KDPaine's PR Measurement Blog

Great post on evaluating Twitter

MediaPost Publications Twittering Away Time And Money 06/30/2009.

Time for us to put up or shut up

I've been at dozens of measurement conferences this year and handed out thousands of stickers that say "YES WE CAN MEASURE PR" and "YES WE CAN MEASURE SOCIAL MEDIA"  and most people seem to agree with that statement. Now's our chance to prove it. Everyone out there that is doing good research, measurement or evaluation in the field of social media or public relations should submit his/her program for the Jack Felton Golden Ruler Award.
Lets prove to the world that we can in deed tie PR to tangible results

Can Nokia's reputation be saved?

When I first heard about the Wall Street Journal story essentially blaming Nokia & Siemens for the Iranian dictatorship's ability to track and arrest protestors via cell phones, I was all for signing the petition demanding a  Boycott of  Nokia, Siemens for Selling to Iran.
Then I read spokesperson Ben Roome's blog post which provided a rationale explanation of the issue. But from a reputation measurement perspective, it got me wondering. As long as the WSJ stands by its story, and as long as that story is being tweeted and retweeted amongh the thousands of folks following #iranelection on Twitter, what chance does the company have of actually controlling the public's perception of the company's role in the brutal crackdown in Iran? And, does a company have an obligation to be more proactive in a crisis of this sort?  I know that Nokia Siemens is following standard crisis communications theory by putting their story out there, listening (and publishing) the comments and criticisms, and I really can't fault them.
But I'm wondering if, in this era of instant communications and continuous news reporting, classic crisis communications no longer works. Do you have to do somethingn above and beyond the norm, something proactive, not reactive, that will tell the world that you do indeed stand for the basic human rights of freedom of speech and liberty for all?
I guess if I were them, I'd be tracking my social media presence against sales of phones, to see whether the call for a boycott has legs, But I'd be working on a blan B if it does.

Thoughts on the Berlin Protocol

Barry Leggetter, AMEC's Executive Director and the force behind last week's Berlin Measurement Summit, very correctly asked me for specifics of "The Berlin Protocol" that I proposed in my post last week.
So here's a start.

 

• 1.       We agree to use no research methodology that isn’t based on solid research and facts
• 2.       We agree to a standard principle that the best measurements are business outcomes not exposure, AVE or OTS
• 3.       We all agree to avoid to not use multipliers and other non-proven false statistics
• 4.       We agree that transparency is key to credibility in  our industry, and so we agree to reveal, if asked, our methodologies and our intercoder reliability scores and eschew “black boxes” and mystery algorithms
• 5.       We do not promote or offer or endorse AVEs, and if they are used, they must discount negative stories, stories that do not contain key messages, and stories that do not mention the brand in the headline or top 20% of the story. (i.e. stories you’d actually be willing to pay for)

Further thoughts? Additions? ?

My favorite newmeasurement tool

I got a chance to check out  this new analysis tool out from NEWBASE called Infonitor at the AMEC Measurement Summit last week, it's pretty impressive.

Why 31% of Marketers and most PR people will probably lose their jobs

There's more and more research, like this new report on Marketing Measurement
that essentially says that CEOs expect ROI and serious business metrics, while most marketers haven't even budgeted for basic measurement.
Like the recently released AMEC Benchpoint study reveals, there's a gap the size of the Grand Canyon between what your average PR or Mktg person measures, and what the CEO expects/wants.
So is it any wonder that marketing and pr budgets are getting slashed and more and more of our friends are looking for jobs?

Assessing the assessors at AMEC's Summit on Measurment

 After spending 3 days in Berlin talking about measurement, I’m ready to try gardening for the rest of my life. Or maybe politics, at least with gardening and politics things actually change. Don’t get me wrong, I was as delighted as the next person by the fact that 8% more people measure today than they did 5 years ago. But it was the lack of movement in HOW people measured that really got to me. In essence, despite the advances in Dashboard, survey research, and social networking analysis, most PR people are measuring in 2009 with tools that I rejected in 1987 when I started Delahaye, my first measurement company.

When David Rockland asked the 150 or so people how many people used AVE (Ad Value Equivalents) almost everyone raised his/her hand. And while a large number of them also admitted not being exactly proud of doing so, the universal assessment was that “they had no choice.”  They had to deliver what the client wants. And, I asked, if the client wanted heroin or nuclear weaponry or child porn would they also deliver. Sadly, the consensus was yes. The proliferation of AVEs is driven by market demand.
Rockland went on to spend another hour or so discussing a metric that IMHO has no place in today’s measurement discussion. But obviously I was a minority (except, of course on Twitter, where there was a general consensus of WTF – why was so much time being devoted to this topic. )But that’s because people on Twitter tend to be aficionados of social media where AVE isn’t even an option.

I obviously have a radically different outlook than most of my profession. But somehow, I’ve managed to grow two companies, hang on to over 4000 twitter followers, generate  over 2000 subscribers to our newsletters, and happily service 100s of clients that don’t seem to mind me sticking to my principles. So I for one will continue to eschew AVE and welcome any and all fellow supporters into my club.

In fact, the idealist in me wish for a “Berlin Protocol” in which we all agreed to not just promote measurement, but to promote the “right” way of measuring based on outcomes not outputs and based on true science not “assessment by voodoo economics.” 

As a side note, it does make my life easier. As you might imagine, I am frequently asked to judge PR award programs, and my stance makes it for far  easier judging.  I routinely toss  out any entry that even comes within the discussion of AVEs, so as a result I have far fewer entries to judge.

But I digress. At the Amec there were numerous fascinating and elucidating presentations on all aspects of PR measurement and beautifully summed up by Nanette Bresson.   But when it came down to the nitty gritty, in essence, the vast majority of vendors in the room, were still counting hits (How Idiots Track Success) and AVEs.  They were all basing decisions on data that was either patently false or never existed. Don Wright and David Michaelson discussed their  seminal research that proved conclusively that multipliers had no basis in reality, but that doesn’t mean anyone in that room in Berlin has plans to abandon them anytime soon.

So here’s a question and a proposition. First the question: If I drop out of sight for a year, tend my garden, speak no more, and let the industry get on with its day to day issues, and assuming I returned to return to the business in June of 2010, would anything have changed?  

And here’s the proposition: Lets all agree to never again deliver an AVE number, or any other number we don’t believe in. Do you really think our business would collapse? Would clients really leave measurement in droves? . Or would they be forced to actually look at true business outcomes. And if we don’t do this, don’t we lose the business to management consultants anyway?

Watching the Green Revolution from the home of the Velvet one.

It’s fascinating to watch the developments unfold in Iran, while I’m in Prague learning about their “Velvet Revolution” --   If you haven’t been following the bloody aftermath of the recent Iranian election which many believe to have been stolen,  just  search for #iranelection on Twitter and you won’t get any more work done for the rest of the week. It is a fascinating 1^st person account from dozens of people on the street, talking about events literally as they are happening. It started with proofs that the election was stolen, went on to accuse CNN and American Media in general of gross negligence in its coverage. Ultimately the Tweets on the streets started posting photos of the violence, the Twitterverse responded with a number of innovative ways of showing its support, The most compelling were the shots of Iranian women, bloddied but unbowed taking to the streets in the cause of freedom.

It’s being called the Green revolution and as we speak hundreds of my Tweeps have changed their avatars to green in support of the protests. There are several key twitters, specifically @change_for_iran and @persiankiwi who have been live blogging the events,  and while I’ve never met either one of them, I’m praying like crazy that they are safe.   

As I’m running around Prague I started thinking hard about what it all means and what’s the difference between the Czech “Velvet” revolution and todays’ “Green Revolution” in Iran.  Obvioulsly when the Velvet revolution happened, while there was no alternative or social media to report it, the truth was that the soviet regime had essentially run  out of steam, and didn’t have the muscle to fight the protesters. According to a student I sat next to on the plane, who's parents were in the thick of it, those in the know, and in authority, realized what the future held,  saw the writing on the wall and switched sides. Thus the whole thing happened with nary a shot fired. There was no Twitter, no Facebook, no such thing as “blocking” Internet access because it was before the Internet, Google, Hulu and any of the other tools we’ve gotten used to.

Fast forward 20 years later, Prague is a vibrant city, with free Wi-Fi virtually everywhere, a startingly diverse cultural life, a healthy divergence of political opinions, that retains its Bohemian reputation but has added democracy and freedom to its repertoire. This for a country and a city that has been occupied, terrorized, subjugated, and otherwise robbed of its freedoms more times than you can count. Yet here it is today, with better arts and culture, more tourists, a better reputation, and one might argue a healthier democracy and a freer society than American has enjoyed in the last 8 years.

Which brings me back to Iran. Obviously Achmadinajad is nowhere near as close to the end of his powers as Gorbachev was in 1989. But Gorbachev didn’t have Twitter and the rest of social media to deal with. Despite the Iranian government’s numerous attempts to block various social networks Including Twitter, the amazing crowd sourcing abilities of the millions of people who are on line  providing proxy servers, alternative means of distribution, and a continuous stream of photos, videos and proof that the election was rigged.

All of which reminds me of a conversation that I had with Shel Israel a couple of years ago. Shel and I are both idealistic hippy reporters from the 70s, so it wasn’t a big stretch for us to come to the conclusion over dinner in Chicago one night that social media might actually lead to world peace. Okay, you can attribute whatever percentage of that idealistic notion to the wine we may or may not have consumed. But we’ve now had some serious proof, in Moldova, Colombia and now Iran that revolutions really can be, if not started, at least fomented via social media.

I pray that my friends and Tweeps in Iran survive this night and the ensuing weeks, and that their revolution is both “Green” and “Velvet”  and that change happens in Iran with a minimum of bloodshed. But I also pray that every other authoritarian ruler out there, that thinks that they can somehow keep down the human spirit in an age of social media takes heed of these happenings.

As I chanted in the 70s “The people, united, will never be divided”  I now add, the people, united by Twitter, Facebook, Flickr, YouTube and all other forms of social media, will never be divided. Ultimately, we are all human at heart, some more human than others, but when we have the ability to connect with each other and remind ourselves that the vast majority of us want the same things as Elvis Costello would have said – peace, love and understanding .

Wandering thru Prague one sees constant evidence that over time, even the strongest of bastions will decay, whether it be a Castle, a church, a tower, or a command and control authoritarian government. The good news is that if Prague is any indication, we’ll may chose to patch elements back together, but ultimately, humanity does survive. 

persiankiwi (persiankiwi) on Twitter.

Stop with the excuses, ROI isn't that hard, just read this

Paul Dunay has captured perfectly why so many of us are running out of patience with the wringing of hands about ROI of Social Media discussion.

Great summary of AMEC Summit

For those who couldn't attend the AMEC Measurement Summit - TNannett Bresson has written a wonderful synopsis

Great explanation as to why HITS still stand for How Idiots Track Success

Confusion, lawsuits, denial of reality and resistance to change are all roiling the audience measurement marketing these days. Read all abouot it:  Nielsen Glitch Focuses Attention On New Online Measurement System, Impact Unknown

Interesting stats on Twitter Usage

Sysomos has released this research data on Twitter World.

Another reason to love Radian 6 @ambercadabra

I''ve always known that the folks at Radian6 were smart -- so smart that I really don't mind that it occasionally feels like they're stalking me, we speak at so many conferences together. But this rant on the Difference Between Hard and Hard Work |by Amber Naslund better known on Twitter as @ambercadabra is just brilliant. Without being preachy she absolutely nails all those whiners out there that complain that social media can't be measured.

What the experts really said

My apologies for my last post. I wasn't aware that the article was subscription-based, since I'm a subscriber to PR Week and it just popped up. Without getting into a debate about the viability of subscription-based content as a revenue model, and enforcement of copyright laws, I've highlighted a few of the most memorable measurement moments of PR Week's roundtable. I believe the full story is available in their new hard-copy monthly as well as online.

Katie Delahaye Paine (KDPaine & Partners): It used to be that PR measurement was about justifying your existence. Finally people are realizing we need the data to figure out where to spend our resources and where to spend our efforts and energies. If something isn't working, take the money and do something else. But we need to know what's working, what's not working, and how to continuously improve our program.

 

I [have] said, “Anybody who's not measuring today won't be around for very long.” Somebody is going to come along and say, “I only have this many resources.” We're going to use measurement finally as the tool that it was designed to [be], which is to get better.

 

Changing the definition

Mark Stouse (BMC): It's operational analytics. Measurement, I'd like to propose, is a dated word. Measurement historically has been about what just happened and justification. The way we're using it today is that we want to be able to project forward and [determine what] we believe the coverage will look like and get ahead of that and meet it.

Later he added this:

Stouse (BMC): One of the things that we've been working on is putting together a chain of analytics that supports a revenue contribution. So that we can credibly say, for example, that in [any given quarter], [we can establish] a revenue [contribution]. When it comes down to budget time, it's not at that point about defense. It's about additional investment. Let's invest in success. Whatever the equivalent is for revenue in your organization, if you can prove that, you've got it locked.

 

Johna Burke (BurrellesLuce): How did you come to that agreement with the rest of the teams to be able say that is this is the percentage that's attributed directly to our PR efforts?

 

Stouse (BMC): In my particular case, it's made somewhat easier by the fact that we essentially don't advertise. BMC puts the vast majority of its market awareness on the back of comms. So from that standpoint, it's a lot easier to lay claim to. But you still have to stitch together the data points logically to say this is how I got here where it's defensible.

Mark by the way will be my Measurement Maven in The Measurement Standard next month. He's actually figured out how to tie his results to Earnings per Share.

David Kellis (Clorox): We're getting the data in real time on an online basis and being forced to react to it. It's taken the PR industry a number of years to get to the point where we're able to measure PR and its impact on sales. We [Clorox] were able to do that a couple of years ago. It's a marketing mix model and it's impressions that are driving sales. Our group looks at the number of impressions generated, treats it somewhat similar to advertising, and maps that against sales that are going on market by market.

 

So impressions became the thing and now social media comes along and it's really difficult to put social media into the impressions category because you can tell how many people potentially read a blog or link to a blog, but you don't know the ripple effect.

 

Paine (KDPaine): You don't know how many people read my blog unless I tell you.

 

Kellis (Clorox): Right. So therefore it's harder to measure, which gets back to “How serious should I take what's going on in social media?” We just figured out that generating media impressions increases sales. Everyone talks about social media, but because it's so difficult to measure and fit into the model we've all created to measure PR you're stuck

 

Saswato Das (SAP): We have to figure out how people are consuming information today and in the future. We want to provide information there.

 

Paine (KDPaine): We have to do the research. [We have] 40 years worth of research that said if “I hit this many people with this kind of message, they're going to buy this stuff.” We need to start doing the research that says, “So there's a human being doing Twitter… and six months later we sold this much more.” It's just experimental research that needs to be done.

 

Lt. Col. Michael J. Paoli (USAF): In the Air Force, we tie research with analysis. You rarely see them pulled apart. We're doing it monthly beginning with communication audits; are our messages resonating out that there. We have monthly focus groups and surveys that then tie back into our strategy and analysis.

 

One of our greatest challenges has been and I think always will be not how well we measure things. When you get into the weeds of it, you can argue over the percentage points regarding impressions and so forth. I can tell you, big picture, if your story is on page one of the New York Times, that's generally an indicator of how everything else is following suit. Our challenge is once we measure it, what do we do with the information. There are a lot of unknowns out there, especially with social media.

 

Paine (KDPaine): For years we've gotten caught up in this conversation about we need a standard way to measure. Measurement for years might have meant to one person impressions, to somebody else it might have been sales. Now we're forcing people, because of the nature of social media, to say, “Am I doing this because I need to improve the reputation and the way people perceive me or for sales?” If it's sales, you get your Web analytics tools out and you do that. If it's reputation, then you're going to do reputation studies, relationship studies, [etc]. It's forcing people to make a decision up front about what their measures of success really are.

My personal favorite quote of the day came from Lt. Col.. Paoli when asked about any pushback he got from higher ups on his encouraging members of the Air Force to use social media. "If I can't trust my Airmen, who can I trust?"

That kind of got me thinking about the kind of message that sends, vs the message sent when companies block access to Twitter, FAcebook etc.  What these other companies are saying is: "I don't trust you.:  Which of course leads to reciprocating mistrust.

But then again, the military doesn't measure success the same way that normal PR departments do. They consider "no resumption of hostilities" to be a better metric than "I got 457 column inches, generating 1 billion impressions for an Ad Value of $1000000000000000000000000.

 

PR Week brings Measurement Mavens together to brainstorm on the future

This piece is the result of an amazing measurement roundtable organized  by PRWeek US. 
For anyone in PR, it's a must read.