Research and Evaluation (Week 10)

Research is the key to any successful public relations, communications and/or marketing efforts, not only in the business world, but also in the non-profit and government sectors. Public Relations Research, as the name implies, focuses on the entire public relations process and examines the communications relationships that exist among and between institutions and their key target audience groups. Evaluation can then be better analyze with the factual feedbacks or results. Without research, those who administer public relations, public affairs, promotional, and related communications programs and activities for their organizations would be operating in the dark, without any guidance or clear sense of direction.

I think the key points to remember from this week’s reading were that for the public relations or public affairs officer, a useful definition of public relations research is that it is an essential tool for fact and opinion gathering - a systematic effort aimed at discovering, confirming and/or understanding through objective appraisal the facts or opinions pertaining to a specified problem, situation, or opportunity. Most public relations/public affairs officers have come to recognize the following as real “needs” for conducting public relations research:

• To collect information that public relations professionals need to have and to know to do their jobs more effectively.
• To obtain benchmark data regarding the views of key target audience groups.
• When facing a sudden and unexpected crisis, to put the issues involved into and etc.

The readings made me think more about public relations theory and practice in that for truly effective public relations research, advance planning is necessary. Before PR practitioners begin, they should clearly define their goals and objectives. They could ask themselves “what you want and need the research to do for you.” They should remember, finding out “why” things are the way they are or the reasons individuals feel and act the way they do are often much more important for public relations planning and evaluation than simply finding out “what” the facts are or “how” people feel. This would aid in providing a better evaluation both for the organizations or the PR practitioners as well and improvise even better outcomes in future.

Stating an example, when communications researchers consider doing qualitative studies, the data collection methodologies that usually pop quickly into mind are focus groups and in-depth interview studies, similarly to what PR practitioners thought of as well. Focus groups, which involves input, output and outcome research or results, under the guidance of a trained moderator -- are encouraged, as a group, to discuss freely any and all of their feelings, concerns, problems and frustrations relating to specific topics under discussion. Focus groups are ideal for brainstorming, idea-gathering and concept testing.

As part of the communications research effort, I guessed PR practitioners are interested in measuring the credibility and/or believability of the information sources, the relevance and overall importance of the messages being disseminated, finding out as much as they possibly can about the opinions, attitudes and behavior patterns of those in the target audience groups, as they respond or do not respond, as the case may be - to the various messages being disseminated and in pinpointing the best and most effective communications channels to use when disseminating messages.

Tactics (Week 9)

If public relations tactics like special events, brochures, broadcast plugs and press releases dominate the consumers or organizations answer, I guessed most of them might be missing the best of what Public Relations has to offer, through tactics.

I think the key points to remember from this week's readings were that, it may be through some form of media relations, or a speaking engagement, but each message needs at least one vehicle to be carried to the intended audience. It makes me ponder what are the best “vehicles” for your message? How can PR practitioners get the word out in the most cost-efficient way? When looking at the different options of choosing tactics, they should consider the fact that research shows that a target audience needs to hear the message about five times until they understand it and take action. Therefore, the more times PR practitioners or firms can reach your target audience, the better it is.

The readings made me think more about public relations theory and practice in that it takes more than good intentions for PR firms or practitioners to alter individual, key-audience perception leading to changed behaviors. It takes a carefully structured plan dedicated to getting every member of the PR team working towards the same external audience behaviors insuring that the organization’s public relations effort and tactics used stayed sharply focused.

I guessed when PR practitioners or firms are thinking of tactics selection or the methods of delivery to audience, they should try to remember that their PR effort must require more than special events, news releases and talk show tactics if they are to receive the quality public relations results they deserve. PR professionals and organizations will need the communications tactics certain to carry their message to the attention of their target audience. There are many available from speeches, facility tours, emails and brochures to consumer briefings, media interviews, newsletters, personal meetings and many others. However, they should be certain that the tactics they pick are known to reach folks just like their audience members.

Linking to what we have read and blog of Chapter 7, it reflected that PR planning is a vital tool while PR practitioners are brainstorming of the tactics selection where public could sense the awareness of the messages and felt appealing to them. PR practitioners and firms indeed have to do a lot of research before catering strategies to the target audiences, with creative tactics at the right budget.

Sponsorship and event management (Week 8)

I think the key points to remember from this week’s reading were that of how organizations use different tactics of special events and sponsorship to achieve their aims and goals. These could be ranging from how organizations grow its trust through communicating with values, positioning themselves in special forms to differentiate themselves from competitors and cultivating strategic alliances with the internal and external publics.

Sponsorship is the underwriting of a special event to support corporate objectives by enhancing corporate image, increasing awareness of brands, or directly stimulating sales of products and services. Sponsorship can be individual or joint; the event can be a one-time affair or a continuing series of activities. Why organizations are interested in sponsorship then? I believed this is because of the perception of how beneficial sponsorship can be. When done well, it offers significant opportunities for distinct marketing and competitive advantages, as well as showing support of the event.

The types of sponsorship that were highlighted in the text were interesting facts to be understood as well. Namely the three types of sponsorship are: philanthropic, corporate and marketing sponsorship. The third example is the most well-liked form of sponsorship, and is a common inclusion as a cost effective sales and marketing strategy. A company can benefit from sponsorship in many ways, such as for example, enhancing its image or shaping consumers’ attitudes. Often, companies are looking to improve how they are perceived by their target audience. Sponsoring events that appeal to their market are likely to shape buying attitudes and help generate a positive reaction. Coca Cola, for instance, is always looking to generate a positive influence of their products in the minds of their consumers and as such regularly support events they feel can influence consumer opinions.

However, organizations do have to take notice and beware of “ambush marketing” stealing the limelight of an official sponsor or an event. Ambush marketing occurs when one brand pays to become an official sponsor of an event (eg. athletic events) and another competing brand attempts to cleverly connect itself with the event, without paying the sponsorship fee and, more frustratingly, without breaking any laws. Ambushing, is as undeniably effective as it is damaging, attracting consumers at the expense of competitors, all the while undermining an event’s integrity and, most importantly, its ability to attract future sponsors. While getting ambushed is as inevitable, I guessed there are still tactics that a brand can take to minimize the damage. For example, organizations that sign a sponsorship deal should always proof read the details carefully. They have the need and capabilities to negotiate for every potential right to block out competitors as well.

The readings made me think more about public relations theory and practice in that organizations should not expect totally that sponsorship should drive sales. Sponsorship is about values and visibility. Participation may lift organization’s reputation and exposure but there are still needs to attend to the other marketing elements. Additionally, I think that organizations should not keep up a sponsorship deal that has run its natural course. Organizations should monitor the feedback from their sponsorship and beware of sponsorships that can turn “bad” overnight. On the other hand, before organizations start to plan an event or even think of whom to get their sponsorship from, it is important to research on the fundamentals to check the feasibility of the event. Important factors that can be analyzed include:

• How much the event is going to cost;
• Whether it offers an opportunity to raise revenue;
• What the organization can gain from it;
• The effect of the even on the organization’s key publics and etc.

This make me ponder on my team’s upcoming debate topic.
“Sponsorship does not generate authentic value for PR and is a poor cousin of advertising”.

What are your says then? :)