About half of PR practitioners still "measure" their campaigns based on gut instinct and intuition, according to the 2001 Media Relations Reality Check, an Internet-based
survey conducted by QuickSilver Interactive Group, Dallas. A total of 4,200 members of a public relations association answered questions during April and May on how they measure
and why. Results showed:
- Media relations measurement and evaluation budgets remain small - 70 percent of respondents report line item budgets for measurement less than 10% of their overall PR
budget. Twenty-six percent say their budgets have increased in the last three years. - Of measurement tools and methodologies used over the past two years, 82 percent of those surveyed frequently use clip books, video tapes or logs, and 50 percent list
"intuition or gut feel" as their metric of choice (or what they resort to most often). More quantifiable measures, including audience impressions (38%), content analysis (37%), ad
equivalency reports (33%), audience surveys (26%), focus groups (26%), tracking sales or share prices (24%) and tracking interactive chat rooms (10%) ranked significantly lower. - Goals for measuring the impact of media relations include: improving communications planning (89%), establishing use of key messages (86%) and proving the value of PR (81%).
- Excuses for avoiding measurement: too expensive (66%); no one is demanding it (49%); too time consuming (45%); not knowledgeable about measurement (23%); and concerned what
results might show (9%).
The survey's error margin is +/-5%. In addition to QuickSilver Interactive Group, survey sponsors include The Public Relations Standard Council, TRAKWare Inc., Publicity
Valuation Research Inc. and Bulldog Reporter.
(Angie Jeffrey, TRAKWare, 713/956-1516, [email protected])