The Digital Temple

Could Muhammad move a mountain or was that just PR?

 

- Judas, Jesus Christ Superstar

 

Business, Politics, even Charity spends oodles of money every year selling brands.  The goal is to ensure their message is read in every newspaper, heard on every radio, seen on every television; the PR folk want the message to resound throughout the entire Internet.

 

But what is the message?  Whatever the service, product or position, it almost invariably boils down to reminding or convincing people of why they need us.

 

Almost.  Not always. 

 

I'm pretty sure the founders of religions (like Christ or Mohamed), philosophies (like Lao-tzu or Rumi) or movements (Gandhi) didn't hold a lot of fundraisers.  As such, they weren't beholden to sponsors - just their visions.  This helped keep barriers from forming between those visions and the people who would follow them.
 

 

An idea. Resilient, highly contagious. Once an idea has taken hold of the brain it's almost impossible to eradicate. An idea that is fully formed, fully understood. That sticks, right in there somewhere.

  - Cobb, Inception

 

A couple of things about ideas. 

 

The best ones tend to start free.  They inspire proactive action rather than incite reaction.  They also don't require a lot of PR.  The Golden Rule has popped up in every major religion, regardless of its origin not because of promotion, but because of its inherent power.

 

Oh - and they're bulletproof.

 

The same does not apply to manufactured coalitions of concepts slapped together with the hopes of appealing to manufactured constituencies.  Built on fabricated foundations, these policy packages are employed by Parties and rely heavily on extrinsic promotion. 

As is the case with genetics, while the packages spend time and energy selling themselves, ultimately it's the best ideas that carry on in the long-term.  This is why Political Parties, whatever their name brand, shift along the political spectrum depending on when and where they find themselves.  Their constituencies must adapt to modern contexts and therefore politics is ultimately the dog being wagged by the tail, whatever its practitioners convince themselves.

 

Inflexible brands are like flower pots; they either kill that which they attempt to contain through excessive restraint or break under the natural inclination to grow further.  This is why we eventually transplant individual flowers to collective gardens.  We don't leave gardens to grow wild - that just begs for cleansing brushfires that clean everything away, strong and weak.  Instead we ensure the health of each plant by also maintaining the well-being of the whole.

 

"Strength through unity" is a box, implying unity under one roof - something impossible with an expanding constituency.  Any variation on "us vs. them", to maintain a stable constituency of some kind, will inevitably exclude a majority to retain a minority.  The flower outgrows the pot.

 

Strength through diversity, on the other hand, isn't about borders - it's about adaptation.  The idea is to provide space and opportunity for each individual to reach their maximum potential in a collaborative setting, creating an evolving whole that is more than the sum of its constituent parts.

 

The church, after all, isn't a building - it's wherever godspeople are praying, sharing, collaborating.  That can be a patch of arable land in the Middle East or the Far East, along the Andean coast of South America or in Sub-Saharan Africa.  Increasingly, it's starting everywhere and connecting via the Internet.

 

Society has always had community hubs; these could be a home, a church, a market, a legislature.  Now we're finding these taking root online. 

 

And there's the rub; the best ideas don't sell themselves to grow their constituencies; it's growing constituencies that need adaptive ideas to make them whole.  Understanding is the place where diversity meets and innovation happens; when we all turn our individual strengthens in one direction, we can move mountains.

 

 

Kool, Topp & Guy Public Affairs: Teaching Clients to Fish?

The three partners won’t act as lobbyists themselves – making them part of an increasing number of firms that offer strategic advice on whom to talk to and what to say rather than approaching government decision-makers for their clients.

Smart people of different opinions pooling their resources and perspectives together, collectively providing advice to clients on how to fish for partners and support?

This is notable.  And quite possibly encouraging.  We'll see where this trend leads next...

FURTHER: As this piece is suddenly quite popular, here's where I think we're going wrong with selling public services in a quasi-capitalist model and an idea or two, conversation starters really, on how to capitalize on expanded knowledge of how people behave and new technology to nurture a more empowered, sustainable system.  A healthy society, as it were.


UPDATED:  This piece seems to be getting a lot of attention of late, which I will take as a positive thing.  So, for those interested in learning more about the "teach to fish" model of doing business, be sure to check out Swerhun Facilitation as well.  They make more than enough money doing what they do (amazing facilitation) to allow for them to dedicate staff time to their core objective of putting themselves out of business.

Yup, you read that right.  The Swerhun folk (special props to Bianca and Yulia) want everyone - politicians, community groups, residents - to have the capacity to facilitate as well as they do.

They know it won't happen in their lifetime and even if it did, they're smart enough to find something else to get paid doing.

Empowering others - is there a future business model in this?  Flies in the face of traditional capitalism, so we'll see.  I remain hopeful.

The Future of GR (The Government Relations Industry)

Had a former political staffer friend of mine ask me a couple questions about Government Relations today.  He wanted to know if it was possible to start your own GR shingle these days and what was better - to slug it out on your own or to accept the limitations of working for someone else?

For what it's worth, this is the answer I gave him:

Here's the reality; GR, as it has evolved over the last decade or so, is in decline.  Government rules are tight (and are only going to get tighter) and with the prospects of global economic uncertainty for the foreseeable future, businesses are hesitant to try new service providers.  When the pressure's on, you go with known commodities.  Plus, there are way too many newbies on the market, trying to make the cut.

What I'm seeing happen is that existing firms are either petering out, merging (or at least engaging in more partnerships) or growing.  Those trying to break into GR independently are doing piecemeal work offering to do everything from database management to press releases in addition to standard GR.  Potential clients see what's happening and are encouraging pro-bono work, suggesting if they're going to pay money they might as well go with the established experts.  This pro-bono work leads to either businesses bringing talent in-house or bigger GR firms snatching them up.

Even the bigger, successful GR firms are branching out into business management, more PR/Comms, that sort of thing.  The water hole is shrinking, so it's diversify/evolve to survive, or fall behind (there's a lesson for the CPC in here). 

If you really want to break in as a fresh face, you're going to have to develop an untapped market to play in.  To this end, look at what's going to be needed down the road and start laying seeds now.  The Knowledge Economy is the next big thing; that means education, workplace development, cognitive development and that great social taboo, mental health.  Also keep this in mind; the future of the industry won't be two-way chats between Client and Government, but multilateral conversations that connect Government, the Private and Not-For-Profit Sectors in collaborative, initiative-driven opportunities.

It's a tough row to hoe, but if it's what you want to do, go for it.  To last, though, don't go in it for the money.  The model to follow is teaching - find what you're passionate about and pursue that.  You'll end up happier that way, too, whether it pays big bucks or not.  Expect it to be an uphill trajectory, though - the best approach is to have another gig and then slowly build a brand for yourself from there.

Cheers,

CCE

I wouldn't say I'm an expert on GR, but there are seasoned vets that peruse this blog.  What do you folks think?