Put to the test

In practice, the evaluation of communication measures is often neglected.

 

Yet there are various reasons for the ongoing monitoring and critical assessment of every activity.

Evaluation 

  • serves to ensure quality.
  • It increases transparency in the assessment process.
  • enables conclusions to be drawn about ‘What has it actually achieved?’ (ROI).
  • provides valuable insights for future initiatives.
  • highlights where adjustments are needed.
  • enables comparison with advertisements (advertising value equivalent, AVE).
  • And much more.

A bespoke approach works best

To make well-founded assessments of a campaign’s success or failure, analyses of actual versus target performance, a clear briefing and the precise identification of the target audience and core messages are essential. Equally crucial is the choice of the appropriate evaluation method. If PR is intended as a sales-supporting measure, KPIs and business metrics are suitable for measuring success. If the aim is long-term image-building or increasing brand awareness, social science research methods such as surveys and interviews are the way forward. Whilst press clippings can be counted quickly and click-through rates easily recorded, in-depth interviews, media response analysis or focus groups are more labour-intensive. 

The ideal approach lies in precision. Just as every campaign should be tailored to the target audience and the desired effect, the evaluation method must also be chosen accordingly. Only in this way can it yield sound insights that enable the optimisation of the next steps. We therefore recommend addressing the issue of performance monitoring as early as the briefing stage for PR activities, defining measurable objectives and establishing the evaluation method as well as the budget available for this purpose. In this way, evaluation is on the agenda from the outset and does not get sidelined at the end due to a lack of time or budget.

Read more:

Service: Product communication