How Retailers Can Achieve Good PR Coverage - Essay Example

? How Retailers can achieve a good PR Retailing is a huge global business that keeps on growing with eachcoming day. New stores are opened in new locations everyday to meet the soaring demands of the locals. Even within existing markets, new needs emerge every time, and as a result, new retailers step in to meet the demands (Wood 2012). To effectively achieve this objective, the goodwill of the public is required. It is not just enough to provide the best goods at the best prices, but also quality services that would attract more customers. Issues such as ethical business practices, employee working conditions and customer service can often be the difference between profit and loss in any retail business. To communicate and relay any important information about the company to the consumers, retailers rely on a host of techniques which are collectively referred to as public relations. Good public relations improve the retailer’s bottom line. On the other hand, poor public relations are known to retard the growth of the company or worse still, lead to heavy losses (Wood 2012). These techniques range from traditional ones such as discounts, to modern ones such as environmental sensibility. The perfect mix in this broad range is not well known, but some basic tenets underline these chaos. The United Kingdom is known as the principal retail location with such brands that are recognized world wide. For example, Tesco, Asda, Morrison’s, Marks and Spencer, Next, Dixons, just to mention but a few. These retailers alongside many others account for 8% of the islands G.D.P. To be specific, the city of London is a huge retail capital with a large spending ahead of other big cities like Tokyo, New York and Paris. These U.Ks largest retail brands have to apply the full range of tools and techniques, so as to secure good public standing. This range of public relations measures shall form the core of this paper. Finer analysis specific cases shall be conducted. The qualitative and quantitative benefits that derive from each shall also be evaluated. Finally, valuable lessons for new retailers shall be inferred. Most of the public news used as case studies for this paper shall be gleaned from The Guardian. This is because it is an authoritative and widely read broadsheet. Readers both within the U.K and without, rely on it for their news. Also important shall be The Telegraph. The mode of presenting the information shall be in a form akin to the case study. A retailer recently covered in the news shall be identified. The nature of coverage received shall be evaluated i.e negative or positive. The impact that the publicity had shall be discussed. At the end, a lesson for new retailers shall be contained. The first study is that of a retailer called Neal Yard. Neal Yard is a natural and organic beauty products retailer. On the 26th of May 2009 they agreed to take part in a segment in The Guardian, called “You Ask, They Answer”. The underlying objective was for the wider public and customers in particular to question the retailer and in turn get back answers to their question. As it happens with all companies, vociferous critics questioned the company’s ethical and green claims. The company was, however, unable to face up to the criticism. Instead, it pulled out of the debate without due notification to the public. No additional questions were taken. Despite constant prodding from The Guardian to respond to the questions or at least make a commitment to do so later, Neal Yard was non-committal. As a result, the questions surrounding their removal of a homeopathic malaria medication remain. This interest attracted much big newspapers and even blogs. The reason simply is that the company employed poor P.R techniques (Adam 2009). This leads to one of the cardinal rules of publicity for businesses. That is, they should always respond to customers concerns. It matters less whether they make a lot of sense or not. It is easy for companies to bury their heads in the sand and imagine that only a few disgruntled customers are trying to taint a good product. For a sensitive industry like beauty products, silence breeds doubt. According to Max Clifford, a P.R consultant, one should always stand up, otherwise all one gets is one side of the argument and people assume – rightly or wrongly- that they do not have a leg to stand on. This proves that even half a response is better than none at all (Gammell 2012). Tesco is obviously the largest consumer goods retailer in the U.K. While it is difficult to attribute all its success to only one element, it is fair to say that good public relations are a central part of it. They have learnt customer intelligence better than most other retailers. Reports and findings have revealed that Tosco’s insight and concern for its customers is second to none. The supermarket chains P.R excellence came under trial again in the week of April 28, 2012. The company had just released its full year results. Very visible was the fact that the profits had fallen for the first time in two decades. This news received widespread coverage, not only in the news, but also in the Daily Metro, The Telegraph and even in the Marketing Magazine. It was no doubt a very low point for the company, but what followed is more instructive for the small retailer. The company C.E.O immediately commissioned a research to find out what was behind the decline in profits. In the findings, it was reported that customers asserted that Tesco’s stores felt industrial and cold in comparison to those of other retailers. Philip Clarke, the company C.E.O immediately set in motion a one-billion-pound restructuring program. All the branches of Tesco were to be modernized and warmed up to the customers liking. The moral behind the story is simple; being able to give customers the impression that their criticisms are treasured. Philip Clarke went further still. He said that Tesco had taken a little too much from customers. These are the sort of things that customers want to hear. They are central to good P.R. It also marks a major departure from the previous case where Neal Yard failed to give the criticisms a hearing (Adam 2009). The old saying, that the customer is always right, is right after all. There is another kind of publicity. This is the one that derives from association to a person or a cause. Celebrities are the perfect agents to do this kind of publicity. It might be incidental i.e the celebrity buys a product then the retailer capitalizes on the publicity. Or it might be deliberate or planned. Either way, the need to associate the organization with a celebrity who is loved or admired by all people can not be overemphasized. At the beginning of March 2012, Middleton’s found itself thrust into the media. It had nothing to do with its royal namesake either, at least not fully. The business is of course associated with the Duchess of Cambridge, Kate Middleton. The main idea was that customers who shopped from their stores were to be given the option of donating their spare change to charity. This was exclusively for online customers. Gammell (2012) asserts that the scheme seemed to be gaining a lot of momentum and even publicity. More customers were donating ever-increasing pennies. This in turn translated to an increase in sales for the retailer. However, profit, important as it is, is not the issue under study. Rather, the positive publicity that attracted more people to the store is the focus of this study. Such association with a person or a cause is not new. In this case, the celebrity is Kate Middleton; while the cause is charity. When seeking to create such associations, retailers’ should make several considerations. Among them are the popularity of the person, and the credibility of the cause. Many customers wish to associate with pleasant celebrities. Few people like celebrities who are divisive. Conversely, customers do not mind doing something for a worthy cause like charity. In fact, they enjoy it. However, as they draw attention using these associations, retailers have to be careful not to steal the thunder from these causes. If they try to draw attention to themselves, the P.R turns negative. This is because the customers consider it selfish. Already in the mind of consumers, retailers are profit minded. They should as a result stand behind these causes, not in front of them. There seems to be no end to the means available to the retailer to improve their public standing. It is almost the case that any positive deeds that the company associates itself with seem to improve its public face (Siegle 2012). The same case applies when discounts are used. In such times of great economic hardship, the prospect of buying at a lower price exerts a huge pull on the consumer. Primark is the fashion retailer under the larger, Associated British Foods brand. It is gaining a lot of attention. Barely two years ago, the fashion section seemed to be headed for trouble. However, it is driving other sales for the brand as a whole. Its profits for the year 2011-2012 gave the parent company a huge boost. A third of the parent group’s earnings were from Primark. It is clear that this was as a result of the huge discounts it offered to customers who were hunting for bargains. This news made it to all newspapers. The Fashion Magazine, The Telegraph and the Irish Times all carried the news. This certainly boosted the companies’ sales further. More customers are looking for cheaper options; thus, they bargain because they wish to buy good quality products at a good and affordable price. That is why; discounts are a double edged sword. The products have to be of right quality and specifications too. If there is no adherence to quality, then this might create bad company publicity in the future. It seems fashion retail is the only section of retail that is not suffering a great deal from the economic crisis. For instance, H & M Company is the best reference. They are the world’s second largest clothes retailer. The other bigger company is Inditex. An article about H & M made it to the local dailies. The motivation was that the company seemed to be embracing greener ways to conduct its business. The article titled, Is H & M the new home of ethical fashion, sought to look into the companies green claims. The company had pointed out how it was making its manufacturing greener, and more sensitive to the environment (Siegle 2012). The company was quick to point out that its clothes were being made from sustainable materials. They also publish a sustainability report every year to assess the extent at which their operations have sensitively treated the environment. This is an extremely positive course. Furthermore, the company also expounded on how it meets its green targets. Recycling polyester from strewn plastic bottles was top of the list. They also ranked higher than any other clothes retailer in the use of organic cotton. In addition, the company also produces innovative short films on fire safety. All these efforts are positive, but they also raise concern within customers, and prompt curiosity since many customers do not understand why a company has to do all that. The truth is that the company does this so as to attract more customers. Closer scrutiny of its operations in China revealed that its employees work under poor conditions. When asked to publish information about its China operations, all the company would say was that they could not do so due to commercial confidentiality. It is not new for companies to try and hide behind convenient phrases such as these. However, there is a significant lesson contained therein for small retailers. They are made aware that if they have to go out boldly and make outstanding records in sales, then they should ensure they have a compelling story to tell the public (Gammell 2012). In addition, they must be ready to achieve full confidentiality. Although, one must ensure that this is done in a well planned manner, or else it might ruin the company’s image. For example, the problem with H& Ms approach is that it raises more questions than answers. First of all, it appears that its commitment to green production is pure tokenism. Secondly, it appears that it is only concerned with chest thumping with no real objective behind it. In the end, these gimmicks are self defeating because the company attracts a lot of bad publicity in the process. Another important element when seeking publicity is that one should be as relevant as possible. Take the example of Sainsbury’s unveiling its T.U swimwear. Dozens of bikini clad models were paraded on West Minister Bridge. Below them was a famous river. The idea behind the unveiling was that these ladies were portrayed as individuals who were ready to swim. This story was covered widely in all the major dailies. The sales for the T.U swimwear shot through the roof. All people who were headed for work using the Bridge got to see the unveiling. Lastly, the importance of cultivating good media relations can not be overemphasized. The media might be called upon to attend the unveiling of products or to publish press releases. If relations with the media are good, the company benefits a lot. Bad relations with the media might mean that important events like press conferences are not given proper coverage, or prominence (Shankman 2006, p 65). The company is bigger than any individual, and this should be reflected in the way issues of the media are dealt with. If media relations are to be optimized then the need for full transparency can not be ignored. The work of the media is to shed light on all the dark spots. If media relations are to be important, journalists also have to be treated with respect. Any questions they pose must be responded to. Often, it appears that they are disputatious during a crisis, but it must be realized that they ask those hard questions on behalf of the consumers. By and large, publicity is a two way street. Bad publicity when responded to in the correct manner can be very good for the company. Good publicity on the other hand if not properly courted can give the retailer a bad image (Gammell 2012). This is a huge departure from the traditional line that all publicity is good publicity. There can never be a definitive list of all the correct public relations practices. The circumstances determine the response. However, there are tenets that are almost always common in a good public relations exercise. The dos and don’ts described above include, do make the customer feel they are always right. Do not fail to respond to customer issues or queries in a timely manner. Do not go public with appealing elements of the company when you are not ready to be questioned about negative company practices too (Shankman 2006, p 45). Do not seek to benefit from charity and other noble causes, at least not openly. Finally, do not go public with a story that is not likely to properly capture the consumer’s attention. All these and more are important. References Adam, V 2009, ‘The P.R lessons from Neal’s Yard Remedies Public debate U-turn’, the Guardian, 28 May Shankman, P 2006, Can we do that? Outrageous PR Stunts that work- and why your company Needs them, New Jersey: Wiley Publishers. Gammell, K 2012, ‘Middleton’s Party Pieces to give your spare change to charity’, the Telegraph, 16 March Gladwell, Malcolm 2002, The Tipping Point: How Little Things Can make a big Difference. Back Day Books Levine, M 1994, Guerrilla P.R. London: Collins Publishers. Scott, D 2007, The New Rules of Marketing and P.R, New Jersey: Wiley Publishers. Siegle, L, 2012, ‘Is H & M the new home of ethical fashion’, The Guardian, 7 April Wood, Z 2012, ‘Tesco’s U.K profits fall for the first time in two decades’, The Guardian, 18 April, p.23 Read More