The Evolution of Evaluation...or is it?

On 21 April 2007, GlaxoSmithKline started a communications revolution when the pharmaceutical giant became the first company listed on the FTSE 100 share index to send a tweet.

Eight months later, on 5 December 2007, Carnival Cruises set sail on its Facebook adventure, becoming the first FTSE 100 company to establish a presence on the social networking site.

Today, 67 members of the FTSE 100 index are actively engaged in social media.

three [d] Digital and Social Media, www.threepipe.co.uk

In an earlier blog entry, I decided that PR evaluation is often overlooked in theory and in practice and thus came my topic for my Master's dissertation. Organisations are using public relations (PR) as part of their “problem solving and change processes” (Broom, 2009, p. 285), and while many practitioners are implementing a myriad of campaigns by which to do this, there is still widespread debate about PR, and its effectiveness and value from a business perspective.

Amidst the continuing debate about the evaluation of PR, the rise of new media technologies, notably social media, offers a new challenge to PR practitioners as it relates to evaluation. Many trade associations such as the CIPR, the International Association of Business Communicators (IABC), the Public Relations Society of America (PRSA) and the Association of Measurement and Evaluation for Communication (AMEC) have consistently been asking the question, “How do you get started in measuring social media and what are the relevant metrics?” (CIPR, 2011).

My study will explore what PR practitioners across the FTSE 100 companies expect to achieve by integrating social media into their ongoing programmes and campaigns, and more importantly, how well they evaluate these objectives and what are the prevailing metrics, methods and tools used across the industry.


I have already had the opportunity to interview a few PR practitioners from large UK companies and gained some fantastic insight from them. However, I am still looking to deepen my understanding of how social media evaluation is being carried out by PR executives in the UK. 


I am hoping UK-based PR practitioners will be willing to assist me in my research by agreeing to a short interview. The interview should not take longer than 45 minutes, and I am more than willing to meet with you at your office or a location convenient to you, or alternatively interview you via telephone.


I can be reached via email at avianeh@hotmail.com, and you can also find me on LinkedIn. I genuinely appreciate your time and willingness, especially in light of professional commitments.


Thanks a lot everyone, for your support and assistance! 

----
References cited:

• Broom, G.M. (2009) Cutlip & Center’s Effective Public Relations, 10th edn. New Jersey: Pearson Education Inc
• CIPR (2011) Social Media Measurement Guidance. Available at: http://www.cipr.co.uk/sites/default/files/Final_Social_Media_Measurement_Guidance%20_March_2011.pdf (Accessed: 2 April, 2011) 

Content is king, even and especially during an election

There are three contentious issues most people tend to avoid, religion and a woman's weight being two of them. The other is politics. Though I have no comments on the election campaign at hand here on the twin island state, or the leaders or their parties, I stumbled across the Opposition Leader's Facebook page yesterday with over 5,000 fans. I immediately thought "Yes, She Can", in light of the Obama links running around.

The People's National Movement, in addition to their website, also has a Fan Page and a YouTube channel.
So, yes they are, but the question is CAN THEY?

Nothing really jumps out at me from either party's initiatives thus far. Photos from events, updates on meetings. The UNC page has some notes from meetings and news reports but nothing new. It's a social calendar as far as I see, and a space to post press ads and news articles.

I remember back in the day, there were a PNM and National Alliance for Reconstruction (NAR) manifesto on every coffee table, with the details of what each party hoped to achieve if elected.

Manifesto = what is my unique selling proposition?

Does the electorate even ask for this anymore? Do we even care? So while it is great that we are getting social and political parties reaching out, it's not that fantastic if it's the same old song and dance and nothing solid. I have not seen anything yet that will influence me in either direction. There is nothing really that I cannot access from picking up a paper or turning on the television. So far it's a lot of speech posting, ad posting, meeting schedules.

In much the same way that customers look to brands for rich content about what they do, about performance, new and upcoming initiatives, and look for brands to offer something different, especially when using the new tools, I think we should expect the same from our politicians and not get caught up in the tribalism. And this goes way beyond social media now.

I would love to see us get back to basics. Let's get the basics right - comprehensive information, information which pushes your political brand, your mission, your vision, your strategic direction. No sense upping the ante and using technology if we aren't really saying anything. Content is King, yet the content I have seen thus far is far from regal.

One thing I would really like to see happen one election year in the near future, though I doubt it will happen this time around (if ever) is the televised debate. Give us our leaders and their take on the issues and their plan for the country, minus the flag waving, minus the branded supporters, minus the campaign trail mudslinging. I really enjoy these. With an experienced, assertive and brilliant moderator, debates can be rich viewing.

The Brits had their first ever election debate this week and what is most interesting with this is that the televised debate has given Nick Clegg and the Liberal Dems in the UK greater visibility and perhaps a greater chance in the polls (not predicting that they will win eh). Nick Clegg, by most accounts was brilliant. The first past the post electoral system, which we chose to keep as a souvenir from the Queen, effectively maintains the "strength" of the two established parties. Nick Clegg possibly emphasised the limitations of this system in the UK's first ever televised debate, giving the traditional Labour and Conservative party leaders a run for their money and opening himself and his party to segments of the electorate he may never have necessarily been exposed to during the normal campaigning. The debate provided an avenue that the electorate would not have had before to hear the views of all the candidates, outside of the myopia of blind party allegiances.

I don't know about the rest of the population, but I want this type of debate, and this type of content from our leaders, not just the allegations and "in my back pocket" mysteries about candidates. These are the types of communication channels that we should tend to first, before we dabble in others, without giving us anything substantial to "feast on". Perhaps now that the election date has been announced we will get to the meat of the matter as far as manifestos are concerned. Let's hope so. If not, then I am not really interested in the myriad of communications channels available. They all mean nothing, if they say nothing.

As for a woman's weight, I will not even touch that...not even with a 15ft pole!

Nick Clegg on Facebook
David Cameron on Facebook
Nick Clegg on Twitter
The Conservatives on Twitter
Labour Party on Twitter


Funny review of the Brown/Cameron/Clegg debate here as well.