Thursday, August 22, 2013
"Good things come to he who waits” is an old adage, but one that contains within its words more truth than meets the eye.
I am reminded of this adage as I look back on my own career, and when I observe younger talent in business today, as they are reaching for a plum. The conclusions of the “Marshmallow Story” I relate below should communicate some key principles about how we communicate to and evaluate talent. The “story” appeared in The New Yorker on May 18, 2009.
It involved a couple of kids, a brother and sister, ages 4 and 5, who had a tray of marshmallows put in front of them and were told by a Stanford researcher that they were welcome to eat one marshmallow now; but if they waited a while until the researcher returned, they could have two marshmallows.
Each also had the option to ring a bell immediately after the researcher left, notifying the researcher of the decision to eat the marshmallow and not wait further. The little girl waited. The little boy did not. The experiment, testing delayed satisfaction, was carried out with many kids. Seventy percent were like the little boy; they struggled to delay eating the marshmallow by covering their eyes and kicking the chair, but ultimately gave in. Thirty percent were like the little girl. “They successfully delayed gratification until the researcher returned some 15 minutes later. These kids wrestled with temptation but found a way to resist.”
The thrust of the research was not about willpower or self-control. It was about some kids who figure out how to make a situation work for them. “They want the second marshmallow, but how can they get it? We can’t control the world, but we can control how we think about it,” the study points out. So, what made waiting possible for those who waited? Kids start out unable to wait for anything.
The researcher– based on hundreds of hours of observations– finally figured out the answer to the conundrum. It was the “strategic allocation of attention.” In other words, how you train your mind to think or not think is the solution. The patient children made themselves forget about the marshmallow by covering their eyes, singing songs or getting underneath the desk. If you think about how delicious the marshmallow is, you will eat it. “The key is to avoid thinking about it in the first place.” Take your mind off that which you can’t have now for a better prize later. Don’t stare at it.
The psychologist found that among 8th graders the ability to delay gratification was a far better predictor of academic performance than IQ. She found that while intelligence is important, it is still not as important as self-control. Although some toddlers come by these traits naturally, parents are critical in teaching children that waiting is worthwhile. Even teaching children not to snack before dinner or to save at least part of their allowance, are subtle ways of teaching this skill. As an adult, learning to put away money for retirement would be an example.
I recall a point in my career where I had to wait a year to be appointed a vice president on the heels of a rival being appointed immediately. It was tough, but I eventually surpassed my nearest rival. The ability to wait and figure out the situation confronting you is often the ability to be smart, as the tiny marshmallow test so informs.
Thursday, July 18, 2013
The Value of Trust Deposits
Public relationships share something in common with hard assets: they have currency, just like money in a bank. Specifically, they create what I call “trust deposits.” When companies engage in actions and behaviors that nurture strong public relationships with all their key constituents, and they do that in a consistent manner, they are building trust reserves not unlike bank deposits, which they can redeem when hard times come.
Let me cite a business example of how this principle works.
Martha Stewart is a brilliant businesswoman who has, in certain quarters, established unprecedented loyalty and trust. But she also has a shadow reputation for being arrogant, controlling, and self-righteous. In 2004, when Stewart was charged with and ultimately convicted of insider trading, that negative perception, whether unfairly or not, was widely reinforced. This image was damaging to Stewart’s business for two reasons. First, it contradicted her public persona as a gracious hostess. Second, because she had assumed the company’s almost exclusive public face, her descent had an outsized impact on the stock of Martha Stewart Living Omnimedia (MSLO). It took two years for the company’s valuation to recover. It seems clear that had Martha Stewart made some trust deposits with her more critical publics — diversifying and showcasing company management to investors, softening her image through sincere, high-profile charity work — the damage might have been mitigated.
Thus, it is worth dispelling here the myth that public relations can “manufacture” a positive image from whole cloth. The truth is that practitioners can only shape, rather than create, reputations. Without the basis for building a desired reputation, a campaign will invariably fail. Further, social media has enhanced transparency.
But Martha has learned some lessons since those days. After leaving prison, she began a comeback campaign in 2005, returning to television with various shows, releasing a number of new books, adding product lines and in 2012 returning as Chairman of her namesake company.
But she decided to do it differently this time — with more heart. As part of the Clinton Global Initiative, Martha cofounded the impressive Martha Stewart Center for Living with Mount Sinai Hospital in New York. It serves to promote and facilitate access to health and resources for older adults and enhance the public perception of aging.
Good public relationships rarely, if ever, just happen. They are established and maintained by commitment to a strategic plan that targets each of its constituents with a rationale for building a relationship. Then a company needs to establish the messages and the best channels to communicate these messages and reach those constituencies.
While the value of public relationships is intangible, one leading accounting firm estimated 35% of a company’s value to be non-financial intangibles, such as goodwill. Thus, trust deposits work to a company’s benefit.
Wednesday, July 03, 2013
The Difference Humanities Makes in Business
What do you do with a BA in English?
What is my life going to be?
Four years of college and plenty of knowledge
Have earned me this useless degree.
--Avenue Q (Broadway Show)
The above verse from the Broadway show, Avenue Q, sums up how so many feel today about a degree earned from majoring in the humanities, specifically English majors. This attitude has lingered but it was personified in this hit show, which picked up steam in the heat of the financial crisis. The show’s takeaway: Be practical!
This thinking is further evidenced in a recent article by Verlyn Klinkenborg in The New York Times. The author of “The Decline and Fall of the English Major” cites some depressing statistics from the American Academy of Arts and Sciences: at Pomona College, only 16 students graduated with an English major out of a student body of 1560, a fractional number. In 1991, 165 students graduated from Yale with a B.A. in English Literature; by 2012 that number was 62.
Of course, I find these numbers shocking only because I believe so strongly in how the humanities shape us as individuals, who cannot only write and think clearly but can carry on a conversation with the world around us.
For those who choose public relations/communications as a profession, focusing on the humanities, as I did during undergraduate years, provides other advantages. Our business is all about being a quick study of a client’s business and the environment in which the client exists. The ability to capture the essence of that information quickly, assess its strategic value and communicate the story with the right messages are skills developed in humanities courses.
We, at our firm, often debate the value of humanities majors vs. public relations majors. As I see it, the study of humanities builds the foundation that supports an array of sophisticated public relations skill sets.
Nevertheless, as the Times article points out, “Parents have always worried when their children became English majors. What is an English major good for?” In other words, will it lead directly to a job? The article offers this answer: “Wait and see – an answer that satisfies no one. And yet it is a real answer, one that reflects the versatility of thought and language that comes from studying literature.”
The editor asserts that former English majors turn up almost anywhere. In my opinion, many have the edge in public relations over the more practical PR major. Need everything we do in life pay off immediately? Perhaps “it takes some living” to find out that the gift of the humanities is “clear thinking, clear writing and a lifelong engagement with literature,” giving us the “word consciousness” that makes copy sing.
A deeper issue is that thought leaders in the humanities have done a poor job of marketing the value that humanities bring. And right now, there has never been a greater opportunity.
As a friend notes, “since content and content development are the bloodline of the commercialization for nearly all businesses because of the internet, writers are critically important. Positioning humanities as a ticket to work for online publications of the 21st century could change this perception of students that studying the humanities is not a viable choice.”
Writing well is a fundamental principle of the communications business, deeply appreciated by clients and all others we work with. Our business is just one of many examples where training in the humanities stands strong. Whether you are an engineer, mathematician, actor or senior executive, everyone who possesses the “grace and energy” that the humanities develops in us, can only be secure in appreciating the rich heritage they have been given.- See more at: http://www.makovsky.com/insights/blogs/my-three-cents/27-insights/blogs/my-three-cents/493-the-difference-humanities-make#sthash.UTLdwjxK.dpuf
Thursday, June 20, 2013
The Myths about Paul Revere
“Listen, my children, and you shall hear
Of the midnight ride of Paul Revere,
On the eighteenth of April, in Seventy-Five;
Hardly a man is now alive
Who remembers that famous day and year.”
Sadly, the great poet Henry Wadsworth Longfellow understates. As I wrote last month in my blog — “Is America Clueless? — 30% of Americans can’t name the vice president of the United States. So I wouldn’t be surprised to find that — not only didn’t they recall an important date in American history — they probably didn’t know much about the man behind the date. If they remember Paul Revere at all, it’s probably in the vaguest of terms: as a patriot … something to do with the American Revolution. But there was much more to the man and, as the Fourth of July draws nearer, it’s a good time to remember Revere as a great American communicator.
Long before his midnight ride, Revere did what all good communicators do: as the member of a secret group in Boston known as the “Mechanics,” he gathered intelligence on the activities and movements of a key stakeholder group: British troops. He also helped organize an early warning system and arranged for delivery of important messages directly to the rebels, another key constituency.
History.com has a fascinating posting on the “12 Things You May Not Know about Paul Revere” and his fateful 1775 ride. Here are the top three popular myths about the Revolutionary War hero … busted.
- He didn’t ride alone. He was accompanied for a part of the journey by William Dawes, who was tasked with warning John Hancock and Samuel Adams that they were in danger of arrest. Along the way, Dawes and Revere were joined by Samuel Prescott, a young physician. By the end of the night, as many as 40 men on horseback were spreading the word across Boston’s Middlesex County.
- He never shouted, “The British are coming!” The operation was meant to be conducted as discreetly as possible, since scores of British troops were hiding out in the Massachusetts countryside … so no shouting. Also, at the time, the colonists considered themselves British, so it’s more likely the colonists would have alerted other rebels that the “Regulars” — a term used to designate British soldiers — were on the move.
- He never reached Concord. Revere was temporarily detained by the British at Lexington and Dawes lost his way, leaving to Prescott the task of alerting Concord’s residents.