|
introduction statement of problem literature review rationale & research question method discussion references appendix authors
|
1. Measurement approaches need to be brought in at the campaign planning stage.
2. The plan must include clear identification of the campaign elements – what messages each will convey, to whom, and with what desired effect. This will help identify appropriate measurement techniques.
3. Those effects must be clearly tied to overarching organizational goals and objectives. That will place resulting measurements within an organizational context, linking PR to organizational goals.
4. Conduct a preplanning search for related information that might predict success or failure of individual elements and the entire program. Chances are, someone has tried your approach before. Look for articles that provide insight into likely outcomes as well as appropriate measurement techniques.
5. Individual campaign elements should be pretested. The focus group or field experiment approach might be appropriate for this.
6. Measurement tools should be employed before, during, and following the campaign. Proven tools might include surveys (awareness, attitude, opinion, etc.), in-depth interview, content analyses, inquiry feedback, impression counts.
7. Make certain you are not merely measuring outputs, but outcomes as well.
8. Use a mix of measurement tools for the highest likelihood of isolating cause and effect.
9. Include “bottom-line” measurement such as sales or legislation passed or blocked, but don’t limit measurements to short-term effects.
10. Employ simple, daily procedures to track and document ongoing measurements such as requests for reprints of newsletter articles.
11. Mix quantitative and qualitative assessments to provide complete texture and context of program effectiveness. This is sometimes called “triangulating.”
12. Don’t merely
use results to demonstrate PR’s effectiveness; learn from the results.
Make appropriate adjustments to the program. Organize the PR staff
to reflect efforts based on highest return on investment.
From: Alan R. Freitag (1998). How to Measure What We Do. Public Relations Quarterly, 43 (2), 42-47
Proposed news clip input form for MRE Model
U.S. Air Force Academy video news clip input form
The survey conducted to verify the validity of the MRE should be consistent with the following:
Indicate your
degree of agreement or disagreement with each of the following statements
about the MRE Model being an effective tool for measuring your media relations
program by circling your response.
SA = Strongly
Agree, A = Agree, U = Undecided, D = Disagree,
SD = Strongly Disagree
SA
A U
D SD
1. I see the
need to effectively measure the value my media relations program
adds the overall unit or organization.
SA
A U
D SD
2. Determining
media relations output in addition to outcomes is
an effective way of measuring a media relations program.
SA
A U
D SD
3. Determining
advertising equivalency is an effective element of
measuring a media relations program.
SA
A U
D SD
4. Determining
the editorial slant of positive, negative and neutral are effective elements
of measuring a media relations program.
SA
A U
D SD
5. Determining
the balance of a story is an effective element of
measuring a media relations program.
SA
A U
D SD
6. Determining
whether a story was generated due to a news release or response to query
is an effective element of measuring a media relations program.
SA
A U
D SD
7. Determining
the number of stories aired or printed by the media is an effective element
of measuring a media relations program.
SA
A U
D SD
8. Determining
whether an organization’s key messages were relayed to the target audience
is an effective element of measuring a media relations program.
SA
A U
D SD
9. Tracking
the number of media stories about my organization is an effective element
of measuring my media relations program.
SA
A U
D SD
10. Using a mixture
of any variety of the elements together mentioned above is an effective
element of measuring a media relations program.