Jim Macnamara’s Measuring Up
Non-profit public relations, often marginalized, deserves recognition as being innovative and easier to measure. Plus, they are the good guys.
The non-for-profit (NFP) sector is often seen as existing on the periphery of the professional public relations industry, overlooked in many discussions and marginalised in both professional and academic discourse about public relations. That is not to say that PR is not actively deployed in the NFP sector – it is, by thousands of dedicated practitioners. But their budgets are small and in discussions about PR the bulk of attention goes to the big budget business sector, the similarly large government sector, and high profile consultancies.
Meanwhile, the not-for-profit sector works quietly in the background, taking an ever-increasing role in supporting sectors of society and achieving social, cultural and political objectives.
There are three reasons that the PR industry should focus greater attention on the not-for-profit sector.
Not-for-profit organisations are the good guys.
NFP organisations are engaged in community service, such as providing support to disadvantaged groups, as well as managing cultural institutions. If ever PR wanted sites and examples to show that it can contribute positively to society, the non-for-profit sector provides these.
While PR combats a ‘cringe factor’ every time big business and corporations blot their copybook with yet another financial or environmental disaster, not-for-profit organisations and their communicators contribute positively to society. They attract blood donations for the Red Cross which can literally save lives; they distribute aid to impoverished and disaster-affected people; they help the homeless and the needy; they save animals; and the protect the planet. Without communication these organisations would fail to attract donations and volunteers and be unknown.
Why hasn’t someone written a book focusing specifically on communication campaigns that help make the world a better place? Perhaps they have, but I don’t see it on the lists of text books or promoted by the industry. Most often, PR is portrayed as disreputable, as in books such as Stauber and Rampton’s Toxic Sludge is Good for You and Stuart Ewen’s PR! A Social History of Spin, TV shows such as Spin City and movies such as Thank you for Smoking.
NFP PR is not lost in the mix.
Second, NFP organisations usually do not have budgets for advertising or paid promotions. They tend to rely on ‘below the line’ public relations strategies. This means that the outcomes of public communication are not complexly interwoven with other influences as they are in the case of integrated campaigns. Causation – one of the major challenges for evaluation research – is much easier to show and attribute to PR in many NFP public communication programs. With evaluation of its contribution a continuing challenge, PR could learn some valuable lessons and gain useful case studies from the NFP sector. For instance, an international aid organisation found that when it decreased PR activities to create public awareness of relief operations, both donations and volunteerism decreased. Conversely, when it increased publicity, Web site promotion and public presentations about its aid programs (with no advertising or other influences evident), donations flowed in and volunteers came forward in increased numbers.
Scant resources frequently leads to innovation.
Third, the aphorism ‘necessity is the mother of invention’ is often demonstrated in the not-for-profit sector. With scant resources in most cases, not-for-profit organisations and their communicators regularly develop innovative approaches that, far from being the ‘long tail’ of PR, are at the forefront of the bell curve. For instance, in undertaking research in 2009 and 2010 into uses of social media, cultural institutions and some not-for-profit organisations emerged as the most innovative in creating true community engagement and two-way communication. One war museum posted old archive photographs of unnamed dead soldiers on a ‘Commons’ Web site and invited people worldwide to participate in its historical records construction. The result was the successful identification of many ‘lost’ soldiers, emotional closure and copies of important mementos for many families, and a contribution to history.
This is not to simply sing the praises of not-for-profit groups or eulogise them over other fields of PR practice. It is to enjoin in this themed issue of The Measurement Standard in calling for a greater focus on not-for-profit PR. Rather than see NFP PR as the ‘green fringe,’ ‘tree-huggers,’ and socialists of the industry, our colleagues in this field should be brought into the mainstream. NFP PR could take centre stage as evidence of public relations contributing a societal good and some of our best NFP practitioners and case studies could be put in front of corporations as examples of how they could contribute more to society, enhancing their reputation and community engagement in the process.
*****
Jim Macnamara PhD, FPRIA, FAMI, CPM, FAMEC became Professor of Public Communication at the University of Technology Sydney in 2007 after a 30-year career working in journalism, public relations and media research which culminated in selling the CARMA Asia Pacific franchise which he founded to Media Monitors in 2006. He is the author of 12 books including The 21st Century Media (R)evolution: Emergent Communication Practices published by Peter Lang, New York in 2010.
Jonathan Rick’s post on Mashable yesterday encourages those who sell social media services to frame what they offer in terms of case studies. He advises avoiding the vague definitions and buzzwords commonly used to describe social media by using real-life examples of what social media has actually accomplished. And he provides about a dozen case study examples.
David Geddes, Ph.D., is Chair of the Institute for Public Relations Commission on Measurement and Evaluation. 
Twenty plus years ago my mission was simply to get people to measure. Once measurement became more common, I focussed on getting people to measure correctly and accurately. Now, thanks to the Barcelona Principles and other efforts, there is official recognition that there is a right way and wrong way to do things. That’s real progress.
Is measurement going mainstream? Has anyone else noticed that justifying oneself with facts and figures is becoming more and more common lately? You can hardly read an article nowadays without a intro paragraph of justification stats. In fact, recent figures show that 87% of all magazine articles begin with— (ha ha.)
“Data will become the new soil in which our ideas will grow, and data whisperers will become the new messiahs.” 