Supply vs. Demand Revisited
Can the job market support the increased number of public relations and advertising graduates?

Remember Watergate? Of course you do. It was that little episode in American history that put the presidency at risk long before Bill, Monica and Cuban cigars.

But Watergate also taught us that the laws of supply and demand spill over into academia.

Would-be journalists crawled out of the woodwork after Bob Woodward and Carol Bernstein helped to bring down President Richard Nixon.

Interest in journalism went up, as did enrollment in journalism schools, but quality and price went down.

Fast forward now to 21st century public relations.

Public relations and advertising is one of the fastest growing programs at Kentucky colleges and universities. The question is whether the major is popular due to job market demand or whether the major is becoming a dumping ground for students who can’t make it elsewhere.

Based on some of the work product I’ve seen, it’s more the latter than the former.

Public relations and advertising graduates are not in demand – they never have been for entry-level posts. That’s why those positions still command salaries only in the high teens to low twenties at a time when engineering and technology graduates are walking out of college and into $50,000 annual salaries.

Even with the booming economy of today (or perhaps, more appropriately, yesterday), talented public relations and advertising graduates are still working outside their field of study years after graduation. The competition is simply tremendous.

Of course, there are exceptions. Some graduates have landed jobs in New York, Chicago, Atlanta, et al. But how many others are working in restaurants or retail, still trying to find a job in their field?

While broad generalities do not apply to all public relations and advertising students, they do make the point. As a group, the students have limited writing ability and limited understanding of grammar and punctuation.

Having taught part-time at the university level, I’m appalled at their ability (or perhaps I should say inability) to write. I’ve long suggested that certain students be precluded from public relations and advertising programs if they couldn’t pass a basic writing test.

I still think it’s necessary.

We can teach junior staff members how to plan an event or develop a media relations strategy or mount a public education campaign. We can’t teach them how to write, and we shouldn’t have to.

If cutting the student population back to 1995 levels means making the program more selective, I’m all for it.

Current supply of public relations and advertising graduates far exceeds industry demand, which explains why entry-level salaries have remained relatively unchanged for the past 10 years. Supplying a better candidate will create more demand from potential employers. Limiting the supply by making the program more selective will allow a more qualified candidate to enter the program and increase his or her demand in the job market.

Bigger is not always better. In this case, increasing student and faculty numbers is not the answer. Graduating thousands is not nearly as impressive as placing hundreds in the job market.

Phil Osborne is president and CEO of The Preston Group and a part-time UK professor of Integrated Strategic Communications.

Back to Advertising Index

Back to May Issue

Copyright 1996-2001, by Kentucky Business Online.  All rights reserved.

Editorial content is copyright 2001, Lane Communications Group
All editorial material is fully protected and must not be reproduced in any manner without prior permission.

The Lane Report is a trademark of Lane Communications Group.  All other trademarks are the property of their respective owners.