The Problem with PR Measurement

In 2024, the tracking tools at the disposal of any communications agency are plentiful. We have more opportunities than ever to measure the impact of audience engagement, coverage and brand or campaign impact. Not just our own relevant data, we also have access to everyone else’s too.

How then, as an industry, are we still utilising the ‘big numbers’ to share the efficacy of our work, rather than the meaningful, drilled down metrics that would ultimately prove more useful in truly analysing results and inputting into forward planning?

For decades, we have been bound by the data that justifies a financial ROI. Clients are usually answerable to CFO’s and we know the kind of numbers these people need to see to attest to agency spend. This measurement is of course vital, and we must all remain accountable. Measurement and reporting are often the bane of any PR executives work life. We are obliged to showcase value and work executed, but we should also be using owned data for learning, and if we are not measuring effectively, then we are not learning.

And it’s not just for our own benefit. Educating clients on ‘what good looks like’ from an impact perspective is something we should all be trying to do for the future of the industry. ROI based purely on the legacy of MUV’s and ‘ad value’ negates the authenticity of campaign impact and true brand or message awareness, and legacy measurements do not help us reflect either the work executed or the ‘real’ success or otherwise of the transparency of our partnerships.

Let’s be honest, the whole PR industry is based on results that technically cannot be guaranteed. How else do we convince clients to work with us, or convince existing clients of the need to consider other factors when reporting on success?

Education is a key factor here. Ideally, clients onboard with agencies based on a relationship of mutual respect and trust. Agencies should be partners, and not just vendors — either as an extension of in-house counsel or providing expertise and delivery that the business cannot execute themselves.

To this end, part of our role is to balance the client directive on results with what is truly possible, with the tools we are given to work with. Agility is key throughout the tenure, as again, PR should never be an ‘off the shelf’ purchase, and we have the same market forces, consumer appetite and market forces to contend with just like any other service industry.

For PR measurement to have any meaning we have to know not only what it is we are measuring but also what for?

The power of clients appearing in online earned PR is far greater than is currently understood or realised, with its direct linkage to search and sales, yet current measurement tools are failing to generate results that help to understand business outcomes generated by coverage.

The pure volume of media coverage is a weak measurement of performance. Strategic impact of placement and audience is far more important for ROI.

On the flip side, how do we measure the true impact of a front cover story or placement, beyond those aforementioned MUV’s or ad space cost? With online and earned we can at least see a correlation between the coverage and the search volumes and ideally, click throughs.

It’s time for less standardisation and more of bespoke strategy. We must have honest conversations with stakeholders about the true organisational goals for PR, and base our campaign planning around this. Which tactics should be used to achieve those goals and how will you measure if they are working? Execution, tracking, and of course, the inevitable readjustment should follow.

Vaguer ‘brand awareness’ and ‘profiling’ opportunities should never cease to exist, and quite rightly have their place in the mix, but when we are still answering to the cheque writers for ROI, we must move away from a historic measurement system that values success via ad space in print publications — so fewer and far between these days.

There is no longer any ‘new age media’ or separation of digital and traditional, and PR measurement — and there is no ‘one size fits all’ measurement or reporting matrix any longer either.

The industry calls for standardisation, but this doesn’t work if every metric is bespoke to a campaign or a client. Collectively, the modern landscape calls for it and I hope that as an industry, working alongside our partners, we can create something meaningful for all that is ‘new’. More numbers? Probably. More impact? Certainly.