Reimagining the mobile-enabled PR agency of the future

“Publically traded diversified energy company.”

Try texting that while juggling other tasks. It is how New Jersey’s largest utility company, Public Service Enterprise Group (PSEG), describes itself.

Basically it means PSEG subsidiaries – there are four with names too long to write: control power generation, distribution, line maintenance and infrastructure investment. In non-jargon speech, it means they are almost a monopoly, overseeing nearly all aspects of the energy universe.

But PSEG’s success got me thinking. How can public relations agencies corner their own communication market, becoming “diversified communication companies” along the way?

Energy to change

PR agencies can do that by broadening their offerings and by becoming true information access, distribution and generation conglomerates. What will be their “power lines” – their message distribution medium?

Mobile.

Two recent articles speak to this need but tackle it from different perspectives.

Earlier this spring, The New York Times advertising columnist Stuart Elliott reported on the rebranding of PR powerhouse Fleishman-Hillard turned “FleishmanHillard” and highlighted how the brand is becoming “an integrated marketing communications agency.”

What does this mean? Hint: it sounds a lot like “diversified energy company,” just dressed up differently. It means expanding the agency’s focus largely from traditional earned media to include paid media (advertising), owned media (think branded content and blogs) and increased capabilities to use social media as a critical storytelling medium.

Each of these examples rely – or should rely – heavily on a communication company’s mobile presence and that of their clients. 

Read the rest of the article on Mobile Marketer.

Come Together / from MediaPost

A few weeks ago, Vocus released a survey about the divergent attitudes amongst us marketing and PR professionals and our take on integrated communications. The survey, also featured in MediaPost's Center for Media Research, looked at the differences in our perceptions surrounding the effectiveness, priorities and purpose of integrated communications.

One of the most surprising findings centered on the definition of integrated communications itself. And this raises a question: is something as ill-defined as integrated communications preferable or even valuable for companies? Is there a benefit to bringing together communications functions of two distinct practices (marketing and PR) that can barely agree on each other's applicability or raison d'être?

The answer is a resounding YES, and for two main reasons;

1) Despite the disconnect between marketing and PR professionals regarding the philosophy and aim of communications, these are viewed and consumed by outside entities (consumers, in the case of B2C companies, businesses for B2B) in the same way. That is to say, various communications are inherently linked, and so they must be developed and disseminated in an integrated way.

2) Integrated communications leverages the power of both PR and marketing to achieve unified aims. Rather than a mash-up of at-odds tactics and strategies (as does exist with separate PR and marketing entities), the sum of techniques used in a robust and integrated communications program becomes so much greater than its individual parts.

We All Own It

While the Vocus survey stops short of making a pronouncement on the value of integrated communications, integrating our efforts (yes, I'm talking to you, Marketing Department) is the only way to effectively engage and manage the diverse communications channels available today. Just as the survey finds that both PR ad marketing practitioners perceive social media outreach as being part of their scope (43% of PR professionals feel they should "own" social media, while 34% of marketers make the same claim), an integrated approach is really the only way to maximize the benefits of this still-growing medium. It's impossible to be effective in a vacuum.

Talking of Social Media

Social media is a great example to support the above statements - that both the PR and marketing aspects of corporate communications are linked. Facebook pages or Twitter feeds function equally as awareness drivers and marketing vehicles. The commonality here is brand engagement, and that is neither a strictly marketing nor a strictly PR function. It is a function of integrated communications, period.

That said, social media demonstrates that it's often necessary to use different tactics to achieve different results. Even as social media resists easy tagging as a 'PR' or 'marketing' medium, it produces different end results if traditionally marketing-related or traditionally PR-related techniques are used to activate it. And users of social media can usually tell the difference between sales and outreach efforts, and each may be relevant under different circumstances. But to make this resolve, and to reap the most rewards from communication in this channel, everyone has to be on the same page.

Integrate Baby, Integrate....click here to continue reading.