|
11/8/2008 6:05 PM
The historic outcome of this week’s presidential election will have a tremendous impact on the nation and resonate in many corners of our society. One place where this impact very likely will be seen is on Capitol Hill as committees in the House and Senate develop hearing schedules on a broad group of regulatory and policy issues the new majority will seek to advance.
The anticipated expansion of regulatory change will likely include aggressive hearings on a wide range of topics that build on existing activities of the current Congress. For example, the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform alone has held dozens of hearings during the past year.
When I talked in an earlier blog about six situations that make communications training an imperative, one of them was delivering testimony before Congress – or other elected or regulatory bodies at the federal or state level. I’ve seldom met anyone who did not see the value in preparing for such encounters when they expected tough questioning, and particularly so when called by subpoena.
Though it may not be perceived as pleasant or desirable to testify before a regulatory or legislative forum, the most sensible approach to testimony, even when the issues are contentious, is to treat the process as an opportunity to express a point of view or deliver critical information that touches not only policy issues but also the organization’s own messages.
This is almost always complex and requires thorough preparation.
And while the preparation for a trip to the Hill is customarily guided by the general counsel and government relations team, over the years I’ve seen an increasing desire by the attorneys to bring in public relations professionals to assist with issues analysis from the reputational perspective, core message development, drafting of oral testimony and – of course -- communications training.
Which makes great sense, as the appearance of any witness before Congress has more public relations than policy impact and is more about framing an issue than fact finding.
If you are in an industry, business or organization that may be called to testify, here are five basic recommendations to help guide the process from an effective communications perspective.
Consider Your Audience. Work with professionals to understand the committee members who will be asking questions. Keep in mind, however, that both they and you will be responding to the needs of a larger audience – the public, known also as voters and consumers.
Know Your Key Messages. Understand that your witness will be speaking to one or more issues, but also representing the organization and its reputation. The organization’s messages should be paramount and mesh with issue-focused messages.
Listen Before, During and After. Research the issues and your messages with key audiences before a hearing to make sure messaging resonates. And then listen closely to committee members and address their concerns. Follow up with research to gauge the impact of the event.
Use the Right Tone. It’s not just what you say, it’s how you say it. Calm, comfortable, engaged and conciliatory – these qualities win over strident, angry, argumentative and ill-at-ease.
Prepare Testimony for the Ear. Submitted testimony may be long, detailed and intricate. Oral testimony, however, usually is under five minutes and must carry the day through effective presentation. Make sure the oral testimony is not just a short version of the written testimony, but a clear and compelling story line in the voice of your witness.
It goes without saying – but I will say it – that all these recommendations only come together in a session devoted to preparing a witness to present testimony and answer committee questions at a hearing. 10/13/2008 5:29 PM
About a dozen years ago I began to wonder what would happen if – or when -- the emerging power of the internet to flood the average online participant with a tsunami of voices, opinions, commentary and new visual and audio material of every description were to dominate traditional sources of credible information, particularly news outlets.
I was not alone or particularly early in my concern for these matters. Prominent internet personalities were already releasing rumor as news, creating havoc for some, consternation for others and angst for news people. Heretofore unheard-of web based gathering places were catering to affinity groups, creating echo chambers of opinion and marshaling support or opposition with astounding ease.
Where would public relations people go, I asked myself, when there were no clear sources of implied third party endorsement, no reporters who could be trusted to probe, ask tough questions, be skeptical about what people told them and produce balanced, coherent information and informed opinion? Moreover, what would become of those people – me, particularly – who work with key individuals from public and private sector organizations to help craft their information and points of view into clear, credible, persuasive communications?
In my most extreme moments, I wondered who would need well trained communicators and incisive messaging when every voice in a cacophonous open system was as important as just about every other voice?
More than a decade on, matters have – as we all know -- been clarified. The communications industry has thoroughly embraced the internet and its rich opportunities to have important conversations with the public, listen to a wide range of input and communicate through a vast and growing array of channels. The internet has changed the way we think about information exchange; it has further shrunk and flattened a world already hurtling in that direction.
It has not, however, replaced the individual communicator – the person who represents an organization to the public or stakeholder groups. One reason is because the internet has actually expanded the number of news or quasi-news organizations, almost all of which combine some level of traditional news gathering with internet-enabled conversations with readers and viewers.
But the bigger picture is that the internet has ignited an explosion of on-line opportunities such as podcasts, blogs, video blogs, discussion boards, social networking sites and video sharing sites that are open to all. Organizations ranging from the most staid to the most internet-ready are involved in some or all of these.
What does this mean for individual communicators and the organizations they represent? Based on what I see in my work with clients, here are two important issues all companies should consider.
First, I think they must redouble their efforts to achieve clarity, reasonable perspective, powerful expression, and points of view supported by data and facts – everything we work so diligently on with our clients – because the need for these qualities, often in short supply in the digital universe, is greater than ever.
Second, the plethora of new on-line opportunities, combined with the need to enter into the digital dialogue through channels the organization does not own, requires the preparation of more “individual voices” to handle the increased requirement for engagement.
This means preparing many more people to communicate from a common set of facts and points of view and with one mission – precisely the core work of communications training.
So in answer to the question in my title above, the individual communicator will grow and thrive and there will be many more of them, entering public conversation in many more online channels. It’s a new imperative for our age. 8/25/2008 2:42 PM
I said in my last post I would talk about five general situations in which I had found training to be an imperative. I had been thinking about five, but when I sat down to write, a sixth emerged for the list.
To be clear, the core training of public relations is media training, and its most obvious use is to prepare people to be interviewed by the press. PR and public affairs professionals have come to see media training as necessary preparation for interviews. But I’ve spent two decades working with insightful colleagues and clients who have looked at communications training from a broader perspective to solve communications problems and address issues. What has emerged is a much more nuanced approach to viewing what I’ve called the communications training imperative.
Please keep in mind that this is not an exhaustive list, and if someone has examples that don’t fit in here, please share.
1. Basic Skills. Effective verbal communication is complex and challenging. Some people have benefitted from good instruction in school and some have not. An obvious time for communications training is when executives require the basics. The need generally arises when a change in status requires someone to communicate in new ways or more frequently.
2. Many Voices, One Message. When many people need to communicate a single message, training is an imperative. Training helps disparate and far-flung individuals understand and commit themselves to messaging while at the same time providing the skills to communicate successfully. This is critical when large organizations and associations with broad membership are involved in campaigns that require many voices to amplify the message.
3. New Situations, New Challenges. Even experienced communicators face new situations that make training imperative. A new position (President or CEO) or challenging new conditions (downturn in the business, acquisitions, testimony before Congress, facing an angry audience) can trigger the need for communications training. Sudden and persistent media attention may add urgency to this imperative.
4. New Messages. After new messaging has been developed and tested by polling and focus group research, many clients turn to training as a crucible to find out how the messages stand up in realistic scenarios. Messages may not change (or in some cases they may), but they will be refined and given the most effective voice, tied to the people who will use them.
5. Scenario Role-Play. Role playing anticipated events – such as a quarterly conference call, the release of a scientific study, or new regulation and legislation – will help an organization test its response plan and build confidence in the messaging. Scenario role play is a critical element of any good crisis preparedness program.
6. Selling In. Clients have used training to communicate internally about change, including desired changes in organizational culture. Let me explain this with two examples. We once worked with a building products company that had to put a health warning on their product. This came as a shock and raised many questions about the business. We designed a training program that both explained the change and helped management at all levels communicate about it.
To bring about a policy and subtle cultural shift, we worked with another company to media train hundreds of local representatives, sending the message that they would now engage locally with the press rather than exclusively from the central corporate office. And with the change in policy and culture, local managers acquired the skills to make the change a reality.
Few Exclusives
One last and probably obvious point: few training sessions or programs are exclusively one of these six. Every situation has its unique characteristics, just like every specific training session is unique, if only because the people, relationships and local particulars are different. That’s what keeps communications training challenging – and interesting.
8/5/2008 3:16 PM
Communicating consistent messages to a variety of overlapping audiences is a necessity facing just about every modern organization. And the reality is that “organizations” as such do very little communicating. The task generally falls to individuals, often those who not only manage the business, but also speak for it both internally and externally.
So if communicating an organization’s messages depends to a large extent on individual capabilities, those capabilities simply cannot be left to chance. Preparing senior managers to speak well in any of the many situations in which they are the organization’s voice is, therefore, more than just vitally important. It is an imperative.
What’s more, the profusion of avenues for communication has created additional challenges. Currently, those who speak for an organization not only face a host of traditional communications venues – cable and broadcast TV; newspapers and magazines; teleconferences with and without video; speeches and presentation to live audiences; and an explosion of on-line and printed publications directed at employees, customers, consumers and other specific audiences. They must also deal with internet podcasts, video clips, blogs, chat rooms and the like. And they must consider the reality that all their communications are subject to collection and re-presentation through search engines and social networking sites like You Tube.
Adding to the challenge, everyone is linked to everyone else through the internet, so we are all potential communicators as well as audience members, further confusing any effort to present a common message to key audiences.
In this fragmented communications universe, the development of the communicator’s “voice” – a voice that is clear, forceful, credible, attractive, constantly on key and consistently representative of the organization’s brand – is essential.
All of this should put communications training – the process by which the voice is developed and honed – somewhere near the top of an organization’s priorities. And from time to time it is. But there is still a tendency to overlook the value of training.
Why? Perhaps because modern managers have been selected in part because they are good communicators. And possibly because they are experts in their fields and know so much more about their subjects than most audiences, including reporters, they don’t see the role training can play in enhancing their ability.
The reality is that natural capabilities and expert knowledge are often not enough to help a communicator when dealing with a new or particularly tough issue. Nor may they be sufficient when confronting unaccustomed situations like hostile audiences or the news media.
Every important communications event should be evaluated to see if some form of training or coaching would help clarify messages and build comfort and skill in transmitting them.
In my next post I’ll talk about five general situations in which training can be an imperative.
7/18/2008 2:10 PM
One of the ways an organization -- private or public, for profit or not -- communicates is through the voices of its people. For years, an increasingly important factor in selecting leadership has been the ability to communicate comfortably with key audiences.
Even the most talented communicators, and certainly those with less developed skills, need to grow and hone their capabilities, and a significant consultancy has grown up to assist them become more effective speakers as they take on increasingly more important communications responsibilities.
My name is Don Cunningham, and I have been a proud member of that consultancy for over thirty years. Most of that time has been spent at Burson-Marsteller, which has afforded me a vast and variegated opportunity to meet and work with thousands of fascinating people from just about every industry, profession and government position, facing nearly every communications situation, in front of every possible audience, from investors to consumers, from voters to regulators, and of course with reporters.
I have had a chance to work with and learn from exceptional colleagues in the public relations and public affairs business, handling major issues, difficult crises, and critical marketing assignments. My colleagues have included many fine media and communications trainers, some of whom I have the pleasure of working with today. As a former college professor of speech, I bring a nuanced sensibility to how people learn, combined with a forceful perspective about clarity and persuasiveness, two essentials that underlie all effective communication. My background has meshed well with the journalists with whom I have worked over the years, and together we have developed a clear, step-by-step technical approach to communicating with reporters and other audiences that, time after time, has been successful in practical situations.
By participating in web-based conversations, I want to expand the reach of the dialogue I have had with clients for more than 20 years. In this blog, I want to address issues that should be important to any communicator and offer insights, techniques and practical tips to assist individual communicators and those who prepare them to represent their organizations. |
|