Perspective from the 19^th Hole is the title I chose for my personal blog, which is meant to give me an outlet for one of my favorite crafts – writing – plus to use an image from my favorite sport, golf.  Out of college, my first job was as a reporter for the Daily Astorian in Astoria, Oregon, and I went on from there to practice writing in all my professional positions, including as press secretary in Washington, D.C. for a Democrat Congressman from Oregon (Les AuCoin), as an Oregon state government manager in Salem and Portland, as press secretary for Oregon’s last Republican governor (Vic Atiyeh), and as a private sector lobbyist.  This blog also allows me to link another favorite pastime – politics and the art of developing public policy – to what I write.  I could have called this blog “Middle Ground,” for that is what I long for in both politics and golf.  The middle ground is often where the best public policy decisions lie.  And it is where you want to be on a golf course.

The best answer to this blog headline is:  Perhaps.

Woods was one of the best, if THE best, pro golfers of all time.  For my part, I give THE best nod to Jack Nicklaus, but a vote among many of us who love golf could go either way.

So, Sheffler and Woods?

Perhaps too early, however good Scheffler is playing.

But, Scheffler continues to amaze with his amazingly solid play, including his win last weekend in the BMW Tournament, the next-to-the-last-stop in pro golf’s season.

He’ll defend later this week in the Tour Championship in Atlanta, which he won last year.

Beyond his great play, what resides inside his mind was on display recently in Europe where he played in the British Open – pardon me, The Open.

He displayed his depth in a press conference when he unburdened himself about the often-fleeting images of golf success.

A story in GolfWeek magazine, put it this way:

• He questioned the purpose of relentlessly pursuing victory, despite acknowledging the joy of accomplishment.
• He emphasized his faith and the importance of not letting golf define his identity.
• He admitted to struggling with the constant pressure and the unsatisfying nature of fleeting victories.

According to GolfWeek:

“’You work your whole life to celebrate winning a tournament for like a few minutes.  It only lasts a few minutes, that kind of euphoric feeling.  To win the Byron Nelson Championship at home, I literally worked my entire life to become good at golf, to have an opportunity to win that tournament.

“’You win it, you celebrate, get to hug my family, my sister’s there, it’s such an amazing moment.  Then it’s like, what are we going to eat for dinner?  Life goes on.”

So, too, did Scheffler’s answer.  He was only getting started.

“Is it great to be able to win tournaments and to accomplish the things I have in the game of golf?  Yeah, it brings tears to my eyes just to think about, because I’ve literally worked my entire life to be good at this sport.

“To have that kind of sense of accomplishment, I think, is a pretty cool feeling. To get to live out your dreams is very special, but at the end of the day, I’m not out here to inspire the next generation of golfers. I’m not out here to inspire someone to be the best player in the world because what’s the point?

“This is not a fulfilling life.  It’s fulfilling from the sense of accomplishment, but it’s not fulfilling from a sense of the deepest places of your heart.  There’s a lot of people that make it to what they thought was going to fulfill them in life, and you get there, you get to No. 1 in the world, and they’re like, what’s the point?

“I really do believe that, because what is the point? Why do I want to win this tournament so bad?

“That’s something that I wrestle with on a daily basis.  It’s like showing up at the Masters every year; it’s like why do I want to win this golf tournament so badly?  Why do I want to win The Open Championship so badly?  I don’t know because, if I win, it’s going to be awesome for two minutes.

“Then we’re going to get to the next week, hey, you won two majors this year; how important is it for you to win the FedEx Cup playoffs?  And we’re back here again. So, we really do; we work so hard for such little moments.  I’m kind of a sicko; I love putting in the work.  I love getting to practice.  I love getting to live out my dreams.  But at the end of the day, sometimes I just don’t understand the point.”

Scheffler calls it a daily struggle to avoid making golf define him.  He oranizes his life in such a way so that, when he leaves the golf course, he doesn’t bring golf home with him.  This wasn’t the first time he shared the anxiety he’s experienced heading into the final round at the Masters when he won.  

Ahead of the 2023 Masters, when his wife was pregnant and back home in Dallas, Scheffler recounted the advice one of his buddies who was staying at his rental house gave him.

“I wish I didn’t want to win as much as I do.  I wish it didn’t matter this much to me.   I wish I didn’t care as much about the result and could just go out and play and enjoy it,” Scheffler said on The Bible Caddie podcast. “My buddy said, ‘Well, your victory is secure on the cross and that’s really all you need to know.’  I was like, OK, that’s a good line. I’m going to think about that.”

Scheffler prioritizes time in the morning to read scripture, noting Numbers 24-26 as a particular passage of scripture that he reads from a devotional book on his iPad.  He listens to music with Christian themes such as Need to Breathe and is strong in his faith without coming across to the masses as a Bible thumper.

More from GolfWeek:

“’It’s super rare in sports to see the top of the top, who are the best at their sport, faithfully walk with golf,’ said Webb Simpson, a past U.S. Open champion, on the podcast that he co-hosts to Scheffler.  ‘A lot of young listeners, high school guys or even college kids around us, they are fearful that if they walk with the Lord they’re going to lose their competitive edge.

“’Somehow, somebody thought a long time ago that because you’re a Christian means you’re a soft competitor.  But you embody a faithful man of God who is a fierce competitor.’” 

To that notion, Scheffler gives a telling answer:

“I feel like God kind of created me with a little bit of extra competitiveness. Since I was a kid, whatever we were doing, I always wanted to be the best at that thing.” 

He continued:

“I feel like we’re called to go out to use our talent for God’s glory and in my head it feels like being an extremely competitive person going out there and fighting and trying to do our best and then taking our hats off and shaking hands and being done at the end of the day.”

There.  That illustrates why Scheffler has become my favorite golfer.  He is not just golfer.  He is a man, a family man, and a lover of God. 

Perspective from the 19^th Hole is the title I chose for my personal blog, which is meant to give me an outlet for one of my favorite crafts – writing – plus to use an image from my favorite sport, golf.  Out of college, my first job was as a reporter for the Daily Astorian in Astoria, Oregon, and I went on from there to practice writing in all my professional positions, including as press secretary in Washington, D.C. for a Democrat Congressman from Oregon (Les AuCoin), as an Oregon state government manager in Salem and Portland, as press secretary for Oregon’s last Republican governor (Vic Atiyeh), and as a private sector lobbyist.  This blog also allows me to link another favorite pastime – politics and the art of developing public policy – to what I write.  I could have called this blog “Middle Ground,” for that is what I long for in both politics and golf.  The middle ground is often where the best public policy decisions lie.  And it is where you want to be on a golf course.

A friend of mine from Salem writes about rules every month for the Oregon Golf Association (OGA) on-line newsletter.  Usually, he makes rules come alive.

This time, he wrote about slow play in golf.

And this friend, Terry McEvily, outlined excellent steps to speed up the game we love.  Nothing magic.  Just intention to the pace-of-play.

At the same time, of course, many of have been used to watching many pro golfers slow the game, sometimes to a crawl.

I have often said that a key to moving the game along would to be to apply the existing official golf rule – once you reach your golf ball and pull a club, you have 40 seconds to execute the shot.  If you don’t, you should get a warning the first time.  Then, if slowness persists, you should receive penalties, which could involve fines, extra shots, and, eventually, disqualification.

On the pro side, if this was done, slow play would no longer be an issue.

Back to McEvily.  Here is a summary of what he wrote:

A round of golf is meant to be played at a prompt pace, so:

• Each player should recognize that his or her pace of play is likely to affect how long it will take other players to play their rounds, including both those in the player’s own group and those in following groups.
• The player should play at a prompt pace throughout the round, including the time taken to:

+  Prepare for and make each stroke,

+  Move from one place to another between strokes, and

+  Move to the next teeing area after completing a hole.

• A player should prepare in advance for the next stroke and be ready to play when it is their turn.
• When it is the player’s turn to play:

+  It is recommended that the player make the stroke in no more than 40 seconds after he or she is able to play without interference or distraction, and

+The player should usually be able to play more quickly than that and is encouraged to do so.

• Depending on the form of play, there are times when players may play out of turn to help the pace of play.
• In stroke play, players may play “ready golf” in a safe and responsible way (see officials golf rule 6.4b(2)).”

Good suggestions from McEvily.

If all of us followed them, we’d be able to play faster – not running.  Just playing with intent and focus.

And we’d all have more fun on the golf course.

Perspective from the 19^th Hole is the title I chose for my personal blog, which is meant to give me an outlet for one of my favorite crafts – writing – plus to use an image from my favorite sport, golf.  Out of college, my first job was as a reporter for the Daily Astorian in Astoria, Oregon, and I went on from there to practice writing in all my professional positions, including as press secretary in Washington, D.C. for a Democrat Congressman from Oregon (Les AuCoin), as an Oregon state government manager in Salem and Portland, as press secretary for Oregon’s last Republican governor (Vic Atiyeh), and as a private sector lobbyist.  This blog also allows me to link another favorite pastime – politics and the art of developing public policy – to what I write.  I could have called this blog “Middle Ground,” for that is what I long for in both politics and golf.  The middle ground is often where the best public policy decisions lie.  And it is where you want to be on a golf course.

There is a thought around that language and punctuation is – or at least should be – marked by hard-and-fast rules.

While I understand that notion, I tend to favor my own rules, which could be called idiosyncrasies.

Here are a few:

• Make the word Democratic into Democrat

Why?  Well, too often political figures who called themselves Democrats weren’t interested in being democratic.  They wanted their way or the highway.  So, now we have Donald Trump getting even.

• Always spell out, not abbreviate, such words as the month of the year, titles representative and senator, and the names of states.

Would only take as few more keystrokes to install this clarity.

• Never split infinitives, such as in:

From The Washington Post…”Trump is using a little-known law to criminally charge migrants who fail to register presence with the government.”

Should have been “to charge criminally…”

Or, from The Atlantic Magazine…”For the second in less than a month, Trump has used law enforcement to directly target Congress.”

Should have been “to target directly Congress.”

And, from the Oregonian newspaper…”In both cases, the initial extradition denial turned political, prompting the governor to personally intervene.”

Should have been “to intervene personally.”

Avoiding splitting infinitives makes language stronger.

• Use the singular modifier, no matter how bad it sounds on occasion.

As in Atlantic Magazine which recently ran this sentence:  But none of the structural contradictions in the bill have gone away.”  The verb should have been “has,” not “have,” though, I admit, the accurate word does sound bad.

Or, this quote from another national newspaper as it wrote about clients of a health plan:  “Many of their clients are on the Oregon Medicaid plan.”  It should have read “many of its clients…”

And, this quote from the Salem Statesman newspaper:  “The Oregon Government Ethics Commission based their own investigation and fine on the evidence it had from an interview with Marks where he admitted to diverting and purchasing a single $329.99-bottle of rare Pappy Van Winkle 23 bourbon.

The sentence should have read “based its investigation….”

• Avoid phrases that don’t make sense.

From Salem Reporter:  “The protest officially began at noon and ended at 3 p.m. Saturday, but hundreds were already gathered along Center Street and clustered around a number of informational booths and resource tents before 12 p.m.”

Think about it for just a second – it’s impossible “to center around” something. 

The same problem exists with a televised ad for a financial management company, Corian.  The language says Corian “centers around” its clients.  Impossible.

Perspective from the 19^th Hole is the title I chose for my personal blog, which is meant to give me an outlet for one of my favorite crafts – writing – plus to use an image from my favorite sport, golf.  Out of college, my first job was as a reporter for the Daily Astorian in Astoria, Oregon, and I went on from there to practice writing in all my professional positions, including as press secretary in Washington, D.C. for a Democrat Congressman from Oregon (Les AuCoin), as an Oregon state government manager in Salem and Portland, as press secretary for Oregon’s last Republican governor (Vic Atiyeh), and as a private sector lobbyist.  This blog also allows me to link another favorite pastime – politics and the art of developing public policy – to what I write.  I could have called this blog “Middle Ground,” for that is what I long for in both politics and golf.  The middle ground is often where the best public policy decisions lie.  And it is where you want to be on a golf course.

The title of this blog crossed my mind this week as I contemplated the fact that a company where I was a partner for 25 years is now celebrating its 35^th anniversary.  Without me, of course, because I am retired.

Still, it was good to look back at reflections about the start of a company that bore the partners’ names – Gary Conkling, Pat McCormick, and mine – Dave Fiskum, as in Conkling, Fiskum and McCormick, or CFM Strategic Communications.

We came to be known simply as CFM.  And, today, those who have followed us as partners have kept the initials, now CFM Advocates.  They have expanded substantially on our initial start, which is a credit to them, not us.

But, back to the headline on this blog.

When we spun out from our employer, Tektronix, then Oregon’s largest private employer, we got great help from the vice president for whom we worked there as Tek lobbyists, Chuck Frost.

His commitment to ethical behavior and his ability to lead us toward it set a high bar for us.  Without ego, I say we met the challenge over my 25 years due in some substantial part to Chuck’s tutelage.

After we had spun out, we kept Chuck involved as the “conscience” of our new company and he helped us in ways too numerous to count.  Unfortunately, our mentor died in 2016.

All of this came to mind, too, as I read a book about Oregon’s last Republican governor, Victor Atiyeh, who also valued high ethics.

It was my privilege to work for Atiyeh in Salem, Oregon, before I ventured over to the private sector.

One section of the book — it was written by retired Pacific University professor, Jim Moore — highlighted the operating principles enunciated by Atiyeh when he was governor.  They are worth noting today, even as people like me wish they would be as true today as they were with Atiyeh more than 40 years ago here in Oregon.

The principles:

• The best government is one that is less involved in people’s lives

• The government that is closest to the people is best

• Democracy is not efficient, and that is a good thing

• People may want a public life and a private life

• “We the people” means that we get the kind of government to which we are entitled

• There should be objective government policies for dealing with taxes and funding

• Government should create incentives to change people’s behavior, not solely punishments

• Never trade votes for something that violates closely held principles

• Is a policy proposal good for Oregon (partisanship should be irrelevant)

• Always govern without regard to re-election

In addition to these principles, one other fact about Atiyeh stood out for me as I worked for him.  I noticed it repeatedly. 

If something good happened in Oregon when he was governor, Atiyeh did not set out to take credit for himself as many politicians would.  He dispensed credit to others.

Again, it is a principle I wish was the case today.

So, for me, two models of ethical behavior.  Chuck Frost.  Victor Atiyeh.

Perspective from the 19^th Hole is the title I chose for my personal blog, which is meant to give me an outlet for one of my favorite crafts – writing – plus to use an image from my favorite sport, golf.  Out of college, my first job was as a reporter for the Daily Astorian in Astoria, Oregon, and I went on from there to practice writing in all my professional positions, including as press secretary in Washington, D.C. for a Democrat Congressman from Oregon (Les AuCoin), as an Oregon state government manager in Salem and Portland, as press secretary for Oregon’s last Republican governor (Vic Atiyeh), and as a private sector lobbyist.  This blog also allows me to link another favorite pastime – politics and the art of developing public policy – to what I write.  I could have called this blog “Middle Ground,” for that is what I long for in both politics and golf.  The middle ground is often where the best public policy decisions lie.  And it is where you want to be on a golf course.

Washington Post columnist George Will, a wordsmith himself, wrote recently about words he hates.

His work appeared under this headline:  “FIVE WORDS THAT TODAY ARE GRATINGLY MISAPPLIED OR WORN OUT.”

Here is how Will started his column:

“’When we Americans are done with the English language,’ wrote Finley Peter Dunne (1867-1936), ‘it will look as if it had been run over by a musical comedy.’”

Going on, Will cites five words he hates, as follows:

• The fifth-most misused word in what remains of the tattered language is “massive.” It is an adjective applied to anything big, even if the thing has no mass.  There cannot be a massive increase in consumer confidence.  Similarly, it would be wrong to say there is massive illiteracy in many uses of “massive.”
• The fourth-most shopworn word is “unique.” It is applied to any development that has happened since the person misusing “unique” was in high school. As in, “There is unique polarization in America today,” a judgment that cannot survive even a cursory reading about the 1850s.
• The third-most gratingly misapplied word is “only,” but only in the phrase “one of the only.” As in, Mickey Mantle is one of the only switch hitters in the Hall of Fame.  One of the only is a wordy way of avoiding “few.”
• The second-most worn-out word in contemporary discourse is “iconic.” This adjective is, it seems, applicable to anything or anyone well-known in a way different from the way anything or anyone else has become well-known.
• Today’s most promiscuously used word is “vibe.” It probably is used so often by so many because trying to decipher its meaning is like trying to nail applesauce to smoke.  Having no fixed meaning, “vibe” cannot be used incorrectly. So, it resembles the phrase “social justice,” which includes a noun and a modifier that does not intelligibly modify the noun.

I agree with what Will wrote.  But, to his list, I add this, one of my many language biases:  I hate words that end with the letters, “ize” or letters that carry similar sounds, such as “yz.”

Such as prioritize.  Why not just say such words as “what’s most important?”

Or, incentivize.  Why not just “incent?”

Or, then this word one my business partners used that grated on my ears for years, with all due respect to my friend and business colleague – “catalyze.” 

What does that mean?  I suppose it could be conveying something like – “those advocating for passage should be getting their act together soon.”

More words?  Yes.  But they get across the point better than “catalyze.”

And, I add this:  I hate nouns that are used as verbs.  Consider “helm.”  It is a noun, but is often used, including in top media outlets, as a verb, as “he helmed that organization.”  No.  He led it.

Or, consider one of my favorite words “golf.”  You do not “golf” your ball.  You hit your ball.  I know this because golf is my favorite sport.

Some readers of this blog could say, “who cares?”

Yes, but, to me, purity of language is a solid quest.

I am still on it.  I fall short from time to time, but the quest prevails.

Perspective from the 19^th Hole is the title I chose for my personal blog, which is meant to give me an outlet for one of my favorite crafts – writing – plus to use an image from my favorite sport, golf.  Out of college, my first job was as a reporter for the Daily Astorian in Astoria, Oregon, and I went on from there to practice writing in all my professional positions, including as press secretary in Washington, D.C. for a Democrat Congressman from Oregon (Les AuCoin), as an Oregon state government manager in Salem and Portland, as press secretary for Oregon’s last Republican governor (Vic Atiyeh), and as a private sector lobbyist.  This blog also allows me to link another favorite pastime – politics and the art of developing public policy – to what I write.  I could have called this blog “Middle Ground,” for that is what I long for in both politics and golf.  The middle ground is often where the best public policy decisions lie.  And it is where you want to be on a golf course.

I had forgotten about this, but one of my former partners reminded me and others of this the other day:

It has been 35 years since, with two partners, we started in business in a firm that became special because of its performance in the lobbying and strategic communications space.

Since 1990, as they say, the rest is history.

Rather than recount the history from my point of view, I choose to reprint my partner’s blog, which he entitles “Life Notes.”  It conveys information about three individuals – me, Gary Conkling and Pat McCormick — who weren’t sure they were entrepreneurs but became the same.

So, read on.

*********

CFM’s 35-Year-Old Origin Story

How Improbable Entrepreneurs Stumbled Into Success

More than 35 years ago, a college classmate, a co-worker and I decided to go out on a limb and start a public affairs company.  Friends thought we were nuts.  Our families were understandingly nervous.  The rest is history.

We were improbable entrepreneurs.  We had worked in the media, held government jobs and represented a large company.  None of us dreamed of launching a business venture or becoming a tycoon.  Then circumstances conspired to plant the seed of an extraordinary idea.

We didn’t have to search each other’s backgrounds.  We knew our collective strengths and quirks. Like many other people who have started a business, we just dove into deep water.

The CFM Backstory
Dave Fiskum and I worked on the same college newspaper in Seattle.  A few years after we graduated and found newspaper jobs, Dave recommended me for news editor at The Daily Astorian where he covered city government.

While working together in Astoria, we met Pat who was the top lieutenant in Oregon for newly-elected Congressman Les AuCoin.  Eventually, all three of us worked for AuCoin – Dave and I in Washington, D.C. and Pat heading his Portland congressional office.

Before our public affairs adventure, Dave logged 15 years in Oregon state government, including as press secretary for Governor Vic Atiyeh and in management positions in the Human Resources, Economic Development, and Executive departments.  Pat served as staff director for House Speaker Hardy Myers and later represented the Oregon electronics industry in Salem.

After helping newly elected Congressman Ron Wyden get established in his first term, I (Gary Conkling) came back to Oregon as public affairs director for Tektronix.

When Tektronix fell on hard times, the idea of starting a public affairs firm popped into my head as a last-ditch alternative to being laid off.  While skeptical, Dave was interested.  Pat, who by this time had gone to work for Oregon’s most prominent PR and advertising firm, egged us on and promised to join us if we took the plunge.

The Business Plan
Step one, we were repeatedly told, was writing a business plan.  One of my lawyer friends privately advised that I may know communications, but I didn’t know squat about business plans.  He was right. 

I did as much research as time allowed, drafted a plan, then shared it with Pat, Dave and a few trusted colleagues and potential clients.  It turned out to be an unnecessary and stressful exercise.

When word spread the three of us were hitching our wagons to form a public affairs team, we got recruited, mostly by law firms.  Nobody asked us for a business plan.  Instead, we were courted with stories of how we would fit into existing organizations.  It felt good to be wanted after fearing we would be fired. 

We chose to align with Stoel Rives.  Its pitch was simple:  The law firm didn’t want former Tektronix employees like us siphoning off work from one of their biggest clients.  They offered us downtown office space, reserved parking, computer support, an office manager, and access to corporate billing and human resource systems.  They also offered a generous credit line, which we never needed to access.

A friend needled me that public affairs professionals were talking heads not brainy businessmen.  Maybe so.  But we were fast learners and had top-notch mentors at Stoel Rives.  Most important, we had good clients who respected our skills and paid our invoices on time.

We outgrew our relationship with the law firm and set up shop on our own.  We took Donna McClelland, our original Stoel Rives office manager, with us and she stayed until her retirement.

Surprise and Relief
When I broke the news of our spinoff plan to our boss and good friend Chuck Frost, he was taken aback.  I assured him we weren’t leaving mad; we were leaving for a good reason.  I said we viewed our departure as a friendly Tektronix spinoff.  Interestingly, maps depicting the evolution of the Silicon Forest include CFM as a Tek spinoff.

Chuck sold our spinoff to top management by stressing the company would retain our services at less cost and no personnel overhead.  For a desperately downsizing company, that was a no-brainer.  The embattled CEO even made a point of shaking my hand, albeit in the men’s restroom at corporate headquarters.

After he retired from Tektronix, we invited Chuck to be our in-house conscience and offer advice on sticky client work.  He was a huge influence on me and how I conducted myself as a lobbyist and community leader for what was then Oregon’s largest employer.  Until his death in 2016, his advice was solid gold.

Choosing Our Company Name
My ideas for a colorful company name were shot down by Pat and Dave.  Pat argued, it turned out correctly, that our own names were the best way to gain market recognition for the new firm.

Thus, our tongue-twister name became Conkling, Fiskum and McCormick.  We used a tagline to identify what we did.  As Pat predicted, we quickly became known simply as CFM.

Over the course of 35 years, our name has changed a few times as we tried to convey the scope of what we do.  The most recent change to CFM Advocates says the most in the fewest words.   However, most people still call us CFM.

Recruiting Clients
Before departing Tektronix, we made quiet overtures to potential clients.  The first client to sign up was the Providence Health System, which had never retained an outside lobbying firm before us.  Dave took the lead on Providence even as I got to know the Providence CEO by being a recurring patient at St. Vincent Hospital.  Because of Dave’s outstanding work, Providence remains a CFM client today.

We also attracted high tech firms, including Tek-spinoff Mentor Graphics, that had seen and benefitted from our work with the Oregon Chapter of the American Electronics Association.  Pat planted the electronics industry on the policy map for the governor and lawmakers.

My role as co-founder of the Business-Education Compact landed us a lobbying gig for the Beaverton School District.  That started the firm’s continuing relationship with Oregon public education – and led to a string of gubernatorial vetoes of bills that would allow high-growth school districts to acquire school sites outside urban growth boundaries.  I live nearby one of the school sites the Beaverton School District was eventually able to acquire.

CFM has enjoyed a long relationship with Oregon’s wine industry and many of its pioneers.  We got the job after the industry’s original lobbyist lost his temper at a legislative hearing and flipped off the committee chairman.  Willamette Valley Vineyards founder Jim Bernau was a strong CFM supporter and bottled a special Pinot Noir for a CFM anniversary.

The Oregon Graduate Institute in Hillsboro was an early client that hired CFM to convince the legislature to fund engineering education and research.  We succeeded and later OGI’s Norm Eder joined CFM as a partner specializing in big, long-term projects like the Willamette Water Supply project, which after a decade of work will finally be finished in 2026.

Pat introduced CFM to ballot measure campaigns that dealt with divisive issues such as doctor-assisted suicide, genetically altered crops and Liberty Mutual’s effort to brush aside the State Accident Insurance Fund (SAIF) as Oregon’s sole workers’ compensation provider. 

Pat influenced our thinking that strategic communications is only strategic when based on solid research.  He cultivated a close relationship with Tom Eiland, a veteran researcher who had put out his own shingle.  Over time, Tom’s and our practice overlapped so often, we invited him to become a CFM partner.  As a result, research infused our entire practice.  Along the way, Tom pioneered online focus groups, which played a critical role in passage of a major Oregon transportation package.  Tom died last year.

Fear and Exhilaration
Starting a new business is a mix of exhilaration and fear.  We fortunately got off to a strong start with blue-blood clients, but we wondered what would it take to sustain our practice over the long haul?  What services should we offer?  Should we add staff and, if so, to do what?  How would we judge success?  What level of profitability did we want to achieve? 

Dave, Pat and I held our first partner retreat in a condo near Lincoln City to discuss those and other questions.  One of the earliest decisions we made was not to represent tobacco interests, despite the huge commissions they offered to provide PR for their campaigns.  Instead, we chose to work for anti-tobacco advocates for far less money but a lot more satisfaction.  CFM’s anti-tobacco work was honored with the Public Relations Society of America’s highest honor, the Silver Anvil Award.

The three of us didn’t always agree, which in retrospect was a strength.  But there never was a moment of doubt all of us wanted long-term success without sacrificing our honor or good judgment.  Not all our clients were saints, but they had legitimate issues we helped them resolve.

The vibe at CFM today is different, yet very similar.  Younger people who now own and run the firm share CFM’s long-time commitment to principled advocacy.  They added that promise to the firm’s logo.

As for the three founders, Dave continues to golf and chairs the Oregon Ethics Commission.  Pat is “retired” but still joins CFM teams to work on teacher strikes and roll out new major infrastructure projects.  As for me, I’m still on the clock.  Advocacy, it appears, is a hard drug to kick.