With all the buzz surrounding digital communications and the measurability of eyeballs viewing online platforms, it might be tempting to abandon traditional measurement efforts
for the lure of the future. True, measuring online influencers is now a necessity, but so is quantifying the impact of offline communications. An added bonus: The technological
advancements spawned by digitalization have improved the means of doing so.
"There must be some offline metrics because, ultimately, not all activities are in the online world," says John Greenberg, vice president and co-founder of Goodmind.
With that, he offers advice and a case study for measuring offline communications with effective tools and techniques. First, however, he sets the stage with the caveats of such
metrics:
"Metrics help you define problems by quantifying results, thus generating better decisions and improved outcomes," he says. "Yet, simple metrics are insufficient. Clipping
services only tell us how many times our message appears; ad equivalency has no provable basis, as editorial exposure is fundamentally different in nature and effect from
advertising."
With that storm front on the horizon, he offers the work Goodmind, in conjunction with Peppercom, provided General Electric's management for generating data
around the quality and effectiveness of the company's PR efforts. While it is only one specific example, it does offer PR professionals on both the agency and corporate sides
strategies and tactics for quantifying forgotten metrics - that is, those generated offline.
"There are too many measurement products where the company tells the customer what's good or not; these formulas are created, and the client is force-fed them. It's the client,
who understands what is important, who should do the weighting,"" says Ed Moed, co-founder and managing partner of Peppercom. "We've worked with four departments of GE [financial,
energy, transportation and infrastructure] over two years time, doing a quarterly analysis from a quality and quantity standpoint to see if media relations was getting better or
not, while also looking at if the company was pushing the needle with business outcomes."
This experience directly applies to Moed's negative comment about quantifying what the measurement provider decides on, rather than building a strategy around the needs of the
client. In GE's case, the Peppercom/Mindshare team first established which parameters were most important.
"The idea of getting agreement up and down the line in terms of what is important is really key," Greenberg says. "Think about the unit performance - opportunities in terms of
reach and influence. Establish which activities you feel people will be most responsive to, whether it's a live event or a word-of-mouth recommendation."
Together with GE, the team identified pre-project parameters: results needed to be simple, verifiable, flexible/expandable and prescriptive to the front-line manager
responsible for results. Knowing this ahead of time ensured that the outcomes were relevant, rather than a waste of time and money.
"Measurement doesn't need to be expensive if you focus on just a few things that really matter to you," Moed says. "What are your ultimate communications goals?"
Other typical communications objectives include evaluating programs for fit with the target audience; understanding the drivers of influence among the target audience and
credibility of the communications activity; enabling more accountability by measuring effectiveness of specific activities where possible and overall effectiveness from a
baseline; and, estimating the value of specific programs and initiatives.
Once you have set out mutual expectations, Moed and Greenberg point to the following offline measurement strategies:
*Don't be single-minded. "First, don't just measure media for media's sake," Moed says. "Think about what you really care about. The reality is, most companies have
integrated PR campaigns, and media is just one aspect." However, many people may focus solely on media metrics because they think these are the easiest to quantify, but that
isn't the case (not to mention the fact that, in some cases, that's not even relevant to your organization's objectives).
"You can measure anything as long as you have something to track data on," Moed says. "Just tracking media won't give you a real indication if the program is working."
*Find your premise. In conjunction with the client, go through the process of determining the desired parameters.
"They key to finding out if your premise is right is to ask people why they chose your brand," Greenberg says. "It's a matter of being able to collect that data and then
correlate it to behaviors. There is a big difference between association and correlation. To be statistically correlated is essential."
*Know what you are actually going to measure. This relates to the key messages and tone that will have the most impact. For example, if you want to initiate a campaign
that brands your CEO as the face of the company and measure its success/effectiveness, then the most important parameters are based on the "events" (articles, speaking
engagements, etc.) that are associated with this person. These are the key messages that need to be honed and measured.
*Put someone in charge of disseminating these key messages. You can strategies and define parameters all you want, but it's a moot point if there isn't someone
responsible for overseeing the execution.
*Track and validate. "We're talking about quantitative validation of qualitative results," Greenberg says in reference to the work with GE, which, Moed says, " takes
soft data and puts weights against that to make sure the score in the end means something in the context of what the client cares about."
*Don't just measure; improve. "It's not just enough to measure," Moed says. "Once you measure [an offline initiative], you have to take a deep look at what isn't
working and change it."
This process is especially important in offline communications, as there are no easy fixes. You can't post a blog or respond to a comment and then see how many people
read/linked to it; you have to recalibrate messages and then start the process all over again.
Of course, despite the current success of many measurement efforts, both online and offline, the biggest challenge is not one of quantification.
"There is still so much confusion surrounding measurement," Moed says. "There's no standard in our industry, and that's a problem. One can be created around how you go about
measurement, but it's hard to create one standard around how you look at variable and what they mean. At the end of the day, clients just want something simple that they can show
to their CEO." PRN
CONTACTS:
John Greenberg, [email protected]; Ed Moed, [email protected]