In the course of our work here helping small and mid-size companies determine their brand, decide on a competitive position and develop resonating messages, we’ve been invited to help several clients hire agencies to do the implementation. Sometimes it’s design, sometimes it’s advertising, but most often, it’s public relations. Why? Because PR is the only mechanism that creates word of mouth, visibility and credibility all in one fell swoop.

But what I’ve been seeing from your standard public relations agency lately is good old-fashioned press relations. I see a concerted effort to create publicity—cute contest ideas, publicity stunts, “news bureaus” and pitch calls. A lot of smile and dial.

What I do not see is a solid understanding of how this marketing/communication tool can be used to offer a competitive advantage to a company in today’s complicated communications environment. I don’t see an in-depth understanding of how the flow of information through trusted channels affects decision making. The issue here is that it used to be easy to get your arms around a trusted channel because it had a name, an address and an editorial director. It also had an operating strategy that was well known and incorporated a certain set of rules that both the “buyers” and the “sellers” lived by. Today’s trusted channels don’t have any of that. They are social networks that operate almost as living organisms and they overlap, operate in suspended animation and encompass the globe. There are no rules and no one is “in charge.”

Once upon a time, getting a “placement” in the New York Times would create a flurry of word of mouth and have a concrete effect on people’s buying decisions. The PR person’s job was relatively simple. PR pros built good relationships with reporters by sourcing information to them and often “scored” as a result. As journalism matured and evolved in the post-Watergate era, PR people learned how to adapt to a more difficult “placement” environment and learned how to influence the press by influencing their sources. But the press remained the cornerstone in a good public relations program.

Today, though, the PR job has expanded beyond pandering to journalists and influencing their sources. Today, PR professional have to understand people’s decision-making as a much more complex array of influences. Some are credible. Some are not. And it has become very difficult to tell the difference.

In this world, it’s public relations that must mature and evolve. PR professionals must become schooled in the complex array of influences on the public and come to understand how the flow of information through myriad channels affects decision making. They must also understand what factors induce trust in this environment. The PR job is a whole lot harder today.

Yet still I see PR agencies talking about pitch letters, news bureaus and publicity stunts to get the press interested in writing about their clients. Sure, they use the language: “blogs, pod casts and YouTube,” but they are clueless as to what to do with these developments. I’ve even heard them refer to these as “tools.” These are no more “tools” than the New York Times is a “tool” to be exploited at the hands of a publicity expert. They are channels of communication between and among social networks. They reveal access to communities. Nothing more. In this brave new world, it is up to the public relations profession to help companies reach their constituents. All of them. Not just the New York Times.

Looks to me like public relations still needs some redefining. Hmmmmm….