New measurement techniques link sales directly to PR

published 2005

Five years ago marketing people were pressuring for better PR measurement. Now there are claims that new PR media measurement techniques can show a direct link between PR and sales results. 

It’s evidence of just how far PR measurement has come in such a short time.  These rapid advances in PR measurement techniques are helping support the huge increases in PR budgets in the marketing arena, sometimes at the expense of advertising.

Most PR measurement is focused around its media generation role. Typically most measurement seeks to analyse media exposure - which is similar to the traditional advertising approach that marketing and brand managers are familiar, and comfortable, with.

First Level - Who did we reach?

The most fundamental - and least costly media measurement - is to evaluate the impact of PR outputs - measuring the effectiveness of the work done.  

Typically this measurement will cover:

• media reach  - number of media, number of readers?
• message delivery - did the story deliver the pre-determined messages,
• what was the tone?

The advantage of this is that helps tell the organisation using PR whether the communication of their messages is reaching the desired target audiences.  The disadvantage is that it is only measuring the organisation’s communication and taking no account of competitors.

Second Level - How do we compare?

The second level of media measurement is the equivalent of the traditional advertising ‘share of voice’ approach. 

This tracks the organisation and its competitors.  It provides the advantage of knowing how much media coverage and of what type it obtained relative to its competitors.  It is more costly, and time consuming, than the first level, but not markedly so.

In a very competitive marketing environment, it’s essential for organisations serious about their PR. Combined with the first level it provides most organisations with a good evaluation tool.

Third Level - How does media exposure relate to sales?

Increasingly the measurement techniques at the second level are being analysed on a different basis - their correlation with sales patterns.  And this has been re-named by some as ‘Share of Discussion’.

The hypothesis about Share of Discussion is that if:

a) PR can increase the amount of public (principally media driven) discussion about a topic, and

b) It can gain the majority share (or dominance) for its client or product, then

c) It is likely that there will be a consequent increase in sales for that product/competitor after a period of time.

A US organisation - PRTrak - has produced several case studies that directly - and scientifically - provide a link between peak periods of discussion, and competitor domination of these, to increased sales.

However the time lapse between activity and action varies according to the type of product or service.

PRTraks case studies show:

• Menopause therapy - per capita prescriptions rose and fell according to the level of public discussion.  In this instance the prescription increases came 11 weeks behind the peak period of discussion.
  
• Nutritional product - a tracking study showed a clear correlation between public discussion and sales.  As discussion increased, sales increased - and conversely.
  
• B2B software product - a study showed a clear correlation between share of discussion for the company and the percentage of sales that resulted from each face-to-face call.
  
• College admissions - a New England college showed that parental preference, and its competitive position, was influenced by all forms of discussion about it compared to its competitors.

The method of analysing public discussion, and the relative weighting between the parties, involves distinguishing between positive, neutral and negative mentions in order to arrive at each competitors ‘net favourable media value’ and then their final ‘share of discussion’.

It must be recognised that these studies are related to unpaid media coverage i.e. that which is generated through PR. It supports other studies that report that consumers are much more influenced by editorial comment and coverage which they perceive as being independent and credible.

If the hypothesis works, then (for example), if mobile phones are very much an item of discussion in the media, the mobile phone brand which gains the greatest exposure stands to reap the greatest sales benefit.

Of course, it may be argued that marketers have always intuitively known this anyway.  However, what makes this different is that this is showing the potency of unpaid media exposure - and that’s PR. If unpaid media is so important, what marketer is able to take the risk of allowing a competitor to get a competitive advantage in this space?

The author of this article - Grant Common - is a Sydney-based independent advisor who helps PR Managers get the best out of their PR Department  and/or PR agency. He also blogs regularly on topics similar to this.