Kim Hohman

Talking effectively about systems and system change is tricky. This short article sums up a key dilemma (overemphasizing individual choices vs. creating fatalism about systems), and outlines a path forward: "By being careful about *how* we present systems, we can guard against fatalistic interpretations and advance a constructive understanding of systems as under the control of people and therefore able and open to change." 

10

2 Comments

One of the many things PR and Comms pros share on this site is what we can't control when working with reporters. Here's another one for the list: Headlines We don't have any impact what the reporters or their editors decide to run here. Or do we? Recently set up an interview with a source to talk about a pressing economic issue with a national outlet. The journalist pulled one of his quotes and used it in his headline. Good sources will deliver solid content in a press interview. Great sources will give the reporter irresistable points that make solid headlines because they pull people in and encourage them to read the story. Be a great source in your next interview. #pr #communications #leadership #publicrelations

16

3 Comments

Many a communications professional has seen an employee survey rating overall communications low. Generally, the leadership team comes back to the comms team to fix it. Here’s the question I like to ask: How did the employee define communications? Because the reality is, what they think is communications and what the company was trying to survey isn't always the same thing. I had the opportunity to speak to a group of supervisors one time who were complaining about communications. Come to find out, what they were really complaining about was how their manager/supervisor/direct leader communicates to them. When we started parsing out what they meant, it became easier to follow up with concrete actions with a specific target. Communications is not just the emails, town halls, talking points and magazines the corporate comms team puts out. It’s the conversation you have one-on-one with a colleague, or it’s the performance review you had with the absent supervisor who suddenly critiques everything you thought you were doing right. It’s the information shared, or sometimes more importantly, not shared. One leader mentioned that they try to limit what they share with their team because there’s so much going on. I asked them to reflect on a previous statement they had made about how they felt out of the loop because their boss was limiting what was shared with them. When I next saw this person, they mentioned that they stopped assuming what was and wasn’t important to their team and just gave all news as is. Sometimes our job is to reflect back where inconsistencies lie. Because maybe the survey results aren’t reflecting what you thought you were asking. Anyone else run into something similar? #EndOfWeekReflection

21

4 Comments

Kimberly Cheatle + Crisis Comms: A Case Study in What NOT to Do Whoever is coaching Kimberly Cheatle on answering questions is doing a horrible job. There is a Standard Operating Procedure in crisis comms and she has missed every single step. I’ll hit on a few here: 1. Open the lines of communication and keep the media updated. There should have been a media briefing the night of the attempt and several following. As you have seen with all of the rumors online, if you don’t tell your story, someone else will. 2. Be an information filter. Even if you don’t know all the answers, you can at least look like you’re trying to get to the bottom of it. Her answers are doing her no favors. 3. Tell the truth. I don’t think I need to say anything else. 4. An apology goes a long way. “This should have never happened and on behalf of the entire Secret Service, you have my sincere apology.” 5. Choose your words carefully and don’t repeat negative statements. ‘Cooperating’ with the FBI sounds like they are twisting your arm. Working with the FBI sounds much better. There are several more I could add but you get the picture. I actually have a pretty good idea of who is advising her and they are either not doing their job or someone has told her to take the fall, and in that case, no amount of crisis comms can help. She’s toast. What are your thoughts? Would love to hear. #crisiscommunications #casestudy #USSS #cheatleistoast

1

If your comms team pushes back on pitching something during this very crowded news cycle, they aren’t being lazy. If your comms team pushes back on using media relations as a tactic to solve a problem, they aren't being negative. They are being honest. And protective of the brand. And protective of their hard-earned media relationships. You're only as good as your last pitch. Media will start ignoring your emails if you keep sending lame story ideas, or pitching them news items unrelated to the breaking news stories of the moment.

1,923

58 Comments

"I already have a communications team." Is there a scientist among them? PR, social media, and UX/UI folx expertly build awareness and, depending on your product, bring consumers to your door. But when it comes to stakeholders -- I'm talking funders, regulators, policymakers, community groups, affiliates, enterprise clients -- they want to dig deeper. To check your math, so to speak. These are the people you create reports, briefs, white papers, and proposals for. The ones who want a sophisticated, persuasive document that show you're worth your salt. The ones whose impression of you will determine the impact your initiative will -- or won't -- have. Don't ask your Marketing Lead to proofread your white paper. She's trained in communications, not science and engineering. She'll do her best. But she'll end up skirting around the technical explanations. Or watering down their robustness. (And honestly, she has enough work already.) Don't miss the chance to make a lasting impression on those all-important stakeholders. Get a Science Interpreter. When you see the results (and the TIME you'll not be spending eeking out a report over the weekend) you'll be glad you did.

9

10 Comments

An open post to Simon & Schuster, as to why you should hire me as your new VP of Global Communications and Marketing. This is literally (not metaphorically) my dream job. I'm going to shoot my shot, right here on LinkedIn. 1) With considerable and due respect, you don't need someone experienced in the publishing industry. What you need is someone who can build a distinctive brand people prefer in a highly-commoditized industry. I've done this. Many, many times. It's my favorite brief. 2) I'm an avid reader who buys books. A lot of books. My wife claims my relationship to books is an addiction, which I think is a bit harsh. (But her point is taken. I could open an independent book store out of our basement.) 3) Stephen King. Quiz me. I've even read Danse Macabre, which most people have never heard of. 4) Books don't move the wider culture the way they once did. Streaming. AI. Disliked advertising. This is your competition. I've created a lot of impact for brands not inherently part of the fabric of a wider conversation. 5) I'm writing this while wearing a Powell's Books t-shirt. This was not on purpose or for effect. It's just the shirt I wanted to wear today. 6) I helped StoryStudio Chicago reboot their purpose and narrative when I served on their board. Talk to Jill Pollack. She’ll tell you. 7) I recognize the irony of creating a listicle for a noted literary institution. My network and folks who have worked with me can vouch for these things. Vouch away, network. Sincerely, Alan T. Kercinik (EDIT: For those who have asked: Yes, there is a job listing. This is a role they're actively trying to fill.)

1,852

362 Comments

Did you know that according to the CECP #Givinginnumbers report that only 18% of companies have a position dedicated to measurement and #evaluation? The Corporate M&E Community of Practice recently launched a benchmarking survey to understand the state of Impact Measurement & Evaluation across the corporate landscape - who is doing it, how, why and what tools and approaches are being used.  Can you please help us out?  Two ways to help: 1. If you work in a company or corporate-established foundation, please take the survey. You can access it here: https://lnkd.in/gv9Deiwi 2. Will you please forward this ask to one or two colleagues in the corporate social impact space? Finally, if you are one of the 18% we would welcome you into the free community of practice—you can find out more here: https://lnkd.in/gsvrHRQH TCC Group Morgan Buras-Finlay Lisa Frantzen

15

2 Comments

This. Right here. Communication is an art and a science, not an administrative function. It is a multifaceted field with specialties such as public relations, marketing, health communication…. the list goes on and on. Using communication staff to fulfill administrative duties is a gross misuse of their expertise and skill AND hurts organizational performance.

4

Last week, I shared five ideas for reframing stewardship content to achieve the best of both worlds: delighting your donors and attracting broader audiences for your content. ICYMI, the ideas are: > Give a nod to philanthropy in the stories your organization is *already telling.* > Use Q&A-style articles to highlight people in your organization doing work related to an in-the-news topic — and who have received philanthropic support. > Shift the focus from the donor to the issue they care about. > Use graphics that show, rather than tell, the impact of a gift. > Use donors' alumnus/emeritus status to your advantage. It's easy to write a quick list of five ideas, but I know from experience as an in-house development communicator that the work behind each idea takes time — and many small nonprofit or higher ed development teams don't have that luxury. That's where I come in! Whether it's > analyzing your current development and central communications content and making recommendations, > conducting stakeholder interviews with your donors to learn how they really want to be honored in your communications, or > bringing the new stewardship story ideas you've unearthed to life, I'm here to help. Learn more about these services at Kristin Hanson Writes LLC

1

Here's a question I got this week and I'm not sure I really have an answer. "Which companies are considered best-in-class when it comes to internal communications? This is likely a tough one to answer given that the proof is internally facing and not directly visible like social media and marketing, but are there any particular companies or organizations that come to mind in terms of who’s leading the pack/ getting it right with what they share, how they share it and who they serve?" To my wise network - what companies come to mind when you think of best-in-class internal comms?

62

40 Comments

Contrary to the beliefs of some (and media portrayal), PR is *not* an easy job. Often, we are like ducks on the water - cool, calm and collected on the surface with feverishly paddling legs below the water line. On any given day, we're: - building stories worth telling and telling them to the *right* people - managing reporter relationships and C-Suite spokespeople - applying to relevant conferences and awards - writing LinkedIn copy - collaborating with internal and external stakeholders to make the most of a press hit ...and doing it all with a smile on our faces while up against a tight deadline. One thing that makes our job a whole lot easier? Having leadership that not only believes in the importance of a strong PR program but invests their own time in that program. When leaders invest in PR, the results will be infinitely better. Full stop. As a leader, the time you spend with your PR team is just as important to the success of your PR program as your team’s skillset. And your voice is just as important to a good story as the news itself. Before you invest the money, make sure you're also prepared to invest your time. I count myself lucky to work with founders like Julia Collins, Sarela Herrada and Matthew Cohen, and Anna Hammond who get it. (honorable mentions to amazing teammates who also get it, like Naomi Laporte, Lizzie A., and Carrie Swails) Thanks to Allison Carter for sharing my take alongside the advice of so many other PR pros I admire in PR Daily. https://lnkd.in/emtf5CCg

22

6 Comments

There's something I have to tell you. Some will find it upsetting. Others may need a fainting couch or a therapist on standby. It's a harsh truth about #publicrelations. In 2024, PR has little to do with who you know. Frankly, who you know hasn't mattered for a long time. Instead, public relations is about what you have to offer the audience(s) you hope to address. Having a great story to tell - one that is educational rather than promotional - is what defines good PR today. Having a buddy at a trade publication, a contact at The Wall Street Journal or a cousin who is an executive producer at Good Morning America is all well and good, but none of those folks are going to put their jobs at risk by bringing a story to their editorial meetings that doesn't pass muster. I don't care how high up you are on their holiday card list; it isn't happening without a great story. Add to the mix the shifting realities of today's newsrooms that have resulted in record numbers of journalists changing jobs or leaving the field entirely, and its clear that what you know matters more now than who you know. Do relationships still matter? Yes, in so far as journalists are more willing to work with PR pros who consistently deliver great, informative sources or unique insights on trends and news. However, even those journalists will say no to the PR pros they know best if those individuals fail to ensure their pitch is a fit for the media professional's beat or interests. So please stop asking your PR reps who they know. Instead, ask them how they can help you craft a great story or unique perspective that will better inform the audiences you hope to reach. Meanwhile, if this offends your sensibilities, there are ... other professionals you can call to help work through this trauma. #bestpractices #businesscommunications #themoreyouknow #freetherapy

34

4 Comments

True advice. I always focus on our speciality which is hospitality and lifestyle PR. I refer other enquiries to different consultants in their field

2

This is spot on! I would add that until comms/brand strategy is seen as overhead on balance sheets and not as an essential driver for transformation and paradigm shifts, nothing will change. Philanthropy has failed for decades to recognize their own role in perpetuating insufficient models that exclude the active, catalytic role of communication, esp. when it comes to complex issues like climate and social justice. So many orgs and foundations have narrative change as a focus but naively believe they can achieve that with small, overworked, under-resourced and undervalued comms teams. Wake up philanthropies of the world, it’s time to put comms, marketing and brand development in your grants structures as key success factors!

4

2 Comments

Press releases are dead. Says every comms person on LinkedIn. I get it. When using press releases as a "drumbeat," considering a sequence of press releases a strategy, or just the sheer amount of terrible, non-news "press releases" out there, maybe they should be dead. I am not one to say they are dead - they just aren't as needed or relevant and shouldn't be the default. It's a tool in the toolbox, and sometimes they will make sense as a tool depending on what the news is and objectives of your effort. What I often don't see after the bold statement is what we do if press releases are indeed the bane of everyone's existence. To me, it always comes back to the business objective, the audience you're trying to reach and outcomes you want. Some (many tech companies) push their owned channels, be it blogs, newsletters or similar. Reporters that follow them know this is what they do, so it works for some when combined with embargoes/exclusives or targeted pitching. That same group may release news at an event or conference - makes sense if your audience is there. Some just focus on targeted media pitches and no release. At times and when relevant, some will use a version of a press release as additional context or content. Some will newsjack (jump on trends or cultural conversations), to insert brand into conversation. Could be social engagement or various types of social content, product placements or shipments, or a distinct POV. Usually combined with pitching and only works when super relevant and a brand has already established they are (insert fun/quirky/relevant/distinct/etc). And then there's this platform. One example we recently executed with a client: A LinkedIn article from the CEO. Business objectives were to gain attention for a new concept from potential partners and those in the industry, ultimately building interest and pipeline. Media coverage was a desire, but not the most impactful outcome. We knew LinkedIn would push this first article, though of course, the content had to be relevant. It was written like a story with a good hook, new news, timely and relevant anecdotes, and left the reader wanting just a bit more. The article gained about 50K eyeballs (no where near a big media push vanity metric). However, those eyeballs were all targeted eyeballs. The CEO received quite a few emails and calls from partners, industry leaders and potential customers. The internal team was excited and contract conversations heated up. A press release and strong pitching may have garnered some coverage, but can we guarantee those same people would have read the article and acted? No. People mistake PR for media relations. PR is relating to the most relevant stakeholder in most relevant way. Sometimes media is not the way. It doesn't mean press releases are dead. It does mean they should not be a default tool and that the tactic should ultimately ladder up to a strategy that supports the overarching business objectives.

94

26 Comments