I had a quick lunch with a competitor Nathan Lane in Leeds last week, and was pleased to hear that he is as hacked off with the process of tendering as I am (as an agency we haven’t tendered for a couple of years).

My issue is simply that proper consultancy is a creative process that doesn’t suit the process of tendering.  Ask us to consult, to look at your organisation, the people involved and the business issues too and then we will propose the best activity to suit your business needs.

The fact is that some agencies like to tender. They have developed a framework that can be dropped in for any job that ticks boxes and wins work with little bespoke thinking or input.  They have junior staff rattling them off in a ‘numbers game’ approach.   

In-house marketers should appreciate that the tender process leads to duplication and lazy documents devoid of real creativity.  The most cost effective agencies don’t have the time to invest in bespoke tenders (as we don’t have fat margins) and most of the best ones don’t do ‘tick box’ proposals for any pitch because it is poor practice.

Why not have PR people invest their time into the solving of creative business issues, rather than ticking boxes?

A good example of the kind of irrelevant minutia that local government tender processes can involve could have a look at any council’s website.  Try this compelling detailed document from a recent Fenland District Council PR tender process, for crying out loud!

So, if you want to get the best consultants for your organisation follow these steps;

1)      Ask for credentials from between six to ten agencies

2)      Meet five or so and brief them face to face

3)      Ask for proposals from the most appropriate/impressive three

4)      Hire the agency that demonstrates a balance of best thinking and most cost effective proposal

I guarantee that if you run the process well and are open with the agencies you will have made a better appointment at the close than by implementing the dry and faceless tender process.  As a bonus your new PR partners will understand your issues better. 

Stick to tick box tendering, and you will keep hiring the people who are good at the tender process, not good at PR.

Still, it was an impressive and fundamental breakthrough which paved the way for our now passionate love affair with the internet. A small click for some very clever scientists, a giant plug-in for mankind.

In a relatively short space of time, this beloved piece of technology has wildly altered the way in which we live our lives. Could anyone now cope without it? Go back to relying entirely on posted correspondence, doing research in libraries, ditching our ipods for Discmans and buying our CDs from the spotty teenager at Our Price record store? How did we communicate, nurture friendships, sell, buy, do business? Can anyone actually remember?

I recently found myself living without internet access for a few weeks and had to navigate through what can only be described as a grieving process. Like a break-up. It surprised me just how often I would sit up to go and switch on my computer, hoping to find the answer to a question I’d dreamt up, plan trips I needed to make or search for those shoes I couldn’t find on the high street, before realising that that resource was not available to me.

I felt anxious that I couldn’t get to the hallowed shores of Facebook or the comfort of Hotmail, and frustrated when I needed a phone number right that minute for that restaurant I couldn’t remember the name of. It was like leaving the house without my wallet or mobile phone.

Had I really become so pathetically dependent on it? Or did I just have to accept that I, along with our society, am now simply unable to function as efficiently without it?

I’m glad to report that we’re now back together and very happy we are too. Once again I really do have the world at my fingertips and I can’t imagine it any other way. My social life is enhanced by it. My work depends on it. I can research everything I need to know (almost!) in a few hours, catch up with business news and journalists in an instant and promote my clients to audiences it may otherwise miss.

Indeed, social media mechanisms like Facebook, LinkedIn and Twitter have evolved beyond the realm of personal networking to become a fundamental part of our PR campaigns. Communicating through these channels allows businesses to reach out to previously untapped audiences, building profiles and sharing information, whilst keeping track of what others are doing and what tricks they’re missing.

The momentum they have gained is incredible and they are now justifiably seen as key business tools – social media really is the future and has a legitimate place in all communications campaigns in one way or another. It seems like everyone is exploiting it and it’s therefore important for businesses to recognise the opportunities it brings and incorporate social media into marketing strategy.

PR results can be hugely enhanced through digital media, allowing for effective corporate positioning, endorsement and news profiling, reinforcing a brand and building a personality behind it. It’s something that Appeal is taking seriously and we’re committed to meeting this revolution head-on to offer best value for clients. Embrace it and reap the benefits. We can help show you how.

So, the last 40 years has seen the internet evolve into a vast universe of knowledge and opportunity. It has changed the way we work forever, bringing us closer to our customers, helping us to operate and sell harder, faster, better. And this is only the beginning. If life begins at 40 then I, for one, am looking forward to what lies ahead.

Interested? Here are a few Appeal hints, tips and opinions to help you get into the swing of social marketing.

The benefits of Twitter

Making the most of LinkedIn

Facebook – Employers’ friend or foe?

There’s no doubt that the newspaper industry is in dire straits – News Corp, which includes The Times, reported a $3.38bn loss – and many media moguls may well be breathing a sigh of relief that Murdoch has led the way in seizing this thorny issue which has long been of concern.  The claim is that the digital revolution is ‘cannabilising’ quality journalism by giving away content.  Consumers are choosing to get their news for free online causing newspaper sales to fall further, combined with a worldwide decline in advertising revenues.  Thus, newspapers must find new methods of generating income.

The question is, will it be possible to change the public mindset and convince users that they should start to pay?  The digital generation which has grown up with the internet, considers free content to be their birthright – a recent survey showed that a third of Europeans aged 16 to 24 had no intention of paying for online content such as video and music.  There seems to be even stronger antipathy to the concept of paying for news with a Netimperative poll  indicating that 87.5 per cent would not be willing to pay for mainstream news online. 

Brand is Key

However, some titles such as the Wall Street Journal and New York Times already levy charges to online users- the New York Times ‘pay wall’ generated $10m a year, while it lasted.  In the aftermath of Murdoch’s announcement, both the Financial Times, which charges for some content, and the Boston Globe have indicated that they are also considering payment schemes.  Perhaps if a brand is strong enough, the consumer can be convinced to pay for what he believes is a unique ‘product’.  Guardian Media Group has recently mooted the idea of creating a paid-for ‘members club’ giving readers access to exclusive content.

Opponents of the fee model also point out that web publishing is based on gaining mass traffic from open access, but a pay wall will destroy this benefit.  As media expert Neville Hobson  points out, the raising of a pay wall could open the way for redundant journalists to become bloggers and build their own alternative news sites.  He suggests that piecemeal pay-for options, targeted at niche readers offers a more viable approach.

Yet again, the newspaper industry is facing a time of great change.  During its often tumultuous past, it has proved adept at handling turmoil and I tend to think that this latest challenge is likely to be no different.  The question of how news is to be funded will not go away – whether the solution is subscriptions, advertising or a combination of the two, the industry must re-assess the new digital media landscape and find a way it can adapt in order to prosper within it.

Despite the fallout from the recession, we still keep hearing that the UK has a severe skills shortage which will leave the country in a poor position when the long-awaited recovery finally arrives.  With large numbers of well-qualified, experienced professional women struggling to return to employment because of the challenges of juggling the work-life balance, surely a willing workforce is at hand if only employers are able to give them the flexibility they need?

PR is an industry which has traditionally had a culture of long hours, but as the profession seeks to attract and retain skilled staff, even it is realising that flexibility is the order of the day.  A feature in last week’s PR Week discussed the issue, and a recent survey of PROs  showed that a flexible working life was cited above salary as the most important factor when deciding where to work.

The increased willingness of employers to consider alternatives to the traditional 9 to 5 grind can only be a good thing – as well as enabling them to draw from a skilled, experienced workforce, it could also ease the payroll burden in these difficult times.  In my own experience, a sympathetic employer, willing to give a little flexibility (early finishes a few days a week in time for school pick-up and extra time during school holidays) has made balancing my work-home life a breeze.

After almost ten years in the PR industry, I took a career break back in the late ‘90s when my daughter was born and then decided to stay at home when my son followed just 17 months later (to be honest, life at the time was simply a matter of survival from one feeding frenzy to the next and returning to work didn’t really figure in my sleep-deprived brain).  Once my delightful offspring were school age, I decided to set up my own business rather than returning to PR, largely because I didn’t want to be stuck with rigid office hours and misguidedly thought it would give me more flexibility.  Anyone entrepreneurs will know that this rose-tinted view could not be further from the truth – the reality is that you end up working 24/7 as, regardless of the hour, the buck stops with you. 

Having, thankfully, sold my business, I decided to return to the world of PR and see whether I could cope with a ‘proper’ job as well as the demands of family life.  I took on a full-time position, but after six months felt like a hamster on a wheel I did not have the energy to stop, let alone fling myself off.  In contrast, my slightly-less-than-full-time hours at Appeal cause minimal inconvenience to clients and colleagues, but enable me to manage my home life effectively, meaning that I can give 100 per cent when I am at work.

So let’s encourage employers to do some thinking outside the 9 to 5 box.  There are thousands of experienced, skilled women out there whose motivation and loyalty you could harness, with just a little bit of give – not to mention lots of men who would appreciate some flexibility in their work lives.