Mid-sized public relations firms are receiving greater recognition for carving out singular identities in their approach to media relations and client services, as evidenced by a report from the London-based Public Relations Consultants Association.

The survey examined the varying approaches to PR by pinpointing the differences in work structure between large- and mid-sized PR organizations. The study cited the strict attention to client services paid by mid-size shops, as well as the emphasis on fresh thinking and collaborative spirit.

So what are the fundamental differences between large PR firms and their mid-sized counterparts?

For one thing, large organizations tend to be heavily loaded down with bureaucracy. All too-many big firms have a roster of vice presidents and senior vice presidents whose reporting system resembles something devised by Rube Goldberg. By having so many arms on a project, innovation is not only stifled, it’s strangled as each executive puts his or her hands around it.

The lack of middle management at mid-sized firms tends to translate into a lack of constraints. Therefore, with such a cumbersome set of obstacles removed, the work produced at mid-sized firms is not only handled much more swiftly, it’s handled with more creativity. Needless to say, because one is dealing with more compact teams, the only thing being constrained at a mid-size firm is the client’s budget.

There’s a collaborative culture that is inherent at a mid-size firm. Often, at a larger firm, when someone working on a particular account is promoted or leaves, their replacement comes with no history and has to start from scratch. At mid-size firms, which tend to be headed by refugees from the large firms, it’s a necessity that some duties are shared. And aside from being the mother of invention, necessity demands agility, flexibility and accountability. These qualities are worth emulating, but unless they’re ingrained within the structure of an organization, it’s just pretense.