Unconfirmed rumours reach me that Cheryl Curling, head of communications has been summarily escorted from Brent Civic Centre. Two days ago PR Weekly LINK carried the story that she had been made redundant as part of the council's restructuring that will increase staff from 9 to 11 and with a new head on a higher pay grade than Curling. PR Weekly noted that Cheryl had not responded to a request for a comment at the time of going to press.
PR Weekly stated:
PR Weekly stated:
Curling’s role as head of comms and marketing is set to be replaced by the wider ranging and higher salaried role of head of media and external relations, with the post currently being advertised.Not very good public relations really...
Brent Council’s interim senior comms adviser Richard Stokoe, hired last year as part of the review, said the restructure would see a shift in focus towards making the council’s 2,500 staff its spokespeople.
"The most trusted form of comms is verbal, and the most trusted form of verbal comms is from friends and relatives, so this is about getting staff out there. If you have each member of staff talking to five people about the council and what it's doing, you can start to bring about big behaviour change."
Alongside a change in the top role, the comms officer roles will be changed to media officers, while new corporate comms officers will oversee longer-term strategy and the training of staff as spokespeople.
9 comments:
'..this is about getting staff out there. If you have each member of staff talking to five people about the council and what it's doing, you can start to bring about big behaviour change.' When the 2500 staff are 'out there' being 'spokespeople' (presumably wandering the streets of Brent buttonholing innocent passers-by and boring them with corporate-speak accounts of Brent Council's latest triumphs) who will be doing their jobs back in the office or providing Council services?
Or is this overtime? If so, do they get double time for 'getting out there' and spreading the word on weekends and bank holidays?
I just hope this increase in expenditure proves cost-effective because the 'behaviour change' it's supposed to bring about is notoriously difficult to measure. Perhaps the Council could provide us with a quick reference guide along the lines of 'Big Behaviour Change Delivery: 10 Key Indicators'.
I'm looking forward to playing my part already.
It is a pity that this "shift of focus" does not seem to have registered with Sue McKenzie, Head of Libraries, Arts and Heritage. As part of her recent "staff restructuring" at Museum and Archives she has made redundant two members of staff who for years have been supplying excellent PR for Brent by providing an excellent front-line customer-based service, both at the Archives and out in the community with talks at libraries, information tables / bookstalls at events etc, and building good working relationships with local history societies, volunteers and teachers.
Their work will now be done by two newly recruited staff, paid at a higher scale, but without the excellent local history knowledge or contacts of the staff whose jobs have been "deleted". No doubt they will be encouraged to 'get out there' and tell people in Brent what an excellent Museum and Archives service the Council provides, but there is a great difference between "talking" a good service and actually providing one.
Philip Grant.
Library staff who are not librarians, archive staff who are not local historians, school expansion staff who are not educationalists...
2500 spokespersons who are not spokespeople.........
Having looked at the advert on Brent's website for the new Head of Media & External Relations post (Salary £60k to £70k pa), I find the description of this role very worrying.
The new Head of Media 'will work closely with the senior management team and the political executive to develop our priorities and advise on how we seek to present, promote and position Brent.' This suggests that not only will Brent's policies continue to be decided by a small clique of Senior Officers and Executive members, but that this will be done with an even closer eye on "presentation", trying to fool more of the people, more of the time.
He or she 'will strategically influence across the organisation to ensure we spot and maximise opportunities to promote Brent and the council to local residents and businesses, regional and national stakeholders.' In other words, Brent Council is even more determined than ever to persuade us what a fantastic job it does, whether this is actually true or not.
This person 'will bring energy and a clear vision to lead and develop the whole organisation’s approach to communications and reputation management.' That last phrase worries me most of all - does this mean that not only will Brent be trying to put out only positive stories about what it does, but that it will also be trying to "take out" negative stories, like those which appear from time to time in "blogs" like Wembley Matters, or, more rarely now, in our local newspapers?
Philip.
Scarier still is the idea that, once the 'narrative', which best 'presents, positions and promotes Brent' has been concocted and agreed on, it will be disseminated to Brent's 2500 staff/'spokespeople' who will presumably be expected/obliged/ordered to trot it out in pre-formed language ('hard-working families' etc) anytime they engage with any member of the public, in order to bring about 'big behaviour change'. It is certainly likely to change my behaviour, though not necessarily in the manner intended.
The 'big behaviour change' that Brent needs is a change in attitude by many of the Council's Senior Officers, and some of its senior elected members, so that they listen to and work together with local people for the benefit of the community, rather than dreaming up "big idea" policies in their Civic Centre bubble. They should change their behaviour, rather than trying to "spin" local residents into accepting what a wonderful job they are doing, and expecting Brent's residents to change and accept what they are told without comment or complaint.
Philip.
'Unconfirmed rumours'?? Are you kidding me??
Well, I will confirm:
1. Cheryl was NOT escorted from the Civic Centre, this is a complete lie.
2. She was NOT contacted by PR Week to comment because she knew nothing about the article until a few days ago (yes, a whole week after it first appeared).
3. She also knew nothing about this blog post until today.
I really think you need to stick to blogging about the 'environment and social justice' instead of gossiping about someone's circumstances you know nothing about.
'Unconfirmed rumours'?? Are you kidding me??
Well, I will confirm:
1. Cheryl was NOT escorted from the Civic Centre, this is a complete lie.
2. She was NOT contacted by PR Week to comment because she knew nothing about the article until a few days ago (yes, a whole week after it first appeared).
3. She also knew nothing about this blog post until today.
I really think you need to stick to blogging about the 'environment and social justice' instead of gossiping about someone's circumstances you know nothing about.
Post a Comment