You asked for it, Nick

Nothing like throwing out a controversial headline to get the blood boiling. Reading Nick Wrenden's column in TechLinks entitled Lets stop trying to measure PR  was better than a vente espresso with an extra shot-- I actually  had to take an extra dose of my blood pressure medication after reading it.

After the drugs kicked in, I took a deep breath and realized that this is a classic case of  everything looking like a nail if all you are selling is hammers.  Wrenden sells sales lead management systems, so he's making the argument that the only valid form of communications measurement is sales and that everything else is a waste of time.

The most infuriating element of Wrenden's rant is that he uses a Sears study that I'm very familiar with to make his point.  If he'd bothered to do any homework, he would know that Sears was absolutely able to calculate sales increases as a result of PR.  As does Southwest Airlines, Procter & Gamble and numerous other companies.

First of all, Mr. Wrenden, not all communications programs are designed to  generate sales leads. Many are intended to manage issues, inform audiences and build relationships.  But again, if all you're selling is lead management systems, you probably can't t fathom that anyone would have any other objective.

Secondly,  PR is NOT the same as media relations. Public Relations professionals are in the business of building relationships with stakeholders. Yes, some of those relationships are with the media, and yes, many many PR people measure their success in terms of media coverage. But they also measure relationships, awareness, attitude shifts and other outcomes.

Thirdly, PR measurement is not about justifying ones budget, it's about collecting data on which to make better decisions. Sure, one data set might include the number of leads generated, another might be the number of opportunities to see your key messages, another might be your share of brand recommendations, or the number of web site downloads or web sales. Its when you look at these measures in the context of each other that you get really solid information about the performance of your organization. That's how to measure PR.

Wrenden's piece is a bit narrow minded and totally self serving, but in terms of measuring its results, it was a pretty effective headline if your metric is the number of controversial conversations started.  On the other hand, if you're measuring in terms of sales leads, I've talked to a heck of a lot of PR people about it, and I'd hazard a guess, none of them will ever buy Mr. Wrenden's product. 

Comments

[Justin Sullivan]

As a sales guy, I guess I just look at this issue from an entirely different perspective.

What PR firms (with a B2B practice) are talking about these days is measuring the number of leads that they produce - generally speaking. This then becomes great ammo for budget time, and in general to justify their existance. Others want to take it a step further and look at hard-dollar metrics (revenue generated from PR leads).

The challenge is that most marketing departments feel that their job is to fill the top end of a sales funnel with leads. Once the leads are in the funnel, it goes to sales and marketing's job is done. Looks great on paper, and marketing can (hopefully) show progress.

In this mentality, it's perfectly acceptable to throw $40k at a trade show and come back with 300 names of people who stopped by a booth to pick up a tzotchke.

The dirty little secret is that sales guys know these leads are DOA. Thus, the return on this investment is nill.

True sales professionals should not be paid 6-figures to chase down unqualified leads. This should be done up-front by someone (or some organization) who'se job is to ask the right questions (Is this project funded? Who is the economic buyer? Is there a true business need for this solution?) *before* engaging a field rep.

Are PR and brand-building valuable? Absolutely. Is it the silver bullet? Hardly. There is a lot more work that should go into qualifying something before it even reaches the sales radar.

[Nick Wreden]

Thanks for your feedback. However, a couple of comments are in order.

First, the name is Wreden, not Wrenden.

Second, I do not sell lead management systems, which makes it a bit difficult for people to buy a system from me. I am an international brand consultant. I do, however, believe that every company should have a lead management system.

Third, the ultimate goal of every PR or branding investment must be to increase profitability. If that is accepted as the goal, then why not measure PR in terms of its contribution to profitability? Doesn't profitability have more relevance -- and thus give PR professionals more credibility -- in executive suites than, say, as you suggest, "web site downloads?"

Best,
Nick Wreden, CEO
FusionBrand
Author, ProfitBrand: How to Increase the Profitability, Accountability and Sustainability of Brands.