What are the common issues that hinder successful communications? When you work with many different organisations, as we do here at Agenda, you get to spot trends in the way people work. Some of these approaches to comms can be helpful, others not so much.
During a recent session with fundraisers in the Fuel network, run by Andy King of Fireside Fundraising, Becky Slack shared five of the most common issues that make communications harder to deliver.
1. For comms sake! Why strategy should always drive tactics
We regularly have organisations approach us wanting a PR plan. When we ask which media they want to target, the answer is usually “tier 1 outlets” (so the big well-known print, broadcasters and online providers). When we ask who they want to influence through this media coverage, they often say “the general public”.
When we ask how this activity will support their comms strategy, the answer is frequently – “er, what comms strategy?” And when we drill down further and ask how this will support their wider organisational strategy... well, you can guess the response.
Similarly, we are often asked to run social media campaigns, build apps, run events – all activities the organisation wants to do because that’s what they’ve always done or it's what other orgs are doing, or it's what the CEO or trustees want to do - with very little consideration of whether this is actually going to deliver the desired outputs and outcomes.
More often than not, there is no comms strategy in place to drive thinking and planning. And in too many cases, there isn’t an organisational strategy either.
There’s no point in doing comms for comms sake. Communications must support your wider organisational goals, otherwise you will end up spending time and money pushing out content which might or might not get in front of your target audiences and might or might not have the right messaging and right ask.
The starting point for all communications activities should be: How is this activity going to support our work, who do we need to reach and how best to reach them, what do we want them to think, feel and do with the information we are sharing – and why should they care?
Key takeaway: Strategy always comes before tactics.
2. When ambition exceeds budget: how to get maximum bang for your buck
I suspect this is an issue that is familiar to you all. It’s certainly something we relate to here at Agenda. We love working with organisations that want to think big and be brave. The challenge comes when the available budget isn’t equally as ambitious.
To give you a sense of some of the work we’ve been asked to do and the accompanying budgets:
Can you please quadruple our six-figure income? With £8,000 of investment
We have no brand profile or supporter database. Can you deliver a nationwide PR campaign, major event, and a fundraising campaign to secure £50,000 and 1,000 new supporters for £15,000?
We want a major presence at a global summit, a cross-channel/cross-country campaign that will raise our profile and secure new partners, and a video featuring high-profile people from around the world. We’ve got a budget of £25,000.
Clearly, to deliver the above projects, the budget available was not sufficient. In situations like this, either an organisation needs to budget properly or amend their expectations.
When there’s no choice but to work with a limited budget, activities need to be designed to deliver maximum bang for buck. Which again is where good organisational and communications strategies come into play. These will allow you to identify the most important goals and audiences and tailor your activities accordingly.
Key takeaway: With limited budget, you need to pick the activities that are going to give you maximum bang for your buck. And a healthy dose of realism is essential.
3. You want to do what by when? Why timing is everything.
As a consequence of not having a comms strategy, comms activities suffer from a lack of planning and proper consideration. More often than not, they are an after-thought at the end of a project. Or the person commissioning the work fails to take into account the process required to deliver whatever it is they are asking for.
For example, while making a video for a client, we were told that the Prime Minister should be one of the talking heads. The deadline for the video was three weeks away. Assuming this interview was something that had already been recorded, we asked for the footage, only to be told that this was something we were expected to source. The video brief was then revised accordingly.
Another common occurrence is us being asked to secure media coverage for a report that’s due to be launched in a few days. In these instances, it is rare that any thought has been given at the start of the report research and writing process as to which media might be interested and why, what the top line might be, or the lead-in times required for a successful pitch.
Campaigns take time to pull together – stories need to be sourced and approved, materials need to be created, case studies interviewed, written up and signed off, journalists need to be pitched, media interviews need to be booked in, back and forth needs to be managed.
The publication schedules of the titles you want to work with are also important. For example, women’s monthly magazines tend to work on their Christmas issues in June and July, so there’s no point pitching Christmas stories to them in November or December as you’re too late.
Key takeaway: Comms input is required at the start of a project and activities need to be planned well in advance, even if the bulk of the work doesn’t need to take place for several months.
4. Doing more harm than good: Why comms skills need investment
Investing in comms skills, even if comms isn't your core role, is important if your organisation is to perform well. You need to know what’s possible and what’s not, what the best approaches are for your needs, and whether your comms activities are achieving the desired results.
Even if you are outsourcing a comms project to a freelancer or agency, you still need to have a basic understanding of the work involved if you are to provide a good brief, set realistic expectations and invest your money wisely.
For example, we were once approached to run a PR campaign that would achieve tier 1 coverage in a particular region of the country. There was a £3,000 budget. The charity wanted to promote its work in that area so that they could secure more government funding. When we asked what the story was, we were told “charity does good work”.
“Charity does good work” is not a story. Journalists are interested in stories that are new, unique, which offer something surprising or shocking, and which hold powerful people to account. There is nothing new or unique about a charity that has been running a service for several years continuing to run that service.
There were no strong case studies or data available to support the story, and the charity was not willing to say anything contentious for an opinion piece due to not wanting to upset the funder. Nor would they pay for any research that would create a news hook. There was nothing interesting to say, no story, no sell.
When I said that the lack of a strong story meant it wouldn’t be possible to place the level of coverage they wanted and so we wouldn’t be able to help them, the person commissioning the work didn’t believe me. Apparently other agencies had already quoted for the work. My reply was to ask those agencies how they planned to achieve results when there was no story for journalists to cover.
Key takeaway: If you don’t know what makes good comms, how do you know if you’re commissioning the right activities or if they’re delivering the right results for you?
5. Comms: the lifeblood of an organisation
People don’t donate to orgs they’ve not heard of.
People don’t use services if they don’t know they exist.
People don’t want to work for organisations they don’t trust.
Comms is as essential to an organisation and its work as managing the finances. It covers everything from customer service interactions to how easily website visitors can find information, to how your teams interact with each other, to predicting and mitigating risk. The way in which you communicate impacts your reputation, your income, your talent pool and your services.
And yet despite this, comms is frequently thought of as a ‘nice-to-have', a bit fluffy, or ‘can we get an intern to do it?’.
This is reflected in the sector’s media (where’s the magazine dedicated purely to comms to accompany the many about fundraising?), in recruitment practices (how many fundraisers do you know who get to promoted to director of fundraising and comms versus the number of comms people who get promoted to the same job?), and in the way it’s funded – when it comes to budget cuts, comms is often the first budget line to be slashed.
This is folly.
When there is a lack of interest in communications from within the senior leadership team, when comms isn’t even represented on the senior leadership team, we see the following things happen:
Good comms is harder to achieve: A lack of participation in comms activities by people outside of the comms team (if there is one) can make it very difficult to source stories, secure media coverage, keep digital channels updated, use data and insight to inform strategic decisions. This in turn impacts on brand recognition and reputation, team morale, and inevitably, results..
Money is wasted: A lack of support for, and understanding of, communications can mean that money is spent on the wrong things, as per the examples above, thus creating the perception that comms doesn’t add value
Opportunities and risks are missed: A lack of a comms culture across an organisation can result in missed PR moments, missed chances to reach new audiences, missed occasions to showcase the great work that’s been achieved. And it can mean risks are not spotted and crises are not averted.
No one wants this for their organisation, their people or their customers.
Key takeaway: Investment of time, energy and budget into integrated communications is absolutely essential for a healthy and sustainable organisation.
What do you think about the above? Does it reflect your own experiences? Is there anything missing from the list of pitfalls? We’d love to hear your thoughts.
If you’d like to find out how Agenda can help you deliver consistently excellent comms that have influence and impact, get in touch at hello@your-agenda.com