Do bosses need to “understand” public relations?

One of the topics I often hear from many brand public relations people is: “Our boss doesn’t know public relations.” The “boss” mentioned here, in addition to the actual controller role of the founder, chairman, and president of the company, of course, also includes senior managers or responsible persons who undertake and perform decision-making actions in business. This kind of vomiting listens a lot, and it will inevitably raise a question: Do the bosses really need to understand PR?

Everyone knows that public relations is not in public relations. It is nothing more than focusing on the consequences of public relations when the bosses will generally make decisions. They will command and talk indiscriminately, which will bring trouble to the enterprise, often to themselves, and then it will be simpler and more rude. Force public relations to “handle”. The so-called processing is actually to get the ball right away. The problem is that quite a lot of public relations is needed to get things done in the media, or it is already in a state that is not within the public relations power, or it needs to have a fundamental solution in the business. Otherwise, it will be futile to get the media, and it will even be counterproductive. oil.

For example, in the case of the “fake doctor” incident of the American Year of Health in 2018, when the company was smashed by the former employee with the question of “using a doctor who left the company and issued a medical report for violation of regulations”, the enterprise did not immediately conduct a self-examination and determine whether the business exists. Violation of the law or illegal issues, but the adoption of a firm statement of disapproval, and said that “there is an organization of black public relations, has reported to the public security organs.” However, the denial of the statement was “closed” by the regulatory authorities on the next day.

Similar examples can be described as endless. One of the commonalities is that the involved companies encounter serious grievance risks, fall into the public relations crisis, and whether they interpret and remedy afterwards, they will leave a “stain” of unrecoverable reputation.

In fact, we can think about it: Are these risks and crises largely avoided?

The answer is yes, the truth is disappointing. The reason, from the perspective of many public relations people, is inevitably a professional habit that the bosses do not understand public relations.

What deserves our further consideration is that there is another commonality in these situations that lead to the public relations crisis. It is that the business operations of enterprises have fundamental bottom-line problems that clearly break through legal compliance, assume responsibility, and respect people’s hearts. Therefore, the so-called bosses do not understand public relations, but the appearance is that the root cause of business management decisions and the basic bottom line are unstoppable, which is the deeper cause of the public relations crisis.

From this point of view, it is not important for bosses to understand PR. Even the bosses do not need to understand public relations. They must first hold legal compliance, assume responsibility, and respect the people. Even if they don’t understand public relations, the situation is not bad. go with.

So, do you say that for the bosses, there is no need to know about public relations? Obviously not!

The relationship between management decision-making and public relations thinking is one yuan is absolute, and binary is relative, that is, business decision-making and public relations thinking are not split, but unified and coordinated. We know that business management has a dream of a hundred-year brand, and the public relations department pays attention to and pursues long-term effects, which are embodied in reconciling differences and contradictions, winning identity and opportunity, warning and defusing risks. The intersection of the two is in the “people’s heart”. Two words.

Take Gree’s report on Oaks as an example. A company buys products from peers for testing, and then uses its own standards as a reference to define competitors’ products as unqualified and publicly “reports”. Such behaviors are not only “offside” but also inevitable. Being questioned in violation of unfair competition regulations is to some extent challenging the authority and seriousness of regulatory supervision. Secondly, Gree’s so-called public “reporting” is actually destroying the benign competition of the industry and the ecology of commercial civilization. It not only has a huge contrast with its status and image as a leading company in the air-conditioning industry, but also violates the common responsibility and mission of the industry. Gree does not put the battlefield of competition on the continuous improvement of products and services, but tries to weaken the disadvantages of its own product price by suppressing peers. Not all consumers agree, but it is more likely to stimulate some consumers’ dislike. Leave more hidden dangers.

It can be seen that Gree’s report to Oaks, from the perspective of the unity of business decision-making and public relations thinking, is a “people’s heart” move, which will undoubtedly worsen the situation in isolation from the industry.