Outcomes-based PR

We`re all name-droppers. Old Francois, Old Nick, Old Hansie, Old Ali, Old Frik... the time we met them, at the dinner, at the cocktail party, at the game... it`s part of life`s rich embellishments.

Decide what outcome you need or want to achieve with your PR. Define your process backwards from this outcome to ensure smooth deliverables, and fire up the engines.

I feel on totally safe ground dropping the name of Steve Mulholland, though. Currently in semi-retirement as chairman of the Connection Group, as incisive Sunday Times columnist and formerly as maverick editor and publisher, he has had and continues to exercise much influence on my career and my thinking.

If you read this, thanks Steve. Your type comes around but once.

Much of my admiration of Steve comes from his ability to shake all trees, no matter how sacred. So while the world rushes to embrace outcomes-based education, he says no: Because it leads to falling standards, which would be catastrophic for our dear, sadly mismanaged country.

Now, when Steve writes about anything, I take note. And so I flagged outcomes-based education and other outcomes-based thinking at the back of my mind.

Until, recently, when I realised my PR company was outcomes-based.

I`m sorry, Steve. This certainly isn`t the first time I`ve disagreed with you, but this time I`m truly sorry. But we`re an outcomes-based company. Because all we worry about is the result. The outcome. For three years now we have focused solely on the outcome of a goal, a project, a dream, a programme. The outcome is measurable, and measurable against target.

Everything else is of limited or no relevance. What did you achieve? Did you grow the company? Did you shift its parameters? Did your activities lift the share price?

Or did you simply issue a press release of dubious quality that had all the goodness sucked out of it by an internally oriented ego-driven process?

And so here I am at the point of my circuitous intro: you can either have PR that focuses on the outcome, or you can have PR that focuses on process. They are inherently inimical, and to have one is to stifle the other. There is no other way.

Entrepreneurs focus on the outcome; bureaucrats focus on process. Entrepreneurs - remember that the definition of an entrepreneur wholeheartedly embraces the concept of risk-taking - break the rules to achieve a result. Bureaucrats - remember that the definition of a bureaucrat is literally he (or she) who governs from an office - derive their power from staying within the rules.

The one approach is flexible and creates wealth; the other is rigid and consumes resources without producing any tangible benefit. For the entrepreneur the only outcome is a healthy bottom-line; for the bureaucrat the sole purpose is staying within the tramlines of process. The entrepreneur gets on with the job with minimal resources; the bureaucrat surrounds himself with yes-men and constantly inhibits projects. The JSE versus the government.

There you have it: goal-driven PR versus manage-to-the-nth-degree PR. Spirit-of-the-contract PR versus letter-of-the-contract PR.

A prime example of process-based PR is the US PR model, which is so wary of litigation that it has stripped all the goodness out of releases. It is template-based, and wrapped around in so many regulations that it can`t communicate anything meaningful. It is stilted, awkward and can`t possibly produce any results. The originators are operating against a thick manual and if they step even a millimetre out of line they get whacked.

Heaven help us all in SA if we fall into this trap.

This is the only way, from our perspective. Decide what outcome you need or want to achieve with your PR. Define your process backwards from this outcome to ensure smooth deliverables, and fire up the engines.

What outcome do you want? A higher share price? A greater market share? A strong sales pipeline? Then put in place the minimum processes to achieve these deliverables and, as far as possible, get out of the way.

You`ll be amazed at the results.

And maybe if outcomes-based education were similarly goal-driven, results-driven and free of bureaucracy, Steve Mulholland would come to embrace it.

"People will pay a little more (sometimes a lot more) for the perceived value of dealing with the best. For example, the very best restaurants do charge too much. But they never lack customers. Patrons continue to pay because they know that the cheese will be properly aged, the soufflé perfect, the wine excellent, the service impeccable. They get an excellent return on a low-risk investment. They`d rather plunk down $60 per person on a guaranteed four-star experience than gamble $40 per person on the chance of eating a four-star meal at a two-star establishment." - Mark McCormack in his book "On Negotiating".