activities of his PR department. I told him bluntly that
the survival of his PR department depends largely on the
magnanimity of his chief executive officer (CEO). I further
told him that for his PR department to do well, he must
report directly to the CEO as opposed to the senior officer
incharge of marketing. This is because in the PR area, a
lot of spending has no immediate nor direct returns. In
fact, it is very difficult to determine the relationship
between any increase in sales to that of PR activities. PR
activities are definitely different from those in marketing
whereby its expenses on advertising and promotion are all
sales-related. Thus, if the PR person were to report to the
marketing manager, the outcome is not difficult to predict
-- PR activities will endup with step-child treatment. Yet
in today's highly competitive environment, the need for
effective PR programmes cannot be overlooked.
What, then, determines structure? In war, it is always
strategy. In other words, the strategy must be the genesis
of any organisational design and structure. Undeniably, no
organisation starts off with no structure. The point is,
when it comes to any new initiatives or programmes, the
strategy must be designed first. The appropriate support
structure and systems can then be put in place. It is just
like in military campaigns. No army in the world is
organised without a structure. If anything, the army is
probably one of the most structured organisations around.
However, when it comes to planning for war, the starting
point for the whole exercise begins with defining and
outlining the strategy (or battle plan and goals). For
example, in the 1991 war against Iraq, the United States-led
forces decided on the strategy first before embarking on how
to organise for combat. Otherwise, the United States would
have to ship its entire army to the Gulf, including then
President George Bush! After all, as the President, he was
the commander-in-chief. Of course, in reality, we all know