Last week’s PRNewser Poll asked “How creative can publicists be with staff titles?” The votes are in, and the majority said, “Somewhat.”
Nearly half, about 48 percent, said PR firms can add a touch of whimsy to PR titles, going a little farther than the traditional account executive and VP labels we’re used to. One comment on Twitter said titles could have a little imagination, but should stay “professional sounding to outsiders. Perception ≥ Reality.”
A little over 45 percent said PR firms should stick with traditional titles; that the PR industry and its staffers need to be taken seriously.
Only about 10 percent said PR titles should be very creative. Another commenter said her title is “agent of public relevance” so she felt PR firms should get creative with staff monikers.
The issue came up after GolinHarris announced that it has stripped away traditional titles as part of its g4 reorganization. According to Fred Cook, GH CEO, the reorganization as a whole is part of the firm’s effort to change with the times.
The outcome indicates that a person’s job title reflects heavily on how seriously people take the person that holds it; specifically, that the title should show that publicists have expertise and mean business. Perhaps the fact that PR is finally getting its “seat at the table” is part of that. A major client’s CEO might not want to get advice from the “social media rockstar.”
ClickZ pinpoints a few problems that job seekers with unique titles might have as well, like the possibility of being overlooked.
With new roles hammered out at PR firms, and companies seeking to stand out from the competition, it’s likely we’ll see titles that run the gamut. Continue the conversation in the comments section and @PRNewser.