Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
This article was downloaded by: [McGill University Library]On: 25 August 2012, At: 04:48Publisher: RoutledgeInforma Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number:1072954 Registered office: Mortimer House, 37-41 Mortimer Street,London W1T 3JH, UK
Journal of Public RelationsResearchPublication details, including instructions forauthors and subscription information:http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/hprr20
Communicating PublicRelations ResearchGael F. Walker
Version of record first published: 19 Nov2009
To cite this article: Gael F. Walker (1994): Communicating Public RelationsResearch, Journal of Public Relations Research, 6:3, 141-161
To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1207/s1532754xjprr0603_01
PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE
Full terms and conditions of use: http://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditions
This article may be used for research, teaching, and private studypurposes. Any substantial or systematic reproduction, redistribution,reselling, loan, sub-licensing, systematic supply, or distribution in anyform to anyone is expressly forbidden.
The publisher does not give any warranty express or implied or makeany representation that the contents will be complete or accurateor up to date. The accuracy of any instructions, formulae, and drugdoses should be independently verified with primary sources. Thepublisher shall not be liable for any loss, actions, claims, proceedings,demand, or costs or damages whatsoever or howsoever causedarising directly or indirectly in connection with or arising out of theuse of this material.
JOURNAL OF PUBLIC RELATIONS RESEARCH, 6 0 ) . 141-161 Copyright O 1994, Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. Inc.
Communicating Public Relations Research
Gael F. Walker University of Technology, Sydney
In this article, I report a study on the extent and nature of research in the public relations industry. I begin with a document analysis of all campaigns submitted to a national industry awards in 1991 and 1992 and then investigate the re- search experience of public relations practitioners by using interviews with a sample of award-winning practitioners. The discussion provides insights into attitudes toward research. The implications of the study are useful for assessing the development of the profession, the issues facing practitioners in competing for resources, and the usefulness of initial and continuing public relations education. Critical theory is used to examine the way individuals conceptualize their research activity and focus on the importance of the language used by practitioners to describe their data-gathering processes, its significance for
~ -
understanding and rewarding public relations contributions to organizational effectiveness, and its relevance for communicating across disciplines.
This article deals with public relations research issues of particular relevance to individuals and professionals who attempt to communicate with colleagues and management from other disciplines. The practice of public relations relies on research to identify features of its target publics, and its purpose is t o inform, influence, or communicate with these groups. This dependence o n research increases as public relations is conceptualized along a scale of com- plexity and perhaps legitimacy from press agency, journalistic persuasive cam- paigns, and two-way asymmetrical public influence strategies to the two-way symmetrical communication advocated by Grunig (1989). A campaign based on a view of communication as a one-way process could focus on the sender of information to the extent that detailed research about the receiver of the information may not appear to be necessary. However, when the aim is to engage in interactive communication with an audience, it is vital that all
Requests for reprints should be sent to Gael F. Walker, Communicatian Studies Unit, University of Technology. Sydney, P.O. Box 222. Lindfield, New South Wales 2070, Australia.
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
McG
ill U
nive
rsity
Lib
rary
] at
04:
48 2
5 A
ugus
t 201
2
142 WALKER
characteristics of that audience are available and understood, which may require extensive research into the nature of the audience, as well as complete facts about the nature o f the task being envisaged.
All campaigns require the collection, organization, and analysis of data to enable decisions to be made and action taken. However, much of this informa- tion is easily available and tends to be devalued. Routine tasks such as check- ing files for details of previous similar events and talking with others inside and outside the organization to learn details about previous and current campaigns provide crucial information from which decisions are made. Yet, the term research seems reserved for specially commissioned quantitative and qualita- tive enterprises such as surveys, interviews, and focus groups. I suggest that this emphasis on formal research may be hindering what Finn (1984) described as the "long-awaited integration of research into the public relations field" (P. 20).
Although this is an Australian study. 1 investigated issues that concern developing communication industries in many countries. I compared public relations in Australia with the United States where entries in the Silver Anvil Awards of the Public Relations Society of America (PRSA) are often criticized by judges for the absence of preliminary and evaluative research, according to Brody and Stone (1989) who claimed that "entries with outstanding action plans and communication etiorts are often devoid of research and evaluation" and that "those whose practices do not include research are doomed to the fate of dinosaurs because they are operating in an aggressive, rapidly changing environment with yesterday's tools" (p. I I).
Assumptions underlying the investigation are that research is a vital compo- nent in the development of a public relations campaign and that public rela- tions practitioners generally use research of some type even when they do not commission formal studies. It is possible that research is being done but that it is not recognized because the language of research is not used to describe it. From the perspective of a public relations manager in an organization or a public relations practitioner working for a client organization, it is a major constraint if one's work is perceived as lacking a thorough knowledge base, if it seems based on bright ideas and creativity alone, and if other managers or one's clients regard it as not comparable to the thorough management tech- niques that they believe underlie their own work.
A narrow definition of research in the public relations context may be a political disadvantage to practitioners. Not all campaigns require specially commissioned formal research. Less formal research methods may be more appropriate to common public relations situations, but if these daily practices are not conceptualized and described as research, they may fail to be organiza- tionally relevant. Cutlip, Center, and Broom's (1985) description of methodi- cal, systematic research as the "foundation of etiective public relations" (p. 202) gives it a central role in identifying problems, monitoring programs.
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
McG
ill U
nive
rsity
Lib
rary
] at
04:
48 2
5 A
ugus
t 201
2
COMMUNICATING RESEARCH 143
and evaluating their effectiveness. Broom and Dozier's (1990) definition of research as "the controlled, objective, and systematic gathering of information for the purposes of describing and understanding" (p. 4) is presented in the context of rational management in organizations but seems to focus on what they described as scientific research. Although the importance of such research in public relations is emphasized, I wish to draw attention to some types of research activities already in use. This requires a wider and more applied meaning of research, such as Pavlik's (1987) definition of "how data are collected, how a study is designed, or how the data are analyzed. Most funda- mentally, it refers to how knowledge is obtained" (p. 31).
THEORETICAL BASIS
This research is informed by critical theory that emphasizes the conditions of power and dependence that characterize contemporary organizational life. Focus on patterns of communication provides the opportunity to understand the existing relations and to develop alternative styles of communication and management.
I investigated and interpreted perceptions of one aspect of the subjective dimension of reality held by some communication professionals. Critical theo- ries account for the subjectivist nature of knowledge and attempt to under- stand a situation from the viewpoint of the individuals concerned. Although both interpretive and critical theories emphasize that reality is socially created, critical theories (Deetz & Kersten, 1983) pay particular attention to the mech- anisms of power that exist to sustain the status quo and claim that knowledge of the conditions affecting people's existence "should free them from these conditions" (p. 155).
Critical theory provides theoretical and methodological frameworks useful for research into communication practices in and between organizations. Its emphasis is on consciousness as the force that ultimately creates and maintains the social world. A key role of critical theory is to reveal the means to foster practical action through undistorted communication. Appropriate methodol- ogy focuses on participant analysis of their behavior, and these behaviors are best described by the actors themselves. This study is founded on such partici- pant analysis.
Unlike the traditional commitment to attempted value neutrality, critical theory is openly committed to social change and to improving social existence. The centrality of language to critical theorists lies in their conception of lan- guage as constituting thought and action and, hence, being "a principal me- dium in the establishment and maintenance of social control" (Harmon & Mayer, 1986, p. 322).
Underlying every theoretical perspective are the unstated assumptions of
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
McG
ill U
nive
rsity
Lib
rary
] at
04:
48 2
5 A
ugus
t 201
2
144 WALKER
the particular researcher whose frame of reference plays a crucial role in generating the chosen research. In this instance, the research is seen as a possible factor in bringing to public attention issues that are believed to reduce the status and power of individuals in an emerging profession.
Critical research is not a series of simple, sequential steps, but it is an overall approach based on concepts such as totality, consciousness, and critique. For Heydebrand (1983), critical methodology is "a complex of policies and strate- gies that permit a given problematic to be understood, analysed, acted on, and resolved or transformed" (p. 312). Hence, there is no set critical method universally applicable, and the appropriate method has to be determined by its relevance to the particular situation, allowing the use of quantitative andlor qualitative methods. Critical analysis needs to focus not on theory or on data but on what Kersten (1985) described as the dialectical interaction between the two.
METHODOLOGY
The documentary records and the interview reports gathered for this research were studied using content analysis as a tool "to understand the meaning of the communication both manifest and latent within the context of the respon- dent's own frame of reference" (Mostyn, 1985, p. 118). This enables the researcher to look for meaningful relations in the data and to understand the roles and values of the respondents.
Rationale
Although much content analysis is quantitative and focuses on discovering and analyzing facts, when the concept of intent is introduced this methodology can also provide insights into the reasons behind the facts. This may present a dilemma between rigor, precision, and reliability, and descriptive, phenomeno- logical data, as well as between concern with frequency and concern with real meaning. I used qualitative analyses as a necessary sequel to the initial method- ologies of studying documentary records and interviewing practitioners.
Although Krippendorff (1980) indicated that content analysis is about sym- bolic meaning of messages, messages have no single symbolic meaning and can be looked at from various perspectives. Reliability varies with the indepen- dence of the person measuring the data, but reliability can be enhanced by systematically applied rules, as shown in this study. The ultimate test of a good content analysis is whether the data provides a trustworthy basis for drawing inferences, making recommendations, and supporting decisions. Therefore, it is important that researchers are conscious of their own theories of human behavior and recognize their own biases to perception. The personal and
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
McG
ill U
nive
rsity
Lib
rary
] at
04:
48 2
5 A
ugus
t 201
2
COMMUNICATING RESEARCH 145
subjective element has to be accepted as part of a critical use of content analysis.
Reporting qualitative data is only the beginning. The data must then be interpreted. Whether this is successful depends on factors such as the immer- sion of the researcher in the topic, the ability to categorize to reflect the purpose of the research, the synthesis of data into patterns until a key concept emerges, and the culling of all extraneous material. Interpreting the data requires the researcher to stand back to gain a new perspective, work with contradictions, explore new relations, turn a problem around, understand and apply basic motivations, see behind rationalization, and analyze what it all means (Mostyn, 1985). Content analysis in this study provided me with the possibility of comparing actual behavior demonstrated in documentary evi- dence with expressed intentions or perceptions of the person.
Description
A project was developed in which recent public relations campaigns were examined to discover the extent and nature of research used in their prepara- tion and evaluation. In Australia, the public relations industry, through the Public Relations Institute of Australia (PRIA), presents an annual award for excellence, the Golden Target Award. Entries from 1988 to 1992 are held in the University of Technology, Sydney PRIA Golden Target Awards Collection which I have established to enable this resource to be accessed by practitioners. educators, and students throughout Australia using interlibrary loan.
A pilot project to determine which type of research was claimed to be used by practitioners was conducted to examine the 124 campaigns in the collection from the 1990 competition. This revealed that practitioners of 51 of these campaigns did not provide comments in the mandatory Research section of the submissions, and those who provided some comments to this category em- ployed a wide range of ways to describe the research component of their campaign with many referring to research and evaluation in vague or sketchy terms.
I report on several approaches to the problem, first, by providing a docu- ment analysis of campaigns from 1991 and 1992 and, second, by presenting information gathered from interviews with 20 award-winning public relations practitioners.
DOCUMENT ANALYSIS
The documents chosen for study were all of the campaign entries in the Golden Target Awards (90 entries in 1991 and 87 in 1992). As explained previously, content analysis was used to note the extent and nature of research described
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
McG
ill U
nive
rsity
Lib
rary
] at
04:
48 2
5 A
ugus
t 201
2
146 WALKER
by the entrant as part of the planning or evaluation processes. Although no claim is made that these entries are representative samples of the Australian industry, it was hoped that, as a purposive sample of campaigns that had been submitted for the most prestigious public relations competition in Australia, they could provide insights into some common aspects of industry practice.
Three hundred ninety-two comments were made about research in the planning of the 177 campaigns (see Table 1). The largest number (n = 55) referred to a survey being done, but whether this was a formal or informal survey was not always clear. Some analysis of the attitudes of targeted publics or of possible opponents of a projected plan was reported by 51 practitioners. Forty-nine practitioners carried out interviews or held discussions as a basis for their planning. Forty-eight practitioners mentioned referring to existing data, records, or knowledge. Previous campaigns were analyzed by 31 practi- tioners, sometimes using their own archives and sometimes benefiting from the experience of other companies. Expertise was sought by 29 practitioners from statistics, product details, or experts. Twenty practitioners mentioned some analysis of media, and another 7 did some research into media choice or mailing lists. Focus groups were used for 17 campaigns, and formal market research was commissioned for 14.
Twenty-seven campaigns did not mention research (17 in 1991 and 10 in 1992), although every entrant is required to supply details of the research used. Those mentioning no research included a $A68,000 corporate image program
TABLE 1 Plannina Research
I . Survey 27 28 55 14 2. lnterviewsldiscussions 2 I 30 5 I 13 3. Analysis of targct public attitudes 3 I 18 49 I I 4. Existing data, records, or knowledge 2 I 27 48 I? 5. Analysis of other or previous campaigns I 5 I6 3 l '1 6. Use of statistics. experts, or specialisl information 13 I6 29 7 7. No research mentioned 17 10 27 7
8 . Analysis of media 10 10 20 5 9. Focus group5 '1 X 17 4
10. Pilot program or cun~ultalwe proces* 6 I I I7 4 I I . Commissioned or market research X 6 14 1 12. Meetings or vivts h 7 13 i 13. Monitoring or tracking 4 4 X 14. Use of literature or research study 4 3 IS. Media chalce or mailing list analysis 7 0 7 2 16. Client bneting 1 6 7 . Total number of comments 200 192 192 IOCl
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
McG
ill U
nive
rsity
Lib
rary
] at
04:
48 2
5 A
ugus
t 201
2
COMMUNICATING RESEARCH 147
to advise company executives on corporate communication policy and activity and improve the company's corporate image among its customer base, im- prove liaison with the company's British parent company, and improve media relations and staff morale. It is obvious in the rest of this campaign description that considerable research activity was carried out in the planning stages, but no comments on this research were provided. A further campaign with a budget of $A300,000 was based on the unsubstantiated "incredible demand" the practitioners had received from target audiences and the statement that the concept "seemed effective" because it used positive reinforcement and "is colourful, fun, and memorable and creates an impact where a more hard- hitting promotion may not."
The other end of the research spectrum is represented by a publication designed to enhance corporate image. The research cited for this campaign included interviews with each divisional manager and a random sample of 30 existing customers to provide feedback on the company's reputation in the marketplace. An analysis of their ongoing media relations with trade press revealed some inadequacies in using the trade press as the sole method of distributing written material. The national data base of actual and potential customers was accessed, and a sample was interviewed by telephone to dis- cover attitudes to the previously received material.
Study of the evaluation methods described in these 177 submissions shows 105 heavily relying on achieving response from a target public, such as an increase in membership or sales, attendance at functions, or inquiries to the organization (see Table 2). Media coverage was used to show success by 73 practitioners, but this rarely included any analysis of the significance of the coverage, simply its extent. Seventy-two practitioners mentioned the feedback
TABLE 2 Evaluation Research
Curegorirs I991 I992 Total '%
I . Response (membership/s;rlesi attendancelinquiries/ ctc.)
2. Media coverage 3. Feedback [employeelgovcmmentl
businessietc.; relatianslsnpport) 4. Survey [formal or informal) 5. Objectives achieved 6. Anecdotal evidence 7 . Manager's comments 8. No evaluation mentioned Total number of comments
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
McG
ill U
nive
rsity
Lib
rary
] at
04:
48 2
5 A
ugus
t 201
2
148 WALKER
they received from groups such as employees, government, and business and their increased support or better relations. Some kind of formal or informal survey was used by 51 practitioners. Only 38 practitioners referred to achieving their objectives as a measure of their success. Fifteen relied on anecdotal evidence such as letters of congratulation, 10 simply said it was successful, and 4 provided no evaluation at all.
Most campaigns used a mixture of evaluative measures, such as the corpo- rate imagelenvironmental issues campaign whose evaluation was based on activity reports of the consultative committee, business endorsement, media coverage, results obtained in the community attitude and staff surveys, and the number of target public representatives attending the information display and events. In another case, a public awareness campaign measured its success by evaluation forms following each marketing workshop, feedback from work- shop participants, increase in market share, and media coverage. A large number simply provided a listing of the media they reached and did not attempt to evaluate the campaign's significance.
INTERVIEWS
A vital element of this research was talking to the people whose activities and motives for acting were the focus of the research (Wadsworth, 1984). Due to limitations in drawing conclusions from material written for another purpose, 1 decided to interview a selection of practitioners to develop an understanding of their experience with research. There was a possibility that submissions written for the awards did not give the true picture due to the rush of putting proposals together, the possible screening of information by the client, and the sensitive nature of some issues and campaigns. There was a need to account for what Dozier (1984) called "the imperative that manag- ers make decisions and act even when all the information useful to decision- making is not available" (p. 13). The interviews were designed to provide a selection of practitioners with the opportunity to discuss their work without such constraints.
Following Heydebrand (1983). observations and interviews can assist an analysis of all relevant documentary material to construct the situation as perceived by participants. I analyzed the interview data using the interviewees' own words as much as possible. Some of the analysis comes from the partici- pants, although the ultimate choice of which comments to include gave me the responsibility of reporting events as they appeared to me. There is always the possibility that the questions chosen will emphasize some aspects and omit others that may be equally significant. Another possible limitation of inter- views is that memories may be distorted by prejudice or preconception, so 1 attempted to deal with this problem by becoming familiar with campaigns
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
McG
ill U
nive
rsity
Lib
rary
] at
04:
48 2
5 A
ugus
t 201
2
COMMUNICATING RESEARCH 149
implemented by each practitioner before each interview. Also, informal discus- sions complemented many of the structured interviews.
In-depth interviews were arranged with a purposive nonprobability sample consisting of 10 participants from 1991 and 10 from 1992 (from the total of 44 winning entries) chosen according to involvement as a sole or shared practi- tioner in an award-winning entry, willingness to be interviewed, and represen- tativeness of a particular sector. Ten interviewees were from agencies and 10 from public relations departments of corporations or nonprofit bodies (n = 5) and government or semigovernment organizations (n = 5).
Twelve questions were designed to gain the necessary information and were tested in the first two interviews. For each of the questions, a different set of categories had been used, depending on what appeared suitable to the situation as described by participants. Most information presented here came from questions about the practitioner's descriptions of research, belief in the possi- bility of measuring public relations activity, and types of research generally and specifically used. The data gathered from interviewing all participants have been recorded and analyzed, and much of the material is presented in the participants' own words to communicate their attitudes and thoughts, but confidentiality precludes any identification of particular comments.
Definitions of Public Relations Research
Respondents' definitions of research ranged from "the techniques or processes for fully understanding the opportunities and threats posed by any situation, using a whole variety of techniques" to simply "learning the client's business." Research was described as "the collection of in-depth information using a variety of means and channels to determine the nature and severity of the communication problem," "getting an understanding of the environment in which you're about to operate," and "sitting down logically to look at your ideas and maximizing opportunities . . . but real research is formal market research." Another comment that "research is formal market research" was used by a practitioner who conducts interviews and discussion panels but did not refer to these activities as research.
Research was seen as "the cornerstone of modem sophisticated public relations" and described as "having a lot of levels-research can mean getting information from the client and analyzing its meaning"; for most practitioners, it was seen as important. "Research is definitely necessary to know about your target market and identify that market . . . results are our reason for being." Research was described as "finding out what will work and what won't." The process was described by one as "very ad hoc" and by another as "nonexis- tent."
Different purposes for research were provided by those who saw it as having two components: the background information material used to develop and
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
McG
ill U
nive
rsity
Lib
rary
] at
04:
48 2
5 A
ugus
t 201
2
150 WALKER
execute a project and evaluation research at the conclusion of a campaign to track and measure progress. Formalive and evaluative revrarch were described as quite different, hut both were believed to he needed because research was "the only way you really know where you're going."
Some practitioner definitions of research focused on client attitudes. It was considered valuable to demonstrate to the client where target market aware- ness originated. Several relied heavily on the client's research, and a common response was "we don't ever have budgets to research or monitor public relations" or "we do what we can with no budget." Several definitions were public relations centered, but some described research as "a marketing func- tion."
One attitude toward research was suggested by a practitioner who described "ordinary research" as very predictable and claimed that it prevented creativ- ity because the questions being asked imposed the researcher's point of view on a situation. Another perceived limitation of research was that it was thought to provide information only about what has happened and never about why things happen.
Research was generally valued. One practitioner commented, "Over the years it is much clearer to me that it is incredibly important to understand what the opportunities and threats are. The only way to do this is through contin- uing research." "It's very important to conduct research of some kind in order to achieve marketing objectives" was a common response. Program evaluation was particularly important in government organizations because it "demon- strated to politicians and senior bureaucrats that a program was valuable and should be continued and that funding should be dedicated to support it."
Attitudes Toward Public Relations Measurement
When asked whether it was possible to measure public relations activities or their effectiveness, interviewees talked about the difficulty of distinguishing public relations outcomes from outcomes related to advertising or other mar- keting activities. Most saw some problems in measuring public relations out- comes because of the possibility of such confusion, and one did not believe that it was possible. The ideal situation cited was that public relations could be measured, but all stressed the difficulties of funding and time to allow for such nonessentials. Research for some practitioners was closely related to or even integrated with the marketing functions of their organizations. It was difficult to identify the outcomes of marketing and public relations activity in several organizations because practitioners "did not ask people whether they heard about the program through an advertisement or a publicity story."
Eight of the 20 respondents believed it was possible to measure public relations outcomes precisely. They commented that measurement was possible if there was a scientific benchmark or baseline way to monitor it or if objectives
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
McG
ill U
nive
rsity
Lib
rary
] at
04:
48 2
5 A
ugus
t 201
2
COMMUNICATING RESEARCH 151
were set in consultation with the client and the criteria developed before embarking on the promotion. For several, this meant setting up performance indicators and measuring direct impact and change. A survey could establish benchmarks for performance and direction for complementary marketing and public relations activities with interviews of representative members of target markets, although one practitioner stated she "would not like to try to disen- tangle marketing and PR . . . although I know they are different and separate activities in other organizations." Ten interviewees believed it was difficult to separate marketing and public relations outcomes, although some had very precise ways of measuring outcomes of the combined process by attendance and membership. Two interviewees suggested that formal research did not differentiate between the effects of advertising and publicity, with the result that they found it "too difficult to prove the effect of public relations."
The perceived difficulty of measurement depended on the type of cam- paign and the objectives or outcomes being sought. It was claimed that ex- posure to a campaign or message can be measured easily, as could its impact, whether a goal is achieved or a problem solved. However, precisely measuring attitudinal, society, or cultural change was more difficult. Rea- sons such as these lay behind beliefs about the possibility of public relations measurement.
Other factors seen to cause difficulties were the multiple impact of much public relations, the expense of getting feedback from people, and the fact that the client has to have the time and the large budget to pay for follow- up research. Although measurement was easy with a clear-cut campaign (e.g., a listing of a company on the stock exchange), it became a problem for products in the marketing group. Some public relations activities were described as very difficult and almost impossible to measure according to traditional research tools. In an organization for which attendance figures were the only real gauge, activities could be affected by other influences (e.g., the weather) over which the practitioner had no control. Some practi- tioners who found success bard to measure precisely had developed other ways to ascertain it, such as stakeholder contact and a combination of sur- veying and consulting.
A different attitude to measurement was a fear that it was "counterpro- ductive as dollars and cents in the bank doesn't take into account the feel- ing the community has about the organization and its reputation and image."
Those who believed that precise measurement was not possible commented that public relations was difficult to separate from marketing and contami- nated by or confused with advertising. Lack of evaluation was referred to as "the great tragedy as clients and practitioners don't get the impact of their own work." Another claimed that research was missing from the discipline and that people do not want to invest in research.
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
McG
ill U
nive
rsity
Lib
rary
] at
04:
48 2
5 A
ugus
t 201
2
152 WALKER
Types of Research Used
Interviewees were asked to list their usual research techniques (see Table 3). When asked about the types of research generally used for planning and
evaluating public relations campaigns, three practitioners used what they re- ferred to as a scientific approach: "We approach research and results in a scientific way within the limits of the client's budget." Some said that research was done to find out about clients and new business and as platforms for media relations or that every program was intensively researched as "part of the marketing process." Reference was made to extensive research on staff behav- ior, research into trends in behavior for a product launch, and "a total focus on finding out all details of the specific market." Others referred to "ongoing research built into everyday activities" or said "you can't possibly plan a campaign without having the information. It would be ineffective, just guess- ing."
Analysis of Target Public Attitudes. Fifteen of the 20 practitioners inter- viewed claimed that they used research to identify the attitudes of target publics, although the type of research was seldom specific. One practitioner described the process as "keeping abreast of the current analysis and thinking in the community." For most, this consisted of an informal process of environ- mental monitoring to enable them to "identify and interpret events and trends that may create change in personal, professional and organisational circum- stances" (Brody & Stone, 1989, p. 65).
TABLE 3 Research Mentioned bv Interviewees
1 . Analysis of target public attitudes 2 . Survey 3 . interv~ews/discuss~ons 4. Existing data. records, or knowledge 5 No research mentioned 6. Analysis of other or previous campaigns
7. Use of statistics, experts, or specialist information 8. Analysis of mcdia 9. Focus group
10. Commissioned or market research I I . Media choice or mailing list analysis I 2 Meetings or visit 13. Pilot program or consultativr process 14. Monitoring or tracking issues 15. Use of literature or research study 16. Client hriefing Total number of comments
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
McG
ill U
nive
rsity
Lib
rary
] at
04:
48 2
5 A
ugus
t 201
2
COMMUNICATING RESEARCH 153
Surveys. Fourteen practitioners said that they used surveys. One de- scribed an omnibus qualitative survey that asked questions, required opinions to he expressed, requested criticism, obtained feedback about planned promo- tional material, and established benchmarks for performance within certain time frames. Formal market research was sometimes commissioned to under- take benchmark research, advertising effectiveness, and consumer perceptions of service. External counselors were required to evaluate positions, attitudes, or possibilities. Several interviewees gained information from sponsor's re- search or student projects, some commissioned a poll, and another used formal readership surveys to test the effectiveness of written material.
lnterviewslDiscussions. A common research method for 15 practitioners was the interview or discussion. Discussion ranged from brainstorming and productive talk sessions at the beginning of a campaign to regular meetings with supervisors, discussions with authorities, and round table talks with people who have an opinion. Interviewees expressed considerable faith in the effectiveness of face-to-face and telephone discussions and felt that such an informal form of feedback could provide a gauge of community perception of the organization. It also enabled them to gain input from other staff in a consultative process. Some evaluations used discussions of what worked and what they described as a post-mortem on the event as a basis for the following year's campaign.
Existing Data, Records, or Knowledge. Most desk or easily accessible preliminary research on previous campaigns was informal and used in-house experience and the model of previous years. A practitioner made reference to accumulated knowledge and personal knowledge of what has and has not worked-"almost a guf feeling" --as desk research, and another practitioner felt that "files tell a story: of budgets, successes, failures, cooperation, stone- walling, etc." Only three practitioners were really organized in collecting data by means such as content analysis into media coverage and correspondence and direct contact by telephone or at meetings to keep abreast of results or surveys. Limited use was made of an organization's frontline survey work by mail or phone, and internal research-collecting data from libraries-was rare. A difficulty with desk research, according to one practitioner, was that "you are not always aware that you are involved in research when you are just gathering information."
Analysis of Other or Previous Campaigns. Eight practitioners described some analysis of previous campaigns and reports of developments in industry to provide data about problematic issues. Some used studies done by counsel- ors to document community response to proposals. Several spoke of research into similar organizations in the United States and their ability to access an international data base. which is especially useful when dealing with multina-
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
McG
ill U
nive
rsity
Lib
rary
] at
04:
48 2
5 A
ugus
t 201
2
154 WALKER
tional clients. Actual visits to significant people or organizations were used Tor research in three instances.
Use of Statistics, Experts, or Specialist Information. Nine practitioners made use of statistics, experts, or specialist information by engaging an expert. holding discussions with media and scientific experts or committees of experts. whereas one organization used a newspaper research department. The final report of a campaign was used for media coverage or to find angles and opportunities for the next time. Two practitioners said they always do evalua- tions "as a results oriented company, interested in the end result. what we achieve."
Analysis of Media. Media coverage was a research tool referred to by LO practitioners as "collecting clippings," but there were wide variations in the methods for dealing with this data. Some analyzed clippings using in-house analysis methodology based on an advertising value evaluation. Others were interested in their strike rates-percentage of submitted stories published. Systematic environmental monitoring was done by an organization with a system of staff reading all relevant publications and reporting on client, indus- try, and business information. Most collected press clippings and kept track of interviews, hut ongoing media content analysis was rare.
Focus Groups. Several practitioners had set up formal committees of key people as part of their research for a campaign. A total of I I practitioners mentioned some kind of focus group, 2 opted for a communication audit, and 1 used what was referred to as "informal focus group work."
Pilot Program or Consultative Process. A pilot program or consultative process was used for testing public opinion and trialing advertisements or graphics. Such testing was referred to as nonscientific. Campaigns on highly sensitive issues used the consultation with the community as a way of deter- mining the reaction of affected publics to proposed developments. This consul- tation may have consisted simply of talking to key opinion leaders and local politicians. For several campaigns, a survey would have been inappropriate. so information gathering had to be very discreet.
Media Choice or Mailing List Analysis. For media choice or mailing list analysis, some used a demographic or sociographic study to find appropriate media: this was described as research into media.
Client Briefing and Reports. The usefulness of client briefing varies. Some practitioners rely heavily on the client to provide information on which to base the campaign and receive from the client a clear brief, including full
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
McG
ill U
nive
rsity
Lib
rary
] at
04:
48 2
5 A
ugus
t 201
2
COMMUNICATING RESEARCH 155
access to their research, a comparison with other countries, and identification of a particular market with its demographics and psychographics. Another approach to client relations was taken by practitioners whose specialty public relations work required them to study the client and their needs and to perform research using clients who were described as "often not understanding their own assets." Several complained of receiving none of the information or cooperation they needed from clients. Three practitioners referred to monitor- ing the effectiveness of their campaigns by monthly evaluation reports or regular formal strategy evaluations. Such short-term monitoring enabled them to modify objectives when necessary.
Reasons for Choice of Research Methods
Some reasons provided for choosing particular research methods were to establish and maintain good relationships with professional bodies and unions, to validate to the client the position they took, and to confirm that they were reaching their target market in the right way and that the money they spent was well worth it. One practitioner said, "Formal research done properly can give direct feedback and allow us to plan and evaluate. I may surprise the client and can justify further PR expenditure." Some referred to clients who did not share their own market research results.
Support for a regular survey was expressed as "You have to be able to justify what you're doing, and you have to he able to show that you are a professional who knows what you're doing." Desk research was described as immediately accessible, cheap, and able to he done quickly. Public attitude tracking was very important to several practitioners. For most people, no method was considered more important than others for keeping abreast of the current analysis and thinking in the community and in the media. A wide- spread attitude was "The more information I can get, the better off it is."
Most methods were described in simple language, not in the subject's formal academic language. Some spoke of the "need for PR practitioners to use language which will help them win and do a job. . . . need to use ordinary, not academic or specialist language." The easiest technique was described as esti- mating what media would have cost if purchased because "clients like to see the dollar value equivalent."
Research was sometimes used to convince management of the legitimacy of the section's approach, although it was described as "expensive but cost- effective in the long run if it helps . . . to make decisions which pay off in the end." It was useful for confirming that plans are what the management wants or to communicate the success of marketing and public relations programs to the board or the government. A vital role of thorough research was that it was "easy to get distracted and overly focused on something if you don't use research," referring to research that clarified the fact that a vocal pressure
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
McG
ill U
nive
rsity
Lib
rary
] at
04:
48 2
5 A
ugus
t 201
2
156 WALKER
group had only limited community support and that other community groups supported a project.
Preparatory research for the interviews and informal discussions had made me very familiar with the work of each practitioner, and I inquired why some of the research that I already knew about was not specifically mentioned. One reason given was that "research is an integral part of what we do. It's not mentioned because we take it for granted."
MAJOR ISSUES ARISING FROM THIS STUDY
The Nature of Research
Because I was aware of the extensive preparatory work involved in many of these campaigns, I noted how little of this preparation was described as re- search, whether in the summary submitted for the competition or in discussion at interview. This seems to confirm an initial assumption that a considerable amount of informal research is being done but not thought of or described as research. Practitioners constantly talked about "real research as if their own informal processes were not regarded as research at all. It seemed that their definition of research corresponded to that of Broom and Dozier (1990) as "the controlled, objective, and systematic gathering of information for the purposes of describing and understanding" (p. 4). Most did not refer to their informal data gathering as research, despite Brody and Stone's (1989) advice to "always use informal research if possible. . . . When needed information can be ob- tained through informal research, informal procedures are preferable. Other- wise, formal research is appropriate" (p. 10).
The practitioners' informal research included the identification of affected publics and data gathering from a range of sources such as the news media, industry groups, or government bodies. A great deal of this information was easily found, sometimes within the files or memories of the organization itself. Another research method used by most practitioners was environmental moni- toring, the process of identifying and interpreting events and trends in an organization's environment. This requires the practitioner to scan published information and keep track of all responses. It provides vital information through everyday actions, such as networking and identifying significant trig- ger events, or through more complex procedures, such as expert panels or consultative committees. Existing studies of attitude and opinion, such as communication audits or surveys, were accessed, and informal reflections of behavior were found from files or from interviews. Information was gathered from industry associations and publications, as well as from visits and ohserva- tion.
"Secondary research requires sifting masses of information," according to
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
McG
ill U
nive
rsity
Lib
rary
] at
04:
48 2
5 A
ugus
t 201
2
COMMUNICATING RESEARCH 157
Brody and Stone (1989, p. 96), and it allows the public relations practitioner to develop an analysis of the most useful indicators of how stakeholders are responding or how they could be expected to respond to a problem. The public relations person who described bow she talked to all the relevant people, understood the sensitivities of the issue, read as much as she could on the issue, contacted all the people she knew in the media, trained company executives to speak at functions, and present well in front of the media, and so on did not refer to any aspect of this campaign preparation as research. After discussion, she conceded that the activity of finding out information on these various topics, writing it up, and presenting it to interested parties is research. Another described the work she did as planning, rather than research, but did concede that it could be called research although "it's just what you would do anyway, isn't it?' and another said she would feel "like a cheat" if she described what she did as research.
Few used the language of research to describe everyday data-gathering activities, although the systematic process of making a phone call, reading the paper, talking to a colleague or someone outside the organization, going through the files, and attending meetings could he described as informal re- search to form a picture of what preceded and what should follow. A practi- tioner explained that "we always think of research as formalized. . . . research needs a new definition--broader and clearer." One practitioner felt it was "time to get serious for the survival of our industry . . . the language of research and sophisticated evaluation is the language of corporate culture." Another expressed concern that "the marketing people eclipse us in the end because they talk the language ofmanagement--they enjoy the favor of the CEO at the expense of the PR department."
Reliance on Media Coverage
One concern with the research mentioned in entry submissions is the concen- tration on media coverage without any attempt to analyze the nature or usefulness of this coverage for the client despite the fact that no "measure of the amount of media placements indicates program impact on publics" (Broom & Dozier, 1983, p. 6). In most entries, it is treated as an end in itself rather than used as evidence to point to the achievement of reaching a targeted public. However, interviews showed some concern among practitioners about this problem. Four practitioners had developed systems to assess its signifi- cance for the client, although none referred to using more sophisticated media- tracking programs.
The collection of data is only the beginning of research, and it seems from this study that some data are not being studied to find their significance. Until this step is taken, there is no meaning in the data; they do not support the objectives of the campaign. A practitioner expressed concern that "the clipping
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
McG
ill U
nive
rsity
Lib
rary
] at
04:
48 2
5 A
ugus
t 201
2
158 WALKER
services do not provide information about their circulation which would make a stronger case when presenting clippings to the client." Another referred to the "lack of information about where the news item is placed in a newspaper or magazine," so they cannot tell the client the prominence being given to the public relations stories.
One practitioner who has generated pages of press clippings and long lists of radio interviews reported that although she says "Look at all the PR we got," she knows that this is an unsatisfactory way of quantifying results but cannot find another way to do it. Another practitioner often shows the client press clippings because she feels that it is the only tangible evidence she can produce to demonstrate the effects of public relations activity.
Clients are thought to like to see the dollar value equivalent: "It is crucial to the client and the only empirical evidence I can come up with." Some believe their measurement is media driven with a typical evaluation measure of col- umn inches, although this often measures a very small part of the campaign. Evaluation by media coverage was described as unsatisfactory "as it doesn't take into account the level of difficulty in obtaining press coverage" and "the client may not understand the amount of time or level of effort for a few press releases." "Media analysis is limited," said some, "We may not be using the media for the campaign." Also, some outcomes are difficult to measure be- cause no information on their effectiveness is available in the short term, and no analysis of press clippings would he relevant, although the column inch model of public relations criticized by Heath (1991) is widely used.
Role of the Client
Discussion of research with practitioners often led to comments about clients "because few clients have the budget for formal market research or recognize its importance. . . [we] have to gather information from a variety of sources" and "they think formal market research is expensive and don't want to pay for it but they think informal research is OK and feel better if you tell them you are doing something to clarify your understanding of their position." Acommon response was "I'd like my clients to be more willing to participate in research," and it was suggested that "clients generally don't know anything about research. They are not aware or else are only dimly aware that it exists and, therefore, they do not request that it be conducted." Another practitioner said:
Because clients do not provide research reports or request research be per- formed as part of the PR planning, it is very difficult to develop programs at the beginning of the relationship which have a results component that can be quantified in a particular way at the end of the campaign. This leads to very broad-based programs which are a bit vague and much wider than they need to be.
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
McG
ill U
nive
rsity
Lib
rary
] at
04:
48 2
5 A
ugus
t 201
2
COMMUNICATING RESEARCH 159
Lack of time was a problem in that "consultants have so many demands on them that the time left over for evaluation is minuscule, and if the client isn't asking for it we often don't do it. There just isn't time." Another complained that there was "no time left for the nice soft stuff between meeting deadlines and meeting crises."
Several mentioned that the attitude of some clients was that the agency should automatically know what the media think of an existing client as an organization in the marketplace. One stated:
Many clients just assume you know what you are doing, expect you to go away and do it, and don't bother to report back. It's either because they don't really understand what PR is so they don't know the level of accountability to demand, expect or recelve, or else they have no respect for PR as a corporate function and just do it because it's part of the marketing mix.
It was suggested that some "clients do not think PR is important and it is often only tacked onto the portfolio of usual activities." Comments made included "marketing managers and advertising agencies think PR is only peripheral" and "these people don't think PR is serious." Another expressed concern that they "have to fight for their client's attention in amongst the marketing advis- ers and ad agency representatives who quite often misunderstand or denigrate PR's contribution to the achievement of the client's communication objec- tives." It was suggested that this was caused by a "problem in the education system. Marketing courses have public relations as a small part and marketing people often don't know what PR really is," and "the main stumbling block is that PR can be viewed by senior management as an adjunct of the marketing manager-a block to access."
A different problem raised by four practitioners was that "sometimes clients are not aware they should offer any information they have," and cases were described in which "formal market research existed, but we did not know about it until the relationship with the client had developed to the point where the client considered we were conducting the campaign well and then passed the information on." Another described the client's attitude as "you are told what you need t o know" and felt that the client wanted to protect corporate confidentiality, but if there was a change in their market positioning or percep- tion, she felt the PR company should be told because they were "vulnerable to making the wrong decisions on a campaign based on out-of-date or incorrect information or no information at all."
The economic climate had affected some research plans. One practitioner remarked:
We used to recommend research to all clients as a benchmark, to point us in the right direction and to give the client the best value for money. Because of the recession we use infomal research which is cheaper and cost effective.
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
McG
ill U
nive
rsity
Lib
rary
] at
04:
48 2
5 A
ugus
t 201
2
160 WALKER
CONCLUSION
Does it matter if informal or formal research is being done but not sepa- rately or specifically mentioned? The descriptive, explanatory, and predictive research described by Pavlik (1987) may sound like routine processes to any public relations practitioner, but they are still research and must be under- stood and described as such if the extensive amount of preparation and plan- ning involved in developing public relations strategies is going to be appreciated by other managers or by clients. It is not possible to communi- cate without the right language. The consciousness of practitioners as profes- sionals is affected by their methods of thinking and communicating about their work.
Research and evaluation provide the basis of negotiation for resources with and within organizations, and I suggest that if the language used to describe these tools is not consistent with language understood by other managers, the public relations practitioner is politically disadvantaged and hindered in the contest for resources. In reporting on trends in public relations, Anderson (1991) stressed research technique and concluded that "we need to emulate our friends in advertising and marketing. . . if we are to become able practitioners of precision public relations" (p. 31). The knowledge of social science research techniques is described by Ryan and Martinson (1990, p. 377) as a major component of public relations professionalism.
Public relations as a profession already faces the difficulty that much of its applied research is of a proprietary nature and is not available for publication. A further constraint facing practitioners competing for scarce resources is a common perception that public relations practice is based on creativity rather than research skills. If research is interpreted as purely formal and quantita- tive, much of the fundamental preparatory activity of a public relations practi- tioner will be overlooked. Consequently, the collecting of easily available as well as less accessible data followed by analyzing its significance and making decisions based on this research will not be accorded its significance within the development of a campaign.
In a profession where many current practitioners have not had the opportu- nity to complete formal studies in this particular field but have moved to public relations from some other discipline, this investigation into the way in which some practitioners describe their work supports the case for providing and encouraging continuing professional education. It also suggests that such edu- cation should enable practitioners to make the connection between common industry practice and the language of research, informal as well as formal, and that "educators may need to stress the importance of social science research for all students" (Judd, 1990, p. 25). Until public relations practitioners can com- municate to practitioners of other disciplines the extent of preparation, strat- egy, and measurement that characterize their work, the real nature of this work
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
McG
ill U
nive
rsity
Lib
rary
] at
04:
48 2
5 A
ugus
t 201
2
COMMUNICATING RESEARCH 161
cannot be understood in organizations, and their contribution toward organi- zational goals will not he valued.
REFERENCES
Anderson, J. W. (1991). Public relations in the United States: State of the art and trends. Inlrmarional Public Relolions Review. 1414). 2 7 36.
Brody, E., & Stone, G. (1989). Public relulions research. New York: Praeger. Broom, G., & Dozier, D. (1983). An overview: Evaluation research in public relations. Public
Relalions Quarrerly, 2813). 5-8. Broom, G., & Dozier, D. (1990). U.sin8 reseorch in public rela1ion.s. Englewood Cliffs, NJ:
Prentice-Hall. Cutlip, S., Center, A,, & Broom, G. (1985). Efeerivrpublic relalions (6th ed.). Englewood Cliffs.
NI: Prentice-Hall. Deetz. S. A,. & Kersten, A. (1983). Critical models of interpretive research. In L. L. Putnam &
M. E. Pacanowsky (Eds.1, Communkolion nnd or~uniiarions: An inrerpreliw approach (pp. 1 4 7 171). Beverly Hills: Sage.
Dozier, D. M. (1984). Program evaluation and the roles of practitioners. Public Relolionr Review. 10(2), 13-21
Finn, P. (1984). In-house research becomes a factor. Public Relalions Journal. 40(7). 18-20. Grunig, I. E. (1989). Symmetrical presuppositions as a framework for public relations theory.
In C. H. Botan & V. Hazleton, Ir. (Eds.), Public relations rheory (pp. 17-44). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. Inc.
Harmon, M. M.. & Mayer, R . T. (1986). 0r~rmi:olion theoryforpuhlic adminislralion. Boston: Little, Brown.
Heath, R. L. (1991). Public relations research and education: Agendas far the 1990s. Public Relnlions Review. 17, 185 194.
Heydebrand, W. V. (1983). Organization and praxis. In G. Morgan (Ed.), Beyond melhod (pp. 306-320). Beverly Hills: Sage.
Judd, L. R. (1990). Importance and use of formal research and evaluation. Public Relnrionr Review. 16(4), 17-27.
Kersten, A. (1985). Philosophical foundations for the construction of critical knowledge. In M. McLaughlin (Ed.), Communicarion yearbook 9 (pp. 756-774). Beverly Hills: Sage.
Knppendorff, K. (1980). Conten1 onoly~ir: A n inlroducrion to ils melhodolo~y. Beverly Hills: Sage.
Mostyn, B. (1985). The content analysis of qualitative research data: A dynamic approach. In M. Brennar, J. Brown, & D. Canter (Eds.), The rerparch interview: Uses and approaches (pp. 115-132). London: Academic.
Pavlik, J. (1987). Public relalions: Whal research lells us. Beverly Hills: Sage. Ryan, M., & Martinson. D. L. (1990). Social science research, professionalism and public
relations practitioners. Juurnalirm Quurlrrly. 67. 377-390. Wadsworth, Y. (1984) Do il yuurselfsociol rescarch. Melbourne, Australia: Allen and Unwin.
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
McG
ill U
nive
rsity
Lib
rary
] at
04:
48 2
5 A
ugus
t 201
2
