by Jaclyn White

In today’s economy, people are tightening the purse strings and buying the most inexpensive products possible: it’s every man for himself, right? Surprisingly, this is not necessarily true.

Edelman, one of the world’s leading independent public relations firms, has again sponsored the annual goodpurpose study. This study samples more than 6,000 people ages 18-64 from around the globe about consumer habits and thoughts. One interesting statistic from the study: 61 percent have purchased a brand that supports a good cause even if it wasn’t the cheapest brand.

The study uncovered many other interesting facts, such as 83 percent of those surveyed are willing to change consumption habits if it can make the world a better place to live. In a related matter, 63 percent are looking to brands and companies to make it easier for them to make a difference.

So what does this mean for companies today? When talking more in depth about the study, Mitch Markson, the CEO and president of Edelman goodpurpose, said that finding the right cause is very important. In order to really make cause marketing work, companies must “link the brand’s business purpose to an authentic higher social purpose and use consumer insights and research to understand what social purpose territories are right for your customers.” In other words, make sure that the purpose you are linking to your company is relatable and relevant to your customers.

Markson began the study three years ago in response to what he saw as a changing and evolving market. “I realized there was a shift in consumer values – a search for more meaning, desire to participate and personally make a difference on a variety of social issues – and recognized that brands were looking for new ways to differentiate in a more sustainable and meaningful way. As a professional working in branding and communications, I felt I could personally make a difference by using research, creativity and new channels of engagement to help brands connect more with consumers and do good at the same time.”

Companies need to look at what is now valuable to consumers. Although consumers may not be able to contribute as much financially as they could before the economic recession, they want to contribute in other ways. Having extravagant possessions is no longer a status symbol; it’s about making an effort to make the world a better place. Sixty-seven percent of those surveyed would rather drive a hybrid car than a luxury car, and 70 percent would prefer to live in an eco-friendly house rather than a large house.

Companies all over the country and the world are picking up on this trend, and it means a changing focus for PR professionals. General Mills, one of the largest producers of consumer products in the U.S., places a strong emphasis on corporate social responsibility. The majority of the focus of its corporate Web site is what General Mills is doing to help others, rather than on the actual products it offers.

General Mills even has a part of its company, Community Action, that is dedicated to addressing the needs of the community. It includes the General Mills Foundation, Brand Partnerships, Disaster Relief, Gift-Matching, International Giving, Hunger Relief, United Way and Volunteerism. General Mills says its goal is “to support innovative nonprofit organizations and programs that improve our headquarters and manufacturing communities, with a focus on youth nutrition and fitness, social services, education and arts and culture.”

A focus on social causes and responsibility is cropping up everywhere. The Corporate Responsibility Officer, a trade association for corporate responsibility professionals, is dedicated solely to highlighting and awarding good corporate responsibility practices. It recently published its list of “100 Best Corporate Citizens,” with Bristol Myers-Squibb, General Mills, IBM, Merk & Co. and HP making up the top five.

Cause marketing, which is seeing a recent increase in popularity, isn’t going anywhere, and it could mean good and different things for the PR world. “Before the global recession there was evidence we were moving in that direction. In the future, social purpose will become an established pillar of good brand behavior and good marketing in general,” said Markson.

In today’s competitive economy, having a cause is making or breaking the top companies. The focus in the PR world is subsequently changing as well, and there has never been a better time to educate oneself on social responsibility. Perhaps the PR industry can earn a little good PR for itself. It’s nice to focus on how companies are making the world a better place, rather than why their product is marginally better or why they really weren’t involved in "that" scandal.

by Meg Watson

During the past year, headlines have been filled with news of layoffs. According to the Layoff Tracker at Forbes.com, more than 600,000 Americans have been laid off since Nov. 1, 2008. The economic recession forced companies such as General Motors, Boeing and Eli Lilly & Co. to drastically reduce their workforces, leaving thousands of Americans without jobs.

Among the companies forced to downsize was Hyatt Hotels. Hyatt recently found itself in the midst of a PR nightmare when it outsourced the jobs of 98 housekeepers from three of its Boston area hotels. The housekeepers, who made $15 an hour, were asked to train some new employees who would fill in for them when they took vacation. Then, managers informed the housekeepers that they were being laid off and replaced by the workers they trained. The new workers were employees of a staffing agency, and made $8 an hour.

This situation sparked public criticism from many in the region. A hotel workers union, Local 26 of Unite Here, took up the cause of the fired housekeepers. The Boston Taxi Drivers Association also demonstrated their support for the fired workers by threatening to refuse customers traveling to and from Hyatt hotels in Boston. The PR firestorm climaxed when Massachusetts Gov. Deval Patrick threatened a government boycott of Hyatt Hotels unless the housekeepers were rehired.

How could Hyatt have better handled the necessary workforce reductions and prevented the damage to its reputation? Maureen Gleason is the vice president of operations at American Behavioral in Birmingham, Ala. She has extensive experience with downsizing events and offered her opinion on Hyatt‘s critical mistakes.

Gleason suggested that Hyatt should have first considered all alternative options to cut expenses. She also said Hyatt should have had outplacement and other services in place before the layoffs occurred so employees would not have felt so abandoned. Gleason said giving employees assistance in the first place would have prevented the bad publicity that plagued the company after news of the layoffs became public.

“When they finally realized they had a public relations nightmare on their hands, the damage was already done,” Gleason said. “Their additional efforts to assist the laid off workers were seen as weak attempts to put a happy face on a poorly handled event.”

In this economy where stories like Hyatt’s are a regular occurrence, PR professionals need to understand how to handle the delicate issue of company layoffs. Gleason stressed the importance of planning and said PR professionals must consider all aspects of the workforce reduction.

“Human Resources personnel, public relations staff, management and the Employee Assistance Program representative should collaborate on a plan to implement every step of the layoff to ensure that it is communicated in the most effective and dignified way possible,” Gleason said.

Robby Johnson, APR, is the marketing manager at Tuscaloosa-based The Westervelt Company and has experience communicating workforce reduction with several employers. Johnson said PR professionals should focus on their organization’s internal public communicating authentically during a period of layoffs. The loss of the workforce will doubtless have an effect on the employees who remain in the organization. Johnson said it is important to acknowledge that sense of loss and help rebuild morale.

“It would not be appropriate to have a lavish event to build morale, but there are a plethora of creative outlets which cost nothing yet contribute significantly to collaboration and rebuilding shared purpose and performance equity,” Johnson said.

Johnson also emphasized the need for transparency in communicating layoffs. He said PR practitioners should deliver measurable messages by referencing the finite reason for workforce reductions, such as a budget analysis or market-changing condition. Johnson also said PR practitioners should equip managers to deliver the news to affected employees.

“Working with HR to develop a FAQ or speaking points is where an ounce of prevention will exceed a pound of cure,” Johnson said. “Managers may not always have a lot of time to prepare for this sort of conversation, so equipping them will do much to make it easier for all parties by maintaining consistency of messaging.”

If Hyatt Hotels had taken steps to make downsizing easier for all parties, perhaps it would not have suffered such reputation damage. Had Hyatt’s PR staff been aware of the managers’ plans to outsource labor, they could have taken steps to ensure the workforce reductions were handled in a more ethical manner. Johnson advised PR practitioners to avoid Hyatt’s mistakes by seeking ethics input if faced with an ethical dilemma.

“A practitioner challenged with a scenario outside what they feel is an honest organizational position should seek ethics input from a trusted source, like PRSA’s Code of Ethics,” Johnson said.

As practitioners, our role is to ensure that unforeseen circumstances — such as a downfall in economy — do not destroy critical relationships with internal and external publics. Though little training is given to PR students for handling situations such as layoffs, PR practitioners should have a strategy in place in case their organizations are one day forced to downsize.

Photo by Niki Gautier

by Jessica Boyd

When you hear the words “spin doctor,” what image comes to mind? If you see the popular 90s music group The Spin Doctors, think again. Most people think about only one group of people: public relations professionals.

“Spin doctor” has almost become a synonym for “public relations professional.” The American public sees public relations as a way for its practitioners to spin the truth in order to boost their clients’ public image.

In a review for the book PR: A Persuasive Industry? Spin, Public Relations and the Shaping of the Modern Media, author Seth Brown said, “People tend to think that PR involves being manipulative and saying whatever is in the employer’s best interests.” He said the authors of the book view public relations as “amoral, a tool for good and evil purposes.”

Gini Dietrich, CEO of Arment Dietrich Inc. and author of “The Fight Against Destructive Spin” blog, gave her own definition of spin in the public relations world. She said, “People always refer to PR professionals as spin doctors, meaning they can take a client’s business and turn it into a newsworthy story that a reporter would want to write about, even if it means not telling the full truth.” According to Dietrich, public relations professionals are often lumped in with professions, such as used car salesmen, “because people believe we lie to tell our clients’ story.”

PR professionals are believed to spin the facts in a positive way in order to make headlines and gain press for their clients. Sometimes the “spin” is a simple omission of facts, but public relations professionals have been known to blatantly lie to protect their clients’ image.

“I did not have sexual relations with that woman.” Nine words ultimately defined former President Bill Clinton’s presidency and created one of the most complicated public relations crises in American history. President Clinton and his press squad continued to lie about the president’s infamous affair with his intern until the facts could no longer be ignored. The former president eventually came clean, but it was virtually forced after incriminating facts surfaced. Because of bad PR practices, Clinton’s public image has been forever tarnished.

Spin has a negative connotation, especially in the public relations field. But is spin always a negative practice?

Mike Cohen, executive vice president of Ackermann PR, has a somewhat different definition of spin doctor that removes the negative connotation. He said spin is simply trying to present the clients’ story and facts in the best way possible without lying. According to Cohen, honest spin in public relations is no different than a child explaining how he accidentally broke a vase: both the professional and the child present the facts in a way that will alleviate as much blame and criticism as possible.

Although he believes spin can be positive, Cohen also acknowledges unethical spinning practices. He said, “All we do is try and put a good face on facts. Now if anyone tries to make a bad thing sound like it’s really good — well, that can be a problem.”

Even if “good spin” does exist, public relations practitioners must continue to combat the lying associated with negative spin. This may seem like a daunting task, but there are some simple solutions to keep spin ethical and beneficial for clients.

Gini Dietrich combats negative spin through her blog “The Fight Against Destructive Spin." She explained that public relations practitioners should be firm with clients. She said, “It’s even more important to tell the truth and never lie, even if it means conflict or uncomfortable situations.” Dietrich maintained that the best policy for addressing the spin doctor label is honesty. She said, “If we all remember that it’s our job to tell the truth, not to do everything the client asks, eventually the label will go away.”

People may define spin in different ways, either positively or negatively, but most will agree on one thing: honesty is the best policy when addressing a client’s needs. If this policy is upheld, “spin doctor” and its negative connotation could be erased from PR vocabulary. Maybe then The Spin Doctors would no longer be confused with people who doctor dishonest behavior.

Graphic by Niki Gautier