Government public relations is often best practice

Despite some negative ninny naysayers, practicing PR for government organisations is an excellent and rewarding option as it often takes a strategic, holistic, best practice approach, it is founded on a thorough process and great rigour, it is generally well-funded, it provides excellent career opportunities and it inherently exists to benefit all society.

Government PR works in teams to help all society

Yes, there are those smarty pants who think that working for government is a bludge (an Australian term for slacking off or taking it easy). I’d bet that most of these smarty pants haven’t worked in a comms role for a government organisation because, in my experience, this perspective is bollocks.

As someone who is occasionally [:)] accused of generalising, the accusation noted above is really beyond the pale. It is up to the individual (person and organisation) whether they don’t work hard to achieve best-possible outcomes. It certainly isn’t an inherent characteristic of government PR. If anything, it’s the opposite.

I’ve had experience with the following government organisations and they all worked (and work) extremely hard in securing excellent results, as well as applying what can loosely be described as ‘best practice’:

  • Australian Nuclear Science & Technology Organisation
  • Centennial Park & Moore Park Trust
  • EnergyAustralia
  • Endeavour Energy
  • Delta Electricity.

Best practice government PR

You only have to look at roll call of winners of Australia’s leading PR awards, the Golden target Awards, to see how positively the industry views the quality of government comms. Yes, this is due to more factors than the pure talent that works in government PR (see below) but that is clearly a significant factor in the equation.

There is a serious responsibility on all government employees to work hard, as all of us taxpayers are paying their salaries. There is also ministerial pressure on those who work in government departments to get it right. This is not a pressure to be underestimated.

In my experience, you do NOT want to get on the wrong side of a minister or his or her staff. I’ve seen it happen and the impact can be more severe than in a comparable private sector situation.

An outcome of this is that government PR tends to take a big picture, holistic perspective as well as seek to apply approaches that are founded on best practice.

The rigour with which government PR approaches its craft is often based on its endemic processes and quality controls. These processes and controls – like good PR theory – are not a burden. Conversely, they provide a solid, well informed platform from which creativity can be used to achieve effectiveness.

The rigour actually makes it easier to achieve excellent results. Admittedly, though, it can be a trial for those who have to document the processes in the first place!!

Funding for government public relations

Government departments and agencies are well resourced with comms employees. Communication – public relations and marketing – is highly respected as a discipline within government and its potential for reputation and bottom line impact well understood.

Because of this, the diversity of PR specialisations is well represented within government. Media relations, community relations, corporate social responsbility, marketing communication, sponsorship, publication production, event management and social media and website are some of the specialisations.

These and other responsibilities are sometimes blurred in single roles and even if they aren’t, opportunities exist to gain experience in complementary specialisations. I’d suggest getting these opportunities to broaden your skill set is easier to achieve in government than other sectors.

Getting these opportunities and experience can:

  • help stimulate interest and engagement in PR’s wider remit
  • provide opportunities for advancement in different specialisations
  • help build a skill set which facilitates career progression.

Like any industry, working in one area of government will often give you an advantage when applying for roles in other government entities as you have experienced the unique challenges and rewards of the sector.

Public relations benefitting society

One of my own passions is making a positive difference to society through the work I do. I’d like to leave some sort of legacy (no matter how small) that I can explain to my son in the hope that it inspires him to do the same. It’s one of the reasons we are both involved in Surf Lifesaving Australia – it offers an invaluable community service.

There really is no better place to work than in government if this is an aspiration you, too, have.

Government and its arms are there to make society a better place:

  • This includes ensuring our natural environment survives for future generations
  • This includes ensuring that, socially, all people have an opportunity to achieve their potential.
  • This includes ensuring that all people are given a voice in decisions that affect them personally and affect their concerns in the world.

Public relations is not limited to communication. Public relations is about involving relevant parties in decision making processes and issues which impact upon them – then evolving decisions and processes to achieve mutually beneficial outcomes. Of course, excellent results appear in many different ways and we need to take a broad perspective to our goal of achieving these outcomes.

Have you worked in or with government public relations? what can you tell us about your experiences? Good or bad? Come on, don’t be soft or shy – give it up!!

If you found this post of value, please share it through Twitter, Facebook or LinkedIn. Thanks in advance!

Related posts



  • Smudger

    Nice to see public sector PR get a mention

  • Exspindoctor

    Government PR is often reactive, slow to act, usually significantly underfunded and seen as a necessary evil, having a lesser role in the organisation than accounting, HR, logistics, strategic planning or operations.
    Many comms units see their role to actively avoid issues rather than deal with them and foster a bunker down attitude hoping problems go away.In recent years PR jobs have been the first to go in budget cuts, aided and abetted by cynical governments  to counter opposition claims of massive numbers of spin doctors employed to keep the government in power.  Ie new PR public service roles are currently rare or non existent. (See Qld Smartjobs and Govnet)!  Communications units concentrate on sucking up to the minister, director general and execs for their survival usually at the expense of rural and regional stakeholders. Never mind their respective publics, gov’t staff are told their key stakeholder IS the minister.  Long before elections are held most departmental comms output is massively restricted as ministerial staffers vet all PR resulting in informative, timely releases never being published.  In too many government departments the minister himself determines if your media release or promotions will go ahead- I kid you not!Ultimately your PS PR career path rests on how good you are sucking up rather than how well you do your job.  Cronyism is rampant and how most middle to upper management appointments are made.  There is active age, gender and region versus city bias. PS PR training and a structured career progression process is largely non existent. Staffers seeking to gain essential work skills in strategic planning and community consultation are often actively discouraged as only the ’select few’ get those roles to help their career progression.   

  • http://craigpearce.info/ Craig Pearce

    Thanks for the expansive comments, Mark. A different perspective is always welcome on this blog. I don’t feel I have much to add to your thoughts, I’m afraid, but if there are others out there with views on this topic it would be great to hear what you think.

  • Bruce Conway

    I’ll take one of those organisations listed and see how they shape up:

    Australian Nuclear Science & Technology Organisation 
    http://www.ansto.gov.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0013/50521/John-Carlson-talk-Nuclear_Governance_110517.pdf 

    “nuclear energy’s capacity to provide low-carbon base-load electricity”

    I think any first-year university student that tries to prove nuclear energy is low-carbon would end up with a D minus write large in red.

    The industry claims that nuclear energy is “carbon free” because while a nuclear plant operates, it does not directly burn hydrocarbons. However, from a life-cycle analysis, nuclear energy is a carbon hog. Plant construction – cement, steel, and complex electronics – is carbon intensive. The nuclear fuel cycle – mining, milling, enriching, fabrication, transport, and processing nuclear waste – is carbon intensive. Halogenated compounds used in uranium refining have a greater impact on global heating than carbon dioxide. Finally, when a nuclear plant’s 40-to-60 year life is over, decommissioning adds more carbon costs and leaves a radioactive, lifeless blotch on the landscape. Many studies confirm that nuclear electricity is not low-carbon; here are three:A study of carbon and nuclear power by the Australian government and Sydney University, found that nuclear plants emit about 60 grams of carbon-dioxide equivalent per Kilowatt-hour of electricity 3-times the comparable emissions from wind turbines.The International Energy Agency’s 2006 World Energy Outlook, a pro-nuclear report, found that among the alternatives – wind, solar, hydro – nuclear power yielded the lowest emission reductions.At Stanford University, Dr. Mark Jacobson compared the lifetime CO2 emissions of energy sources, “Review of Global Warming Solutions,” and found nuclear electricity to be the highest non-hydrocarbon option, emitting between six and 60-times more carbon than wind and concentrated solar.http://www.energybulletin.net/stories/2011-07-19/nuclear-delusions So, I hardly think outright fibbing is “best practice” and I do believe James Grunig would cross them off the list of organisations characterized as “excellent” (ref. “Excellence in Public Relations and Communication Management”) and that two-way symmetric communication for them is probably still a dirty word, as it is for most governments.  (Even for those professing an interest in so-called Open Government).http://books.google.ca/books?id=Bs4ISeYi1qkC 

  • http://craigpearce.info/ Craig Pearce

    Thanks for taking the time to compile what is clearly a passionate and well reearched response, Bruce. I don’t feel qualified to comment on the research you identify, but clearly nuclear energy can’t be carbon free, due to the lifecycle of uranium production at the very least. I’d be surprised to see the industry claim that, but clearly you’ve seen it stated somewhere.

    In the case of ANSTO, of course, I think it relevant to bear in mind that it is an organisation that does not produce nuclear power and, when I was working for it at least, didn’t undertake research into the area either.

    What is does do is produce nuclear medicine that saves lives and that hundreds of thousands of Australians use each year. It also produces radioistopes and neutrons that are used in environmental, materials and other research. Because of this deep value it offers the Australian and global communiaties, I think it is inherently an organisation characterised by two-way symmetrical communication because it is delivers to an community need, health, whilst its research is helping achieve community aspirations.

blog comments powered by Disqus
Get Adobe Flash playerPlugin by wpburn.com wordpress themes