In English Common Law, a man's home is his castle. Today, with every aspect of our lives spilled out on social media, poured over by friends, family and the wider nosey public, and with views of our homes from every angle on Google, a man's home resembles more of a fish bowl. According to market intelligence firm TNS, who interviewed 72,000 people across 60 countries, 56% of adults admitted to using SM to spy on friends and family. Getting the gossip has never been so easy. Having conquered individual privacy, recently Social Media has tuned its all seeing eyes towards our places of work, corporations and companies, exposing their inner workings and internal politics. This is the focus of employment review websites, where employees can spill the beans about their current or former company for all prospective employees to see. It is a phenomena that was born out of product review sites.
Leading the way is Glassdoor, with employee reviews of around 130,000 workplaces and close integration with Facebook and Google+, while job boards, eager to increase their appeal, have started to include reviews. Indeed started it's online reviews in 2011. It now has over 1 million reviews with 200,000 added each month. Rather than being the slate-fest one imagines this turning into, Glassdoor encourages positive comments - its hard to search for negative reviews and there is no 'lowest rated' company. Roughly two thirds of comments indicate satisfaction with current jobs. Employees can also leave anonymous salary info, interview questions and photographs. Companies can sponsor their own pages on the site (a good transparency strategy) and even promote their vacancies on the pages of competitors with less glowing reviews. In December, Glassdoor released its first 'Best Places to Work', with many tech companies and fast food employers featuring in the top 15.
A prime example is Hill & Knowlton's (now H&K Strategies) Worldwide page on Glassdoor, and here's the Indeed page, where the company scores more highly. This can be filtered down to the UK and there's a salary scale available - but you have to sign up to the site. Clearly, PR firms are making their way onto the profile listings and, while it all needs to be taken with a pinch of salt, it will become the go-to first point of information for many prospective candidates, especially entry level. Time to make sure your staff are happy, brush up the exit interviews and sponsor your company page.
It's not all one way traffic though, as a new start-up, KarmaFile, promises to provide fair and honest co-worker ratings. If it works, this could become the go-to point of call for hiring managers outside of personal networks.
Saturday, 9 February 2013
Academania: Re-Assessing Vocational PR Degrees.
In December, an interesting article appeared in the Schumpter column of the Economist. The article talks about the huge disconnect that exists in some parts of Europe between the high levels of unemployed under-24s and vigorous complaints from companies that say they can't get hold of the right people. Strong evidence of this comes from management consultancy McKinsey, who surveyed employers in nine countries (including the UK) and found that 43% think they can't find enough skilled entry-level workers. Indeed, medium sized enterprises (50-500 staff) had an average of 13 entry level jobs open, while large employers had 27.
In their report, McKinsey argue a large part of the problem is that educators and employers inhabit parallel universes and need to work more closely and with greater empathy - a revamping of vocational education which, outside of Germany, has been shunned by parents and employers. Of course, the focus of this report and the Economist article is on vocations such as technology, utilities and construction rather than soft-skilled professional services.
But I was reminded of this article from PR Week, a few years old now, in which the PRCA reported that a third of those PR Agency heads surveyed said a PR degree made candidates 'less attractive'. This post on the Peppermint PR blog from around the same time (2009) echoed this, while Simon Martin, in his blog on the subject, qualified his feeling a little further, regarding how many courses are actually worth accreditation.
However, there have been significant changes in both the market and the economy since that PR Week article was written. For one, Social Media has added to the activities and job descriptions possible in PR. Another change is that university fees have spiralled out of control, prompting Tash Pert to ask on PRMoment, "Is a PR apprenticeship scheme or a degree more valuable to students?" (August last year). It's worth a read, as the comments that follow show that in many cases, misconceptions of what a PR degree involves still exist.
Over the last few years of rising tuition fees and improving school grades, there has been fierce competition between Universities. There is little doubt that the youth of today, who wish to take advantage of the technology at their disposal, are brighter and better educated. That's the youth of today, not ten years ago mind you (the viewpoint that many PR degree refuseniks are commenting from). PR degrees have transformed in step and addressed the theoretical-practical divide. To highlight this, take a read of this excellent blog post by Jamie Garantziotis, where he compares the degree he completed with what it should include today. What's remarkable is the breadth of training, theory, practice and experience he received then. Admittedly, he lives in Australia, but many of the top UK courses already include modules he suggests as part of their courses.
Of course, there are many advantages to an academic degree - such as the ability to question and probe issues deeply, think about wider context, and in some cases gain technical knowledge (such as medical understanding for a role in medical education or healthcare PR).
But it's also true that the argument that 'one can learn the skills on the job' can be flipped on it's head. One can learn life 'on the job'. How many agencies prise the ability to think creatively over the ability to think deeply? 'Thinking deeply' is not a phrase I encounter on many job specs, whereas 'experience' and 'creativity' are. What's more, several PR degrees now include studies in business management, or organisational behaviour, allowing the student the best of both worlds in many ways - a more traditional academic side combined with practical training - as described in this blog entry by Gemma Clarkson of Raw Creative in Leeds.
While I meet very few entry level PRs, those that I have met over the last two years who have had PR degrees have been very well equipped to start working in an agency immediately, without the agency needing to invest in the start-up training usually required. Rather than learning less useful information, such as the history of PR, they have had a practical focus and some serious training. Some degrees as good enough that the students leave with press release writing, new business pitching and big brand experience as well a year spent in internships. Above this, they glean an understanding of PR and Comms in the wider context of marketing, a knowledge of the most successful PR campaigns of the last ten years, an exposure to communications within clients (such as internal comms) and some personal theories about how PR can influence an organisation. Surely you want someone like that in your agency?
If you're a senior member of an agency right now, you have probably read some books by prominent peers. Maybe you've studied the market and the competition - read the odd blog by a PR professional. Why? because it makes you more informed, increases your creativity and contributes to your market knowledge. But did you do this when you were a new Account Executive starting in an agency?, or did it come as you grew into your vocation? Now imagine employing someone who has studied all of this intensively for three years while receiving all the tools they need to start in a job straight away. Writing for Octopus Communications blog, Samuel Jamieson touches on this in his own reassessment for his PR degree.
On the other hand, one often hears about the academic achievers who look great on paper but can't articulate themselves well and flunk the press release test.
Then there's the argument that leavers feel superior and try to reinvent the wheel as an account executive. Or they want to be hired at SAE level. Of course, there may be some case of this, but it's one of those sweeping generalisations that is supported by very little evidence. From my experience, most PR students are trying their utmost simply to get the best chance of a foot in the door in this competitive market, and many have six to 12 months internship and work experience. They are not coming to the market wide eyed and totally naive and few have illusions of grandeur.
Ultimately, at the final reckoning, work experience and personality are the most important aspects of an entry level hire. But you wouldn't disregard a business management student for a job in business management. And in the same way, for hiring managers to dismiss PR graduates simply because they studied for this vocation is both arrogant and foolhardy.
The PR industry should encourage PR course providers to improve further, include intellectual rigour in the courses and provide more training, as opposed to shunning the gift horse.
And it's time the value of these degrees was re-appraised
In their report, McKinsey argue a large part of the problem is that educators and employers inhabit parallel universes and need to work more closely and with greater empathy - a revamping of vocational education which, outside of Germany, has been shunned by parents and employers. Of course, the focus of this report and the Economist article is on vocations such as technology, utilities and construction rather than soft-skilled professional services.
But I was reminded of this article from PR Week, a few years old now, in which the PRCA reported that a third of those PR Agency heads surveyed said a PR degree made candidates 'less attractive'. This post on the Peppermint PR blog from around the same time (2009) echoed this, while Simon Martin, in his blog on the subject, qualified his feeling a little further, regarding how many courses are actually worth accreditation.
However, there have been significant changes in both the market and the economy since that PR Week article was written. For one, Social Media has added to the activities and job descriptions possible in PR. Another change is that university fees have spiralled out of control, prompting Tash Pert to ask on PRMoment, "Is a PR apprenticeship scheme or a degree more valuable to students?" (August last year). It's worth a read, as the comments that follow show that in many cases, misconceptions of what a PR degree involves still exist.
Over the last few years of rising tuition fees and improving school grades, there has been fierce competition between Universities. There is little doubt that the youth of today, who wish to take advantage of the technology at their disposal, are brighter and better educated. That's the youth of today, not ten years ago mind you (the viewpoint that many PR degree refuseniks are commenting from). PR degrees have transformed in step and addressed the theoretical-practical divide. To highlight this, take a read of this excellent blog post by Jamie Garantziotis, where he compares the degree he completed with what it should include today. What's remarkable is the breadth of training, theory, practice and experience he received then. Admittedly, he lives in Australia, but many of the top UK courses already include modules he suggests as part of their courses.
Of course, there are many advantages to an academic degree - such as the ability to question and probe issues deeply, think about wider context, and in some cases gain technical knowledge (such as medical understanding for a role in medical education or healthcare PR).
But it's also true that the argument that 'one can learn the skills on the job' can be flipped on it's head. One can learn life 'on the job'. How many agencies prise the ability to think creatively over the ability to think deeply? 'Thinking deeply' is not a phrase I encounter on many job specs, whereas 'experience' and 'creativity' are. What's more, several PR degrees now include studies in business management, or organisational behaviour, allowing the student the best of both worlds in many ways - a more traditional academic side combined with practical training - as described in this blog entry by Gemma Clarkson of Raw Creative in Leeds.
While I meet very few entry level PRs, those that I have met over the last two years who have had PR degrees have been very well equipped to start working in an agency immediately, without the agency needing to invest in the start-up training usually required. Rather than learning less useful information, such as the history of PR, they have had a practical focus and some serious training. Some degrees as good enough that the students leave with press release writing, new business pitching and big brand experience as well a year spent in internships. Above this, they glean an understanding of PR and Comms in the wider context of marketing, a knowledge of the most successful PR campaigns of the last ten years, an exposure to communications within clients (such as internal comms) and some personal theories about how PR can influence an organisation. Surely you want someone like that in your agency?
If you're a senior member of an agency right now, you have probably read some books by prominent peers. Maybe you've studied the market and the competition - read the odd blog by a PR professional. Why? because it makes you more informed, increases your creativity and contributes to your market knowledge. But did you do this when you were a new Account Executive starting in an agency?, or did it come as you grew into your vocation? Now imagine employing someone who has studied all of this intensively for three years while receiving all the tools they need to start in a job straight away. Writing for Octopus Communications blog, Samuel Jamieson touches on this in his own reassessment for his PR degree.
On the other hand, one often hears about the academic achievers who look great on paper but can't articulate themselves well and flunk the press release test.
Then there's the argument that leavers feel superior and try to reinvent the wheel as an account executive. Or they want to be hired at SAE level. Of course, there may be some case of this, but it's one of those sweeping generalisations that is supported by very little evidence. From my experience, most PR students are trying their utmost simply to get the best chance of a foot in the door in this competitive market, and many have six to 12 months internship and work experience. They are not coming to the market wide eyed and totally naive and few have illusions of grandeur.
Ultimately, at the final reckoning, work experience and personality are the most important aspects of an entry level hire. But you wouldn't disregard a business management student for a job in business management. And in the same way, for hiring managers to dismiss PR graduates simply because they studied for this vocation is both arrogant and foolhardy.
The PR industry should encourage PR course providers to improve further, include intellectual rigour in the courses and provide more training, as opposed to shunning the gift horse.
And it's time the value of these degrees was re-appraised
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)