Tom Garrity

Archive for the ‘Reputation’ Category

Cash for Flunkers

In Reputation on August 6, 2009 at 1:48 am

NEA GovernorThis week the New Mexico Public Education Department (PED) announced its progress, or lack thereof, on improving the State’s high school graduation rate.  The measure, called Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP), shows New Mexico’s 54% success rate is one of the worst in the United States, which has an average graduation rate of 70%).

There are a number of reasons for the low scores.  For example, culturally, there isn’t a rich history of formal education.  It isn’t uncommon for some graduates to be the first in their family to get a diploma.  Plus there are changing family dynamics that find grandparents raising their children’s children.   Some would see those reasons as excuses… it is just reality.

The sad reality that the PED has failed is seen in many ways.  The most glaring is how it has left behind the most vulnerable special needs children. Looking at the 2008-09 school year only 4% of the State’s special needs population were proficient.  As a benchmark, the same group had 6% proficiency just four years earlier… aren’t you suppose to improve over time?

So, now that New Mexico’s chief executive officer has received the coveted “America’s Greatest Education Governor Award”, presented last month by the National Education Association, it is good to know we are finally seeing some measureable initiative to combat this problem that “suddenly” appeared.

Two days after the PED released the information, the Governor announced a plan to recapture as many as 10,000 drop outs, establish committees/taskforces and create brochures.  The Reader’s Digest version, it is an aggressive truancy and top heavy bureaucratic approach which is the same as trying to get toothpaste back into the tube.  He is focusing on the students who don’t want to be there instead of giving attention and resources to those who are in school.  The squeaky wheel isn’t even getting the grease (and it is $2.4 billion of taxpayer grease each year)!

Terry Abbott, when he served as director of communications for Houston ISD (and later US Secretary of Education) Rod Paige, would have an approach he called the “its much worse” strategy.  In this particular case, the approach would acknowledge the low graduation rate but then focus on something that was “much worse”, like the fact that after years of hard work only 4% of 11th grade students with disabilities are proficient in math.  He would then outline the plan to increase proficiencies and “define” the issue, instead of a headline writer setting the agenda.

Delivering “bad” news is expected when State government is involved.  The lesson learned here, provide workable and reasonable solutions when the problems are first identified, not four years after the fact.

Image: New Mexico Governor Bill Richardson accepting the NEA’s “America’s Greatest Education Governor Award”… thank you NEA for this “priceless moment”

Credit: Thanks to twitter for coining “Cash for Flunkers” on this issue

Developing Your Approach

In Reputation, Uncategorized on July 12, 2009 at 1:28 am

In a crisis/reputation management situation, you approach should always be focused on what you want to achievApproache as a result of your effort.  What are the deliverables? 

If your organization is faced with declining business, your end result could be measured by generating more business.  If your business is faced with a product recall, the end result could be securing the tainted product.  If you are getting slammed by critics, your end result could be improved perception and accurate information about your business.  All of these items are measureable.  The strength of your approach is determining how the outcome is measured.

Once you have your end game/result identified, you need to identify your target audiences.

In a crisis there are four groups of people that need to be addressed: victims, employees/vendors, customers/clients and the media.  Lets briefly explore each of these groups.

Victims – The level of compassion you show to this group will determine how successful you are in rebuilding bridges and winning public perception in the wake of your crisis.  A victim is anyone who says they are a victim.  Don’t spend time on who is a victim, welcome and communicate with everyone who could be a victim.

Employees/vendors – This is typically the last group to know anything.  Don’t fall into this trap of “mushrooming” the people/supporters who have a vested interest in your organization. If the situation allows, inform them first.  They can be a great first line of defense and a great sounding board.  Provide enough information to keep processes flowing, keeping them engaged and thinking on behalf of the organization.

Customers/Clients – Shape the message by getting out ahead of the story, when possible.  Leverage existing tools to communicate.  Provide FAQs, leverage websites, wikis, blogs and social media (more on this in Sharing Your Message).  Connect and provide as much transparency as the situation and leadership team allows.

Media – Your communication with the media should be a culmination of your communication and messaging provided to the victims, employees and customers.  Like the other communications it needs to be deliberate and concise, some would say purpose-driven. 

Now that the measureable objectives and target audiences have been identified, it is time to shape your message.

Indy o’ Indy were art Thou?

In Reputation on May 22, 2009 at 10:42 am

Memorial Day weekend use to be one of those “iconic” weekends for auto racing, featuring its “Super Bowl”, the Indianapolis 500.

Growing up in Houston, I was a fan of AJ Foyt.  When I moved to Albuquerque I added the Unser family to the list of drivers I’d follow.  Memorial Day weekend was a time I looked forward to seeing how my favorites would do against the likes of Mears, Rahal, Sullivan, Rutherford, and Fittipaldi.  It was a great time for the auto racing industry.

Then it became 1994.  The Indy Racing League (IRL) was created.

In 1996, the All but a few slots in the Indy 500 were reserved exclusively for members of the IRL.  That year, all hell broke loose on the track (literally) prompting a number of changes and marketing gimmicks for all future events. 

A competing event called the US 500 failed and the owners of the Indianapolis track through it would be a good idea to break its brand of being an “open wheel” (Indy Car) track by inviting NASCAR to the table.  As a result of those and other events, Indy Car racing found itself in a death spiral and it couldn’t pull out.

Recently, the best thing to happen to Indy Car racing was the addition of Danica Patrick.  She is a solid driver with attitude… it doesn’t hurt that she is also easy on the eyes.  Indy Car fans thought this was the spark to reignite interest in their sport.  Interest was a short lived.  It was only successful in temporarily attracting NASCAR viewers (not fans) who were drawn-in by the hype.

Now, Indy Car racing didn’t implode on its own.  NASCAR did a great job of capturing the disgruntled Indy Car racing fans.  NASCAR knows its brand and they have promoted and leveraged it better than any other sports league, on par with the National Football League.

Indy Car racing let greed and ego get in the way of its brand and it never recovered.

This weekend I’ll probably watch the Indy 500 for curiosity sake, to see if Danica can get it done and win the race.  But, if I end up having to tend to the ribs on the barbeque smoker, I’ll rely on DVR because Indy Car racing lost me as a fan a long time ago.

Popularity vs Credibility

In Reputation on March 8, 2009 at 1:52 pm
PopularityAs expected, an interesting discussion surfaced today on Meet The Press. The topic was the trouble the Obama administration continues to have trying to keep the recession from becoming a depression.
Once everyone agreed with the Obama talking points, that this was a problem inherited by the administration, real dialog (and rhetoric) started to take place.
A passing comment stating that this was an issue of popularity versus credibility caught my attention. 
The argument was based on President Obama’s great popularity among the people but lack of credibility that he had any experience to propose solutions for a tame economy let alone one that is in a death spiral.
Are the two, popularity and credibility, mutually exclusive? Yes and no.
Typically the two go hand in hand to help establish a brand. In the campaign, your credibility is supposed to build popularity. But, this election cycle, the sitting President lacked so much credibility and popularity that the typical ground rules went out with the mantra “anything is better than what we’ve got now.”
Who is popular: Britney Spears, Mickey Mouse, Tom Cruise.
Who is credible: Colin Powell, Albert Einstein, Walter Cronkite.
As you can see, it is difficult to have your foot successfully planted in both camps.
Presidentially, H.W. Bush was the most qualified person to hold the office, but he wasn’t the most popular.
Ronald Reagan and Bill Clinton were more popular than credible (ok, I can’t believe I just used both names in the same sentence).
President Obama is clearly popular. But we desperately need him to be credible. His administration’s latest approach of establishing short-term objectives and readdressing strategies based on the changing market will help him to establish a greater foothold in the credibility camp.
Given the choice of being either credible or popular which would you choose? Or, better yet, how do you want people to refer to you: I liked him/her; or, He/she was right.
So, is it possible to be both popular and credible? For a time, yes. But in the long run, you have to decide which is more important.
Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.