To return to the current issue's contents page, click here.

To return to the contents page of the issue that this article appeared in, click here.

Comments Please!
Send us your thoughts on this article and we will post them in our Comments section.

The Measurement Standard Readership Survey

Survey Results Show
Subscribers Read Newsletter
Most readers claim they use The Measurement Standard a couple times a day.

Here are our survey results in a nutshell (read the rest of the article for the details):

• You actually read our articles—and 8 percent of you read every one
• Most of you use at least a couple ideas from TMS everyday
• You are being held more accountable
• You don't read blogs much
• You are using media content analysis and surveys to measure your communications programs

Survey conducted and reported by Bruce Aube

Last month we asked you, our Measurement Standard readers, to tell us a little about who you are and what you think about this publication. Three hundred of you went to SurveyMonkey and responded to the survey. More than a few of you made the effort to respond with specific comments on how we can improve (see below). Thank you all very much for participating. (And if you have something more to say about this publication, please write The Editor, he'd love to hear from you.)

Here are some of the results (and be sure to read Katie Paine's comparison of these results to those of our survey two years ago.):

What Sort of Person Reads The Measurement Standard?

You are being held more accountable, especially if you work in private business.

Using a one-to-five scale, with 5 representing much more accountable and 1 representing much less accountable, communications professionals surveyed were asked to describe the how much more or less accountable they are for PR/communications results than they were a year ago. Two-thirds of respondents (67%) said that they are more accountable than a year ago, scoring 4 (44%) or 5 (23%). Only three percent said that they are less accountable, scoring 2 (2%) or 1 (1%). The mean score on this measure was 3.87. Respondents who work for private business were significantly more likely to say that they are more accountable (4.01) than were respondents who work for research/measurement suppliers (3.53).

Respondents who stated that they are more accountable for their PR/communications results were asked to describe how they responded to the request for more accountability. Close to half said that they studied the subject (45%) and about one-third said that they upgraded their existing measurement system (37%), or implemented an in-house measurement program (32%). Nearly one-quarter (23%) said that they attended a measurement seminar/conference and one-in-nine (11%) said that they hired an outside measurement vendor.

You don't read blogs much, especially if you work for the government or a nonprofit.

Less than half (46%) of communications professionals surveyed said that they read PR blogs more than once a month. Respondents who work in government (29%) or for a non-profit (37%) or private business (41%) were significantly less likely than respondents who work for a research/measurement supplier (63%) or PR agency (54%) to say that they read PR blogs.

Only 27 percent of all respondents said that they use an RSS reader to get content on the Web. Respondents who work in the government (48%) were significantly more likely to say that they use an RSS reader than respondents who work in education (19%), for a non-profit (20%) or private business (25%).

You are using media content analysis and surveys to measure your current PR/communications program.

Nearly two-thirds of all communications professionals surveyed (63%) said that they are using media content analysis to measure their current PR/communications program. Respondents who work for a research/measurement supplier were significantly more likely to say that they are using media content analysis (88%) than were all other respondents (61%) surveyed. The majority of respondents (52%) also said that they use survey research to measure their PR/communications program, with those who work in education (69%) being the most likely to do so.

You subscribe to The Measurement Standard to stay up-to-date on the latest PR/communications measurement trends.

About one-in-four respondents (24%) said that they are a current subscriber of The Measurement Standard. Seven percent stated that they are former subscribers; the remaining 69 percent said that they have never subscribed to The Measurement Standard. The cost of subscription ("too expensive for my budget") was the top reason (49%) for not being a current subscriber; 11 percent feel that they get everything they want to know from the free part of the publication.

How Do Subscribers Use The Measurement Standard?

You actually read the articles—and 8 percent of you read every one.

When TMS subscribers were asked to describe the extent to which they typically read the electronic newsletter, eight percent said that they read every article completely, 39 percent said that they read 50%-75% and 22 percent stated that they read 25%-50%. Thirteen percent reported that they just read the email or contents page and slightly more (16%) cited that they just skim through the articles. Three percent claimed that they don't read it.

Most of you use at least a couple ideas from TMS everyday.

Subscribers were asked to describe the extent to which they have incorporated ideas, methodologies or information learned from The Measurement Standard into their everyday activities (using a one-to-five scale, with 5 representing "have incorporated several ideas" and 1 representing "never incorporated any ideas"). Close to half (47%) said that they have incorporated several (17%) or some (30%) ideas, scoring 4 or 5. More than one-quarter (26%) stated that they have incorporated two or three ideas, scoring 3. Eight percent said that they have incorporated one idea and less than one fifth (19%) said that they have never incorporated any ideas. The mean score on this measure was a 3.19.

You print out TMS articles for future reference.

In an aided question, more than half (61%) of all TMS subscribers surveyed said that they have printed articles for future reference.

You find The Measurement Standard enjoyable to read, especially if you work in the government or an agency.

Subscribers were asked to describe the extent to which they find The Measurement Standard enjoyable to read (using a one-to-five scale, with 5 representing very enjoyable and 1 representing not at all enjoyable). Sixty-four percent said that they find TMS enjoyable to read, scoring 4 (42%) or the top score of 5 (22%). Only nine percent feel that TMS is unenjoyable to read, scoring 2; no respondents scored 1. The mean score on this measure was a 3.78 on the five-point scale. Subscribers who work in the government (4.33) or a PR agency (3.83) were much more likely to find TMS enjoyable to read than were subscribers who work for a research/measurement supplier (3.22).

Subscribers prefer articles in the following order, from most to least:

1. Feature Stories
2. Ask The Experts
3. The Paine of Measurement
4. Contributed Articles
5. Can This Reputation Be Saved?
6. Mavens and Menaces
7. Benchmarks

Feature Stories: Using a one-to-five scale, with 5 representing excellent and 1 representing poor, subscribers of The Measurement Standard were asked to rate each of seven components of the publication. Nearly four-out-of-five subscribers surveyed (78%) rated feature stories favorably, scoring 4 (44%) or the top score of 5 (34%); only four percent rated them unfavorably, scoring 2; no respondents scored 1. The mean rating score for feature stories was a 4.08. Subscribers who work in the government (5.00) or private business (4.55) were much more likely to rate feature stories favorably than were subscribers who work for a PR agency (3.73), a non-profit organization (3.86) or a research/measurement supplier (3.88).

Ask The Experts: Using the same one-to-five scale (5=excellent, 1=poor), three-quarters of subscribers surveyed (76%) rated "Ask the Experts" favorably, scoring 4 (45%) or the top score of 5 (31%); only 10 percent rated them unfavorably, scoring 2; no respondents scored 1. The mean rating score for feature stories was a 3.96. Subscribers who work in the government (5.00) or private business (4.60) were much more likely to rate "Ask the Experts" favorably than were subscribers who work for a research/measurement supplier (3.50), PR agency (3.60) or in education (3.83).

The Paine of Measurement: Using the same one-to-five scale (5=excellent, 1=poor), close to three-quarters of subscribers surveyed (71%) rated Katie Paine's column favorably, scoring 4 (39%) or the top score of 5 (31%); only 10 percent rated them unfavorably, scoring 2; no respondents scored 1. The mean rating score for The Paine of Measurement was a 3.92. Subscribers who work in education (4.80) or private business (4.36) were much more likely to rate Katie Paine's column favorably than were subscribers who work for a research/measurement supplier (3.44), a non-profit organization (3.57) or a PR agency (3.75).

Contributed Articles: Using the same one-to-five scale (5=excellent, 1=poor), more than two-thirds (70%) of subscribers surveyed rated contributed articles favorably, scoring 4 (50%) or the top score of 5 (20%); only four percent rated them unfavorably, scoring 2; no respondents scored 1. The mean rating score for Contributed Articles was a 3.86. Subscribers who work in the government (5.00) or education (4.40) were much more likely to rate contributed articles favorably than were subscribers who work for a research/measurement supplier (3.50) or PR agency (3.60).

Can This Reputation Be Saved?: Using the same one-to-five scale (5=excellent, 1=poor), 71 percent of subscribers surveyed rated "Can This Reputation Be Saved?" favorably, scoring 4 (52%) or the top score of 5 (19%); only four percent rated them unfavorably, scoring 2; no respondents scored 1. The mean rating score for Can This Reputation Be Saved? was a 3.85. Subscribers who work in education (4.33), private business (4.20) or a non-profit organization (4.17) were much more likely to rate "Can This Reputation Be Saved?" favorably than were subscribers who work in government (3.00) or for a research/measurement supplier (3.33).

Mavens and Menaces: Using the same one-to-five scale (5=excellent, 1=poor), nearly two-thirds of subscribers surveyed (62%) rated "Mavens and Menaces" favorably, scoring 4 (47%) or the top score of 5 (15%); only six percent rated them unfavorably, scoring 2; no respondents scored 1. The mean rating score for Mavens and Menaces was a 3.70. Subscribers who work in private business (4.00) were much more likely to rate "Mavens and Menaces" favorably than were subscribers who work for a research/measurement supplier (3.22).

Moves and Shakeouts: Using the same one-to-five scale (5=excellent, 1=poor), less than the majority of subscribers surveyed (42%) rated "Moves and Shakeouts" favorably, scoring 4 (35%) or the top score of 5 (7%); one-in-eight (12%) rated them unfavorably, scoring 2; no respondents scored 1. The mean rating score for Moves and Shakeouts was a 3.37. Subscribers who work in government (2.00) or education (3.00) were much less likely to rate "Moves and Shakeouts" favorably than were subscribers who work for a private business (3.70) or a non-profit organization (3.60).

Reader Recommendations:
The following are verbatim responses to the question: "What recommendations would you make to improve The Measurement Standard?"

• Would seriously appreciate if a site could be provided for purely articles on public relations strategies. I would appreciate too, the inclusion of workable goals and objectives.
• Take into consideration other PR environments especially in less developed economies and democracies like in Africa.
• Sometimes Katie goes overboard in her criticism of other people. The advertising and self-promotion can be a bit annoying.
• Site mechanics: Make it more intuitive (or dummy-proof) to navigate back to the front page from articles while staying logged in as a subscriber. Content: I like it as it is. Maybe more case studies?
• Should include more PR tactics.
• RSS
• Please improve the login screen access points in the article teasers.
• More of the how to lessons to help business improve.
• More case studies on companies measuring PR.
• Media analysis and metrics are applicable to many areas outside of PR. Can you write about how it is used by brand managers, for example? Please come down from the AVE soapbox. Yes - AVE is an unscientific, unproven metric that simply shouldn't be used. Those who don't understand this by now probably never will until they are provided a metric that can assign a dollar value to PR results.
• Make the articles available for those who need the articles but could not subscribe especially students.
• Layout is a little difficult -- when reading an article, it's hard to find the links back to the other articles. I typically give it only one good reading, then it gets buried. The more I see during that first reading, the more I'll take in, and some better navigation would help me remember what else is there.
• Keep analyzing measurement trends and measurement products offered by various companies. I loved the Sept. 26 Indexes Revisited article.
• Interactive roundtable discussions.
• Increase attention to internal communication measurement.
• I recall when I first subscribed I had trouble getting my password to work. I'm not even sure if I still have a subscription. I think it was a waste of money because I haven't ever really looked at it but I would like to improve our measurement at our agency.
• I enjoy the articles from different contributors and would like to see more.
• I am subscribed to your mailing, but can't access the articles. You decide whether I am a subscriber or not.
• Easier to read email layout
• Content is excellent. Keep it up!!
• Case studies are helpful.
• Access to more of the valuable content for on-line subscribers.

You know you need to measure your results, but chances are there’s never been enough money in your budget for evaluation. Until now.
KDPaine & Partners’ new Do-It-Yourself Dashboard system combines a Web-based application with professional consulting to enable PR professionals to customize their own PR dashboards. Look here for more information.

1. You’ll learn how to use hard numbers to prove the results of your PR efforts.

2. You’ll learn which are the right vendors for your measurement projects.

3. You’ll learn how to design your program right from the start to be easily measureable.

Click here to
subscribe now!
(It’s 100%
money-back guaranteed!)

51 Durham Point Road, Durham, NH 03824
603-868-1550 fax: 603-868-3346 www.measuresofsuccess.com