Catherine Huggins, assistant VP of corporate communications, Western & Southern Financial Group, Cincinnati, is “enthusiastically” sharing her views on 13 issues that this website presented to her and other PR Society candidates yesterday.
Catherine A. Huggins serves as assistant VP of corporate communications at Western & Southern Financial Group, handling national reputation, corporate visibility, branding, internal and external communications, media relations, publications, and special events.
During the 1980s, she served as Iowa Governor Terry Branstad’s chief speechwriter and deputy press secretary and led the governor’s communications efforts in his policy development division.
In the '90s, Huggins led corporate and government relations account teams for a Des Moines, Iowa, firm and . was director of corporate comms. for GuideOne Insurance, a niche insurer for houses of worship.
Prior to Western & Southern, she served as VP of communications for Casey Family Programs in Seattle, a $2 billion non-profit foundation established by UPS Founder Jim Casey.
She serves on the executive committee for PRS/National's corporate section and MBA Advisory Council. |
Huggins, who is the nomine for director from the East Central district, said she hopes her answers “stimulate further discussion among your readers and/or encourage others to share differing viewpoints.”
If this happens, she said, “then we have taken a step forward in the right direction. The vitality of the PR profession is dependent upon the passion of its members.”
Questions and Answers
1. Should directors sign an agreement at their first meeting limiting their ability to discuss Society matters in public or with the constituents in their districts? Should text of this agreement be publicly available?
Signing disclosures, confidentiality agreements or conflict of interest statements is not unusual. I have signed these types of documents in my role as a Board Trustee, as a corporate officer, and when working on high-level projects. When doing so, I carefully review and assess binding agreements before placing my signature on them.
As it relates to the second part of this question, I support making information available to others as long as there is not a legal, proprietary, or other extremely justifiable reason for restricting access or distribution.
2. What are your thoughts about removing the APR requirement for serving on the national board or Nominating Committee?
I believe the APR designation should be a mark of excellence, not an impediment to leadership. It is possible to strongly encourage individuals to obtain the APR designation. Concurrently, we must support individuals who are extraordinary leaders and may not have the three valued letters of APR appearing behind their names. It is a fine balance to achieve, but one that is absolutely necessary in order for our profession to flourish in the long-term.
3. Do you support having both a printed and online directory for PRSA members?
It is important to be both environmentally responsible and fiscally conservative. I would support PRSA members having the option of choosing an online membership directory or ordering a printed version. If a printed membership directory is offered as an option, I would advocate utilizing soy ink on recyclable paper, etc. Also, any increased expenses tied to having a printed option of the membership directory should be carefully tracked by PRSA staff and assessed by the Board of Directors.
4. Do you support having PRSA’s Charter remain in New York or move to Delaware?
At this time, it is not appropriate for me to take a firm position on this important issue. Specifically, I require more detailed information, an assessment on the financial impact, and feedback from current PRSA members. Once each of these steps is completed, I am happy to clearly articulate a position. However, I would advocate discussion of this issue be brought before the General Assembly for future consideration by the Board of Directors. Ultimately, a change of this magnitude should be placed on a national ballot for PRSA members to decide.
5. Do you support removing three-year limit on Assembly service?
I support initiating further discussions with local PRSA chapters. It is important to gain deeper insights on whether eliminating term limits for Assembly Delegates would meet their needs. This issue goes beyond talking about the tenure of individuals serving in this capacity. It lands squarely on the topic of how the General Assembly is or is not meeting the overall needs of PRSA members, local chapters, districts, and our evolving PR profession.
6. Do you support having General Assembly Delegates set policy for the Board?
I support the General Assembly providing direction to the PRSA staff. The role of PRSA’s Board of Directors is providing strategic oversight to the staff on behalf of the PRSA members. The Board also is responsible for moving PRSA forward in fulfilling its mission and vision. In addition, Board Members have a fiduciary duty and ethical responsibility to serve PRSA members by evolving our association and PR profession to the highest levels possible.
7. Do you support reporting conference costs accurately?
Yes. As mentioned earlier, one duty of the Board of Directors is to be a valued and trusted financial steward for PRSA and its members. This fiduciary duty is cornerstone to maintaining confidence among PRSA members and maintaining positive momentum for our association.
8. Do you support providing Assembly transcripts?
I support making information available to others as long as there is not a legal, proprietary, or other extremely justifiable reason for restricting access or distribution.
9. Do you support the tightening of bylaws to block the return of Directors to Officers?
No. If there is a talented Board Member who is sincerely interested in running for an officer position down the road – he or she should be able to contribute in a different role and not be limited by increased restrictions within revised bylaws. A good example is what occurs at the local chapter level. Chapter board members often serve their PRSA membership in a variety of roles over a number of years. It provides planned succession to select officer levels, ongoing professional development, and increased benefits to the chapter by dedicated, seasoned board members.
10. Do you support a bylaw barring proxy votes?
I require more detailed information on this why this change is now needed and historically, why the bylaw was modified to include proxy votes. Once this information is available, I will take a position.
11. Do you support opening the PRSA Web site to greater participation by members and the press?
I support transparency, accessibility and clarity in how PRSA presents itself to members and the press. PRSA members pay an annual fee to receive benefits, access information and secure professional development opportunities.
It is important to ensure the official PRSA Web site supports PRSA members, attracts new members, provides information to interested individual, and continues to be a valued asset by the media.
Without question, I am open to listening to PRSA members’ and the media’s suggestions and/or concerns related to the association’s Web site and ways to move our profession forward.
12. Do you support an enforceable “Code of Ethics?”
Yes. Organizations across the country have dramatically changed the way they do business due to increased levels of oversight by regulatory agencies and/or legislation like Sarbanes-Oxley. I am a firm advocate of and dedicated toward enforcing PRSA’s Code of Ethics.
13. Do you support removing the bar of O’Dwyer ads in PRSA publications or having an O’Dwyer staff member join the Society?
While I understand and respect why you are asking my thoughts on this particular question, it would be irresponsible for me to take a position without first securing additional information from PRSA and you.
Thanks again for providing me with an opportunity to share my views with you and your readers. It was a wonderful experience.
Sincerely,
Catherine A. Huggins, M.B.A., APR
2009 Board of Directors Nominee
|