News that Michael Sitrick is selling his Los Angeles-based firm to an Orange County-based turnaround firm creates an interesting question about whether more deals could occur.
This story in The Wall Street Journal explains why Resources Connection is creating a one-stop shop for firms in distress. (Note: Some may find it interesting that Michael agreed to be interviewed by the Journal, the same paper he was battling just a few months ago after the Journal broke a major controversial story about an Orange County financier who may have been conducting a Ponzi scheme. But if you know Sitrick, he is a master of dealing with the news media.)
For a couple of reasons, the Sitrick-Resources merger/acquisition makes sense. Most obvious is that companies will continue to be in distress and will need consultants who can offer expert services.
Offering a single location for multiple, related services has been the mantra for major media giants like Omnicom and WPP. Advertising, marketing and public relations all seem to go together, allowing for like-minded management and business operations.
The Sitrick-Resources marriage appears to step out of the safety of symbiotic operations. Yes, the model looks logical. It made sense to the firms involved. But, the question is whether two very different types of businesses can blend operations, two different types of mindsets can aim in the same direction?
How many times have we seen mergers fall apart? AOL-Time Warner seemed like a good idea. How many major corporations are forcing non-core business units to prove themselves? Look at Proctor and Gamble putting the challenge to their acquired units.
One thing the Sitrick-Resources marriage lacks is Investor Relations. I mean, real IR expertise. An IR firm was probably behind the scenes of the acquisition. IR firms do well in both good times, when companies are buying other companies, and in bad times, when companies are buying struggling companies. The merger and acquisition pace has only slowed for brief periods.
IR firms, like Abernathy MacGregor, also specialize in the same kind of crisis communications that Sitrick offers, but most only do it quietly. They have to keep the volume down because they usually are working for publicly traded companies.
Which now leaves us with another question: Is the Sitrick-Resources marriage limited only to private companies and other organizations?
If so, what will the market bear in terms of similar mergers? Will a WPP or Omnicom begin to search for the kind of firm filled with the counselors and specialists at Resources?
Stay tuned. Comments welcomed. Prediction: A few more "like" mergers are coming.
Thursday, October 29, 2009
Monday, October 12, 2009
Six things THEY don't have
You are picky when it comes to professional training. I don't blame you.
Especially when money is tight. Which organization do I join? Which conference do I attend? What online seminar is worth the money?
If you are a public relations, communications or marketing professional, either at a company, an agency or on your own - how do I make sense of the multitudes of offers I see daily?
Let me give you six factors to consider when it comes to a convention or conference. In no particular order, here you go. (This should work whether you are a seasoned pro or starting out).
1. The experts. Check out the bios of the panelists. Are they tied to major accounts? Do they look like they have some years on them? Have they moved up quickly in their career? Are they quoted in the trades? Do they hold positions in the trade association or with other organizations? A quick Google search can tell you whether this conference has collected the "top of gamers" or the "desperately seeking credibility" types. Do the descriptions try to "sell" you their credentials or does it become clear you have someone who is going to give you some meat on the bone?
2. The keynote speakers. Yeah, it would be nice if every conference had the complete "A" list, like it would ever happen that Seth Godin, Malcolm Gladwell and the other gurus were all in one place next to a Steve Balmer or another CEO or two from a Fortune 100 company. But keynoters are just the icing on the cake. Some of the best conferences are the ones that focus on great panels, seminars and programs and, maybe, get you an well-known name.
3. The range of programs. I don't know about you, but it seems conferences today are becoming more and more specialized and singularly focused. I used to plan on attending 2-5 major conferences a year with the public relations industry, but because of time (less of it in this economy) and money (same), I need to be on the lookout for the one conference that gives me the full complement of programs. Today, I can't afford to be highly specialized. Today, it pays to get a range of training and experiences under your belt - if only to borrow ideas from another field or medium. A health care tactic or strategy just may be applicable to some of my public affairs work.
4. The networking. Let's face it, it's not only the training, but the networking and the parties that make a conference worthwhile. OK, so the day is ending and you have every intention of running back to your hotel room to get some work done, or read the book you brought along. But, that person from Memphis you just met at the morning session sounded like he/she had some intriguing life stories and was going to grab a drink at the bar across the street. And, he/she invited you to meet her/his friends. Forgot the book. Network. The odds are generally in your favor that you'll meet a lifelong connection who will come in handy someday. After years of attending conferences, I have friends across the country - each with the right, specific answer to the most unique question or dilemma I come across. And, they all know where I work so my company's reputation and name recognition is marketed with just a couple of beers.
5. The location. Vegas? Been there. New York? OK, still have fun there. But, why not pick somewhere new and different? When a conference pops up in a city you've never seen - it's the one and only chance you likely will see this town. At least, not as a layover to somewhere else. I have been fortunate to have seen some very important sites in Philly only because a convention was there. I've managed to see football games in Detroit's and Philadelphia's new stadiums because of conventions. I've been to well-known museums. And, of course, some famous bars. Go ahead. Dream.
6. The price. If you are considering a conference that lasts 2 or 3 days, there are probably 30, 40 or 50 sessions. Maybe more. Now, consider the asking price for a teleseminar or webinar. Take the lowest price webinar and then multiply that by the number of likely sessions you'll attend at a conference. Now, do you start seeing the economies of scale? A packed conference will have a much higher rate of return. Let the boss know this when you ask to have the company pay for this training.
Bonus: An extra tip. Leadership training. Look for the conferences that have sessions designed to make you a manager. Even if you never become an EVP or team leader, these sessions will make you a more valuable member of any team.
So, now look at the PRSA 2009 International Conference and see how these factors line up.
Hurry. The conference is less that a month away. Go to www.prsa.org/ic2009
Especially when money is tight. Which organization do I join? Which conference do I attend? What online seminar is worth the money?
If you are a public relations, communications or marketing professional, either at a company, an agency or on your own - how do I make sense of the multitudes of offers I see daily?
Let me give you six factors to consider when it comes to a convention or conference. In no particular order, here you go. (This should work whether you are a seasoned pro or starting out).
1. The experts. Check out the bios of the panelists. Are they tied to major accounts? Do they look like they have some years on them? Have they moved up quickly in their career? Are they quoted in the trades? Do they hold positions in the trade association or with other organizations? A quick Google search can tell you whether this conference has collected the "top of gamers" or the "desperately seeking credibility" types. Do the descriptions try to "sell" you their credentials or does it become clear you have someone who is going to give you some meat on the bone?
2. The keynote speakers. Yeah, it would be nice if every conference had the complete "A" list, like it would ever happen that Seth Godin, Malcolm Gladwell and the other gurus were all in one place next to a Steve Balmer or another CEO or two from a Fortune 100 company. But keynoters are just the icing on the cake. Some of the best conferences are the ones that focus on great panels, seminars and programs and, maybe, get you an well-known name.
3. The range of programs. I don't know about you, but it seems conferences today are becoming more and more specialized and singularly focused. I used to plan on attending 2-5 major conferences a year with the public relations industry, but because of time (less of it in this economy) and money (same), I need to be on the lookout for the one conference that gives me the full complement of programs. Today, I can't afford to be highly specialized. Today, it pays to get a range of training and experiences under your belt - if only to borrow ideas from another field or medium. A health care tactic or strategy just may be applicable to some of my public affairs work.
4. The networking. Let's face it, it's not only the training, but the networking and the parties that make a conference worthwhile. OK, so the day is ending and you have every intention of running back to your hotel room to get some work done, or read the book you brought along. But, that person from Memphis you just met at the morning session sounded like he/she had some intriguing life stories and was going to grab a drink at the bar across the street. And, he/she invited you to meet her/his friends. Forgot the book. Network. The odds are generally in your favor that you'll meet a lifelong connection who will come in handy someday. After years of attending conferences, I have friends across the country - each with the right, specific answer to the most unique question or dilemma I come across. And, they all know where I work so my company's reputation and name recognition is marketed with just a couple of beers.
5. The location. Vegas? Been there. New York? OK, still have fun there. But, why not pick somewhere new and different? When a conference pops up in a city you've never seen - it's the one and only chance you likely will see this town. At least, not as a layover to somewhere else. I have been fortunate to have seen some very important sites in Philly only because a convention was there. I've managed to see football games in Detroit's and Philadelphia's new stadiums because of conventions. I've been to well-known museums. And, of course, some famous bars. Go ahead. Dream.
6. The price. If you are considering a conference that lasts 2 or 3 days, there are probably 30, 40 or 50 sessions. Maybe more. Now, consider the asking price for a teleseminar or webinar. Take the lowest price webinar and then multiply that by the number of likely sessions you'll attend at a conference. Now, do you start seeing the economies of scale? A packed conference will have a much higher rate of return. Let the boss know this when you ask to have the company pay for this training.
Bonus: An extra tip. Leadership training. Look for the conferences that have sessions designed to make you a manager. Even if you never become an EVP or team leader, these sessions will make you a more valuable member of any team.
So, now look at the PRSA 2009 International Conference and see how these factors line up.
Hurry. The conference is less that a month away. Go to www.prsa.org/ic2009
Thursday, September 3, 2009
PR pro handling Jaycee Duggard family
Based on her resume, Erika Price Schulte is a likely choice to act as the spokesperson for the Jaycee Dugard family. Erika is shown here during the OC Register's exclusive interview with Jaycee's aunt.
Based on a cursory search, it appears Erika has some experience with missing children issues. A resume shows she is on the board of trustees for the Joyful Child Foundation, created in the memory of Samantha Runnion, who was kidnapped and murdered in 2002.
The rest of her resume is below, as it once appeared on Dailey Marketing. (The Daily Web site does not list her).
An experienced public relations professional with a broad, fifteen year background in both corporate and agency environments,Erika has directed corporate communications and public relations initiatives for premium brands such as Canon, Toyota andBosch, as well as entrepreneurial ventures and local organizations.Her expertise in media relations and special events has earned recognition and awards from leading organizations such as PRSA, IABC and the Bulldog Reporter, but much more important, she is known for getting results and achieving success for her clients.
Erika prides herself on a high level of professionalism, and maintains solid working relationships with top reporters, editors and journalists at both a local and national level.Her strong verbal and written skills help ensure clarity and accuracy when communicating with the media.
She also is active in several philanthropic organizations, including The Joyful Child Foundation - In Memory of Samantha Runnion, where she serves on the board of trustees, volunteers as spokesperson and communications director and advises founder Erin Runnion on all communication strategies and media appearances.Erika also serves on the board of directors for the California Conservatory of the Arts, providing communications guidance and support for the school.
Erika earned her Bachelor of Arts degree in Communications/Public Relations from California State University, Fullerton.
An experienced public relations professional with a broad, fifteen year background in both corporate and agency environments,Erika has directed corporate communications and public relations initiatives for premium brands such as Canon, Toyota andBosch, as well as entrepreneurial ventures and local organizations.Her expertise in media relations and special events has earned recognition and awards from leading organizations such as PRSA, IABC and the Bulldog Reporter, but much more important, she is known for getting results and achieving success for her clients.
Erika prides herself on a high level of professionalism, and maintains solid working relationships with top reporters, editors and journalists at both a local and national level.Her strong verbal and written skills help ensure clarity and accuracy when communicating with the media.
She also is active in several philanthropic organizations, including The Joyful Child Foundation - In Memory of Samantha Runnion, where she serves on the board of trustees, volunteers as spokesperson and communications director and advises founder Erin Runnion on all communication strategies and media appearances.Erika also serves on the board of directors for the California Conservatory of the Arts, providing communications guidance and support for the school.
Erika earned her Bachelor of Arts degree in Communications/Public Relations from California State University, Fullerton.
Where are the stories?
(My apologies today - veering off the PR blog for a journey into my past as a journalist)
Perhaps one fallout of the decline in print journalism and the rise of electronic and social media is the ability to capture the drama. The rush to get news out fast via blogs, Twitter and 24-hour TV news cycles is, by this observer's opinion, leaving us with less of the emotional aspects of a story. Is speed killing the ability to tell us the complete story? Are we simply OK with tidbits?
When I began my career as a journalist, I was captivated by dramatic stories and the writers who could convey a great story. I was told by journalism teachers (like my friend Joe Saltzman and the late great Bill Farr) and some editors to always "paint a picture" so the readers could feel they were actually next to you, observing what you were seeing at the time. This was always my challenge as a writer.
As a journalist, you usual arrive to a story after it happened. If you are fortunate, you can report and collect facts as a story is unfolding before you. However, since you are usually reporting about something that you didn't directly observe, it was (is?) incumbent to probe, ask questions and collect information to write "a story."
Some of the greatest news writing occurs in catastrophes, when the human spirit is tested, when conditions are extreme. Wars provide opportunity to convey the human struggle, the drama of the moment, the extreme tests, the sadness, the glory and the pure, raw emotions. Nobody likes war. But, news stories about war are necessary because human lives are at stake, countries are anguished, leaders are questioned, and so on.
In Los Angeles these past few days, we had our own little war - the largest wildfire ever. What began as a small brush fire in the hills above La Canada at 3:30 p.m. Aug. 26, soon grew into a deadly monster. Two firefighters lost their lives. At least six people were injured. Nearly 100 homes were lost. Nearly 5,000 firefighters battled flames on three or four major fronts. Smoke choked a city. What began as a small hillside fire that was originally 20% contained within 300 or so acres, soon became an uncontrolled beast that wiped out a major national forest.
Yet, for the most part, local journalism covering this major dramatic moment lacked drama. Sure, we had occasion stories of drama - like rescues of wild and exotic animals at refuges or the battle to save radio towers and historic observatories. But, when you have thousands of firefighters spread out over 150 square miles and flames more than 100 feet high, it's time to get into the field as a reporter and get the news. (Note: Many great news photographers did not let us down in this one).
I don't mean to pick on an particular news organization or reporter, but I will offer one story to exemplify my point. Today's article in the Santa Clarita Signal tells the story of two animal trainers in Acton who saw the fire coming, forcing them to relocate bears, deer and elephants (yes, Elephants!) before they got trapped by 100-foot flames. With him were firefighters who also were trapped and they used his stone house as protection while the flames roared past. The owner stayed in his stone house. Everyone survived.
This may not be the MOST dramatic story of this fire, but is certainly could be in top five. There is so much more to tell in this story, so much more emotion and "color" to paint the picture. (Could you have at least asked the normally silly question: "Were you scared?").
Worse? We're getting this story nearly five days later. The drama happened Saturday, Aug. 29. The only other news outlet to interview Handley (from a quick Google search) was the CBS network news two days earlier - and that was only a story about residents refusing to evacuate. Hardly a mention about the drama that came across Handley, his neighbor, the animals, the trapped firefighters.
Perhaps one of the greatest stories about a deadly wildfire was in a book, about the 1994 Colorado "South Canyon" fire that killed 14 firefighters. What made me read the book was an excerpt in a magazine. Even the excerpt was storytelling at its best, providing me the picture and the drama as if I was there. That story then was a new benchmark for me as a writer, a new challenge to write better.
So, what's your view? Are we losing the ability to capture a story in our rush to get news out via the Internet? Maybe we're OK with the tidbits via a blog or RSS feed and will be OK to get the story much later when the book is published? Not me.
Next up will be how we take all this into consideration as we do our public relations jobs.
Perhaps one fallout of the decline in print journalism and the rise of electronic and social media is the ability to capture the drama. The rush to get news out fast via blogs, Twitter and 24-hour TV news cycles is, by this observer's opinion, leaving us with less of the emotional aspects of a story. Is speed killing the ability to tell us the complete story? Are we simply OK with tidbits?
When I began my career as a journalist, I was captivated by dramatic stories and the writers who could convey a great story. I was told by journalism teachers (like my friend Joe Saltzman and the late great Bill Farr) and some editors to always "paint a picture" so the readers could feel they were actually next to you, observing what you were seeing at the time. This was always my challenge as a writer.
As a journalist, you usual arrive to a story after it happened. If you are fortunate, you can report and collect facts as a story is unfolding before you. However, since you are usually reporting about something that you didn't directly observe, it was (is?) incumbent to probe, ask questions and collect information to write "a story."
Some of the greatest news writing occurs in catastrophes, when the human spirit is tested, when conditions are extreme. Wars provide opportunity to convey the human struggle, the drama of the moment, the extreme tests, the sadness, the glory and the pure, raw emotions. Nobody likes war. But, news stories about war are necessary because human lives are at stake, countries are anguished, leaders are questioned, and so on.
In Los Angeles these past few days, we had our own little war - the largest wildfire ever. What began as a small brush fire in the hills above La Canada at 3:30 p.m. Aug. 26, soon grew into a deadly monster. Two firefighters lost their lives. At least six people were injured. Nearly 100 homes were lost. Nearly 5,000 firefighters battled flames on three or four major fronts. Smoke choked a city. What began as a small hillside fire that was originally 20% contained within 300 or so acres, soon became an uncontrolled beast that wiped out a major national forest.
Yet, for the most part, local journalism covering this major dramatic moment lacked drama. Sure, we had occasion stories of drama - like rescues of wild and exotic animals at refuges or the battle to save radio towers and historic observatories. But, when you have thousands of firefighters spread out over 150 square miles and flames more than 100 feet high, it's time to get into the field as a reporter and get the news. (Note: Many great news photographers did not let us down in this one).
I don't mean to pick on an particular news organization or reporter, but I will offer one story to exemplify my point. Today's article in the Santa Clarita Signal tells the story of two animal trainers in Acton who saw the fire coming, forcing them to relocate bears, deer and elephants (yes, Elephants!) before they got trapped by 100-foot flames. With him were firefighters who also were trapped and they used his stone house as protection while the flames roared past. The owner stayed in his stone house. Everyone survived.
This may not be the MOST dramatic story of this fire, but is certainly could be in top five. There is so much more to tell in this story, so much more emotion and "color" to paint the picture. (Could you have at least asked the normally silly question: "Were you scared?").
Worse? We're getting this story nearly five days later. The drama happened Saturday, Aug. 29. The only other news outlet to interview Handley (from a quick Google search) was the CBS network news two days earlier - and that was only a story about residents refusing to evacuate. Hardly a mention about the drama that came across Handley, his neighbor, the animals, the trapped firefighters.
Perhaps one of the greatest stories about a deadly wildfire was in a book, about the 1994 Colorado "South Canyon" fire that killed 14 firefighters. What made me read the book was an excerpt in a magazine. Even the excerpt was storytelling at its best, providing me the picture and the drama as if I was there. That story then was a new benchmark for me as a writer, a new challenge to write better.
So, what's your view? Are we losing the ability to capture a story in our rush to get news out via the Internet? Maybe we're OK with the tidbits via a blog or RSS feed and will be OK to get the story much later when the book is published? Not me.
Next up will be how we take all this into consideration as we do our public relations jobs.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)