Thought Leaders Interview: Tom Watson
In the past part of our interview series we looked at PR Measurement from a practitioners perspective by talking to Ketchum’s David Rockland. This week Tom Watson explains his personal view on the topic as an academic and points out the development of the field. Tom Watson is Professor of Public Relations in The Media School at Bournemouth University and co-editor of the Journal of Communication Management.
Communicationcontrolling.de: Professor Watson, when did you start to deal with questions of PR measurement and evaluation, and why are you especially interested in this topic?
Tom Watson: My first research into PR measurement and evaluation was in 1992 when I undertook a study of UK practitioners’ attitudes towards PR evaluation. It was a postal survey among members of the Institute of Public Relations. This was an early stage of my PhD studies and sought to understand the mentality of PR practitioners on this important subject. 20 years later, I am still researching the topic.
This interview is part of the series „Thought Leaders in PR measurement” – we’ve talked to 12 people who shaped the international debate on communication measurement in various periods.
cc.de: Why do you think communication measurement is essential for organizations today?
Watson: There is a hierarchy of reasons. The base level is formative research that tracks the progress of PR campaigns and continuing activities. That gives PR managers the opportunity to make tactical changes that address failures and successes, and to develop responses to issues that arise. Above this level are various methods that measure progress towards objectives (outcomes) and that gauge the creation of value (outflow). The most interesting challenges are to agree methods of judging value creation with organisational management which are not solely focused on financial metrics.
cc.de: What have been the most important insights and turning points in your research on the topic?
Watson: For a long time, I was persuaded by the argument that if PR adopted business language, this would promote a better measurement practices and more budget allocation by clients and employers for evaluation of PR activity. In 2004/5, I investigated the usage of the term Return on Investment (ROI) by academics and practitioners and found there was very weak understanding of the term in its financial sense. Academics were ignoring it in their research and publications. For example, analysis of over 200 papers found one or two references to ROI. The attempt to curry favour with management with ‘friendly’ language was, it seemed to me, a dead-end. The turning point for me was that public relations had to explain itself better, not bend to the linguistic limitations of management-speak.
cc.de: International research constantly shows large gaps between the importance and implementation of measurement practices. Many complain about this, but nothing seems to change. Do you think there are any ways out of this dilemma?
Watson: The world has moved on, rather gradually, over the past 20 years. For example, one comment to my 1992 study was: “The only real evaluation is when the client is satisfied, happy and renews the contract. All else is meaningless”. While there is no doubt that this type of crude judgement is still widespread, we have seen the conversation among practitioners move on from “it can’t be done” to “how can it be measured simply?”. That’s not a Mao-like Great Leap Forward, but it is progress on a shallow, upward gradient. There have been long-term and well-resourced PR measurement education campaigns but the response to them has been partial. My view is that the seven Barcelona Principles, while very basic, have helped to challenge some industry “custom and practice” like Advertising Value Equivalence, which are condemned, and focused discussion on methods which have some validity. After more than two years, there is still acceptance that the Barcelona Principles have value for public relations and are part of the professional dialogue.
cc.de: Do you think it is possible to develop international standards for linking communication to organizational goals and for evaluating communication activities? What will be advantages and disadvantages, who might profit from such initiatives?
Watson: The “Communication Controlling” initiative from DPRG and ICV has the potential to be the basis of a more sophisticated international standard. It has a name which is consistently misunderstood outside central Europe but, that aside, it is a model that can be applied to trans-national organisations. The Barcelona Principles, which were followed by the so-called ‘Valid Metrics’ are a less sophisticated alternative and have been largely captured by the media measurement companies. My concern is that they keep slipping back into over-simplification and into language like ‘ROI’ and old press metrics. So there are two opportunities to develop internationally-recognised standards. I hope that “Communication Controlling” can cross the Atlantic and enter the North American debate.
cc.de: From your point of view, what is the most important future challenge for PR measurement and evaluation?
Watson: The two challenges are the development of robust methodology for the measurement of social media and the consistent setting of meaningful, measureable objectives for campaigns by practitioners. For social media, there is plenty of data to analyse traffic but less so for judgement of outcomes and value creation. There is much discussion on setting standards in AMEC and the results are expected in late 2013. As for setting measurable objectives, the best way forward is for greater alignment between organisational objectives and communication objectives. That calls for PR practitioners to be closer to top levels of management.
cc.de: Thank you for that conversation!
About Tom Watson
Tom Watson is Professor of Public Relations in The Media School at Bournemouth University (UK). Before entering academic life, his career covered journalism and public relations in Australia, the UK and internationally. He ran a public relations consultancy in England for 18 years and was chairman of the UK’s Public Relations Consultants Association from 2000 to 2002. Watson`s research focuses professionally-important topics such as measurement and evaluation, reputation management, and issues management. He also researches and writes on the public relations history and established the annual International History of Public Relations Conference in 2010. Tom is a Fellow of the Chartered Institute of Public Relations and Founding Fellow of the Public Relations Consultants Association. He took his first degree at the University of New South Wales in 1974 and was awarded his PhD in 1995 from Nottingham Trent University in England for research into models of evaluation in public relations. He is editor of the Journal of Communication Management and guest edits for Public Relations Review and PRism.
Readings
Watson, T. (2012a). The evolution of public relations measurement and evaluation. Public Relations Review, 38, 390-398.
Watson, T., & Zerfass, A. (2011). Return on investment in public relations: A critique of concepts used by practitioners from communication and management sciences perspectives. PRism 8(1).
back to News
