A client of PR Newswire (and of my company as the vendor to PR Newswire) wrote a thesis paper for her MBA in Communications. She happens to be the PR Manager for Varian Medical Systems and has been an active user of our MediaRoom service for three years. Meryl Ginsberg gave us permission to make a pretty whitepaper out of her thesis...born of real, hands-on experience with managing online media relations content for her company.

Here's the link to the whitepaper. Enjoy. http://www.hightech-pr.com/prn/2008_05_01/2008_05_01.html 

this is a copy of a post I made on my own blog and I thought it was relevant for our audience.

There's been so much good discussion about the structure (or in this case re-structuring) of the press release. Todd Defren and his team at Shift Communications are carrying the torch on this quest...makes me think of Monty Python whenever I say that.

The Quest for the Holy Grail! King Arthur: "We have ridden the length and breadth of the land in search of knights who will join me in my court at Camelot. I must speak with your lord and master." Soldier: "What? On a horse?" King Arthur: "Yes." Soldier: "You're using coconuts..." King Arthur: "What?" Soldier: "You've got two empty halves of coconut and you're banging them together!"

Dee Rambeau prompted some interesting dialog about hosted content management services while I was away on vacation. In case you hadn’t noticed, David Johnson continued his side of the argument on his blog. His blog is for Phoenix Information Services, LLC, "Speaking to the Automotive Retail World." So David may be coming from a really big and multi-layered industry perspective.

Another participant in the discussion, Dominic Jones, also commented on David’s blog. Dominic comes from IR Web Report, which bills itself as "the world's #1 source for investor relations website advice and best practices."

My own perspective is from a growing, medium-sized global company. While both David and Dominic have their points, I think they miss what is the central issue to me:

- The world is moving to outsourcing (including lots of IT jobs)
- The world is moving to hosted software services (even key business applications such as CRM and ERP)
- There is no inherent advantage for a business to do anything internally that can be done more efficiently by an outside vendor

There was a day when many large manufacturers had their own delivery trucks. Now they mostly let outside carriers do it. There also was a day when large companies had huge PR departments, and huge engineering departments, and huge IT departments. Those days are passing, too.

Corporate websites are business tools. The enabling web technology is just that: it is the carrier of the message, not the message itself. The business doesn’t care how the message is carried. They just want to get it done quickly, reliably, professionally, at the least possible cost, and in keeping with corporate graphic and stylistic standards.

You would have a hard time today finding IT people who do not embrace the Internet. But that was not the case so very long ago. Just as mainframe-oriented IT folks resisted the PC, we’ve all seen our share of IT people who were unprepared for the Internet. This certainly helped gave rise to hosted services, such as Dee Rambeu’s MediaRoom,  which is itself a CMS that is optimized for PR use.

I am a great believer in content management systems, but content management systems don’t have to be tied to internal resources. I’ve had excellent results in outsourcing web development/hosting and associated support services. When K-Tron International created its web department six years ago, the first thing we did was develop a CMS. From the beginning, our focus was on business results, not the technology. We used an outside service to develop and host our first website in 1995, and we continue to use the same service today.

Our web department is separate from IT, though I report to the CFO, as does the head of IT. Although I do not work in IT, am a great fan and supporter of the services they provide. I have excellent working relationships, indeed friendships, with our IT managers.

As K-Tron grows into new markets, or acquires new companies, our hosted CMS allows us to create new websites, or move exiting websites onto the CMS platform. In every case our new business users have enthusiastically embraced the CMS, which frees them to create and manage their content with little or no assistance from K-Tron’s web department and no dependence at all on their internal IT support.

When K-Tron acquires a company, the objective is to let the business run itself. Beyond integrating the acquired company’s financial system into K-Tron’s, one of the few things we change is to move the company’s website into our CMS. You can see examples at Jeffrey and Pennsylvania Crusher of websites that were greatly enhanced by being moved into our CMS. You can also see Penn Crusher’s Chinese website, a new website created at the same time. The results for Jeffrey and Penn Crusher are striking:

- Easy to navigate, user friendly websites that for the first time generate valuable sales leads for the companies and provide enhanced satisfaction for customers and prospects who visit the websites
- Vastly improved search engine visibility
- An exponential growth in web traffic, which has resulted in more business opportunities
- Empowered business users, who can instantly update existing pages and add new pages with no assistance from either web or IT specialists

One final thought on the “big company” CMS issue: When an IT department becomes perceived by another department as a barrier to getting its messages delivered via the web, right or wrong, the IT department has an image problem. They might want to take a look at their own internal public relations. Indeed, rather than playing power games with their PR department, they might want to ask for some help in a) understanding how they have alienated their customers and b) devising appropriate actions and communications to win back the trust and support of their customers.

Don Dunnington

This is important. I've continually spoken about and represented that it is nearly impossible within some organizations for the PR or communications team to adopt new tools to better serve their audiences. Let's assume for a moment that the PR team is searching for a better way...perhaps they've read about online mediarooms or blogs or wikis or podcasts...or attended a presentation about them. So they set about the task of understanding them better. Then they make a decision to buy. This decision falls within their authority, their budget and certainly their professional purview. But since this new "tool" is a WEB tool, it has to get a "signoff" from the organization's IT group.

At this point, the PR professional faces several potential scenarios. The "least" likely of which is an understanding IT representative that gets the big picture, that realizes that the PR person is struggling to do their job effectively within the current toolset offered by the organization, and that this decision to adopt is really a "communications" decision and not a "technology" decision. Like I said...that's the "least" likely scenario.

More than likely, the IT professional will condescend, road block and even insult the PR professional, who clearly doesn't understand the "grand technological scheme" set forth for the organization.

I offer up a real letter. This letter comes from a client that we were working with to implement an online mediaroom. The client was struggling to manage their media relations content because in their words, "our IT is slow and unresponsive...it takes me days to post a simple news release. They say that they're working on it, but I need a quick solution now." I've only edited the letter in places where it mention's names...there is no need to incriminate or point fingers at this organization because the sad truth is that they are not unique. I've had hundreds of conversations with IT gate-keepers over the years...this is the only occasion where I've been sent a letter.

Dear PR Dept. Head: From IT Dept. Head: 

I have reviewed the mediaroom service from XXXXX, read the reports from several IAD managers, and met with them regarding this product.  I agree with their conclusions and support their recommendation not to purchase.  There is no need for all of us to meet. 

This product is a content management system.  We have just purchased a content management system (CMS) in the XXXXX product.  This purchase was made after thorough research, numerous vendor demonstrations and the input of trained web department management and staff, as well as extensive input from staff members throughout the system.  Indeed I made certain to include staff from both the Development Office and Printing and Publications as representatives on the Web Redesign Committee from the very beginning of the process.   XXXXX has nearly every feature listed on the MediaRoom website and will provide the Development Office with the tools you need.  It also has many additional features that allow for the production of web content in a timely fashion on an attractive site. 

We specifically purchased a content management system that, by its very nature, allows sufficient flexibility so that every area of the company will benefit:   public service (both Central and Branches) and offices that wish to get the word out to the public on specific topics such as the Human Resources Office on volunteering or getting a job here at the company, or the Development Office on Getting Involved in whatever ways you and your staff envision.   The Mediaroom product is a specific product geared only to the area of public relations.  The entire reason for IAD's entering into the purchasing of a new CMS is to better market the company.   But we are marketing the company as a whole, not just any one office such as Development.  At one point, you mentioned that PR Newswire could just be a button under the “Get Involved” tab.  This, however, is not the issue.  The real issue is if we will have one website or two, which end up competing with one another.  The organization cannot afford to have separate and duplicative informational conduits that will confuse the public.

 X XXX already allows your staff to build its own content in whatever way you wish.  It contains sections such as a Welcome Page, Organization Overview, Event Calendar, and RSS feed that you have expressed as a need.  If the company purchased specific content management systems for every office and department in the organization, we would have in the neighborhood of 40-50 different systems.  This is why I spent seven months searching for a new Web Department Manager and Assistant Manager and why the Web Department spent about a year and a half convening a systemwide committee to research institutional needs and vendor products to determine the best match for the company.  I am confident that XXXX is that product. 

My staff and I have had extensive experience in dealing with vendors and routinely find that when they claim that there is "no need for IT intervention" this is nothing more than slick salesmanship and little basis in reality.   This is why it is so important that staff trained in both technical areas and contract negotiation are the ones who vet products that will have systemwide impact on our web presence or computer network.

Rolling out a new website is a huge undertaking for any organization.  The first step, after actually purchasing a CMS, is to build out a basic site -- one that says who we are.  Later, that basic site becomes the core on which to hang all the bells and whistles.  The entire process can take a couple of years.  XXXXX provides the solid foundation upon which the company will be able to accomplish that.  I must ask that you afford us the time to do that and that you participate fully in the rollout by building out your Development Office tab.  Later on, if you find an important element is lacking for your office’s needs, we will certainly be open to adding a feature. XXXX became an attractive product to us because of its flexibility and its company’s innovative nature.

The most important thing that Development Office staff can do is to begin producing the web content that you want under the new website's "Get Involved" tab.  Web Manager XXXX has been conducting demos the last few months in different company locations so that staff can be gathering content and updating information in their own individual areas.  I recently assigned all IAD managers to write a description of his/her department so that we will have this ready when it is needed.  IAD staff is willing to help you and your staff in any way possible to do that, if needed. 

7 months finding a web manager? 18 months reviewing vendors? Slick salesmanship and little basis in reality?

There's really very little to be said in critique of this...it is so very obvious. A PR department that is completely hamstrung by an IT group that fails to understand it's job.

Nuff said.