IPA stratstock
…Went to this on Monday night with Nick.
Already a few reactions to the night here, here and here. I too thought it was great for four main reasons-
a) It’s always good to get out of your agency and discipline bubbles to see what other people’s take on the world is
b) Some really interesting people there
c) corona and crisp dinner
d) A PR agency was at an IPA strategy event
Seriously though, some really inspirational and bright people all staking brilliant claims as to why their approach is the best (i.e why they could lead campaigns rather than big ol’ ad agencies!) and all really saying similar things (particularly about online- buzzwords: dialogue, authenticity, transparency, content, relevance, story-telling, continuity, utility etc) with the end goal of influencing the consumer to buy our client’s stuff.
Inspired by James over at 77PR’s reproduction of David Bain’s ‘value’ formula, I’ve had a stab at reproducing James’ own flipchart inspired moment- a lovely little diagram which I thought quite succinctly summised how PR attempts to make a business message relevant; here’s my reproduction…
Shoddy I know. But his main point of difference with PR’s approach to planning, was that PR focuses more on the intermediary, whether they be the media, NGO’s pressure groups or key opinion formers. Obviously that very definition of the ‘intermediary’ and ‘influencer’ as well as PR’s role in engaging with them, is now under increasing scrutiny due to the rise in digital communications and it’s impact on the consumer’s relationship with these intermediaries (that being the online world allowing brands to bypass this ‘influencer’ model, is probably a post for another day- or maybe a quick digest of Mark Earls for now).
However, I have one big take out from James’ pitch as to why PR people are well placed to make half decent planners… if CONTENT really is king today… surely you’d want people who have “been trying to be part of it for years” involved in devising the strategy at some point?
