Measuring and Evaluating Public Relations Efforts

This weeks topic was an introduction to evaluating and monitoring Public Relations Efforts.The areas of text (Macnamara 2014) which appealed to me the most, were those that discussed opinion, advocacy and engagement. Why? I think it has something to do with my childhood dream of being an incredibly famous actress. I hate money. I need the thing, but I hate it. So the hunger for fame was not based in the desire for fortune, but in the desire for influence.



Opinion and Advocacy 

In terms of opinion and advocacy, I agree with that posed by Nuendorf (2002), which I have interpreted as a belief that data (an opinion) is rich with symbolism and underlying meanings that have been sourced from other aspects of life. This means that content that could simply be analysed as 'negative' from a PR perspective, is actually a complex mixture of influences; consisting of many ideas/values and beliefs which contribute to the on-screen, face-value opinion that one is left with.

Essentially, what this means to me as a future PR officer, is:

"There's always more to what you see, than what you can see."

For that reason - don't underestimate the depth and complexity of an opinion, because even the most educated or informed perspectives, are riddled with unintentional biases. It's part of being human and it just can't be helped. Our opinions will always be tainted by indirectly-relevant matters, and negative past experiences can be hard to override. However, I believe that a company's greatest critic has a potential to be it's greatest advocate.



Engagement

Now this is where the real reflection happened. The only way to turn people around, is through engagement. I can agree (and appreciate) Macnamara's (2014) attention to the fact that:

I. Engagement should not be a buzzword (right on);

II. True engagement is profound and actually requires psychological depth (yes!)

III. It's about commitment, absorption and participation (PREACH IT)


So I read on... and then didn't actually see a suggestion on how to measure engagement?

Luckily, Patel (2016) supplied the "how to engage" aspect. Patel inadvertently outlined how to engage the audience. In retrospect it was both obvious and subtle. Patel outlined three ways to engage your audience:

• By personally responding to comments - which requires commitment on your part.
• Joining conversations - which requires your passion, enthusiasm or energy towards the topic.
• And by mentioning people - which requires participation on your part, and also invites other to participate.

So, how do you engage your audience? By being engaged, yourself! How do you measure it? Well, I figure that someone who couldn't even care enough to argue - is completely disengaged because they don't exhibit any of the elements of engagement. No commitment, participation or energy towards to the topic. But comments to and fro - whether in argument or discussion, are a definite sign of engagement. Both parties are committed, both are investing energy towards the topic and both are participating. Therefore, the elements of engagement, are: commitment, energy and engagement.



How then, would I measure engagement?

1. I would personally choose to measure true engagement through repeat comments - whether "positive", "neutral" or "negative."

2.  I would also measure and evaluate engagement through the the number of overall comments (evaluates participation and energy)

3. Replies to a topic or comment, on a single thread (evaluates commitment and energy),

4. How many people are mentioned/tagged in comments (evaluates participation).