Don Tapscott, CEO of Toronto-based consulting firm New Paradigm
Learning Corp., and co-author of "The Naked Corporation: How the
Age of Transparency Will Revolutionize Business" (Free Press,
2003), recalls the reaction he got to his book when he spoke
recently at a Fortune Boardroom Forum.
"They were a bit stunned and surprised," Tapscott says,
referring to the 120 CEOs, board chairs and corporate directors who
make up the forum. "They have never heard someone talk in these
terms before: about transparency as a force that can be harnessed
for building trust and a sustainable business model."
Corporate transparency is the mantra for Tapscott and co-author
David Ticoll, CEO of Toronto-based Convergent Strategies, a
research and consulting firm specializing in IT and business
strategy. Both Tapscott and Ticoll are widely recognized as two of
the leading business thinkers of the Digital Age. They have been
hitting the lecture circuit lately, talking not only about the
importance of transparency vis-a-vis the entire company but the
role communication executives can play in being change agents for
the corporation. PR NEWS caught up with Tapscott and Ticoll to chat
about the book and why, in their view, corporate "spin" may be on
its last legs.
PRN: How are changes in the way corporate America
conducts business impacting the role of senior PR execs? And how
dramatically is the definition of the job changing as it relates to
Sarbanes-Oxley, Reg-FD and other efforts to reform corporate
governance?
Ticoll: People who work as corporate communication execs
and see the rise of transparency as it affects all the interests of
all the stakeholders of the firm are, in a way, in a bigger crisis
than the CC people who are focused on SOX and the annual meeting.
What [PR execs] need to come to grips with is the relationship
between accountability, stakeholder engagement, corporate
responsibility and business strategy. Because transparency can be
used as a communications issue the people in the communications
function are wrestling with much bigger issues: What is our need to
change if we're going to be truly engaged and committed to the
expectations of stakeholders? People in communications need to
understand that they're the canaries in a coal mine of issues that
may be bigger than just communication issues.
PRN: What do you see as some of the biggest shifts in
corporate communications the last few years and how, collectively,
have senior PR execs responded?
Tapscott: Because of transparency, various stakeholder
groups can more easily find out the truth. That means it is more
difficult to spin, and messaging needs to be changed profoundly.
First, it needs to correspond to the truth. In the new environment,
our research shows that it makes more sense to have candor, warts
and all. And rather than think in terms of messaging, they have to
think in terms of engagement.
PRN: You describe in your book that whether it knows it
or not every company has a 'Stakeholder Web.' In lay terms what is
a 'Stakeholder Web' and what role do senior PR execs play in its
development?
Tapscott: S-Webs are the embodiment of transparency.
These things are very different than traditional opponents or
challenges. First of all, you can't attack them the way you could a
traditional opponent because that makes them stronger. They're like
the blob: when attacked it gets bigger. So you need to develop a
strategy of engaging them. When McDonald's published a
'Sustainability Report' it had unintended consequences in that it
stimulated its Stakeholder Web and the people attacking McDonald's
did so on the grounds that it was a company that killed animals.
People whose interests are not at all aligned with yours need to be
treated differently than those whose interests are aligned. You
need to diagnose and understand the S-Web and identify the
different subgroups and develop and differentiate strategies for
each. This is the new art and science of PR and we really think
it's a sea change.
PRN: Don has referred to PR execs as people who "squirt
ink." What's wrong with that?
Tapscott: The comment came from a senior PR executive of
one of America's largest companies in a private meeting hosted by
Hill & Knowlton. I presented our point and when I said, 'Spin
is dead' he put up his hand and I thought, 'Oh, here it comes.' He
said he agreed with me and thought I was understating it. From his
view, PR execs have been like cuttlefish. When attacked, cuttlefish
know only one response: squirt ink, to confuse or hide from an
opponent or enemy. And [the executive] said that's been PR. 'We
message, and rather than messaging we need to engage in two-way
relationships.' So public relations becomes public
relationship-building.
PRN: Why is it companies are always doing damage to
themselves to conceal truth? What is it inherent in corporate
makeup that makes it so difficult to play it straight?
Ticoll: People who are in charge of things like to take
accountability for what they do and believe that's part of their
job. They're accountable for solving the problems that confront
them. There's a positive motive behind that. But what tends to
happen with the positive motive is it turns into a paternalistic
attitude that says, 'We knows what's best for our stakeholders.'
What that does is it drives them away from relationships and toward
relations...We're now seeing that the paternalistic model is not
sufficient. But that force wasn't here even 10 years ago, when
institutional shareholders were saying, 'We'll go with the existing
corporate governance model.' So in some respects you can't blame
management for the current situation but you can blame management
if it fails to understand that the situation has changed.
PRN: Are CEOs creating environments, perhaps even
subconsciously, that make it next to impossible for PR execs to
share bad news with senior managers?
Ticoll: We're talking about a very different model of
communications. If you as a communication exec find yourself in the
kind of company you describe, you're either in the wrong company or
in a company whose culture needs to change. You need to make an
assessment about which of those is true and whether you are capable
of changing the culture of the company to a much broader sense of
the role of communications.
PRN: What do you see as some of the PR disciplines that
may be a bit under the radar now but will more pronounced in the
years ahead? How can PR execs get ahead of the curve?
Tapscott: There are four big areas of change. First, PR
needs to think of all classes of stakeholders and not just
customers. Second, it should think not just in terms of messaging
and communications but what is the behavior of the company and how
do I communicate that behavior. Third, it's not just about
reputation and image but relationships, engagement and managing
relationships as assets. Finally, PR needs to be much better
integrated with other key aspects of the business. In the age of
transparency, strategy changes and PR and communications executives
are perfectly positioned to have a seat at the table and help with
this new, historic challenge that's arising.