PR Evaluation News
This is a selection of news and events relevant to PR and Media Evaluation. We are also contributing on a more regular basis to a blog called Evaluating the Media: http://mediaevaluation.blogspot.com/. If you would like to respond or add a comment contact us here.
Contents:
In conjunction with the Greater London Group, with Lord (David) Puttnam, the prolific film producer and ex-CEO of Columbia Pictures, who will offer his views on internationalism and the media.
More details to be posted nearer the event.
This morning the Chartered Institute of Public Relations was hosting a practitioner's roundtable discussion on the legitimacy of lobbying. This discussion was being led by Lionel Zetter, the CIPR President elect, and from the lobbying firm Political Wizard. Central to the issue was the apparent widespread misconception of lobbists aims and methods. It is a fascinating area and one which poses particular challenges regarding its justification. How one measures success of a public affairs campaign is tied up with its objectives and whether these can be measured.
In this regard public affairs campaigns are no different to PR campaigns. In my ear I can hear ringing the comment “you are what you measure” (KD Payne), a comment which I am convinced is foreign to many in public affairs.
On a broader level the discussion dealt with the risks facing the discipline and its reputation from scandals and associated misconceptions of what the sector has to offer. There was an acknowledgement that public affairs is only an option for those with money and Andy Sawford, from Connect Public Affairs raised the point that the industry can benefit from rejecting its ‘Godfatherly’ overtones. This was followed by Donna Castle from the British Lung Foundation saying that money is often not an issue and that much can be achieved with next to no budget.
On the matter of self regulation, Simon Nayyar, from Edleman suggested that the sector could do worse than model itself on the service perception of the legal profession, where the contribution is often more highly valued.
Lionel Zetter said that we may only be one scandal away from full legislative regulation and that this would be a retrograde step. Personally I would like to uphold the comments by Donna Castle and suggest to organisations that if they have a strategy and an issue to support which they believe public affairs can contribute towards, they can achieve an awful lot themselves, irrespective of the budget.
To end I feel there is an educational message-that with basic guidance many can present an effective public affairs campaign using the tactics set out in books like ‘Public Affairs in Practice’ (Thompson and John, CIPR, 2006).
At the start of September 2006 Media Evaluation Research was accepted into the Chartered Institute of Public Relations recognised Partnership Scheme, alongside, amongst others, Ipsos MORI, Precise Media and PR Week.
Ann Mealor, Deputy Director General of the CIPR said “We are delighted that Media Evaluation Research has joined our Partner Scheme and shown its commitment to the industry and the Institute in this way. Media Evaluation Research is a leader in its field and has contributed to the development of the PR profession. We are very pleased with this association."
The key representatives of Media Evaluation Research have over fourteen years experience in media research and analysis. They have undertaken a series of industry and specific studies for the profit and not-for-profit sectors, full examples of which are available via the website.
Senior consultant at Media Evaluation Research Michael Blowers said "The Chartered Institute of Public Relations is the highest professional representative for the UK’s PR industry; something it has demonstrated through its attainment of Charter status. I enjoyed undertaking the CIPR Diploma and see our acceptance onto the Partnership Scheme as validation of the way we undertake our analysis."
More information on the CIPR’s Partnership Scheme is available via this link.
The International Group and the Corporate & Financial Group invite you to:
The Sound of Schmoozing or The Sound of Improving the State of The World? with Mark Adams, Head of Communications, World Economic Forum
The World Economic Forum is best known for its Annual Meeting in the Swiss mountain resort of Davos. It describes itself as an independent
international organization committed to improving the state of the world by engaging leaders in partnerships to shape global, regional and
industry agendas.
Many CEO’s of the large corporations which you may represent will be participating every year and we are all familiar with the immense press
coverage which echoes from the Swiss Alps every January.
Mark Adams, the World Economic Forum’s Head of Communications, is responsible for orchestrating most of the Davos sound. He will explain
how he communicates the organisation, but also how the Forum manages to deal with the many competing egos. Or should we ask about the
dilemma of potentially competing intentions of the Forum and its participants?
Even though he now has an office overlooking Lake Geneva, mark is originally from Redhill, Surrey. Early in his career, he rose through
the ranks to edit the ITV Early Evening News before relocating to France to be the editorial director at EuroNews. Whatever questions
you may bring to the evening, we expect a highly interesting talk with Mark. And to make this even more appealing, the event will
take place at 30 St Mary Axe, aka ‘the Gherkin’ and will conclude with the opportunity for some networking over drinks.
Margaret Nally Memorial Lecture: House of Lords/Churchill Room House of Commons We are fortunate to have the agreement of Des Wilson to deliver next year’s Maggie Nally Memorial Lecture.
Des is, of course, arguably one of the most significant public relations practitioners of the past three decades as well as being skilful as a journalist, charitable campaigner and much else.
Born in New Zealand (1941) he was a founder of Shelter (1967) but then worked as a journalist on the Guardian, Observer, Social Work Today (editor) and Illustrated London News (deputy editor) throughout the seventies. He was also Head of Public Affairs RSC (1974-76).
Turning then to environmental issues, he was active on CLEAR (Chairman), Friends of the Earth, Citizens Action and Campaign for Freedom of Information. Politically he became President of the Liberal Party (1986-87) and directed the Liberal Democratic Election campaign 1990-92.
In the nineties Des entered public relations consultancy more fully. He was vice chairman of public affairs worldwide for Burson Marsteller (1993-94) and director of public affairs British Airports Authority (1994-2000) . Also during this time, member of the British Tourist Authority (1997-2003) and on the Earls Court and Olympia Group (2001-04).
With strong sporting interests, Des remains a public affairs adviser to the MCC after being a member of the English Sports Council (2000-2003) when he served on the Lottery Panel. His report on worldwide gambling in cricket attracted international attention.
The author of several books and novels, he has written literally hundreds of respected articles on communication issues over all these years. He now lives in Cornwall but travels widely.
By common consent a magnetic speaker, Des will indeed be a welcome guest next March. For more details please contact us here
Today Media Evaluation Research was announced the winner of an Excellence Award in Enterprise and Training from the Technology Enterprise Kent and Canterbury Christ Church University in recognition of the agency's growth over the past 12 months.
Patrick Tierney from Technology Enterprise said the award was deserved as 'the agency had exploited an opportunity to place within the market a product, quite unlike others, which genuinely made PR measurement noticable clearer'.
Thursday, 27 October 2005
Ever wondered how a brand is developed? And what’s the involvement of PR in its creation and management?
If so, then come along to this event and hear the answers from Nick Liddell, Director of Brand Valuation at Interbrand – the world's leading brand consultancy. Nick manages the company's annual study of the leading global brands, published in cooperation with Business Week (http://www.interbrand.com/surveys.asp).
Nick joined Interbrand in September 1999, having obtained an honours degree in politics, philosophy and economics at Lincoln College, Oxford.
As well as the ranking, Nick has worked on brand valuation projects with diverse and international clients in various sectors including financial services, telecommunications, luxury goods, energy and FMCG. His clients have included major international brands such as American Express, Heineken, Prada, BP and GE. Nick was a contributing author to Interbrand's hardback publication, Brand Medicine.
Interbrand's ranking, which positions brands by dollar value, has become a benchmark and according to a recent PR Week/Burson-Marsteller Fortune 500 survey, CEOs view the best global brands report as one of the three most significant business rankings.
About the presentation
This event will focus on the role of PR in brand development, brand management and brand value, and will look at:
What is brand value?
* How valuable are brands?
* The role of PR in brand value creation
* PR in the context of reputation building
* Relevant case studies
There will be a question and answer session at the end of the presentation. And we ask you to stay with us for drinks and canapés.
CNN: "After two days of criticism, Christian broadcaster Pat Robertson apologized for his controversial suggestion that the United States should assassinate Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez."
The Times: "KEN LIVINGSTONE provoked outrage yesterday when he compared an outspoken Muslim scholar who backs suicide bombings to the reforming Pope John XXIII."
Reuters: "A California atheist who last year lost a Supreme Court fight to remove the phrase "under God" from the Pledge of Allegiance on Wednesday won an initial round as he revived his cause in the courts."
How are the image and influence of religion bearing up in the post 9/11 world? Renowned PR guru, columnist, author, and recently ordained minister, George Pitcher weighs into the debate when he delivers the CIPR International Annual Lecture at Old Trading House on 19 October 2005.
The lecture is a must for anyone working in the voluntary sector, and wondering how government support for faith-based initiatives will affect charities – religious and secular – on both sides of the Atlantic.
For public affairs practitioners, the lecture goes to the heart of some of the most controversial political debates of the age. For those in marketing communications, it looks at how ancient and venerable organizations can rebrand for the modern world, while staying true to their core values. Book your place at this key PR event!Date: 19 OctoberTime: 18:30. Venue: CIPR, Old Trading House, 15 Northburgh Street, London, EC1V 0PR.
Price: £20 for members and £25 for guests. (Price includes refreshments).
Please contact Media Evaluation Research for further information and booking details
Today Media Evaluation Research was nominated for an Excellence Award from the Technology Enterprise Kent and Canterbury Christ Church University. Although the organisations key staff have over fourteen years experience of research the media Media Evaluation Research is a relatively new name to the research field.
Commenting on the award Michael Blowers, principle researcher, said "recognition for the work undertaken is always great and we hope to build upon our successes to date with a series of new research tools and applications we think will add to the whole experience of media evaluation".
The past couple of decades have witnessed a revolution in thinking on company value and reputation. There has been a recent bonanza of white papers, research documents and reports on the subject and it is exciting that so many feel they have thoughts to share.
Seeking a little light relief during the summer break the task was set to review what research has been recently published. The idea was somewhat thwarted, as the sheer volume of what has been produced was frankly daunting. What was supposed to be some part-time reading quickly resembled full-time tasking for several people. So a little later than planned, this is a brief resume of highlights from recent documents and a little prognosis of our own.
Over the Summer the CIPR released in association with Dr Jon White ‘Measurement and Evaluation: Moving the debate forward’ which provides a detailed and informed review of current research. It discusses research from the DTI and other information on the PR return on investment.
One of the findings is that using ‘ROI’ in connection with PR is unhelpful and would be better replaced with ‘evidenced based PR’. Clearly, the second term is more relevant to the sector however there is a belief that PR needs to increase its accountability to the greater corporate audience and one of the main ways to undertake this would be through sharing terms and their meaning. ROI has a business-wide application and it is up to all in PR, marketing and on the management board to become educated in its interpretation and application.
The valuation of intangible assets is not only of interest to the accounting profession; it has now entered the mainstream of business management and Kaplan and Norton, creators of the Balanced Scorecard, estimate that intangible assets make up a phenomenal 75% of organisations market capitalisation. In our sector the intangible asset of greatest interest is reputation.
All will acknowledge that they need to understand more about reputation, nurturing and build upon the good parts, but by its very nature it defies easy measurement. ‘If you can’t measure it, you can’t manage it’ is an appropriate maxim and when it comes to something as all-encompassing as reputation the board would be wise to get specialist help.
MORI recently found that honesty is the factor most likely to influence views on a company - the link between honesty and reputation is obvious. According to Roger Haywood ‘reputation management is public relations’. Obviously reputation matters but possibly the realisation now is just how much it matters.
Although CEO’s believe they own reputation, they also understand that managing it is the responsibility of PR, an issue covered in ‘CEO views on reputation management’ by Murray and White (September 2004). Is it possible that PR’s stature will increase in the coming years? Through the increasing management of reputation this could happen, more-so if PR and the board learn more to speak each others language.
On a practical level, most of this research is available free through the CIPR, Clearing House and other websites. All you need do is find time to read it!
* Roger Haywood: ‘Corporate reputation, the brand and the bottom line’ Kogan Page 2005
Obviously there are two factors which come into play when an incident occurs like this: respect for those involved and the domination of the media by the incident.
Consider carefully the nature of the story to be promoted and if it could in anyway cause offence during the grieving period. Inappropriate stories could be at the ‘lighter’ end of the news spectrum, however it is really difficult to outline hard and fast rules on this. Consider the scale of the incident and the type of story promoted, speak with the stakeholders, study carefully the mood of the media and try not to hurry on the media environment you feel is most conducive.
As of Monday 11th July the UK media has been saturated with coverage on the bombing. In this period there have been 1,141 articles in the major UK press and 5,035 worldwide. If there is any hesitation about using a story in this environment the advice would be to hold onto it for the time being. However the question asked is: ‘when will things get back to normal?’ To do this, consider two recent examples.
On the 11 th March 2004 Madrid was hit be a series of bombs which was found to be the work of Islamic extremists. The day after the incidents the Spanish press featured 639 articles on the bombings. There were over 150 articles per day for the next ten days. It was not until the 10 th April, a full month after the incident, that there were less than 30 articles per day on the incident. Obviously the rate at which the story diffuses depends on many things including the continued threat and efforts to find the perpetrators, etc.
Regarding the 1999 Paddington rail crash the day after the incident there were 206 articles on the story. A week later this had dropped to 50 articles – a level of exposure maintained for the next ten days.
Both of these incidents highlight that getting another story in the media in the immediate aftermath of a similar incident is going to be difficult. From the analysis undertaken it is recommended to wait seven to ten days after an incident. After this time the media agenda would tend to open up.
The other more complex question is: when would it be appropriate to promote a story? Common sense should prevail and we suggest seeking out the views of the parties involved, possibly including the media targeted.
In this vital period leading up to the G8 meeting in Gleneagles next month the media across Europe and the United States have firmly put Africa to the top of the agenda. According to research undertaken by Media Evaluation Research both the UK and the US media have run double the number of references to ‘Africa’ compared to ‘climate’ over the past month.
Interestingly, this view is not shared across Europe and in the past month the French, and Italian media have devoted much more exposure to the climate change issue, than to Africa.
The media’s apparent ambivalence to the climate change issue is largely a reflection of the perceived reluctance on the part of the Bush administration to enter into any meaningful discussions on carbon dioxide emissions. Nowhere is this more so than within the US media where in the past week only 0.13% of media items sourced from domestic press and online sources have referred to ‘Bush’ and ‘climate’ in the same item of coverage.
Over the past month (up to the 8th June) 1.5% of French press articles sourced by Media Evaluation Research from the key French press and online sources have featured the Olympics compared to 0.9% of UK press and online sources.
A follow-up search of the past weeks media has illustrated that the gap has closed, somewhat, but with France still ahead. One of the key findings by the Olympic inspectors was that the French people are more in favour of the Olympic bid than people in the UK.
This data comes via our Quant.Observer research tool which undertakes quantitative media research of almost 10,000 global media sources including The Wall Street Journal and the Financial Times.
This massively over-subscribed event was billed as an opportunity to learn how to network successfully. It featured Carole Stone, the former producer of BBC radio programmes Women’s Hour and Any Questions. Carole has over 24,000 contacts in her database covering the complete spectrum of society, from within the media, politics and industry. Her regular small gatherings have featured top politicians, including the Blair's, captains of industry, and many media celebrities.
Her comments proved enlightening – she understood well that walking into a room of complete strangers is quite daunting, particularly when your main reason for being there is to try and gain business. Her advice was to just try and be nice to people, to engage in conversation and to show your interest by asking questions.
Carole did indicate that a little preparation was a good idea. She suggested trying to find out who will be at an event and putting together a list of people you would like to talk to. If you miss them at the event why not try calling their office the next day and saying you were sorry not to say hello the day before? Taken as part of an ongoing process of communication, this will begin to create a network of contacts. Email, used appropriately can create its own network particularly if the comment is well targeted and funny to the recipient.
Amusingly, Carole left us with a technique to get one out of talking to those crushing bores when you know there are others you need to catch up with. Answer; carry two glasses of wine - so when it gets too much just say ‘must go, so-and-so will be dying of thirst’!
The quietness of his tone could not detract from the weight of his comment. The threats to PR are manifold. KPMG and McKinsey have set up marketing agencies within their structures with the intention of further expanding their remit on the back of their close relationship with the board. Unless PR learns to talk the language of the board they will loose out on billings, influence and the chance of a place on the board.
Reputation is the key. Warren Buffett, the second most successful businessman currently alive said “if you loose money, be understanding; if you loose reputation, be ruthless”. As organisations wake up to this so PR needs to take the initiative, show it can contribute to the management of reputation. In this respect PR has the upper hand and can capitalize on this by combining its creative flair with a closer relationship and understanding of the ways of an organisations top management.
While it was suggested that there were great advantages by fostering closer relationships with the top management, the possible steps to achieving this run counter to the obvious path. Martin Sorrell, Chairman of WPP, said “PR is what you know, not who you know”. This suggests that progress will come from boosting PR’s ability to handle hard business information and by developing the skills to convey the sort of response the board will find hard to live without. The clear objective is for top management to view PRO’s as consultants, not mere members of staff.
The discussion followed on to focus on the significance of the Europe and in particular London as the centre for global PR activity. Times zones, the English language, the international/cosmopolitan population and trusting image of the UK were all quoted as reasons PR works well out of London. Traditionally PR has employed arts graduates and it was predicted that by employing more graduates from economics, politics and MBA’s would benefit PR’s profile within the board.
Finally, the discussion looked at the current impression of PR within business and where it would like to be. The overall current view was that the discipline could be described as ‘soft, fuzzy’. ‘Soft’, as in its ability to interact with other disciplines and departments and ‘fuzzy’, as in the nature of media. The proposed move is towards a ‘hard, fuzzy’ position, where the discipline displays a sharper understanding of needs of business, is accountable and commands respect for the contribution it can make towards the management of corporate reputation.
This all leads back to the question of return on investment and how PR can be accountable in the eyes of the board. At present there would seem to be a view that PR is unaccountable because the results it produces are often not in the language of the board. Results seem anecdotal and too often lack the hard facts the board can understand. Evaluation is trying to provide those facts, as best as it understands how to do so, but an open discussion needs to be started between the board at one end and the researchers at the other, with PR in the middle collecting views, educating and setting in place systems to filter and translate outcome into the language which the board can understand. Personally, I predict that only then will PR get its hard edge, although with an increasing volume of online media exposure (where accurate audience data is variable, to say the least) hard data is going to become more difficult to come by.
As with all these discussions we welcome your views.
Technology is allowing tactics of internal communications to become far more diverse and outputs more creative. The combination of advise from the BBC on how they utilize the digital internal communications channels and a practical guide from Redhouse Lane (video production) on the relative ease of creating semi-professional video productions illustrated the breadth of options available and the budgetary implications.
Karen Smith from the BBC illustrated how best to use newsletters for internal purposes. She explained that they worked best when the message was non-complex and complimented by a series of internal based blogs written by members of staff. The overall result was that information penetration was increasing. She noted that by granting staff interactive access, so their involvement increased - "If you give people control of their content they will use it. If you don't give people control you will loose them" Jarvis
Video production has always been seen as expensive, however in recent years good quality internal video production is far more affordable with cameras largely accessible and editing easily undertaken using an average PC. Time can now spent on refining the message rather than on the act of getting something out.
Employee surveys are possibly the most proactive way of testing opinion and are useful for testing views, sampling concerns and as long as the results are shared and seen to been acted on, are a good way of raising morale. It is important they are seen as part an ongoing programme of employee consultation and not a one-off, ideally repeated every two years.
This presentation by the Stephen Welch from the Hay Group detailed the processes involved in identifying a need, creating the programme and implementing it. There then follows the important response phase when results are fed back to the employees with a view to providing a plan for change. The important feature was that this be done relatively soon after the survey and is seen as accurate of opinion. While this process should not replace the managements’ right to manage it offers a valuable opportunity to involve the staff, effect change for the better and avoid accusations of tokenism. Management need to support the process entirely and be willing to share in the outcomes – something which some corporate cultures do not easily take to!
It is anticipated that the sheer diversity of web media will make it a sought-after skill to be able to pin-point those most likely to be relevant. Nobody likes spam and it will become very easy in the future to have your material blocked by the recipients if it is not directly relevant.
By the end of next year 10 million people will have access to broadband and most service providers are upgrading receivers to one or two megabytes per second download capacity without even telling them. In effect it will be like having 20% of the population having access to an almost infinite number of television channels, available when they want it, how they want it – that is what the speed will mean. Targeting is going to become key in this transition period. PR planners will pay to receive grass-roots data on what sites people are visiting. The dynamic and viral nature of the medium will mean a list of target sites will be quickly out-of-date and will require almost continuous updating.
Evaluating online media will also hold new challenges. Audience data (if available) tends to be site wide and so does not reflect number of visits per page. In some ways this is no different to newspapers which don’t provide readership figures per page; however the BBC web site has 4 million pages and so an overall visitor figure to the whole site would be unrepresentative if you only appeared on one page.
In recent years audience figures have been widely adopted as the primary measurement unit largely because it involves evaluating press. This has happened in preference to the advertising equivalent value (AEV) measure, which is viewed as being unable to represent unfavourable exposure. I anticipate that the measurement of online media will, if anything, move back towards the advertising equivalent value, primarily because it has a data stream more freely available, and would be better than not having any measure at all.
I would suggest that the majority of web sites targeted by PRO’s will take advertising (with the obvious exception of the BBC Online) and the rates to advertise will reflect the markets perceived value for the site. The AEV is quite adaptable – it can factor in volume audience and size on page or screen and in my opinion will present the one truly meaningful, impartially valued measure of PR value for online exposure.
This is a fascinating area and I would like to come back to it at a later date. Some of my ideas above are rather embryonic and I would welcome any views or input – I will even put them on this site if they are printable!
You know how much we all like multiple option call telephone routing systems – I think you get the idea! The problem now is how do you differentiate yourself when everyone is trying to as well?
"I always enjoy hearing what Michael Bland has to say, but I must take issue with his comments in last weeks Letters (18th February) section concerning research. I know it is not his intention to degrade the use of evaluation and I am sure most think it is unreasonable to expect media content analysis to give them all the answers: it will take you down the road but it won’t lead you to the front door.
If readers reject a structured approach to evaluation there has to be a grave risk to corporate and departmental justification. It is commonly accepted that the UK’s expertise in this field is second to none. Most people factor in an element of gut feeling to post analysis, however on its own it will look flimsy in front of the board."
