|Thursday, 08 March 2012 09:48|
The PRSA’s new definition of public relations, which was unveiled last week, has attracted a multitude of reactions.
The winning description was the result of a four-month campaign, which involved whittling down submissions from PR professionals, followed by an engaged online discussion.
The definition reads: “Public relations is a strategic communication process that builds mutually beneficial relationships between organizations and their publics.”
The CIPR were keen to congratulate the PRSA for their efforts to produce a modern take on the industry in an engaging and collaborative manner.
Jane Wilson, CIPR CEO says: “One of the things that characterises this profession is the wealth and variety of the roles we undertake which creates a vast range of different understandings about the nature of public relations. Our own research has highlighted the need for a better definition of the discipline in order for the profession to continue to secure a successful future.”
Conversely, the final outcome was met with some controversy by the PRCA.
Francis Ingham, chief executive of PRCA says: “Around a third of our members agree with the PRSA. But far more than that think the result is wrong. In fact, I have yet to meet a member who endorses the PRSA’s definition, and who has been enthusiastic about it. Most of those who approve do so with a shrug.”
While the PRCA recognised the hard work that had contributed to the PRSA’s conclusion, it found the need for a definition that can be utilised in the UK to be of ultimate importance.