“If the number your client demands is one that’s easy to produce, how much incentive is there to go the route that takes more effort?”
Ad value equivalencies refuse to die. Clients demand them and, let’s face it, they are easy to calculate. But the PR industry can start to wean itself off them, writes Carma’s Fares Ghneim
FARES GHNEIM, MD of insight and analytics at CARMA, on the lure of the AVE.
The reliance on advertising value equivalencies (AVEs) to measure performance is one of the most polarising issues in the communications and public relations industry. Many, if not most, communications practitioners will agree that AVEs are fundamentally flawed, yet they remain in demand by stakeholders and continue to be widely used.
There are many reasons why organisations cling to AVEs. Inertia, an unwillingness to let go of such a concrete number and consistency in annual reporting are just a few of the justifications those of us in the communications measurement field have heard.
Measurement experts have for years cautioned against the use of a metric that ultimately does not provide actionable intelligence, at times taking a hard-line approach and directing communicators to simply refuse to provide this metric. Yet AVEs remain common currency across the industry, both in the Middle East and globally.
To move beyond AVEs, we must first understand why they are so entrenched. The common response when communicators are asked to stop using the metric is: “We cannot; our clients demand it.” While this is true, it is only half of the story. Clients and stakeholders do demand it, and it’s fairly easy to see why: AVEs are an at-a-glance assessment of PR efforts. They are easy to understand, attaching a dollar value against the resources, be they internal or external, that organisations put toward communications.
The other side of the story – the one that communications pros don’t often mention – is that they are also very easy to calculate. Take the size of the article, find out the dollar value of an equivalent advertisement and you have an instant metric.
Nevertheless, what AVEs offer in convenience and ease of use they lack in terms of real insights that allow organisations to fine-tune and improve their communications efforts. Real measurement that examines outcomes and maps back to business goals takes a lot more time. If you are a time-pressed PR professional, and the number your client demands is also one that is easy to produce, how much incentive is there to go the route that isn’t what the client is asking for and also takes much more effort?
Demanding organisations stop using a metric they are comfortable with – regardless of how flawed it may be – just doesn’t work. Smart communicators are using a different approach.
The approach that strikes a middle ground is more likely to be well received, both by stakeholders and by communications professionals. If you’re already providing AVEs and the client or management demand it, continue to provide that number – but start to incorporate additional information that shows the true effectiveness of your PR efforts.
This is a straightforward way to show the value of measurement, but sometimes it can be difficult to get started, particularly if there is no budget allocated to doing additional measurement. It also, as noted above, can take time. Here are some ideas to get started on providing clients with additional metrics that show value and won’t take too much additional time to generate:
Measure taking an action. If a communications programme is driving people to a website or landing page, track items like click-throughs, downloads and any interactive content.
Measure engagement. Watching for increased engagement on social media channels is another way to see how communications programmes are reaching intended audiences.
Track sentiment change. This measurement can be particularly important to watch after an event or programme, or even following a crisis. Changes in sentiment can be a reflection of communications efforts. Measure inquiries and feedback. During and after an event or product launch, track any increases in questions and contacts, as these both indicate an increased level of awareness and interaction with a brand.
Carry out surveys. Surveys at the start and end of communications campaigns can measure changes in awareness or perceptions among intended target audiences. These are all good entry-level metrics that are simple to understand, and do not take significant amounts of time. They also tie back to business goals, and can be used to provide insight into what programmes and messaging are working and which ones might need to be revised or reconsidered.
If you warm clients and stakeholders up to measurement that can provide an understanding of how efforts are playing out alongside the AVEs they are accustomed to seeing, they will begin to understand that information that can inform future action is more valuable than a simple dollar figure.
AVEs have stuck around for a long time, and eradicating them will take time as well. By demonstrating the utility of alternative measurement, communications professionals can introduce their stakeholders to alternatives while still providing them the metrics with which they feel comfortable. As organisations begin to see the value of metrics that provide informed paths forwards, they will gradually rely less and less on the ones that do not. This gradual approach also allows communications professionals to become more comfortable with seeking out new data sources – or looking at existing data in new ways.
This approach brings clients and communicators together to determine the best way to meet client needs, rather than a steadfast refusal to provide what the client has requested, which only serves to drive partners apart.
Demanding organisations stop using a metric they are comfortable with – regardless of how flawed it may be – just doesn’t work. Smart communicators are using a different approach.