It's hard enough to measure the results of a PR campaign conducted in one's own country. Evaluation of media or market response for programs conducted in one or more overseas countries becomes even more complex. But the demand for international programs is rising, which is forcing organizations to address this challenge.
Getting Experienced
How can PR programs be best analyzed when language and cultural differences stand in the way? Some companies are not yet prepared for the international market that "is now booming, more so than even a year ago," says Forrest Anderson, senior vice president and director of research and account planning at Golin/Harris Communications Inc., Chicago, a unit of Shandwick Communications International.
Most clients that come to Golin/Harris for international audience analysis want media analysis, because it's faster and cheaper than other methods, like phone and mail, focus group and pre/post surveys (before and after surveys to measure change in attitudes.) For audience analysis, prices for analysis vary depending on factors such as sample size, how long the survey takes to complete and how many questions are asked. Golin's clients conducting overseas measurement have concentrated on the most developed markets thus far, such as Europe and the Asia-Pacific region.
One of the more popular media coverage evaluation techniques being used for international programs is content analysis. This involves studying and tracking print and broadcast hits or clips, says Anderson. Hits are analyzed based on factors such as length, prominence and section of the country in which the media vehicle appeared.
The tough part about international research is that you actually have to get your hands on the publication, and break the language barrier to read and interpret it, to see if your message was portrayed as you wanted it to be," says Anderson.
This poses the problem of culture biases and differences, which can only be attacked by an analyst familiar with the country who speaks both languages, which can be difficult to find. He says that even though many PR agencies have their own in-house media analysts, "it's not quite kosher to evaluate your own stuff. You should get an outsider to do it."
Golin/Harris knows that analysis results are not just as concrete as how many mentions a company received on TV or how many people attended an event. Anderson argues that PR people's jobs are not to try and get as many people as possible to an event or to buy a product, because "if you start measuring everything that way, you reduce PR to promotion. You can't put a dollar sign on measuring what's in people's heads."
In Europe, the firms and their clients are in the early stages of identifying the resources and methods need to conduct multi-country evaluation programs. The profession is "on the cusp of it," said Stella Hitner, managing director of The Reputation Managers Ltd., London.
InfoPress Communications Limited in London also does media analysis for European and U.S. clients, and hires other communications companies to do research tasks like phone and mail surveys and focus group interviews. Rob Walker, group systems manager, says that the demand for international programs and audience measurement in multiple countries is rising faster than the firm can keep up. So far, InfoPress has chosen to restrict media analysis to English-language nations, such as the United Kingdom, Ireland and the United State. They're working on forming associations with analysts in other countries, mainly Europe, but Walker says that, "it takes a lot of groundwork and you have find analysts who really know the cultures and will be really careful about the biases."
Ketchum Public Relations, New York, has a system that they use for every PR campaign, domestic or international. It's called the "effectiveness yardstick," which consists of three levels that depend on each other. The first is output --did the messages appear in the right target markets (publications, tv stations, radio stations)? The second is the outgrowth -- did the audiences receive the messages? And the third is outcomes --was the ultimate awareness, attitudes, or behavior changed?
As Walt Lindenmann, senior vice president and director of research at Ketchum, says, each level identifies or pinpoints a higher or more sophisticated plateau for the measurement of PR success or failure.
Lindenmann says there's no one way to analyze an audience. In some countries, phone surveys are standard, while in others, people won't talk unless it's face-to-face. To get it right the first time, he advises "picking the appropriate methodology to fit the particular country to get the highest response rate."
(Golin/Harris, 312/836-7378; Reputation Managers, 011-44-1-908-696-169; InfoPress Communications Limited, 011 44 171 353 2320; Ketchum Communications, 212/878-4608)