Wednesday, June 5, 2013

I don't think PRSA will mind if I post an article I wrote for the current issue of Public Relations Tactics on my little old blog (commercial for them: every PR person should join). Here's some reasonable advise as I reflected on my @two-year adventure as an online graduate student in the Health Communications program at Boston University.

Michael

Public Relations Tactics — Current Issue

Career commitment: Make a healthy choice when considering an advanced degree

By Michael M. Durand

0 Comments

June 4, 2013

Increasingly, PR professionals with decades of experience in health care are considering returning to school to obtain master’s degrees in communications — degrees perhaps planned for earlier days before families and clients.

With the advent of online and distance education programs, universities have made it more realistic for PR professionals to study for a master’s while still earning their paychecks.

“Our program does indeed draw students who are well into their careers,” says Dr. John Lammers, director of the Health Communications Online Master’s Program at the University of Illinois. “In fact, that makes them the right students. They are not seeking a new career or trying to decide what to do with their lives; they are committed to a career in some aspect of health care and fairly well aware of what our program can do for them.”

For mid- to late-career practitioners, there are seven items to consider before investing $35,000-$45,000, which is what a degree like this commonly costs.

1. Be clear about your goals.

For younger professionals, the common maxim — and one that universities widely proclaim — is that a master’s degree will help advance your career. That’s true for people in their twenties, but for older PR professionals, an advanced communications degree will not necessarily lead to a promotion.

With that said, we all know that the PR field is ever evolving and yesterday’s cutting-edge approaches are tomorrow’s boring old tricks. Graduate communications degrees allow people to look at the communications arts in new ways and challenge assumptions that may have congested their work for years.

Graduate study may help people narrow their focus in areas such as public policy and health care, or understand how marketing communications now intertwines with public affairs and policy.

For instance, health care — particularly pharmaceutical public relations — is evolving from a traditional “consumer pull model” (with special events and celebrities) to a model in which public health strategies, integrated marketing and pharmacoeconomics are increasing in importance. The Affordable Care Act will accelerate this trend, with its emphasis on outcomes research and data analysis.

It’s important to study the curriculum before making an enrollment decision. While programs may sound similar, the emphasis may be different between schools. Make sure to discuss this with an enrollment advisor. Better yet, ask to speak to a current or former student.

2. Discover if you are comfortable working in an online atmosphere.

While some part-time programs require weekend or weeklong attendance on campus every semester, many popular programs are totally online.

For older students who may not feel comfortable watching a lecture on a computer screen or who want to engage in a spirited face-to-face discussion with a professor, online learning might not be the best option. But for most, adapting to the pixels is not a problem. Some may wonder how robust a program can be if you never meet professors or fellow students, but it’s not as difficult as it sounds.

“The most pleasant surprise is how easy it is to build an online community of scholars,” says Steve Quigley, associate professor of public relations and co-director of Boston University’s Online Master of Science in Health Communicationprogram.

“Contrary to what some think, online learning is anything but isolating. The discussions between students and professors are as robust as anything I’ve found in a BU classroom and, sometimes, students are even more thoughtful and provocative when they communicate online.”

3. Be realistic about the time commitment.

Admissions counselors suggest that you set aside 25 hours per week for studies in an online program. While some courses may require less, there aren’t any shortcuts for serious students. If you can’t make the commitment, then it’s better to enroll at another time.

“A successful student must learn to manage his or her day so that work deadlines are met, term papers are written beautifully and children don’t feel short-changed,” says Kajsa Haracz, who is wrapping up her online master’s in journalism and mass communications at Kent State University. “That means less television, less socializing and, perhaps for me, less sleep. I just keep reminding myself that the goals are worth the sacrifice.”

4. Make school your client.

Successful students are disciplined students. You should approach schoolwork as you would a client assignment. Organize your time to finish assignments ahead of schedule and with the clarity and precision that a client would expect. It might not be fun to wake up at 5 a.m. to finish a term paper, but remember that you likely wouldn’t hesitate to get up early for a client.

As you would with a client engagement, you should go above and beyond what’s expected with class projects. Add your own commentary — supported by facts — to demonstrate that you are not simply completing an assignment, but also thinking about the issue or problem at hand. Often, you will find that you can discretely apply real-life client situations to your schoolwork.

5. Ensure that your family and your boss are behind your decision.

Online education means spending some time after dinner and on weekends doing readings and written assignments. You need to be sure this is the right thing for you, but the support of your partner and your children is vital as well.

You also have to assess a program’s impact on your professional life. Can you continue your daily responsibilities while tackling school? Most employers are supportive, but it’s worth double-checking before embarking on this adventure.

6. Be a mentor, not a know-it-all.

It’s possible that in one or two classes, you will know more about the subject than the professor. Be careful about that.

Graduate programs are designed to let ideas fly and for students to thoughtfully research topics and express their views with clarity and organization. It’s OK — and expected — to challenge assumptions, but it isn’t in anyone’s best interest for the veteran professional to hint, “I already know that.”

Sometimes exams can be exasperating and assignments are reminiscent of what you wrote decades ago. But remember, you are in school to learn, not to prove how smart you are.

PR pros who return to school can be great mentors to younger students. Online programs attract people with a range of interests and experience. So the younger kids will invariably love having your expertise and will rely on your wisdom with challenging class problems.

7. Be part of a global community.

Finally, you should be comfortable being part of a community of scholars, with students hailing from across the United States and other countries. A key attribute of online learning is students’ close collaboration on case studies and class projects, regardless of distance.

Barbara Noble, a 2011 graduate of the BU master’s program, underscored this, saying her fellow students were not only a great help in studying for exams and working together on group projects but also “helped keep my morale up when things got rough. I made a lot of friends through the BU program and while we don’t see each other often, their support helps me even today.”

An online degree is not a hobby or project to tinker with when you have one or two extra hours to spare. It’s a massive commitment that will doubtlessly change your work patterns, sleep patterns and weekends for 18 months to two years. However, a graduate program can enrich your life in countless ways, giving you new energy, new perspectives and a fresh approach to your PR career.

Michael M. Durand was the founding director of Porter Novelli’s global health care practice and head of health care strategy for Ogilvy Public Relations. He recently completed his online master’s in health communications at Boston University.
Email: michaelmdurand at outlook.com

Comments

No comments have been submitted yet.

Webinars Now Included With PRSA Membership!

PRSA membership is more valuable than ever before. As a member, broaden your skill set with access to more than 50 free live and on-demand webinars that are planned for 2013.

Monday, May 13, 2013

After two grueling--okay, tough, not grueling-- years, I've wrapped up my Masters in Health Communications at Boston University. Next Saturday I "walk," along with the kids 30+ years younger than me. Well, as one says, better late than never.

I've come to the conclusion that there are few, if any, really great textbooks on public relations, marketing and health care; primarily because these fields are so dynamic that whatever is written is soon dated. Further, not many textbook writers are ballsy enough to be really provocative, which to me is the hallmark of a great educator.

That said, over the course of the program I did read some really excellent books and articles as part of my course work. Few were textbooks, per se. Here's my list of what was really great:

Best Readings from Boston University MS in Health Communications

Communications, PR and Marketing

Anderson, C. (2006). The long tail: Why the future of business is selling less of more. New York: Hyperion.

Bernays, E. (1923). Crystalizing public opinion. Brooklyn, NY: IG Publishing.

Haskett, J. I., Jones, T. O., Loveman, G. W., Sasser, W. E., & Schlesinger, L. A. (1994). Putting the service-profit chain to work. Harvard Business Review, (March-April), 164-174.

Hicks, N. J., & Nicols, C. (2012). Health industry communication: New media, new methods, new message. Sudbury, MA: Jones & Bartlett Learning.

Levy, S. (2011). In the plex: How Google thinks, works, and shapes our lives. New York: Simon & Schuster.

Linden, T. (2011). The New York Times reader: Health and medicine. Washington, D.C.: CQ Press.

Making health communication programs work: A planner's guide. (1989). [Bethesda, Md.]: U.S. Dept. of Health and Human Services, Public Health Service, National Institutes of Health, Office of Cancer Communications, National Cancer Institute.

Ogilvy, D. (1983). Ogilvy on advertising. New York: Crown.

Ries, A., & Ries, L. (2002). The fall of advertising and the rise of PR. New York: HarperBusiness.

Scott, D. M. (2011). The new rules of marketing & PR: How to use social media, online video, mobile applications, blogs, news releases, & viral marketing to reach buyers directly. Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons.

Public Health Policy

Altman, S. H., & Shactman, D. (2011). Power, politics, and universal health care: The inside story of a century-long battle. Amherst, NY: Prometheus Books.

Bayer, M., Merritt, D., & Galea, S. (2012). Salt and Public Health: Contested Science and the Challenge of Evidence-Based Decision Making. Health Affairs, 31(12), 2738-2746.

Gawande, A. (2012, August 13). Big Med. Can Hospital Chains Improve the Medical Industry? : The New Yorker. Retrieved January 13, 2013, from http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2012/08/13/120813fa_fact_gawande?printable=true

Goldhill, D. (2009, September). How American Health Care Killed My Father. The Atlantic. Retrieved January 19, 2013, from http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2009/09/how-american-health-care-killed-my-father/307617/

Mnookin, S. (2011). The panic virus: A true story of medicine, science, and fear. New York: Simon & Schuster.

Rettig, R. A. (2007). False hope: Bone marrow transplantation for breast cancer. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Starr, P. (1982). The social transformation of American medicine. New York: Basic Books.

Health Care

Bohmer, R., & Campbell, B. (2002). A Father's Love: Novazyme Pharmaceuticals. Harvard Business Review, October 22.

Groopman, J. E. (2004). The anatomy of hope: How people prevail in the face of illness. New York: Random House.

Hamermesh, R. G., & Gordon, R. (2010). Amylin Pharmaceuticals: Diabetes and Beyond. Harvard Business Review, March 1.

Mukherjee, S. (2010). The emperor of all maladies: A biography of cancer. New York: Scribner.

Pence, G. E. (2011). Medical ethics: Accounts of ground-breaking cases. New York, NY: McGraw Hill.

Topol, E. J. (2012). The creative destruction of medicine: How the digital revolution will create better health care. New York: Basic Books.

# # #

Wednesday, March 6, 2013

1.5 Cheers for the American Health Care System

It’s easy to pile on the dyspeptic American health care system... most everyone who follows health care has read or heard of the January Institute of Medicine report comparing U.S. health care with that in other developed nations. It’s the 1,000,234 study to suggest that if the Emperor isn’t undressed, he at least he caught a very bad cold: We rank 16^th-17^th in life expectancy, and fare much worse than our peer nations in infant mortality, injuries and homicides, AIDS, obesity, diabetes, heart disease and other health disorders. And for this privilege we pay an average of twice what other industrialized nations spend in GDP terms.

But there is an “on the other hand.” And it’s only fair to waive the stars and strips, however limply.

The United States health care system benefits from three traits that are largely unique to America: (1.) our world-class academic medical establishment, (2.) our commitment to government funding of science and (3.) an entrepreneurial chromosome that is the envy of all other countries. Fusing these together has helped create a medical enterprise that has delivered medical therapies benefiting tens of millions both in the United States and across the globe.

Simply put, no national matches the U.S. in the quality of medical education and the output of medical discoveries coming from academia. According to several sources, seven of the top ten medical colleges worldwide are American. Since 1983 more than fifty percent of Nobel Prizes in Medicine or Physiology have been awarded to Americans. And while governments in other countries fund medical research, no nation funds institutions such as our National Institutes of Health and National Science Foundation, both of which conduct their own research and underwrite university and community studies that have changed the face of medicine.

The biotechnology industry originated in the USA and is a grafting of academic research and venture capital that in the last thirty years has created more than 150 thriving companies with some, such as Amgen and Gilead, having market capitalization greater than traditional health care companies. More than half of medicines recently approved by the FDA were derived from processes initiated by the biotech industry. While some may downplay the importance of new technologies, you cannot tell a leukemia or colorectal cancer patient that targeted therapies aren’t important.

But still the question remains, “how can we be so progressive in the creation of health institutions that generate knowledge and discover medicines, and so remedial in delivering the results of these outputs?” The answer is complex and uniquely embedded in our national makeup.

Sunday, October 21, 2012

On the passing of Geroge McGovern---

The 1972 campaign, quixotic as it was, taught me the skills to be a reasonably decent public relations guy, and for that, coupled with the idealism of the age, a bevy of still close friends, and many, many memories make me to grateful to this iconic American leader.

Monday, October 15, 2012

Governor Romney on Health Care

Romney comments on his version of health reform in last week’s New England Journal of Medicine.

http://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMp1211516?query=TOC. Physicians must be disappointed he’s so facile, like he’s talking to an American Legion post.

Lots has been written generally about the Romney-Ryan jihad against the Affordable Care Act, but what is offered in its stead? A lot, actually, if you visit the Romney website (http://www.mittromney.com/issues/health-care). The problem is, most of his proposals nip around the edges of what’s needed in health care reform, and only offer decades-old Republican chestnuts that will not cut costs and do nothing to lend a hand to the millions of Americans, around 47 million it seems, that do not have access to health plans.

Here’s what in the Romney toolkit, with, of course, comments by moi.

• Block grant Medicaid and other payments to states—

Block grants surely mean rationing. I thought Republicans hated that.

• Limit federal standards and requirements on both private insurance and Medicaid coverage—

Doesn’t this mean “race to the bottom?” If the government does not establish standards, insurance

companies are free to establish restrictive policies and coverage that wouldn’t include Band-Aids.

• Ensure flexibility to help the uninsured, including public-private partnerships, exchanges, and subsidies

To date exchanges haven’t been very successful where they have been tried. Just what do they have in mind when they talk about public-private partnerships? Would these be any cheaper and more effective than the current system?

• Ensure flexibility to help the chronically ill, including high-risk pools, reinsurance, and risk adjustment

Guys, it’s pretty well established that high-risk pools have not worked. One can participate, but the costs are extraordinary. How is this helpful?

• Offer innovation grants to explore non-litigation alternatives to dispute resolution

Who is this helping? Certainly not patients. But fine, let’s see the meat on the bones of this old GOP principle.

• Cap non-economic damages in medical malpractice lawsuits

Same as above.

• Empower individuals and small businesses to form purchasing pools

This actually isn’t a bad idea. There’s no reason organizations cannot do this now. What Romney needs to do, however, is demonstrate how he’d be willing to actually encourage purchasing pools. And what they’d cost.

• Prevent discrimination against individuals with pre-existing conditions who maintain continuous coverage

Well, duh. This is one of the central goals of the ACA. Glad to know the Reps are on board. The problem of course, is that if the ACA is repealed, Congress would be glaceriously slow in adding a benefit such as this to whatever bill they try to replace the ACA with. It may be years before this common-sense provision is restored. Further, the good governor means to cover people who have previously enjoyed insurance. If you haven’t for a time, tough luck.

• Facilitate IT interoperability.

Sure. Why not? Everyone in on board with this.

• End tax discrimination against the individual purchase of insurance

I drink to this. But would the COST of such coverage be unavoidably high?

• Allow consumers to purchase insurance across state lines

What is it about state lines that enamors the GOP? Will it mean that insurance companies will relocate to states with the least restrictive laws for them?

• Unshackle HSAs by allowing funds to be used for insurance premiums

I thought we weren’t going to talk about “shackles” anymore? In any event, how does this save money for the consumer and the health care system?

• Promote "co-insurance" products

Okay, I give up. What are these?

• Promote alternatives to "fee for service"

Fine and dandy. But the ACA makes very specific recommendations in its 2,000 pages about how this is to be accomplished. Is Romney going to throw out what’s already in place, replacing it with who-knows-what?

· Encourage "Consumer Reports"-type ratings of alternative insurance plans

Why not rating all health plans. Oh, doesn’t Consumer Reports and other organizations already do this?

Michael M. Durand

Me