting only brand mentions will miss the most relevant conversations. Discussions are key
• Simple measures (counts, brand mentions, sentiment) are not useful for understanding why people do what they do and, without understanding, we don’t gain the insight of what to do next
• Effective social media monitoring is going beyond buzz and ‘sentiment’, to understand the emotional and motivational drivers of your customers or clients. Human analysis of social media data is vital.

Web visuals’ growing impact

The power of visuals – and moving visuals at that – on the internet seems to be replacing the primacy that television has (had?) in our lives. Online visuals can be seen at the viewer’s convenience and may take only a minute or so to view. From there, it takes mere seconds of effort before an online missive is despatched, whether through Facebook, Twitter, YouTube, blog and others where untold numbers of people may see it.

Strategic alliances

One method of combating this is applying the tried and true methodology of strategic alliances, even more potent in the social media environment than in a non-digital environment. This is a key tool public professionals should always consider applying when designing communication strategies.

The three primary benefits of strategic alliances are that they enlarge the communication footprint an organisation can have, they can enhance the credibility of alliance ‘partners’ and they provide excellent ROI (especially if they are mostly free!).

In this context, the following is relevant:

• Identify customers, suppliers or other organisations that have appropriate communication mechanisms in place and a mutually beneficial interest in, helping communicate your messages/position
• This is particularly useful, in the context of this discussion, if those mechanisms include social media and their audiences are complementary/relevant to your own
• As these messages, even if they are flagged as being your own organisation’s, come from a third party, they come with their brand imprint and, presumably, credibility
• Even, as has been seen ad nauseum at the Frocomm summit and elsewhere, if the alliance’s social media network is not big but it is influential, then it will be a strategic tactic (um, verging on tautological here…) worth implementing.

These alliances won’t be ‘one-offs’ (who the hell is going to, firstly, want to institute an alliance with your organisation when it is in the credibility ‘bad books’ and, secondly, have the time to do the sign off protocol turnaround in about 24 hours flat?).

As Libby Day, From Roche Australia, said at the summit, alliances and partnerships are built up over years, not hours. Whether we are talking social media or ‘simple’, professional relationships, it takes trust to form alliances and for those alliances to be willing to put themselves at some level of risk by associating themselves publicly with another organisation under the gun.

But if those relationships are meaningful from a two-way perspective, if they are mutually beneficial and if they are founded on trust, then they may well help your organisation get over the crisis line.

This post is part of an extended series covering the summit. All the coverage is also available in a free PDF report that you are welcome to share with your colleagues and peers. As a return favour for providing this resource, and only – of course – if you think the content is worthwhile, perhaps you could tweet about it or flag it on one of your social media networking sites, such as LinkedIn.

Tweet This Post