Comments on: Does PR Really “Build Awareness?”

By: PRJack

PRJack — Fri, 03 Oct 2008 16:18:21 +0000

ah, the age old paradox. Everyone agrees that ‘you can’t manage what you don’t measure’. But when faced with the realities of the cost of capturing perception in a target audience before a campaign and again after, and then having a real analysis done… well suddenly the purse-strings draw tight.

Ultimately any marketing effort – PR included – aims to alter (or potentially reinforce) behavioural patterns amongst a pre-determined audience. And no other metric can directly gauge that (not sales, hits, Media Relations Rating Points, clicks, visits, etc) other than actually talking to that audience.

So while ‘increasing awareness’ is not just valid, it’s critical, the ability to actually measure that is far too often not seen in the same light… unfortunately.

By: davidmullen

davidmullen — Thu, 02 Oct 2008 20:57:08 +0000

@Lara – Ha! No pressure!

The solution is specific metrics that you are going to measure. Which could be “increase awareness.” As long as you’re going to measure pre- and post-awareness levels.

I’m not saying “increase awareness” is bad. I’m saying that if we list it as a goal, we should be ready to measure it and say – through data – either “yes we did” or “no we didn’t” on the results.

By: Lara Kretler

Lara Kretler — Thu, 02 Oct 2008 15:00:02 +0000

We usually state specific metrics when developing a program to raise awareness – such as measureable increase in online buzz/chatter, increase in media placements, etc. But I see what you are saying – even if we can show increased blog posts/comments about a client or increased media coverage, does that necessarily equate to increased awareness among target consumers/customers? I say it does, and I’d be wager most people would agree, but we’re still not connecting the dots all the way. I am now expecting you to come up with a solution for all of this, David!

By: libbykrah

libbykrah — Wed, 01 Oct 2008 20:55:21 +0000

David, great points and great questions. It seems like “building awareness” has become a goal for every PR effort. If we’re not even trying measure it, what’s the point? I guess the assumption is that good PR will generate media placement, and media placement contributes to public awareness.

…as the kids say, “Well, dur!”

If we’re assuming that PR builds awareness, then that goal basically becomes a given. So what’s the point of even writing it down?

By: earmstrong

earmstrong — Tue, 30 Sep 2008 17:05:07 +0000

Whoa! If you were only a fly on the wall of the meeting I just left. It was all about setting “measurable goals” and as you might imagine we fumbled our way through most of it. I agree that this issue relates to areas outside of PR, in fact I was the only PR person in the room. Nicely written! This one gets saved.

By: Katie Paine

Katie Paine — Tue, 30 Sep 2008 15:12:05 +0000

brilliant post. Actually, there are a few companies that really do pre-post metrics to determine shifts in perceptions and awareness, but they are few and far between. Interestingly, however, their CMOs and VPs of PR have remarkable longevity. When will marketing folks realize that accountability not only builds credibility but job security.

By: davidmullen

davidmullen — Tue, 30 Sep 2008 14:50:27 +0000

@Jay – hilarious! I almost lost my Mr. Pibb laughing at that one.

@Kellye – I think that’s the key. If we agree goals should be measurable, then we should set measurable goals. Right on.

@Kirk and @Sonny – I agree that it gets tossed around by too many folks, including those outside of PR. Thought I’d call us out on it, especially since we tend to get dinged for having too many “soft” measurements anyways.

Thanks for sharing your insights!

By: Sonny Gill

Sonny Gill — Tue, 30 Sep 2008 14:12:11 +0000

Hi David, Kellye pointed me to your post. Great points here.

As Kirk stated, it goes further than just PR but many aspects of marketing. It’s the invisible ‘metric’ that many execs I know love to hear about.

Definitely a change in behavior is needed but might need a bit of an education as to why not. And then having the ability to plan out goals that are visually (numerically) attainable.

By: Kirk Phillips

Kirk Phillips — Tue, 30 Sep 2008 13:58:41 +0000

An eternal question. It applies to all marketing channels, not just pr. In my college classes, I was taught the steps in the marketing process are: 1) raise awareness, 2) build expectations, 3) generate trial, 4) etc. leading to build brand loyalty. Some of the softer steps can be measured through research, although that has never been very satisfying. “Sales are flat, but yowzers, look how well we scored in unaided awareness.” Of course, trial can be measured with hard numbers. But where is the linkage between awareness and sales? (One of the great advantages of interactive marketing.) I agree with your conclusion: establish metrics for every step of the process and establish correlations.

By: Kellye Crane

Kellye Crane — Tue, 30 Sep 2008 13:57:09 +0000

Excellent points, David. In the past, there were limits to how much we could measure awareness without spending a great deal in the process. Fortunately, new technologies are leading to improved and more cost-effective measurement dashboards. As you point out, now we just have to change our behavior and get in the habit of setting specific goals in this area.