How often in Asia do communications professionals truly view themselves as advocates of their clients' causes? To what extent do they engage intellectually with the tough issues clients are grappling with and then use all the tools at their disposal to present the case persuasively in the court of public opinion?

Those are the questions which occurred to me after reading a really interesting post by Michael Netzley, a fellow blogger in Asia and corporate communications professor in Singapore who writes thoughtful pieces on his CommunicateAsia site. In his fascinating, almost philosophical, discussion of the rhetorical significance of the terms "convincing" and "persuading", Michael reveals his interest in the topic was reawakened by a Canadian PR site where the writer defines conviction as "a person [who is] convinced by evidence or argument made to the intellect" while persuade refers to, "a person [who is] persuaded by appeals made to the will, moral sense, or emotions." 

Kudos to Michael for highlighting the origins of an important subject for the PR profession in Asia. Let me take it a step further: can we be doing more to convince or persuade stakeholders and audiences? Certainly, our colleagues in advertising and marketing are doing their best to persuade - they are increasingly raising the bar with more creative work. I reckon there's a huge market emerging in this part of the world for PR professionals who can cut through clients' own distractions or overcome clients' seeming reluctance to be forthright in defending their own reputations when coming under attack. At the same time, consultants are working hard to develop the skills, commitment and courage to articulate their clients' position  in compelling terms. The ability to convince and persuade will be increasingly important as the stakeholder environment in the region becomes more sophisticated - and complex.