Oct8

Hammer Says “Analytics Time”

by Heather Whaling

We spend a lot of time in the social media space talking about monitoring, listening, results, ROI, metrics — and justifiably so.  As my friend Chuck Hemann recently wrote, “Social media monitoring isn’t sexy. But, it isn’t negotiable.”

What do we mean by monitoring? Or measurement?

For example, I recently heard someone suggest that we should communicate the value of online placements (i.e., blog posts, online news articles) by word count. (Seriously, I couldn’t make that up even if I tried.) Remember when a traditional media placement of 400 words was deemed less valuable than a 1,500 word placement? It seems obvious to me why that metric isn’t applicable to the online world, but it’s not obvious to those just learning about social media and online marketing.  (To be honest, I don’t get why it was applicable in the offline world either, but I digress …). I was reminded why when we talk about measuring social media, we need to be much more specific. Otherwise, there are more than a few people who will think it’s perfectly acceptable to apply old metrics to emerging media.

Coincidentally, I came across this video on Rebecca Dennison’s blog. As she said, “If MC Hammer understands that analytics and market research is essential, how long before we all get it?  Not to put him down, but if the music industry can use analytics to their advantage, why can’t PR?”

To be fair, there are a number of social media strategists who are brilliant at measurement. But, by and large, I think the majority of people are figuring it out as they go. If PR wants to “own” social media, perhaps we should start by driving the measurement discussion. That means we need to be innovative — applying the old rules to the new tools won’t work. We need to go deeper than buzz words and generalities.

If they haven’t already, savvy business leaders will start to see through the smoke screen if we just keep repeating some version of “measurement and analytics are key.”  We need a new “elevator speech” to kick-start a smarter discussion about measurement. Is that even possible? How would you begin to explain what we mean by “measuring social media” and why it’s important, without using jargon? Put it in business terms that make sense to decision-makers.

The comments are yours — let’s see what we can come up with.

  • It is possible, and it is happening. PRSA sponsored a measurement working group to but together an "elevator pitch" deck to help public relations practitioners communicate the value of PR through number. You can access a link to it in the show note of a podcast I just uploaded with Mark Weiner of PRIME Research, who was a member of the working group. Interestingly enough, Mark makes a pretty argument for the pros of advertising value equivalency, which I had thought was a complete joke, until I heard him explain why they work for some people. Social media measurement is the next frontier, but the questions remains, how do you possibly listen to a veritable avalanche of social media in real time without artificial intelligence?
  • heatherwhaling
    Eric, thanks for sharing. I'll be sure to check out PRSA's suggestions. Keeping in mind that I haven't listened to the podcast, AVE seems like such an inexact science -- I find it hard to believe that it will emerge out of this as the accepted standard. I know firms who take the rate, inflate it, add "dollars" for front page placement vs. interior pages, etc. There's an awful lot of number fudging that occurs. That said, I'm interested to hear his arguments. So, thanks again for reading and sharing!
  • Heather, No argument. I never said AVEs would emerge as an accepted standard, just that Mark made a pretty argument for them, and frankly, it's the first good argument for them I've heard, that's all.
  • Hi, Eric - Mark does make some valid points when it comes to AVE's, but quite frankly, the measurement industry is really against him in that regard. I would assume that AVEs will not be part of the recommendations going forward, but thats just my assumption.
  • First and foremost, kudos to incorporation Hammer into a blog post! I've done some work with him over the years and he is a really good guy.

    I think the best way to measure social media results is to work backwards. What is your goal, short term and long term? If you achieved that goal or those goals, then it was successful.

    Is it awareness, chatter, sales, page hits, attendance?

    When it comes to valuing the hits, that will honestly be difficult. Value in traditional media is based on various formulas - all of which include impressions. Should we ask bloggers what their average weekly pageviews? Is something on TMZ more valuable than MSNBC?

    What I'm getting at is the weight of each hit. Daily newspaper is worth more than weekly newspaper. How does that translate into the Internet world?

    Perhaps there should be an independent panel that assigns "grades" to all websites, and that grade is what's used to calculate value. As sites gain traction, they move up a grade, thus, making their content more valuable.
  • marydemingbarber
    Heather, I think this is a good discussion but also want to be sure folks realize that PRSA has a group that's working to generate some measurement standards that I believe will also include measurement of social media. The group who's working on the project certainly includes some of the measurement gurus in our industry. My thought is that we need to agree on public relations measurement with social media guidelines included as a component within those. I'm not sure we need a separate set of guidelines for social media but I could be wrong. Thoughts?

    Information about PRSA's initiative: http://media.prsa.org/article_display.cfm?artic...
  • Mary - I think separating social and traditional media measurement is the way to go. There's some overlap, for sure, but I don't care (necessarily) about eyeballs in social media. To some degree, traditional media still cares. There's no real "engagement" metric for traditional media, but that's a critical part of the social media equation.

    We'll see where the commission ends, but at the moment all we can say is that the right people are behind it.
  • heatherwhaling
    Hopefully, PRSA will ban on ad equivalency reports :)

    To answer your question about whether we need separate standards for online and off: I'm not actually sure. I probably need to spend more time thinking this over, but how one measures grassroots efforts, traditional media outreach, community relations, etc is probably very different than how one would measure outcomes generated by participating in social media.

    Additionally, social media is more than a PR tool. For example, I'm not sure that PR-oriented metrics would help Dell -- or a local coffee shop -- measure customer service delivered online. As such, should social media measurement be broader than PR measurement? I need to think about that one.
  • And, Mary, the Institute for PR Measurement Commission (of which I am a member) has been on the vanguard of this issue for some time. Several Commission members are part of PRSA's effort -- very encouraging!
  • Heather, my thanks too for this discussion. Just two points to add here:
    1. PR people have shrunk from measurement because they are afraid it will show that what we do doesn't matter to the business as much as we claim it does; and
    2. We are very comfortable in the world of images and words and not comfortable at all with quantitative matters (with many exceptions, but you know what I mean.)

    There are strong theoretical reasons why what we do matters. And there is much research that demonstrates the impact of much of our activity. For the most part, PR people don't know their theory and don't do enough research in their own organizations. Add to that a tendency to keep internal research proprietary and you have a lack of demonstrated best practices that match up well with other disciplines.

    What if we found out tomorrow that broadcast journalism had no impact on any aspect of business? Every viewer just stops believing anything they see and hear on TV and radio, and relies more on the opinions of people they know.

    Oh, yeah, that's right! It's happening now, incrementally, and not just on TV and radio. This is an existential challenge to our business. And yet, you still find most businesses focusing people and money on mainstream media, because it still exerts some influence on brand awareness, disposition and purchase behavior (and reputation).

    We simply have to get this measurement thing right, or we're dead.

    Sean
    @commammo
  • See...I told you Sean was the guy you wanted to talk with about this!
  • mariancutler
    The adage ‘everything old is new again’ fits perfectly here. Conversations about ROI, measurement and value have plagued PR for decades and until we collectively address this we’ll never own the magic and results of our livelihood.

    Like most PR folks, I’ve been left scratching my head at the success advertising lays claim to while we all know editorial and WOM—the PR brainchildren—carry the greatest influence, impact consumer behavior and drive sales of all marketing communications functions. As an industry, starting with and including PRSA, IABC, Council for PR Firms and so on, we’ve done a flat out abysmal job defining universal analytics that are powerful, forceful and ownable.

    I’d challenge NOT to have hundreds of PR folks at dozens of agencies figuring out single systems. Rather, nominate panel of experts for a Measurement Summit including all necessary outcomes such as Published Report, White Papers, Policy Guidelines and Fact Sheets to lay in concrete universally recognized terms, definitions and measurements applicable across mediums and channels, relevant to pharma and telecom, but usable from the multinationals to the single person agency.

    It’s the classic PR challenge….mixed lexicon, diluted definitions and random applications ….. in need of an intellectual solution. Seems we’re the perfect discipline for the job. I’m up for the job. Anyone else??
  • Heather -

    First, thanks a lot for the link to my post. You know how strongly I feel about social monitoring and social measurement so I am really digging your post.

    Some of what Olivier Blanchard and Don Bartholomew have done in this space can really help PR pros develop the elevator speech about measurement. PR folks can drive that discussion but I think two things must happen first. Primarily, they need to understand the distinction between ROI and measurement. Measurement is the process by which we determine ROI. They are NOT the same things. We often use the words interchangeably, which doesn't help our case in the least. Second, and this is probably something that's a longer term issue, but PR pros need to embrace a sense of accountability. Anybody that does PR research for a living can tell you some horror stories of how communicators want to "prove their worth." If you have a chance, corner Katie Paine, or Sean Williams or Don at a conference and ask them to share some stories. They are horrific. That isn't to say that ALL PR folks are like that, but using placements as a benchmark for success is a recipe for disaster. It might make you look like the conquering hero for a short period, but after a while your boss will ask you what we got from that placement in the New York Times.

    The move to social is no different. Engagement metrics are fine for now, but how we, as PR pros, help define bottom line impact of what we're doing is how we will (and should) ultimately be judged. Reality is that many companies aren't at a stage (yet) where showing financial impact is necessary, so spending some considerable time honing your engagement metrics is important. Showing how you're ultimately going to transition from engagement metrics to influence metrics over time will also be key.

    Sorry...this has turned into a rambling comment...the answer to your question is yes, it can be done. However, PR pros need to embrace a sense of accountability that, as of now, has been sorely lacking in this profession.
  • heatherwhaling
    Coming from a public affairs background, I had the chance to work on "traditional PR outreach" initiatives that included pre- and post-campaign research. It's amazing to me how much more strategic PR people are when they know there's that accountability at the end of a project. I imagine social media will be the same. If you know you're going to be judged on specific metrics, you'll be more strategic about your recommendations -- instead of just saying "get a blog, a Twitter account and a Facebook page."

    The PR industry shouldn't shy away from measurement. For all the griping that goes on about how PR doesn't have a seat at the table, you'd think we'd embrace -- and to my point, want to lead -- measurement. What better way to show our value? Now, if only we could all agree on what that means ...
blog comments powered by Disqus

Previous post:

Next post: