Speaking at the 2006 ICCO Summit — the PR industry's annual global talkfest — Burson's essential role as the pioneer of the PR network ensured that everyone present listened to his words closely, more so when he added that his views had nothing to do with Burson-Marsteller or WPP policy.
Leaving aside the basic irony of the situation, there has for some time been a broad acceptance that the PR industry has a perception problem. Often characterised as spin doctors or — worse — masters of the dark arts, PR executives still face considerable scepticism in justifying their roles. For Burson, one way out of this situation might be through licensing. Reversing a long-held stance against such an approach, he pointed out that licensing may raise standards and ensure that agencies are treated as partners rather than vendors.
"Only infrequently nowadays are we regarded as long-term partners; rather we are often positioned as vendors," he said. "I do not feel we get the appreciation we deserve."
Burson is too canny to endorse licensing fully, and with good reason. Many of the other agency heads at the event remained cautious about mandatory licensing. "I respect that point of view," said Text 100 global chief Aedmar Hynes. "But I'd go back to asking the question of what problems can we solve by licensing. I would probably look at it in the context of a different array of services; there is a degree to which our services are being commoditised."
The Summit's location this year — New Delhi — further illustrated the difficulties of regulating an expanding profession. India is suddenly awash with PR agencies; a nascent industry is growing fast and several of the major players complain about commoditisation being driven by the smaller shops.
Few, however, are asking for increased regulation. "Licensing is premature for a market like India — in a market that's not mature and evolved you will create an entry barrier," said Jai Xavier Prabhu David, founder of PR Hub.
India's relatively young agencies, however, may have an edge over their more established brethren in other markets, given the general disquiet with the agency business model that has evolved from the West. A key theme that emerged from the two-day event was the need for consultancies to become more consultative and less focused on implementation. Some even floated the idea of a fundamental shift in the business model — splitting strategy and execution.
"But what is consultancy?" asks Hynes. "Even at an execution level, you can take a consultative approach to it. It's critical we don't move people up into these ivory towers — the danger is that it does become execution, when you shove (work) down."
Hill & Knowlton global CEO Paul Taafe, however, remained singularly unconvinced. "There is no margin on pure consultancy; almost all margin is implementation," he said, during a discussion on the changing nature of communications.
But is a system where the industry's best client servicing minds get shunted into management roles really the best way for agencies to combat a perception problem? Carlos Lareau certainly thinks not. The ex-B-M global COO departed his position last year to set up an agency and work more with clients. "For the last 10 years of my career I was breathing down the necks of management," he points out.
