Let me give you a couple of quasi-metrics:

One deals with title escalation.

● In the 1940s the person (invariably a male) who headed the function was titled “publicity manager”

● In the 50s, director of public relations • In the 60s and 70s, vice president – public relations

● In the 80s, senior vice president – corporate affairs/communications

● In the 90s – executive vice president

Another “metric” deals with how the senior public relations officer is now positioned in the management hierarchy:

● A seat on the management committee, and

● Worldwide functional responsibility

A quantum jump in compensation is yet another indicator that says something about how senior public relations jobs are valued.
* * * *
We also should not overlook the enhanced relationship between CEOs and their chief public relations officers:

● Until about 1990, the senior public relations position was perhaps the “most institutionalized” on the corporate roster (Tony DeLorenzo was in the top position at General Motors more than a quarter century – he served six CEOs)

● Post 1990: CEO/CPR joined at the hip; CEO sees CPR as “protector/advisor,” with media relations often the primary responsibility; downside is that when CEO goes, CPR may not be far behind

This greater dependence by the CEO on his/her Chief Public Relations Officer did not happen in a vacuum. Rather it was a gradual response to a change in the external business environment.

I have identified three “defining moments” that caused CEOs to be more respectful of the public relations function and led to greater dependence on public relations to achieve corporate goals. The first involved the legislative/regulatory environment; the second the proliferation of media; the third the changing competitive environment (in large part a fallout of the information technology age).

The 1960s was perhaps the most significant decade in the maturation of public relations. It started with the formation of the European Common Market. This was a cataclysmic event for business, a precursor of today’s global economy. Almost overnight it became important for a German company to be known in France and in Italy and later in Spain and the UK. It was equally important for well-known American brands to gain recognition in Europe. And later in Asia and on other continents.

It was also a decade of stunning social change, especially in the United States, but also in other developed countries the world over. The push for equal rights, begun in earnest in the U.S. in the early 50s, resulted in legislation that outlawed discrimination in employment on the basis of race, religion, gender, age, marital status and, eventually, sexual preference. Protecting the environment came to the fore with strictly enforced legislation mandating clean air and clean water. Consumerism – the consumer’s right to know – affected how products and services could be described and advertised. Safety became a major issue -- both safe products and occupational safety. Manufacturers became legally liable for injuries and deaths -- occupational as well as those that could be attributed to design faults or failure to provide warnings for potentially hazardous products.

In the United States in the mid-60s, such organizations as the EEO (Equal Employment Opportunity), OSHA (Occupational Safety and Health Agency), the Consumer Products Safety Commission and the Environmental Protection Agency came into being at the Federal level. Soon, they were replicated at state and even local levels. Their equivalents have found their way into governmental structures worldwide where, not infrequently, standards are more stringent than in the United States.

The 60s was also the decade when what we now call NGOs (non-government organizations) began to multiply – and gain power as an influence in the legislative/regulatory process. In both Europe and the United States, and even in countries like Korea and Indonesia, groups of like-minded people came together on issues ranging from protecting the environment, human rights and driving while intoxicated.

The tsunami of regulation and legislation in the 60s spawned the term “corporate social responsibility,” the subject of a talk I made at the Columbia Graduate School of Business in March 1973. It was an aspect of business with which CEOs had little experience and, at the outset, low tolerance. Almost invariably, they turned to their public relations officers for guidance. In words I have used over the past quarter century, the public relations function in many corporations escalated from the “how do I say it?” to “what do I say?” and, eventually, to “what do I do?”