I’m delighted to be able to speak to you tonight at the launch of the 2011 TIN100 report. I first got involved in technology at age 11 when I built a crystal radio, using a diode, a coil and a tuning capacitor along with an aerial strung across the garden. It made a change from rugby, a sport at which I was particularly dreadful.
So I get 6 layer printed circuit boards but I accept that they are alienating to some and terrifying to others.
That brings me to how New Zealand views the way we make a living. We have a sustainable competitive advantage in food and fibre. We are blessed with strong primary industries, but these have limits to growth. Furthermore, when it comes to innovation, there are few incentives to innovate when you can sell commodities. Companies like Gallaghers or Fisher and Paykel Healthcare or my own company Magritek, either innovate or die.
And innovation is the key driver of productivity and economic growth in advanced economies.
New Zealand has the fundamentals in place. Painful reforms were carried out in the 1980s and 90s. Now we are ranked among the highest countries in the world for property rights, market freedom, free trade, lack of corruption and legal and political rights. And our taxation rate, personal and business, is one of the lowest in the OECD. Only Chile and Mexico are lower. Indeed we clearly beat Australia in all these measures. So when the 2025 task force says that the key to matching Australia’s per capita GDP is to further lower taxation and reduce regulation and constraints to free markets, they are clearly not referring to planet Earth where we already excel by their yardstick. What planet they are referring to I am not quite sure.
My view is that it is right to set a goal to improve per capita GDP to the level of Australia. Prosperity does matter, and the impact of the Christchurch rebuilding on our economy makes that abundantly clear. To achieve that goal we are looking at another $40 billion per annum GDP growth, preferably in exports. What is happening in New Zealand is that there is an underlying part of our export economy that is growing much faster than the total, and that part is the knowledge sector.
TIN100 growth rate, over the past 7 years since the list was compiled, is around 5% per annum. And the higher up the value chain one goes, the higher the growth rate. In the World Bank survey of high tech products, a subset of TIN100, the rate is 10% per annum.
However, the question that must exercise us is why will such businesses stay in New Zealand? It will not be because of proximity to markets, greater availability of skilled employees or deeper investment sources. It can only be because the principals of those companies, and especially their creative people, choose to live in New Zealand. For that reason our policy framework must be geared to ensuring that New Zealand is a place where talent wants to live. For that reason we protect our natural assets, our national parks, our coasts, lakes and rivers. And because creative people don’t like living in gated communities with poverty and crime on their doorstep, we need to address issues of wealth inequity and social justice. We need to look to the quality of our schools and our health system.
So my recipe for growing prosperity is to expand the TIN100 companies. Currently they export $5 billion, half of dairy. Ten times as many and we have achieved our goal. Even if we do nothing, their current growth rate suggests we may achieve our goal in a couple of decades. But we want to accelerate that. And to do that, we as a nation have to change our thinking, to realise that we can live by being smart, that to grow our economy we have to stop looking to our traditional land resources, and start to think like a Singapore or a Switzerland. Growth from here on requires that we innovate.
And nothing has quite so changed our perceptions as TIN100. Greg Shanahan has done an enormous service to New Zealand. Who else measures this? Certainly not Statistics New Zealand. TIN100 tells us how big this sector is. It tells us what we are good at-physical platform technologies, ICT, software, creative businesses like Weta, and a small component of biotech as well.
We will be good at what we are good at, and TIN100 tells us that some of what we are good at is quite surprising. I am not against cleantech, biotech, or any other fashionable area that a politician thinks we should be good at. So long as it is legal and not morally objectionable, I don’t care what it is. But what I am really interested in is where we are the world’s best and where we are profitable.
The other interesting thing we learn from TIN100 is the nature of the innovation system. When we plot numbers of companies against their export value on a log-log graph we find a straight line, a power law in other words. That’s the same power law shown by earthquakes or tree diameters in a forest. In other words our system is complex, interconnected and self-organised. What that means that you can’t have the big companies without the little ones. And to grow a company ten times larger than our largest, you probably need to grow the total number of companies by a factor of ten as well. These are powerful insights.
Let me say now why I think New Zealand has a great future. We have natural advantages in the world with abundant fresh water, renewable energy and robustness to climate change; we have extraordinarily beautiful natural environments, an excellent education system and a civil society. Once we get our on model of our country right, once we project who we are to the world as a smart innovative economy, we are an obvious place for talent to reside, attracting the best of our diaspora home, attracting the best migrants to want to live here. And most importantly we can motivate our most underutilised potential, our kids who know nothing of what is happening in the TIN00 story.
I want to finish with two requests to you all.
First, embrace the paradox. Because New Zealand is 0.2% of the world's economy, that economy is 500 times larger. That means we can succeed in the niche markets of the world, growing businesses that are substantial in the New Zealand context. We have to think like Singapore, not as we have done for 150 years, as a country that can live off its natural resources. And the further a business is from the primary sector, the more the drive to innovate.
Second, tell the story. Many of you are invisible because your markets are almost entirely abroad and what you do, in your niche areas of business, is often mysterious to the public. But your kids are growing up here. Be visible in New Zealand; work with local schools and the parents of the kids to tell them about the opportunities that businesses like yours present. Sponsor locally, even if your markets are abroad.
We have grown a $7 billion a year innovation sector with $5 billion per annum of exports without most New Zealanders even being aware that this is what we can do. Imagine what will happen when all New Zealanders discover what we really are good at. Then we will have bridged the prosperity gap and New Zealand really will be a place where talent wants to live.
Tuesday, November 1, 2011
Tuesday, August 9, 2011
The Trust Factor
“The way to gain a good reputation is to endeavour to be what you desire to appear” – Socrates 469-399 BC.
2,500 years later Socrates still speaks the truth about the importance of practicing what you preach.
A good, sound reputation has multiple layers, but there are two key factors without which a good reputation cannot be; trust and good practice.
Trust and good practice have been familiar since primary school; nobody still believes the smart kid is smart after he is caught cheating on his spelling test and that remains true throughout life.
However, the consequences of cheating in later life have harsher consequences.
And while it is familiar, one extreme example that has preoccupied our news headlines in the past month suggests not everyone takes notice. That story has a moral which will be well reinforced by a reminder about how trust eventually breaks down due to bad practice – and the previously held reputation will never be regained.
This particular story started in May, when a court order was granted to allow investigation into allegations of phone hacking.
Then Sienna Miller was awarded $100,000 in reparation for having her private phone line illegally tapped by News of the World staff.
Illegal activity is never good practice.
But it gets worse. Shortly after it was revealed that News of the World also tapped into the voicemail box of a murdered girl and then began deleting her messages to create space for more, giving false hope to a family about their daughter being alive.
This revelation sparked a huge investigation into News of the World’s staff and practices. News of the World was closed down. People were arrested, including former CEO Rebekah Brooks. Statements were given and retracted. Rupert Murdoch had a foam pie launched at his face. Investigations are ongoing and the situation is not getting any prettier.
In fact, the situation is far past the point of being able to be rectified. Other publications run by Rupert Murdoch, such as the Daily and the Sunday Mirror, are feeling the sting of a lack of trust and have to prove that they are tightening their practices. News of the World will not be reopened. It could not even give money to charity in its final two issues; the charities approached turned down the money.
Not every breach of good practice is punished by a court trial. Nor is interfering in the case of a missing person forgivable even where a company has countless credits in their bank of credibility.
But what is illustrated is the way that extremely poor practice is like pressing the self destruct button.
Poor practice is a major cause of reputation ruin because today people become emotionally invested in the companies they choose to support.
It is rarely the case that the deciding factor of applying for a job is because it’s the only position of its kind. Nor that you fill the car at the closest petrol station. There is so much choice that those few extra cents or few extra miles are no longer enough as a point of difference. This is where the power of a good reputation can be seen.
So as Socrates said millennia ago, a good reputation can no longer be based on a projected image. It has to be backed by good practice.
Because a reputation is like a vase. It is able to be glued back together, but that just makes it all the more easily broken again.
2,500 years later Socrates still speaks the truth about the importance of practicing what you preach.
A good, sound reputation has multiple layers, but there are two key factors without which a good reputation cannot be; trust and good practice.
Trust and good practice have been familiar since primary school; nobody still believes the smart kid is smart after he is caught cheating on his spelling test and that remains true throughout life.
However, the consequences of cheating in later life have harsher consequences.
And while it is familiar, one extreme example that has preoccupied our news headlines in the past month suggests not everyone takes notice. That story has a moral which will be well reinforced by a reminder about how trust eventually breaks down due to bad practice – and the previously held reputation will never be regained.
This particular story started in May, when a court order was granted to allow investigation into allegations of phone hacking.
Then Sienna Miller was awarded $100,000 in reparation for having her private phone line illegally tapped by News of the World staff.
Illegal activity is never good practice.
But it gets worse. Shortly after it was revealed that News of the World also tapped into the voicemail box of a murdered girl and then began deleting her messages to create space for more, giving false hope to a family about their daughter being alive.
This revelation sparked a huge investigation into News of the World’s staff and practices. News of the World was closed down. People were arrested, including former CEO Rebekah Brooks. Statements were given and retracted. Rupert Murdoch had a foam pie launched at his face. Investigations are ongoing and the situation is not getting any prettier.
In fact, the situation is far past the point of being able to be rectified. Other publications run by Rupert Murdoch, such as the Daily and the Sunday Mirror, are feeling the sting of a lack of trust and have to prove that they are tightening their practices. News of the World will not be reopened. It could not even give money to charity in its final two issues; the charities approached turned down the money.
Not every breach of good practice is punished by a court trial. Nor is interfering in the case of a missing person forgivable even where a company has countless credits in their bank of credibility.
But what is illustrated is the way that extremely poor practice is like pressing the self destruct button.
Poor practice is a major cause of reputation ruin because today people become emotionally invested in the companies they choose to support.
It is rarely the case that the deciding factor of applying for a job is because it’s the only position of its kind. Nor that you fill the car at the closest petrol station. There is so much choice that those few extra cents or few extra miles are no longer enough as a point of difference. This is where the power of a good reputation can be seen.
So as Socrates said millennia ago, a good reputation can no longer be based on a projected image. It has to be backed by good practice.
Because a reputation is like a vase. It is able to be glued back together, but that just makes it all the more easily broken again.
Friday, April 1, 2011
Managing Customer Communications after a Natural Disaster
The Christchurch community has been in disarray following the recent earthquakes, with many grieving and some homeless. On top of community values, the lines of communication between companies and their customers are now more important than ever.
Customers grow to trust companies that offer relevant and timely information over sustained periods of time, backing up their words with action. It is the trusted, familiar companies that are relied upon after natural disasters - aftermaths are not appropriate times for commencing new relationships with stakeholders.
There's more than one list of crisis management commandments, but many are just expanded or situation specific versions of the five 'C's Model, where message strength is judged by how well it demonstrates concern, clarity, control, confidence, and competence.
Customers need to feel that a company is genuinely concerned for them and the message needs to be communicated simply and clearly – it is unlikely that a customer has time to decode complex information. It's about thinking how the customer will receive the message and what impression they will get from it. The medium needs to be accessible for the majority of people. For example, if the power is out, wired electronic media is not suitable. Lastly, companies need to have a clear idea of what is going on before making any statements. Nothing is to be gained from blame-placing or careless information-giving, nor is it reassuring if the customer perceives the company to have been completely unprepared. The information needs to be controlled and substantial to ensure the company is confident in its distribution.
The Department of Labour used this model to effectively manage customer communication following the Christchurch earthquakes and won an award for using newer technology and the available infrastructure by sending personalised texts and emails to customers with relevant advice and information. This effectively demonstrated concern in an easy to understand manner through an appropriate battery powered medium.
B&D Doors is another example of a company exercising customer communication and the five ‘C’s model. Garage door manufacturer B&D Doors’ Christchurch factory was damaged during the February earthquakes. Production was suspended during the week-long clean up, and during this time the company communicated frequently with its customers and employees. A Facebook page was created for employees to share the latest developments and for messages of support to be posted from friends and family members, as well as B&D’s Auckland-based employees to stay in touch with their Southern colleagues.
Even though B&D’s computer systems were down, daily email updates and pdf newsletters were sent to key customers advising of progress made and key milestones such as the recommencement of manufacturing and deliveries. Keeping key stakeholders updated was important, as they in turn had customers whose expectations needed to be met. The frequency and content of the communication gave important stakeholders the confidence that B&D was doing everything it could to restore operations as soon as possible. This was especially important as marketplace rumours about the damage to B&D’s Christchurch operation were grossly exaggerated. Feedback of B&D’s transparent and informative approach to customer communication has since been positive.
Where information is lacking and speculation left unchecked, the stakeholders do not get an accurate view of the situation and trust in a company weakens. Natural disasters call organisations to reach out to their stakeholders – their customers, employees and suppliers.
Keep on talking. Have a disaster communication plan ready. It is hard to adhere to the 5 ‘C’s model if caught completely unaware. After all, what good would a company be if it left you in the dark when you needed it most?
Customers grow to trust companies that offer relevant and timely information over sustained periods of time, backing up their words with action. It is the trusted, familiar companies that are relied upon after natural disasters - aftermaths are not appropriate times for commencing new relationships with stakeholders.
There's more than one list of crisis management commandments, but many are just expanded or situation specific versions of the five 'C's Model, where message strength is judged by how well it demonstrates concern, clarity, control, confidence, and competence.
Customers need to feel that a company is genuinely concerned for them and the message needs to be communicated simply and clearly – it is unlikely that a customer has time to decode complex information. It's about thinking how the customer will receive the message and what impression they will get from it. The medium needs to be accessible for the majority of people. For example, if the power is out, wired electronic media is not suitable. Lastly, companies need to have a clear idea of what is going on before making any statements. Nothing is to be gained from blame-placing or careless information-giving, nor is it reassuring if the customer perceives the company to have been completely unprepared. The information needs to be controlled and substantial to ensure the company is confident in its distribution.
The Department of Labour used this model to effectively manage customer communication following the Christchurch earthquakes and won an award for using newer technology and the available infrastructure by sending personalised texts and emails to customers with relevant advice and information. This effectively demonstrated concern in an easy to understand manner through an appropriate battery powered medium.
B&D Doors is another example of a company exercising customer communication and the five ‘C’s model. Garage door manufacturer B&D Doors’ Christchurch factory was damaged during the February earthquakes. Production was suspended during the week-long clean up, and during this time the company communicated frequently with its customers and employees. A Facebook page was created for employees to share the latest developments and for messages of support to be posted from friends and family members, as well as B&D’s Auckland-based employees to stay in touch with their Southern colleagues.
Even though B&D’s computer systems were down, daily email updates and pdf newsletters were sent to key customers advising of progress made and key milestones such as the recommencement of manufacturing and deliveries. Keeping key stakeholders updated was important, as they in turn had customers whose expectations needed to be met. The frequency and content of the communication gave important stakeholders the confidence that B&D was doing everything it could to restore operations as soon as possible. This was especially important as marketplace rumours about the damage to B&D’s Christchurch operation were grossly exaggerated. Feedback of B&D’s transparent and informative approach to customer communication has since been positive.
Where information is lacking and speculation left unchecked, the stakeholders do not get an accurate view of the situation and trust in a company weakens. Natural disasters call organisations to reach out to their stakeholders – their customers, employees and suppliers.
Keep on talking. Have a disaster communication plan ready. It is hard to adhere to the 5 ‘C’s model if caught completely unaware. After all, what good would a company be if it left you in the dark when you needed it most?
Monday, February 21, 2011
JML Welcomes ...
Eloise Gibson to the team. She’s blonde, she’s sassy and she means business! Eloise has previously worked as an environment and science reporter at the NZ Herald as well as an environmental and planning lawyer in NZ and London. Her favourite thing about JML so far (apart from the sunny stroll to work from her Symonds St apartment) is meeting JML’s different clients and learning how she can share and support their plans and activities. Eloise will be working with a range of JML clients across energy, technology and corporate services. Check out her mention in this week’s National Business Review: http://bit.ly/fHH57N.
Friday, February 11, 2011
Can journalism survive the digital revolution?
Almost 2,000 communication professionals from 46 European countries predict that press and media relations will develop predominantly into online media by 2013.
Already over one million people own an iPad and messages can be sent around the world in a matter of seconds. Inevitably predictions show that traditional press will become redundant as fast-moving messages and news can be sent across the interweb cheaply and instantly.
Paid newspapers are being taken over by their free online editions and journalists are bearing the brunt of change. The Pew Project for Excellence in Journalism, states that in America, 2,400 full-time professional newsroom jobs disappeared in 2007, and 5,900 more were lost in 2008.
Since the rise of the internet over 50 million blogs have appeared, documenting news, events and opinions. The majority of these blogs are written by everyday people rather than by paid journalists, many publishing news before it even makes its way to the newsroom.
So will quality journalism be taken over by the everyday joe blogger in this internet age?
Maybe not. Media tycoon, Rupert Murdoch in a recent interview stated “We are moving from newspapers to news brands.” While he acknowledged newspaper subscriptions were decreasing and online editions growing, he suggested the public would be more drawn to trustworthy news brands that would deliver quality information from trained journalists.
Last week, Murdoch ‘wowed’ the world with the launch of a digital ipad-only newspaper - ‘The Daily’. Subscribers pay an annual fee to receive an online newspaper that claims superiority over other free editions.
He claimed the digital newspaper would be able to pay for itself and gain revenue even though it sported the best journalists, merely by saving money on printing and distribution costs.
On top of that, symbiosis is becoming apparent between journalists and the web. Twitter is becoming an effective research tool for new stories. When Heathrow Airport cancelled its flights over Christmas, New Zealand journalists were able to find and interview stranded New Zealanders who tweeted about their situation.
Journalists commonly use facebook and twitter to publicise their stories seconds after they are published. Twitter especially has become a competitive port for the latest news and information where links to not only stories, but videos and news discussions can be opened.
So which is it? Will journalists be swallowed up in the internet age or adapt and thrive in new conditions?
Watch this space.
Already over one million people own an iPad and messages can be sent around the world in a matter of seconds. Inevitably predictions show that traditional press will become redundant as fast-moving messages and news can be sent across the interweb cheaply and instantly.
Paid newspapers are being taken over by their free online editions and journalists are bearing the brunt of change. The Pew Project for Excellence in Journalism, states that in America, 2,400 full-time professional newsroom jobs disappeared in 2007, and 5,900 more were lost in 2008.
Since the rise of the internet over 50 million blogs have appeared, documenting news, events and opinions. The majority of these blogs are written by everyday people rather than by paid journalists, many publishing news before it even makes its way to the newsroom.
So will quality journalism be taken over by the everyday joe blogger in this internet age?
Maybe not. Media tycoon, Rupert Murdoch in a recent interview stated “We are moving from newspapers to news brands.” While he acknowledged newspaper subscriptions were decreasing and online editions growing, he suggested the public would be more drawn to trustworthy news brands that would deliver quality information from trained journalists.
Last week, Murdoch ‘wowed’ the world with the launch of a digital ipad-only newspaper - ‘The Daily’. Subscribers pay an annual fee to receive an online newspaper that claims superiority over other free editions.
He claimed the digital newspaper would be able to pay for itself and gain revenue even though it sported the best journalists, merely by saving money on printing and distribution costs.
On top of that, symbiosis is becoming apparent between journalists and the web. Twitter is becoming an effective research tool for new stories. When Heathrow Airport cancelled its flights over Christmas, New Zealand journalists were able to find and interview stranded New Zealanders who tweeted about their situation.
Journalists commonly use facebook and twitter to publicise their stories seconds after they are published. Twitter especially has become a competitive port for the latest news and information where links to not only stories, but videos and news discussions can be opened.
So which is it? Will journalists be swallowed up in the internet age or adapt and thrive in new conditions?
Watch this space.
Friday, February 4, 2011
Baby Steps: From Copenhagen to Cancun
Compared to the media frenzy at Copenhagen in 2009, coverage of the Cancun climate negotiations last year was relatively low-key.
In fact the UK’s Guardian newspaper estimated that in the months around the conference the big US media (the New York Times, USA Today, the Wall Street Journal, the Washington Post, ABC, CBS, Fox, MSNBC and NBC ) ran fewer than 200 stories tackling climate change, fewer than the Guardian alone.
But is that a bad thing?
While Copenhagen collapsed under the weight of impossibly high standards, Cancun kicked off with very low expectations.
The negotiations seemed to fare better without the full glare of the world’s media, visits by high-ranking world leaders and do-or-die political rhetoric – all the things that were supposed to help Copenhagen succeed.
This time, with comparatively little fanfare, negotiators made some small but helpful steps.
To start with, the UN’s REDD programme, which helps rich and poor countries team up to save tropical forests, officially became part of negotiations. Countries such as Brazil, Congo and Indonesia will be able to receive aid for not burning or logging forests – a major contributor to carbon emissions.
Countries also worked on furthering a promise made at Copenhagen to create a climate fund to help poor countries cope with climate effects - although the details remain very sketchy.
Perhaps most significantly, tentative progress was made towards allowing countries to keep tabs on each others’ emissions cuts – the subject of a sub-negotiations facilitated by New Zealand’s Climate Change Negotiations Minister Tim Groser.
For the first time, China has agreed to submit its emissions savings to international scrutiny – a must-have for the United States, and a source of tension between the two big polluters (although again there is no detail on how this will happen).
Having been conditioned to expect a shambles, politicians and environmental groups proclaimed Cancun a modest success. It gave new life to the UN process, which was in danger of losing all credibility.
The hard issues have not gone away - country pledges are well below what scientists say is needed, and negotiators will find it hard to keeping deferring legally binding pledges much longer. Kyoto expires at the end of 2012, and as yet there is nothing to replace it. The longer an agreement takes, the more steeply emissions will need to fall.
In the meantime, there is plenty of space for companies to take action.
With political negotiations moving at snails’-pace, some of the world’s biggest companies (Kraft, Unilever) have staked out sustainability strategies in preparation for a greener world economy.
The fourth State of Green Business Report – an annual pulse-checking exercise by Greenbiz.com – concluded that a “sea change” was happening in business sustainability, albeit a very slow one.
The report found that out of 20 “green business” measures, green buildings, water efficiency and investment in green product development had progressed well in the United States last year. Companies did less well when it came to collecting e-waste, encouraging telecommuting and reducing the intensity of greenhouse gas emissions per dollar earned.
The report is worth a look if you are interested in what companies in the world’s biggest economy are doing – and what your company could do better.
You can download a free copy at www.greenbiz.com/blog/2011/02/01/state-green-business-2011
In fact the UK’s Guardian newspaper estimated that in the months around the conference the big US media (the New York Times, USA Today, the Wall Street Journal, the Washington Post, ABC, CBS, Fox, MSNBC and NBC ) ran fewer than 200 stories tackling climate change, fewer than the Guardian alone.
But is that a bad thing?
While Copenhagen collapsed under the weight of impossibly high standards, Cancun kicked off with very low expectations.
The negotiations seemed to fare better without the full glare of the world’s media, visits by high-ranking world leaders and do-or-die political rhetoric – all the things that were supposed to help Copenhagen succeed.
This time, with comparatively little fanfare, negotiators made some small but helpful steps.
To start with, the UN’s REDD programme, which helps rich and poor countries team up to save tropical forests, officially became part of negotiations. Countries such as Brazil, Congo and Indonesia will be able to receive aid for not burning or logging forests – a major contributor to carbon emissions.
Countries also worked on furthering a promise made at Copenhagen to create a climate fund to help poor countries cope with climate effects - although the details remain very sketchy.
Perhaps most significantly, tentative progress was made towards allowing countries to keep tabs on each others’ emissions cuts – the subject of a sub-negotiations facilitated by New Zealand’s Climate Change Negotiations Minister Tim Groser.
For the first time, China has agreed to submit its emissions savings to international scrutiny – a must-have for the United States, and a source of tension between the two big polluters (although again there is no detail on how this will happen).
Having been conditioned to expect a shambles, politicians and environmental groups proclaimed Cancun a modest success. It gave new life to the UN process, which was in danger of losing all credibility.
The hard issues have not gone away - country pledges are well below what scientists say is needed, and negotiators will find it hard to keeping deferring legally binding pledges much longer. Kyoto expires at the end of 2012, and as yet there is nothing to replace it. The longer an agreement takes, the more steeply emissions will need to fall.
In the meantime, there is plenty of space for companies to take action.
With political negotiations moving at snails’-pace, some of the world’s biggest companies (Kraft, Unilever) have staked out sustainability strategies in preparation for a greener world economy.
The fourth State of Green Business Report – an annual pulse-checking exercise by Greenbiz.com – concluded that a “sea change” was happening in business sustainability, albeit a very slow one.
The report found that out of 20 “green business” measures, green buildings, water efficiency and investment in green product development had progressed well in the United States last year. Companies did less well when it came to collecting e-waste, encouraging telecommuting and reducing the intensity of greenhouse gas emissions per dollar earned.
The report is worth a look if you are interested in what companies in the world’s biggest economy are doing – and what your company could do better.
You can download a free copy at www.greenbiz.com/blog/2011/02/01/state-green-business-2011
Tuesday, November 23, 2010
Social Media: How to manage your online presence
Social media has transformed the public relations world, demanding new skills and creating new opportunities. Social media not only provides a platform for a more personal and direct relationship between brand and audience, but also opens up the boundaries for external influence in products and services.
While it initially looks impressive for a company portfolio to sport a blog, Twitter account and Facebook page, an organisation must ensure social media is used to enhance reputation rather than undermine it.
Diving into social media without any plans or guidelines can be risky for a major corporate. Many organisations are guilty of setting up grandiose social media sites then leaving them static and ignored - allowing abuse and misuse from the active online audience. Others see no value in the influence of social media users and miss out on resolving conflict while still in its early stages. As a result, social media has become a place for consumers to express their opinions and gather wide interest and support in their endeavours – especially against large corporations.
BP learnt the power of social media during its oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico earlier this year. On Facebook alone, over 16.5 million people publicly declared that they were either angry or they were going to boycott the corporation.
So too did Nestlé. when Greenpeace UK launched a social media protest about the use of palm oil in its Kit Kat chocolate bars, leading to the brand promising to use only certified sustainable palm oil by 2015.
Both situations saw large and previously considered indestructible organisations feel major effects due to the power of people being able to gang up online.
Social media can also be effectively used to great effect to increase the reputation and popularity of an organisation.
Auckland’s Giapo is testament to the positive use of social media. Since first becoming active online in January 2009, the ice cream store has almost 13,000 friends on Facebook and 4,000 on Twitter. The store encourages its customers to become active online by incorporating public suggestions into new ice cream flavours and instantly replying when customers talk online about their experiences at the store. Giapo displays large screens broadcasting their live Facebook, Twitter and blog pages inside their store and offers customers free wireless internet so they can write and see their own comments at the store.
Social media is an effective way to establish a two-way conversation and friendship between organisation and audience. While it is frequently misused, social media can strengthen relationships and loyalties in ways that would be impossible otherwise.
Organisations that use social media must establish a regularly monitored page with a solid network of followers so in times of crisis, the organisation can speak directly with their audience and solve the issue.
So how will your company make the most of social media?
For more on the topic check out this essay from Malcolm Gladwell of The New Yorker:
http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2010/10/04/101004fa_fact_gladwell
While it initially looks impressive for a company portfolio to sport a blog, Twitter account and Facebook page, an organisation must ensure social media is used to enhance reputation rather than undermine it.
Diving into social media without any plans or guidelines can be risky for a major corporate. Many organisations are guilty of setting up grandiose social media sites then leaving them static and ignored - allowing abuse and misuse from the active online audience. Others see no value in the influence of social media users and miss out on resolving conflict while still in its early stages. As a result, social media has become a place for consumers to express their opinions and gather wide interest and support in their endeavours – especially against large corporations.
BP learnt the power of social media during its oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico earlier this year. On Facebook alone, over 16.5 million people publicly declared that they were either angry or they were going to boycott the corporation.
So too did Nestlé. when Greenpeace UK launched a social media protest about the use of palm oil in its Kit Kat chocolate bars, leading to the brand promising to use only certified sustainable palm oil by 2015.
Both situations saw large and previously considered indestructible organisations feel major effects due to the power of people being able to gang up online.
Social media can also be effectively used to great effect to increase the reputation and popularity of an organisation.
Auckland’s Giapo is testament to the positive use of social media. Since first becoming active online in January 2009, the ice cream store has almost 13,000 friends on Facebook and 4,000 on Twitter. The store encourages its customers to become active online by incorporating public suggestions into new ice cream flavours and instantly replying when customers talk online about their experiences at the store. Giapo displays large screens broadcasting their live Facebook, Twitter and blog pages inside their store and offers customers free wireless internet so they can write and see their own comments at the store.
Social media is an effective way to establish a two-way conversation and friendship between organisation and audience. While it is frequently misused, social media can strengthen relationships and loyalties in ways that would be impossible otherwise.
Organisations that use social media must establish a regularly monitored page with a solid network of followers so in times of crisis, the organisation can speak directly with their audience and solve the issue.
So how will your company make the most of social media?
For more on the topic check out this essay from Malcolm Gladwell of The New Yorker:
http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2010/10/04/101004fa_fact_gladwell
Thursday, September 30, 2010
Measuring PR
Effective public relations practitioners are able to demonstrate their achievements in a language their clients understand. There are several methods of measuring effectiveness. Similar to a trip to your favourite restaurant, the ‘menu of measurement’ is vast, and public relations practitioners must select the method of measurement most relevant to their clients’ communication objectives.
First up on the menu is Advertising Value Equivalent (AVE). This technique measures PR by the amount of media space generated. The physical size of the news piece multiplies the advertising rate card while reflecting the credibility of the particular news source. The resulting dollar value is the AVE.
While clients can appreciate the taste of AVE, it is falling out of favour. In fact, PRINZ’s Paul Dryden has said “AVE [is] flawed and damaging to public relations’ drive to professionalism and probably even unethical because it is so misleading in presenting an indicator of success to the organisation or client.”
The next choice uses goals or SMART objectives that are specific, measurable, achievable, realistic and timely. In order to measure the success of a campaign, all one needs to do is evaluate the results against the campaign’s initial goals such as the quantity and quality of the media coverage.
While SMART objectives appear simple and practical solutions, the reality is, they too fall short. The media is made of a complex range of stories. A story must be weighted depending on characteristics such as tone, key messages, accuracy, comprehension; action generated and source credibility to really measure its success.
For example, often the objective of public relations is to not generate media coverage, so if an unreliable source published the story, would it be seen as objective failure? Also, could the coverage still be counted as meeting the measured objective if it was written in a negative tone?
Next up is the chef’s special: PRINZ has developed six golden rules for media and PR measurement. These recognise that unlike AVE, the quality of information is much more valuable than its quantity. PRINZ suggest PR is to be measured by its outputs, out-takes and outcomes. In other words, menu option three is the combination of AVE, a measure of target reach or audience awareness and the actual behavioural, attitude and perceptive changes resulting from the campaign.
On top of this, PRINZ’s Catherine Arrow states that this process has become a lot more complex with the growth of social media and online tracking, opening up a whole new world for publishing and collecting PR information.
In a perfect world effective PR measurement would evaluate results by comparing pre-campaign and post-campaign research results. Realistically however many organisations simply don’t have the budget for this research and post analysis and would rather invest in more PR activity.
Overall, while PR influences many people, it takes effort and time to measure its results. Simply appearing in the news media is no longer the only way to convey an organisation’s messages to its publics. Further research is needed to measure not just the initial coverage but also the behavioural changes, relationships built and audience perception and attention.
If that is what you wish to order.
First up on the menu is Advertising Value Equivalent (AVE). This technique measures PR by the amount of media space generated. The physical size of the news piece multiplies the advertising rate card while reflecting the credibility of the particular news source. The resulting dollar value is the AVE.
While clients can appreciate the taste of AVE, it is falling out of favour. In fact, PRINZ’s Paul Dryden has said “AVE [is] flawed and damaging to public relations’ drive to professionalism and probably even unethical because it is so misleading in presenting an indicator of success to the organisation or client.”
The next choice uses goals or SMART objectives that are specific, measurable, achievable, realistic and timely. In order to measure the success of a campaign, all one needs to do is evaluate the results against the campaign’s initial goals such as the quantity and quality of the media coverage.
While SMART objectives appear simple and practical solutions, the reality is, they too fall short. The media is made of a complex range of stories. A story must be weighted depending on characteristics such as tone, key messages, accuracy, comprehension; action generated and source credibility to really measure its success.
For example, often the objective of public relations is to not generate media coverage, so if an unreliable source published the story, would it be seen as objective failure? Also, could the coverage still be counted as meeting the measured objective if it was written in a negative tone?
Next up is the chef’s special: PRINZ has developed six golden rules for media and PR measurement. These recognise that unlike AVE, the quality of information is much more valuable than its quantity. PRINZ suggest PR is to be measured by its outputs, out-takes and outcomes. In other words, menu option three is the combination of AVE, a measure of target reach or audience awareness and the actual behavioural, attitude and perceptive changes resulting from the campaign.
On top of this, PRINZ’s Catherine Arrow states that this process has become a lot more complex with the growth of social media and online tracking, opening up a whole new world for publishing and collecting PR information.
In a perfect world effective PR measurement would evaluate results by comparing pre-campaign and post-campaign research results. Realistically however many organisations simply don’t have the budget for this research and post analysis and would rather invest in more PR activity.
Overall, while PR influences many people, it takes effort and time to measure its results. Simply appearing in the news media is no longer the only way to convey an organisation’s messages to its publics. Further research is needed to measure not just the initial coverage but also the behavioural changes, relationships built and audience perception and attention.
If that is what you wish to order.
Wednesday, August 18, 2010
Investor Relations - Changing Landscape, Changing Expectations
New technology, consumer expectation and a changing reporting environment are changing the world of investor relations.
Recently, the obligation of a company to communicate with its shareholders was mainly seen in annual and interim reports.
With the 2007 ‘opt out’ amendments to 1993’s Financial Reporting Act, companies no longer have to send stakeholders financial reports unless they are requested.
While some companies have embraced the chance to better manage print costs, others have started to completely rewrite the manner of company-stakeholder communication.
A new trend is seeing many choosing to go above and beyond compliance to build and strengthen relationships with their investors.
In addition to financial reports, online presence opens up a whole new range of instant communication techniques that have never been used before.
Recent changes to financial reporting standards have made financial statement disclosures more complex. Many organisations are responding to this increased complexity by publishing concise annual reports containing easily understood information and a minimum of financials. This short form report is supplemented by the more detailed, traditional annual report, available on request.
Stakeholders have unlimited access to current data, downloadable financials, reports and presentations as well as a 24/7 personalised access for a range of purposes such as online voting and giving feedback.
Due to the ‘I want it now’ nature of modern society, many news reporters and investors are increasingly expecting companies to supply up to the minute, clear and timely information. Several companies now combat this by encouraging subscriptions to weekly email reports and direct RSS feeds.
A compliance-plus attitude to investor relations not only makes the company attractive to potential investors, but also reinforces relationships with existing debt and equity investors. This has caused a major divide between the companies who address old demand and the ones who run the extra mile.
Success is now found in the interlinking of necessary information with its most effective medium so that different stakeholders have easy access to any information they require.
Overall, traditional methods of investor relations have been taken over by new ideas and methods. New technological opportunities along with the instantaneous expectations of modern society are causing many developments that are strengthening relationships and frequenting company-shareholder communication.
To keep above competitors, companies must now strive to communicate with their investors in new and creative ways.
Now, to experience the full potential of investor relations!
Recently, the obligation of a company to communicate with its shareholders was mainly seen in annual and interim reports.
With the 2007 ‘opt out’ amendments to 1993’s Financial Reporting Act, companies no longer have to send stakeholders financial reports unless they are requested.
While some companies have embraced the chance to better manage print costs, others have started to completely rewrite the manner of company-stakeholder communication.
A new trend is seeing many choosing to go above and beyond compliance to build and strengthen relationships with their investors.
In addition to financial reports, online presence opens up a whole new range of instant communication techniques that have never been used before.
Recent changes to financial reporting standards have made financial statement disclosures more complex. Many organisations are responding to this increased complexity by publishing concise annual reports containing easily understood information and a minimum of financials. This short form report is supplemented by the more detailed, traditional annual report, available on request.
Stakeholders have unlimited access to current data, downloadable financials, reports and presentations as well as a 24/7 personalised access for a range of purposes such as online voting and giving feedback.
Due to the ‘I want it now’ nature of modern society, many news reporters and investors are increasingly expecting companies to supply up to the minute, clear and timely information. Several companies now combat this by encouraging subscriptions to weekly email reports and direct RSS feeds.
A compliance-plus attitude to investor relations not only makes the company attractive to potential investors, but also reinforces relationships with existing debt and equity investors. This has caused a major divide between the companies who address old demand and the ones who run the extra mile.
Success is now found in the interlinking of necessary information with its most effective medium so that different stakeholders have easy access to any information they require.
Overall, traditional methods of investor relations have been taken over by new ideas and methods. New technological opportunities along with the instantaneous expectations of modern society are causing many developments that are strengthening relationships and frequenting company-shareholder communication.
To keep above competitors, companies must now strive to communicate with their investors in new and creative ways.
Now, to experience the full potential of investor relations!
Wednesday, July 7, 2010
PR and Sponsorship – finding the right fit
The practice of corporate sponsorship is becoming more like a Cinderella story than ever before.
Companies are today’s Prince Charming; increasingly struggling to find the Cinderella who perfectly fits their glass slipper.
In the past, companies would simply invest in a club, team, charity, cause or event and in return receive awareness, corporate social responsibility kudos, target audience engagement and newsworthiness.
Everything was very simple and easily defined.
Since the days of ‘old school’ communications, sponsorship is a field that has developed dramatically. Now, the consumer and technological world is more complicated and returns on investment invariably impact sponsorship decisions.
Not only is it more difficult for a brand to find its perfect fit, but also a major issue is ensuring the sponsorship is not overshadowed or surpassed by other brands and initiatives.
Looking at the FIFA World Cup, adidas reigned as partner and key sponsor of the international soccer competition investing tens of millions of dollars in sponsorship for over 30 years. However this year its competitor, Nike, incorporated successful guerrilla marketing techniques and social media initiatives gaining the attention and market share of sports fans and consumers for a fraction of the sponsorship spend by adidas.
Similarly, major competition has already arisen around sponsorship for the London 2012 Olympics.
Companies must also ensure a sponsorship is strategically focused at every level. That means it must be integrated into advertising and marketing, staff engagement and sales promotion strategies, to have any chance of gaining the return that used to be so easily given.
Leverage has also become a main factor in modern sponsorships. Some would argue leverage is even more important than the sponsorship itself, some companies spending up to 3 times the investment on letting their target publics know about the sponsorship.
Companies must also work hard to bring their sponsorships to life rather than merely funding and reaping the benefits.
More often than not, this entails telling a story that links the values and cultures of the company to the sponsored organisation. If there is no ‘story’ that lets audiences understand the link and association, often a sponsorship will not return the value invested.
Sponsorship should be a part of every communication toolkit but for it to work effectively companies need to think more carefully about how, why and who they are aligning themselves and their money with.
As they say, if the slipper fits then wear it!
Companies are today’s Prince Charming; increasingly struggling to find the Cinderella who perfectly fits their glass slipper.
In the past, companies would simply invest in a club, team, charity, cause or event and in return receive awareness, corporate social responsibility kudos, target audience engagement and newsworthiness.
Everything was very simple and easily defined.
Since the days of ‘old school’ communications, sponsorship is a field that has developed dramatically. Now, the consumer and technological world is more complicated and returns on investment invariably impact sponsorship decisions.
Not only is it more difficult for a brand to find its perfect fit, but also a major issue is ensuring the sponsorship is not overshadowed or surpassed by other brands and initiatives.
Looking at the FIFA World Cup, adidas reigned as partner and key sponsor of the international soccer competition investing tens of millions of dollars in sponsorship for over 30 years. However this year its competitor, Nike, incorporated successful guerrilla marketing techniques and social media initiatives gaining the attention and market share of sports fans and consumers for a fraction of the sponsorship spend by adidas.
Similarly, major competition has already arisen around sponsorship for the London 2012 Olympics.
Companies must also ensure a sponsorship is strategically focused at every level. That means it must be integrated into advertising and marketing, staff engagement and sales promotion strategies, to have any chance of gaining the return that used to be so easily given.
Leverage has also become a main factor in modern sponsorships. Some would argue leverage is even more important than the sponsorship itself, some companies spending up to 3 times the investment on letting their target publics know about the sponsorship.
Companies must also work hard to bring their sponsorships to life rather than merely funding and reaping the benefits.
More often than not, this entails telling a story that links the values and cultures of the company to the sponsored organisation. If there is no ‘story’ that lets audiences understand the link and association, often a sponsorship will not return the value invested.
Sponsorship should be a part of every communication toolkit but for it to work effectively companies need to think more carefully about how, why and who they are aligning themselves and their money with.
As they say, if the slipper fits then wear it!
Monday, June 21, 2010
JML to Support 2010-2011 Velux 5 Oceans Race
Building on its sporting PR credentials, JML Communications has been appointed as NZ PR support for the eighth edition of the Velux 5 Oceans yacht race.
The race, established in 1982, sees solo sailors circumnavigate the planet in five stages, beginning on October 17. The French city of La Rochelle, will host the start and finish, and sailors will travel to:
1. Cape Town (7,500 nautical miles)
2. Wellington (7,000 nautical miles)
3. Salvador, Brazil ( 7,400 nautical miles)
4. Charleston, USA (4,000 nautical miles)
5. La Rochelle (3,600 nautical miles)
JML will provide support for the Wellington stop over, the first time New Zealand’s capital city has hosted the race, and the third time the race has returned to New Zealand.
In early 2009, JML provided PR advice and support for America’s Cup holders Alinghi when it competed in the Louis Vuitton Pacific Cup series, and also supported Chicago’s bid for the 2016 summer Olympics when bid cities visited New Zealand.
View Admedia's Fastline Article
The race, established in 1982, sees solo sailors circumnavigate the planet in five stages, beginning on October 17. The French city of La Rochelle, will host the start and finish, and sailors will travel to:
1. Cape Town (7,500 nautical miles)
2. Wellington (7,000 nautical miles)
3. Salvador, Brazil ( 7,400 nautical miles)
4. Charleston, USA (4,000 nautical miles)
5. La Rochelle (3,600 nautical miles)
JML will provide support for the Wellington stop over, the first time New Zealand’s capital city has hosted the race, and the third time the race has returned to New Zealand.
In early 2009, JML provided PR advice and support for America’s Cup holders Alinghi when it competed in the Louis Vuitton Pacific Cup series, and also supported Chicago’s bid for the 2016 summer Olympics when bid cities visited New Zealand.
View Admedia's Fastline Article
Friday, May 14, 2010
Journalism VS Public Relations: A war or a marriage of convenience?
There may be a war going on every day when you eat your toast and morning coffee.
As you open the pages of your newspaper and watch or listen to the news, you probably have no idea how the forces of public relations and journalism have collaborated and sometimes fought to bring you what is happening in the world.
Behind the news, who wins? Who loses? Who works hardest? You see the results every morning without noticing it.
So where does it all begin?
As early as 1926, the New York Times, found that on average, about 60% of all articles were from news releases.
A more recent example and closer to home, on May 10 the first three pages of the New Zealand Herald contained five PR generated stories out of eight.
From then, changes such as the development of technology and the internet have continued to increase the demand for the immediacy of news. With online newspapers, journalists have to work harder and faster to publish news as soon as it happens. Deadline pressure, dwindling newsrooms and round the clock bulletins make up an ever-growing news hole. Not surprisingly, PR becomes the conduit and ‘quick fix’ for journalists looking for prime sources and company spokespeople. They help the media better understand the issues that a company or individuals are trying to communicate in a short amount of time.
So why then are the PR practitioners the ‘bad guys’, ‘spin doctors’ or ‘flacks’?
Helen Sissons, who wrote the book Practical Journalism: How to write News (2006), summed up this attitude when she said “Public relations companies generate news releases as propaganda, not to help the poor overworked hacks.”
Ok, but is this true? Can’t the relationship be more of a marriage than a war?
It is really more akin to a symbiotic relationship where journalists and PR practitioners work together in close harmony and depend on each other. With the development of new technology and demand for more news, journalists and PR practitioners have a massive opportunity to collaborate to get the news to audiences and make a positive difference by giving people the news content they need. So rather than a war, why not use each other’s strengths and create, like a marriage, a partnership based on working together as a team and not opposing forces.
Then everyone, and especially the public reading their news with breakfast, wins.
As you open the pages of your newspaper and watch or listen to the news, you probably have no idea how the forces of public relations and journalism have collaborated and sometimes fought to bring you what is happening in the world.
Behind the news, who wins? Who loses? Who works hardest? You see the results every morning without noticing it.
So where does it all begin?
As early as 1926, the New York Times, found that on average, about 60% of all articles were from news releases.
A more recent example and closer to home, on May 10 the first three pages of the New Zealand Herald contained five PR generated stories out of eight.
From then, changes such as the development of technology and the internet have continued to increase the demand for the immediacy of news. With online newspapers, journalists have to work harder and faster to publish news as soon as it happens. Deadline pressure, dwindling newsrooms and round the clock bulletins make up an ever-growing news hole. Not surprisingly, PR becomes the conduit and ‘quick fix’ for journalists looking for prime sources and company spokespeople. They help the media better understand the issues that a company or individuals are trying to communicate in a short amount of time.
So why then are the PR practitioners the ‘bad guys’, ‘spin doctors’ or ‘flacks’?
Helen Sissons, who wrote the book Practical Journalism: How to write News (2006), summed up this attitude when she said “Public relations companies generate news releases as propaganda, not to help the poor overworked hacks.”
Ok, but is this true? Can’t the relationship be more of a marriage than a war?
It is really more akin to a symbiotic relationship where journalists and PR practitioners work together in close harmony and depend on each other. With the development of new technology and demand for more news, journalists and PR practitioners have a massive opportunity to collaborate to get the news to audiences and make a positive difference by giving people the news content they need. So rather than a war, why not use each other’s strengths and create, like a marriage, a partnership based on working together as a team and not opposing forces.
Then everyone, and especially the public reading their news with breakfast, wins.
Wednesday, March 10, 2010
When saying sorry is not enough
One of the first rules of good PR is “front up” – state the facts when things go wrong and apologise, instead of hiding unfavourable information that will eventually come out (and it always comes out!). We’ve seen this principle being heeded a lot recently, with several high profile figures saying sorry to an audience of national and international media scrums, some even shedding a few tears. But are these apologies genuine, or just strategies, excellently worded by the well paid PR staff standing in the background? And even if what is said is coming from the heart, is it enough or are actions needed to validate the words? We can find these answers in evaluating recent apologies.
The Telecom dramas continue as the communications giant battles ongoing XT network and other problems. Telecom has issued several apologies backed by compensation payouts, but there is still a call for greater visibility - we've seen Paul Reynolds but when is the board going to front up? So far Telecom has borne the blame, but recent media attention on Alcatel-Lucent’s involvement provides an opportunity for Telecom to share the load. Whether Telecom's reputation will survive the crisis is something that only time will tell.
Another ongoing case is Tiger Woods’ scandalous love life. The long-awaited sorry finally came and seemed genuine (although no questions please) in a exclusive press conference set to end the spotlight on the darker side of golf’s golden boy – until he finishes sex addiction rehab anyway. But no, there was more to come. An apology and sex addiction admission was appropriate, given the circumstances, and a stint in rehab demonstrated sincerity. However when one week later Tiger admitted to drug addiction allegations, the episode no longer seemed sincere. Maybe Tiger just likes rehab, but this latest confession has us wondering what's next in the pipeline for Mr Woods.
The tearful apology is always a good way to show sincerity, as displayed by two key figures lately. Firstly, Mr Toyoda of Toyota Motor Corp, who cried in front of international media, although the tears were more in gratitude for the loyalty of his staff than for the lives allegedly taken by Toyota's faults. Still, the apology that followed was heartfelt and most importantly, was supported by plans for change. Like Telecom, this is an apology to be judged by the ongoing actions of the organisation.
The second set of tears was in relation to the tragic death of Georgian Olympian Nodar Kumaritashvili. International Luge Federation Secretary General Svein Romstad’s speech was touching and about as appropriate as an internationally mediated statement responding to an unexpected and unnecessary death can be. But the issue lies more in the release of the accident footage. Fronting up is always a good thing, but can it be taken too far? Maybe the Olympic broadcasting service felt a responsibility to show the moment when the fastest ever luge track went horribly wrong, but the international outcry at the screening of the death proved that respect for the individual comes before public viewing rights in such a case. The video was pulled from CTV and most international broadcasters and copyright laws ensured its immediate removal from You Tube.
While an apology is never judged to be perfect, it is clear that when it comes to PR, honesty is definitely the best policy. What’s done to put things right in the aftermath of the crisis is what really counts.
The Telecom dramas continue as the communications giant battles ongoing XT network and other problems. Telecom has issued several apologies backed by compensation payouts, but there is still a call for greater visibility - we've seen Paul Reynolds but when is the board going to front up? So far Telecom has borne the blame, but recent media attention on Alcatel-Lucent’s involvement provides an opportunity for Telecom to share the load. Whether Telecom's reputation will survive the crisis is something that only time will tell.
Another ongoing case is Tiger Woods’ scandalous love life. The long-awaited sorry finally came and seemed genuine (although no questions please) in a exclusive press conference set to end the spotlight on the darker side of golf’s golden boy – until he finishes sex addiction rehab anyway. But no, there was more to come. An apology and sex addiction admission was appropriate, given the circumstances, and a stint in rehab demonstrated sincerity. However when one week later Tiger admitted to drug addiction allegations, the episode no longer seemed sincere. Maybe Tiger just likes rehab, but this latest confession has us wondering what's next in the pipeline for Mr Woods.
The tearful apology is always a good way to show sincerity, as displayed by two key figures lately. Firstly, Mr Toyoda of Toyota Motor Corp, who cried in front of international media, although the tears were more in gratitude for the loyalty of his staff than for the lives allegedly taken by Toyota's faults. Still, the apology that followed was heartfelt and most importantly, was supported by plans for change. Like Telecom, this is an apology to be judged by the ongoing actions of the organisation.
The second set of tears was in relation to the tragic death of Georgian Olympian Nodar Kumaritashvili. International Luge Federation Secretary General Svein Romstad’s speech was touching and about as appropriate as an internationally mediated statement responding to an unexpected and unnecessary death can be. But the issue lies more in the release of the accident footage. Fronting up is always a good thing, but can it be taken too far? Maybe the Olympic broadcasting service felt a responsibility to show the moment when the fastest ever luge track went horribly wrong, but the international outcry at the screening of the death proved that respect for the individual comes before public viewing rights in such a case. The video was pulled from CTV and most international broadcasters and copyright laws ensured its immediate removal from You Tube.
While an apology is never judged to be perfect, it is clear that when it comes to PR, honesty is definitely the best policy. What’s done to put things right in the aftermath of the crisis is what really counts.
Monday, February 22, 2010
How to Communicate Climate Change
After all the hype surrounding the Copenhagen climate convention and John Key's last-minute attendance, little has happened to affect the public or show any definite signs of change. So what then was the point of this meeting and what has it achieved? The convention resulted in the Copenhagen Accord (http://unfccc.int/resource/docs/2009/cop15/eng/l07.pdf).
Fifty-five countries, making up 80% of the world's greenhouse gas emissions, have pledged goals for their efforts in the matter.
The Accord outlines goals as part of the aim to stabilise greenhouse gas concentration in the atmosphere - a seemingly worthwhile cause given this has been identified as one of the obvious outcomes of pollution and causes for Climate Change. But is this cause for celebration?
Maybe not, as the Accord is not a legally binding document - rather it is "politically-binding". The strength, or weakness, of this term was summed up by noted PR practitioner, blogger and climate change expert, Kevin Grandia: "With all the long hours I've been putting into to covering these climate talks, I'm sure my wife is wishing our marriage was a politically binding agreement, as opposed to a legal one". Nevertheless some world leaders are speaking out in support of the Accord. On February 1, 2010, the NZ Minister of Climate Change Nick Smith called the Accord a "constructive step forward" which closely echoed a similarly supportive statement from Gordon Brown at 10 Downing Street.
So it seems for the moment that Copenhagen stands only as a symbol of a political agreement with little influence or action to motivate those that really matter - the mass of world public opinion. What then can PR do to communicate more clearly the reasons for understanding or supporting the convention?
This is difficult because Climate Change is inextricably based on scientific reasoning and like all good science there are reports on both sides of the debate. This debate hasn't been helped by a recent article suggesting that ExxonMobil has been funding anti-climate change think-tanks - http://www.nzherald.co.nz/world/news/article.cfm?c_id=2&objectid=10624726. In addition the public has also been scared by the prospect raised by critics, of the cost to consumers if governments enact climate change legisation such as the NZ Government's Emission Trading Scheme (ETS).
No wonder climate change remains controversial and the general doubt or disinterest will remain as long as there is a plethora of divided opinion. This is where the UN, in conjunction with world governments and the private sector, needs to take a much more definitive and concerted role in consistently communicating the positive effects of tackling climate change in ways that do not confuse or shock the public, but rather inform and encourage. PR plays a vital role in issuing the call to action on a global, national, regional and individual level.
It will not be science alone that will convince the public to support the Accord and initiatives such as the ETS - it is the job of professional communicators to inspire change through making scientific data more accessible and showing how many companies and people are already making practical changes, from using sustainable energy such as biofuels, to recyclable packaging, to public transport.
PR practitioners need not to convince their audience just of the strength of the Accord or even the validity of climate change; rather they only need to communicate the desire for change through real examples.
Fifty-five countries, making up 80% of the world's greenhouse gas emissions, have pledged goals for their efforts in the matter.
The Accord outlines goals as part of the aim to stabilise greenhouse gas concentration in the atmosphere - a seemingly worthwhile cause given this has been identified as one of the obvious outcomes of pollution and causes for Climate Change. But is this cause for celebration?
Maybe not, as the Accord is not a legally binding document - rather it is "politically-binding". The strength, or weakness, of this term was summed up by noted PR practitioner, blogger and climate change expert, Kevin Grandia: "With all the long hours I've been putting into to covering these climate talks, I'm sure my wife is wishing our marriage was a politically binding agreement, as opposed to a legal one". Nevertheless some world leaders are speaking out in support of the Accord. On February 1, 2010, the NZ Minister of Climate Change Nick Smith called the Accord a "constructive step forward" which closely echoed a similarly supportive statement from Gordon Brown at 10 Downing Street.
So it seems for the moment that Copenhagen stands only as a symbol of a political agreement with little influence or action to motivate those that really matter - the mass of world public opinion. What then can PR do to communicate more clearly the reasons for understanding or supporting the convention?
This is difficult because Climate Change is inextricably based on scientific reasoning and like all good science there are reports on both sides of the debate. This debate hasn't been helped by a recent article suggesting that ExxonMobil has been funding anti-climate change think-tanks - http://www.nzherald.co.nz/world/news/article.cfm?c_id=2&objectid=10624726. In addition the public has also been scared by the prospect raised by critics, of the cost to consumers if governments enact climate change legisation such as the NZ Government's Emission Trading Scheme (ETS).
No wonder climate change remains controversial and the general doubt or disinterest will remain as long as there is a plethora of divided opinion. This is where the UN, in conjunction with world governments and the private sector, needs to take a much more definitive and concerted role in consistently communicating the positive effects of tackling climate change in ways that do not confuse or shock the public, but rather inform and encourage. PR plays a vital role in issuing the call to action on a global, national, regional and individual level.
It will not be science alone that will convince the public to support the Accord and initiatives such as the ETS - it is the job of professional communicators to inspire change through making scientific data more accessible and showing how many companies and people are already making practical changes, from using sustainable energy such as biofuels, to recyclable packaging, to public transport.
PR practitioners need not to convince their audience just of the strength of the Accord or even the validity of climate change; rather they only need to communicate the desire for change through real examples.
Friday, February 19, 2010
Crisis Communications
Gone are the days when companies could respond to a crisis situation in time for television or newspaper deadlines. The rise of social media has seen several new channels added to stakeholder communications and they have already been tested by major NZ companies this year. One example is Vector’s response to customer’s affected by Transpower’s system fault which led to a blackout in much of Auckland. Vector’s website received thousands of hits in the first few hours of the outage, proving the popularity of online channels for fast information. But the event that stands out as 2010’s first catastrophic crisis, and most media-covered response, is without a doubt Telecom’s XT network crash which left thousands unable to use their mobile phones, even to call emergency services. Issues like these call for fast and effective communication to respond to the questions and demands of customers, shareholders, journalists and bloggers.
Given the speed of the internet in broadcasting news, and the immediate spread of this news across social networking sites like Twitter and Facebook, companies need to communicate instantaneously across several mediums. Traditional channels are still vital to provide further information but it is online media that is key for breaking news. While it is important for companies to communicate using TV and radio it is equally as important to “tweet” the information for the online audience, post online real-time updates on the corporate website and speak to online fan and consumer groups. This platform has increased the pressure and demand for a quick company response but is also incredibly valuable for agency or in-house practitioners dealing with a crisis. The capabilities of Twitter were displayed in Telecom’s use of the channel throughout its XT crisis, responding immediately to the initial crash as well as posting updates and apologies from the CEO. Online media allow organisations to target specific audiences and broadcasts facts during the time when rumours are only starting to emerge – dealing with the original crisis immediately as opposed to its amplified version on the six o’clock news.
The ability of the online audience to gain huge amounts of information at the click of a button means companies need to supply insightful information instead of a statement which skilfully avoids the facts using colourful jargon. Organisations are no longer able to use a “one size fits all” crisis management strategy, instead responding with a unique approach to each issue. Considering all this, practitioners need to be able to offer insight into the customer’s field as well as an understanding of both traditional and new media to respond effectively in crisis. The way a company responds to a crisis either credits or further damages its reputation – the loss of which could cost more than any compensation payout.
Given the speed of the internet in broadcasting news, and the immediate spread of this news across social networking sites like Twitter and Facebook, companies need to communicate instantaneously across several mediums. Traditional channels are still vital to provide further information but it is online media that is key for breaking news. While it is important for companies to communicate using TV and radio it is equally as important to “tweet” the information for the online audience, post online real-time updates on the corporate website and speak to online fan and consumer groups. This platform has increased the pressure and demand for a quick company response but is also incredibly valuable for agency or in-house practitioners dealing with a crisis. The capabilities of Twitter were displayed in Telecom’s use of the channel throughout its XT crisis, responding immediately to the initial crash as well as posting updates and apologies from the CEO. Online media allow organisations to target specific audiences and broadcasts facts during the time when rumours are only starting to emerge – dealing with the original crisis immediately as opposed to its amplified version on the six o’clock news.
The ability of the online audience to gain huge amounts of information at the click of a button means companies need to supply insightful information instead of a statement which skilfully avoids the facts using colourful jargon. Organisations are no longer able to use a “one size fits all” crisis management strategy, instead responding with a unique approach to each issue. Considering all this, practitioners need to be able to offer insight into the customer’s field as well as an understanding of both traditional and new media to respond effectively in crisis. The way a company responds to a crisis either credits or further damages its reputation – the loss of which could cost more than any compensation payout.
Saturday, October 10, 2009
Leading journalist and writer joins Auckland PR firm
AWARD WINNING JOURNALIST GERALDINE JOHNS JOINS JML COMMUNICATIONS
JML Communications is delighted to announce the appointment of Geraldine Johns as a senior consultant.
Geraldine has a wealth of journalism experience. For 10 years Geraldine worked at the New Zealand Herald as a medical and political reporter, and as chief reporter. Included in this period was a stint as a Fulbright fellow with the Baltimore Sun.
Geraldine’s appointment will add additional strengths to the team and expand the range of PR services offered to include the food and beverage sector. Geraldine has superb knowledge of New Zealand cuisine and wine as both a food editor and restaurant reviewer. Geraldine was the foundation restaurant reviewer for the New Zealand Herald’s Viva magazine. Over the years Geraldine has also looked after the food and restaurant review columns for Metro Magazine, the Sunday Star Times and Sunday Magazine, and more recently been a contributor to Bon Appetit and Cuisine Magazine, and feature writer for Heritage, Next and NZ Home magazines.
Geraldine will also provide senior communications counsel, having been a senior staff writer with the Sunday Star Times. There she covered both news and feature stories, as well as profiles, with her specialty areas being crime, politics and health. In addition, Geraldine has vast media knowledge and contacts from being a television reviewer for Nine to Noon and researcher for BBC World, Greenstone Pictures, Third Party Productions and Screentime Television. JML is delighted that Geraldine has joined us and she will be a welcome addition to the JML team and its clients.
JML Communications is delighted to announce the appointment of Geraldine Johns as a senior consultant.
Geraldine has a wealth of journalism experience. For 10 years Geraldine worked at the New Zealand Herald as a medical and political reporter, and as chief reporter. Included in this period was a stint as a Fulbright fellow with the Baltimore Sun.
Geraldine’s appointment will add additional strengths to the team and expand the range of PR services offered to include the food and beverage sector. Geraldine has superb knowledge of New Zealand cuisine and wine as both a food editor and restaurant reviewer. Geraldine was the foundation restaurant reviewer for the New Zealand Herald’s Viva magazine. Over the years Geraldine has also looked after the food and restaurant review columns for Metro Magazine, the Sunday Star Times and Sunday Magazine, and more recently been a contributor to Bon Appetit and Cuisine Magazine, and feature writer for Heritage, Next and NZ Home magazines.
Geraldine will also provide senior communications counsel, having been a senior staff writer with the Sunday Star Times. There she covered both news and feature stories, as well as profiles, with her specialty areas being crime, politics and health. In addition, Geraldine has vast media knowledge and contacts from being a television reviewer for Nine to Noon and researcher for BBC World, Greenstone Pictures, Third Party Productions and Screentime Television. JML is delighted that Geraldine has joined us and she will be a welcome addition to the JML team and its clients.
Wednesday, October 7, 2009
Digital Now New Zealand (www.digitalnownz.co.nz.)
The event was an overwhelming success with 270 attendees from leading companies, such as Air New Zealand, and a range of speakers who highlighted the important ways that marketers can use digital and social networking tools in the rapidly changing media landscape.
The quality of the speakers at DNNZ was superb including Justin Baird, Google’s Innovationist, who illustrated the importance of the Engagement Framework so that people are moving from a transformational framework of creating to actually nurturing ideas.
The convergence of brand and reputation is having a big impact on trust, as consumers now have the power themselves to create, distribute, and moderate all types of content in what is now an uncontrollable marketing environment. Not surprisingly, online retailers through to hotels now let their customers review their products and services.
As an example of how quickly things have changed, in the course of a few years we have now seen the rise of blogs not only as means to communicate, but also as trusted places where people get their news and base their opinions. Social networking sites such as facebook and twitter have become the new accepted ‘norm’ for connecting with friends, as well as a way to reach audiences in a personal way.
Nearly 80% of NetGeners under 28 regularly visit blogs, the most popular way to create and share content.
Corporate blogs are increasingly a tool that is being used and can humanise and help organisations address issues and consumer questions head on (i.e. by-passing the media) – these are more interesting than corporate websites, which won’t necessarily have a human voice.
Blogs are decentralising influence as the Net Generation speaks out – sources of power are being altered and the balance of power is being shifted away from more traditional sources. Not surprisingly, friends are more important than movie reviewers.
If you would like to know how to control your brand online please contact Julien Leys at JML Communications.
Messages for marketers using digital media
TVNZ
Social sites catch 90 percent of Kiwi web users
NZ Herald
Digital Media the way forward for Kiwi businesses
National Business Review
Speakers say it’s time to utilise digital realm
IT Brief
The quality of the speakers at DNNZ was superb including Justin Baird, Google’s Innovationist, who illustrated the importance of the Engagement Framework so that people are moving from a transformational framework of creating to actually nurturing ideas.
The convergence of brand and reputation is having a big impact on trust, as consumers now have the power themselves to create, distribute, and moderate all types of content in what is now an uncontrollable marketing environment. Not surprisingly, online retailers through to hotels now let their customers review their products and services.
As an example of how quickly things have changed, in the course of a few years we have now seen the rise of blogs not only as means to communicate, but also as trusted places where people get their news and base their opinions. Social networking sites such as facebook and twitter have become the new accepted ‘norm’ for connecting with friends, as well as a way to reach audiences in a personal way.
Nearly 80% of NetGeners under 28 regularly visit blogs, the most popular way to create and share content.
Corporate blogs are increasingly a tool that is being used and can humanise and help organisations address issues and consumer questions head on (i.e. by-passing the media) – these are more interesting than corporate websites, which won’t necessarily have a human voice.
Blogs are decentralising influence as the Net Generation speaks out – sources of power are being altered and the balance of power is being shifted away from more traditional sources. Not surprisingly, friends are more important than movie reviewers.
If you would like to know how to control your brand online please contact Julien Leys at JML Communications.
Messages for marketers using digital media
TVNZ
Social sites catch 90 percent of Kiwi web users
NZ Herald
Digital Media the way forward for Kiwi businesses
National Business Review
Speakers say it’s time to utilise digital realm
IT Brief
Thursday, August 27, 2009
DNNZ 09 Forum
The Digital Now New Zealand (DNNZ) ‘09 forum [www.digitalnownz.co.nz] at Sky City on Tuesday September 22 will look at how the online space is being transformed by digital technology, interactive media and collaboration. The essence of building brands is now about learning to let go rather than tightly controlling marketing messages. DNNZ will examine the tools and strategies at the heart of the collaborative digital arena. Today’s marketers and PR professionals need to harness the value of well-placed connections and maximise the value from ‘stakeholder webs’ and other online communities as commerce shifts from marketplace to marketspace.
Put together by Google, JML Communications (an affiliate of Hill & Knowlton), Y&R, G2, TNS and Research International DNNZ ’09 will help marketers and anyone involved in the digital space get the latest understanding and thoughts on the rapid change occurring in the digital landscape.
Please see www.digitalnownz.co.nz for more information.
Put together by Google, JML Communications (an affiliate of Hill & Knowlton), Y&R, G2, TNS and Research International DNNZ ’09 will help marketers and anyone involved in the digital space get the latest understanding and thoughts on the rapid change occurring in the digital landscape.
Please see www.digitalnownz.co.nz for more information.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)