Insights for Leaders Navigating
Visibility, Credibility, and Growth.
From media strategy to reputation management, we explore the trends shaping public perception and share the approaches that drive measurable results for growing brands.
Last week I was trying to make plans with a friend and suggested he “ping me” when he had a better sense of his schedule.
“What’s ping?” he asked. “Is that a new app or something?”
That’s when it hit me. I had become a corporate buzzword abuser.
I “circle back” with reporters. We strive to “move the needle” for our clients. We “disrupt.” We follow “unicorns.” We gauge “bandwidth” and “extra cycles” that can be dedicated to projects.
Exhale. My name is Beth, and I blurt out meaningless jargon to my friends without even realizing it.
In the tech and startup communities, it’s almost impossible not to weave corporate buzzwords or acronyms into everyday conversations. It’s just how we talk and write. And this in and of itself isn’t necessarily a bad thing; every industry has its own language and specific phrases that only insiders will understand.
Buzzwords as a means to build community
As a 2014 article in The Atlantic (“The Origins of Office Speak”) states, “A well-placed buzzword is a great way to claim membership in a certain tribe.” The article offers a fascinating history of office speak, noting that in the 1950s and ‘60s, many American companies underwent several mergers and acquisitions, creating massive conglomerates. “This made it more difficult for workers to feel a connection to their companies,“ writes article author Emma Green.
The creation of a common language, or at least some frequently used buzzwords specific to a company or an industry, was designed (hopefully) to foster a more emotional connection for employees to their work and their workplaces. “In a workplace that’s fundamentally indifferent to your life and its meaning, office speak can help you figure out how you relate to your work—and how your work defines who you are,” writes Green.
Translating corporate jargon for the outside world
Industry jargon presents a unique challenge for PR, marketing and communications professionals. Trying to minimize, or at least translate, jargon for non-techies or other industry outsiders can create both the biggest headache and the biggest reward in our field.
If, as Green writes, office speak helps to define who you are, then industry jargon and buzzwords also help to define a company and what it does. Too often, however, the language that companies (and their PR teams) use to describe themselves mistakenly assumes that their target audiences know (1) who you are and (2) what you do. It’s easy to get caught up in the vernacular of your company and its industry, but when it comes time to talk to outsiders about it – including reporters, investors and other influencers – it’s time to simplify and speak as clearly and plainly as possible. Remember the days when companies had “customers” and not “end users”?
Last year a British PR agency made a list of the most annoying jargon phrases that PR professionals use with journalists. Hamish Thompson, the firm’s managing director recalls in The Drum, “A few years ago, I remember seeing a business describe itself as ‘a global leader in the adhesive labelling solutions sector’ and I thought, what you mean is ‘we sell stickers,’ which I think is better.”
Without proof or explanation, jargon is meaningless
It’s also important to back up your claims rather than rely on the convenience of generic buzzword-y descriptions like “groundbreaking.” In a highly entertaining anonymous post from The Guardian on PR jargon, the author states, “First, I doubt the product is anywhere near groundbreaking. Second, prove it.”
Saying a product is “scalable” or “robust” or “enterprise-grade” is all well and good, but companies need to back up those claims, especially when they’re being shared with journalists. It might seem cumbersome to explicitly reference a survey or report or statistic in a press release or blog post, but the reality is that if a reporter can’t find a source for your claims, you’re going to lose credibility fast.
What are your most-reviled buzzwords that you use in your industry? “Ping” me here and we can “take the conversation offline” if need be.
The local tech community will come together again next week for the annual GeekWire Summit to hear from leaders of known brands including Amazon, Microsoft, Starbucks and Zillow, as well as lesser known experts who are driving change through technology.
The conference agenda, which runs Monday from 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m. and Tuesday from 8:30 a.m. to 3 p.m., covers a wide range of technologies including artificial intelligence, driverless cars, cargo drones, robotics, mobile payments, innovations in cancer therapies, and the application of universal design.
Perhaps a reflection of the broader dialog taking place in the U.S., this year’s event includes stories of immigrant entrepreneurs, a Fireside Chat with Washington State Attorney General Bob Ferguson, and a panel focused on diversity and inclusion.
A crowd favorite includes the Inventions We Love, where local entrepreneurs share their latest gadgets, creations and devices. In past years this has included revolutionary bike helmet technology, home brewing solutions and internet-enabled remote pet feeders.
Tickets are still available – click here to register. If you’re going to be there, I’d welcome the opportunity to connect with you. Please reach out!
In the wake of the recent hurricanes, earthquakes and wildfires devastating communities worldwide, many businesses, government agencies and nonprofits are reflecting on their crises plans. Any business, at some point, will face some sort of public relations crisis and the response can either benefit or significantly damage the brand.
Aside from natural disasters, there is a wide variety of different types of crisis situations that a business can face such as technological failures, workplace violence, confrontation (boycotts, lawsuits), malevolence and organizational misdeeds, among others. Regardless of the situation, it’s a good practice to have a plan in place in the event of an emergency. Consider the following components when developing a crisis plan:
- Anticipate crises
Work to identify potential scenarios that could occur at your organization. In some cases, you will know a crisis will occur because you’re planning to create disruption, such as a major acquisition or employee layoffs. Consider outlining scenario action plans for anticipated crises, recognizing that the plans will serve as a framework because
specific circumstances of a given event will always drive the actions taken by the company.
- Communicate
In the event of an emergency, swift, accurate and controlled communication – delivered with transparency and sensitivity during the initial hours and days following the incident – is crucial. The tone for coverage around any issue is usually set by the first few stories that break within 24 hours following an incident. Responding quickly with accurate, factual information can help manage a story in a favorable direction.
- Establish roles and responsibilities
While each situation will involve unique facts and circumstances, it is important to have a general protocol in place before such an event occurs to ensure a swift and well-managed response. Components to consider when developing a protocol include:
o Identifying the appropriate crisis response team and establish a chain of command
o Assigning a lead spokesperson/spokespeople
o Communicating clear direction for employees, who may be contacted by media, about who is authorized to comment on the situation
o Disseminating approved messages and materials to key stakeholders
o Following up with key stakeholders, including the media, as more details are confirmed
- Managing media relations
Depending on the circumstance, issuing a statement to the press may apply. This statement could take shape as a media statement for newswire distribution, a press conference, or digital publication such as website and social media channels. Regardless of the delivery mechanism, developing template talking points and media responses will ensure effective information communication.
- Establish notification and monitoring systems
It is absolutely essential, pre-crisis, to establish notification systems that will allow you to rapidly reach your stakeholders using multiple modalities. If you use more than one modality to reach your stakeholders, the chances are much greater that the message will go through.
Intelligence gathering is an essential component of both crisis prevention and crisis response.
Knowing what’s being said about you on social media, in traditional media, by your employees, customers, and other stakeholders often allows you to catch a negative “trend” that, if unchecked, turns into a crisis. Likewise, monitoring feedback from all stakeholders during a crisis situation allows you to accurately adapt your strategy and tactics.
- Aftermath and analysis
In the week(s) following the incident, the crisis planning team should reconvene to review any new details that have surfaced about the incident and determine if additional outreach may be needed. Conducting an analysis of the particular scenario, process and execution will also identify adjustments that can be made to inform future crisis response efforts.
Effective and accurate communication with the media and external audiences following a serious incident or emergency can help build media and general public confidence that the company has responded in an appropriate manner. It is imperative that organizations be prepared to respond to an emergency or other serious incident with a communications plan that can be implemented quickly to minimize potential adverse effects.
We recently had a brainstorming session here at CPR and, not only was it really fun, we generated some good ideas. Despite its popularity, however, when I started researching this blog I found that many people find brainstorming to be a frustrating and fruitless process that fails to get the team’s creative juices flowing. The more I researched, the more I realized that the reason some people find brainstorming unproductive isn’t because brainstorming itself is ineffective, it’s because the method being used is.
Scientists have been studying idea generation for decades and have found that, in terms of generating original ideas, individuals perform better. Where the group really comes into play is evaluating and building on those initial thoughts. This deviates from the traditional brainstorming layout where you get a group of people together, present a problem, generate as many ideas and solutions as possible, don’t criticize initially, and build on the ideas that others throw out.
But traditional brainstorming can lead to a bigger problem – an idea called groupthink. Groupthink is a psychological phenomenon that happens when a large group of people decide to follow an idea, not because it is the best idea, but because it’s the most popular and they want to fit in. This goes hand-in-hand with another phenomenon that can happen during a brainstorm – idea convergence. This is when someone shares their idea and it affects the memory of the entire group to make them look at the problem through that same lens, cutting down on outside-the-box thinking that is the fuel for a good brainstorm. These phenomena combined generally mean that the more extroverted participants in the brainstorm will shout out an idea early on that the group can’t shake, even if it isn’t the optimal solution.
Luckily, these are easy to combat by simply having each one of the participants spend time generating ideas alone before going into the brainstorm. If everyone comes to the meeting with a list of as many ideas as possible, no matter how crazy, and presents them during the brainstorm, it will allow for more ideas to be shared and avoid early idea convergence. Then the team can work to build off each original idea until they find the best option. It might seem counter-intuitive, but the best way to work together is to work alone (at least at the beginning).
There are a lot of different ways you can implement this idea of combined individual and group work. One example is the stepladder technique. The topic or problem is presented to the entire group, then everyone leaves the room except for two people. They discuss the problem and attempt to arrive at a solution. After an allotted amount of time, a third person enters the room, and shares his or her ideas on the topic before the original pair shares their ideas. This continues until each member has rejoined the discussion and presented their individual thoughts.
Another popular method is the 6-3-5 method. This has six individuals sit in a room and write down three ideas around the topic and then they pass their ideas to the right and build off the ideas passed to them. After five rounds, everyone in the group has had a chance to see each original idea and add their input, and the group then gets together to evaluate each idea.
Both of these methods will lead to better brainstorming, but there are tons of other ways to do it. It is all about finding the right method for you and your team.
Once the pesky issue of stifled creativity is out of the way, brainstorming sessions can have a lot of benefits. It allows you to collect different viewpoints, encourages critical thinking, build up your team, and it can be a lot of fun! It is a great way to break up hours of individual labor and work together in a creative environment. Combining individual and group work is the best way to ensure that your brainstorming session is both successful and effective.
If you’d like to check out some additional articles on brainstorming, here are some great options:
• Five Tips for Effective Brainstorming
• 10 Longtime Brainstorming Techniques that Still Work
• Your Team Is Brainstorming All Wrong
My colleague Beth Mayer recently wrote about our experience at “Managing Yourself & Leading Others,” a professional development workshop we took through the Harvard Division of Continuing Development. Her post focused on the importance of flexing one’s leadership style and it was a part of the session that I found to be most helpful. However, another valuable part of the course was learning more about organizational culture and the importance of working effectively within the context and norms of the company.
Oftentimes when people think about corporate culture, they want to know what an environment is like. For Instance, sometimes people will ask what kind of culture does your organization have? Is it heads down all the time? How frequently do you meet as a team or have team lunches? These are valid questions, but culture is bigger than just the fun stuff.
Ed Schein, a former professor at the MIT Sloan School of Management, defines culture as “a pattern of basic assumptions, invented, discovered or developed by a given group, as it learns to cope with its problems of external adaptation and internal integration that worked well enough to be considered valid, and therefore is to be taught to new members as the correct way to perceive, think, and feel in relation to those problems.”
So let’s break this down and look at this definition using an example with our team.
For instance, at Communiqué PR, we have certain processes that we routinely follow when we receive a phone call or an email from a potential new client. This includes learning about the company’s business and communication objectives, and asking a host of other questions before moving to the next phase of developing a proposal. We consider this methodology to be valid because we have an excellent track record of winning new business. Therefore, when new members join the company or team, they are taught our process of approaching business development.
According to organizational development experts, the more thoroughly a person understands an organization’s culture, the more effective he or she can be. Research has also found that there are some common characteristics where groups form cultural norms. These include the following:
- Innovation and Risk Taking: Does the group have a high or low tolerance for innovation and risk?
- Attention to Detail: How much attention to detail is expected? Is this of high or low importance to the group?
- Outcome Versus Process Orientation: Does the group care more about steps to take or the outcome?
- People Orientation: Does the group care about people’s individual preferences?
- Team Orientation: Does work get done in teams or by individual contributors?
- Aggressiveness or Competitiveness: Does the group value competitiveness or is this frowned upon?
- Stability: Does the group have a preference for maintaining the status quo over growth?
When you’re leading a group or team — or interviewing to join a new company — you might want to think about your own biases in relation to the cultural norms. For instance, do you have a propensity to innovate and take risks? Do you have high or low attention to detail? Do you prefer more outcome-oriented work or process-oriented work?
One good way to getter a better understanding of your personality and preferences is to take the Myers-Briggs personality test. This will help you better understand your personal preferences and style so that you have a better understanding of how you get energized, how you take in information, how you come to conclusions and how you approach the outside world — including your coworkers. Different personality types have very different preferences.
Finally, in our class we discussed how leaders create strong cultures. Researchers have found they are often a function of the stability of the group, the length of time they’ve existed, the intensity of their learning experiences, how they learn and are rewarded for learning, and how the strength and clarity of assumptions by founders or leaders of the group help. Rewards for learning might include positive reinforcement or avoidance conditioning.
In what kind of culture do you thrive?
September typically marks the return to school for children all over the country, but earlier this summer I had the opportunity to pack up my notebooks and pencils and head off to Harvard for a leadership workshop with Communiqué PR’s management team.
The session, “Managing Yourself and Leading Others” was packed into a solid two days of case studies, live group discussions, role playing and, of course, marshmallows (but more on that later).
I’ve managed people for almost 10 years now and, like a lot of people, didn’t go through much formal training to do so. I’ve tried to base my management style on those managers who have really affected my professional and personal development – those I loved and learned from, and others who I learned from in far less positive ways.
Understanding Motivations: Good Days and Bad
Some of the most compelling and interesting exercises for me during the workshop involved taking the time to reflect on both my personal and professional motivations as a manager, and those of my team and organization.
To start things off, the instructor asked us to think back to a day when we came home from work feeling truly excited and fulfilled about our job. Similarly, we thought about days when we came home feeling a little beaten down and discouraged about work.
Some of us are motivated by money, titles or promotions, meaningful work, or a public acknowledgement of a job well done. When you think back on an awesome, inspiring day at work, what about it made it great? Do you know what motivates your team and employees?
Going through this exercise helped us to not only identify our own motivations but to consider those of the people we manage – understanding that can help us to adapt the way we manage and mentor them.
Which leads us to our next point…
Flex Your Leadership Style
Every manager is unique and will bring their own leadership style to an organization, but staying in your management “comfort zone” too frequently can be a drawback for you and those you manage. Managers need to use a variety of leadership styles depending on the business situation and the people or teams they are managing.
Some leadership styles are more authoritative and coercive, others more democratic or mentoring/coaching-focused. Part of our leadership styles comes from our personalities, our backgrounds, or the way we were managed previously. The reality is that none of these styles on their own are wrong, but focusing on one style too heavily can create challenges.
What works for a self-motivated, highly competent employee may not work with another that needs more development and coaching. In an emergency situation, a coercive style (“Do what I say!”) can be very effective, but it can also impact motivation long-term. An affiliative style, focused on team building, can increase morale, but has the potential to allow poor performance to go uncorrected. Daniel Goleman has identified six main leadership styles in this article from Harvard Business Review (registration required).
Goleman’s article underscores the importance of thinking outside our comfort zones as managers and adapting our preferred style based on the person and the situation. Being flexible to switching between styles, as the circumstances require, is an indication of both emotional intelligence and strong, adaptive leadership.
Don’t Eat the Marshmallow!
Then, as with all executive leadership seminars, we also discussed the power of marshmallows.
This stemmed from Walter Mischel’s work on impulse control and delayed gratification in the 1960s where he gave preschoolers a choice: You can have one marshmallow now, or wait a few minutes and then have two marshmallows. The results showed that those children able to wait for the second marshmallow (i.e., focused on long-term goals) were more successful later in life than those who immediately ate the first marshmallow (i.e., focused on short-term satisfaction).
As a manager – and a longtime PR agency employee – I found this analogy fascinating. Too often we focus on quick wins and short-term success that don’t connect to the bigger picture or objective. For our clients, we want to show value and results, especially early on in the engagement, but if those results don’t drive their businesses forward in a meaningful way, are they really worth it?
Perceived Versus Actual Rules
In another marshmallow-centric exercise, teams competed to build the tallest structure out of dry spaghetti sticks, masking tape and string that would support a single marshmallow (Spoiler alert: Marshmallows are surprisingly heavy!).
While this task seems ridiculous at first, it actually allowed our teams to put the workshop’s lessons into action. It presented an opportunity to collaborate quickly, understand each team member’s strengths and roles, test and re-test prototypes, and learn from those results.
For my group specifically, we learned the drawbacks of following perceived rules versus actual rules. Long story short, we assumed we couldn’t build the structure’s foundation in a certain way, and no one thought to ask the instructor or conduct competitive research to see what other groups were doing. We just kept plodding along assuming we were right. We lost the competition as a result.
The dangers of following perceived rules have huge repercussions when it comes to managing others and your own professional development. If you keep your head down, assuming you’re following the right path, you’re not guaranteed to succeed. There might be new and different paths to take, or even an escape ladder hiding in the corner that will take you to another destination entirely!
I realize it’s not always feasible to cross the country and head to Harvard for a two-day workshop, but I would highly recommend the power of external training for anyone who manages people, in any capacity. Getting outside of your day-to-day business routine and interacting with new people from vastly different backgrounds and professions was almost as helpful as the workshop’s lessons themselves.
What type of leadership or management training has been useful to you as a PR professional? Has any of it involved marshmallows? Tell us here, in the comments!