Top >> Managing_PR Managing PR:  The approval process for media releases published November-December 2005 One thing that drives good writers to distraction (and takes all the fun out of writing) is a bad approval process. As someone once said about art; “It takes sheer genius to paint a masterpiece but any fool can rip it up”. How easily you can gain the relevant approvals for any article or release depends to a large degree in how the process is designed and what those in the approval loop believe they’re being asked to do.  The first problem arises from the name of the process, approval.  You’re not really seeking people’s approval to say something. You’re the writer.  It’s your job to say something. What you’re asking is for people to contribute their knowledge on the matter so that the piece is accurate and conforms to company policies.  Here are a few pointers to help streamline your process and help people understand their part in it: What’s in a name? As we have seen, simply by referring to it as an approval process creates a string of problems. So, call it something else. Call it sign off, or refinement, or completion, but try and avoid calling it approval. Who’s in charge? By just thinking of the process as gaining approval, you run the risk of placing yourself in a position of subservience. The reality is that you have created something that others lack the skills and training to do. You’re an initiator. They are merely being asked to make sure there is nothing in it that adversely affects their area of responsibility or is contrary to company policy. This means that the legal department looks at areas such as privacy, product managers look for descriptive accuracy and marketing ensures the copy is ‘on message’. You must take control from the outset and seek their help, not their permission or approval. Who’s on the team? This is a team event, with players, spectators and an umpire. The team are the individuals in the process. The umpire is the person who ultimately signs off. And the spectators are those who may happen to see the article along the way. You have to make sure that you only have as many team members as you really need. Take a look at your current process and see if you have people suggesting and/or making changes who, by all rights, should be regarded as spectators rather than team members. Getting the players and spectators sorted out at the start of the process can save time and hassle at the end. Who’s writing this? Bill Gates created a monster for writers when he introduced ‘Track Changes’ on Word’s toolbar. Suddenly anyone can electronically scribble across your document. Psychologically this makes them writers - which they (most likely) are not. One way of avoiding this situation is to distribute the draft as a ‘read only’ document or as a PDF file. Comments and inclusions can be typed by them in the body of the email when they respond to you. What you are in fact doing, is helping them respond as ‘area experts’ rather than as writers. I’m not talking to you. More often that not, the style in which you have drafted an article is for a specific audience.  Ensure that those in the checking process understand that they are not necessarily the target audience for this article, thereby discouraging them from becoming ‘style police’. Keep in mind that style is not just the chosen words, but grammar and punctuation as well. You want it when? Set a deadline by which inclusions and suggestions must get back to you. And make sure people know that it is a company deadline, not your personal one. Let them know that the distribution of the release is just one part of a larger activity, and that the time and day of distribution is critical to that larger activity. Look what we did! Lastly, let those involved in the process see the results of your (joint) efforts by circulating coverage clips when appropriate and thanking them for their part in getting the article out on time and in good shape. Obviously the ease or otherwise of implementing such a process will be dependant on the culture of your own organisation. However, if there’s only one thing you are able to change, then try and make it the name of the process. And stress at all times that you are asking for help, not approval. To read further on this topic go to these two previous articles in the PR Influences archives: Tips on writing media releases 25 Commandments of Media Relations to Memorise and Live By Have something to say about this article? Why not email our editor at editor@prinfluences.com.au

PR Influences: Managing Public Relations. Approval process for media releases