Anyone who has ever worked in an organization knows about the “grapevine”—the informal rumor-mill where fact and speculation mix together to breed various strains of truth, half-truths and outright misconceptions.

Strategic, open communications can reduce the grapevine’s activity and influence. This is even more apparent, and important, as companies and their stakeholders (including employees) engage more in the range of communication channels powered by social media tools and platforms such as blogs, Twitter, LinkedIn and Facebook.

Companies today are looking to join in the conversations occurring within and outside of the company walls. Those conversations can change and move rapidly, which makes it more difficult for company “spokespersons” (either formally designated or ad hoc) to be a trusted participant if they haven’t spent time engaging with others.

Some of the bigger challenges occur in times of change, when information may be less available or less readily shared, and the unknown can seem more apparent and more ominous. Does that describe the situation at Hewlett-Packard, following the sudden resignation on Friday of Mark Hurd, HP’s chairman, chief executive officer and president? (Read more in my previous post.)

A few HP executives have been quoted in articles appearing online. For example, in the U.K., a Guardian newspaper’s online article quoted HP’s general counsel Michael Holston as stating that Hurd engaged in a “systematic pattern” of submitting falsified financial reports to hide a “close personal relationship” with a former HP contractor.

The official HP blog, Data Central, on Saturday offered scant information other than a retread of the corporate statement published on Friday. It stated that “Comments are closed for this post and will not be published.”

Let’s hope that the communications internally at HP were much more transparent. After all, Hurd was not universally loved within HP for his tough business decisions that led to thousands of job cuts over the years. How will HP’s communications staff manage this time of change?

That was exactly the topic of a session led by HP communicators Robin Andrews and Desiree Sylvester in 2005. It was titled, “Keeping employees focused and engaged in times of change,” and it was delivered on the day before Hurd accepted the IABC EXCEL Award at the IABC International Conference in Washington, D.C.

Much of what Robin and Desiree shared in that presentation could hold true today, such as the “communication challenges”:

• Balance focus on delivering day-to-day business vs. change
• Manage leaks in the media
• Everything said internally was expected to be shared externally—very difficult to give employees additional or advance information

Check out the presentation and then let’s see what surfaces from HP’s employees. Will they feel like their feelings and opinions have been heard?

Another more minor observation. I had noticed that on Friday, the day of the Hurd resignation announcement, the HP site was not completely updated. Although the press release was posted under HP’s News Releases section, the company leader page still indicated that Hurd was in charge.

On Saturday, the site was updated to indicate that Cathie Lesjak
was named interim chief executive officer and would remain chief financial officer.

I first met Mark Hurd at the 2005 IABC International Conference in Washington, D.C. He had just joined Hewlett-Packard as its CEO and president, after a successful stint in a similar role at NCR. In fact, Hurd was being honored as the recipient of IABC’s EXCEL Award for his support, encouragement and practice of exemplary communication.

It saddened me to read the news article on Friday under the headline, “HP CEO Hurd resigns after sexual-harassment probe.” To be clear, an investigation by HP’s outside legal counsel and its General Counsel’s Office, overseen by the HP Board determined that no violation of HP’s sexual harassment policy occurred. However, it did find that Hurd violated HP’s Standards of Business Conduct. Read the official statement on the HP website.

As I reviewed some notes I took during Hurd’s address at the 2005 conference, the irony of some of his comments and statements jumped out.

• He had begun his remarks, following a warm applause by the audience, with the comment, "As CEO, you aren't used to hearing people say nice things about you."
• Hurd later told the audience that the term "fired" originated from an incident that involved two early leaders at NCR. Quick summary: NCR head John Patterson allegedly punctuated the termination of Thomas John Watson, Sr. by having Watson's desk taken outside and set ablaze. Hence, the phrase "fired."

I’ve since found many references to the origin of the phrase, “fired,” that don’t point to NCR. It may be another example of Hurd’s misunderstanding of information—like HP’s Standards of Business Conduct.

Two other Hurd comments from his 2005 EXCEL Award address stood out to me today:


• The CEO can't replace the relationship of front-line employees with their immediate supervisors, he said. "The CEO can provide a context [to] try to bring clarity."
• Hurd later said that as he would "promote, demote, recognize and reward people, I tell 30,000 people what I value."


As a highly visible CEO, Hurd has sent a message to his employees with his misconduct, and I hope that it doesn’t erase the good that he did for HP. I also hope he uses this as a lesson in what to value most as a business leader and champion of communication excellence.

What context and clarity can Hurd’s interim successor, Cathie Lesjak, bring to company employees? In my next post, I’ll look back at a presentation on employee communications made at that same 2005 IABC International Conference by HP communicators, and then compare that with what has been communicated in the past couple of days following Hurd’s resignation.

You wouldn’t know it by my lack of recent posts, but I have been actively engaged lately in communication activities. A lot of the activity has surrounded my transition into the role of IABC/Chicago chapter president for the 2010-2011 board year (beginning July 1).

Before things get rolling, I’m going to spend next week as a volunteer youth leader and take a trip to “Never the Same Camp“. Early mornings, late nights, a lot of running in-between lots of prayers. Not sure how that will be different than the past few weeks.

Anyway, I’ll be off the grid. Be good.

UPDATE 5/14/2010: Follow the Twitter conversation with the hashtag #braudtalk

I’m hosting Gerard Braud‘s Friday Free Media Training Teleseminar. The fun begins at 11 a.m. CDT. Sign up here

This series of teleseminars is helping to raise awareness of his new book, Don't Talk to the Media.

Braud’s tour and communication “lessons learned” about Hurricane Katrina were one of the highlights for me when I attended the 2007 IABC International (now World) Conference in New Orleans. He is savvy, experienced and very entertaining.

Join us and bring your questions!

It was lunchtime on Friday, and I was surfing various media websites, when I took a decided left-turn at the South Idaho Press in Burley, Idaho. Feeling somewhat morbid, I decided to check out the local obituaries, where I came across this interesting notice:

Frederico Bernal (Fred) III "Grand Pizzle,"
Frederico Bernal (Fred) III "Grand Pizzle," of Burley, funeral at 11 a.m. Saturday at the Hansen-Payne Mortuary, 321 E. Main St. in Burley; visitation from noon to 4:30 p.m. today at the mortuary.

I have no clue as to what a Grand Pizzle does, but surely Burley is suffering the loss this week.

While attempting to uncover the duties of a Grand Pizzle, the closest I came to an answer actually extended the mystery. I discovered that someone has created a LinkedIn profile for a “Lord Pizzle,” Grand Poopah at Prestige Worldwide, in the Toronto area. Perhaps a distant cousin?

I may have to investigate the Toronto lead in-person this summer, when I attend the IABC World Conference in Toronto.

In the meantime, any suggestions from you as to the value of a Grand Pizzle in society?

On Feb. 16, 2010, IABC/Chicago held a professional development session titled, “Making the Most Effective and Efficient Use of Your Time.” Barbara Talisman, president of Talisman Associates, Inc., delivered the presentation.

UPDATED 2/28/2010: I finally was able to upload the video to the IABC/Chicago YouTube channel. I’ve deleted the PodPress videos, which took too long to load, and embedded the YouTube video. Enjoy!

In this 8:45-minute video, Barbara is interviewed by IABC/Chicago volunteer Wanda Whitson. They discuss:

• The benefits of a social media policy for organizations, and the risks if companies don't have one
• Some of Barbara's favorite social media tools
• An example of a successful social media campaign for an external audience
• Who 'owns' social media within an organization
• Then, two session attendees share one learning that they obtained from the session

For information on upcoming IABC/Chicago events, go to http://chicago.iabc.com.

For information on the consulting services offered by Talisman Associates, Inc., go to www.3talisman.com.

According to Associated Press Economics Writer Jeannine Aversa, the Federal Reserve released a forecast on Wednesday predicting unemployment will stay high over the next two years because recession-scarred Americans are likely to stay cautious.

Coincidently, I had spoken the day before with two separate and distinct groups of job-hunters, which were clearly scared AND scarred by ongoing weak economic conditions and the related highly competitive and frustrating job market.

I’m no stranger to unemployment and a prolonged job search, having been laid off from communications positions in 1991 and 2001. The 2001 layoff was the hardest, coming just three weeks before the Sept. 11 terrorist attack on the World Trade Towers. That attack caused an already struggling economy to tailspin, and hiring froze across the board. I was sitting that morning in a coffee shop with a group of fellow unemployed professionals who had agreed to form a job/networking group. When one of the group members said, “Hey, someone just flew a plane into the World Trade Tower,” I replied, “That’s a shame, but we’ve got to focus on getting a job.” Of course, what I mistakenly perceived to be an accident caused by a poorly skilled pilot turned out to be one of the most significant events of this decade.

It also marked the beginning of a two-and-one-half-year period of under- and unemployment for me. It was a humbling experience, which continues to make me more empathetic with current people who are “in-transition.”

Like the fellow IABC/Chicago members who shared a drink with me after the lunch seminar at Maggiano’s in Chicago. (I took the afternoon as vacation time, and they had time to spend.)

Like the soon-to-graduate Loyola University students who later that evening asked me and three other professionals for advice about a communications career—and whose stiff expressions and carefully chosen words revealed their unspoken, deepest question: “Do we really have a CHANCE to get a decent job?”

At times like this, job seekers need to be heard. It sucks to finally get an interview after weeks of no nibbles, only to be discarded because someone else matches your work experience, AND has something else that the hiring manager preferred. When you are in mid- or late-career, your spouse doesn’t want to hear it. He or she wants to hear that you got the job, along with the salary and benefits that you’ve struggled without for so long.

When you are about to graduate, your parents and friends don’t want to hear that you don’t have any prospects. They want to hear that you have landed a terrific position that will allow you to move out on your own and pay back your student loans.

No, in this scary job market that scars more than it soothes, people need to have someone who has an open ear.

Someone who has been there…and knows that he might be there again one day.

What are the links between effective communication and a company’s profitability? In this YouTube video interview that I recorded for IABC/Chicago using its Flip camera, Jill Folan, a senior communications consultant with Watson Wyatt Worldwide, shares some findings and insights gleaned from the firm’s “2009 Communication ROI Study Report.” (The report itself is available at this link.)

The interview was conducted just two weeks after the study results were released, at a Dec. 15, 2009 lunch event organized by IABC/Chicago’s professional development volunteer staff.

Folan was interviewed by IABC/Chicago member Julia Winn, who also created the video.

Advertising Age yesterday posted a video in which Verizon CMO John Stratton discusses the “Map War” it is conducting with rival service provider AT&T.

In the video, Stratton states that the cellular service provider market has cycled back to a focus on network reliability, rather than available phone choices, as the primary differentiator among service providers. Of course, as AdAge points out, Verizon has hung its marketing hat on network reliabilty ever since it introduced us to the “Can you hear me now?” guy.

I don’t know whether Stratton is correct that customers will focus more on network reliability than phone products. He admitted that the introduction of the Apple iPhone disrupted marketing when tens of thousands of customers drooled over the iPhone and had no problem going with AT&T, which had an exclusive distribution agreement.

I experienced something similar today at work, when I overheard a coworker talking about his new Motorola Droid, which he purchased through a Verizon “buy one, get one free” promotion. I asked him if he was happy with Verizon, and he said, “Oh yeah, the coverage is great.” But he really wanted to show us the cool features of the Droid.

Back around 1990, when I was working in the public relations department at Cellular One in Schaumburg, Ill., network reliability and reach were the primary marketing angles used by us and our primary competitor, Ameritech. At Cellular One, we ran story after story about the most recent cell towers that we built, and how that would improve coverage and reliability. We couldn’t keep our coverage maps as current as we would have liked, because new cell towers were being introduced at a fairly rapid pace.

But that began to change for two main reasons:

• Local communities became disenchanted with the many cell towers dotting their landscapes, and were less inclined to approve new towers, and
• Reception with existing towers was average-to-good over the majority of Cellular One's "coverage area."

But all of the talk of coverage and network reliability ignores a basic fact that continues to be ignored by the media and service providers:




After you achieve a base level of network coverage, the experience of a particular customer depends far more on that customer's travel and cellphone usage patterns than the company that provides the cellular service.

For all of the advertisements that we see and hear that are focused on the benefits of a 3G or 4G network, the fact remains that the root of any cellular service is the transmission of data through the air. Those transmissions can be limited or blocked by natural and man-made obstacles including trees, hills, bridges, and buildings.

No cellular provider has the resources needed to blanket every city or state with unbroken cellular service. So–with the exception of occasional service outages that might occur at a particular cell tower–a customer’s impression of a network’s reliability will depend upon how many “dead spots” exist for that customer as he or she travels. That experience will be different for every customer.

That’s why I chose AT&T as my service provider. I talked with many people who live and work in the same general geographic area as me. I heard their experiences with AT&T, Verizon, Sprint and others. In my case, AT&T was considered to be more reliable by most people with whom I talked, and, in fact, I have been very satisfied with its service. Yet at the IABC World Conference in San Francisco last June, I spoke with Shel Holtz, ABC, who was looking forward to getting a new Palm Pre through Sprint. He had several unsatisfactory experiences with AT&T before he “abandoned” AT&T several years prior to writing the review of the Palm Pre on his blog.

It may not be wise for all cellular service providers to put all of their marketing chips into one basket, whether it be network reliability, new products, price or something else. Find what resonates and stick with it, as long as you can support any claims that you make. I get a sense that neither Verizon nor AT&T have been able to make an airtight case in the “Map Wars” battles.

Let me know what you think. Call me, if you have enough bars.

During the IABC World Conference 2009 in San Francisco last June, I talked with a respected colleague from the U.K. regarding the then-current state of commitment there to corporate social responsibility (in light of the economic downturn).

My colleague told me that he was hearing that many companies were scaling back their CSR spending, and he took that to mean that CSR remained a “nice-to-have” in good times, and a “don’t need to have” in tougher times.

Little did my colleague or I know that, at the very moment we were talking, new research was going to show that the commitment of corporate leaders to social responsibility programs and initiatives was still strong.

Here are two sources of current research:

IBM Institute for Business Value 2009 CSR Study
(survey of 224 business leaders worldwide):

• 60% believe that corporate social responsibility (CSR) has increased in importance over the past year
• Only 6% say it is a lower priority.

The State of Corporate Citizenship in the United States 2009

(Joint project of the Boston College Center and The Hitachi Foundation.

• Conducted by GlobeScan between June 4-June 23, 2009
• Survey queried 756 executives, 36% at small businesses (1-99 employees), 24% at medium (100-999) and 40% at large companies (1,000+)
• Despite upheaval in the economy, a majority of U.S. companies are not making major changes in their corporate citizenship practices. Of those who made changes 38% reduced philanthropy/giving, 27% increased layoffs, and 19% reduced R&D for sustainable products.
• Most U.S. senior executives believe business should be more involved than it is today in addressing major public issues including health care, product safety, education, and climate change.
• Reputation was cited by 70% as a driver for corporate citizenship, tied for the top spot with "it fits our company traditions and values."
• Based on current economic conditions, 15% of companies are increasing R&D for new sustainable products; 11% are increasing corporate citizenship marketing and communications; and 10% are increasing local and/or domestic sourcing or manufacturing.

I’ll add some anecdotal evidence that I obtained during two recent conferences.

At the Melcrum Strategic Communication Management Summit 2009 held in Chicago from Sept. 22–24, 2009, I asked three panelists whether their companies had cut back on SR spend this year, due to the economy or other factors. All three said the spend had not decreased, and one of the panelists, Beth Miller, a communications manager at Unilever Foodsolutions, stressed the importance of the company’s efforts in social responsibility for attracting and retaining quality employees, as well as satisfying customer concerns over the environment and natural resources.

That same message came through loud and clear in presentations held during the IABC Pacific Plains Region Exchange Conference, held Oct. 11-13 in Minneapolis, MN. Companies know that employee retention will be a critical strategic focus globally over the next decades. This current tight job market and belt-tightening by consumers will soon pass away. A company’s reputation and “report card” on social responsibility topics will be a competitive advantage to some, and a disadvantage to those who ignored it.

(cross-posted to the SR LINK website)