This month in PR (May 2025)

The learning issue

When we started PR Place Insights (now PR Academy Insights) back in 2017, one of our ambitions was to act as a bridge between two worlds: one inhabited by practitioners and the other by academics. After all, those two worlds combine so well in the CIPR professional qualifications in which ambitious professionals are keen to learn about models, frameworks and theories they can apply to their roles.

Yet I have to be honest and report that if anything the two worlds are further apart now than ever before. Academics are incentivised to address fellow academics (it’s built into the peer review process); they talk mainly to each other at specialist conferences and through publications that are not priced to be widely read.

Meanwhile, there’s a strand of anti-intellectualism among practitioners that has always doubted the value of public relations degrees, say, or public relations scholarship.

So it’s good to be able to report one encouraging development this month, a step in the direction of scholars sharing their work more widely and smart practitioners being open to collaborating to develop new thinking.

Corporate Communication Review is an online and open access publication from a team of European communication scholars. Open access means it’s shared freely without registration or a paywall.

In the words of the press release announcing the new publication:

‘The magazine will serve as a platform to bridge the gap between academic research and corporate communication practice, providing valuable insights for both practitioners and researchers in the field.’

The first article in the first issue exemplifies this approach: two Swedish scholars and two Swedish practitioners combining to argue for a new approach to narrative and corporate communication they call strategic improvisation. This draws on jazz improvisation and brings together the rational world of management theory with the emotional world of musical creativity. (This concept is developed more fully in the new book by Falkheimer et al, Conducting Narratives.)

‘The aim  of  strategic  improvisation  is  to  enable  us  to  navigate the tension between order and chaos, perform the balancing  act  between  complexity  and  the  ever-changing  nature of  everything,  and  establish  a  clear  direction. Ultimately, strategic improvisation fulfils the basic needs for stability, security, and shared values.’

But why learn?

To better adapt to change.

Why now?

Because you will increasingly be asked to justify the value of your role and by the comms function in the face of budget constraints, economic uncertainty and the inexorable advance of AI.

Earlier this month John Edden spelt out the challenge in blunt language: I’ve wasted my entire career (and so have you!).

He was mocking the attitude that comms is easy because anyone can send an email and it’s not highly valued because the task so often involves something routine.

‘The truth is, PR professionals aren’t valuable because they can perform the mechanical task of sending emails—they’re valuable because they know what to say, who to say it to, when to say it, and perhaps most importantly, what not to say. That expertise comes from experience, continuous learning, and a deep understanding of human psychology and media landscapes.’

Let’s turn to one current example where a rethink of narratives may be required and where strategic improvisation can be helpful: policy on diversity, equity and inclusion (DEI).

Paul Compton addressed the ‘onslaught of hate’ faced by his ‘normally resilient team of fire and rescue communicators’ in response to posts shared about International Women’s Day, Ramadan and a local Pride festival.

Should you stick or twist? Paul Compton went back to the original purpose:

‘It’s important to remember what inclusion is: it’s about people. People feeling understood, safe to be themselves, having an equal voice, being able to belong and contribute in the way that others can. That’s not a political thing, it’s a people thing. And communications sits right at the heart of it.’

He argues for ‘clear community standards for social media’ and says you should ‘explain why you’re supporting initiatives (people, not politics), you are prepared for comments and have plan to deal with them, you speak to people onlooking and not the haters, and you know when to stop a discussion before it goes too far.’

It’s strategic, and it involves improvisation.

Ann-Marie Blake considers the same challenge through an internal communication lens and reminds us that communication is a two-way street.

‘If your organisation’s approach to DEI is changing, the first step isn’t to draft a carefully worded announcement — It’s to ask questions. Engage the network members who’ve helped to build your inclusive culture and ask how they are feeling. Listen carefully to what they say. Even if it’s uncomfortable. What support do they need? Communicate what you’ve heard, and how this will be fed back to leaders.’

That’s two reminders to put people first.

Yet we will often rely on some combination of media and technology to reach the people we want to involve.

So a key discussion is taking place about the value of media coverage and SEO link building in the age of AI. In summary, we know that the primacy of media coverage was challenged early this century by the rise of search engine optimisation. Eventually, earned media asserted its place alongside paid, owned and shared (or social) media.

Now, AI search summaries are effectively reducing the number of clicks through to web pages, challenging business as usual.

We’ve gone from writing for journalists, to writing for the Google algorithm, to writing for AI in a process now called Generative Engine Optimisation (GEO). But what feeds GEO? That is the question posed by Richard Edelman.

Some are directing advertising budgets towards influencer partnerships but Edelman argues for a renewed focus on top tier media. He even describes this as ‘The Golden Age of Earned.’

‘The best stimulus to GEO results is still a story in The Wall Street Journal, Financial Times, The New York Times and their equivalents in key global markets (Handelsblatt, Le Monde, The Times).’

Meanwhile others remain focused on unmediated forms of communication such as thought leadership articles on social media. Yet Trevor Young notes how hard it is to stand out amidst all the noise from those gaming the platforms.

‘Originality and depth are losing ground to AI drivel and shameless self-promotion.’

It’s another way to look at AI and ask questions about the added value of humans. Since an acceptable level of expertise is instantly available on any topic, how does the genuine expert (and indeed the communication specialist) rise above the acceptable and assert their value? 

‘Experience, continuous learning and a deep understanding of human psychology and media landscapes’ is certainly necessary. That’s the lesson; let’s end with an example.