Evaluating Efficacy in Public Relations/Corporate Communication ...
Evaluating Efficacy in Public Relations/Corporate Communication ...
Evaluating Efficacy in Public Relations/Corporate Communication ...
You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles
YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.
<strong>Evaluat<strong>in</strong>g</strong> <strong>Efficacy</strong> <strong>in</strong> <strong>Public</strong> <strong>Relations</strong>/<strong>Corporate</strong> <strong>Communication</strong> Programm<strong>in</strong>g –21<br />
be evaluated <strong>in</strong> all three phases of the communications campaign. Basel<strong>in</strong>e assessment of the<br />
ability to carry out essential components from previous campaigns and some measure of team<br />
engagement is necessary. A basel<strong>in</strong>e for content, leadership support, and creative vision also<br />
needs to be established sett<strong>in</strong>g benchmarks aga<strong>in</strong>st which the basel<strong>in</strong>e subjective analyses are<br />
made. Basel<strong>in</strong>e data can be obta<strong>in</strong>ed through quantitative and qualitative methods and<br />
analyzed simple statistical analyses through sophisticated statistical model<strong>in</strong>g and created<br />
algorithms.<br />
The weight<strong>in</strong>g of each level should be set historically, aga<strong>in</strong>st past campaign success.<br />
For some campaigns, where success has been limited or the problem or goal is new, weight<strong>in</strong>g<br />
of the essential level may be high—perhaps 50%—of overall excellence. Where the<br />
communication function has performed well <strong>in</strong> the past, that weight may be reduced and the<br />
weight given to levels 2 and 3 <strong>in</strong>creased.<br />
Conclusion<br />
At present there is standard for evaluat<strong>in</strong>g campaign plann<strong>in</strong>g and programm<strong>in</strong>g. A<br />
standard, as Michaelson and Stacks noted is someth<strong>in</strong>g used as a “measure, norm, or model <strong>in</strong><br />
comparative evaluations (Michaelson & Stacks, 2011). As such, a standard for evaluat<strong>in</strong>g<br />
communications campaigns and their plann<strong>in</strong>g can be both <strong>in</strong>ternal and external contexts.<br />
What is needed is a metric or matrix from which to place obta<strong>in</strong>ed data, weigh and analyze the<br />
results, and demonstrate the measurable and quantified outcome aga<strong>in</strong>st expectations and<br />
other “comparative” results. We propose that the model discussed <strong>in</strong> this paper serve as the<br />
<strong>in</strong>itial attempt at establish<strong>in</strong>g a common metric for evaluat<strong>in</strong>g communication campaign<br />
plann<strong>in</strong>g. It is a work <strong>in</strong> progress; over time we hope to establish reliable and valid measures