We've moved edit30!

We've moved edit30 from Blogger/Blogspot to our own server. You'll now be able to reach us at:

• www.edit30.com.

Please change your favorites and your links to http://www.edit30.com.

Don't forget that the auto complete function of your browser likely will take you to edit30.blogspot.com or even edit30.wordpress.com, which are now static.

So, please enter the new shorter address for our server at edit30.com.

Thanks!

edit30 editors

When boards question their own leadership...

It seems that it is times like these — the global economic crisis, you know — that make us aware of the need for, or the lack of, leadership among our institutions of business and government. Perhaps that quality is present, or not, during "normal" times," but it is only when we actually require such capabilities that we recognize their existence, or the vacuum that remains.

So, it is with only little surprise and some anxiety, that we note the results of a McKinsey Quarterly poll. While it was not entirely scientific — because it was an opt-in, loosely controlled sample — we opine that the results likely are representative and, therefore, worth noting here.

McKinsey published “The crisis: Mobilizing boards for change” in February and in connection with that story the company “invited directors to take an online survey to gather their opinions on how boards were responding to the economic crisis.”

Half of board members responding said their boards have “responded effectively to the global economic turmoil. However, many corporate boards have adjusted their practices, and more want to do so.”

Yet the survey says, “Many boards of directors are not providing the leadership demanded by the global economic crisis.”

• Only half of board members responding described their boards as effective in managing the economic crisis.
• “Just over a third” reported that their boards have not been effective in the current circumstance.
• 14% are unsure how to rate their boards’ effectiveness.

At the personal level…

• “Roughly half of corporate directors” reported that their boards’ chairs have not met the demands of the crisis, and
• “A nearly equal percentage” of board chairmen believe the same about their board members.

Though most boards have implemented some changes to their procedures in response to the crisis, 62 percent say their boards need to change even more.

The McKinsey poll results are available here.

“…A failure to communicate,” Part II

Since our last post on this subject, New Hampshire Congressman Paul Hodes has informed us that AIG now stands for “arrogance, incompetence and greed.” And, if you believe CNBC, the nation is in an outrage about AIG’s $165 million in executive bonuses, and Treasury Secretary Tim Geithner’s tacit approval of them.

With those additions to the picture — and the considerable number of positive emails we’ve received — continuation of this discussion seems justified.

The jumping off point was Waggener Edstrom’s survey indicating financial-service institutions are not communicating — or are not communicating well — with their several constituencies.

To that, we restate that a heavy emphasis on crisis communications tactics is in order. These, of course, include messaging with candor, timeliness, clear explanations and, in this case, differentiation are among financial institutions.

These are not “happy letters,” as one writer feared some institutions could uselessly resort to.

Quite to the contrary, this must be truly strategic communications. Such a program requires clear understanding of stakeholders’ interests, fears and anxieties; thoroughly addressing issues that undermine credibility; and effectively communicating candid corporate positions in media suitable to each constituent audience.

Further, executing such a credibility recovery program requires a continuing drumbeat of regular communications. A one-off or short-term effort will not ease the anxiety, will not begin to rebuild confidence, and will not stabilize the brand. Anything less than a thoughtful, thorough, continuing communications program will only exacerbate the fears and frustrations of the stakeholder on one side and diminish institutional credibility on the other. [AIG is an exception because we believe credibility of that brand is all but extinct — at least for this generation.]

Commercial and retail borrowers, working and retired investors, small businesses, and retail consumers are among the stakeholders who have a common interest in this situation — financial security. They must trust that their money is safe or that the loans won’t be called.

However, each stakeholder group has a unique perspective and a unique language; those constituent differences must be clearly recognized and convincingly addressed. One size certainly does not fit all.

This blog is not the place to present a communications campaign. However, we can say that it is important for financial industry leaders — many of whom seem to be frozen in the headlights when it comes to communications — need to understand that a communications vacuum will be filled by the worst possible visions of individuals — and the media — if they are not satisfied by credible facts.

And for this counter-attack on credibility, the only appropriate leaders are the financial services CEOs and their C-level teams.

What we have here is a failure to communicate

Here’s a real BGO — blinding glimpse of the obvious — and then some really valuable information.

First, the BGO: Advertising Age writes that “Even PR pros are shaking their heads at [AIG] the blundering giant insurer, which is fast becoming not only the poster boy for financial-industry greed, but also a company seen as too arrogant or stupid to keep out of its own way.”

Now, here’s the really important information; it is consumer research conducted by Waggener Edstrom and reported by AA’s Michael Bush.

"Our research showed that it was consistently clear that consumers are looking to hear from financial-services institutions and they are not," AA quotes Torod Neptune, WE’s global public affairs SVP.

It may be arguable whether AIG can communicate their way through this image disaster or they’re stuck for a generation with a reputation for arrogance and avarice.

However, looking beyond AIG and in the broader financial-banking industry, well, that’s a different story.

Waggener polled 1,000 consumers and found that “many said they are not even hearing from their own banks.” Here are the numbers.

• 44% said they heard something from their financial-service institutions, but felt more negative about the industry afterward.
• 38% said they heard nothing at all.
• 11% said that had heard from their financial institution and felt better as a result.

We think the financial services situation worldwide needs to be treated with a crisis communications attitude and approach, using proven crisis communications tactics.

However, it appears form WE's numbers, the financial-banking sector is either frozen in their tracks traumatized by the whole situation and uncertain what or how to communicate — or they are communicating poorly.

Clearly, there’s room for improvement in both B2C and B2B communications here.

[Several weeks ago, we posted our 30,000-foot view of crisis communications principles in this blog's side column; you may want to take a look at them about half way down on the right.]

You can read the full AA story here.

Good Idea! PowerPoint presentation tips

Here's a good idea!

Love 'em or loathe 'em, PowerPoint presentations are a fact of life. So, if you accept that premise, the better those PPTs are, the better it will be for everyone.

Here's a helpful site/blog, Visually Speaking - effective presentation skills, that we've found has a lot of helpful ideas for PPT creators and presenters.

Tom Mucciolo is the head of Presentation Skills and MediaNet, which are located in New York. He's been a presentation skills consultant for major corporations since 1985. Mucciolo's focus is on the scripting, visual design and delivery -- especially associated with electronic event presentations.

Cut out the 'Gloom and Doom' talk

"In tough times, words matter. Leaders must choose them carefully," says John Baldoni in "Cut Out the Doom and Gloom Talk."

Baldoni's trying to get leaders to stop using terms such as "financial Armageddon," and he summarizes his his advice for the doomsayers with six basic rules of the road. You can read all of them at Susan Weiner's Investment Writing blog.

Have a read; it is worth your time.

Obama & Geithner — A question of the angles of perception

The Administration's popularity with the electorate is well established; however, Obama's success among the experts viewing his performance as the elected leader of the largest economy in the world is quite a different story.

“U.S. President Barack Obama and Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner received failing grades for their efforts to revive the economy,” according to the results of the latest Wall Street Journal forecasting survey.

The Wall Street Journal’s survey of economists gives the Obama and Geithner team failing grades.

“The economists' assessment stands in stark contrast with Mr. Obama's popularity with the public,” the Journal writes.

While Obama enjoys 60+% popular approval ratings in several national polls, the WSJ survey of 49 economists shows a majority is dissatisfied with his administration’s economic policies.

“On average, [the economists] gave the president a grade of 59 out of 100, and although there was a broad range of marks, 42% of respondents rated Mr. Obama below 60. Mr. Geithner received an average grade of 51. Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke scored better, with an average 71.

The economists also disagreed with the administration about when a recovery would begin — later than the Obama team says publicly.

Those surveyed generally believed that the downturn might end in October, pushed out from their August end suggested last month. And they see the U.S. GDP continuing downward through the second quarter, with slow growth returning in the third quarter of this year.

As to the $787 billion economic-stimulus package, 43% of the economists polled said the U.S. will need another stimulus package of $500+/- billion. “Others were skeptical of the need for stimulus at all.”

The economists' “main criticism of the Obama team centered on delays in enacting key parts of plans to rescue banks.”

"They overpromised and under delivered," the Journal quotes Stephen Stanley of RBS Greenwich Capital. "Secretary Geithner scheduled a big speech and came out with just a vague blueprint. The uncertainty is hanging over everyone's head." See edit30 post.

Mr. Geithner’s Feb. 10, speech announced the administration's plans but offered few details — a shortcoming that has been criticized daily in the financial media, and cited as a black cloud of uncertainty that has created anxiety on traders and downward pressure on stock indexes.

While Geither has since appeared before Congress and offered some specifics, he admits that the plan still is weeks away.

Preparing for an economic recovery

A near total lack of visibility is about the only thing business people know for certain thus far in this recession. But Harvard professor John Quelch has a few thoughts about what business marketers need to do while we wait for an economic turn around. Here is a shaved down version of his “seven top recommendations for marketers looking to plan ahead.”

“Focus on high-potential customers.” In the B2B space, those are the ones “where pent-up demand is going to be unleashed once the economy turns.” On the consumer side, Quelch says, “focus on cash-rich or long-term-oriented consumers.”

“Don't assume a return to normal.” The longer and deeper the recession, the more the landscape and consumer behavior will change. What to do? Listen closely to your customers — obviously good advice in any economic cycle.

“Assess your target customers' trust in your brand.” Economic upheavals always tarnish some industries and brands; some may never regain their luster. This creates a need to “add service support and hold [the customer’s] hand more firmly.”

“Stay focused on costs.” Many manufacturers will be plagued by overcapacity and excess supply chain inventories; thus continued downward price pressure. Consequently, keep the pressure controlling costs and improving productivity.

“Know your lead indicators.” Every good marketer knows the specific indicators, macro or micro, that predict product demand. Use common sense: If the Wal-Mart parking lot looks less crowded, some consumers are probably migrating back to Target and vice versa.

“Develop scenarios.” Since recovery visibility will continue to be very foggy, Quelch suggests Peter Drucker’s advise: "A strategy is a sense of direction around which to improvise."

“Don't wait for permission.” Don’t wait for The Wall Street Journal to “declare the recovery underway.” Develop a recovery plan now, and “pull the trigger when your lead indicators say go.”

You can find Quelch’s whole article in the Harvard Business Review online here.

Communications in the changing media environment

A new research report by The Rosen Group that sampled American readers’ about their use of traditional print media versus digital formats confirms what publishers nationwide well know, that “there is a strong shift to online news consumption.”

But, there is a twist here, and it is an important one; this outcome is with respect to consumers’ desire for breaking news.

• 30% of respondents say web sites are the top sources for news updates.
• 66% say Web sites are among their daily news sources.

By contrast, among the same sampling,

• 80% subscribe to magazines; and
• 65 percent find weekly news magazines relevant.

Even though the numbers are somewhat ambiguous, they confirm what we have long believed is obvious: Not everyone is good at everything.

Therefore, we think the implications for corporate communications suggest a careful examination of what media you are using to communicate with your diverse stakeholder audiences, as well as what corporate subjects are focused where. As Orwell noted, "All of the animals are equal, but some are more equal than others."

Here’s our take on the meaning of this research for business communicators:

• Unquestionably digital media is growing in importance and influence. This is especially the case for breaking news. From a corporate perspective this means, product announcements, financial releases, tactical aspects of your strategic focus need to pay close attention to your digital contacts.
• At the same time, don’t be excessively fearful of “citizen journalists,” such as bloggers, because “60% of respondents believe the information on blogs is not credible.”
• While developing a healthy relationships with digital editors, don’t minimize the attention you pay to daily newspaper journalists, and especially to editors of the “long lead books” [magazines that publish once or twice a month] as well as the weekly publications.

Not surprisingly, in an increasingly costly and competitive media world, discrete areas of expertise will win out.

• In this environment where keeping abreast of fast breaking, rapidly changing information is essential, the natural leaders are going to be digital information providers. These will be stand-alone Web publications as well as the digital adjuncts of print media.
• When a broader focus requiring more in-depth and thoughtful trend reporting is appropriate, [and time sensitivity is less of an issue] the traditional print format will rise to the surface. Again, this is likely to be a digital extension of an analog brand.
• A third, and sometimes overlooked, facet of the corporate media mix are the specialized local print media, sometimes referred to as the “neighborhood newspaper.” We opine that they will survive, and therefore should be included as credible avenues to your stakeholders, too. [Everyone has to live in a "neighborhood."] As the late U.S. House Speaker Thomas P. "Tip" O’Neal was fond of saying, “All politics is local,” and we believe corporations are very political animals, whether they like it or not.

To a large degree this media environment is not much different than the one in which corporate communicators have always work. It will continue to require timely, consistent and accurate information dissemination — three communications values that will be more critical than ever.

Your can read the full Rosen Group here.

Biotech Genzyme stumbles on disclosure, credibility

Corporate credibility is based on a lot of factors, one is the timely, candid delivery of information — especially information that can influence share price. Indeed, the SEC has rules about such things.

So, it is with some amazement — and disappointment — to learn that the Boston-area biotech firm Genzyme held material product information from the media and, thus, investors.

Forbes.com reports that the Food and Drug Administration notified Genzyme in two letters on a Friday afternoon that it was “delaying a key product,” Lmuizyme, an approval Genzyme had expected. The company did not reveal the news until the next Monday — three days, including one trading day, later and then only after NASDAQ had closed.

Such material strategic information leaves plenty of room for insider trading before the knowledge becomes widely distributed, as required.

Even so, Genzyme share fell 4% on Friday and 7% on Monday, outpacing declines in the broader market and biotechs in particular.

When Genzyme did disclose the news, the company said the FDA’s action would cut 2009 profits by about 12 cents per share, and the share price fell another 5% in after-market trading.

Forbes wrote that an SEC enforcement attorney believes that Genzyme may have complied with disclosure laws, but that doesn't mean it made the right choice. After all, investors and analysts do read newspapers over weekend, and even on Mondays.

While legitimate business reasons may have motivated the delay, the incident makes one think back to the ImClone Systems scandal, in which former CEO Sam Waksal was alleged to have tipped off Martha Stewart and his family before telling the market about an FDA delay. Waksal went to jail for insider trading; and Martha did too, but that was for lying to investigators.

The financial pressures on all companies today are enormous, but so are credibility pressures.

In such a situation, share price is going to take a hit, but management’s integrity and credibility shouldn’t have to.

"The quicker you get out that kind of material announcement, the less scrutiny is invited. Anybody who sold [Genzyme shares] from the time of receipt until the company made its disclosure should be expecting a call from the SEC." Jacob Frenkel, a partner at Shulman, Rogers and a former SEC enforcement attorney told Forbes.

Here’s the full Forbes article.

Bernanke's perfect speech, a model in style and of clarity

Every corporate speechwriter knows that the proven format for achieving audience understanding is to create a context of understanding; tell the audience what you are going to tell them; tell them; and then tell them what you told them.

That simple four-step rule may get panned for its simplicity, but unjustly so. We believe that it is as close to perfection as you will get on the speech-making circuit — and that's because it works. And today, Fed Chairman Ben Bernanke once again proved the merits of the simple little format.

Bernanke's presentation to the Council on Foreign Relations represents speech construction in virtual perfection. He presents a very complex topic of vast global interest and, therefore, clarity of message is essential.

His format is a textbook example of how to construct — and in his case deliver — an understandable speech using all of the right elements in the right order and in the right percentages.

Bernanke’s 4,222-word speech precisely uses the four elements essential to gaining audience understanding. Here’s how it breaks down.

• Create a context of understanding for what you will say — 629 words, 15%.
• Tell the audience what you are going to tell them; use a headline list — 221 words, 5%.
• Explain the list, which provides the meat of your presentation — 3,136 words, 75%.
• Tell them what you told them by restating your headline list — 236 words, 5%.

Bernanke’s introduction, or context-setting segment, may have been a bit long at 629 for the average business speech, but not for his difficult topic of Global financial reform.

The text of Bernanke's speech, with our identification of its structural components, is available at this link.

Talk about a lack of credibility! Ya’ hear Mr. Geithner?

Two stock analysts from ConvergEX Group, Nick Colas and Oren Klachkin, have come up with a list of 10 headlines that could signal — finally! —a stock market bottom. Ah, something to build on!

Their first suggested headline is a “significant one- or two-day drop in the market.” To the two, “significant” means 10% or more. Holy Dow Jones! Can the market go to minus numbers?

But the second one is probably the most promising for investors, thus the markets, and the most damning for President Obama and Treasury Secretary Tim Geithner and, it is “Timothy Geithner is replaced by Paul Volcker.”

Credibility is everything in business, and the analysts say that, “Fairly or not, the market does not have a lot of confidence in Treasury Secretary Geithner, while former Federal Reserve Chairman Volcker's ‘proven abilities in a crisis could play better with investors.’”

Volcker currently heads the Economic Recovery Advisory Board under President Obama.

Read the full list at MarketWatch.

Clinton's staff gaff sends message to corporate CEOs

Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton showed great aplomb in her globally embarrassing gaff with Russian counterpart Foreign Minister Sergei V. Lavrov in Ankara, Turkey, Friday (3-6-09). Even so, the embarrassing incident speaks worlds about the importance of competent support staff for C-Suite executives in government and private enterprise. (Sergei also appears as Sergey. The Financial Times of London uses Sergei; The New York Times uses Sergey.)

Before the world’s media, Secretary Clinton told Minister Lavrov that her staff “worked hard” to get precisely the right Russian word for the American English term “reset,” or to begin anew. (The wrong word that was used is "Peregruzka.")

The word was important because it was a play on the office supply store Staples' “Easy Button,” and was intended by Clinton to be the continuation of Vice President Biden’s previous commitment to reset previously contentious American relations with Russia, and to move forward with a more cordial tone.

However, when asked about the correctness of the Russian term, Lavrov told Clinton that “you got it wrong.”  The Russian word Clinton staffers selected for the Secretary’s version of the Easy Button actually meant “overloaded” or “overcharged.”

The two laughed off the gaff and Clinton later suggested that “overloaded” might be a correct description for the work level their two governments will find in front of them.

This embarrassment should’t have too much made of it. Mistakes happen, even to the most well intentioned individuals. However, the source of the incident does speak to American short comings in understanding non-American environments. Where were the native-speakers of Russian to double fact-check exact meanings — to say nothing of the nuanced meanings — of the word?

The incident reminds us, once again, of a mentor who believed firmly in the adage that, “if I can’t trust you with the small things, how can I trust you with the big ones?”

Credibility is built on what one does, and doesn’t do; on attention to detail; on the ability to move swiftly, deftly and accurately. This incident will pass and be largely forgotten, as it should be. But the lingering questions remain: how much attention to detail do American leaders devote behind the scenes and how much expertise is available in Washington to understand the cultures, customs and languages of our allies — and enemies?

To optimize business effectiveness, the same goes for CEOs — and their relationships with critical stakeholders.

Communicating the right pricing message

Faced with dramatically falling consumer demand and subsequent downward pricing pressures, some companies — such as inventory-heavy apparels — feel the necessity to lower or even slash retail prices.

But what sort of message does this send to customers? Are you telling them your products really aren’t worth the prices you’ve been charging? Are you communicating mixed messages that will haunt you when the recovery finally begins?

“Discounting and promotions condition the buyer to expect lower prices” and create a customer mindset that makes it “hard to raise prices later when times are better,” according to Paul Nunes, executive director of research at Accenture's Institute for High Performance

Writing in the Harvard Business Review [2-23-09], Nunes calls this the “discount trap,” and says that it exacerbates the difficulties faced when you want to raise prices. Nunes calculates that a 30% price cut today requires a 43% price increase tomorrow to regain price parity.

Therefore, the Accenture director suggests several alternatives that communicate value more effectively.

• Analyze whether your product has comparable competitors that are strong enough to overcome the brand loyalty you’ve established. Price may not be the deciding factor in your customers’ buying decision processes.
  
• Frito-Lay is trying promotions that are “different at the beginning of the month than at the end of the month," CFO Richard Goodman told The Wall Street Journal. "People have more money to spend at the beginning [of the month] and a little less at the end," he said. It is called 'Paycheck cycle' pricing.
  
• “Discount” by increasing the amount of product you sell for the same price. Nunes notes that "20% more product may cost a lot less than offering them a 20 percent discount” and appeals to consumers’ sense of value.
  
• Haggling is back,” Nunes says. “And it's everywhere. Customers are now prepared to ask for discounts even in grocery stores. Let sales people know how much leeway they have in negotiating prices and “train them to ensure they consistently realize the best negotiated price.”
  
• Create deferred payment plans for higher priced items, formerly known as the “lay-away plan.”
  

So, what’s old is new again, and the mantra “Never pay retail” rings loud and clear.

Read Paul Nunes entire article at the Harvard Business Review.

Geithner: The smartest man in the room?

The smartest person in the room can only claim that title if the others think s/he is. That's because personal and corporate reputations are built on third party opinion. Or, as one mentor was fond of pointing out, “PR is what you do, not what you say you do.”

And it surely was with such awareness that President Obama named Timothy Geithner the nation’s Treasury secretary, and the point man to fix America’s piece of the global financial crisis.

Why else would Obama on Feb. 9 say, "My instruction to [Geithner] has been let's get this right. Let's create a template in which we're restoring market confidence.... We've got to restore confidence, so that private capital goes back in."

Those expectations have been so deeply unfulfilled that even the very liberal Time Magazine this week repeatedly defines Geithner’s performance as less than inspiring. Among its observations on the head of Treasury are the following.

• Geithner’s presentation of a “half baked plan to save the banks” was “less than inspiring.”
  
• That delivery “left Washington and Wall Street whispering that Geithner wasn't ready for prime time.”
  
• Time’s own assessment of that performance is that, “He survived.”
  
• Then Time echoes Florida Rep. Ginny Brown-Waite's assertion that “every time Geithner speaks in public ‘the stock market plummets.’”
  
• “He doesn't seem to fill his suit.”
  
• “He talks too quickly.”
  
• “He swallows the ends of his sentences.”
  
• “He gives the impression of a grad student taking an oral exam, not leading the country out of perdition.”
  

Time concludes that Geithner was named Treasury in part because he “was considered a smoother salesman” than Larry Summers.

However, the publication notes that when the Administration rolls out its more detailed bank bailout plans in the next few weeks, Geithner will have another chance to salvage his reputation as a salesman…. But the truth is, if the plans fail on their own, it won't be Geithner's tone of voice or his demeanor that brought him down, no matter what the Washington crowd may say.”

Nonetheless, Geithners reputation as the smartest guy in the room will forever be bloodied and tarnished by abundant skepticism and accusation, which once again proves that reality is what people perceive to be real and reputation is defined by public perception.

Read the full Time story here.

Effective messaging: One poke in the eye, one not

It is virtually a truism that a great deal of what solidifies corporate images among stakeholders are their perceptions of what is true or factual or real. However, what is not always acknowledged among communicators is that what constituents believe to be true, factual or real may differ from actual empirical facts.

Therefore, to get your money’s worth when executing communications campaigns, it is very important to view corporate message from the perspective of the end-user, the stakeholder.

An examination of two general aviation companies provides a dramatic contrast in approaches, the visceral versus the thoughtful.

The companies are Cessna [see earlier post] and Hawker Beechcraft.

Their common objective is to prove the efficacy of corporate aviation, overcome public and Congressional outrage over high-flying fat cat executives, and to staunch declining aircraft sales.

Cessna’s pokes Congress in the eye in its appeal to CEO machismo when it says, "true visionaries will continue to fly." The headline virtually hammers the board table when it shouts, “Timidity didn’t get you this far.” These messages sit above a gleaming Cessna jet aggressively poised to thunder into a threateningly black sky.

By contrast, Hawker Beechcraft ads don’t feature an executive jet, but the workhorse nine-passenger turboprop Beechcraft King Air 350. The message is clear: this is a business tool, not an executive luxury.

Instead of a damn the criticism, man, fly anyway approach, Beechcraft provides an easily understood example of how business efficiency is achieved by Starbucks’ use of its aircraft as prudent, cost-effective business tools.

The ad says, “Starbucks is a uniquely American success story with thousands of locations in more than 40 countries. Like most successful corporations, Starbucks relies on business aircraft to manage and grow its business worldwide. We are here to help them fly even more efficiently than before by showing them how to right-size their flight department.”

"You can debate the size and amenities,” Hawker Beechcraft CEO James E. Schuster said. “But that doesn't negate the basic economic premise of the value of business aircraft to many, many companies."

(USA Today reports that The National Business Aviation Association says that 86% of those on board corporate planes are non-executive employees, such as sales people, technical experts or repairmen doing jobs more quickly in difficult locations that don’t lend themselves to regularly scheduled commercial flights.)

CEO Schuster added that the choice of executive aviation should be "function of the cost of their time," not their egos. "What makes a business competitive [is] getting the most out of the people it employs" and prudent use of corporate aviation is one way to achieve this legitimate business goal.

Links to Hawker Beechcraft, Cessna and the USA Today story.

Stakeholder communications still essential

Corporate communications with stakeholders have taken less of a hit during this recession than during previous economic downturns, reported the Annenberg Strategic Communications and Public Relations Center.

"The only plausible reason for this change is recognition that in our hyper-informational, increasingly transparent environment, organizations of all types need to communicate effectively or see their relationships with their key audiences wither away. This seems to be true even when — or perhaps especially when — times are tough” said SCPRC director Jerry Swerling in a news release.

“Engaging with your stakeholders in cost effective ways is no longer an optional practice; it’s essential," he added.

For the 200 companies surveyed, 7.4% reported 2009 budgets lower than in 2008. “Thus far in 2009, surveyed organizations have further reduced their spending by an average of 3.9% relative to their planned budgets for this fiscal year,” the release stated.

Budget cuts have hit agencies rather than internal staffs. “While the recession has certainly hurt, and there will undoubtedly be more pain in the future,” Swerling said that, “our survey respondents, who come from a wide swath of the economy, have experienced significant but not debilitating budget cuts and have been able to prevent, at least through today, widespread layoffs.

Read the Annenberg release and report here.