While it was wonderful to hear recently that Porter Novelli had won, for the second year running, Holmes Report’s Best Consultancy to work for in EMEA, it feels ever so slightly like a bit of a burden too.

As we celebrated in the office with our obligatory drinks trolley, (complete with new healthy snacks in place of crisps)  I couldn’t help feeling it’s quite a responsibility to be acknowledged as the best place in Europe to work. How do we keep this up and how on earth are we going to try and complete the hat trick next year?

I suppose one of the advantages of being one of the smaller international networks is that it is easier to foster a sense of community across borders, and this is certainly true when we reach out to each other and ask for help. And when we ask individual offices what talent initiatives they run locally, it is astonishing how many similarities there are even though most are conceived and implemented independently.

This month, I also started my annual peer group meetings inviting all staff to tell me the best and worst about working at PN, and what was encouraging was hearing consistent feedback with the shout-outs from Holmes. Phrases like “supportive and encouraging culture” and “honest and transparent”  come up again and again. Mind you so do those PR agency perennials “very busy” and “challenging work”, so still work to do.

(Sally Ward is MD of Porter Novelli UK)

Wikipedia is a global phenomenon; the openly-editable encyclopedia is the sixth most popular site in the world. So it’s not surprising that, every now and again, vested interests seek to manipulate its content. Not least in the American presidential race, where, its been reported that Mitt Romney’s Wikipedia page has been edited hundreds of times since the Republican primaries began.

Wikipedia’s community guidelines are all available online and easy to find, and emphasise that entries must be written from a neutral point of view, in line with the second of its five pillars. So as a communications professional it’s always worth bearing in mind the following principles (adapted from Wikipedia’s guidelines), to avoid wasting your time creating/editing changes that are undone, or worse, cause severe embarrassment or legal consequences:

1. All of your edits should be in line with the aim of Wikipedia, which is to produce a neutral, reliably sourced encyclopedia
2. Wikipedia is not a battleground – you should not try to begin or engage in disputes via Wikipedia entries
3. Avoid Conflict of Interest (COI) editing. This involves contributing to Wikipedia in order to promote your own interests or those of other individuals, companies, or groups. Where advancing outside interests is more important to you as an editor, than advancing the aims of Wikipedia,this counts as a conflict of interest
4. This includes avoiding self-promotion: adding advertising links, personal website links, personal or semi-personal photos, or other material that appears to promote the private or commercial interests of the editor, or their associates. Examples of these types of material include:
   • Links that appear to promote products by pointing to obscure or not particularly relevant commercial sites.
   • Links that appear to promote otherwise obscure individuals by pointing to their personal pages.
   • Biographical material that does not significantly add to the clarity or quality of the article.
   • Promotional article production on behalf of clients Editors should not create articles which serve solely to promote their subject. All Wikipedia articles should contain useful information written as if from a neutral point of view. The writing of “puff pieces” and advertisements on Wikipedia is strictly prohibited. If you contribute to Wikipedia on behalf of clients, you owe it to both them and the encyclopedia to make very sure you understand the standards for content here, and do not insert promotional material.
5. Wikipedia is not a soapbox or means of promotion or advertising. All information about companies and products are written in an objective and unbiased style. All article topics must be verifiable with independent, third-party sources, so articles about very small “garage” or local companies are typically unacceptable. See also Wikipedia:Notability (organizations and companies) for guidelines on corporate notability.
6. Those promoting causes or events, or issuing public service announcements, even if noncommercial, should use a forum other than Wikipedia to do so.
7. If you are in a situation where you need or wish to try and adapt a Wikipedia page on behalf of an individual or institution on the grounds of accuracy, explain your case on the Wikipedia talk page that sits behind it (example shown below) – being transparent about how you would like the page to be edited and why, and including reference links.

(Adapted from a post which first appeared on Mariamz blog).

By Mariam Cook

For a brand to enhance its customer understanding, communications, and even product offers, it must embrace what people want, by developing interactive social spaces where this can be explored.

Source: ndbekah

But how should these spaces look? You, and certainly your client / boss may ask, what is the formula?

The point is that there is no formula… even though we may embrace certain principles to help us construct them.

David Guantlett presenting, John Naughton consults iPad

This Thursday I attended a fascinating University of Westminster workshop, run by a research network exploring digital transformations in the creative relationships between cultural and media organisations and their users.

Here at Porter Novelli we run several projects bringing people together with brands across offline, earned, and owned online spaces. For this reason I have chosen in this post to elaborate on Fran Taylor’s description of ‘loose around the edges’ spaces (arguably the final frontier for brands, businesses and organisations who want to become more social) at the workshop. (Fran was presenting from her perspective of working at the British Library).

Drawing from presentations and conversations on the day (credited where I have names), these principles are a great place to start for brands and institutions looking to bring people in, perhaps for a brand-run collaborative event, perhaps for an interactive online experience:

1. Seek out and support diversity - John Naughton argued we need to go beyond systems thinking to ecology when considering online interaction and creativity. We know in natural environments that biodiversity equals more productivity. The same goes for rich digital interaction – we need to make room for difference: the unusual, the surprising, even the controversial.
2. Make it about the thing… not the message you want to get out, nor the medium or platform (e.g. Twitter, Facebook). It is knitting, football, shaving, running. It is not the view of your brand you want the world to have. It is the social object: the item or what it does, not the ‘aspirational brand story.’ The pet and its connection to your product or service, the cause the charity supports, rather than the charity’s historical offer.
3. Set no limits on participating - or as few as possible. This represents a core challenge as it is so far away from established media relations as we know it. It explodes linear processes geared towards flat news stories or broadcast programmes, where carefully crafted press releases and messaging have been the focus of mediation between institutions and media. Here instead, we are making room to listen to, brainstorm and generate ideas with, or glean ideas from, the former audience/ passive consumer.
4. Support storytelling and creativity – enable people to tell their stories, rather than focusing on yours. Don’t just think about creating branded content – open up to supporting creative lifecycles around your brand.
5. As David Gauntlett illustrates above with Lego  - celebrate the participants not the platform
6. And finally, be playful. For example Fran Taylor told how the British Library had opened up to designers via the Spring Market, a one day pop-up design fair showing off designers and makers who have used the British Library, as part of their Spring Festival:

Let’s not pretend… for many brands and institutions the above principles represent a fundamental struggle. Our entrenched media systems rely on cast-iron formulas.. so as we try to ‘engage’ we come up against established practices and patterns, expectations on control, problems with describing work and tasks. Few clients will sign off on ‘loose around the edges’ interactive experiences at the first attempt. But even caught between the rock of specificity and the hard place of needing openness to allow people to create and speak… we can start small, move forward together, and navigate the complexity brought about by digital transformations.

Thanks to David Gauntlett, John Naughton, Fran Taylor and everyone else who made Thursday 26th March so special – you can find out more about the digital transformations project here.