MediaBanc, a media monitoring and media analysis company, recently met with local communications practitioners to discuss the value of media performance measurement, an event to which this writer was invited as a speaker. Let me share with readers an abridged version of my speech on PR measurement.
Last year, MediaBanc reported that ABS-CBN had the highest volume or number of articles picked up by Philippine publications. Its internal desk survey revealed that the Kapamilya Network generated 19,985 articles from February to August 2009 alone. Interestingly, it also had the highest volume in the six Southeast Asian countries covered in the study. And what do the data tell us? Truth be told, the data disclose that ABS-CBN is a well-covered brand in the country. But wait, this does not tell us whether the volume of pickup is upside, downside or neutral to the company. There are ways these factors can be measured other than earned space and time, and ABS-CBN moves up to other valuation areas like tonality and visibility level.
But before we discuss the importance of measurement in detail, let us go back a bit and review media, the ultimate power of which was understood better when Canadian critical thinker Marshal McLuhan said in a 1966 talk, “The medium is the message, not the message. It really works us over; it really takes hold and massages the population in a savage way.” Nearly 44 years later new strategies in media measurements are helping organizations tap into this “savage massage,” essentially changing the way we do business. And why shouldn’t PR people be putting it in their communications arsenal?
Bill Fox, the author of Spinwars: Politics and New Media, wrote that the media represent a primary place of dialogue. In politics, arts and culture, business and life, technology, and sports, a lot of what we know is because of the media. So measuring our impact on it makes sense. He added that with every other form of communication, such as advertising, we test constantly to see whether our selling propositions are getting through. When we’re talking about earned media as opposed to paid media, the same principle should apply. Thus, as communicators we must have some way to measure whether our messages are being received and understood as we intended them to be. Here are some points to ponder:
• Most, if not all, PR programs can be measured. It has been said that in every myth there is a corresponding reality. So it is in measuring PR results. The worst myth in the PR practice is that it can’t be measured, but the best reality is “says who?” Communications experts agree that we can measure effectiveness of internal communications; relationships with various external stakeholders like media, communities, government agencies, church authorities, and educational institutions; behavior and attitude changes of target publics, product sales and corporate reputation. How reporters and editors pick up our pitches, how people respond to the way we do business, how we operate within a community, how we modify beliefs, encourage action or even non-action, and how we correct negative perceptions can also be added to the list.
• We don’t measure PR pursuits, we measure results and how they prop up the company’s vision, mission, business objectives, priorities, culture, market environment, stakeholders, employees, and external affairs agenda.
• PR measurement begins with measurable goals. What is it we want to implement? What is it we want to achieve? At the outset, we must be very clear about our stimuli and desired communications and behavioral responses. Likewise critical are the identification of the publics we want to affect, the expected level of accomplishment and the time frame in which it has to happen.
• We can’t measure what we can’t manage and we can’t manage what we can’t measure. PR communications is not what we push or send out, but what arrives or comes back to us. We may have identified key message tracks for our campaign, but they remain useless unless we are able to put them across to our target audiences efficiently and effectively. There are several types of PR measures. These cover inputs or the resources needed by our products or services and the outputs that we communicators provide. It can also be a measurement of the outcome and efficiency of our PR efforts, concretely manifested by opinion, attitude and behavioral changes attained based on defined PR goals, and the effective use of resources like organizational systems, staffing or talents, among others. Quantity or volume output, the quality of service we provide or the dependability of our PR offerings as defined by our customers are measurable aspects as well.
• Impressions don’t necessarily tell the story of what happened to our PR intent. The traditional notion is that media imprints — circulation, ratings or number of viewing audience and online or website hits — are not the be-all and end-all of PR measurement. They are non-measures. We must not confuse measuring a PR activity with measuring progress and achievement. Thus, it is not enough to measure PR efforts based on advertising value equivalent, as most practitioners normally do. Calculating the estimated cost of editorial time and space is not enough to determine success or failure.
• It is impossible to compare advertising and PR. It must be remembered that in advertising, practically everything can be controlled, while in PR editorial placements depend largely on the state of our media relations. The Measurement Standard of Delahaye, a US-based PR research operation, captured the principle very clearly when it stated, “We know a case in which someone was measuring advertising value equivalency, yet the mission of the PR department was to increase trust and credibility. Another was measuring media, when the expectation was that the PR program would increase sales.”
• Media-relations evaluation is as important as bottom-line measures. It must help improve the company’s PR implementations and monitor crafted messages and key points. In the measurement process, we must ask mandatory questions: Are the resulting stories based on our publicity releases — positive, negative or neutral? Did the media use the accompanying photo or video clip? Was the story picked up accurately? Did we connect to the appropriate publics based on media hits? Was the story balanced? Were the contact numbers and addresses listed? Did our competitor generate more coverage than us? Was the chairman or CEO of the company or the designated spokesperson quoted and, if so, was the quote precise? Did the story appear in the suitable print section or in a valuable portion of the broadcast news?
After we have answered this long list of queries, what do we do with the measurement results? First, kill the PR program that does not work, and save or even expand the one that works. This way we can reallocate funds to support other programs that can yield better efficiencies. Second, leverage the results on return on investment and opportunity for continuous improvement in systems and procedures, or on set benchmarks, targets, priorities and defined strategies and executions.
• Measurement is how management realizes the value of communications to the company. It should be seen as relevant and meaningful to the organization, demonstrated, for example, by the level of the employee and stockholder satisfaction, customer retention and revenue growth. Corporate PR has come a long way towards becoming an indispensable weapon in the chief executive’s armory. That said, the scope for the expanded importance of PR people at the boardroom table will remain limited until the profession gives senior management what they want — a measure of return on their investment and a clear understanding of the process of managing a corporate reputation.
• There needs to be a greater appreciation of what we are trying to achieve in our businesses. Add to that the info on exactly how, when and what we can bring in. Measuring PR results is one of corporate life’s ambiguities. We know it works. If it didn’t, successful companies around the world would not continue using it and perhaps find other areas in which to achieve their PR missions. The challenge is how to quantify its impact so that CEOs, financial directors, PR heads and marketing communication leaders can assess ROI.
Given all these, where do we begin to measure? Three main principles apply. First, put measurement on the communication agenda and assign a budget to it. Without measurement firmly on the agenda, PR activity will spin its wheels. Second, ensure that measurement is layered into every facet of the communication process. Measurement should cascade through the campaign from strategic direction to tactical applications. Third, discuss our business goals and the communication results needed to support them. It may be hard to get publicity for our companies, but the harder part is getting regular publicity that will support hard goals.
PR communications is often accused of spending too much time putting out fires or sending out regular “praise releases” and too little time for effective planning and execution. The challenge for PR people is how to make PR processes, programs and implementations work as they are undertaken and how to get to the bottom of intricate communications issues that confront. The means to face up to the challenge is to constantly pick up new information, knowledge and skills that can help us grab hold of advantageous prospects and face PR tasks with dynamism and enthusiasm.
* * *
E-mail bongosorio@yahoo.com or bong_osorio@abs-cbn.com for comments, questions or suggestions. Thank you for communicating.