In a predictable financial ricochet, analysts and the vox populi went into overdrive, as if to prophesize for a reactionary stock slide to start, a company in jeopardy quick to follow. Sure, this leadership jolt forced the stock price to slide a bit, but as the Wall Street Journal asserted, the dip was not a self-fulfilling prognostication of doom. In fact, the response to Apple’s record earnings news that immediately followed Jobs’ announcement is clear: the iconic brand’s future transcends the ingenuity and potent vision of its founder. More to the point, building a sturdy business demands that the brand be bigger than the leadership personalities within it. It must be built to be resilient to change and speculation, while positioned to harness the opportunity in any transition. And that’s what new or interim C-executive leadership creates for any organization: a reflective pivot point between change and future opportunity.

There are exceptions to consider of course. Would the new OWN Television Network be viable without its namesake leader? Is the Trump Empire sustainable without someone from the famous family at the top?

But as we know from IBM and Gerstner, GE and Welch, and even Microsoft and Gates, durable companies build their business equity around more than their top executive evangelist, innovator and dealmaker. The brand promise must be evident across every touchpoint, from the delivery of customer service to the reliable product quality, and every time there is any interaction between the company and its stakeholders.  In today’s open media society where everyone has a microphone and a soapbox via Twitter, blogging and online chat forums, organizational communications fitness must be maintained so that your brand is continually cultivating both disciples and champions across its workforce and customers.

And so as CEO Jobs lightens his workload, look for Apple to move forward doing what he taught it to do best: innovating more cool products that we didn’t know we needed, but now have been conditioned to expect. Today Apple is freed to move beyond the boundaries that Jobs’ daily presence imposed. His legacy will endure in Apple’s purposeful inventions of more transformative consumer and workplace technologies. Its just that his employee crew of thousands doesn’t need Jobs, per se, to be the the day-to-day skipper of S.S. Apple in order to follow the bold course he charted and leaves in their charge. Just as when we purchase an Apple product, we are choosing the company’s overarching brand promises of function, fun and high quality– not the man who stewarded his big ideas from imagination to commercial reality.

Yet an attorney often doesn’t draft contract language around the conversation that sets a commitment for the success of the engagement at its outset: does the client seek a vendor or a partner? And does the consultant know its own dominating trait as defines how it performs best? Do the client and consultant have compatible values, work styles and expectations? What does each organization stand for going into the relationship? What impact does each enterprise intend to make beyond their respective core missions and how will this be reflected in how they work together?

Within the infinite business spectrum that is outsourced consulting there is a place for both of these organizational personalities. But often the word “partner” is bantered about so casually that it risks implications and assumptions largely unexplored in the process of binding a consultant and client at the outset of their association.

To achieve a business DNA match it’s imperative to understand these distinct organizational personalities and to have the big conversation that predicts if your engagement will be a match or a miss. Consider these perspectives:

A vendor consultant provides an important specialized service for which their expertise, speed, facility and value proposition create advantage for their client. There is a transactional quality to the way an outsourced vendor works, providing one-off services like printing or making widgets to a specific work spec. The focus is on the end deliverable, and there is little exposure of the work process that reveals any evolved thinking prior to the final outcome. The vendor is not a member of the inner circle of the client. In fact, they are kept deliberately at arms length and work independently.

A partner consultant suggests a more ongoing, future-facing connection between them and their client. The client executives are willing to open up about the inner workings of their enterprise, their true goals or vulnerabilities and are generous in sharing concerns, strategy and success with their consultant. There is a sense of unity and trustful collaboration with a borderless interplay between both sides. By contributing their knowledge to key decisions, the partner behaves as an extension of their receptive client organization.

So how do both parties get what they want and expect for mutual success and satisfaction?

In a word– communication.

While experience has taught the importance of this conversation early in the new business dialog, its important to revisit this topic at the outset of any program planning or whenever a key leadership change occurs on either side. Both parties need to know: does the client want a vendor or a partner? How do those organizational behaviors differ? How is work to be developed and information shared? What is the expected interplay between both sides? And the consultant needs to self-assess its own organizational character and determine its preference to be a vendor or a partner. This is essential in order for the consultant to know if its work approach and driving values jive with a client’s expectations and work style.

Here are ten questions to start this conversation:

1. Do you invite unsolicited observations or insights to inform your business?  Is constructive criticism or probing back and forth welcome?
2. Are you willing to view documents or work product in a raw, developmental state when doing so achieves speed and joint input?
3. What is your humor threshold? How informal can we be with you? Can we be authentic when we interact?
4. Do you want us to hold strictly to the boundaries of our work spec? Can we propose value-add ideas without being viewed as overreaching? Are you interested in hearing about conferences, networking venues or other events that are outside of our primary scope of work but which might be relevant to your professional or even personal pursuits?
5. Will we each be equally committed to each other’s successes, to include being an ambassador for our respective brands?
6. Do you believe that doing good in the broader society is good for business? Does your organization dedicate assets to civic causes or social philanthropy?
7. Are we both willing to invest extra time in this engagement to be successful?
8. What are your benchmarks for our performance beyond quantitative metrics? Do you fund mechanisms for measurements against our program goals?
9. Do we understand and accept the respective personalities and temperaments of our principals?
10. Are your senior executives accessible to us and do they buy in to our engagement’s goals?

This doesn’t have to be a difficult conversation and it shouldn’t be since you’re in the process of setting a joint course of business engagement to achieve favorable outcomes. But like any formative relationship, both parties need to know what the other one wants, what makes them tick, and how best to mesh communications styles. Effective work planning needs to go deeper than mapping a tactical calendar based on strategy– it needs to establish both the tempo and permissible content to guide how ideas and work product will be shared between a like-minded client and consultant. What questions would you add to this list?

As a consultant or a client, we often get to the point where we feel exasperated and can relate to being Don Draper, or wanting to be him— but if we communicate up front we can avoid these pet peeves to ensure greater success for our partnership. Had Don applied these 20 Tips, maybe that meeting would have had a better outcome for all.

Dear [Pick One] Client/Prospect/Tire Kicker:

1. Our collaboration depends on your openness to new ideas.
2. Corporate citizenship is an essential element of brand distinction.
3. My knowledge and time are my stock in trade. Please don’t look for free ideas.
4. A budget is the fuel of your marketing engine: the more you have, the more traction can be achieved.
5. I will not compromise my credibility or relationships for your benefit.
6. Deadlines exist for a reason.
7. Don’t take yourself too seriously.
8. The best partnership is one we both enjoy and trust.
9. Micromanagers suppress inspiration and creativity. They add time to the process and delay the outcome.
10. Your failure to plan or respond should not create an emergency for me.
11. Smart organizations invest in a crisis readiness program; shortsighted ones often pay for not having one in place.
12. Promises of “future lucrative opportunity” are of no value to my business today.
13. An advisor is your partner and the Golden Rule should apply.
14. Compressing the time you leave me to do your work doesn’t reduce the scope or its cost– it creates needless strife and adds the potential for mistakes.
15. It’s a small world. Remember that reputation is everything.
16. We want to measure the impact of our work. You’ll need to help.
17. We inform and educate stakeholders. There is no “spin” involved.
18. Communication is two parts listening, one part speaking.
19. Someone needs to own our engagement; assign an accessible decision maker.
20. A ‘thank you’ goes a long way and costs nothing.

Now the trick becomes how to convey these expectations to your client or consultant, depending on where you sit. Is this familiar territory? Do you have a favorite peeve? What are your ideas for setting grounded expectations?

Language provides the artful notes through which a brand’s song is sung. In PR and marketing the authors of websites to news releases spend hours to nail the elements of engaging narrative to elicit the desire action in response. Every client seems to need to be explained that just because a document is considered short, that doesn’t mean it was easier to write. Just ask a slogan copywriter.

Generational divides are revealed by the choice of words. How many us have parents who told us not to disrespect another person (yes, def: informal verb: to show a lack of respect for)? The ‘app’ is now universally accepted lexicon (catch up online Scrabble). Professions take license or create new ownership of definitions, such as ‘derivative,’ the speculative investment product assailed as a contributing force of Wall Street’s collapse. In my work universe we ‘incentivize’ consumers, work to generate ‘buzz,’ ‘leverage’ our experience or ‘dialog’ with our clients. A colleague recently asked me to ‘bulletize’ my contribution to a joint document. Hmmm…

So when sitting at a board meeting recently and a person of an even lower hip quotient than I used a word that popped, I found myself asking: am I colossally behind the power curve of au courant lingo or is this another new colloquialism? And more to the point, what does it mean, what does it say and how is it properly used?

Such was the case for ‘administravia.’ Kapow! That word held my attention and compelled curiosity. In its context—a board meeting discussion about a nonprofit’s office operations—it didn’t need explanation, but in its delivery, complete with the flowing gesticulating hands of the speaker, it commanded consideration. It is symphonic, interesting and compelled some in this assembled group to pick up iPhones and Blackberrys to source online etymology and dictionary sites for edification. So as not to disturb the discussion or reveal naiveté, we briskly exchanged texts for having found a new word, not with the authority of Miriam-Webster mind you, but on UrbanDictionary.com and FreeDictionary.com.

Eureka! Like app and buzz before it, it will only be a matter of time before it is elevated to official American English.

And here’s what most amusing: its definition is not exactly a captivating destiny. One usage describes: “mindless bureaucratic tasks imposed on workers in order to crush the soul and prevent one from achieving anything useful or fulfilling.” The second is a little less stinging: “the tiresome but essential details that must be taken care of and tasks that must be performed in running an organization.”

Yuck. The less familiar version was a tad more appealing. Even if the age-old reference to administration and this newfound, more scintillating version end up being on the same longitude and latitude of an organization, the deliberate choice of the distinctively artful word succeeded in piquing the interest of the audience. And that’s what language in an era of 140-character tweets, competitive brand slogans, and pithy pitch letters to editors and employer prospects must do.

It’s hard not to be ‘mad’ for administravia. And now it’s in my working vocabulary. Look for it in a future document or discussion.

Do you have a favorite new word, updated usage for a word, or an accepted definition you’d like to see go away? On that list my first choice is the slang connotation for: ‘spin.’

Clarity client New France, the acclaimed diversified Boston-based restaurant group that includes L’Espalier, Sel de la Terre, and Au Soleil Bakery & Catering has asked us to assist in creating introductions that will lead to finding an exceptional, self-propelled marketing communications director for their organization. This is a hands-on position with a great deal of collegial expectation and professional exposure. This role is a critical pivot for the entire company and is being vacated by our dream client liaison who is leaving to pursue graduate studies. The fantastic rhythm that has been our rapport is a proven formula of success that New France and Clarity will be looking to continue. While honored to participate in this search, it’s a responsibility we take seriously.

The ideal candidate has at least 5-years of rigorous employer and agency experience and fits the expanded job description that follows this narrative. The base salary skews to restaurant industry norms but the professional upsides are obvious—you are working within an exceptional organization of international renown that doesn’t view these accolades with self-importance. All applications will be acknowledged; no calls please. Qualified applicants should send a PDF resume labeled with your name and companion, labeled cover letter that includes hyperlinks to two (2) work and writing samples that you explain in the letter no later than 5PM EST on Friday April 23, 2010 to: marcom@lespalier.com. Initial interviews will be conducted in May with finalists invited for in-person interviews. There may be a writing and quick design exercise for finalists. The hiring target date is mid-late May for cross training. New France is an EEOC compliant employer.

This is a great professional gig… working with quality people who create a distinctly special dining experience. They make the work fun.

Click here to download the expanded job description.

It’s too bad for the stakeholders in Tiger-marketed brands that my original commentary (Tiger’s Quadruple Bogey: News & Views, Dec. 10, 2009) was in any way prophetic. Tiger’s failure to get out ahead of the avalanche of “disclosure de jour” underscores the importance of being forthright, and his “failure to manage” left a telltale financial wake.

Published viewpoints on effective crisis management and Tiger’s scenario specifically are varied and strongly held. Among the many I found, Bob Conrad’s blog exchange illustrates this polarization. I fall into the Shel Holz and Jennifer Windrum camps and back that opinion with more than 25 years of experience in guiding organizations’ toughest communications during change, leadership transition or crisis.

The good news for college students and practitioners is that the legacies of brands rebounding from crisis — Tylenol’s tampering and latest recall, Perrier’s contamination, Enron’s implosion, the devastating Bonfire collapse at Texas A&M, and the bizarrely unsteady response by Toyota to claims of unpredictable mechanics — provide compelling instructional tools. These are all stories of substantial economic, health and social impact; and they are all reasons why the Public Relations Society of America identifies crisis counsel as an essential competency within its industry professional accreditation.

There are ample stories of redeemed public figures that pave an optimistic path for Tiger. In the meantime, the gaze of the PR industry and university faculties are trained on his newest reputation advisor: White House alumnus cum sports PR consultant Ari Fleischer (see ESPN opinion), whose counsel must have factored the Master’s return and interviews.

Like many, I now have Tiger fatigue. But as Nielsen viewership data will likely show, I will be among the millions worldwide who will be tuned into the Masters, in part because I play golf and always watch some of this event (note: I didn’t take the leap to say “I’m a golfer”) but also I want to see this most public reputation business story play out.

Will you be watching too?

It’s not.

Your audio signature is a compelling, interesting statement that you customize to engage the interest of your listener. If you know the four most important aspects of your audio signature, you’ll find it works harder to achieve your networking or job search goals.

1. Content

• All effective speeches begin with notes. Talking about oneself requires the ability to be authentic, to know your distinguishing personal brand attributes, and then to use artful language that succinctly conveys your story. Sit down and create that list—what you are, and what you’re not. Know your personal brand and own it.
• Memorable stories are unique. If you can plug in someone else’s name into your soliloquy, you aren’t using the right words.
• That being said, an audio signature is a “less is more” proposition. Brevity is essential for success. Before you think you’ve got ten minutes to talk, remember how this term got its name—a short elevator ride between two floors to make a first impression and to open a door. Anything longer than 25 words is too long.

2. Relevance

• Know your audience. If you’re talking to a pharmaceutical executive and you’re a software patent attorney looking to create new connections for your clients, your introduction needs to go beyond: “I’m an attorney” which is a closed statement that is too generic. Connect your story back to that of the listener—“I provide intellectual property solutions to your industry. I’m sure we know some of the same people,” or “you probably know our work.”
• Study your potential audiences and know who will be at your meeting, interview, conference or class so you can tailor your audio signature to best relate to them.  Beyond the published speaker list, a conference often has a registration roster that can be secured or members affiliated with the host organization whose attendance could be presumed. With tools like LinkedIn and Twitter, its a missed opportunity to not pave the way for a brief yet meaningful in-person exchange by mining these resources, reaching out via email in advance, and then have your practiced audio signature ready for saying hello.

3. Delivery

• Nothing kills interest faster than a flat delivery. Charisma counts—it’s the centerpiece of any good presentation, including an initial passing introduction.
• Have direct eye contact.
• Practice, practice and practice. Consider your shower your elevator. Try your story on friends and colleagues. Ask people how they would describe you to see if you are missing something or need to do a better job of educating your ambassadors.

4. Call to Action

• The purpose is to open a door for a future conversation. Use open-ended language: “I’d like to follow-up with you at a future time to chat about our common interests” or “I’ve wanted to meet you for some time, I’ve heard about you by reputation and more than one colleague has suggested that I contact you.”
• Nothing opens a door faster than flattery.

If you think beyond what you “do” to the unique, relevant solutions you provide, and practice that story continually in all networking venues, be they social or business, your audio signature will become yours. And it will work harder for you.

It was the ultimate crescendo of the Vancouver 2010 Winter Olympics: the USA v. Canada’s skate for the Men’s Gold Medal Hockey title. By any estimation, it an exciting game, especially at the 00:24.4 mark.

But the game-time dialog by game-time prognosticators and then by post-game armchair analysts with keyboards shows the migration between spirited opinions and vitriol. Who knew that the much anticipated Winter Olympics Men’s Hockey finale was really a referendum on US Healthcare Reform?  The slippery slope extended far beyond the snow-covered Alpine downhill courses at the Vancouver 2010 Winter Olympics and went straight to the halls of the US Congress.

Q: Did the US or Canada “win” the 2010 Winter Olympics?

@jeffschmuck: Canada – most gold medals ever won by a country at the Olympics. Yep, we’re the best.

shepdiz: I’m not really into Olympics, but I’m glad USA won most medals ever in history of Winter Olympics! Boo socialism! Yay freedom & capitalism!

WSAU: Winter Olympics are over. USA had most medals: 9-gold, 15-silver, 13-bronze; but Germany, Canada had more gold

Q: Was Team USA’s Silver Medal in Hockey (men’s or women’s) a referendum on US healthcare?

@OTOOLEFAN : Hey Canada: You may have beat us in hockey, but our health care system…oh wait… Nevermind. Kudos. #hcr #p2

@Futfanatico Ice hockey requires the broadest of shoulders and a will of cast iron. Public healthcare produces neither.

ZachWiIson: I don’t care. We have better healthcare. Good luck getting to a dentist in Canada. That and hockey shall make them a toothless nation.

@JustinFarley: Do you know why #Canada is so good at #hockey? Two words: “government” and “healthcare.”(no room 4politics in #Olympics)

@jdonels: I feel sorry for Cana-duh and their crappy public option #hcr. I am willing to let them have their gold medal. #tcot #hockey #tlot #usa

@Joy__Hart: Now #Canada beat us twice first with #healthcare. And now in #hockey! #hcr #hc10 #p2 #olympics

skooks: If you’re thinking about making a joke connecting Olympic hockey and national healthcare, please know you are not the first.

And yours truly: @loringbarnes Separate the #Olympics hockey outcome from #HCR. #US taxpayers spend $93M on Congressional salaries alone, but they aren’t doing their jobs.

Q: Can we find common ground? Can we agree on some facts?

TruthCry: So pleased US won the most Winter Olympic overall medals (ever), while our gracious host neighbor Canada won the most gold medals (ever)!

Kate_U: Awesome Winter Olympics, North America! Canada most gold medals & Team USA with most overall medals in a single winter Olympics

hurricanedc: Apparently Canada got the most gold medals! And the US got the most medals overall! Hehe, love being Canadian by law and American at heart.

There are communications lessons in the success of Team USA that appear timely for the US Congress:

1)    Be good sports.

2)    Always play by the rules.

3)    Work as a team.

4)    There can be winners and winners.

5)    Do more with less.

6)    Competition is healthy.

7)    Engage us citizens, we’re not spectators.

The Winter Olympics’ cross-border friendly bravado contrasts sharply with the polarization and partisanship that is defining the important issue of fair, transparently constructed, American healthcare reform. But unlike the Olympics: healthcare reform is no game.

Hearty congratulations to Canada, both as warm hosts and terrific athletes. Hurrah Team USA! You did us very proud.  US Congress, are you listening?

P.S.: Which #US #WinterOlympics athlete will be on the @Wheaties_Fuel cereal box?

VOTE HERE (view the tally): http://twtpoll.com/a086q6

But no PR professional worth their salt would have allowed their client to hide out for three months pondering their crisis turnaround while watching their lucrative sponsors and customers defect in a groundswell of public animosity and disappointment. One has to assume that Tiger Woods was again his own boss and that the executives of Nike and Electronic Arts held their collective breaths at 11AM EST as they observed his tightly choreographed apology (read their response here).

“I thought the rules didn’t apply to me” was a theme throughout his empathy-drenched mea culpa, presented in a tightly controlled venue with only friends and (presumably) favorable media in attendance.

Therein lies the chasm in the credibility Tiger Woods seeks to reclaim.

He missed the mark for understanding that the “rules” for Tiger Woods, a global marketing icon whose very image propels or sinks companies and network ratings, ARE different. Take note: every major TV network (including YouTube and TMZ) broke into regularly scheduled broadcasts for this man and his statement. Does that sound like this was a regular guy with a regular story?

Tiger, if you truly understand that you don’t “get to play by different rules” then the timing and journalist protocol for your public statement would have been different; your police interaction would probably have been different as well.  Stacking your room called your sincerity into question. Being indignant about the media’s incessant speculation rings hollow when you left them to create the story you failed to correct. Your PR advisors and your own branding instinct should have told you that YOU extended this story, and did not shorten it.

Tiger, must we restate the obvious: You are a public figure. We can all agree that we don’t have a right to know your private marital conversations. As you said, your aggrieved (appropriately and elegantly absent) spouse summed up the reality of any executive crisis: “My real apology will not come in the form of words, it will come from my behavior over time.”

And now the TV networks, corporate sponsors, and the golf industry will move forward. America is kind to redemption, but loathe to hypocrisy.

Which will this be?

Evidently he either hasn’t availed himself of this counsel, or he’s not listening. Meanwhile advisors, corporate sports marketing sponsors and sideliners must wince as his compounding implosion becomes a textbook case in how NOT to handle a crisis.  For such a public person whose billionaire star power has been built on the foundations of crisis management – preparedness, readiness, practice and precision execution – his failure to step forward and chart a turnaround is instructive for companies of all sizes.  Here are some four textbook crisis management lessons that this sad saga illustrates:

1) Hiding does not make the story go away: Tiger’s conspicuous absence has only worsened the negative hit to his reputation and fueled the “gotcha” media.  TV commentators are creating the facts and newsrooms are left to replay the damaging footage of his smashed SUV, a growing montage of his alleged paramours, and most recently, a new EMT call to his home complete with telltale ambulance run.  The media, including the likes of celebrity spotlight TMZ, haven’t been furnished with anything to replace this damaging content.

2) Public figures retain some privacy, but not all of it: Sorry Tiger, but your colossal net worth is grounded in global public trust, your stellar golf performance and your image of infallibility and decorum.  Companies like PepsiCo’s Gatorade and Gillette have put their brands and customer loyalty line on in your name.  When your conduct failed to uphold those expectations, the public looks for you to make the case for why fans and brands should stand by you.  A website posting feigning media “victim” does not erase the ink of a contractual endorsement conduct clause or the shock of your uncharacteristic alleged transgressions. In the short term Nike may seem to be turning a deaf ear but your actions portend consequential decisions for their marketing spend. Customers will respond by closing their wallets.  Expect more sponsor fallout.

3) No crisis is local: Contrary to the enduring mantra of legendary House Speaker Thomas P. “Tip” O’Neill, what happens in Florida or at any school, corporate building or country will not stay there. This reality requires a crisis response that incorporates the information flow to all stakeholders, in this case, state emergency response agencies, media that follows Tiger Woods or has latently joined this story juggernaut, or global brand and tournament marketers with attachments to him.  The court of public opinion is borderless and powerful.

4) To take control of this story only Tiger Woods can (and should) come forward: in the meantime he should have one authorized spokesman to speak on his behalf.  His deafening silence without proxy representation is putting off D-Day with a marquee interviewer, for which he should be expertly coached in order to respond to the obvious, discomforting questions.  Until he sits for an interview, the media will create the story by conjecture. American forgiveness is well known– just ask Martha Stewart, Michael Milken and even Elliott Spitzer.  The same disciplined practice known to Tiger in golf is what is required for an effective crisis turnaround.  He should work with a PR expert with crisis experience to help him better organize his thoughts, and deliver them with palpable sincerity.  A rigorous media training session is unavoidable. The choice of the interviewer is equally important and should be well reasoned with advisors (my suggestion is ABC News/GMA anchor Robin Roberts).

With every day that passes status quo, more endorsement dollars will be lost and cynicism toward Tiger Woods will increase.  NBC’s enduring lampoon show Saturday Night Live wasted no time in broadcasting a skit that mocked him. Stock values and revenues of his sponsors are at risk. Managing a crisis means that the newsmaker steps forward in a timely way, takes responsibility, and demonstrates through word and deed that the future will not repeat the past.  CEOs in companies without a crisis plan on the shelf should take heed—Tiger’s skill in crisis management thus far has surprisingly not matched his golf prowess.  How long will his sponsors let this go on?

Note: Loring Barnes, managing principal of Clarity Communications Group, has provided crisis communications counsel and media training to companies, CEOs, and senior executives for 25 years. She is Accredited by the Public Relations Society of America (PRSA) and plays golf.