| (Originally
published October 29, 2002)
Shopping
for an Agency that Measures Up?
You
should be.
We review and rate seven top agencies to find out how and what they
measure.
Fleishman-Hillard,
GCI Group, Golin/Harris, Hill & Knowlton, Ketchum,Manning Selvage
& Lee, and Text 100.
By:
Lindsey Wyckoff, Staff Writer
To
complement our other coverage
of agencies and measurement this month, we decided to take a look at
how some of the top PR agencies measure results for their clients. We
know we are not the only ones out there tooting the measurement horn,
so we put some agencies to the test, in hopes of discovering who is
equally excited about measurement.
Here
are some questions we tried to find answers for, and that you should
be concerned with when you consider an agency’s measurement practices:
- Do
they offer some sort of measurement system to clients?
- What
methodology do they use?
- How
much do they recommend their clients spend on measurement?
- Do
they do their own research?
- Do
they have a measurement expert on their staff?
The first
thing we discovered about PR agencies and measurement is that, for the
most part, there is not a lot to learn from their Web sites. The amount
of jargon and PR-speak was overwhelming, and it seemed as though many
agencies attempted to offer as little information as possible. So, if
you want to learn more about an agency, especially about their measurement
practices, we highly recommend you contact an actual human.
After speaking
to numerous humans ourselves, the conclusion emerged that while they
were rather helpful, measurement in the agency world is a boring topic.
No fault of the agencies, of course, but as Mark Rozeen of Golin/Harris
(see below) so nicely puts it, “In the Mexican restaurant of PR,
we’re all selling enchiladas.” The difference between the
gourmet and the generic comes primarily in the attitude and the approach.
The attitude
isn’t exactly what one would expect. Regardless of the question,
the most common responses were “varies by client,” “depends
on the client” and “whatever the client prefers.”
Which naturally makes it difficult for a prospective client to find
out anything. Rather droll, don’t you think?
Now, the
nuances of the client/agency relationship are complicated at best, but
the success of measurement requires both sides be vested in the program.
One agency even stated that they are unwilling to make recommendations
as to their clients’ spending. If that doesn’t put a damper
on measurement right from the start, we don’t know what does.
As we here at The Measurement Standard regularly remind readers,
the importance of budgeting and planning for measurement from the get-go
cannot be stressed enough. It should be a part of the PR program as
a whole, not an afterthought or an addition. This means setting an appropriate
budget with the client up front. It is generally agreed that research
and measurement should account for at least 10% of the PR budget.
For all
the cookie-cutter answers we received, most agencies did manage some
originality in their responses concerning Ad Value Equivalency. We all
know how controversial AVEs are (see Jim
Macnamara's article elsewhere in this issue), and that even in the
most optimistic of lights, they are considered of questionable validity.
While the majority of agencies recognize this fact, they also realize
that AVEs can be useful in sort of proving the value of PR to certain
number crunching clients. So, agencies straddle the line here: They
try to avoid AVEs, but if a client requests them, they are more than
willing to provide the client with what they want. Of the agencies we
spoke with, only Fleishman-Hillard stated that they do not use AVEs.
Fleishman-Hillard
Fleishman-Hillard includes a comprehensive explanation of their measurement
services and methodolgy on their Web site. Under the brand name e.c.h.o
(every communication has objectives-not to be confused with Echo
Research, Sandra MacLeod’s UK media analysis firm), Fleishman-Hillard
Research offers competitive analysis, communication audit, message testing
and media content analysis services as well as benchmarking surveys
and publicity polls. Before beginning any program, they determine initial
attitudes and behavior against which to benchmark results. They do not
use weightings to evaluate results. Clients choose which measurement
methods will be utilized before their program is implemented and the
prices are factored in as part of their service offerings. They recommend
that clients spend at least 5%-10% of their budget on measurement. Their
measurement staff is 20 people, with a number of experts available.
They perform the majority of their research in house, but may utilize
outside sources for data collection and occasionally tabulation.
GCI
Group
At GCI Group, measurement is incorporated into and individualized for
each client’s program. They use Ad Value Equivalency when the
client calls for it, mostly for larger clients who spend a lot on advertising.
GCI often performs research in house, depending on the client’s
preference and the size of the project. Teams of 3-5 people work on
each project. They do not make recommendations as to their clients’
spending on measurement.
Golin/Harris
Golin/Harris offers their proprietary Performance Barometer Scorecard
to clients. Survey results are turned into a scorecard number used to
plot clients against themselves or other brands. Their measurement work
often occurs in conjunction with NFO Worldgroup and Insight Express.
At Golin/Harris evaluation is used to show performance and benefits
consistent with other lines of business in the company. And they do
research up front to determine client metrics. Mark Rozeen is their
measurement expert.
Hill
& Knowlton
Hill & Knowlton offers Radar (their own measurement system) to clients
at no additional cost. It automates a lot of the measurement process.
They perform measurement in house on a small scale, and out-source larger
measurement projects to Millward Brown. (See our discussion of their
services as part of this
article in an earlier issue.) They keep their methodology under wraps
and rework it on a case-by-case basis. Measurement is built into project
costs, and there is no extra charge per se. The client decides
what level of information they require and then metrics for the project
are established. Hill & Knowlton do small amounts of research internally
(the Washington, D.C. office supports three on-staff researchers, other
staff would be added as needed). Their measurement expert is Barbara
Coons; she is involved in all measurement projects.
Ketchum
Ketchum, winner of PR Week’s 2002 Agency of the Year Award, was
once the home of Dr. Walter Lindemann, measurement expert and IPR Measurement
and Evaluation Commission founder. With alumni like that, it is a given
that Ketchum offers top-notch measurement to clients. In fact, measurement
is part of their plans right from the start (check out the Ketchum
Planning Process). Their research department is immense, with 1,300
employees worldwide, so they perform the majority of research on their
own. For clients who prefer to do their own research, Ketchum offers
measurement products like BrandBuilder, which measures awareness and
behavior in the marketplace. For media measurement, they use VMS (see
“Broadcast Monitoring Services” in our August
2002 issue) as a media monitoring tool in conjunction with MediaFocus
and Ketchum Publicity Tracking System to measure and analyze media coverage.
Other proprietary tools include BrandBuilder and the Ketchum Relationship
Index. Their recommendations for client spending on measurement are
made on a case by case basis. Although they try to stay away from weightings
such as Ad Value Equivalency, they find that sometimes they are useful
in measuring awareness. (A claim we here at The Measurement Standard
find of dubious validity.) They have several measurement experts on
staff, including Robyn Massey and Ask the Experts contributor David
Rockland.
Manning
Selvage & Lee
Manning Selvage & Lee uses its sister company, i to i research,
to perform measurement. Run by measurement expert Claire Spencer, i
to i research uses the i to i tracker model. Fieldwork is outsourced
and i to i performs the evaluation. They recommend that clients spend
10% of their budget on measurement.
Text
100
The Global PR Measurement Survey on their Web site is the first indication
that measurement plays an integral part in the PR practices of Text
100. We strongly encourage everyone interested in measurement to take
the survey and sign up to receive a copy of the results. Text 100 emphasizes
the importance of measurement from the beginning; it is included as
a part of each client’s plan. They offer smartPR benchmark tools
as well as customized measurement. The scope of the research determines
whether they will perform it in house or use Biz360, but they always
perform evaluation themselves. The methodology is included with the
client plan, and tailored for each program. Their spending recommendations
vary depending on the needs of the client. Rather than relying on a
standard measure, they evaluate using quality as well as quantity. So
if a story appears on the front page of The New York Times,
it receives more weight than it would in a smaller newspaper. Resident
measurement expert Matt Ravden serves as Director of Practices, Products
and Services.
How
The Leading Agencies Measure Up
After reviewing the answers that all seven agencies gave to
our queries, we ranked them on a set of criteria loosely based on the
IPR's
Guidelines for Measuring Public Relations. The criteria included
whether they used AVEs, whether they used outside independent resources,
pricing/budget recommendations and general approach to measurement.
*****Five
Star Rating = definitely recommended to any professional communicator
who wants accurate measures of success
**Two Star
Rating = acceptable approach but they don’t adhere to the IPR
standards
ø =
Not Recommended
| Ranking |
Agency |
| ***** |
Fleishman
Hillard |
| ***** |
Hill
& Knowlton |
| ***** |
Text
100 |
| ** |
Golin
Harris |
| ** |
Ketchum |
| ø |
Manning
Selvage & Lee |
| ø |
GCI
Group |

|