Yesterday’s Measurement Camp proved to be very well supported with well over 30 people working in many aspects of PR, Marketing and measurement attending the meeting in London. There were specialists in ‘buzz’ measurement, social media planning (a new title I think we will see more of), search, and many aspects of online marketing, with the possible exception of advertising. Notably there were senior online representatives from a number of the large PR agencies including Bite, Fishburn Hedges and Porter Novelli.
The focus of the near future activity is the wiki with a view to building up resources in the form of measurement metrics case studies and best practice. There seemed to be a genuine desire to progress the issue and without a doubt there were people with the necessary diversity of skills and depth of influence.
I am not sure if there are any templates for this kind of initiative but it seemed hard to argue against there being a need to make practical progress in the world of online measurement. The point I really want to make is it would be great if it were possible to formulate the most appropriate ‘best practice’, supported by case studies across a wide variety of industry situations, resulting a broad selection of tools. This toolbox could then be used to educate as well as support the implementation of measurement programs.
I found myself in one of the breakout groups discussing the metrics of measurement online. There were a host of media output measures, like sentiment, topic, message; but I think we could benefit from considering the connection with organisational and PR outcomes, which is something I would like to explore, with others help, on the wiki.
One thing which does concern me is that this might look like a London or UK –centric initiative. Globally people are wondering about this area, hence the value of the wiki. Marshalling the research acumen and the creative energies across the continents would be a mammoth task, particularly as it is increasingly involving the interests of the greater marketing function, not just PR.
I have a problem with your definition of messaging as an “output” — for many organizations, particularly in the non-profit sector, getting the message across IS the desired business outcome. To dismiss it as mere “output” means that you really don’t understand the nature of social media. It’s a conversation, and if you’re good at that conversation it enhances your reputation and your relationships. You might or might not sell something, but you should be able to influence consideration and word of mouth.
You might consider this: http://kdpaine.blogs.com/themeasurementstandard/2008/03/are-we-engaged.html
Thank you for your comment. Undoubtedly messages are an output and I apologise for not qualify that many of the measures have an application in the measurement of out-takes and outcomes. I honestly did not aim to mislead and having re-read the posting I don’t believe that was the way it reads. Many people are feeling their way around this space, learning from what ever sources they can, and any constructive comments are always warmly appreciated.