Comments on: Working in PR: 14 reasons why in-house kicks agency butt

By: Strategy, rigour and creativity: 3 PR power plays | Public relations and managing reputation

Wed, 19 Dec 2012 23:14:13 +0000

[...] in-house or in consultancy, research, benchmarking and evaluation are critically important steps in public [...]

By: Spotlight on in-house PR pros « PRINKS

Spotlight on in-house PR pros « PRINKS — Wed, 15 Feb 2012 01:46:18 +0000

[...] communication professional Craig Pearce pointed out, there are plenty of reasons why working in-house is the way to go, but despite all these, it can get a bit lonely for internal communication professionals… Most [...]

By: Sole operator PR pros are best of PR breed | Public relations and managing reputation

Tue, 15 Feb 2011 18:48:11 +0000

[...] a sole operator is one of the career options we have in public relations. Others are being an in-house PR professional or working for a PR agency. Each have their positives and negatives, with the overarching main [...]

By: Craig

Craig — Wed, 16 Jun 2010 22:27:15 +0000

Thanks for the contribution, Michelle. Your point about working in an agency is handy for when you work in in-house and use agencies yourself is an excellent one. I agree it certainly helps having worked on both sides of the fence.

You can empathise with the challenges of working in an agency better and it helps extract the best ROI from an agency.

The lonliness issue is discussed in this post’s sequel, extolling the virtues of working in an agency.

By: Michelle

Michelle — Wed, 16 Jun 2010 17:20:33 +0000

The grass is always greener, but I am an in-houser at heart. I have to say though, I think that it’s great to start out at an agency. You have to pay your dues and you get so much experience at an agency. I agree with so many folks on here that working at both is best to experience what each has to offer. At an agency, if you start out there, you can gain so much experience in different roles that you can bring in-house. It’s more desirable for employers to see that you have worked for an agency b/c sometimes you will be working WITH and agency (creative, PR, etc.). It does get lonely sometimes, and you miss working with other communications professionals, but you set the agenda and scope of work and that is a beautiful thing that is worth its weight in experience alone. In-house offers so much when you’re ready for it and mature enough to appreciate it. You can build something amazing for a company and put yourself and your organization on the map!

By: Working in PR: 17 reasons why agencies fly, in-house sighs | Public relations and managing reputation

Thu, 10 Jun 2010 09:21:37 +0000

[...] relations, Strategic communication In the partner post to this one, I presented 14 reasons why working in public relations in-house kicks agency butt. This post, obviously, presents the [...]

By: Craig

Craig — Wed, 09 Jun 2010 20:33:41 +0000

Thanks for the generous comments, Catherine. I have checked with my department and team (um, that would be a department and team of one…) and they all agree with you!

By: Catherine Sweet

Catherine Sweet — Wed, 09 Jun 2010 20:00:50 +0000

On the one hand…I could have written that list myself, and it is weird to find a doppleganger on the other side of the world from me, whose experiences and insights so closely match my own views! The only three things I would add to the list are a) generally speaking, in-house senior positions in big corporate organisations are better paid than agency, unless you own equity in the agency. B) in-house teams are smaller, so you will get more of a chance at a younger age to put your hand up and say “I can do that”, even if it’s new to you. And, c) there is something exciting about sitting in a board room full of directors who run the business, but they turn to YOU as the expert in communication. It’s what I describe to my students as “super hero PR moments”, when single-handedly you can stop a business from doing soemthing incredibly damaging to stakeholder relations or make a significant intervention that changes corporate communication strategy, because you are the only one who really hears what the external stakeholders are saying- and can translate it for an incredulous senior management. Your persuasive skills are tested the limit, but you know them all, they know you. It’s a matter of trust, having built up credibility over the years that means the CEO and board take your advice seriously.

On the other hand, that kind of “high octane” comms all depends on you being part of the dominant coalition inside the organisation. Alas, a lot of really good in-house professionals never get a look in to the board room; instead they are relegated to the “PR department ghetto”, and don’t get to play at top levels. It’s a shame, because that is where the real action is.

Like many of your commentators, I have been on both sides of the business, and sometimes the senior management just want to won’t listen if it comes from inside; they have to hear it from outside the organisation.

So, my answer to your question? It all depends on who YOU are! In-house rocks for those able to talk their way into the boardroom; otherwise it’s a lonely business. Agency works if that’s what it takes to get heard in the boardroom. But, if you are stuck in an agency chasing every bit of new business and not getting paid for much more than extra “arms and legs” work thrown to you by a harassed and overworked in-house department- well that’s not much fun, is it? WHO you are as a communicator is more important than WHERE you are!

By: Craig

Craig — Sun, 06 Jun 2010 09:49:49 +0000

Hey. At least it was an offer. The more offers the better. Lets you know you are ‘desirable’…

By: Greg Smith

Greg Smith — Sun, 06 Jun 2010 07:51:07 +0000

And the salary in house is usually more “stable”. I just had a consultancy offer me $30k less than I get now. Bloody insult.