Stockholm Accords first draft up for comments. Please contribute, suggest, criticise and help shape the future of our profession

Have you ever heard of any profession uniting more than 70 national professional associations to implement a global yet highly flexible and local advocacy program to enhance its own perception in society by arguing issues where it believes to contribute more value to social, private and public sector organizations?

This blog has already discussed the Stockholm Accords process here and now the first draft of the Accords accompanied by references, glossary and other explanations is posted here for each of you to look at, think about, comment, criticise.

Clearly all our readers and contributors are excellently placed to support the Global Alliance’s effort which has been driven by many of us who regularly post here on this blog.

Please do not let us down and express yourselves as clearly and loudly as possible.

The second and semi final draft of the Accords will be prepared before the Stockholm World Public Relations Forum and discussed and approved on that occasion.

Then…… comes the best part of the program: the actual implementation.

Please follow our blog:

10 Replies to “Stockholm Accords first draft up for comments. Please contribute, suggest, criticise and help shape the future of our profession

  1. Paul, nice of you because you ‘ve done a big job by thoroughly studying the Accords and the glossary of terms presented by Toni. I ‘ve studied your comments, had it being you have followed the ‘herd instinct’ you might have gotten the true pictures of the Accords.

    Your two prongs to your attack are based on wrong premises because: I. You are considering the glossary of terms presented by Toni as an individual. II. Don’t forget that the Accords are not only meant for English speaking countries but for the whole world, therefore you need to think of other languages and not overflog linguistic issues. III.Correct interpretation of the explanation of the glossary of terms will guide correct analysis of the Accords, if your perspective of viewing is defective it will inform your conclusion.

    In your reply to section 2 paragraph 3, you supposed to know as a PR guru that the effective media of outreach in country A might be defective in country B, it is not surprisng that the media that worked in the US might not work in the UK. This informs the importance of research by PR people before choosing any media for reaching their target audience.

    Paul best wishes, try to follow the ‘herd instinct’ in the remaining two parts of your contribution, looking forward for them

  2. The definition of the PR role in the ‘pyramid of communicative organization’ as illustrated in the accord for organizational survival and success is commendable. Its realization in any organization could be real based on its corporate policy and philosophy and the level of institutionalization of PR in the organization. It also depends on the level of competence of the in-house PR professional(s)/PR consultant(s) employed by the organization.

  3. dear Faridah,

    I apologise for responding so late, but the recent disruption of trasport in europe has severely hampered my usual concern for timely responses.

    The issue you raise is, in my view, topical.

    As much as I consider investors as only one, and not necessarily the most relevant, public of an organization, I do believe that if the new frontier of public relations is in stakeholder relationship governance and, from this perspective, investors are certainly amongst the most relevant.

    This implies that as organizations need media, employee, supplier, community, institutional, consumer relations competencies they also need investor relations ones.

    Having said this I hope you will keep us informed on your activities so that we may learn from you and upgrade our professional practices.

    Just to cite one area in which I believe there needs to be much more attention is in the area of what you define as stakeholder engagement.

    In many cases this has become an overdone buzzword which can mean everything and nothing.

    An effective process for me goes like this:
    a) the organization acknowledges stakeholders knowing that active stakeholders decide by themselves to be so, as they are characterized by being aware of the organization’s objectives and interested in a relationship;
    b) the organization involves these active stakeholder groups by supplying them with facilitated access to information and incentivated access to feed back. This involvement extends also to other potential stakeholder publics, this time identified by the organization on the ground that, if they were made aware of the organization and its objectives, they would presumably be interested in a relationship;
    c) the organization then engages those stakeholder groups it believes to be essential in active communication and negotiation before, during and after deciding its actions. This engagement is very much based on listening (i.e. collecting information, understanding it, interpreting it) and then, but only then, negotiating;
    d) the organization then marries those stakeholder groups which, based on the results of the negotiation, agree to support its objectives and separates from those who do not, but keeping the latter involved.
    Finally, e) the organization needs sometime also decide to divorce…..

    I would be happy if you, and others of course, wish to comment on this process and add or criticize.
    Thank you for writing,

  4. Dear Toni,

    I am Faridah Hanim from Malaysia and one of the participant who attended the ‘IPRM Brainstorming Retreat’ on 17 April at Janda Baik. It was an extremely fruitful brainstorming session as a result numerous key action plans have been identified for implementation in the next coming months. The key action plans comprised of 4 major projects :1) The establishment of Young PR Professionals Chapter 2) The establishment of Chartered Public Relation Institute Malaysia 3) Open Dialogue between PR students, young PR professionals and Senior PR Practitioners.4) Enhancement of IPRM website.

    As a Corporate Communication practitioner in the organisation that I am currently serving, one of my key responsibility is stakeholder engagement which includes Financial Public Relations or some called Investor Relations. I spearhead IR communication initiatives to reach out to the investment community. This IR function is currently predominantly engaged by Finance people. Through my journey of understanding the needs and expectations of investment communty is to understand and speak their invesment language. Many PR professionals in Malaysia shy away from IR due to lack of understanding, knowledge and skill required to perform this special function. Investor Relations is a unique blend of Communication Skill as well as Finance Skill. Knowledge of IR would put a PR professional to another pedestal.In Malaysia a Listed Organisation needs to sell his/her company story and communicate the true value of his/her organisation. Transparency and Governance is the key word in IR. I humbly would like to spearhead IR through IPRM and reach out to as many PR professionals that are willing to embrace this special skill.

  5. Toni, JOhn and the team, congratulations is in order for the great collective effort from the Swedish PRA on the Research Findings and the draft of the 2010 Stockholm Accords. The recommendations from these efforts, if implememtned at organisational levels, should certainly strengthen the position of the Professional Communicator as a Leader in organisations. I will be extending the 2010 Stockholm Accords Draft and the Research Findings /Chaos Theory as an Agenda for comments at Malaysia’s ‘IPRM’s Brainstorming Retreat’ on April 17, 2010 at Janda Baik (a malay word meaning ‘The good Widow’), a green lung outskirt of Kuala Lumpur where 30 PR practitioners will gather for a discussion on industrial issues amidst the lovely green and clean, fresh air. More comments for you after IPRM’s Janda Baik Retreat. Care to join? Just fly in, hospitality on us….Best always, Shameem Abdul Jalil

  6. Toni – I tried to post this note on the Accords page for Internal communication, but it wouldn’t accept the comment. Perhaps you’d be kind enough to forward along my comments? Many thanks!

    Kudos on taking on a valiant struggle. Aside from “how knowledge is shared” this seems a very one-way, HQ-centric perspective. What of collaboration across organizational boundaries, or of an organization learning from its employees? What of measurement in the internal space, apart from the current engagement focus (which assumes much regarding employees’ willingness to expend discretionary effort)?

    What about the idea of promulgating a “great place to work” ? Obviously, there must be accommodations to length, given the Accords’ desired overall simplicity, but I’d feel better with some of the foregoing included.

Comments are closed.