Tom Cheesewright of AND Partners left the following comment after I posted a piece about an enterprising graduate:

“When it comes to graduates looking for a job, any effort is welcome.

I get shed loads of letters and emails from grads that start ‘Dear Sir/Madam’.

How difficult is it to look up my name?

From there on in it is clear that the applicant has no clue about my business and has sent the same letter to a thousand other people. If I do bother reading on, I generally (more than 80% of the time) find the letters to be riddled with typos, spelling errors and general nonsense.

Worst of all though, on a few occasions I have taken the time to respond – politely – and point out what they are doing wrong and how to improve their chances. Out of three times I have done this, how many times do you think they have responded? None. Which just proves to me that they were never going to be worth employing. Rant over.”

Now two things before I get started: there will be a terrible typo here that undermines my authority for writing this entry and secondly I have had similar experiences although surprisingly I am not the number one destination of graduate career aspirations.

So here are a few simple tips, which somehow are not followed as often as they should, that is they should be all the time:

Do some research – I have a blog and a Twitter account and lots of references about Artisan on the major search engines.   It is not hard to find out some interesting things about the company you want to work for. Use that research to show you are keen and have some resourcefulness.

Find out the name of the member of staff you are applying to – personalise your application.  A quick call will give you the name you want if it is not online or not clear who the best contact is.

No spelling errors - I reckon a CV takes at least four hours to write and much longer to proof, edit and amend.  Make sure there are no mistakes.  The latest application had this mistake “Daily mail” on the CV.  We all do it but that’s no excuse – get someone to proof it.

Social media – Use Twitter.  Read blogs.  Make some contacts on LinkedIN.

Follow up -  Even if it is a “no,” it might be a “yes” next time.  Initiate contact, generate a rapport if possible, ask advice.  You never know what might happen, maybe a nod towards someone that can help.

Be prepared to accept that job searching can be a thankless task that takes time unless you are lucky or stupendously good – Rushing off / spamming every agency you can find with cut and paste covering letters is easy to see through and generally does not work.

Some people will be rude.  They are probably not working for if it is indicative of their general attitude.  But many employers will not.  They might have been in the same situation.  But if you want them to help at least show you are displaying the respect you want them to show you.

It doesn’t matter how much you spend on advertising or a PR agency or branding or how many tweets you post, if the reality and expectation doesn’t match up.

Marketing is only really as strong as the product or service in the end.

I wanted to give an example of how two different experiences have reinforced the marketing effort or made it inconsequential.  I suppose I wanted to give credit where it’s due and vent my spleen at the same time to be truthful.

Let’s start with the baddie: (apparently 5 star rated) Qatar Airways, not the world’s favourite airline nor indeed mine (to borrow the world’s cheekiest run airline’s strap line (MD Willie Walsh wants staff to work for nothing for a month)).

Qatar Airways, what can I say?

The flight times are changed three times, I’d better check and confirm with Qatar once I arrive advises my travel agent.

Bags go missing on arrival at Delhi, over 2 hours trying to find out where at three in the morning.

Qatar office asks why they are in Bangkok!  I have to explain?  (Oh I wish I was there now).  Do I get any money for toiletries or for the inconvenience, you bet not.  It arrives – 36 hours late.  I check my latest flight times with staff, a puzzled look, and told that they are of course right.

Going back, arrive at Delhi Airport with 800 Rupees (about £10).  Even though the train was 4 hours late my flight doesn’t leave for several hours.  I can relax and have a coffee.

I decide to check in early: the flight’s gone.  Qatar changed the flight back (without telling me).  Luckily sympathetic airport duty officer gets me back to Manchester with Lufthansa.  I am not the first to have this problem with Qatar he informs me.  If I didn’t have the print out of my flight times then I would have been stuck – my card doesn’t work over here.

I write to Qatar for some satisfaction (it must be two months ago or more): nothing.

I take a swipe at Qatar on Twitter: progress, they follow me.  I decide to take another swipe to see if I can start a dialogue: “sorry” would be a start or why are you not happy with our airline?  Nothing!  What is the point of using Twitter for your marketing if you do not actually act on it?

The AA: this is shorter, so stay with me.

I have been with the AA for I don’t know: years.  I have used them 4 or 5 times in the last couple of years and they have been nothing but polite, friendly, highly skilled and professional.  If I hadn’t broken down I would say it is a real pleasure to deal with them.

What’s the key difference: I will tell anyone who is flying to Dubai or onwards not to use Qatar; I would tell anyone looking for a breakdown service to use The AA.

Clients are your most powerful marketing communications, whether it is good or bad, not your marketing spend.

What does planned communications matter at this point, once you have experienced the service yourself?

Simon Wharton of PushON has declared war on BD Recruitment.

A litany of sins committed against Simon when he clearly directed the agency on his wishes has provoked his wrath.  There are only so many unsolicited and irrelevant CVs any man can take.

Within a short time his irate blog post was only a few positions below BD’s site on Google.

The lessons are straightforward: managing reputation online is a constant 24/7 occupation.  It is one where just one voice can have a detrimental impact.

I placed a piece for Simon in What’s New In Marketing, an online magazine that was run by the Chartered Institute of Marketing, on organic search marketing some time ago.

One of the respondents was an electronics company that had read the piece and was clearly interested in Simon’s ideas.

When Simon brought up the URL there was a whole page of disastrous economic news following it.  The company had had a bad year but had recovered – their online reputation had clearly not and they were totally unaware of it.

I believe many businesses neglect their online reputation, not realising the round the clock damage their brand is suffering.

What is perhaps most surprising about this first story is that I came across it through Twitter today, a full year after the blog post about BD Recruitment.  And do you know BD Recruitment has not stopped bothering Simon and his angry post is still a few places below their website on Google.

Manchester PR agencies are using sweatshops to churn out press releases for clients according to some new reports.

The incidences if true mirror Primark’s, perhaps unknowing, use of illegal workers in sweatshops in North Manchester last year.

It appears that a small number of unscrupulous agencies are taking advantage of illegal workers, many from the sub-continet, to produce press releases and articles at much lower rates than English professionals.

The illegal “PRs” are thought to be mainly operating from cramped premises in Cheetham Hill, North Manchester.

The Chartered Institute of Public Relations and Ethical Trading Iniative will be investigating the allegations.

If true it is a worrying sign of things to come.

Ed Balls, former economic advisor to Gordon Brown and current secretary of state for children, schools and families, came out with a frankly staggering statement reported today by the BBC.

Addressing a Labour audience he said the financial crisis will be “more extreme and more serious than that of the 1930s.”

Balls didn’t mince words,  “The reality is that this is becoming the most serious global recession for, I’m sure, over 100 years as it will turn out.”

What was he thinking?

Where communications is all important in politics how could he be so irresponsible?  It is not really the most reassuring messaging.  Well it is not messaging, it is just blunt.  Downing Street attempted to play down the comments.

Speaking after Gordon Brown used the word “depression” during prime minister’s questions (later explained away as a slip of the tongue) you would think all government ministers would be watching their words carefully.  The Labour communications team would be ensuring a clear, honest but confidence building message, well as much as is possible.

Now we have a situation where there has been a big balls up, which will make brown the colour of the week.

When I was asked by a client if the publication, we had just been interviewed by, would link back I sheepishly said, “no.”

How many online versions of popular business and trade press and lifestyle publications allow you to link back?  How many offer that small incentive?  Surprisingly few is the answer or so it seems.

And that is a shame because it is an opportunity to encourage more loyalty and increase levels of conversation.  And it all accrues brownie points with the search engines.  The best thing it does not bring major costs but only a change of tactics.

You could also point that many online outlets do not link to the subject of their stories, another missed opportunity.

You only have to look at How-Do to know that it is a vital communications source for North West communications professionals.  And why?  Well because it encourages that conversation and loyalty.

There are so many online outlets that are missing out, that are not interacting with their clients and that is disappointing.  In this current climate it is also criminal.  After all if a site has lots of comment and encourages more traffic by engaging with readers, it surely will have more chance attracting advertising.

I am not having a go at publications that are not taking advantage of their potential, I just want the media and the journalists to become more vital and even more valued sources of information.

Media UK gives a sarcastic lists of tips of how to not get the best from journalistic relationships.

Unfortunately some things such as calling to see if a journalist has gotten a release are still quite common.  It would seem that experienced PRs cannot make such mistakes, but….

Images sell copy.

Great images can sell average copy, and sometimes do not need much copy if they tell a story or are highly creative.

Two men in grey suits shaking hands or signing something or doing something equally jaded are not even worth sending with a release.

Obvious to many people outside the media and to all PRs you would think.  But this is not so, by a long chalk.

Take the image (NOT MINE!) above.  I found it when I was doing some research and it is from a non-NW company, if you think you recognise the subjects.  As in spot the difference, how many things can you see that make this unsuitable for publication?

Clutter – what is that thing sicking out of the left hand subject?  Not to mention all the stuff to the left of them.

Cropping – a little cropping can tighten the image and get rid of superfluous material.  The clutter to the left could go.

Subject – How dull.  What does it tell you: they are signing a contract.  That happens every day, tell us something interesting about the contract and build a theme round it.

Experimentation – try different angles, move in closer, poses, expressions, subject activities.

For instance take the shot below, but you can see them just peering over the contract (not in focus) perusing the fine detail.  Trust me it would look better, it is hard to paint an image with words.

In the above shot no imagination has come into it.  I know subjects can have little patience and there is few resources, but try.

But whatever you do, do not send something like the above image.

One PR agency has been making great waves about their payment by results, but if you look closer it is not all it seems. It has been featured in Crain’s and How-Do. As far as I am concerned and many other PRs it is just a publicity stunt.

On the face of it payment by results for PR seems like a good idea, why should clients not pay on results? But delve a little deeper and not all is at seems.

Firstly it is a guarantee, not payment on results. It is not a smaller fee with a target driven bonus. There is still the retainer or project fee, the same as anywhere else. If targets are not met you get your money back.

I believe this will store up trouble for any agency that uses this strategy. It will not do too much for the clients because:

• Agencies should be delivering anyway. If they do not they will lose the clients.
• Unlike advertising you cannot guarantee coverage. If a publication (s) is / are not interested in your story you cannot make them have it. We could get a lot of pushy PRs and some irritated journalists as a result.
• There are going to be arguments or disagreements between clients and agencies about what is a “result” unless very specifically defined.
• Will agencies simply hit certain targets (even if they prove less effective than first anticipated) and ignore opportunities not initially discussed because the target must be met? Agencies should be working out what is effective as the campaign progresses and adapt accordingly.

As Tom Cheesewright, a former PR account director in London, says in his letter to Crain’s on their article simply totting up coverage is a one dimensional way to measure achievement. Tom argues if you are working with key influencers to support or champion your campaign how does that tie in with payment by results?

I have got clients in broadcast media and this contact can be developed and coverage achieved long after I have stopped working with the client. How do you measure that and within what time frame? One of my clients is a physical training instructor and he trains a journalist, a contact that I initiated. It has resulted in some good coverage and an on-going relationship. A payment by results model would have to be very flexible to incorporate such a scenario.

There is a need for agencies to be accountable. There are agencies that do not deliver. This is an issue as in any other profession.

If a client is choosing an agency it is more important to (and this is not exhaustive):

• Use recommendations and use testimonials to find out if they are the right agency
• See if you can work with the personnel you will be working with if that agency is selected. Ensure the people pitching are the people delivering.
• Have a reporting structure and regular meeting to discuss how a campaign is progressing
• Open two way communication to discuss expectations, goals and issues
• Look at the enthusiasm of your agency, do they really want to work with you?
• Are the agency’s clients similar to your profile? Go to an agency that handles BP and Mark’s and they are not likely to be interested in your business if you are a small company, but they might like your money.

For an agency to use such a model ads another layer of admin. Time and effort that could be re-invested in getting on with the job. It might be that this time is included in the time allocated to the client.

One agency has been making much mileage of this, they say: “We are very excited to be innovating the regional market, by becoming the only local PR agency to be putting our money where our mouth is and take away the risk associated with PR.”

Well the standard of English does not fill you with hope. Like a couple of other agencies that have been telling everyone else in the sector how rubbish they are or how they are so much better, it does make you vulnerable if it does not come off. If you say that you had better deliver.

I expect some clients will go for it. It might be a really successful tactic but it will have a cost.

Tom Cheesewright, of I O Communications, all round Internet industry follower, has found The Good Agency’s website.  Those responsible for the Olivia Newton John incident.
A modest quote about themselves from The Good Agency on the site: “How great we are at writing and communicating with our journalists friends,  how fantastic we are at selling in stories and how good we are at coming up with new and sometimes challenging ideas….”

Really?

And they offer digital services and had to rely on Tom to find them online.

Still let’s get back to something important: the PR campaign to keep Sven.