I’m attending the Public Relations Society of America International Conference in D.C. from Oct. 17 – 19. Disclaimer: These posts reflect my opinion, although I was asked to blog by PRSA as media.
I shudder at words such as synergy and case study. The problem that has arisen with case studies (and sharing them via traditional methods or with a social approach) is that we focus too much on the “What.”
- “What did Company X do to solve X issue?”
- “What did Company Salamander do to increase brand awareness?”
- “What did Company Blah Blah do to increase sales on X medium?”
Why, exactly, don’t we also focus on the “Why” and the “How”?
The problem that many PR professionals have when it comes to social approach is at the foundation – the education and questions that should be asked at the start, whether if its within an agency, corporate brand or at the start of a campaign. If we aren’t sure what questions to ask, how do we define objectives? How do we push clients to think past pre-conceived notions?
Use cases is a better word for what should be seen, but it’s rare that we ever see it. We go from point A to point D, consider it sharing and blaze right past B and C. B and C are important, too. Case studies are meant to teach, discuss and takeaway – but if I don’t know how or why a certain approach was taken, then it completely defeats the purpose.
By making it too basic (focusing on the what happened – which, by the way, Google can tell me) we risk losing 2/3 of our audience. People walk out of sessions, at a conference where they paid a lot of money. Yes, networking and events are valuable. Education is a key focus for many professional organizations – after all, we want to make the industry the best it can be.
Speakers spend a lot of time preparing presentations, taking into account the demographic of their audience and what they already know. I applaud them for taking a broad spectrum and trying to appeal to the masses. The thing is, those tweeting/blogging/most interactive on social platforms already know the “What.” Those are the people being heard. Those are the people who are saying it’s not worth it to attend.
So how can we fix it?
A few ideas:
- Have different tracks at the conference, and have a specific process for picking the best speakers
- Instead of “Call for Proposals,” why not reach out to some that you feel are smart, able and ready to share information that s valuable? Don’t always focus on one specific vertical or idea.
- Schedule, Schedule, Schedule. It’s never a good approach to schedule the Top 3 measurement minds in the country at the same time.
- Have pre-reads and prep before the conference (webinars, podcasts and blog posts can go a long way in giving a peek at what a session will cover)
What do you think? By focusing too much on the “What,” are we losing attendees and missing out on smart conversation? Let’s discuss.
