Lead trainer and founder Guy Clapperton writes:
“Thought leadership” is one of my pet hates and I’m pleased to say a number of people in PR and communications are starting to come around to my point of view. Like all bad ideas it starts in a good place but has ended up as a meaningless bit of jargon.
Starting with the positives, if a startup client looks set to be a genuine leader in their industry and can express genuinely innovative views in a comprehensible way, this is a godsend to the public relations industry. An article people will want to read, which will make them go away and think about your client, has obvious benefits. Your client will want to be positioned as an authority as early as possible in front of clients, prospects, investors and their peers.
The problem arises when, from the very best of intentions, public relations professionals put “thought leadership” on some sort of shopping list they need from the client. They may strike it lucky; sometimes someone will have thoughts and instincts they don’t realise are usable in this way and will be only too pleased to offer them.
Thought Leadership as packaging
Too often, unfortunately, the PR professional feels pressured into packaging any old opinion as “thought leadership” when it really isn’t. Nonetheless a commonplace view will get pitched as unique. This doesn’t position them as a leader, it positions them as someone who hasn’t done the research around their market.
(Also a quick search on LinkedIn even throws up people who think “thought leadership” is a job title. It’s not.)
The next stage, which I’ve certainly seen, is when people start pitching “thought leadership” to journalists and editors. This is only a step away from the time someone offered to tell me about “their client’s messaging” – these are pieces of jargon best left to internal communications among the PR team, use them to a journalist and it’s like a conjurer telling someone they’re going to do an illusion. We know it’s an illusion but it’s more effective if it’s left unsaid.
If “thought leadership” becomes commoditised (and if someone is offering people like me some “thought leadership” that’s what’s happened) or if it can be produced on demand, it’s no longer leading anything, it’s following a marketing agenda. Clients will suddenly find themselves branded not as leaders but as followers. Indeed, when I put a version of this blog entry onto LinkedIn, one editor said she’d had a PR professional get in touch offering thought leadership from their client; she asked “Great, what’s the subject?” and the client basically said “we don’t know, what would you like?” This is the extreme opposite of “leadership”.
That said, by all means keep pitching those opinion pieces. Many are readable. If you’re pitching someone for an interview, brief the journalist on the sorts of views they’re likely to come out with, it will help in the planning.
But try to resist the idea that everything has to be a piece of leadership. Overstatement really undermines whatever and whoever you’re pitching.
