Worthy Award Filing Tips

By Carolyn Bobo, APR, Fellow

The Worthy Awards – a first for our chapter – are designed to provide area communications, marketing and public relations professionals with an opportunity to celebrate creativity, strategic thinking and professional ability.

Don’t be hesitant about entering. Think about your activities since 2010 (as a first-time contest, we have a broad entry time frame) and go for it. Here are some tips for preparing your entry.

A solid entry will address these points:

· What was done?

· Why did it matter?

· How was it measured?

Here’s how to prepare your entry.

Carefully read the entry parameters.

The judges (Central Michigan chapter) will look at each required area and base their scoring on how well the four entry areas are explained. Entrants should address each required point, and thoughtfully explain their good work so that it is excruciatingly clear to judges not familiar with our area.

Rationale (Tactics) and Research (Campaigns, Projects)

Explain any type of research, and why it was used. A textbook campaign would include formal, original research, but that isn’t always feasible or necessary. Judges know this, so entrants should clearly describe what was done. For example, a brainstorming session, a review of media clips or discussions with clients may be described as secondary, qualitative research … literature review … content analysis … anectodal reports.

Objective/Purpose (Tactics) and Planning (Campaigns, Projects)

Why did you do this? Possible reasons are to increase sales, raise funds, create name recognition, affect public behavior. Describe any factors about the project/tactic that will help judges understand the purpose and the market. Note that the purpose must - absolutely must – match the outcome. Read on to the Evaluation section.

Execution (Campaigns, Projects)

Explain which tactics were chosen and why. When there are several tactical options, the entrant should state, for example, that “these tactics were selected to expand the reach of our message,” identify and justify each tactic. Remember that the judges won’t know that your decisions and efforts were special unless you tell them.

If your entry states that “TV station XYZ sponsored the event,” you must explain that “TV station XYZ rarely supports activities in Fort Worth.” Or, “TV station XYZ sponsors only three events per year and we convinced the station to choose ours.”

Another hypothetical example: If your target market/public prefers electronic media over print, your entry should state, “Secondary research found that our target demographic prefers to receive electronic communications.” Such data may be obvious to you, but your entry narrative also must make your decision obvious to the judges.

Execution (Tactics)

Here’s where to explain who wrote the copy, designed a magazine, edited content, provided photos, approved the budget and negotiated with a vendor. The tactics section of The Worthy Awards is an explanation of who did what. If an unusual price or component was negotiated, say so, so the judges will understand your extra effort.

Results (Tactics)

Tactics are created to meet a specific need, and are skillfully and professionally prepared. An evaluation of effectiveness and impact, based upon defined objectives, can be simply stated. However, the results must - absolutely must – match the purpose. If the purpose was “to generate five media stories,” the result must show five (or more) media reports. If the purpose is “to raise awareness,” the results must show a measurable increase in awareness.

Evaluation (Campaigns, Projects)

Explain how the targeted market, public or audience responded and how you learned about its response. This is the time to include quantitative data and analysis. Such measures may be a replication of preliminary research or measures of other activities. For example, measures can be election results, a sales increase, ROI, donor or donation increase, or the number of participants/responses that exceeded expectations. Include as much measurable and anecdotal response as possible, and describe future plans. If comprehensive research was not needed, say so. For example, “More than 5,000 people in our target public responded to the activity. We expected only 3,000, so we did not repeat our preliminary research to measure interest in the topic. However, we will analyze the experience of these respondents to plan future campaigns related to this issue.”

Good luck to everyone. See you at the May 31 awards presentation.

(Don’t forget to submit nominations for Communicator of the Year. There is no fee.)

Please feel free to contact us if you have questions or would like more information:

The Worthy Awards Committee

Michelle Clark<mailto:clarkm@trinityra.org>, Trinity River Authority of Texas

Margaret Ritsch<mailto:m.c.ritsch@tcu.edu>, APR, TCU

Carolyn Bobo<mailto:cgbobo6311@att.net>, APR, Fellow PRSA, University Relations, UNT

Allyson Cross<mailto:cross@gcgadvertising.com>, president, Greater Fort Worth PRSA

Liz Heck<mailto:liz@jodesign.com>, JO Design, Marketing, Public Relations

Megan Murphey<mailto:murphey@gcgmarketing.com>, GCG Marketing

Rita Parson<mailto:rita.parson@tccd.edu>, Tarrant County College District

Are You Worthy?

By Michelle Clark

The Greater Fort Worth Chapter of PRSA is thrilled to embark on its inaugural Worthy Awards competition – designed to recognize the highest level of professional performance in our industry and our region. The awards committee – co-chaired by Margaret Ritsch, APR, Carolyn Bobo, APR, Fellow PRSA, and me, and with the tremendous support of Allyson Cross, Liz Heck, Megan Murphey and Rita Parson – has worked incredibly hard over the past year to research the best ways to introduce a rigorous yet attractive competition to our area.

Worthy Awards will be given in three separate categories – first, a strategic communications programs and campaigns category that includes integrated communications efforts; a tactics category that evaluates specific campaign components as stand-alone items; and a separate category for academic contributions to the public relations profession. We’re very proud of that last category – all indications are that the Worthy Awards will be the only regional competition in the nation that includes an academic category. Our chapter has a long history of academic support from our local universities, and we want to make sure to celebrate the work they do to prepare future members of our profession. Awards in this category will recognize everything from textbook chapters to published academic articles and formal presentations.

We’re also throwing in a dash of the unexpected: a Communicator of the Year selected from outside the public relations field. One of our key roles as public relations professionals is mentoring the leadership teams of our organizations in the art of open, effective communications with various publics. This award seeks to recognize that kind of commitment to public discourse, and nominees are sought from across all avenues of public life – clergy, elected officials, business leaders, educators and more.

We’ll celebrate our winners May 31 at a dinner ceremony at the Marquis on Magnolia – a fittingly elegant setting in which to recognize our region’s highest professional achievements. Star-Telegram Columnist Bob Ray Sanders will serve as master of ceremonies for the evening.

Early entries are due by March 19, and the final entry deadline is April 6. All entries will be judged by an out-of-state PRSA chapter. Our most recent chapter luncheon addressed the importance of the Research, Planning, Implementation and Evaluation model for developing award entries. If you weren’t able to attend and are curious to know more, I hope you’ll reach out to the awards committee for help with crafting effective entries.

You can find everything you need for your entries at the Worthy Awards website – worthyawards.com. The site offers a detailed explanation of each category, and you can fill out entry forms and submit nominations for Communicator of the Year. You can also find the contact information for awards committee members if you need someone to address a specific question.

This is our time to showcase the outstanding work we all deliver every day as members of GFWPRSA and the public relations profession. I, along with my colleagues on the awards committee, encourage each of you to enter – and to invite others to do so, regardless of whether they are PRSA members. Let’s make our inaugural competition a tough act to follow.

Communicators as Change Agents

Linda Jacobson, APR (@LindaJacobson) shared her program on Change Management. Get the full presentation on Slideshare.

Let's Talk Video

This is the digital age, which means we should be thinking visually more than ever before, according to Studios 121 Account Manager Dani Dufresne.

During her presentation to PRSA this week, Dufresne offered three basic tips to keep in mind when planning to tell your organization’s story via video:

1. Be Professional: Because visual storytelling leaves little room for distraction (vs. reading online text), poor video quality will be reflected without proper attention to audio, lighting and graphics. Therefore, beware of bargain packages, which may or may not offer excellence along those lines. Another sign of good video quality is the addition of other elements, which add interest and pace. No one wants to watch a talking-head-only video, so consider cutting away to B-roll footage and including graphics to add appeal.

2. Be Real: Coaching is highly recommended, and videos should be scripted, not read. Consider using what is “real” about your organization (e.g., featuring an employee, the campus, parts of the community, etc.), to convey authenticity.

3. Be Different: Dufresne likes the phrase, “be bold, not beige.” In other words, transform your dry content, be distinctive, and think outside the box.

When communications planning, consider using video in any way you can, such as for VNRs, brand awareness, community outreach, crisis management, and more. To contact Dufresne, send an email to: dani@studios121.com

Help Define Public Relations - #PRDefined

by Richie Escovedo (@vedo)

In 1982, a first-class stamp was 20 cents, Michael Jackson's Thriller was released, the world's population was 4.6 billion, and Johnson & Johnson had a PR nightmare on their hands that led to what is now a model crisis response case study. Ironically, 1982 was also the last time the Public Relations Society of America defined public relations.

Last week, PRSA launched a campaign to create a modern definition for PR with a dedicated site and a strategic Media & Advertising column placement in the New York Times.  I was thrilled to see this collaborative effort to get an updated (and hopefully better) answer to the question, "What is public relations?"

We've needed something new. Public relations takes a beating outside the industry from those who relegate it to only media relations or worse, spin. And honestly, we seldom do an adequate job within the ranks of PR pros of fighting these and other misconceptions. So it's time for a change. (Disclosure: I've been a member of PRSA since 2001.)

Out with the old, in with the new
In 1982, PRSA adopted a definition for PR as:

“Public relations helps an organization and its publics adapt mutually to each other.”

Today, we have an opportunity to adapt this definition to better fit what it is that we do. Take some time to review the notes from the one-day summit of the Definition of Public Relations Task Force.

The group concluded that a modern definition of public relations should be limited to a single sentence: 

Public relations [DOES WHAT] with/for [WHOM] to [DO WHAT] for [WHAT PURPOSE].

The group also saw the need for the modern PR definition to explain two specific things:

1. How public relations drives business success; and
2. How public relations protects and/or promotes the organization or brand.

Submit your definition by Friday, December 2, 2011.

Only the beginning
The campaign is just a start to what could be something really fantastic for public relations. Will the final definition end the debate? No way. Consider it the start to a much greater conversation within our field. I can't wait to see what's next.

Follow the conversation on Twitter with the #PRDefined hastag.

(This is cross-posted from the Next Communications blog.)

Related articles

• What is PR? An Updated Definition for Public Relations (comprehension.prsa.org)
• AdVoice: Defining PR: Words with Friends (forbes.com)
• Have your say in redefining public relations for the modern age (nevillehobson.com)
• Public Relations ... Defined (prsay.prsa.org)
• Redefine PR? No, just learn to listen (globalneighbourhoods.net)

Nowhere to Hide -- Transparency, Communication, Integrity Protect Reputation

By Joan Hunter

*My Summary, Plus Full Speech, of GFW PRSA Ethics Month Speaker John “Pat” Philbin, Crisis1 CEO and former FEMA official.


Unethical practices or actions “are going to come out,” said John “Pat” Philbin, president and CEO of Crisis1, in Washington D.C.

Speaking to one of the largest-attended GFW PRSA monthly programs during our chapter’s September Ethics month, the former director of external affairs of FEMA, offered his personal experience and professional expertise on how public relations professionals can help protect and defend their organizations against unethical conduct charges – whether unintended, true or publicly misperceived.

As an Accredited Public Relations (APR) professional and long-time member of PRSA, Philbin emphasized the importance of leading our organizations to adhere to PRSA’s national code of ethics.

Philbin graciously agreed to allow the Fort Worth Chapter to share the text of his remarks which can be accessed at the end of some of his major points I’ve summarized here:

*Philbin emphasized that PR professionals must match the speed of traditional news media in getting their organization’s own messages out simultaneously, not just to news media but to all their key audiences.

His observations about the environment in which our organizations operate today included:

*Today, speed is viewed as “more important than accuracy.”

*(As a result of this environment), “we also can observe the role of technology and influence of immediacy in watching reporters who monitor twitter accounts and broadcast reports live without so much as qualifying the veracity of the information.”

*“PRSA’s Code of Ethics requires us to advance the free flow of accurate and truthful information that serves the public interest. It is one of the primary reasons that I entered this profession in the mid-1980s.”

*“…We as communicators must embrace and leverage the capability it (technology) provides by getting critical information to those who matter most to our organizations because we will be held to a much higher standard than the media if the information is inaccurate.”

*“I believe it is imperative to help organizations create trust with those who matter most. One way to accomplish this is to promote and enhance transparency throughout our organizations.”

*“The interesting thing about being transparent is that it can actually reduce risk.”

*“Doing the right thing and performing well is necessary but not sufficient. An organization that does the right thing well can be quickly dismissed, marginalized, bankrupted, you-name-it, if it does not communicate well.”

*“As a communications professional, there is little I can do to help a client if they aren’t doing what they say they are doing. Integrity is the only currency we have in public relations.”

*Philbin’s 25+ year career includes public and international affairs, business development, change management, crisis communication, media relations, reputation management and strategic planning with top-level senior governmental officials and company executives. He may be reached at
jphilbin@crisis1.net or www.crisis1net.

Read the full text of Philbin’s remarks.