Experts Matter. Find Yours.
Connect for media, speaking, professional opportunities & more.
The management Knowledge Transfer Partnership (mKTP) with Beever and Struthers will help drive the firm’s digital transformation The 30-month programme will specifically aim to develop, embed and exploit smart data driven technologies It will enable the business to increase quality, productivity and capacity. Aston University has begun a management Knowledge Transfer Partnership (mKTP) with nationwide accountants and business advisors Beever and Struthers to help drive the firm’s digital transformation. A management Knowledge Transfer Partnership is built around identifying strategic management-based initiatives to increase business effectiveness and improve management practices. As part of the mKTP, led by Aston University in collaboration with Professor Brian Nicholson and Dr Sung Hwan Chai (Alliance Manchester Business School), Dr George Moyenda Salijeni (Aston Business School) and the team will conduct a comprehensive evaluation of Beever and Struthers' existing data systems. Following the assessment, specific methodologies will be proposed to ensure alignment between the mKTP and the firm's ongoing data systems. The 30-month programme will aim to develop, embed and exploit smart data driven technologies within the audit function, enabling the business to increase the quality, productivity and capacity to deliver additional insight and value to clients. Dr George Salijeni, a lecturer in accounting at Aston Business School and an expert in data analytics tools used in external audits and knowledge base supervisor in the mKTP, said: “This mKTP offers an opportunity to share and utilise knowledge and technical exposure which academics at Aston University and Alliance Manchester Business School have gained and generated over the years through undertaking multi-disciplinary research and engagements with practitioners and audit regulators on data driven technologies which include artificial intelligence. Potentially, this project generates insights, workflows which could impact and transform the way audits are performed by leveraging data driven analytics tools and models.” Michael Tourville, partner at Beever and Struthers, said: “Given that the business has been around for up to 125 years it is quite traditional in its approach, but we are now keen to embrace the opportunities that a truly digital transformation could offer. Although we are a firm with a long history, we are also an entrepreneurial business and are keen to grasp opportunities when we see them. This mKTP is all about giving our clients more insight and helping us navigate data far better too. The main improvements for us will come from increased efficiency and insight, but we will also be able to further improve the quality of the service we offer.” Professor Andy Lymer, head of the Accounting Department at Aston University, said: “Digital approaches to accounting are increasingly at the heart of how the accounting industry works – and therefore increasingly at the heart of what we teach and research related to this industry and its practices. This extremely innovative project will enable us to work with the partners in this programme to go in depth into an organisation exploring how the use of the latest developments in the use of digital tools such as advanced data analytics can further enhance the processes of audit. The experience and knowledge gained in this work will be brought back into the classroom for our students to benefit from also.”
COP27 should be turning point to switch from heating homes with fossil fuels Professor Patricia Thornley, was a presenter at COP26 in Glasgow She believes one year on there’s not enough progress to cut emissions from homes. One of the UK’s leading bioenergy experts has said COP27 should be a turning point to help UK consumers switch from heating their homes with fossil fuels. Professor Patricia Thornley, director of Aston University’s Energy and Bioproducts Institute (EBRI), was a presenter at COP26 in Glasgow last year. She leads the UK’s national bioenergy research programme, SUPERGEN Bioenergy hub. Her research focuses on assessing the sustainability of bioenergy and low carbon fuels. Professor Thornley believes that one year on, not enough has been done to encourage the public to cut down on the emissions their homes produce. The UK has the oldest housing stock among developed countries, with 8.5 million homes being at least 60 years old. That is despite COP26’s reaffirmation of the Paris Agreement goal of moving away from fossil fuels, and the call for stronger national action plans to reduce carbon dioxide emissions. She has welcomed initiatives to help some UK industries move towards net zero, but believes householders are not getting the same support, for example with help to insulate their homes more effectively. She said: “Responses to the energy crisis in which we find ourselves have been mixed. “Government initiatives such as funding feasibility studies for hydrogen from bioenergy (turning biomass into hydrogen whilst separating and capturing the carbon portion of the biomass) and other technologies are promising.” Professor Thornley adds: “The recent price hikes in petrol and natural gas highlight the extent to which the UK relies on fossil fuels. “Unlike some areas of industry, domestic consumers have been treated differently, and recent help with energy costs is arguably subsidising us to keep emitting carbon dioxide. “A more forward-thinking approach would have been to invest in tackling the root cause of the problem by addressing home insulation.” Professor Thornley is a fellow of the Royal Academy of Engineering, and recently gave evidence to the Environmental Audit Committee about the use of sustainable timber in the UK as an alternative fossil fuel.
What's next in Georgia's 2020 election saga?
All eyes are on Georgia once again, but this time it's not about an upcoming election. As we sort through the 2020 election aftermath that saw Georgia in a tug-of-war between lawyers, politicians and pundits, the actions a few important figures may now be coming to light. Rudy Giuliani, the former advisor to President Trump, may be in some serious trouble according to Augusta's leading political expert, Dr. Gregg Murray. "When politicians are involved, there are almost always political calculations," Murray said. "But there’s a lot of information suggesting there may be problematic behavior that he was heavily involved with. There are reports of investigations involving several possible Georgia law violations: solicitation of election fraud, making false statements to local officials, conspiracy, racketeering, violations of oath of office and involvement in violence or threats of violence, according to Voice of America." As for Sen. Lindsey Graham, he, too, has been summoned to appear and explain how he may or may not have attempted to influence the election outcome. A federal judge on Monday turned down Sen. Lindsey Graham’s bid to throw out a subpoena compelling him to testify before the Atlanta-area grand jury investigating Donald Trump’s effort to overturn the 2020 election. “[T]he Court finds that the District Attorney has shown extraordinary circumstances and a special need for Senator Graham’s testimony on issues relating to alleged attempts to influence or disrupt the lawful administration of Georgia’s 2022 elections,” U.S. District Court Judge Leigh Martin May wrote in a 22-page opinion rejecting Graham’s effort and sending the matter back to state courts for further proceedings. Politico, Aug. 15 According to Murray, defying the judge's request might be the likely choice for the senator. "It seems the Republican party is still clearly tied to Trump," Murray adds. "I don’t think he would be hurt politically by not showing up. It’s an interesting question if some people would hold it against him for showing up." This legal wrangling will be long and drawn out, so if you are covering this topic, let our expert help with your story. Dr. Gregg Murray is available to talk about the election audit and what it might mean for voters in Georgia and across the country. Murray’s research focuses on political behavior and psychology with specific interests in voter mobilization and turnout. He is also executive director of the Association for Politics and the Life Sciences. Simply click on Murray's icon to arrange an interview today.
With an estimated 1.5-million faculty in the US and a near 50,000 growth in UK-based academics in the last decade (to 225,000), universities and colleges have a whole range of interests and expertise on offer. In fact, despite rumours to the contrary, academia is a large and growing global ‘industry’. If you’re responsible for external relations, communications, marketing, civic engagement, knowledge exchange - or any other aspect of external engagement or “connectedness” in a university or college - then the ability to choose which faculty experts you selectively promote and publicise can be a very tough assignment. I’ve had first-hand experience with this. I was once in that very position - trying to keep up with the opportunities and the expectations afforded by 800 academics at just the one mid-sized UK institution where I worked. With the benefit of that firsthand experience and having since worked with more than 100 higher education institutions in the UK, Europe and North America, here are a few observations and also a few tips on how to organize your expertise: Approach #1: The Focus on Expertise Clusters An approach taken by some universities nowadays is to promote their expertise as a group of “grand challenges” or “beacons of excellence” - drawing together as many areas of research expertise under (usually) three or four headings. While identifying “token clusters” of expertise for focus and prioritisation may seem logical, this approach doesn’t really work. It may help with internal politics but it fails to generate enough precision to be relevant to various communities such as the media and industry. Approach #2: Selectively Promoting Key Experts One trap that universities can also fall into is to focus on a small group of academics who appear to be more suitable to promote. The reasoning for this approach is often driven by the need to have a manageable number for internal communications/press office staff to work with. The easy route to take is to just work with academics who are more keen to work with comms staff in promoting their work and who are already at ease in speaking to the media. Selection of experts on these factors, while important, isn’t the optimal way to build up the profile for the institution with key audiences. First off, this approach often doesn’t yield the diversity that audiences such as journalists and potential student and faculty recruits want to see represented. This approach will also miss the mark if it just plays to popular disciplines or hot topics. Being more inclusive to promote a wider range of disciplines and specialized topics is better value all round. Approach #3: The Faculty “Expertise Audit” I’ve seen institutions make many mistakes in positioning their faculty as experts, given it’s a proven way to differentiate brand, build profile and reputation. That’s why I’ve started to work with several universities on what I refer to as a “faculty expertise audit”. This brings a more structured process that helps prioritize key areas of research expertise and identify specialist experts. The audit also looks at the resources and overall capacity that universities have available to support an “expertise marketing” program that optimizes all these elements to significantly boost performance. Start with The Business Case for Expertise At the heart of this more structured, targeted audit approach is ensuring you are generating “return-on-investment” and “value-for-effort.” A good starting point is to ask: Where is the budget coming from? Where is current and expected demand for your programs? When starting this assessment, you have to think longer than a year out. Instead, look very hard and in detail at the next three to five years (the typical cycle of research investment and university strategies) and identify which expertise is most likely to solve the problems and consequential explorations that governments, industry, benefactors/donors, and funding agencies will want to support. I’m not saying that research areas without such sizable levels of predicted investment should be ignored - far from it - but we are in a competitive climate and universities now have to secure ‘orders’ (for applied and contracted expertise) that will ensure institutional sustainability and success. In turn, that success will allow investment in other areas that are socially vital but financially a weaker bet as regarded by funding sources. Having proven where research funding is most available, pressing and externally directed, then the audit is designed to identify and match the institution’s research talent to these requirements. These audits involve shortlisting, enlisting and then coaching the appropriate academic experts. The best results come from one-to-one sessions with academics which create buy-in and yield a more detailed marketing plan to leverage your experts. While more inclusive, this is an efficient process designed to create a “shared roadmap” for where the university and the academic both want to take their expertise. A large part of this roadmap then covers off other important activities such as creating a more discoverable and engaging online presence with enriched academic profiles that perform far better than the traditional “faculty directory.” Keeping online academic profiles fresh, content-rich, jargon-free, and compelling makes the job of expert ‘mining’ so much easier. Developing a sustained program of content with an organized lead generation process is also necessary. These extra steps are where many universities miss the mark. The result is a significant loss of inbound opportunities for research grants, consulting revenues, academic collaborations as well as local and global media coverage. I recently spoke with a Vice Chancellor of a prominent UK University who admitted that they as an institution deserved a failing grade when it came to promoting their faculty research achievements, saying that he “doubted any of their academics would be happy with the way their work was being promoted online.” This is an important aspect of the faculty audit. As a consultative process, it is non-threatening and we’re listening to staff and academics. That not only enriches the information the University has to promote its brand better, it also helps to enlist the support of the academic community who see that the university cares and that it is getting their input to put together a plan – both for the university and for individual academics. The academic is happy (they understand the value for them personally and for their institution); the University is happy (it is able to focus and prioritise its expertise in an evidence-based manner), and Communications and press office staff are happy (they have so more to work with in connecting the work of the University to a variety of local and global communities). The Benefits of A Faculty Audit Having completed many of these, I’ve seen very clearly, the results of a well run Faculty Audit process that without exception yield an excellent return on investment. Here are just some of the benefits to consider: Greater Insights: Gain a deeper understanding of the hidden strengths and opportunities within your academic ranks. Better Planning: A detailed report from a Faculty Audit enables a more strategic approach to planning where faculty research and expertise can support various programs within the University - such as industry engagement, media coverage and recruitment. Building Trust: When conducted by a third-party, a Faculty Audit is seen as more credible and less prone to perceptions of internal bias. More Engaged Faculty: Increased collaboration with faculty is gained through a more consultative process that builds “shared awareness” and enables more proactive support of their research. Increased Capacity: Producing more proactive content with faculty yields better results in terms of media coverage, research engagements, etc. Demonstrate Diversity: A better understanding of expertise that goes beyond the “usual suspects” to engaging a more diverse set of faculty to promote the University. News Coverage: Positioning your faculty and their research in a more relevant way aligns with the interests of the outside world and what's on the mind of outsiders. Less Stress: A more proactive, well structured plan helps everyone to synchronise activities better versus scrambling too much to meet deadlines in the “here and now.” Is a Faculty Audit Right for Your Institution? Here are some key considerations when evaluating the value of a Faculty Audit for your institution. You are ideally suited to undertake a faculty expertise audit if: You have a stretched workload where there's little capacity for proactive comms. You're tending to turn to the same academics for expert commentary in the media or elsewhere. You tend to get complaints (or mild mutterings) about not supporting academics enough. You don't have time to get to know the range of academic experts in your institution - especially new arrivals or eager early career academics. You've adopted an 'inside out approach' rather than one that engages with the interests of the outside world and what's on the mind of outsiders. There's weak management of expectations with the academic community - and a need for clarity and shared pathways for publicity. You're operating too much in the here and now and don't have the time to plan for future events, milestones and opportunities. You want to be more strategic in your comms and engagement - and make a real difference via attracting interest, income and investment. You don't have an integrated approach to comms (where content can be repurposed and recycled). You want more global reach and presence and can exploit digital tools to enable this. Additional Resources Academic Experts and the Media (PDF) This report, based on detailed interviews with some of the most media-experienced academics across the UK and United States draws on their experiences to identify lessons they can share in encouraging other academics to follow in their path. Download the UK Report Here Download the US Report Here The Complete Guide to Expertise Marketing for Higher Education (PDF) Expertise Marketing is the next evolution of content marketing. Build value by mobilizing the hidden people, knowledge and content you already have at your fingertips. This win-win solution not only gives audiences better quality content, but it also lets higher ed organizations show off their smarts. Download Your Copy Click Here for Additional Resources
How to Show Your Smarts: A Proven Approach to Expertise Marketing
If you’re operating in a knowledge-based industry, you’re in the business of selling expertise. Unfortunately, many organizations in these expert-rich sectors take an ad-hoc approach to planning and executing their expertise marketing initiatives. As a result, they often lack coordination across departments and fail to leverage valuable assets such as talent, content, technology and media channels. By following some simple rules, you will see significantly better results. It Starts with A Conversation First we need to talk about cross-team collaboration. Expertise marketing is a team sport, so it’s vital that your star players are ready. Throughout your organization, there are a broad range of people who are eager to support this type of initiative.Don’t focus too much on roles or seniority levels. At this stage, it’s about having candid discussions with the people around you and then expanding the conversation. You could start by discussing the value of expertise with stakeholders in your organization and sharing how it would help you meet your targets. Or you could reach out to department leads and team managers to get their insights and generate ideas. Most importantly, you need to get to know people outside of your immediate circle and discover the hidden talent within your organization. Sometimes the best results come from surprising places. The ExpertFile Approach As we go through the key elements of an expertise marketing program, you might find that you’re already following some of our best practices. However, when we start working with our clients, we often find that their expert content is disconnected and scattered across various teams and channels. If this sounds like you, that’s ok – you just need a bit of help putting the pieces together. Below, we’ve provided an overview of our proven approach and its alignment with the 5 key elements of expertise marketing: Strategy & Talent: The first step is to assess your expertise bench strength in your organization at various levels. Using a range of evaluation tools and techniques, we set out to identify any hidden expertise in your organization and establish what each expert can contribute. By engaging experts to share their expertise early on, we can define a strategy and open up doors for a range of high-quality content. Storytelling: Now, we need to establish your strengths and how we can best position your experts for your target audiences. Not only do we want to create stories that highlight your core offering, but we also need to showcase your experts in the context of breaking news and emerging issues. This ensures that you are always putting out timely and relevant content for high-value audiences like journalists, conference organizers and other media professionals. Digital Experience: Once you know which topics are best for your organization, we need to boost audience engagement with rich online experiences. We audit any existing channels and develop comprehensive “content footprints” for your experts. These footprints map out the future state of your expert content – such as new webpages, speakers’ bureaus, improved expert profiles, multi-media and/or social content assets. Search & Discovery: All the planning in the world won’t help you if your content isn’t visible. At this stage, we look to optimize your channels and maximize your reach with new and existing audiences. By publishing your expert content in searchable formats, we can make your organization more approachable and discoverable across your owned channels, search engines, social networks and newsroom platforms. Measurement: To show momentum it’s essential that we measure and track important content metrics to ensure the expertise marketing program is meeting expectations. We focus on key metrics such as expert content contributions, visitor engagement, and direct expert inquiries. And because we consider this from the onset of a project, we’re able to accurately report on your return on investment (ROI).
Aston Law School corporate governance experts launch new book on investor stewardship
Dr Daniel Cash and Robert Goddard co-wrote Investor Stewardship and the UK Stewardship Code: The Role of Institutional Investors in Corporate Governance The book will be relevant for an international audience of academics, regulators and policymakers in financial regulation, investment regulation and financial services It coincides with the publishing of the Stewardship Code 2020 signatories as part of a new regulatory code by the Financial Reporting Council (FRC) Two members of Aston Law School have released a new book around investor stewardship to coincide with a major milestone by the Financial Reporting Council (FRC). The FRC published the first main list of Stewardship Code 2020 signatories on 6 September 2021, after a round of reporting earlier this year. This milestone details who is following the Code and allows the regulator to focus on holding signatories to the articulated standards of stewardship and how it is reported. The new book by Dr Daniel Cash and Robert Goddard, Investor Stewardship and the UK Stewardship Code: The Role of Institutional Investors in Corporate Governance, provides a critical assessment of the development of the Stewardship Code 2020, which sets out principles regarding the role of institutional investors in corporate governance. It discusses how the regulatory framework for stewardship evolved before and after the financial crisis, and how that evolution resulted in the 2020 Code. It also critiques the Code from a practical and academic perspective, as well as evaluating the wider regulatory framework; in particular, the position of the FRC merging into the Audit, Reporting and Governance Authority (ARGA). Dr Daniel Cash, senior lecturer in law at Aston Law School, said: “The Stewardship Code is a big deal in British governance, and that is exactly what the book looks at. “It examines the history of the stewardship Codes and regulation in the UK, and uses this to critically examine the new 2020 Code. “That critical analysis leads into projections of how the Code may fare in the modern business environment, aspects that may affect its progression, and puts forward elements that can make the Code’s impact more substantial. “This important regulatory development will play a massive role in aligning the actions of investors with the wider societal needs in the new world being dominated by ESG concerns. “Stewardship Codes modelled on the UK’s original 2010 version have been introduced in numerous markets and, as such, the book will be relevant for an international audience of academics, regulators and policymakers in financial regulation, investment regulation and financial services.” You can buy a copy of Investor Stewardship and the UK Stewardship Code: The Role of Institutional Investors in Corporate Governance here.
Fourth time a charm? Election audits are getting political in the Peach State
If at first you don’t succeed – try and try again. And Republicans did in Georgia, demanding multiple audits of last November’s presidential election, looking under every ballot box for evidence of election fraud, tampering or other shenanigans that could be used to put the results in doubt. So far, nothing has been found. But that’s not stopping those with an eye on a political future from backing down. In fact, election audits are now a hot topic for those looking to occupy the governor’s mansion in Atlanta. In a bid to bolster former President Donald Trump's lies about widespread fraud in the 2020 election, Trump's Republican allies are now seeking Arizona-style audits in other swing states – including Georgia, where the former President's false claims have set off an intraparty war. A day after Trump said in a statement that Georgia should follow Arizona's lead, former Georgia state Rep. Vernon Jones, a Trump supporter who is challenging incumbent Republican Gov. Brian Kemp in next year's GOP primary, proposed an audit Wednesday. "Georgians still have questions about irregularities found in the 2020 election and they deserve answers," he said in a statement. "We must get to the bottom of all of this and other irregularities to restore trust in our election process. If Mr. Kemp refuses to demand an audit, then I will when I am elected to replace him." Jones' characterization of the election was false: Georgia has already tallied the results to confirm Biden's victory there three times and conducted an audit of absentee ballot signatures. The state found no evidence of fraud, and Kemp and other Republican state officials have backed the findings. May 19 – CNN “This call for yet another ballot review is nothing but political theater," says Dr. Gregg R. Murray, professor of political science at Augusta University. "It’s extremely unlikely it would uncover anything that would overturn the 2020 election or substantial irregularities. It would be a huge waste of taxpayer money.” Despite the findings, this is an issue that won’t likely be going away soon, and if you are covering this topic, then let our expert help with your story. Dr. Gregg R. Murray, is available to talk about the election audit and what it might mean for voters in Georgia and across the country. Murray’s research focuses on political behavior and psychology with specific interests in voter mobilization and turnout. He is also executive director of the Association for Politics and the Life Sciences. Simply click on Murray's icon to arrange an interview today.
What's in a name? Ghoshal finds hiring discrimination persists
New research by an Elon University professor is challenging earlier findings related to hiring discrimination against African American job candidates. A new article by Raj Ghoshal, assistant professor of sociology, addresses a debate over whether employers still illegally discriminate when making hiring decisions, and supports the idea that discrimination persists. His article “Flawed Measurement of Hiring Discrimination against African Americans,” appears in the Fall 2019 issue of the peer-reviewed journal Sociation. In the article, Ghoshal draws upon his own research to argue that earlier claims that employers no longer discriminate have been invalidated, and that if that earlier research was properly interpreted, it means black job applicants need to send out about 50 percent more applications as white applicants to have an equal chance at getting a response. Many experiments in the past 15 years have tested for discrimination by creating two fake identities with equal-quality resumes and applying to the same set of job listings with both identities. Ghoshal's findings address methodological issues in these experiments, some of which have claimed that hiring discrimination based on race has disappeared. In these previous experiments known as audit studies, “Steven Smith” and “DeShawn Jackson” might apply to the same 1,000 jobs. Researchers then measure how much interest each resume generates. This line of research has generally found that black Americans need to send out significantly more applications than white Americans to get the same number of callbacks. A 2016 study by economists at the University of Missouri-Columbia argued that these studies used overly stereotypical names to signal race in ways that exaggerated their results. The economists conducted their own study using what they considered more realistic names, and found no difference in employers’ response rates by race. But Ghoshal’s work finds significant flaws in the methodology the economists used. The 2016 study had used names like “Chloe Jackson” and “Ryan Washington” for their African American job candidates because the last names Jackson and Washington typically belong to black individuals, while “Chloe” and “Ryan” were purportedly race-neutral. Though the economists are correct to see Washington and Jackson as typically black last names, Ghoshal hypothesized that very few Americans would know this and interpret the names as intended. He therefore conducted a 1,050-person national survey which asked respondents to guess the race of people with the exact names the 2016 study had used. Survey findings show that about 60 percent of people do not interpret the economists’ study names as intended, and frequently see the names as belonging to white individuals. Further, those individuals most likely to make hiring decisions make just as many errors as others. The level of error is sufficient that the 2016 study is not merely invalidated. Rather, its results, properly interpreted, suggest that black job applicants need to send out about 50 percent more applications to have an equal chance of response. Overall, the findings suggest that racial discrimination remains an important concern that individuals, employers, and government should address. If you're interested in talking with Professor Ghoshal as you continue to cover this important topic, please reach out to Owen Covington, director of the Elon University News Bureau, at ocovington@elon.edu or (336) 278-7413. Professor Ghoshal is available for phone, email and broadcast interviews.
Optimizing Expertise in the Higher Education Sector: Southern Utah University
Higher education institutions are amongst the wealthiest knowledge-based organizations when it comes to expert resources. While many of these organizations acknowledge the value of their in-house experts, they often struggle to harness their expertise and communicate their strengths to external audiences. But when higher education institutions do take steps to market their expertise, the payoff is exponential. Here’s how Southern Utah University (SUU) leveraged expertise marketing to celebrate their staff, grow their digital presence and drive close to a 10x increase in media inquiries. Embracing Expertise SUU has been acknowledged as a leading university in the U.S. Most recently, the U.S. News and World Report’s 2019 Best Colleges list ranked SUU as one of the top Regional Universities in the West and the highest-ranked public school in all of Utah. Southern Utah University President, Scott L. Wyatt, attributes these accolades to the people within his organization: “Our faculty and staff have dedicated themselves to creating the best educational experience at Southern Utah University,” said Wyatt. “This recognition acknowledges their success and the wonderful learning community they have created!” In fact, SUU is so proud of their people that their initial motivation for expertise marketing was to show their experts exactly how much they were valued. SUU’s faculty and staff bring a wealth of expertise in their professional disciplines, but they’re also deeply immersed in the university’s culture and surrounding environment – including the region’s breathtaking national parks. With this in mind, SUU set out to celebrate their experts’ professional and personal achievements through expertise marketing. Optimizing Expert Content While SUU had expert content on their website, they didn’t have a great process for structuring, organizing and publishing. “We had an Expert Directory, but it just didn’t have background structure we needed to nimbly change profiles and deliver up-to-date content,” said Kenzie Lundberg, Internal Communications Specialist at SUU. ExpertFile’s Platform gave SUU the tools they needed to manage their content, but they still needed a bit of help optimizing their expertise marketing program. They reached out to our customer success team to see how they could better leverage the ExpertFile tool and implement best practices for expertise marketing. After auditing their digital presence, we identified three main areas for SUU to focus on: Showcasing Faculty with Relevant Stories: While SUU had some expert content on their website, it wasn’t structured in a user-friendly way. ExpertFile suggested that Spotlight posts would help them make their content more accessible and encourage audiences to get in touch with their organization. Unlike a standard blog post, ExpertFile’s Spotlights enable users to connect with experts or media relation teams directly from the post while simultaneously distributing the post to the Associated Press, Dejero and ExpertFile Search. By using Spotlights in multiple areas of their website, SUU would be able to drastically improve their visibility and gain better traction with media outlets. Highlighting Specialized Areas of Expertise within SUU: SUU used the ExpertFile Platform to organize and attribute areas of expertise in their expert profiles, but our audit revealed that the topics needed to be more specific to garner audience engagement. ExpertFile recommended that SUU add areas of niche expertise to their expert profiles. For example, a biology professor might list topics like “Invertebrate Evolution” or “Cardiovascular Physiology” in addition to the term “biology.” This optimization would make it easier for audiences like journalists and media outlets to find experts on specific topics. Expanding SUU’s Digital Footprint: One of the key advantages of the ExpertFile Platform is how easy it is for organizations to improve their digital presence. For example, the ExpertFile Design Lab allows marketers to quickly create, publish and manage Expert Directories and Spotlights across various pages on their website (click links for examples). To help SUU better utilize this feature, we suggested linking to their Expert Directory and Spotlights directly from the homepage. This would make it easier for audiences to find their expert content and increase opportunities for engagement. SUU’s Results SUU took the ExpertFile Customer Success team’s advice and their results reflected just how valuable expertise can be to the bottom line. From Q1 in 2018 to Q1 in 2019, SUU went from 3,030 views and 12 media inquiries to 11,949 views and 115 media inquiries. And their success didn’t end there. SUU’s latest analysis of their expertise marketing program revealed some truly impressive results: CALmatters Feature: David Berri, professor of economics, was requested for an interview on equal pay in sports in September 2018. From the interview and stories that followed, SUU received the equivalent of $112,500 in publicity value and 25.3 million unique views. The State Journal Feature: Michael Mower, executive director of SUU Aviation, was asked to be featured in a story highlighting SUU’s partnership with Marshall University in March 2019. The story was published on The State Journal’s website and had the potential to be seen by 800,000 unique visitors. Qualtric’s X4 Conference: Ravi Roy, assistant professor of political science, was asked to join the ranks of the visionaries and leaders behind the world’s most iconic organizations and present at the 2019 X4 conference. Other presenters included President Barack Obama, Oprah Winfrey, and Sir Richard Branson. Over 15,000 people attended the conference. “I really enjoy using the ExpertFile Platform,” said Lundberg. “It’s great that I’ve been able to learn about our experts’ backgrounds – we have some really fascinating people. It’s so unique to be able to see all of their talents and to be able to highlight that for them.” Kenzie Lundberg – Internal Communications Specialist SUU The team at ExpertFile is thrilled that SUU has seen so much success from the optimization of their expertise marketing program. We can’t wait to see what the future holds for their organization and their experts. Download the Complete Guide to Expertise Marketing For a comprehensive look at how expertise marketing benefits the entire organization and drives measurable return on investment, follow the link below to download a copy of ExpertFile’s Complete Guide to Expertise Marketing: The Next Wave in Digital Strategy or download one of our tailored Guides for Corporate & Professional Services, Higher Education Institutions, Healthcare Institutions or Association & Not-for-Profits.
The challenge of accurately weighting contrary advice
Auditors regularly seek informal advice about their initial judgments from other auditors. Audit firms encourage this advice seeking, believing it enhances professional skepticism and improves professional judgment. But does it? A recent study by Kathryn Kadous, professor of accounting; Justin Leiby (U. Florida); and Mark Peecher (U. Illinois at Urbana-Champaign) investigates contrasting theories and evidence on whether seeking advice improves auditors’ judgment and on the factors that influence how readily they incorporate contrary advice into their judgments. They find that nonspecialist auditors who seek advice from those with whom they share a close social bond tend to overestimate the value of that advice. On the other hand, specialists tend to underestimate such advice, perhaps, note the authors, because of threats to the specialists’ egos. In both cases the defensibility of the auditors’ conclusions is negatively affected, heightening audit risk. Source:
