I have a friend that is currently working on a volunteer project. She is putting in many, many hours as a volunteer to help our former high school celebrate its 100-year anniversary. The small group of volunteers producing this event have done a spectacular job and should be applauded.

In a short time frame, they have reached out and found many grads and engaged us in the celebrations. They are producing a video that showcases some grads doing interesting things in the world. They somehow got funding from a former student, now a successful businessperson, to pay for ads in a large daily newspaper to promote the anniversary celebrations. There are active Facebook events, which include a pub night, a gala and many other activities.

The job they have done is incredible. And yet – each time they announce that they have done something, there are the critics. Who – just for the record – don’t seem to be doing much except watching Facebook and criticizing what these people are doing.

It got me to thinking about criticism and the difference between it being constructive and of value, and when it is of no value – except maybe for making the person giving it feel superior. Constructive criticism has great value. It’s about providing relevant and timely input. It is about making something better. It’s about improving and growing. It’s a crucial component of professional and personal development.

At AHA, we always debrief after a project, initiative or event to look at what we can do better or differently. We look at what worked, and what could be improved – relative to the situation. I can tell you, for as tough as all of us at AHA can be – we are very conscious of how we provide criticism, when that happens and why it happens. We always make sure that we put any criticism into context before the feedback starts.

Random criticism about what someone would have done if they were doing it is of no value to anyone except maybe the ego of the person criticizing. Used as the opportunity to tell someone what you don’t like or what you would have done (which, you didn’t do!) isn’t constructive criticism, it’s just bitching and complaining.

At AHA, our approach is that if you are going to provide feedback that is critical of someone’s work or actions, you need to fully understand the context. For example, what was the deadline, what was the budget, what was the expectation, what was the objective, what were the influencing factors that were out of our control…the list goes on and on.  And, it must include the positives – what went right, what was a success, what can be built on.

Constructive criticism makes everyone involved feel positive about what could be improved. It is delivered in a respectful, considerate manner and it acknowledges not just the context and situation, but the work that was done.

I have to say that I also think that no one should be allowed to randomly criticize volunteers like my friend, who are doing their absolute best, unless the critic is willing to step up and actually participate and get involved. Until you actually do something, you have no idea how hard it is to achieve it.

The objective of a case study is (or can be):

• An example of the skill set and abilities of the agency (showcasing the approach and results) – used for business development.
• An example of approach and results – used as a component of building a “business case” for other projects.
• An opportunity to review the success/challenges of a project with some distance, clarity and context.
• An opportunity to put a project into context – used for the client/agency relationship and for AHA crew members to see the big picture of what, why, when and how.
• A part of the AHA legacy – used for internal purposes in the long term to review our professional path and agency evolution. Could also be used for an anniversary celebration for AHA.

All of these objectives are of value to our PR agency. Developing case studies is one of those tasks that gets put on our to-do list and sometimes doesn’t get the priority treatment it deserves. I always enjoy writing case studies and I always learn something important during the process.

We debrief each project with our AHA crew and, when possible (and in the real world we live in, it’s not always possible), with our client. There are valuable lessons to be learned through a debrief. And there are valuable lessons to be learned by developing a case study. Not the least of which is what worked, what didn’t, and what could be done differently next time.

For me, even writing this blog post has given me the opportunity to think about what could be done differently regarding the development of case studies. An idea for an improvement is that we could commit to developing the case study within one month of the project ending, and share it with the client in that timeline. (There’s always room for improvement.)

I am in red.

For many of us in Vancouver’s Lower Mainland, yesterday was an important day. It was the annual Sun Run, a 10K run through the beautiful streets of Vancouver. It was my first Sun Run and it was a very good personal experience. Interestingly enough, as I sat down with a cup of tea (and two extra-strength Advil) last night and reflected on it, I realized that there were some solid communications lessons in it as well.

Preparation is key
I was fortunate enough to join a Sun Run Training Group in my hometown of Gibsons, B.C. We started in January and met initially for two hours each Sunday morning. We built up our strength and stamina over time. Along with runs on Sundays, in February we went out twice during the week, building speed and stamina. We prepared so that we were ready on the day of the run.

This is true for any communications initiative. Preparation is key. Taking the time to do the research, to understand the audience/community, and to make sure you have covered all your bases has a direct impact on results. Without preparation, you are flying by the seat of your pants and you need luck to succeed. Preparation is the foundation of success.

Check your blind spot
For a short period during the Sun Run, it felt a bit like people bumper cars. People kept banging into each other because as they tried to pass someone; they didn’t check over their shoulder into their blind spot to see if someone else might be there. And with close to 50,000 people in the Sun Run, there was bound to be someone there!

This is easily translated to any communications initiative. It’s important to take a solid, clear look at what the situation is – not what you wish it was or hope it will be – but what it is. Think about what the challenges could be, what could create issues, what could provoke a negative reaction. You need to make sure there’s not something sitting there waiting for you to bang into it.

Trust the community to sort things out
One of the challenges of the Sun Run is that you put yourself in the starting category. The serious runners go first and then it goes through the levels of ability until you get to those who are going to walk the course. And it always happens that people over or underestimate their ability. I am a new runner, but I can’t tell you how many people I passed who were in faster start groups. Rather than create a more complicated sign-up process, the organizers of the Sun Run let us sort it out during the run. For the most part, walkers keep to the right and faster runners to the left. (Not always, but for the most part.) They let the on-the-ground process unfold organically; they trust us to work it out.

When you think about any kind of campaign or outreach, it is important to realize that you can’t control everything and that you need to empower your community to work out some of the issues that you know might come up. People are smart. Most of the time, they will find a reasonable way to work out process challenges of how they connect and participate together. (This doesn’t mean you don’t pay attention to what is going on; it means you give those participating the opportunity to sort it out for themselves before you step in.)

It’s not the big boulders that trip you up, it’s the pebbles
No one in the Sun Run seemed to be tripping over big things like boulders or benches; it was small things – pebbles, an untied shoelace, a small piece of garbage or even a little (slippery) leaf that sent people tumbling to the pavement.

It is easier to recognize what might be a big issue than it is to see something small that could turn into a big problem. If there are little things that catch your attention or someone comes to you with something and your first reaction is to dismiss it, think about it again. You shouldn’t be like “Chicken Little” (the sky is falling!); but watch for the small stuff – it could derail your initiative if it isn’t taken care of.

Measurement is crucial
When I crossed the finish line, it was a pretty sweet moment. I had trained for three and a half months and was proud of myself. I was also interested to see what my time was (1 hour, 6 minutes, 7 seconds by the Sun Run time*) because that will allow me to improve. I can see what was challenging, what I did well, and I can plan for my next 10K. If this run wasn’t timed, it would lose its key point.

Measurement is crucial to communications initiatives. Understanding what works, what doesn’t and why is important to effective communication. There is always the challenge of measuring communications efforts because some things aren’t quantifiable, but you can identify a baseline and work out the key objectives of the campaign or initiative, so you can see where you were, where you wanted to go and where you actually moved to.

*Context is important too – the Sun Run time is based on crossing a marker to start and a marker to finish. I have a running app on my iPhone, which I also used. Interestingly enough, my run app had me up almost a minute in time (I started it before I hit the start line), but it also showed that I ran 11K because it counted my steps and included all of the people-dodging I did. Context matters.

Every great writer I have worked with has realized the value of a great editor. Creating interesting, informative, relevant and engaging content takes both a writer and an editor. It’s a little bit like peanut butter cups… On their own, chocolate and peanut butter are really good; together – it’s a whole different level of delicious. The same goes for those making their living with words. Behind every great writer, there usually is a great editor.

This blog post is of incredible value for anyone who writes or edits. It’s so good that I will leave you to it. Nothing I could say would improve this piece.

We have a fun, interesting looking clock in the AHA kitchen. I am sure it was inspired by the works of Salvador Dali. It is kind of melting and surreal, and when a person first sees it, they are unsure how to tell what time it is. It’s been hanging in the kitchen for about a year now. It seems perfectly normal to those of us who spend any time in the room.

We had an AHA crew member come by a few days ago and her surprised (and fascinated) reaction to the clock was interesting. It was a clear reminder that if you are exposed to something on a regular basis, it can lose its impact on you. It is important to remember that, especially when you are developing messaging, positioning and outreach campaigns. Not everyone will have your knowledge, your exposure, your familiarity – they may not view what you are communicating through the same lens that you do.

As communicators, we often need to take a step back and look at things from different perspectives. To think about how they will be received by each of the stakeholder groups – and potentially by the groups as a whole. At AHA, we have developed a series of questions to ask as we build campaigns or develop messages, positioning or speeches (or just about anything that will be shared). It is important to remove yourself from what you think and put yourself in the shoes of others. Our approach is always to view the work we are doing from a range of perspectives – from supporters to critics to those that just don’t care (and many in between).

The work we do is called communication, but a large component focuses on perception – how what is being shared, promoted, communicated or told is going to be heard.

It’s important to take a step back and make sure that you have taken the perspective of all stakeholder groups into consideration.

There are many, many functions of PR. At the foundation, we help our clients to build positive relationships with their “publics.” (You can replace the word publics with the noun that works for you: stakeholders, audience, target market, employees, government, media, community—the list goes on and on.)

One of the questions that came up when I was speaking to the students was around engagement and the best way to approach it. That depends on the community and the organization’s objectives, but it brought home the fact that PR is about engagement and that you don’t engage by just putting up a Facebook page or opening a Twitter account.

At AHA, we have an in-depth process that we go through with a client when we are focused on engagement. You really need to understand your target market—who they are and how they want to connect with you. (Not how you want to connect with them!) There is a great deal of research involved, the defining best practices, understanding what the organization wants to communicate and discovering what the stakeholders want to hear from the organization. Being interesting, informative and, even, entertaining (which can scare some organizations) is important. You want to provide people with something that is of value to them. If you are just pushing out information, you will lose their interest.

We approach engagement as an evolving entity that needs consistent attention paid to it and that can—and should be—measured on a regular basis. Engagement is an art and a science, and it takes effort. You need constantly pay attention and review what is working and what isn’t.  You need to authentically connect and ask stakeholders what they want. You also need to respond in a timely fashion to their requests, demands and feedback or they will go elsewhere.

To me, engagement is at the heart of what we do. There are a lot of great communications plans that don’t produce results because this one important step—engagement—didn’t get enough attention in the planning stage.

So for any of you reading this that recognize yourself in the paragraph above—STOP CALLING! (I doubt this will do any good. It’s clear after about seven seconds of a conversation that they not only don’t read the blog, but aren’t clear about what we do here at AHA.)

I answered the phone the other day (everyone at AHA answers the phone, it’s how we roll) and on the other end was someone trying to sell me a listing for AHA in some online database that targets lawyers. We don’t get business from lists; it just doesn’t work that way for us. We build relationships, we showcase our expertise, and we are fortunate to receive referrals from colleagues, clients and even journalists. However, I happened to be in between tasks and had just poured a tea for myself, so I had a minute to “fully experience” this call.

She had a pitch, but it didn’t feel authentic. She kept telling me that she had a “free listing”—but the more I probed, the more I realized that there was some trickery to her approach. She sounded deceitful, which was a red flag, and she wouldn’t answer any of my questions with a direct answer.

Below is an excerpt of our conversation:
AHA: “So, this listing is absolutely free and there won’t be any costs at any point down the line?”
Telemarketer: “Let me tell you a bit about the listing, which would put you in front of thousands of lawyers…”
AHA: “So, to go back to my question: Is there any cost at any time for this listing?”
Telemarketer: “This (mumble, mumble) has no cost; it is a basic listing…”
AHA: “I am sorry I didn’t hear the first part of what you said. Is there any kind of a cost attached to this listing, now or at a later date?”
Telemarketer: “This listing is free during the evaluation phase of 30 days…”
AHA: “So there is a cost.”
Telemarketer: “No, it’s free during the evaluation phrase. Your name will be in front of thousands of lawyers who really need PR.”
AHA: “First off, there is a cost. Secondly, how do you know that these lawyers need PR?”
Telemarketer: “Let me ask you something. Are you or are you not the decision maker there?”

That’s when I realized that I was engaging her and wasting my time (and hers) and politely ended the conversation with: “Yes, I am the decision maker and my decision is to demand that you remove me from your calling list. Thank you.” And I hung up.

It felt like she was trying to con me. I got off the phone and I kind of wanted to take a shower. That interaction felt gross; it was deceitful, predatory and without ethics. Once I let go of my frustration and indignation over this ridiculous call, I realized that there were lessons to be learned from it.

Below are the three lessons a bad telemarketer taught me about communications.

Be Truthful

If there is an issue, a challenge or a cost involved, be upfront about it. Don’t misrepresent and don’t fib; if you do, you are going to be found out. People aren’t stupid, they can tell when someone is trying to pull something over on them and there are a lot of people out there that will check the facts you give them and bust you if you are wrong.

We pitch media and bloggers and reach out on social media networking sites all the time. It is our job to position stories and to highlight benefits, but it is done in an authentic way.

Be Respectful

When the telemarketer asked me: “Are you or are you not the decision maker there?” it was appalling to me. There are a lot of people who are influencers that may not be the final decision maker. Keep in mind that you don’t know the power or influence that a person may wield. Respect everyone.

I realize that time is money and that many sales books say to ask if that person has the authority to make the decision to buy, but it’s more complex than that. If you don’t acknowledge and respect the people on the team, you won’t get anywhere near the decision maker.

Be Authentic

I know that the telemarketer was just doing her job and she had a pre-written script that she was meant to follow. But from a communications perspective, it screams of being inauthentic. I am not saying that you shouldn’t have key points if you are calling media to pitch them or are being interviewed—references and resources are a good thing. But if you are focused on delivering a script like the telemarketer, you don’t really hear the objections or the opportunities; you are too busy trying to stay on script.

Do you have any communications lessons you have learned from bad telemarketers?