Creative Streak

Overused Buzzwords and Marketing Speak in Press Releases

My good friend Suzanne Ross of The Aerie Company sent this link to me a few days ago. (Sorry, I've been off on holidays for five weeks, and just now getting back to a keyboard.)

As background, Adam Sherk - a search and PR strategist for Define Search Strategies (owned by The New York Times Company) - analysed the number of words used in press releases archived on PRWeb over the past four years. "Leader" and "leading" were the two most used words. I've included the top 20 words below, or click on the link above to see the entire list.

Used together, the words really do repel the reader. ("As the leader of our industry, we at Acme are leading yet again by producing the best and most unique solution from the most innovative team of innovators with award winning exclusive technology.")

It reminds me of something that John Bennett (my first journalism teacher at the University of Iowa) said in one the early classes: "It's easy to select a word to use, but far more difficult to select one with impact."

1. Leader
2. Leading
3. Best
4. Top
5. Unique
6. Great
7. Solution
8. Largest
9. Innovative
10. Innovator
11. Award winning
12. Exclusive
13. Premier
14. Extensive
15. Leading provider
16. Innovation
17. Real-time
18. Fastest
19. Easy to use
20. Dynamic

The brilliant comic is by Drew & Natalie Dee and . Go here to see to their website and BUY SOMETHING. (I have heaps of their T-shirts.)

Framing the Problem

The process of creating ideas begins with a specific objective: what do you want the idea to accomplish?

I was reminded (again) of its importance after conducting and/or participating in a number of brainstorms during the past week. At one meeting in particular, the person (facilitating their own brainstorm – eek!) announced with a sigh at the beginning of the brainstorm, “Well, here we go again. I’m sure we’ll get the same ideas as last time.”

Indeed. Despite the inappropriateness of launching a brainstorm with a broad slap of a negativity brush, 'Mr. Optimism' was right, going so far as to admit afterward that the reality was much his own doing. Why?

The majority of most brainstorms in public relations and communications begin with the same two hoary* objectives:

• Generate (traditional/social) media
• Generate awareness

There lies the problem. Why would you generate any new idea if you always start at the same place and take the same route? Worse, the client in this specific case fell into their weekly routine:

• The same meeting tactics (always at 10 am, the same horrifying conference room, no food, the same people)
• The same agenda (no ice-breaker, no creative warm-ups, no brief, Mr. Optimism virtually started with "Achtung!  Who has any ideas?)
• The same product background (men, aged 1 to 99 who live in Australia and breathe at least once a daily basis).

The Best Writing Tips for Business

When I taught a class in public relations at Columbia College in Chicago (circa 1987), a colleague shared with me Frank Visco’s original list of tips for good writing, entitled How to Write Good.

Over the years, I read additional points. Similar lists began to surface. I threw everything in a folder until last month, when I culled the list for a Business Writing workshop for a client in Melbourne.

I'm a clearly a word geek. This list always makes me chuckle.

• A writer should not shift your point of view.
• Alors!  Why use words from another language?
• Always avoid alliteration.
• Analogies in writing are like feathers on a snake.
• As you know, don’t repeat what the audience already understands.
• Avoid &s and abbrev., etc.
• Avoid clichés like the plague. They’re old hat.
• Be careful of commas, that, are not, necessary.
• Be more or less specific.
• Choose words correctly, irregardless of how others use them.
• Do not use hyperbole.  Only one in a million can do it effectively.

A Brief on Creative Briefs

Successful communications programs of any type have one consistent element: at the beginning of the program's development, someone sat down and wrote a creative brief.

This person might not have called it a "creative brief," but the purpose was the same: to articulate the program's objectives, to outline the problems and opportunities the program will face in the hearts and mind of the intended target audience, and to consider the program's strategic direction.

The name changes depending upon where it's developed. Agencies often call them a strategy brief or client brief. Internal communications departments use slightly more generic names, like strategic plan or planning guide. At MasterCard, we used to call them "OST Plans" (objective + strategy +tactic). A colleague in Sydney doesn't have a name for his department's document per se, but his explanation certainly suggests one: "Our team sits down together and decides what the hell we're going to do before we waste time and money."

SWOT Analysis (Addendum)

How funny. I thought a post on "the most tired of strategy tools" (thanks Gene) would be ho-hum to people who read my blog. And yet, in 24 hours, it generated the highest number of hits and the most comments. Here's the three most common points:

1. More Questions. To the list of questions of Strengths/Weaknesses and Opportunities/Threats, add these three questions (all variations on the same theme): "So what?", "Who cares?", "Yes, and?" Anyone who's developed a SWOT knows it's easy to dive so deeply into the research that objectivity can float away. These questions help ensure your team is being honest, objective and realistic. (Thanks Paul, Lesley and Ed.)

2. The SWOT as an Evaluative Tool. Finish the SWOT Analysis by turning key "tasks" into action steps - either by developing a strategy or (even better) a tactic. A simplified SWOT Analysis is a good evaluative tool to determine the quality of the best strategies or ideas. (Thanks Andy G., Marian and Suzanne.)

3. Action Plan Ingredients. Action plans are typically comprised of several elements. (Thanks Jaroslav and Berrit.)

• What are the next steps?
• Who is responsible?  Also, do we need to bring in others?  Who and when?
• What resources are needed?  In particular, what's the budget?
• What's the timeline?
• What are the deliverables?

Organising Information (Part 2, SWOT Analysis)

Managing and organising the information gathered from research is important to creativity for several reasons. By putting similar or relevant information together (that is, putting it into context), you can understand and unlock its potential insights. Then, once you have critical insights, you can use brainstorming to develop potential strategies or potential ideas for implementation.

Organising Information (Part 1)

Analytical thinking is the important “middle step” between strategic thinking and creative thinking. My favourite definition of analytical thinking was developed by David Stephenson, a professor in the Department of Meteorology, University of Reading, UK:

• Standing back from the information given
• Examining it in detail from many angles
• Checking closely whether it is accurate
• Checking whether each statement follows logically
• Looking for possible flaws in the reasoning, evidence, or the way conclusions are drawn
• Comparing the issue from other points of view
• Checking all the assumptions
• Searching for any contradictions

To enable analytical thinking, information is sorted and organised after gathering to help decipher its insights - usually in a chart or graph. The two most common tools are the SWOT Analysis and the Force Field Analysis.

Objective? Tactic? Strategy? Goal? Issue?

It's one of the oldest arguments in communications: what's the difference between an objective, and a strategy, and a tactic?  Argue with me if you like, but here's a master set of definitions I've adapted over the years, improving them as I go.

Objective

An objective is a statement expressing a mission, a purpose or a standard, which can reasonably be achieved with a defined time-frame and available resources. Generally, an objective is broader in scope than a goal. Also, an objective may comprise several goals.

Objectives should be S-M-A-R-T, a system championed by Peter Drucker in his 1954 seminal work, “The Practice of Management.”

Categories of Questions

Preparing questions in advance of research or an interview is vital for a variety of reasons. First, it means you’ve thought of all possible questions in advance. This in turn means any follow-up interview will focus on drilling deeper instead of playing catch-up.

During the interview itself, you can genuinely listen to the respondent’s answers instead of thinking up the next question. (Similar to handling a crisis or negotiating a deal, most people’s creativity disintegrates during tense situations.) Most important, it universally improves creative sessions because it ensures your brainstormers have the information they need to generate new ideas.

ost questions fall into ten different categories. The list below isn’t meant to be definitive, but I’ve often it’s a good place for teams to adapt and expand to fit a particular situation or client. (It probably goes without saying, but depending upon the organisation or the topic, you may need to sign a non-disclosure agreement to get the information you need.)

The easy method: begin by brainstorming all possible questions in each area. A friend uses a slightly more elaborate method. She begins by developing questions in each area by listing a) what information she knows for sure, b) what assumptions she has (what she think she knows), and c) what she doesn’t know. After you have plenty of questions in each group, finish by using R-O-P-E.

• Remove any questions that doesn’t make sense in context with the others.
• Organise similar questions together.
• Prioritise the questions.
• Evaluate the questions one last time – just to make sure you haven’t missed anything.

A last piece of advice: divide the questions among team members so one person isn’t doing all the work.

Group 1. Background, or Facts of Establishment

NY Times Interview with Richard Anderson, CEO of Delta Air LInes

I'm not a fan of posting links to recent news articles, but I couldn't resist in this case.  I very much liked this recent interview by Adam Bryant of Richard Anderson, CEO of Delta Air Lines, for "Corner Office" in The New York Times on 25 April 2009.

On the second page of the link, Anderson has some specific points about communications which I think is not only timeless - but timely, given that customers, shareholders and employees need more - and more compelling - communications in challenging times.

Of course, I didn't mind either the barbs about PowerPoint and Blackberry. Here too he subtly underscores the key point that modern technology won't make you a better communicator if you don't know how to communicate effectively in the first place.