COMMENTS
I think you are right, top notch PR firms who realize that the current change in their business model is an inflection point will far outdistance themselves from the group that wants to hold onto the past. Modern PR firms have the staffing, capability, skills and insight to help get your message to the masses, rather than just traditional press. The problem is that they then fall into a different catagory and no longer consider themselves PR firms :-)
I think you are right. The small PR firms and net new PR firms are really well positioned to lead the inbound marketing revolution.
The tricky part is what the larger PR firms will do. They are typically run as a partnership and if they are large, those partners have been taking home decent W2's for awhile and it is going to be hard to change. I know some will be up for the challenge and make the move, but others will wait too long and get run over by the innovation bus.
Nice piece. I'd add: PR's an excellent way of building inbound links.
You know I agree that the answer is absolutely yes.
Inbound marketing is creating tremendous opportunities for PR firms to deliver measurable and meaningful results across multiple disciplines, including: PR, Website development, social media, search marketing and content marketing.
However, Brian brings up a very valid point regarding the current industry leaders. I think many of them are too large and risk adverse to make the necessary changes.
There will be a dramatic power shift in the coming years, with a whole new group of emerging firms adapting to changing markets and demand.
Nice post!
Not to quibble, but there are marketing companies that don't do a lot of classic PR that are well suited as inbound marketing agents as well. Maybe there is really no distinction between the two types of firms any more. PR companies are doing more pure marketing along with public relations and vice versa. The classic PR firm function that focuses on press releases and media outlets - that may indeed be fading, but, as you say, the relationship building aspect is growing. Certainly the large, entrenched firms must become leaner and more flexible, but their brands still carry considerable weight. It should be an interesting next 5 years to see how things shake out.
@Brian Halligan. Very valid point. The big firms probably won't feel the pain of the shift for a little while still. By then, it might be too late for them to adapt and catch the firms like Paul Roetzer's who have been leading this change and figuring out how to deliver inbound markerting services for the last 2 years.
@John. There's a few more posts bubbling up in my brain called, "Are Marketing Consultants Poised to Lead the Inbound Marketing Movement?" and "Will Ad Agencies Embrace Inbound Marketing's Annuity Stream?"
@Pete. Of course in most industries faced by change, the large fish swallow the small to reduce competition and increase their spectrum of services.
Oops, excuse me, there's someone at the door...
Social media has to be considered a umbrella component of PR; as does news releases.
The real question is: can PR firms grab and hold a larger piece of the marketing budget then they have traditionally made a play for by leveraging new CMS and reporting tools now available?
I think the answer is yes...for the opportunistic ones.
Companies like Hubspot have lowered the barrier to entry with ease of use and a cost-structure enabling a new crop of cost-effective Internet Marketers who are nibbling at the very same marketing budgets.
I don't think that incumbent PR firms want to leave that on the table; as ability to better service and retain marketing budget share becomes everything going forward.
You're correct that "you need to be an expert at all things inbound marketing in order to serve clients effectively." That's a fact I'm passionate about. And you also wrote compellingly about it in your article
How to Hire a B2B Marketing Consultant.
My only quibble is that agencies should have made this transition by about 2005. Using the revolution analogy, it's Civil War period not pilgrims-landing-at-Plymouth-Rock period.
Spot on! I would merely add that it is also perhaps true that parts of more traditional PR can be extended to something Evangelical netwrking to extend a compnay's reach. Great Post.
I think diversifying a knowledge base within a PR firm is a good thing- but I also think partnerships- the ones someone was poking fun at with a W2 comment earlier- are also good things. Here's why: partnerships build a tighter relationship between a PR agency and their client.
Let's take an SEO firm, for example. If they are paid on page rank results, they are more apt to employ backdoor off-page SEO tactics (see SEO Company's comment above...the comment itself, not what they said.) While Google might rank them higher, the act annoys individual blog readers and hurts the company's image on a one-on-one level. Worse, those annoyed blog readers are typically the company's target audience and they can, in turn, comment and blog about their bad feelings. The company's image is shot, but the SEO company gets paid.
Marketing companies of all flavors should foster the spirit of their clients and without that close partnership, there is no incentive to build brand trust.
In unrelated news, I think it would behoove marketers to make like doctors and keep up with new research. You wouldn't go to a doctor who hadn't read a medicine journal in 10 years. Clients shouldn't hire marketing companies that haven't at least tried Twitter.
I think you are absolutely correct. Some PR sites have high page ranking which makes us think about their Importance.
@Brindey Weber. I love your analogy about doctors. If a marketing firm isn't constantly educating themselves about new marketing tactics, they can't possibly do their job effectively.
Re: partnerships, I think that works really well for larger companies. However, when I talk to mid-sized firms, they can't usually afford to have a PR firm, an SEO agency, a PPC management firm, a marketing/branding consultant, a web development firm, etc.
As @Stephen Polinksky says above, firms that embrace technology to help them expand their offerings, as well as measure all the important metrics, are the ones that will be able to serve the mid sized firms more effectively at a more competitive price.
As a result, I expect to see SEO firms buying PR firms, and ad agencies hiring social media marketers in order to bring talent in-house, and ultimately lower costs for clients.
I have been using PR sites since last 4 months. I do agree with this article.
As a member of the PR industry for nearly 20 yrs, there is no doubt a ton of discussion, handwringing and moving of deck chairs within PR. I’d proffer that whether PR is dead or not is not the question. Instead, we as an industry need to move from debate to action. Even more importantly, we must ask ourselves if we as communications professionals have the right balance of skills we need to bring forward, what we need to learn from other disciplines AND the hunger/risk-taking genes to invent what we will need to change? Bring forward: trust-building, relationship, listening, deep understanding of influence and storytelling as strategic communications tools. Learn: accountability, demonstration of true ROI, authenticity and translucency. Invent: new ways to measure influence, nimble real time communications, active involvement in the practice of influence. It is in the delta between these three pivots where innovation happens. Let’s stop looking backwards and create our own new paradigm. For me and for Waggener Edstrom Worldwide, it means we have evolved into a communications company. And instead of just talking about it, we're taking action http://www.twendzpro.com.
This is brilliant, Jennifer,
"ring forward: trust-building, relationship, listening, deep understanding of influence and storytelling as strategic communications tools. Learn: accountability, demonstration of true ROI, authenticity and translucency. Invent: new ways to measure influence, nimble real time communications, active involvement in the practice of influence. It is in the delta between these three pivots where innovation happens."
Not to beat a dead horse but I do agree the times are changing and PR is in dire need of a facelift. There's something just wrong with association by professionals on this field on communicating effectively with the audience. I think on a unconscious level they still think PR stands for "Press Releases". I want to think it's more like "Progressive Resilience". Thanks Pete. --Paul