Measurement in comms: is it all smoke and mirrors?

Measurement within the comms and content sector has been a sticking point for as us long enough in the tooth can care to remember.

As different as every organisation is, so is the measure upon which value is gleaned from their comms or content campaigns.

While there are some brilliant agencies with significant teams dedicated to measurement, not to mention industry tools that will analyse the impact and reach of your campaign, these all come at a cost – and can eat up a significant proportion of your budget.

Something that can be a barrier for those with leaner budgets.

There are however ways in which campaigns can be measured in a more cost-effective way. The joys of digital mean that free analytics tools are available via Google and social media platforms to measure the impact of any campaigns and see when and where there might have been a step change.

Equally, on the PR side of that coin, gauging success can be considered through whether the total amount of coverage has increased, or whether there is more coverage targeting a specific customer segment. All things which can be managed manually by an individual. Alternatively, you can create simple automated dashboards that capture broader measurement elements – such as if a quote might have been used, or if your company is the sole focus of the article in question.

Other ways to measure success could be through sentiment testing, reviewing perceptions of content/comms through customer surveys, or capturing share of voice against the wider market.

But each of these should only be used – and indeed will only mean something – if you have a baseline upon which to recognise when there has been change.

Time and again (and understandably) – particularly within the startup/scaleup scene – measurement and understanding ROI come up as a blocker when it comes to ongoing investment in content and comms. Why? It is hard to directly measure the value of investment into elements like PR, which are typically more focused on raising the brand's profile.

However, not having hard and fast data immediately available doesn’t mean the activity should be deemed a failure. Equally, giving a campaign time to bed itself in and have time to “perform” is a must – cutting things short before they have time to make a difference will mean a wasted budget.

So, what’s the answer?

You must consider what good looks like from the outset. This requires a little thinking before engaging a comms partner on just that… what does good look like to you?

In some cases that might be about generating leads (please note here that PR should never be considered a mechanism to create leads), increasing the % of coverage or it could be about taking some of the leg work away from the company to allow you to focus on boosting your engagement with customers and prospects – the list goes on.

Put simply – the goals for measuring impact are as broad (or narrow) as you see fit and must be considered and discussed upfront.

Not doing this might result in that smoke and mirrors perception because neither party knows how to define success, so they do so in what they have done for others.

So just as you would consider the objectives for a campaign from the offset, consider what measures you need and care about (or you are measured on internally as part of your role).

Discussion on what’s possible, relevant and budget-friendly at the beginning of any campaign and will make for a measure that will be recognised and applauded internally.

And this is all before we see a wave of AI tools coming to market that will help us with meaningful measurement…

If you are in a measurement muddle, drop us an email at hello@brassneckhq.com or set up a call with us via this link: https://calendly.com/kirsten-paul/30-minute-teams-meeting