Measuring Results: The PR Conundrum
The most difficult question in public relations is "how do you measure results?" Unfortunately, there are more answers than actual solutions, and many systems and approaches that generally fail to resonate with senior management. There is even a small industry of purveyors of PR measurement services, which tend to cater to large corporations with sizable marketing budgets coupled with high volumes of news media coverage required by their proprietary analytic tools.
For decades, public relations has relied on totaling column inches (aka counting clips) as a means of demonstrating the contribution of PR to the bottom line. But measuring value purely by the volume of media coverage is not necessarily a satisfactory solution for all companies all of the time. Still, most measurement approaches revolve around the clip. The PR industry has simply come up with creative approaches for deploying its yardstick. When PR talks about measurement, they often are referring to the following usual suspects:
Clips: counting and measure coverage, either in print or broadcast (air time) venues. Large companies value volume; smaller firms savor the handful of quality clips. "Volume" and "quality" are subjective measures.
Content Analysis: one step beyond basic clip measurement. Content analysis applies subjective criteria to the wording and context of story content. The simplest of systems rate coverage as favorable, neutral or unfavorable. Somewhat controversial since positive and negative interpretations are highly variable, and can be impacted by personal perspectives and business experience.
Impressions: an extrapolation of clip counting, factoring in the circulation total with a certain number of people assumed to have read an article. A guesstimate, at best.
Ad Equivalency: highly controversial and disparaged methodology of assigning a dollar value return for editorial coverage.
Focus Groups: A different flavor of the standard perception measuring approach of conducting public opinion surveys or polls. Although focus groups and polling can deliver tangible PR measurement benefits, the costs associated with deploying this approach far exceeds the means of all but the largest of private, non-profit or government institutions.
Generally dissatisfied with measurement approaches directly based on news media coverage, the PR industry recently has been chanting the mantra of measurement by outcomes. In other words, directly tying public relations efforts to bottom-line objectives, such as increasing revenue, influencing consumer buying decisions or changing market attitudes and perceptions. While measurement by outcomes plays well on the PR conference lecture circuit, the practical implementation within an organization remains problematic. With few exceptions, it is difficult to isolate the role of public relations from other "marketing" functions, such as sales, advertising, direct mail, telemarketing, etc. If there were a direct connection between PR and revenues, public relations would be included in quarterly and annual commissions, bonuses and other forms of direct performance compensation. In general, most companies at best are willing to draw a somewhat-dotted line between public relations and sales. PR persuades, colors and helps to shape market perception. The application of a mathematical solution to the business of influencing target audiences remains an allusive goal.
Ultimately, the public relations industry requires a scientific, quantifiable approach to measurement similar to the A.C. Nielsen system for assessing television audiences. But by focusing on measurement systems that only track outcomes in terms of interpretations of news media pickup, the PR industry is limited to estimating the impact on actual targeted audiences (i.e. the public) via assumptions and extrapolations. In August 2000, Comm Strategies set out to design and develop a measurement solution that would quantify the actual consumption of news generated from companies and organizations, rather than totaling clips. Click here to read more about the "Nielsen" solution to the conundrum of PR measurement.