Aug. 11 (Bloomberg) — APCO Worldwide, the public relations firm that advised Hewlett-Packard Co.’s board after accusations of harassment against its chief executive officer, has handled crises from Merck & Co.’s Vioxx scandal to WorldCom Inc.’s fraud and now is helping Wall Street earn back America’s trust.

HP’s board decided to disclose the allegations against CEO Mark Hurd partly based on advice from APCO, a person with knowledge of the matter said, even as an investigation found he didn’t violate the company’s sexual harassment policy. The board sought Hurd’s resignation after it was found he made inaccurate expense reports.

Companies look for advice from consultants such as APCO, a 26-year-old firm, to manage public perception amid a crisis, said Matt Eventoff, a communications strategist. Since Hurd’s ousting Aug. 6, the stock has fallen 8.6 percent and Oracle Corp. CEO Larry Ellison has criticized HP for pushing Hurd out. It may have been worse if APCO had recommended keeping the accusations private, Eventoff said.

HP’s stock would have fallen a lot more if the allegations had leaked from a source other than HP, Eventoff, who coaches executives on public speaking and crisis management, said in an interview. “It was a bad situation. It’s not a good situation, period.”

B. Jay Cooper, a spokesman for Washington-based APCO, said the firm doesn’t discuss its clients. Mylene Mangalindan, a spokeswoman for Palo Alto, California-based HP, the world’s largest personal-computer maker, declined to comment.

Merck, Ford

APCO is no stranger to controversy. The firm was in the trenches at WorldCom as executives testified on Capitol Hill in 2002 for falsifying profits.

Kent Jarrell, a senior vice president at APCO and director of the litigation communication practice, worked on public relations during Merck’s Vioxx painkiller lawsuits after a study found the drug doubled the risk of heart attacks and strokes. He also worked with Ford Motor Co. when Explorers with Firestone tires were blamed for fatal crashes, and Alaska Air Group Inc.’s Alaska Airlines after a flight crashed in January 2000.

Former government officials, journalists and business executives have joined the firm’s ranks over the years, including Gordon Johndroe, a former White House deputy press secretary; Anita McBride, former assistant to President George W. Bush and chief of staff to Laura Bush; and Anne Womack Kolton, former director of public affairs at the U.S. Department of Energy.

The ‘Worst’ Decision

The decision by HP to ask Hurd to leave has drawn some censure.

In a letter to the New York Times, Oracle’s Ellison said the company “just made the worst personnel decision since the idiots on the Apple board fired Steve Jobs many years ago.”

HP’s board determined Hurd submitted inaccurate expense reports and concealed a personal relationship with a contractor and reality show contestant named Jodie Fisher, who accused him of sexual harassment.

An APCO representative wrote a mock sensational newspaper article demonstrating what would happen if the accusations leaked without HP’s disclosure, according to the Times, which reported earlier on APCO’s advisory role.

While companies should bring in fresh eyes amid threatening events, boards also typically seek advice from lawyers, investment managers and in-house corporate communications, said James S. O’Rourke, management professor at the University of Notre Dame.

“But all of it is just advice,” O’Rourke said in an interview. “Ultimately, the board is accountable for the decisions it makes.”

Wall Street’s Image

APCO is one of three firms leading a public relations campaign to help the Financial Services Roundtable, a main lobbying group for banks and insurance companies, regain trust and goodwill after the recession and criticism from Washington.

Margery Kraus, APCO’s CEO, founded the firm in 1984 and has expanded it to more than 550 consultants in 29 offices around the globe from an office of five people in Washington.

Kraus started APCO as a consulting subsidiary of Arnold & Porter, a law firm known for its work in the tobacco industry. By 2008, the closely held company’s annual revenue climbed above $100 million, according to APCO’s website.

While the debate continues in Silicon Valley as to whether HP’s board made the right call or received the right advice, Eventoff says the public disclosure has at least allowed HP to have more control over the storyline than if the news leaked, as was the case with with BP Plc’s oil spill.

“How’s it going to end? No one knows,” he said.

By Joe Carroll and Jessica Resnick-Ault

June 18 (Bloomberg) — BP Plc Chief Executive Officer Tony Hayward’s failure to set safety standards to prevent the Gulf of Mexico oil spill may cost the company control over U.S. oil fields, refineries and pipelines that account for more than one- third of its sales, lawmakers and analysts said.

Less than 24 hours after Hayward met President Barack Obama’s demand to set aside $20 billion to clean up and compensate victims of the worst oil spill in U.S. history, lawmakers yesterday accused the BP CEO of “stonewalling.” Hayward appeared before a House committee probing the cause of the April 20 offshore rig explosion that killed 11 workers.

Citing a five-year string of accidents and deadly disasters at BP-operated facilities, Representative Bart Stupak suggested the poor safety record could justify banning the London-based company from doing business in the U.S.

“Setting up the fund was a nice pro-active approach by BP, but in reality it’s going to take a decade for them to recover and regain public trust in this country,” said Jonathan Dison of Bender Consulting, a risk management and strategy firm that has advised BP, Chevron Corp. and Royal Dutch Shell Plc.

At risk is BP’s standing as the biggest producer in the U.S., built up after spending $100 billion buying Amoco Corp. and Atlantic Richfield Co.

Shares Gain

BP rose as much as 5.5 percent in London trading before paring gains to trade 2.1 percent higher at 356.40 pence as of 12:50 p.m. local time. The shares have lost 44 percent of their value since the April 20 explosion and fire aboard the Deepwater Horizon rig.

BP’s senior unsecured ratings were cut three levels to A2, the sixth-highest investment grade, from Aa2 by Moody’s Investors Service today, which warned that further downgrades are possible.

The cost of credit-default swaps protecting BP’s debt against default for one year fell 7 basis points to 624 basis points, prices from CMA DataVision in London show.

Congressman Stupak didn’t elaborate on how BP could be banned from operating in the U.S. and whether such authority rests with Congress, the administration, or regulatory agencies.

Scrutiny of BP’s operations in the U.S. intensified after a fire killed 15 workers at its Texas refinery in 2005, and will increase further following the rig disaster, said John Bresland, chairman of the U.S. Chemical Safety and Hazard Investigation Board.

The board added an investigation into the cause of the rig disaster to a list of federal probes into BP, Bresland said in an interview yesterday. The probe was requested by Representative Henry Waxman, a California Democrat.

New Investigation

“Our investigation will look at 2 years before the incident, a year before it, the day before, what happened on that day, up to the time the explosion took place,” Bresland said.

BP was cited for 760 safety violations in the past half decade by the U.S. Occupational Safety and Health Administration, compared with eight each for ConocoPhillips and Sunoco Inc., two for Citgo Petroleum Corp. and one for Exxon Mobil Corp., Representative John Sullivan, an Oklahoma Republican, said during yesterday’s hearing.

Inspections of the company’s five U.S. plants after the Texas refinery fire resulted in a fine of $21 million by the Occupational Safety and Health Administration for safety violations. Last year, discovery of more violations resulted in BP being slapped with a record fine of $87.4 million.

‘Extremely Frustrated’

In his testimony yesterday, Hayward not only failed to convince lawmakers he was committed to making BP safer, he may have deepened suspicion of the company by repeatedly pleading ignorance to events that took place under his command, said Matt Eventoff, a partner at New Jersey communications firm, Princeton Public Speaking.

“Mr. Hayward’s comments today, saying ‘I don’t know’ 66 times, evaporated any feeling of responsibility,” Eventoff said. “Any goodwill that the company bought back yesterday eroded today with his testimony.”

Questioned by the panel about BP practices that may have led to the disaster, Hayward said it was too early in the investigation to know the cause.

Stupak, a Michigan Democrat, told Hayward he and other committee members were “extremely frustrated with your lack of candor and inability to answer questions.” Waxman described the CEO’s responses as “stonewalling.”

“I’m not stonewalling,” Hayward responded. According to a transcript of his testimony, Hayward said at least 23 times he was not involved in decisions.

‘Laser-like Focus’

After taking over from John Browne in May 2007, Hayward, now 53, pledged to apply a “laser-like focus” to improving safety at the company, declaring it one of his three top priorities along with people and performance.

In Nov. 2007 he said that BP already was making “great progress” on safety. He simplified BP’s corporate structure and cut several thousand jobs.

This year, at a March 2 presentation to analysts, Hayward focused on financial performance.

“Our direction is clear: the unrelenting pursuit of competitive leadership in respect of cash costs, capital efficiency and margin quality,” he said.

BP is the biggest crude and gas producer in the Gulf of Mexico. The company has amassed about 500 deep-water exploration leases in the Gulf.

BP has spent about $1.6 billion on containing and cleaning up the spill so far. The company’s spending for cleanup and liabilities may reach $40 billion, Standard Chartered Plc estimated last week.

The yield premium investors demand to hold BP’s 500 million pounds of 4 percent bonds due 2014 decreased 1 basis point to 359 basis points, according to HSBC Holdings Plc prices on Bloomberg. The spread on the company’s 1 billion euros of 2016 notes tightened 6 basis points to 531 basis points.

By GEOFF WILLIAMS, AOL SMALL BUSINESS

If our luck holds, you’re reading this, and it’s a perfectly normal day. The weather isn’t especially unusual, and if you turn on CNN or Fox, you’ll see them doing a standard report….

Once you actually reach people in a disaster, make sure you actually are “open and available,” advises Matt Eventoff, a communications trainer. “Nothing is worse than a CEO who stays behind closed doors and remains silent.” Eventoff stresses you should talk to your top talent, repeatedly, so they aren’t nervous and sending negative vibes to the rest of the employees.

Original Article

When a young woman named Carissa knocked at my door on a recent Saturday evening and introduced herself as a process server, I knew things were about to get interesting…

Matt Eventoff, an expert on crisis management and communications, recommends documenting everything, including any conversations with a travel company. If you think a lawsuit might be imminent, he suggests taking your grievance to the top. “Staff at corporate headquarters tends to be very aware of the public-relations implications of the messages sent in certain situations,” he said.

Executives might have second thoughts about suing a customer who keeps meticulous records and isn’t afraid to talk publicly about a grievance. “Everything that a company does sends a message, and any lawsuit filed against a customer would certainly send a message — and not a good one,” he added.

Elliott is National Geographic Traveler magazine’s reader advocate. E-mail him at celliott@ngs.org.

Full Article: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/02/04/AR2010020401828_pf.html

But not everyone in public relations sees Dixon’s transgression as a permanent black eye for Baltimore. In fact, because so many politicians are being caught philandering or stealing or bribing, she becomes only the latest entry on a growing list.

“Unfortunately, the mayor is not the first, or second, or 10th mayor, nationally, to be found guilty of committing a crime, and won’t be the last,” says communications strategist Matt Eventoff, with PPS Associates in Princeton, N.J.

Read the full article at BaltimoreSun.com.

Layoffs. Disappointing earnings. Plant closings. Embezzlement. The way you communicate news of this ilk could make or break your career. Done badly, and your 15 minutes of fame may be those you never outlive. Done well, and your praises could be sung by pundits, reporters, employees and your boss.

So why do many executives fail to prepare for the day they are the bearer of bad, even tragic news? As the saying goes, stuff happens, and it will happen to your organization.

Delivering bad news well is both a science and an art. These suggestions should give you some guidance on how to prepare yourself to do it well.

Before the Bad –

“It is much easier to communicate bad news to someone who is used to hearing from you regularly…—not only at monthly meetings—[and] especially during tough economic times,” said Communication Strategist Matt Eventoff. Following are a few ideas compiled from Eventoff, other experts, and our own experience on how to prepare yourself and your organization for tough times.

o Strengthen and maintain the good relationships you have with your board members and investors. Never take the lack of criticism as a sign all is well—they may just be disconnected.
o Communicate often and in-person. Misunderstood emails and voice mails can quickly become both “nuclear” and “viral.”
o Be accessible to your internal audiences. Yes, you’ve heard this before. Have you taken it seriously? Sometimes the boss who brags about their open door is the least accessible.
o Take special care of your top talent. You’ll need their expertise—especially in tough times.
o Never forget that news media, business and community leaders, and government leaders should always be looped in.
o Are you willing to be told the brutal truth? Make sure you have several confidants that you will never punish for being blunt.
Creating an environment and processes that facilitate healthy communication and feedback will make a huge difference in how well your organization reacts to both the catalyzing incident, and the way it was communicated.

The Deed

Once you’ve created the ideal environment for the big discussion, there’s still a lot of work to do to get it right.

Be the One: If you have bad news, be the one to break it to others. According to Eventoff, “Trying to hide bad news is a) no longer possible, and b) will absolutely destroy all credibility.” Look at the situation as an opportunity to tell your story on your terms. If you wait too long and the information gets out through other sources first, which is increasingly likely given the 24/7 news cycle and social media outlets, you will spend ridiculous amounts of time doing damage control. And despite the good work you might do in this mode, it’s extremely difficult to fully recover the reputation and relationships you’ve already lost.

Be Brave, Be Clear: One of the two natural human responses to danger is flight. And fleeing the scene, getting into a bunker, or at least trying to hide behind niceties, is one of the most common impulses that ignites as we sit across the table from someone to whom we must tell bad news. “Delivering disappointing information…is often sugar-coated…given in non-direct ways or wrapped up in other neutral news. Many people aren’t experienced enough and to be frank, resilient enough to cope with the pressure. What frequently results is avoidance or a mumbled, poorly delivered message,” advises author and consultant Simon Stapleton.

In a handbook from the American Medical Association (AMA) titled ‘”Education for Physicians on End-of-Life Care,” the AMA instructs doctors on how to deliver life-and-death information to patients. Most of us will never have to communicate that kind of bad news, but the advice definitely applies. “Deliver information in a sensitive but straightforward manner. Say it and then stop… Use simple language… avoid technical jargon or euphemisms… well intentioned efforts to ‘soften the blow’ may lead to vagueness and confusion.”

Be Kind: As a business owner or manager, your first responsibility is to ensure the health of your organization. However, whenever you’re delivering bad news, the recipient will always be another person or group of people. Before you start, put yourself in their position. How will they receive the information? What do they need to know to accept and move past the news? How would you like to be treated if you were in their place? This doesn’t mean you should apologize or waffle. However, answering these questions yourself creates an environment of respect and compassion that will smooth the experience for everyone.

Be a Solution: When there’s bad news to communicate, a good manager can, or should be able to anticipate the questions and concerns that result. If you have to lay off employees, they’ll want to know about severance, benefits, and finding a new job. If you need to tell media about a plant closing, they’ll want to know how it will affect the local economy, and what it means for the future of the company. Be prepared with solutions to your audience’s concerns. An old rule of communication says that people can handle just about any bad news, as long as you give them tools to navigate the situation.

Bad news need not devastate you, your organization, or the people on the receiving end. Care, prepare thoroughly, execute well, and respect your audiences. Failing to do so can have far reaching effects that impact morale, media coverage, productivity, and your bottom line. It’s up to you.

Sources:

Matt Eventoff at matteventoff.com.

Education for Physicians on End-of-Life Care—Participant’s Handbook, American Medical Association

Fred Wilson, owner, Union Square Ventures at avc.com.

Charles Day at thelookingglass.com.

Josh Kopelmen at redeye.com.

You work with corporate execs, politicians and other leaders in public speaking … what to say and how to say it. How do social media such as Facebook, Twitter, texting, etc. figure into this?

ME: Social media are an integral part of communicating today, and will evolve. The single biggest question I hear, whether from a political or business leader, centers around “I want to use social media like Obama.”

My first question: “What’s your message and why would someone who doesn’t know you, live in your district, or use your product care?” Herein lies the fundamental secret to effectively using social media to communicate as a legal, business, nonprofit, academic or political leader … just as in public speaking and presenting, you MUST have a clear, compelling message, or social media won’t work for you .. it just won’t be an effective medium.

My second question: “Do you have $750 million to spend?” That’s what the Obama campaign spent, very effectively, to spread its message. It wasn’t a Twitter and FB page put up in a vacuum, there were thousands of hours and millions of dollars behind creating an unbelievably successful social media program.

So my advice to leaders is the same advice I try to follow myself … put out fresh, compelling material, message it well, start with friends, customers, supporters, associates, etc. and slowly build a following. Make it easy to connect to you via your web site. If you are running for office, put your social media info on your material … if a company owner, on your product packaging and advertising. Remember, social media complement what you do face to face, they do not replace it.

By extension, do you foresee much impact from social media in major news operations such as newspapers and TV news, or in the future of journalism generally?

ME: I do, although I disagree with a number of my colleagues in that I believe major news operations will always have a fairly prominent place in our society. Major media bring legitimacy to a story, and that won’t change. What will change is reaction. Everyone has an opportunity, a real opportunity, to voice an opinion and express it in a very public way. However, mainstream media still matter.

Why? Sheer reach. Mainstream media still reach more individuals than any other single medium. So when a major national daily (the New York Times, Wall Street Journal , USA Today) runs an eye grabbing headline, the public pays attention. Statistics indicate that the reality is that for every five people who read a headline, on average only one reads the actual story and content.

The reality is that a political campaign will use a positive headline in a major daily in paid broadcast advertising over an endorsement from my blog, or any one of the millions of bloggers out there. The difference now is that a candidate’s “blogging army” of 2 or 20 or 200 can relentlessly comment, post and generate their own content and get it listed on Google news, Yahoo, Bing, etc.

Of the various social media, do you see any one in particular as having the greatest potential on the media or generally in society? Any that will fade?

ME: I speak quite a bit in high schools and colleges, and when asked who tweets, uses Facebook, e-mails and texts, texting is always the hands-down winner both in popularity and number of students involved. Most use Facebook, and most use e-mail. Why does this matter? This is the generation that has literally grown up with the web, and I believe that their preferences will, to a large degree, determine what succeeds and what fades going forward.

I believe Facebook will have a long and prosperous life because it helps us connect to those we know and interact on a somewhat deeper level with acquaintances. Communication is not an announcement, it is a discussion. Facebook provides for that. Twitter does, too … however FB is much more personal and much more conversationally focused, and I believe those two traits really, really matter. The recent Twitter study saying that 10 percent of users account for over 90 percent of tweets is telling.

Do social media represent a dumbing down of America , a liberation of new possibilities, or both, or neither?

ME: I believe they allow us to enter into conversations with people we might never have met, and find people who share common interests with us.

As with anything, I think there is a tendency to overgeneralize the effect of social media. Pick a position, yea or nay, pick a social media topic, and there are countless statistics either confirming or questioning the validity of that position. As an aside, I see this regularly with a statistic that is commonly referenced when discussing communication … the “7 percent, 38 percent, 55 percent rule.”

Prof. Mehrabian released a study nearly 40 years ago, and among the conclusions was that when determining the meaning of a message, 55 percent was based on body (or facial) language, 38 percent based on tone of voice, and only 7 percent based on words. Very powerful, and this is cited ad nauseam as “proof” that the words you use are not that critical. All well and good except for the fact that the statistics are taken out of context. Prof. Mehrabian was studying a very specific communication experience. Unfortunately, many people have assumed that words don’t matter.

What does this have to do with your question? As with anything, I don’t think there is a definitive answer … it depends on the individual and how he or she chooses to use social media.

Tennessee women’s basketball coach Pat Summit complained that players on the team bus were texting each other rather than speaking face to face. Your reaction?

ME: Reality. I think this is one of the drawbacks of social media … when they are used to replace face to face communication rather than complement it when face to face communication is not possible. Being able to relate and communicate with another individual face to face will, more often than not, determine your ability to succeed.

What do I mean? You will rarely be awarded a raise via e-mail, win a congressional seat on Facebook alone, become CEO via a text message or acquire a company or major funding over a tweet. VC’s and bankers will always want to meet with you, as will a corporate board, voters, etc. Social media can certainly be extremely beneficial to all of these … however, face to face communication will always be crucial.

Read the original article at OurBlook.com.

From taping techniques to virality tips, pros share best practices in

By Lin Grensing-Pophal – November 23, 2009

In days gone by, PR professionals were primarily wordsmiths — if you could write well…
Matt Eventoff, a principal with Princeton Public Speaking who has worked on publicity videos for elected officials, corporate executives and entertainment figures, agrees. “Randomly shooting a grainy video — or any video — without having a message and some preparation is a recipe for disaster and usually results in such.”

Know How You Want to Say It
In PR video, specifically, the standard practice of using a spokesperson can add to the challenge of creating end-products that capture attention. Eventoff explains, “The issue that PR practitioners face first and foremost when putting clients on tape is one of authenticity. An over-coached, over-prepped executive or celebrity speaking into the camera in a sterile setting at best looks like an infomercial and at worst looks so phony that the client is set up for ridicule.”

The original article can be found here.

Many industry experts have speculated the cause. Was Microsoft attempting to update the servers that handle its subsidiary Danger’s Sidekick data storage, without properly backing them up? Did a server overheat, leading to a domino effect that toppled not just the main servers, but also their backups?

Microsoft has not yet provided an official cause. A spokesperson said Monday the company is still investigating.

The software superpower, however, has said the technology on which Danger’s cloud services are based is “totally separate” from that which powers Microsoft’s other cloud-computing platforms, such as Windows Azure and Office Web Apps. “Danger, as a Microsoft subsidiary, created and continues to operate the Sidekick service,” a Microsoft spokesperson told seattlepi.com.

The Sidekick server outage, the magnitude of which many experts said is unprecedented, has cast much doubt on Microsoft’s ability to offer reliable cloud services.

“If you can’t trust Microsoft, who else can you trust?” said Azita Arvani, founder of the Arvani Group and a mobile-industry analyst.

Last week’s outage, and the events that followed, have put “a huge black eye on the cloud-computing services, in general,” Arvani said. At a time when companies – not just Microsoft, but also Google, Amazon, SalesForce, IBM and others – are pushing cloud computingas a less expensive solution for enterprise data storage, the Sidekick controversy is a big setback.

So what does Microsoft need to do in the next few days to mitigate the problem and extinguish this reignited skepticism of cloud services?

“Microsoft needs to, within 24 hours, be able to message why this cloud computing operation is different than the one they are marketing to other businesses,” Matt Eventoff, a Princeton, N.J., communications consultant, said in an e-mail, “because in three weeks everyone will forget that this was a purchased product (Microsoft bought Danger).

“This window to explain this properly is closing fast.”

In the Sidekick case, Microsoft failed to provide what Lew Smith, of the IT consultancy firm Interphase Systems, called the three main elements of successful cloud services: stability, reliability and disaster recovery….

…Meanwhile, a big portion of T-Mobile’s business has been halted. The Bellevue-based company temporarily stopped selling Sidekick smartphones, spokeswoman Cara Walker said, both online and in retail stores.

T-Mobile planned to give an update of the situation Monday, but hadn’t yet at the time of this post.

“T-Mobile and Microsoft have not done a great job of communicating through this crisis, and therein really lay the issue,” Eventoff wrote. “Cloud computing is a relatively new concept to the masses (me included) and when something is new, people a) are intrigued b) can be intimidated and c) tend to choose the safer alternative until the new concept has been vetted.”

“This issue is that this isn’t about someone’s $300 Sidekick anymore,” he added. “Now it may (be) about a multimillion-dollar cloud-computing contract.”

http://blog.seattlepi.com/print.asp?entryID=181814