My parents weren’t terribly creative in the naming department. In our global connected world there are a lot of Tom (Thomas, Tommy etc.) Murphys.

In hindsight, I made a classical error rushing to get the obvious Tom Murphy email address on many of the major email services as they launched.

You see, my fellow Tom Murphys share a characteristic, email address amnesia.  Each day my inbox is deluged with emails for someone else.

I try and do the right thing.  If it’s personal correspondence I let the sender know, but if it’s newsletters, or sign-ups for services I just unsubscribe.

I was once pulled into a bitter divorce battle where the partners in question would apparently only communicate via email. The estranged wife refused to believe that I was not in fact her (soon to be ex-) husband.

The variety is mind boggling. And for the record, we’re a diverse bunch that buys a lot of new items during December:

• Retail store loyalty cards
• Parent/Teacher associations
• Sports clubs
• Telephone (especially mobile) subscriptions
• Social networks
• Dating sites – including sites whose name (and I imagine but I never checked) and purpose would make your eyes water
• Warranties for every kind of product you can think of
• Business communications
• Random friend and family emails

It reached it’s peak this week. I received a ‘test’ email from a Tom Murphy with a different address.  As per policy I replied and let him know that this wasn’t his email address. Then he replied.

“Oh yeah I know it’s not my email address but I think I used it to sign up for X about three months ago, can you search through your folders and find my password?”

So I have become an email research service for errant Tom Murphys and their correspondence.

Serves me right.

In a world of instant communications people often want to understand the shortcuts. 

How can you drive great results faster, with less effort?

The truth is – for the most part -  you can’t.  You get what you put into it.

Effort shows. 

Your investment of valuable time let’s people know you care.

“I have only made this letter longer because I have not had the time to make it shorter." Blaise Pascal, The Provincial Letters, 1657

How often have you received a long, confusing, rambling email about something important? It’s a missed opportunity.

If something is actually important, invest the time.

Ironically, brevity takes time.

Spoiler alert…..  there is no secret.

Effective communications happens when you invest time, effort, energy and intellect into it.

Bad communication happens when you don’t do those things and just outsource the thinking and the effort to someone else.

Hello there.

You’ve reached the old home of the Murphy’s Law blog.

You’ll find the page you’re looking for at here:

http://www.tpemurphy.com 

I recently attended an internal communications event. I always enjoy getting the opportunity to meet and hear from other communicators. You’ll always pick something up.

This particular event included a panel with four internal communications practitioners.  They each covered a range of topics from what was working best for their organizations, to using social channels with internal audiences.

The moderator’s last question addressed that most notorious of topics for communicators everywhere – measurement. 

Here were the responses…

Panelist 1 (PR agency): “Well with our client <name redacted> we’re buying access to employees on Facebook.”

My take: OK.  That’s a tactic and many companies are investing in Facebook to engage their employees.  But it’s not really measurement….

Panelist 2 (In-house private mid-sized company): “Our company is just too small to measure communications.”

My take: Eh.  Your company is too small to measure communications but big enough to pay the salary of a full time communications person? How do you justify your existence if you’re not measuring your work?

Panelist 3 (In-house large national company): “Well we’ve a big team that looks after measurement but I don’t really get involved in it.”

My take: Where do I even start with that?  So the company is measuring communications but the communications person never asks to see the results? Oh my….

Panelist 4 (In-house high profile (relatively new) public technology company): “Well our company is all about data.  We’re a completely data driven company.  But to be honest, I don’t use data to measure internal communications. I know what’s working and what isn’t”

My take: Sorry I can’t even address that one…

I sat there quietly.  I’m not sure if I was rocking back and forth in my chair, but I could have been.  I was trying to work out how I could respectfully address just how ridiculous, misleading and wrong these answers were.

I did, respectfully.

But here’s the thing.  The experience worries me about the communications profession.

How, in the 21st century, can a communicator not measure the impact of their work?  How do they get budget? How do they make decisions on the right tools, channels and content to use?  Do they stick their finger in the air?

Back in the early 1990s where there was little or no digital tools or channels, we measured communications.

Today, everything is digital.  Data is everywhere. It’s not expensive. It’s not complex – unless you consider using a search engine complex. How can you not measure the outputs and outcomes of your communications?

I realize that, on the whole, we communicators aren’t mad about numbers, or data and analysis, but today this is central to your job.  Central to understanding the people you’re communicating with. Central to understanding what’s working and what’s not working – where to invest valuable time and resources and where not to invest.

Not measuring communications isn’t a failing or a missed opportunity. Not measuring communications is gross negligence.

If you don’t know about measurement then research it on the web.

Start with Katie Paine or the International Association for Measurement and Evaluation of Communications.

If you want some food for thought listen to this great podcast from the FIR Podcast Network on ROI and measurement.

Measurement isn’t just about justifying your existence, it’s about learning, doing a better job, driving better results. It’s simply a non-negotiable.

There’s a surprising amount of confusion out there about the differences between an objective, a strategy and a tactic. I’m amazed how often I see tactics mixed up with strategies in plans and proposals.

As part of my on boarding process when I started my first PR job back in the early 1990s, they provided a simple but effective way of remembering the differences:

Objective – a description of the end result:

• I want to go to Ireland for a vacation starting on Monday

Strategy – how the objective will be achieved:

• I’m going to travel by plane – it’s faster than going by sea

Tactics – specific actions to be taken:

• Check expedia.com for the best flight prices
• Book a room in the Shelbourne hotel in Dublin
• Hire a car for the trip from Avis

Disclaimer: In an ideal world the opinions I express on this blog and the associated web pages would represent my own personal views and not those of my current, prior or future employers. Of course we know the world is never that simple and I’ll write on this blog with that in mind :).

About this blog

I started this blog back in March 2002.  The original purpose was to try and capture links and content about PR and marketing from around the web.  Unfortunately these days – and 2,400 posts later – I’m not as prolific a blogger as I used to be.

About Tom Murphy

I am originally from Dublin, Ireland but have lived and worked in Washington state in the United States since March 2009.

A big part of my job is digging into how new social technologies and channels intersect with our traditional marketing tools and techniques. So much has changed since I started working in public relations back in 1992, yet the basic fundamentals of great communications have remained constant.

I’ve had the great fortune to work in a range of great in-house and agency roles working with many of the world’s greatest technology brands such as Corel, Gateway, Intel and Microsoft, as well as a range of successful – and of course unsuccessful – independent start-ups. I’ve had fantastic opportunities to work around Europe, Middle East and Africa, Asia, North America and Latin America – and along the way worked on the full range of PR and marketing communications functions from strategy to message development, media relations programs, crisis communications, company spokesperson, agency management, corporate social responsibility (CSR), product communications, internal communications, analyst relations, investor relations, stakeholder engagement, and marketing communications.

Thankfully, the one constant through my career has been the opportunity to continuously learn, try new things and drive positive change.

On a personal note, I’m married to the long-suffering Sorcha and we have the world’s best son, Cillian and the world’s best daughter, Anna.

If you want to get in contact:

E-mail: tpemurphy -AT- hotmail.com

Mobile: +1-425-614-614-6

Twitter: @tpemurphy

Facebook: http://www.facebook.com/tpemurphy

LinkedIn: http://www.linkedin.com/in/tpemurphy

ShareThis

Comment policy: Comments on any of these blogs are moderated. Any comments I deem inappropriate for this blog will be not be posted.  Where those comments are not spam, I will flag that decision with the person who submitted the post. Comments on the PR Opinions blog are closed.

Last October I read an interview with Eric Dezenhall on the changing dynamics of issues management that piqued my attention.

Dezenhall, who was promoting his new book: “Glass Jaw: A Manifesto for Defending Fragile Reputations in an Age of Instant Scandal”, was incredibly pragmatic about how the combination of technological and social trends have changed the nature of a crisis.  Furthermore, he believes that the idea that there is a magic PR potion that can solve any reputational issue is nonsense:

"Most crises are not resolved through rhetoric. They are resolved through operations. What’s more ethical, doing what Exxon did and recognize after Valdez that the PR war was over—and then they spent 25 years investing in double-hulled ships and radically overhauling their safety procedures, and they’ve never had a major incident since—or do you do what BP did and spend half a billion dollars saying you’re a wind and solar company?"

For me, a good business book combines opinion, insight and knowledge that ultimately combine to provoke the reader to think. That doesn’t necessarily mean I agree with the author throughout – and there are some elements of his thesis that merit future discussion – but on the whole it’s a recommended read, if only to challenge you to think harder about how you approach issues management.

As you would expect, Glass Jaw presents a pretty grim picture for people responsible for the positive image and reputation of their employer or client. The emergence of social media and the associated culture of overreaction, coupled with the changes we’re seeing more broadly in society are combining to create a difficult issues environment.

It’s interesting to note that PR people aren’t exactly helping themselves or their colleagues either. I completely echo the author’s sentiment that you can’t work in issues management and not have a ‘deep empathy’ for people fighting a reputational issue.

This makes it all the more surprising to see the rise of the ‘self-invented pundit class that declares the controversy to have been mismanaged’.

He acknowledges that ‘in most crises, there are things that could have been done better, and reflection is constructive. Most high stakes situations include experimental actions – some effective, some not – and we do our best to make more good decisions than bad ones’.

Let me digress from the book for a moment. Having spent a lot of time dealing with a wide array of issues – large and small – I really don’t have any time for the ill-informed armchair pontification that accompanies a reputational issue. Anyone who has been embroiled in a real issue knows that it’s complex, challenging and often surprising. To think that someone sitting comfortably in their pajamas with no knowledge beyond what they’re reading on Twitter – and often not even that level of knowledge – can judge someone’s work is just wrong. In my opinion these ‘pundits’ are the PR profession’s equivalent of ambulance chasers.

Back to the book.

While the author does paint a great picture of the changes taking place that impact how effectively you can manage an issue, there are some things I don’t agree with.

For example, Dezenhall believes that ‘social media is of marginal value and often a disaster’ in crisis management. I both agree and disagree with him. I think it’s becoming increasingly difficult to decide when and more importantly when not to engage in social media, but I don’t agree it’s not a tool or channel that can help in the right circumstance – of course correctly identifying that timing and circumstance is the key.

He also believes there is no ‘trust bank’ and that commitments like Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) while worthwhile, do not inoculate against controversy. I agree that operating responsibly doesn’t give you a ‘get out of jail free’ card, but I’d also point out that if a company is committed to shared value, operating responsibly and meeting its commitments, it inherently reduces risk through more responsible decision making which in turn will aid organizational recovery.

There is always a risk when you’re reading a book about how the world of crisis communications is changing that you’ll finish it having lost all hope.

But there is hope. The world has changed. We deal with more issues today than ever before. Every issue is different, every issue has different dynamics,  we no longer have the luxury of a simple cookie cutt
er approach to successfully addressing an issue. Instead we must evaluate each issue on its own merits and act accordingly – in the knowledge that success is not guaranteed.

Glass Jaw is a welcome addition to this discussion. Just don’t be too depressed reading it. It’s not that bad :).