“Only generals should be peace makers.” – Bert Hellinger

One aspect of public relations that does not get enough attention is the inherent parallel of PR planning and warfare.

Really.

Behind the planning motif stressed by all good PR academics and the wiser practitioners is the need for solid foresight in public relations efforts. The idea is that with solid planning we can better measure our efforts and results. To be “strategic” is to have a goal supported by objectives supported by strategies supported by tactics. At the end of the effort, you need to evaluate all for success, or not.

The idea and practice of planning originates of course from military principles. The word strategos is from ancient from Greece; a stratego was a military leader.

For all the talk in the PR and marketing worlds about strategy, little consideration is given toward the historic importance of the word, in which battalions were employed to win and therefore end wars.

Since most of public relations appears to involve enhancing public relationships, rather than waging war, it could loosely be considered that PR people are unwitting historical revisionists.

This is problematic in times of crisis and controversy wherein PR practitioners – who, let’s face it, tend to be nice people and are often uncomfortable with conflict – are forced to occasionally deal with unpleasant situations ultimately faced by all organizations at one time or another.

A PR practitioner not versed in how, if and when engaging in wars of words, in other words, is one who is sorely lacking in requisite skills for the PR profession.