Many organizations actively engage in ‘Issues Management.’ For most, this involves scanning the news, developing communications strategies around relevant issues and trends, and then communicating their messages back through the media.

However, effective communications is more than just managing issues through the media. Companies and organizations must also be aware of their external publics – the people and groups outside of an organization’s sphere that affect, or are affected by, what that organization does.

This is known as ‘Relationship Management.’ It is the discipline of identifying key publics and establishing strategies for building and maintaining mutually beneficial relationships with those publics.

Identifying External Publics

Like most organizations, there is a good chance you are already using media monitoring to track the issues that affect your organization. This is Communications 101.

You may even be taking it one step further and conducting some kind of media analysis, including assigning tones like positive, negative or neutral to news stories. And if you’re not, you should be. Without proper analysis and evaluation, your communications team is not doing its job properly.

But where it really gets interesting is when you take your existing monitoring and analysis and add another dimension to it. One of the best examples of this is tracking and analyzing quotes.

Tracking quotes helps you identify your key publics. You can see exactly what they are thinking, what they are saying, what they are doing.

And by taking further small steps, such as cross-referencing tone with quotes, you can easily identify the type of relationship that exists between your organization and its different key publics. You can get a picture of what you are doing right and what you are doing wrong, and, where necessary, develop a plan to change the relationship.

Obviously, the more positive the quote or article, the greater the chance that the person being quoted is an ally to issues favorable to your organization. Conversely, the more negative the quote or article, the greater the chance that the person being quoted is opposed to issues favorable to your organization.

Furthermore, the more times a person is quoted, the greater the chance he or she is an Opinion Leader – a person that knowingly or unknowingly influences opinion. It’s important that your organization try to have an open and professional dialogue with Opinion Leaders no matter what their position is.

Dealing with Key Publics

A lot of people feel the media ultimately control public opinion. There’s no denying they do have an enormous influence, but they are only one piece of the PR puzzle.

It’s important that PR professionals not limit themselves to just the media. Sometimes it’s best to communicate right to the source, if possible. Remember, as a professional communicator, your primary job is to disseminate information, not necessarily to deal with the media or write news releases. How you get the information to your publics is not what matters; what matters is that they get the information. Using the media and writing news releases are simply a means to an end.

According to Statistics Canada, 61 per cent of Canadians belong to a group or organization, including organizations unions, religious groups, professional associations, etc. Opinion Leaders are a very important component of these groups.

Once you have identified the groups and their Opinion Leaders, it’s important to develop consistent messages that will clearly state your organization’s position on key issues. Without that consistency, you run the risk of looking hypocritical or insincere. The last thing you want is to be communicating different messages regarding the same issue.
(more…)

You’ve just reviewed the final results of your last pro-active media campaign to launch that
new product or service. The numbers look pretty good: media impressions were in the millions;
coverage was evenly split between broadcast and print; and a leading national paper ran three
stories on the launch-pretty impressive. But could it have been better?

Analyze this

Analyzing issues or campaigns is the first big step in truly understanding any communications
success or failure. With busy schedules and/or tight client budgets, more often than not, media
analysis isn’t always carried out. A big investment is being made on gathering the media content,
but not on measuring and analyzing the trends, successes, and areas for improvement. Stories
are often filed away immediately or distributed to a limited group, never to be looked at again
or analyzed at all.

If you’re already conducting ongoing media analysis half the battle is won. But if not, you can
bet your client or director will demand it soon. New analysis technologies combined with increased
expectations to determine communications ROI (Return on Investment) are making analysis a must,
not a should.

(more…)

You’ve just reviewed the final results of your last pro-active media campaign to launch that new product or service. The numbers look pretty good: media impressions were in the millions; coverage was evenly split between broadcast and print; and a leading national paper ran three stories on the launch-pretty impressive. But could it have been better?

Analyze this
Analyzing issues or campaigns is the first big step in truly understanding any communications success or failure. With busy schedules and/or tight client budgets, more often than not, media analysis isn’t always carried out. A big investment is being made on gathering the media content, but not on measuring and analyzing the trends, successes, and areas for improvement. Stories are often filed away immediately or distributed to a limited group, never to be looked at again or analyzed at all.

If you’re already conducting ongoing media analysis half the battle is won. But if not, you can bet your client or director will demand it soon. New analysis technologies combined with increased expectations to determine communications ROI (Return on Investment) are making analysis a must, not a should.

Once you’ve determined the need or importance of analysis, what’s next? This is where the confusion can set in. As can be expected, everyone has their own definition of how media content should be analyzed based on their own experiences. And usually the issue of PR standards and formulas arise…and that is when things often can come to a stand-still.
(more…)

The world of PR is benefiting from dramatic changes in the way media coverage is being delivered electronically to your computer desktop or PDA of choice. Perhaps the nuisance of ink on your fingers is being replaced by a bad case of “BlackBerry thumb” — but nevertheless getting your media coverage electronically has never been easier or more mobile.

These changes now drive the development of new tools from content providers, and new software programs to help better manage and analyze media coverage. The automation occurring at the database level and through the real-time delivery of organizational news, to internal and external stakeholders, is now almost taken for granted. And the holy grail of PR — to automate media analysis and measurement — is already under way; but where should software stop to make way for human analysis?.

Media analysis programs can save countless hours quantifying and sorting media coverage in an unlimited number of ways, including by circulation, region, ad equivalency, company programs and services, and competitive brands. However, do you really want a computer program qualifying how each story affects your organization? It’s a gamble with little upside.

Just Say No

The automation of tone and sentiment has already been incorporated into some software programs, but how accurate can it be? Every story, across every medium, will have a dramatically different meaning or impact for various organizations and their stakeholders. Behind the news emerge both winner and losers.
(more…)