<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><!-- generator="wordpress/2.2.1" -->
<rss version="2.0" 
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/">
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: The Excellence Discussion Continues</title>
	<link>http://pr-bridge.com/2008/09/24/the-excellence-discussion-continues/</link>
	<description>Connecting public relations academics and professionals. Managed by Bob Batchelor</description>
	<pubDate>Sat, 04 Feb 2012 15:30:16 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.2.1</generator>

	<item>
		<title>By: Bob Batchelor</title>
		<link>http://pr-bridge.com/2008/09/24/the-excellence-discussion-continues/#comment-2663</link>
		<author>Bob Batchelor</author>
		<pubDate>Sat, 27 Sep 2008 15:21:30 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://pr-bridge.com/2008/09/24/the-excellence-discussion-continues/#comment-2663</guid>
		<description>Hi Meg, there is a ton of interesting ideas floating around right now, which is great for the field. And, of course, Dr. Grunig and others that support his ideas are a vocal bunch. My hunch is that anytime someone begins talking about integration, PR purists balk at giving up power to other parts of the umbrella marketing professions.

Corporations certainly don't need PR people to make them more altruistic. They conduct these campaigns as part of larger branding efforts, as you explain. I don't get why the idea of a company making money or a nonprofit raising funds is so bad. And, certainly, PR professionals aren't superheroes fighting corporate villains, like one would imagine if reading the Excellence Theory. 

I see other parts of the corporation advocating for societal rules and laws, such as attorneys making sure that companies are acting within the law. If someone sees a larger societal role for PR, then they should ask, where were the PR people during Enron, Worldcom, etc.?

Thanks for your comments, I appreciate hearing from you.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Hi Meg, there is a ton of interesting ideas floating around right now, which is great for the field. And, of course, Dr. Grunig and others that support his ideas are a vocal bunch. My hunch is that anytime someone begins talking about integration, PR purists balk at giving up power to other parts of the umbrella marketing professions.</p>
<p>Corporations certainly don&#8217;t need PR people to make them more altruistic. They conduct these campaigns as part of larger branding efforts, as you explain. I don&#8217;t get why the idea of a company making money or a nonprofit raising funds is so bad. And, certainly, PR professionals aren&#8217;t superheroes fighting corporate villains, like one would imagine if reading the Excellence Theory. </p>
<p>I see other parts of the corporation advocating for societal rules and laws, such as attorneys making sure that companies are acting within the law. If someone sees a larger societal role for PR, then they should ask, where were the PR people during Enron, Worldcom, etc.?</p>
<p>Thanks for your comments, I appreciate hearing from you.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Meg</title>
		<link>http://pr-bridge.com/2008/09/24/the-excellence-discussion-continues/#comment-2650</link>
		<author>Meg</author>
		<pubDate>Fri, 26 Sep 2008 10:13:23 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://pr-bridge.com/2008/09/24/the-excellence-discussion-continues/#comment-2650</guid>
		<description>I have to admit, I don't understand why your POV is so controversial. Something must be going over my head when it comes to the Excellence Theory because it didn't make sense to me as a student, and now that I'm a practitioner it makes less sense. 

My work in PR has always been a blend of strategy and tactics - while some projects required more from one than the other, I've learned that you need both. How does relying on tactical approaches make someone a "lazy" professional? I don't buy it. 

And while I think it's admirable for those in our profession to try to help corporations become more altruistic, it seems to me that companies want to have more socially responsible programs to improve their reputations. Among consumers and the media. To boost sales. To increase the bottom line. There's nothing wrong with that - it's common sense business, right?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I have to admit, I don&#8217;t understand why your POV is so controversial. Something must be going over my head when it comes to the Excellence Theory because it didn&#8217;t make sense to me as a student, and now that I&#8217;m a practitioner it makes less sense. </p>
<p>My work in PR has always been a blend of strategy and tactics - while some projects required more from one than the other, I&#8217;ve learned that you need both. How does relying on tactical approaches make someone a &#8220;lazy&#8221; professional? I don&#8217;t buy it. </p>
<p>And while I think it&#8217;s admirable for those in our profession to try to help corporations become more altruistic, it seems to me that companies want to have more socially responsible programs to improve their reputations. Among consumers and the media. To boost sales. To increase the bottom line. There&#8217;s nothing wrong with that - it&#8217;s common sense business, right?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Jessica</title>
		<link>http://pr-bridge.com/2008/09/24/the-excellence-discussion-continues/#comment-2631</link>
		<author>Jessica</author>
		<pubDate>Thu, 25 Sep 2008 05:24:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://pr-bridge.com/2008/09/24/the-excellence-discussion-continues/#comment-2631</guid>
		<description>I'm with you - why is it that some PR professionals take offense to integrated communications. It is not minimizing PR's role, it is just combining related departments to work together like you said. If anything, I believe that PR is actually seen as the leader in most integrated communication departments.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I&#8217;m with you - why is it that some PR professionals take offense to integrated communications. It is not minimizing PR&#8217;s role, it is just combining related departments to work together like you said. If anything, I believe that PR is actually seen as the leader in most integrated communication departments.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

