Recently, a business associate lamented that his company’s public relations firm is taking advantage.
Joe works as a mid-level business manager at a financial services start-up and though he doesn’t have a communications background, he’s responsible for PR.
Soon after he started in his role, Joe appointed a PR agency on a five-figure monthly retainer to help build his company’s brand and reputation through media relations.
Fast forward a few months and Joe is feeling resentful about the money he is wasting on PR. In his mind, the agency is useless. He’s beyond frustrated and annoyed – he wants the agency sacked.
After listening to Joe’s grievances, I realised there are three interrelated issues at play:
- A retainer was the wrong engagement
- The PR agency wasn’t being managed
- Media relations was the wrong approach
Let’s unpack each one.
1. A retainer was the wrong engagement
PR practitioners are mostly engaged on a project basis or on retainer. Both approaches have their merits.
Project engagements are price-driven, tactical, casual, and short-term. For example, a manufacturing business might contract PR support to manage the publicity aspects of a new product launch.
Retainers, on the other hand, are a long-term commitment as well as being value-driven, strategic and broad in scope. For example, an accounting firm might retain a PR agency for twelve months to raise awareness of its expertise in the agribusiness sector.
Where Joe went wrong was placing the agency on retainer without first engaging with his leadership team. He subsequently discovered his executives – the individuals who would serve as his company’s media spokespeople – have little interest in PR, at least for the time being. They disregard proactive ideas and seldom respond to media inquiries.
Consequently, a retainer that centered around media relations was always doomed to fail.
However, Joe does occasionally need issues management support and he rates the agency for this service. He could therefore take the agency off retainer and engage it ad hoc. While the agency will inevitably charge higher rates for project work, Joe would only be paying for what he needs.
2. The PR agency wasn’t being managed
An agency on retainer needs to be managed in much the same way as you would a direct report.
Joe has limited people management experience and had had very little exposure to agencies. Because he didn’t understand what was required of him, he wasn’t managing the relationship. He didn’t put a plan in place, wasn’t providing sufficient direction and feedback, and was allowing conflicts and performance issues to persist.
That said, effective client-agency relationships require investment on both sides. Almost certainly, there are many things the agency could have (should have) done better or differently to accommodate Joe’s inexperience.
Ultimately, though, if Joe is unwilling or unable to properly manage the relationship, his retainer will continue to be squandered.
3. Media relations was the wrong approach
With media relations being largely off limits, Joe needs to direct the agency to change course. The strategy could remain largely the same, but the tactics used to achieve the company’s objectives obviously need to change.
As it is, Joe is drowning in work and could use assistance with a raft of activities including website copy, brochureware, speech writing and ghost writing. His PR agency has the skills to help out in all these areas.
