On 15th June 2010, the World Public Relations Forum gathered in Stockholm, with PR practitioners, researchers and educators participating from every continent. The CIPR was an active participant and at this meeting, the Stockholm Accords were agreed.
What are the Stockholm Accords?
Public relations representatives from 20 countries, in a bid to help PR practitioners, educators and students to communicate the value of public relations to society and organisations, have developed guidance called the Stockholm Accords (PDF). It outlines the ways in which PR and communications professionals add value to their organisations, specifically in the areas of governance, management, sustainability, internal communications, external communications and internal / external coordination.
It is designed to change the perception of public relations from a tactical discipline to one that sits at the heart of what organisations do and which plays a significant part in that organisation's success.
It is also designed to help professionals have conversations with their organisations about the ways in which PR can be used strategically, to support and defend investment in public relations and to provide a platform from which public relations professionals can outline their value to different stakeholders.
What the Stockholm Accords are not…
A rulebook; a prescription; carved on a table of stone; perfect!
There are those that do not agree with everything that is in the Accords or believe that other things should be included. The CIPR has its own views on some of the content, as do all contributors. The Accords are designed to act as a framework and to facilitate discussion. As they were being developed, there were lots of discussions and differences of opinion, which you would expect when you have professionals, researchers and educators from 20 different countries sharing their views. However, all contributors, the CIPR included, believe it sets a direction that is valuable and worth consideration.
What next?
We welcome feedback and discussion. Practitioners may have examples of how they have supported their organisations as outlined in the Accords and we would love to hear from you. We will also consider how some of the themes included in here might be integrated into our professional development activities and expanded further.
Views from CIPR contributors
Professor Anne Gregory, Past CIPR President and Director, Centre for PR Studies, Leeds Met University. Anne represented the CIPR during the Accords discussions in Stockholm and coordinated the Management Section of the Accords
The Accords are the joint thinking of over 100 people passionate about our profession. It is of course impossible to reach consensus, but we can and should take these statements and apply them to our own cultures and contexts.
I for one can live with the purpose of our profession being sustainability if we talk about PR having a role in sustaining a fully functioning society and helping to sustain our organisation, discipline and practice. I also believe we have a big role to play in governance by ensuring our organisations respond to all legitimate stakeholders and in management by ensuring our organisations act according to their own purposes and values. As for internal and external communications and aligning both, there is enough common ground here for the profession to work with, even if we may not agree with every point.
The good thing about the Accords is that we can use them to stimulate thinking and discussion. They will help our profession to begin to articulate our role beyond the tactical and help organisations to understand what we can do to contribute to organisational success.
If we learn to attach ourselves to organisational and societal agendas then we will be listened to, particularly if we become associated with solving problems. It is a tremendous opportunity for the profession.
Sue Wolstenholme, CIPR Chartered Practitioner. Sue contributed to the development of the Accord drafts
On the 15th June, at the World Public Relations Forum, the Stockholm Accords were debated, having been aired through various channels, since mid-February and contributed to by 59 practitioners and academics from 20 countries in 6 continents. I represented the CIPR and at the final debate Professor Anne Gregory spoke on our behalf.
The objectives for the Accords clearly state that they are a framework for all with an interest in public relations or communication, which covers a vast spread of people in business, NGOs, at universities and so on. They are, the objectives state, "a conscious and planned effort to argue the value of public relations" and therefore they are of specific interest to all of us.
They provide a direction of travel, to guide our thinking and our approaches to work, research and study, as we might find appropriate.
They are by no means inscribed in stone. In fact, the records of the process of their development are testament to the lively minds that our profession boasts. And just as some will say that it is wrong to split an infinitive, so many will find much to argue with, but in doing so they will be losing the opportunity that the Accords give us to extract and interpret some excellent thinking, to address our work with a fresh approach and thereby improve what we do.
For my part, I have issues with the use of the word stakeholders and would always prefer to see publics used, which is unique to our profession and expresses much about the core of what we do in building relationships. I expressed that view more than once during the discussions and failed to persuade. The issues that I hold, however, do not prevent me from enthusiastically welcoming the Accords and looking forward to the opportunities that they give us for stimulating discussions with colleagues and focusing our thinking on how we work.
