Cicero Policy Briefer

Issue 23, April 2008

Integrating public affairs and PR can deliver more than the sum of the parts

By Steve Muir, Consultant

Large financial services organisations take their media relations, or PR, very seriously. After all, it is a useful and sometimes very cost-effective way of promoting themselves and their products. But of course PR isn’t just about product promotion. Threats to reputation are an all too regular occurrence; at least that was my experience having worked in just such an organisation. Threats can range from chronic client servicing issues to ownership of policy funds and from unfair contract terms to responsibility for mis-selling financial products. Never a dull moment!

Occasionally it was possible to go on the front foot, but those positive opportunities were always tempered by the fear that a skeleton or two would fall out of the cupboard and jeopardise any good work.

Against this background there was often little consideration given to public affairs, or engagement with policymakers in Whitehall and Westminster . There was an unwritten, and I believe wrong, rule that there was no point in being exposed to that level of scrutiny. And after all, how could that possibly add to the ‘bottom line’ in the same way that, arguably, PR does?

Such a blinkered approach ignored the obvious benefit of being seen as one of those organisations who are ‘at the table’ when issues, that would inevitably become business critical, were first mooted. The opportunity to influence a positive outcome in these circumstances is an obvious driver.

This is not only true of structural issues, like changes to tax or regulatory regimes, but also of company specific activity that could jeopardise reputation, such as dealing with the insurance claims of flood victims. In these circumstances, a better understanding of Whitehall and Westminster thinking is paramount when making decisions on specific issues or future strategy.

Public affairs is inevitably closely allied to corporate strategy, and so by definition has a longer term time horizon. It is, after all, a tool to inform and influence high level decision making both within the company itself and among those policymakers it wishes to persuade.

A good example of effective public affairs is the outcome achieved by Cicero’s client TISA (formerly PIMA), the trade body that promotes tax incentivised savings, whose membership includes all the clearing banks, many other banks, friendly societies, insurance companies, fund managers, stockbrokers and support companies. It has been successful in its objectives of not only convincing the Treasury to simplify the ISA rules but also in gaining Government’s long term commitment to ISAs. As a result consumers have certainty around a preferred and popular savings vehicle, and the investment management industry has access to the vast sums invested in cash ISAs.

These achievements took time—effectively five years—with a lot of effort and commitment. How often does a PR strategy have a five-year time horizon, and if it does how is it integrated into a public affairs strategy? My own experience prompts me to believe that PR has tended to suffer from being short-termist or opportunist with more emphasis on delivering column inches, or other blunt measures, than promoting the organisation’s brand. Put simply, do you want to be remembered for the weight of the cuttings you produce or for being a participant ready to enter and inform a debate? The two are not mutually exclusive, but I suggest the latter approach means that the content of the cuttings will be remembered and valued for a lot longer.

The challenge for a lot of organisations is, therefore, how to manage two external communications functions, media relations and public affairs, with potentially conflicting agendas and timeframes.

So what prescriptions do I propose in these times of market volatility, uncertainty and budget challenges? The main one is that those tasked with buying agency services demand better integration from their agency support in order to force more value from the agency spend.

This requires a three step approach:

• Review both PA and PR plans to see where the synergies and conflicts may be found;
• Take a longer view, ideally three to five years, and step away from the ‘salami slicing’ approach;
• Align the communications plan with the strategic objectives of the company.

Unsurprisingly what emerges is the idea that PA work should be a major driver for PR activity; that the longer term strategic aims of public policy work should form at least part of the framework within which PR operates and that PR augments a longer term approach.

The reality is that there will be tensions and conflicts. PR practitioners will always have to deal with curveballs, but having a wider public policy context can only help with corporate positioning in difficult circumstances by developing a compelling narrative that expresses the company’s brand values effectively.

The prize is an improved reputation among consumers and business partners—and more credibility with regulators and policymakers.

Steve Muir can be contacted on +44 (0)20 7665 9530 or click here to email.

Please take just a few minutes to complete our Briefer online survey.