Blurring lines between Marketing and PR

A few weeks ago I saw an offer on one of Amazon's local deals emails for an E-Careers e-Marketing and SEO course, so decided to sign up. It was around five hours of learning in total, all delivered online, so I finally managed to squeeze it in this week.

I'd expected there to be a lot of 'new' in this course for me. I wanted to find out more about what the key differences in the Marketing approach to digital would be from the PR. I didn't get that. Instead what I found was that a good portion of this 'e-Marketing' course was about PR.

On reflection, I'm not sure that I should have been surprised about this. The more I think about it, the more blurred the lines between Marketing and PR have become now, thanks to the internet. A large chunk of the course looked at how the two disciplines now work in partnership rather than Marketing being 'advertising' and PR being 'Media'. Neither have this neat categorisation any more. Instead both groups share responsibility for engaging in a dialogue with stakeholders.

Both Marketing and PR are engaging much more in two-way dialogue. It's much less about a broadcast (although the traditional techniques of catalogues, DM etc haven't disappeared entirely, and nor should they) and much more about listening to customers, finding out what they need, and how to respond to them. I've been learning about this in PR since I first joined the CIPR back in the mid 2000s. So it was interesting and relieving to hear the same from a Marketing perspective.

It was also interesting to see how much emphasis was put on content marketing. The course pushed hard on the importance of delivering great content to stakeholders that is segmented to support their particular need. With my PR hat on, corporate blogging, thought leadership, good content and a company news room all sit within corporate communications. But this course was calling all of this 'Marketing'. So really where does the difference lie?

I found myself wondering if the biggest gap is in how businesses split up their PR and Marketing teams by stakeholder. PR remain the gatekeepers for the media and that's undisputed. They also often own what is classed as 'corporate': so news that crosses all stakeholders. But within Marketing, the stakeholders being owned by a specific Marketing team is perhaps more specific. For example within academic publishing the group that support libraries will be a Library Marketing team. And the group that support researchers will be a separate team. Or often they will be split by the type of product that they are selling. Either way, is that really the only division between a PR and Marketeer now? I'm curious for additional views on this.

A few comments on the course itself:

As I've blogged in the past about how highly I rate my MOOC experiences so far, I have to say this online course delivery was somewhat irritating in parts. The functionality was on the whole comparable: you listened to online lectures, took multiple choice quizzes, and got the option to link to further reading. Yet you couldn't pause, rewind or fast-forward through the video material. You couldn't even work out how long each segment was, you had to just wait for it to stop then click to move on.

I also couldn't quite believe that the resources being pointed to in the social media marketing section were dated from 2008. Twitter didn't even get a mention! E-Careers really ought to review how relevant their materials are.

I hate to be nit-picky, but I also fail to see how a half-day's worth of learning equates to 'mastery'. That wording on the certificates is more than a little cringey...

On motivation, and more on the MOOC

It's a long weekend here in the UK and my parents are down visiting. They decided to use this trip to present me with a folder full of school reports, including this charming self portrait:



It forms part of a junior school record of achievement, where I was asked many questions: what was important to me, from friends to family, to how I rated my ability to work alone or in groups, what skills I thought I had, and what targets I was setting myself for senior school. It was basically a personality profile done way before I knew what one of those was. Impressive really, looking back!

What struck me was what it asked in order to identify drivers and motivators. And what was even more interesting is how what I recorded about myself as an eleven year old hasn't really altered all that much.

As I've mentioned in previous posts, I'm in the final stages now of a Gamification course (my first MOOC). One of the key things I've been learning about has been motivation. What makes gamification particuarly worthwhile is its ability to take something otherwise dull or mundane and making it fun. Kevin Werbach's course neatly applies the principals of psychology, understanding what drives motivation, to creating game structures, whether that be external drivers, like points or badges, or intrinsic motivators like the desire to do something for others, or being part of something bigger than yourself.

What I identified about myself aged eleven was that I really hated not understanding something - I wanted to get it straight away, and even now I find it difficult being put on the spot and will spend hours preparing myself and knowing every minutiae about a subject when it's important (a typical introvert response). I also identified that I felt good learning new things. That is something that stays true now, and is one of the biggest drivers for me professionally. I like being challenged, and will go out of my way to find opportunities to increase my skill-set. I'm hungry for new information and am inspired by reading around subjects that stretch my understanding of business and communication. That's really what prompted me to sign up for the Gamification MOOC in the first place.

It makes me wonder what research has been done about the setting of motivators and the application of that knowledge for business. Definitely one to do some more reading around.

Where are all the women in leadership?

screen grab: BBC 'Women at the Top'

Hilary Devey's recent two part investigation for the BBC has given me some food for thought. I'm a thirty year old who knows that she wants a family, but equally hasn't yet reached full career potential. In the documentary this is the point many young women like myself are leaving the career ladder in droves. I want a career AND a family. But can I have both?
When I was born, my mum made the decision to make sacrifices in her career for her family. A consultant radiologist since her early thirties, she was what Hilary's programme would have set out as a future star for senior management. In the long run, deciding to work part time did affect what she achieved, but she feels it was the right choice. Work life balance in the 80's is not what it is now, and would the decisions my mum made be the same if she was in the same situation today?
For me, I know that my current employer offers excellent maternity benefits and flexible working for parents. That is a huge plus. But equally I also know that my current employer doesn't have a strong career pathway for me. It's a dilemma as a thirty year old to decide whether to risk staying on but hurting my career versus leaving for another company that offers better opportunities but less security. There's a huge sensation of guilt hanging over me as I flim-flam between prioritising career over family then back again.
I came away from both episodes of Hilary's programme feeling inspired. I want it all, and I came away feeling more confident that that is possible to achieve. There needs to be better representation of women in senior management positions, and there needs to be better gender balance throughout companies. The research suggests how much more productive, cooperative and happy gender balanced teams are. And that more revenue is generated as a result. It also looked at the psychology of recruitment, and made me realise I myself don't rate myself highly enough when it comes to looking at my skillset. It has renewed my self belief and equally my motivation to go for what I want, which is the best of both worlds.
Gender balance in the workplace is not going to be achieved overnight, but women need to be confident in their abilities and to work with their employers to see the benefits of providing good work life balance.
I know when my husband and I do get around to having kids I will be more driven to find a way to continue my career path, as I confidently believe that I have it in me!

"If he hurts himself he'll learn not to do it again"??

This wise old mantra is one we often tell ourselves, notably when talking about letting a child do something they will probably regret. So what happens when they just don't learn?

An example on Bad Pitch here - it'll make you smile, but more importantly it'll remind you to pay attention to feedback and learn from your mistakes!