Continuing with the "integration is the buzzword, and the time to do it was yesterday" theme from last week's feature, it's an appropriate time for all communications executives to
take a step back and evaluate the very basis of their corporation: its organizational structure. Reporting relationships, both horizontal and vertical, must be individualized based
on the organization's needs and business objectives, but it is essential that communications be the thread the ties everyone together. Message consistency, brand image, employee
relations and corporate culture depend on it.
An organizational structure that facilitates open relationships with key executives is far more conducive to integration - or breaking down the silos of each business sub-function
- than the alternative, and, while there is no paint-by-numbers solution to the puzzle, there are examples of successful options.
Take Pricewa-terhouseCoopers (PwC). The massive financial conglomerate has weathered two of the business trends presented in part one of this series: increased globalization,
prompting a surge in offices opening worldwide, and mergers and acquisitions. PwC operates in 149 countries, and it completed a large-scale merger in 1998 (prior to that date, two
separate entities existed: Price Waterhouse, and Coopers & Lybrand).
"Communications is paramount when you are trying to bring together two organizations, or when you are trying to communicate worldwide," says Mike Davies, director of global
communications at PwC. "Communications has to be very high up the agenda."
Now, according to Davies, the organization follows a more matrixed structure to accommodate its member firms located in countries around the world. Davies reports to the head of
brand and strategy, who then reports directly to the CEO.
"I have a central team of 10 that deals with communications issues, but then we work in close cooperation with the communications leaders around the world," he says.
This matrixed approach - that is, one in which communications executives are nested in local offices and then report back to "headquarters" - has a number of benefits for large,
international corporations. It fosters an understanding of local markets, and it gives a sense that individuals have a stake in large-scale business activities.
Davies offers executives a few best practices when considering this structure:
- You must be well-connected with the leadership of the business. "You must be able to explain to people who are driving the business that it isn't just a case of money and
resources," he says. "It's about spending time to manage and communicate both internally and externally."
- You need to have a clear strategy as to what communications is trying to achieve, and it needs to be communicated within the organization both horizontally and vertically.
- You must be cognizant of the cultural differences around the world. "Execution can differ widely from country to country, so you have to understand and accommodate local need,"
Davies says. "You can have a core message, but you have to tailor that to the marketplaces you disseminate to."
- Bring in new technologies to facilitate communications among local offices. "News travels very fast these days, so you need to be close with your network in order to get the
right intelligence and then react to situations. You can always make things better when bringing on new technology," he says. "Though it's not the answer, it is part of the solution.
You have to make the message worth reading."
But a matrixed structure isn't the only option for organizations looking to integrate communications into all business activities. Wachovia Corporation, for example, has a more
centralized communications function, and it is separate from (but parallel to) the marketing function.
The PR department falls under corporate communications, which, according to assistant VP of communications Kirkland Ahern, "rolled up under HR and CR after a re-organization last
year." Then, the HR/CR committee leader reports directly to the CEO. The marketing team, on the other hand, reports to the CFO, who then reports to the CEO.
Ahern admits that this separation of communications activities has created some challenges, but her team has made significant moves to integrate goals and initiatives.
"For so long, we've been so siloed," she says. "Many [communicators] are struggling to try and merge these two worlds."
For Wachovia, a big part of the solution has been measurement. Ahern's department works on several marketing initiatives to help that department structure its efforts around
getting more press. Marketing, then, shares valuable and expensive data that help the PR team to understand psychological measures, including brand awareness and purchasing
behaviors, and shape their own initiatives around those tendencies accordingly.
Centralized best practices include the following:
- Set goals and establish best practices internally first. This includes looking at consumer habits like brand awareness and purchasing behaviors. This gives focus to all
efforts and allows employees to communicate the goals to management and external audiences.
- Establish benchmarks to measure against. Measure pre-campaign, and then one month out, three months out, etc., to see how well it resonated. If there is no recall after, say,
three months, it's time for another PR push.
- Measure consumer attitude, behavior and intention based on these benchmarks.
- Gather at least quarterly to look at what you did and evaluate its effectiveness. "If something was ineffective, that's a good time to pull together a focus group to figure out
why," Ahern says. "If it did work, we can incorporate it into efforts in the future."
However, separate-but-equal isn't the only way to structure a centralized communications function and its marketing and PR subsidiaries. At Lending Tree, according to corporate
communications VP Rebecca Anderson, "We handle communications more like a client-agency relationship. Executives may be on rosters with different management teams, but they are
officially in the corporate communications department."
This works for her organization, she says, because "we centralize and squeeze efficiencies out of that."
Based on these three corporate examples, communications executives can see a variety of organization solutions that facilitate integration and, in turn, consistent messaging,
strong corporate culture, brand awareness, etc. For companies where communications isn't already woven into all business activities, breaking down the PR and marketing silos is a
good place to start.
"Sometimes the struggle to integrate [stems from] a 'what's mine is mine, what's yours is yours' mentality," Ahern says. "Some people have trouble playing together. If you don't
have a holistic view, it is a challenge to champion the flag. Neither thing can exist without the other."
Contacts:
Mike Davies, [+ 44] (20) 7804 2378; Kirkland Ahern, [email protected]; Rebecca Anderson, [email protected]