Article: CEOs Hit The Road
Speaking as a Brand-Building Tool
As seen in the 2004 Handbook of Business Strategy
By Vickie K. Sullivan
By keynoting at association conferences, CEOs and other top executives use speaking as a platform to introduce their companies' brands into new markets and solidly position them in established markets. Their speeches created "3D branding," a customized experience that constituents can feel, touch, and interact with. Giving speeches also leverages the credible endorsement of the association and, if made part of a systematic approach, starts building a community of evangelists. Yes, the applause feels good, too.
Jose Santiago, CEO of Performance Source in Mill Valley, CA and strategy consultant to Fortune 100 executives says:
The best part about a senior executive speaking in support of a brand is the impact and influence they bring to the experience.
Santiago adds:
Executive stature in itself represents prestige and urgency. These characteristics are attached to the brand in that individual's personal expression of the value and values it represents. Personal expression is the key to this kind of impact.
Bobbette Gordon, president of NewInformation Presentations, the largest speakers' bureau in the Southwest and voted Meeting Professionals International's "International Supplier of the Year" says:
CEOs and key executives are hitting the speaker's circuit at an all-time high.
Yet, most CEOs and other top executives see speaking as "sweat equity". They view it as an activity they have to do. It is just part of the job. Some like it; many don't. Most have very low expectations that their speaking activities will generate a return on their investment of time and effort. Accordingly, they delegate most of the details. As a result, they end up delegating the strategy and the value of this potentially powerful branding tool.
Many speaking campaigns fall short of their potential to powerfully drive brands. So before devoting resources to this initiative, it pays to step back and assess speaking opportunities by answering five strategic questions:
Question #1: Is speaking a strategic or tactical initiative?
Because it's assumed that speaking is an effective branding tool, the discussion on strategy often stops with making the decision to speak and is delegated to the PR or marketing department. This mistake sets up low expectations and diminishes the purpose behind the platform that speaking can create.
In many cases, speaking has been the stepchild among those in the marketing and public relations departments. They see this platform as a tactical adjunct to promote the corporate image, using the same model for guest speaking engagements as they do for generating media interviews and sales leads. In the heat of execution, the focus defaults to the "more is better" philosophy and assumes that all speaking invitations are created equal. But if the department's performance is measured by the number of speeches obtained, who makes sure the platform is being put to the best use strategically? Who ensures that every speaking opportunity contributes as much as possible to expanding the brand?
This scenario lets key strategic questions go unanswered and belies the true power of the platform that can be realized. Plus, by assuming that giving speeches is a tactical initiative, too many executives treat them as "sweat equity," a tactical tool with intangible results too difficult to measure. They become too busy giving the speeches to stop and ask, "Will my next speech generate full value or is it a notch in somebody's belt?"
Santiago says:
Branding must become intimate, personalized, so that what they communicate gets acted on. Personalized action -- on the executive's part -- generates personal initiative on the part of the potential client or customer.
The greater the executive's involvement, which can have many dimensions such as intensity, frequency, duration, the greater the impact generated.
Savvy executives take a highly strategic approach to speaking, using this platform to transform the company brand from "market leadership" to "dominance beyond their industry." For example, former Southwest Airlines CEO Herb Kelleher gave speeches everywhere to feed the company's offbeat brand and make its story "the little airline that could" come alive. Kelleher's active speaking scheduled allowed the Southwest Airlines brand to advance from being a great airline to being a great company. And Kelleher himself went from an eccentric CEO of a great airline to a renegade business visionary. He used speaking as a platform for his personality and views.
Action item: Decide what strategic role speaking will take in brand-building efforts and then delegate accordingly.
Question #2: What are the factors to consider in using speaking as a strategic initiative?
As with every strategic decision, there are many factors to consider before ordering up the PowerPoint slides. Again, if the assumption is made and the initiative is rushed into execution without exploring the strategy, potential pitfalls are touch to avoid.
Being a spokesperson creates the personification of the company brand. It leads to experiences that allow stakeholders to interact in real time with what the company stands for. Speaking engagements occur in a safe, low-risk, high-credibility environment and create emotional connections between the messenger, the stories and the audience. In turn, these potent connections are highly leveraged, making them much stronger than being interviewed or quoted and pursuing other brand-building activities.
The platform created by speaking also provides the opportunity to brand the company by its values. Robert Danzig, former CEO of Hearst Newspapers, who gives 30 speeches annually at a wide variety of conferences, says:
[Speaking] gives you the opportunity to use the power of words to communicate your values. Every speech you give reinforces the values your company celebrates.
According to Danzig, the current environment of corporate mistrust makes having speaking engagements even more important. He explains:
This is no longer a decision; it's a mandate. There is such a stunning retrogression since the [Enron and WorldCom] scandals that we can no longer sit back and hope to be discovered for our values. [Speaking] is a vital bridge of trust between the company and its constituents.
Something else to consider: The CEO's face is "on the bucket of chicken." That means every CEO is personally tied to what the company stands for. So when growth indicators and stock prices are rising, the personality quirks of CEOs are viewed as "endearingly eccentric." They're seen as divergent thinkers brilliant enough to march to a different drummer. But when a downturn occurs, those same traits become the epitome of all things horrible about the industry or even corporate America in general. Worse, CEOs may become associated with dynamics outside their control.
An unfortunate example of this dynamic is Jack Welch, ex-CEO of General Electric. When GE was being touted as a valuable company, Welch was king of the world, a personality bigger than life. He was a highly sought-after speaker both while he was CEO and after he retired. Yet, as investigations and criminations regarding executive conduct and compensation came to light, Welch's lavish retirement perks became a lightning rod for all executive misdeeds.
Action item: Completely assess the pros and cons of reaching out through speaking. Become aware of potential pitfalls. Then make a plan to minimize any damage.
Question #3: Are the executives "road-show" worthy?
There's a difference between giving a speech for in-house conferences and addressing an audience of outsiders who have paid for the privilege. The former is more forgiving of any signs of uneasiness; the latter demands consistent performance with strong messages and meaningful stories -- delivered with humor.
Being in the spotlight can be harsh and listeners will be brutally honest about any weakness in speaking skills. This can be a humbling experience, which is why executives who can admit their discomfort and get objective help will save themselves a lot of painful experiences. Danzig says:
If CEOs are uncomfortable with public speaking, they owe it to themselves to hire a coach. They owe it to their constituents to become more at ease with this kind of communication.
Even if executives feel comfortable with their speaking styles, professional speakers know that any style can be improved upon. Developing a dynamic speaking style goes far beyond saying the words; it involves nuances in movement, voice inflection, and expert storytelling. Having a compelling speaking style doesn't require everyone having the same grand gestures; it's a customized approach that brings out the best in any personality. Marcia Reynolds, CEO of OutsmartYourBrain.com and coach to executives developing powerful delivery styles, says:
The connection you create with the audience will brand your company more than the words you say. When you fully engage the audience, you truly create an environment in which branding "sticks." At the end of the day, the audience is responding to your energy.
Yet even the most charismatic performance will not prop up cold platitudes the audience has heard countless times before. In-house conferences allow executives free rein on topic and content, but that's not true at outside conferences when speakers' comments are fine-tuned to complement each gathering's theme and objectives. Gorden explains:
With this challenging business climate, we can no longer settle for just good feelings [generated from speakers]. Out clients are more demanding and justified in expecting more bottom-line value for their audiences.
Featured speakers at conferences are also expected to challenge conventional thinking and leave audience members with a different perspective on current challenges. Their speeches have to be more than a string of company stories. Rather, the stories springboard a compelling message that allows the audience to adapt the companies' core values into their lives. That dynamic is what allows the branding to "stick."
Example: 1-800-flowers.com CEO Jim McCann's topic "What being a social worker taught me" connects McCann's early career to his company's story. He uses his background as head of a foundation to give the audience tangible advice. His past experience also connects values he learned to his current company and brands the business beyond the floral industry. More than that, it balances the message's take-away value with an emotional connection. Result: a branding experience that personalizes a floral distribution system.
Action items: Get an objective assessment about your speaking style from a trusted source. Eliminate discomfort, and develop a compelling style by getting one-on-one help from a coach or consultant. Avoid the temptation to "play it safe" with content. Position the message beyond the company's achievements.
Question #4: Who decides how, when and where?
Putting aside the theoretical arguments for speaking, the speaking platform can also be a practical win/win situation for all tacticians involved. For example, PR firms and departments use the number of speeches obtained to prove their return on investment. Since associations can be easily located, contacted, and looking for speakers, it's easier to get invitations to speak than to get media coverage. When CEOs become well known in speaking circles, getting interviews with trade journalists and other publications also becomes easier and their reputations -- and brands -- reach their targeted audiences.
Many associations would prefer high-profile executives for their keynote speeches rather than unknown professional speakers. Why? With increasing competition for scarce professional development dollars, (association) meeting organizers are fighting to attract every attendee possible to their conferences. They found that featuring a high-profile executive on the program helps them promote their events and build attendance. Gorden explains:
The marquee value of an executive or CEO from a prominent or successful company can go a long way in boosting attendance.
However, when speaking is approached tactically rather than strategically, the dynamic creates one of the biggest roadblocks for using speaking as a brand-building tool. Many executives delegate the selection of conferences to the tacticians, whose performance is judged on quantity and not quality. When the decisions surrounding speaking invitations are left to tacticians, the strategy behind the choices often gets lost in the shuffle.
As prominent executives are showered with invitations to speak, the selection process then becomes political -- that is, decisions to accept are based not on the value of the platform, but on who made the request. Or they're based on logistical considerations. While both are important, overlooking strategic considerations diminishes the results that could be achieved. In short: a clear strategy about the role of speaking in building the brand must drive these decisions. It's important to be ruthless about the motives before accepting an invitation and generous after it's accepted.
An example: organizations that invite Michael Dell to speak get a request from his assistant to submit a business case outlining how his speaking at their event will help Dell Computers increase sales. Dell clearly knows the value his prominence has with meeting organizers and ties that prominence to specific outcomes.
Action item: Develop the criteria for generating and accepting invitations based on the answers to question #1 -- is speaking a strategic or tactical initiative for your company?
Question #5: What kind of systematic approach will be devoted to optimizing all speaking opportunities?
While involved with activities such as obtaining invitations to speak, organizing logistics and preparing content, sometimes the efforts to optimize each opportunity can get lost. Executives and tacticians both assume that the speech will build the brand, so they place little emphasis on creating a systematic approach to leveraging the opportunity across all functions. Without an internalized and integrated system, a speaking schedule will occur in a vacuum. Consequently, potential opportunities that the event could generate are limited by the staff's ability to play catch-up with the details. And miscommunications about the topic, speaker, and company can seriously affect the results too. Says Gorden:
I'm surprised that more speakers don't ask for approval of marketing materials to ensure that the speaker's name and message are accurately and effectively promoted. They're key to setting up audience expectation and response.
Whatever leverage does occur to support sales through follow-up activities, usually happens after the speech. But that doesn't allow other initiatives (such as coverage in the media) to also take advantage of the same platform. If an invitation to speak is accepted on its strategic value to the company, then activities to leverage that should occur before and during the speech as well as after it.
Lacking a systematic approach to link all branding initiatives, companies lose their most effective time to optimize the platform: before the speech. What happens between the acceptance and the appearance can do just as much to establish branding of the company as comments made during the speech itself.
The power of the invitation alone can be a potent branding tool. A full speaking calendar connotes prestige and fodder for other branding efforts. While security can be a valid reason for not publicizing the schedule, a systematic approach to publicize appearances can balance security concerns with additional branding opportunities. If the approach to optimize is not based on strategy, leveraging the power of the invitation itself is usually not considered.
The speech can also become a showcase, extending exposure beyond the immediate audience. Speakers who make plans to record their speeches (audio and/or video) can then create a plan to strategically use the footage afterwards.
Do those in the executive suite have to make all these decisions? Of course not. But someone needs to ensure that specific goals for each speech are established. Those goals can set in motion a variety of activities, ensure that the speaking engagement gets optimized through all other functions. Remember, it's a strategic issue, not a tactical one. The key question: who is in charge of integrating the platform's full potential?
Action item: Determine who will be in charge of strategic focus and leverage, and give that person the authority to integrate all branding functions.
All roads lead to strategy
Answers to these five questions point down one path: the emphasis on strategy rather than execution is the difference between wasted effort and return on investment.
Making speaking a strategic issue prevents the initiative from becoming yet another "sweat equity" aspect of the executive's job. And by focusing on its strategic value, the speeches themselves become more integrated and create more value. While still risky, the rewards are worth it.
Instead of achieving a full speaking calendar for the intangible sake of "exposure," invitations have to be viewed in a different light. Speeches can't be a justification for tacticians but, rather, a vehicle to transform the brand from an intangible idea to an experience that's "real". As a result, executives view them as opportunities, not obligations.
More than ever, speaking becomes a strategic focal point for numerous branding activities while providing a platform to springboard other initiatives. Not only does it provide a bridge between the company and its consultants, but it can also lead to presenting the company's core values in new, highly targeted markets. It creates the experience that makes the values real and the environment that makes the brand come alive and "stick" in people's minds.
Since 1987, Vickie K. Sullivan, President of Sullivan Speaker Services, has generated millions of dollars in speaking fees, book advances and ancilliary income for her clients. Sign up for her free market intelligence at http://www.SullivanSpeaker.com
|
