About Prospect

philosophy and methodology

Prospect consistently achieves its mission’s goals as a result of the deployment of a philosophy which is genuinely unique in the communications and issues management training world.  This philosophy is illuminated by three core beliefs:

(1) Every situation is unique, and must be dealt with in a context-sensitive way.

Prospect believes that no two clients—no two cases—are entirely alike, and vows never to force client needs into pre-determined molds to be dealt with by pre-determined modules.  Unlike most agencies, Prospect will never attempt to apply a generic solution to a client’s very specific and unique needs and circumstances.  Premium service requires thoroughgoing custom tailoring.

(2) Communications skills and issues management are intimately connected.

At the core of Prospect’s philosophy is also the belief that communications skills development (e.g. interview skills, media skills, public speaking skills) and issues management services (e.g. general issues identification and management, crisis preparedness and management) are two sides of the same coin, and that neither service is complete without the other.  Becoming an effective interviewee or public speaker requires attentiveness to one’s general issues and potential problem areas, and being wholly prepared to deal with one’s issues requires a focus on all areas of communications skills development.  Prospect’s services always keep this important relationship in mind.

Through the development of context-sensitive communications and issues management strategies, Prospect aspires to provide unmatched service to its sports clientele, and to both bolster ongoing “in-game” successes, and to open doors to new forms of success.

(3) Effective communication and issues management is never a matter of “playing the game”.

Like so many politicians and senior business executives, even athletes and coaches are encouraged to play a 'game'—to avoid answering unflattering or difficult questions, or to attempt to deliver answers which contort the meaning of the original question.
 
While there are—legitimately—a small number of occasions in which a sports client can reasonably deem it necessary to bring forward an indirect response to a sensitive or personal question, to use this approach as the norm is wildly counterproductive.  In short, such answers lack credibility, generate distrust, and damage reputations.