Of Cabbages and Kings and Measuring PR
We kicked off our first Twitterchat on measuring public relations yesterday, with the “queen of measurement” herself, Katie Paine. From 12-1 pm EST, we had an incredibly lively and vibrant discussion that surprised even me, the organizer – and I should know not to be surprised by anything on Twitter by now!
You might wonder why I borrowed from “The Walrus and the Carpenter” in titling this post. The thing is, Mr. Carroll’s poem is so full of beautiful whimsy, I can’t help but think it reflects some of the chaos we are still dealing with when it comes to measuring PR.
I write and speak often on this but really… why are we still going round and round in circles about something like AVE (ad value equivalency) which is essentially a measure of output when we know what’s really important to the C-suite is focusing on outcomes? Fortuitously, I stumbled across Pritesh Patel’s post on the subject of AVE as I was pulling this recap together, so do give it a read.
If I have one mantra when it comes to measurement – that’s it. Outcomes outcomes outcomes. Repeat after me: OUTCOMES.
But this recap isn’t (just) about me. So in that vein, here’s Sean Williams’ recap, which also looks at the AVE debate (or paroxysm, as he calls it). Below are some of the highlights of the chat, and you can find the entire transcript here.
The four questions posed were:
- What are the most common mistakes in measuring PR?
- How does a newbie get started in “smart” measurement?
- How has the PR measurement landscape changed over the years, or has it?
- Can you recommend some educational resources?
Here are just a few of the gems, and not just from Katie:
And those are just a few. I do hope you’ll read the transcript and share your thoughts via a comment below, or on Twitter using the #measurepr hashtag.
Katie – thank you so much for kicking off the inaugural #measurepr chat; I hope you’ll be back often as the featured guest!
A quick note on how we’ll proceed: these chats will take place every two weeks for now; if we see a great urge to increase (or decrease the frequency), we’ll do so, but for now, if you’re interested in PR measurement, do mark your calendars for the next one (February 16) from 12-1 pm ET, and every other Tuesday following.
And remember – we want to get your questions answered – so if you have questions you’d like to have discussed at a future chat, please email them to me at sburke (a) shonaliburke (dot) com – or, of course, you can always tweet me.
Until the next time – keep chatting and keep measuring!
More resources:
- The Institute for Public Relations has great resources on measurement
- I created a Twitter list of folks I think are leaders in measurement, so you might want to check them out
- As our featured guest, I think it’s only right to point you to Katie’s website and blog
- A presentation I made at PRSA09 on measurement, which may particularly help those of you at non-profits/with low or no budget
Image: Quinn Dombrowski, Creative Commons
Announcing #measurepr
I had a terrific time on Twitter today. Sean Williams organized a Twitterchat with Katie Paine and myself as a precursor to our respective visits to IABC/Cleveland, and we had a good old time chatting about measurement, PR, social media and the like.
You can read the entire transcript here, if you’re interested.
I sit in on quite a few chats every now and again and the one topic that always seems to come up is measurement. I figured a regular chat on measurement, especially as it pertains to public relations, might be worth setting up.
So I’ve created the #measurepr hashtag and hope that anyone who’s interested in discussing the ins and outs of PR measurement will join.
For now, we’re going to start with a bi-weekly chat, every other Tuesday from 12 – 1 pm ET. We’ll kick off the first one on February 2, and the esteemed queen of measurement, Katie Paine, will be our featured guest.
Do mark your calendars, and join me. If you have questions on PR measurement (which will encompass both “old” and “new” PR), drop me an email, leave a comment below, or tweet me. I’m looking forward to it!
Image: Creative Commons, Darren Hester’s Flickrstream
The Queen Writes on Measuring Engagement
I knew there was a reason I hadn’t written what seems to have become the obligatory first post of the New Year (because it invariably deals with resolutions, predictions, motivation, yadda yadda). That reason being I needed something really thoughtful to kick off 2010. And this post on measuring engagement aka relationships from – who else? – the queen of measurement, Katie Paine, is just that.
Thanks for starting off 2010 right, Katie.
Posted via web from simply shonali
Holiday Cards, PR and ROI
Heads up: I ramble quite a bit through this post, so if you’re hell-bent on reading it, you might want to settle in with a cup of hot cocoa. On the plus side, there are some pretty pictures involved. Having said that, read on!
It’s two days until Christmas Day (which we do celebrate). Though I still have a lot of festive “stuff” to do, I’m not feeling as manic as I was yesterday.
That’s because I finally got our Christmas holiday cards out yesterday. And they all arrived the same day; because I used Plaxo (of which I’m a premium member, and I have to thank John McCrea for responding almost immediately via Twitter to an issue I had yesterday, which was resolved in record time) to send out customized cards to our family and friends.
Remember When…
I can remember the time when December 22nd would have been unthinkable as an acceptable time frame for a holiday “mailing.” In fact, it wasn’t that long ago that we’d do the holiday card thing the traditional way: via snail mail.
It was certainly fun to design our cards and get them printed (we’d use Ofoto, which is now Kodak Gallery) to order our cards. Then write in each of them (which I think is a must-do if you’re going the traditional route, otherwise it’s like sending a bcc email to people) while trying to avoid carpal tunnel, embark on the inevitable trudge to the post office, buy a gazillion stamps, and get ‘em in the mail. And hope they’d actually arrive in time.
Since we don’t have kids but are “pet parents,”our cards would feature our pets; more specifically, one of our pets – the basset hound, Hank. It’s not that we don’t love our other dogs, but bassets just seem to be made to be cover dogs. Hank died very tragically last year, so 2007 was the last time we actually had a “real” holiday card:
We did adopt another basset, Lola, and I guess were ready to bring back the basset holiday card this year. However, also this year, life “stuff” happened, and it also seemed a good idea to curtail at least some non-essential spending (yes, it’s that whole economy thing).
So all our cards this year are e-cards (we’d started bringing an e-version of our cards into the mix a few years ago, but went 100% electronic this year).
To Mail or Not To Mail?
I was curious as to how my friends and Tweeps were approaching the holidays, so I sent out a Twtpoll asking whether they were doing holiday greetings the traditional way or not:
Quite honestly, I expected most of them to say they were going online. But out of the 38 responses to the poll (not to mention a couple of responses on Facebook), the majority WERE going with traditional cards. Here are some of the responses and reasons:
Relationships Rule
You can read all the responses if you click through to the poll. I found it rather heartwarming that in this age of technology, when we have a tendency to bemoan anything that’s not at the speed of mouse, a great many people choose to stick with tradition.
Admittedly, this was not a scientific poll, but I did think it revealed a lot about the importance people attach to relationships and their thoughtfulness about what the recipients would prefer… as well as the fact that many of them made a conscious decision to incur the expense involved in sending traditional cards, which is no small potatoes if you have a large family and extensive business or social networks (I don’t know if that’s going to save the US Postal Service, but that’s another post… or several).
Taking this a step further, this is really good public relations on a micro level, if you think about it. Knowing your audience, how it likes to be communicated with, and then sending the communications that will appeal to them.
What About ROI?
I thought the comment about “ROI” was interesting. How do you measure the ROI of holiday greetings? By how many responses you get to your cards, or cards you receive in return? By how many of the recipients become clients, or brand evangelists? By how much pleasure you derive from them?
From my point of view, I don’t have a quantifiable objective to my holiday greetings – I know, that sounds like heresy coming from an avowed measurement fanatic! I want my friends and colleagues to know I hold the relationships I have with them in high esteem.
So my goal, when I send out greetings, is to do just that – maintain my relationship with treasured friends or business contacts, and move those relationships that are at the acquaintance level up a step or two. It’s one stage in the constant (hopefully mostly upward) spiral of relationships.
And that, in my opinion, is what public relations needs to do, and be. Because business is all – ALL – about relationships.
Which brings me to you.
Even though I might not actually “know” some of you reading this post right now, we do have the beginnings of a relationship by virtue of the fact that you’re reading this. So I hope you’ll enjoy our 2009 holiday greeting, featuring Lola, the Burke Basset during “Snowmageddon” 2009.
Thank you for stopping by, and I’m looking forward to getting to know you better in 2010. Happy holidays!
And before I forget: what do you think about holiday cards, relationships and ROI? I really do want to know what you think about that, so please do share your thoughts in the comments section.
Sun, Sand and… Measurement
In a few days I’ll be Westward-bound; one of several hundred (or is it thousand?) PR and communication professionals converging on San Diego for PRSA’s 2009 International Conference (that’s me on Coronado Beach a couple years ago). My first experience of PRSA’s annual shindig was last year, when I was lucky enough to co-present with Katie Paine on measurement in Detroit.
The entire experience was a blast, and it will also live forever in my memory because that’s where I first met the beauteous and brilliant Shannon Paul and Lauren Vargas, caught up with the dynamite Kami Watson Huyse, first encountered Jason Falls, and was dissed (and defended, thank you Kami!) at my first tweetup. Ah, the good old days.
This year I’m lucky enough to have been selected by PRSA as a solo speaker and will be presenting on measurement on November 9 (here’s an interview I did to promo it a while back). If you’re attending the conference, do come by.
But more than plug my session, I want to pick your brains.
See, the thing is, my take on measurement is very simple (and yes, has been strongly influenced by the afore-referenced Sashet, the Measurement Goddess, aka Katie Paine).
You start at the end – what are your measurable objectives? And by “measurable,” I mean quantifiable and time-bound, not “increase buzz” or some crap like that.
You focus on what outcomes you’d like to achieve, not just outputs (like media impressions) and, if possible (because usually this takes some budget dollars), outtakes as well. A lot has been written about these recently, but I believe in going to the source, so here’s a great dictionary from the Institute for Public Relations (you should bookmark this).
And then you map out your strategy and tactics, track everything along the way, and then analyze the results of your program, based on what you were trying to achieve in the first place.
I like to use a couple of case studies, showing how this has been done both with “traditional” and social media, sometimes on a very tiny budget.
I show how, at my last job, we patiently tracked our communications against organizational key performance indicators, and how we were able to calculate – using a formula that was given to us by the equivalent of the marketing department – the value we added to the organization’s bottom line.
And I will tell you to stay away from ad value equivalency or AVE, which I hear IPR’s Measurement Commission recently voted down as a no-no when it comes to PR measurement.
My presentation’s probably not going to be earth-shattering for anyone (and I kinda hope it won’t, because the measurement debate’s been going on long enough).
What I hope it will be is engaging, and show practitioners who might be overwhelmed by all the jargon out there that measurement is not necessarily tough, mind-blowingly expensive, or tedious… and how to get started, or get back on the right track.
Looking for the Wisdom of Crowds
Here’s my question to you: are there any other questions you think I need to address? What else can I add to my presentation so that attendees can walk away with tips and ideas they can really use?
I can’t promise I can answer all of them, but I’ll try; if I can’t, I’ll try to find resources who can. Or, do you have tips I can include?
The bottom line is, I want the presentation to be about you, not me. So I’m asking you to help me deliver the content that will be most useful to you. I’m sure I can go it myself, but it’ll be so much more fun this way.
I’d very much appreciate your thoughts and feedback; just send me a tweet, or leave a comment below. I promise to give credit where credit’s due, and will be uploading it to SlideShare so that you can all see it.
Thank you!
Media By, For, And Of the Masses
I read about this First Amendment Center report on traditional media still being the first news source for a majority of Americans in PRWeek today (I’m sending you directly to FAC’s site since you might not be able to access the PRW article).
That’s really not a “a-ha” moment for me, despite all the ballyhoo the ongoing debate about traditional media being dead. But it’s an interesting read, and I was fascinated by the way they tried in some cases to break down the finding by demographics (African-Americans and Hispanics are more likely than whites to trust Twitter as a news source… who knew?!).
Reading the survey findings reminded me of an excellent case study by Sean Williams that the Institute for Public Relations published a few months ago, on “how a financial services company used media measurement and content analysis to gauge the impact of financial turmoil on its brand and reputation.”
Because the fact is that regardless of whether you think traditional media is dead, dying or merely comatose while social media beams down indulgently, if your work has anything at all to do with media, you need to be measuring it… and measuring it right.
Sean’s case study, as well as his follow-up blog post on IPR’s site where he shares lessons learned, are must-reads for anyone into media measurement, and why I think he’s one of the smartest guys around today.
He might just be my holy cow of measurement.
Iron Hand, Velvet Glove
My friend Katie Paine, who’s at Bulldog Reporter’s PR Measurement Summit 2009 in New York as I type this (and which I’m not attending), sent me an interesting note via Skype. Apparently the conference notebook contains the following reminder to “Please Use Social Media Courteously during the PR Measurement Summit”:
Social media create powerful opportunities for communicating among a network of colleagues — which can be used constructively but can also lead to awkward and unpleasant consequences when used ill-advisedly. During recent conferences in a variety of industries, for example, participants have provided real time commentaries of the events that have precipitated misunderstandings, embarrassment and even anger. For this reason we offer the following courtesy guidelines for participants in this conference:
1. Avoid participating in social media conversations during presentations. It’s simply impossible to concentrate fully on speakers analyses and advice while participating in online conversations or creating social media commentary.
2. Avoid over-simplifying a speaker’s comments or position in any social media commentary. Most speakers offer a complex and nuanced perspective which cannot fairly be distilled into 140 characters or even 1,400 characters.
3. Keep commentary on a professional level and avoid commentary on personal issues relating to participants.
Again – I’m not at the conference, and typing what Katie sent me as printed in the handbook, so if there are any typos, they’re Katie’s and mine.
I couldn’t help but think, though: for “courtesy guidelines,” aren’t there an awful lot of implied dont’s around?
I have certainly come across speakers who prefer attendees not to tweet (since that’s the most prevalent way of participating in SM at least that I know of) during their presentations. Granted, they spent a lot of time (one would hope) preparing and no one likes to think their audience is not paying attention. But if they’re going to decide for me how much attention I can or cannot pay while attending a presentation – well, I’m going to be thinking of spending my money elsewhere next time around.
Avoid over-simplifying a speaker’s comment? Their “complex and nuanced” perspectives can’t be distilled into “140 or even 1,400 characters”? Good grief. What else do PR practitioners do but distill “complex and nuanced” perspectives into every day speak?
Should commentary be kept to a professional level? Of course it should be. But one would hope the majority of folks who attend such conferences already understand this. It’s called, er, being adult.
I don’t know if Bulldog Reporter provided attendees with a conference hashtag (I assume most attendees are following their guidelines and NOT participating in SM), but surely printing that in the handbook would have been useful as a way to track these conversations and, what’s more, open the door to a whole new potential audience.
I’ve lost track of the number of conferences I was unable to attend but which I was still able to learn from simply by tracking the hashtags. And as far as not being able to pay attention to speakers if we’re using SM: well, we work in PR. Multi-tasking is usually our middle name (or one of them). And most of us are smart enough to stop tweeting or Skype-ing if we’re losing the presentation by doing so.
I threw out a quick poll on Twitter: 1) Do you think conference organizers should dictate SM use (tweets, etc.) during conferences? 2) Would you listen?
Here’s some of what I got back:
I’m sure Bulldog Reporter had the best intentions in mind while drafting its guidelines. I just wish it didn’t come across quite so much as a way to control – or eliminate – the incredibly multidimensional facet that SM can bring to such conferences. Nineteen Eighty-Four was a long time ago.
What do you think?
The Ragan Experience
Last week I had the pleasure of presenting, for the first time ever, at Ragan Communications’ 2009 Corporate Communicators Conference in Chicago. As someone who’s wistfully devoured the CCC brochures every year, this was a big thrill for me.
My session on strategic communications planning took place a week ago today; unfortunately I wasn’t able to stay over and attend the “unconference,” so missed meeting many of the wonderful and smart people I’ve gotten to know on Twitter. I did get to meet Amy Mengel (whose Ragan recap is absolutely killer), Ann Marie van den Hurk, APR, and Lee Aase among others, catch up with the lovely Angie Jeffrey, APR, Katie “queen” Paine and the amazing Jim Ylisela, and have a fabulous lunch and walk with the effervescent and super-smart Kate Zimmer (see how happy we are?).
The Skinny on the Presentation
The presentation itself went well (I think); I must admit I was tickled by having to move from a breakout room to the main ballroom in order to accommodate all the attendees. I very much hope it was worth their while.
When I’m asked to make these presentations, I often wonder – as I’m sure all speakers and presenters do – what I can provide to the audience that will be of most value. Or am I going to say the same things everyone else does, but with a slightly different accent?
So Beth Harte’s recent post, “Social Media’s Dirty Little Secret” really resonated with me. If you haven’t read it yet, you should, as well as click through to Dan Keeney’s post to see the video she mentions and read all the comments.
See – I agree with Beth. Social media is nothing new. And I’m going to go one step further and say that 99% of the time, PR is nothing new. Strategic communications is nothing new.
A vast majority of the time, I find the tweets, blogs, LinkedIn questions, yadda yadda, that I follow and read/respond to… nothing new. And that includes the stuff I say.
Before your jaw quite reaches the floor, I think that’s OK.
We’re not – as the rest of the world loves to say about us “PR types,” rocket scientists, tech geniuses or wildly-brilliant theorists. Most of us will probably never rise to the level of a Les Potter or Jim Grunig.
But that’s OK.
Where we add value – I hope – is in reinforcing time-tested communications best practices with practical examples of how we’ve achieved success for our clients or organizations, and showing others how they might adapt those practices for their use. I have to believe that younger professionals in particular derive great value from this.
And perhaps we’re saying it in a new voice, or a new style, that people identify with, and which drives them to adopt the aforesaid practices.
That’s what I hope attendees got out of my presentation which, in a nutshell, tried to reinforce the importance of starting with your end in sight, putting measurable objectives in place, and figuring out your strategy accordingly. (Gosh, where have I heard that before? Here, and here, and here.)
So if you were expecting a flash of brilliance from my presentation, I’m going to apologize in advance for disappointing you.
Now that I’ve gotten that out of the way, here it is.
A special word of thanks to everyone who contributed to the presentation, particularly Lauren Vargas for reviewing it beforehand, and Bryan Person and Jenna Woodul of LiveWorld for a fabulous case study.
The Adam Lambert Litmus Test
Apparently I wasn’t the only one screaming at my television last night.
Why? I’d set my DVR to record “American Idol” (it allows me to skip the commercials), so when I figured enough time had passed in order for me to be able to skip all the ads, I settled in to watch it.
The show ran over. My DVR did not. And I missed watching the one contestant I’d been waiting to see: Adam Lambert.
So what did I do? I logged on to AmericanIdol.com (which is not a site I frequent) to see if the video had been uploaded yet. No. Then I turned to YouTube. Nope.
This morning, as soon as I brought my Washington Post in, I turned immediately to Lisa de Moraes’ TV column to find out what he sang (again, not my typical modus operandi). I can’t remember a time I’ve been so glad she watches so we don’t have to.
Once I knew which song Adam got a standing ovation from Simon Cowell for, I did a quick search for it, and voilà.
Phew. And all before 7:30 a.m. today.
The Adam Lambert Litmus Test
This is not a paean to Adam Lambert. But consider the atypical behavior – for me – that I engaged in, just to see and hear what he did last night. That’s engagement; not with the show, per se, but with what a single contestant brings to it, and which obviously helps the show.
The bottom line for effective PR is that you need to reach your audiences, and engage them enough to inspire behavior that helps achieve your goals. That engagement is what I experienced last night and this morning – and I’m still engaged enough to write about it.
That’s the kind of thing we should be measuring as PR professionals. Forget about clips and impressions (I’m still amazed at how many people focus on them as a sole or primary measure). It’s about engagement.
Does your PR pass the Adam Lambert litmus test?
What do you think? Have you been able to convince your clients and/or organizations to start focusing on outtakes and outcomes, rather than outputs? What’s your litmus test? I’d love to hear from you.
(Photo: Broadwayworld.com)
