![]() |
|||||
![]() |
|||||
| April 22, 2002
Paine's Perspective
The more we thought about it, however, the more we realized that it really was the raison detre for The Measurement Standard. Why else were people subscribing, but to find out the latest about this industry? So we began our issue by delving into academic papers, and were particularly intrigued with the submissions to the Lindemann Scholarship awards given out by the Institute for PR. This year the award went to Samsop Jo for his work with factor analysis of relationship dimensions in PR. But thats not to say that some other fascinating research isnt underway. For example, as we speak, people are cataloging all the research currently underway in the fields of sociology, anthropology and psychology that may have implications for PR measurement. Another scholar is looking at ways to use expert systems to better measure PR, and then theres Don Stacks latest work, Primer on PR Research, which everyone in this field should read. (We should have a source for each of these! Katie?) I know that when I was on the client sideup to my eyeballs in alligators, the media knocking at my door, and the board demanding accountabilityI always had this niggling sensation that there was something more out there that I should know about measurement. But who has time to keep up? And the point of The Measurement Standard is to give you a taste of some of whats out there. So youll find some new columns in this issue, focusing on direct product/service comparisons between some of these tools. Youll also read about what research is underway which may change the way we view public relations in the future. And, we know you couldnt wait to find out what happens when Marketing Martha and Bottomline Bob get back from their honeymoon. Measure on
|
|
||