Burson-Marsteller boss: Clients must be encouraged to move away from equivalency as a PR measure
Jones, Brett, Brown and Ziavini onstage at CommsCon
Australian public relations agencies are ahead of some of their global counterparts when it comes to PR measurement but agencies must continue to educate clients on the need to move on from the traditional advertising value equivalency (AVE) model, Burson-Marsteller CEO Christine Jones told an audience in Sydney.
Speaking at today’s CommsCon conference on the topic of PR measurement, Jones disputed the notion that Australia is behind the rest of the world and needs to catch up.
“I think Australian thinking and capability is way ahead,” she said.
We all know that PR needs a new measurement model.
The question is: what is it?
No one is answering the question: How do you attribute business value to PR results?
Interesting to hear AVEs still used by ‘big’ agencies, when the Barcelona Principles formed out of the Global Alliance, are not accepted.
The issue is convincing the c-suite of its importance, in order to obtain greater PR budgets in the future. Its another one of those arguments that has been hanging around for many years. We need to stop talking about it and start leading it.
Found PRIA’s model quite useful, particularly on a low budget.
http://www.pria.com.au/eventsa.....evaluation
I simply cannot believe that advertising equivalence, in any guise, is still being discussed by PR companies and their clients. Please go read the Barcelona Declaration http://bit.ly/1hQpzLq and enter the 21st PR century. AVE was dead, certainly no longer credible, at least 20 years ago.
For those looking to explain to clients or colleagues why we shouldn’t use AVEs, here’s an article I wrote that was recently featured on Ragan.com detailing 16 reasons to stop using them: http://www.ragan.com/Main/Arti.....49335.aspx
And for those looking for a better way to measure PR, here is a link to AMEC’s integrated measurement framework, including a user guide, case studies and sample metrics. http://www.bit.ly/smmframework
AMEC is the International Association for the Measurement and Evaluation of Communications and was one of the key players behind the Barcelona Principles. The framework has been adopted and endorsed by the UK Government, Public Relations Consultants Association and the Chartered Institute of Public Relations.
Good links Richard, thank you.
No one using AVEs can say that their thinking is “way ahead” of anything other than perhaps the PR equivalent of a horse and buggy. Not only have do Australian firms like Burson use traditional AVEs, I’ve also heard them makeup new AVE equivalents for social media that are even less accurate http://painepublishing.com/mea.....ent-tools/
The alternative to AVE is to define a PR quality index based on what drives the customer to purchase your product or do change the behavior you want them to change. I’ve done that dozens of times, for many organizations large and small. It’s not that hard, it just requires commitment and bit of conversation with leadership. I have yet to meet a senior leader in a client organization who really wants to be fed false data, http://painepublishing.com/mea.....d-metrics/
Once you explain the falisies behind AVE, they are happy to switch to a more meaningful metric. Many organizations like GM, McDonalds,Southwest Airliines, and others have been able to move beyond AVEs. For an agency with the stature of Burson to cower behind the excuse that “clients demand it” shows a lack of strength and commitement to excellence. If the clients demanded heroin and hookers, would they also serve them up?