Strengths - and why they matter in your communication

Fresh from a recent Strengths workshop with Marcus Buckingham I'm looking at the world slightly differently.

Marcus Buckingham's book "Go put your strengths to work" and one of his recent Sydney seminars was all about how playing to our strengths at work makes us happier and more productive.

And who among us doesn't want that??

This evening I tore the little cards out of the back of Buckingham's book, and started to obediently document when I'd recently "felt strong" (at home, kneading bread...at work, meeting an interesting CEO for the first time) and "felt weak" (at home, washing up...at work, in a very routine meeting).

The exercise bears a startling resemblance to the planning methodology we use with clients.

Invariably we look for both organisational strengths and weaknesses. Strategies, messaging and actions plans are most usually based around the company's areas of relative advantage - in Buckinham's world that equates to strengths.

Risk management, and what we might call "preventative" messaging or actions, come from real or potential areas of weakness.

How much time do we focus on strengths versus weaknesses in a client's PR program? About 90% on strengths and about 10% on weaknesses - unless we're engaged on issues or crisis management.

While there are no little coloured cards we fill out for a client, we usually do overtly partner with clients via a planning process or during an engagement to uncover, articulate and promote areas of relative strength - often these are sources of sustainable competitive advantage as well as key levers in a communication program.

Other times the organisational strengths we uncover with clients might be defined entirely by current news or a particular context. For example in internal communication a strength that you want to dial up may well be defined by the culture or current internal climate, as well as the relative allure of other employers and status of the job market.

Buckingham's work makes a strong case for organising our jobs, no matter at what level, around our strengths, rather than around minimising our weaknesses.

I'd suggest, very simply, the same works in public relations. If firms have their value proposition right (for clients, employees or investors) then communicationg strengths allows stakeholders to find themselves a good match - the service or product provider, employer or investment that best meets their particular needs. The organisation that gives them something they need, and value.

Just as playing to our strengths, and helping others play to theirs, enables diverse work mates to co-exist. When we get it right, as teams or service providers, there's a nice symbiosis between one person's weaknesses and the next's strengths.
 
With that in mind I'm going to check on the bread...I "felt strong" kneading the dough but it might take a better baker than I am to achieve a good loaf.

To skip from the personal to the professional, and in particular the practice of public relations, good communication helps us find that work team, client or service provider who "completes" us.

How to show you genuinely care about all 1 million customers

Many moons ago, in the years leading up to the Sydney 2000 Olympic Games, my then employer, AMP ran one of THE most successful financial services advertising campaigns of the decade.

Enter Vicki Williams, a customer service staff member from AMP in Perth. Vicki was the winner of competition conceived by the agency (Leo Burnett) and run among AMP staff to produce the star of the big budget TV ad.

And Vicki certainly became a star.

It helped that she really did care about AMP's clients. It also helped that Leos had her plus-sized frame in a bathing suit and cheery face in a frilly bathing cap. And of course the media spend was considerable.

One of the reasons the ad was so well remembered had to do with the context of the time. Banks had a lot of bad press for shutting down branches. The other insurance and funds management companies arguably lacked AMP's strong local representation of financial planners who were part of their towns and cities across the country.

People remembered the funny, warm smiling face of Vicki Williams because she was real. The genuine item. And it showed, even when she'd done that shot a million times.

Vicki gave out as many autographs as Olympians - she was LOVED. She may not have sold many policies or superanuation funds, but she was (briefly) adored by thousands.

Then there's "the AAMI girl" as she's known. I'm not sure if there's a picture in the attic of the woman in that long-running TV ad, or if they update her every 5 years. However she's probably been the best known and most liked face of general insurance in Australia for years.

The point?

People connect with people.

Especially when it comes to money (trust matters) and the really boring stuff they'd rather not have to think too much about.

Like insurance and super.

Ads used to be a good way to provide a human proxy for the personal touch.

As branches have closed down and technology has replaced people we've seen all sort of replacements for humans. Interactive voice systems, online banking, ATMs, online share trading.

We've also seen a far greater reliance on public relations or custom content to generate media coverage for financial services organisations. Both communication tools are far more credible ways to get people back in front of customers again, without the multi-million dollar spend or the big geographic footprint of a national staff.

So if you, just like many other financial services organisations with shrinking staff numbers who want to grow their retail presence, think about how you're going to get a credible, friendly and mass-produced human in front of the humans who matter most to your business.

Staff, customers, clients, channel partners, even business partners.

We're all looking for that person who really cares.

Does your brand have one?

Ethics in PR (now stop laughing!)

Today the Public Relations Institute of Australia sent out a link to the PRTV edition about ethics.

It's easy to laugh when the concepts are linked - "PR" and 'ethics'.

My second, more sombre reaction (as when interviewed) is that ethical behaviour by PR people is impossible if they don't really know what they're communicating about.

How do I know? Let's call it bitter experience...stories for another time.

The short version is that as so-called professional communicators we have zero credibility if we don't really know what we're talking about, trust the people we work for and ultimately, take extreme care in how we present facts AND nuance.

Yes, we should follow a code of ethics.

Yes, we should "do the right thing", meaning be honest and truthful.

More than those things we should question whether or not what we're asked is right.

And ultimately satisfy ourselves with an answer we can live with.

I certainly can't claim the moral high ground - as a younger PR I sometimes felt very uncomfortable with the "party line". It's career threatening to say "Excuse me Chairman, are you entirely sure we should present things as you've just described?".

More recently we've walked away from several potentially great (exciting, newsworthy) jobs when we felt unsure of the merits of our client's story, or just had a feeling that 'something wasn't right'.

This is not an argument that PRs need forensic accounting skills. However it is reasonable to expect that senior people in our profession can read both people and data, pay attention to the P&L and do a little due diligence on potential clients and employers.

Long term, if we believe our own mantra, our personal reputation is our most valuable asset.

Perhaps in PR the universal ethical guideline is simply enlightened self-interest.