agreeing an evaluation tool...

[mike mathieson]

There's no doubt that an aggregation of tools to measure on-line for clients is critical. The tools already exist out there to make brands realise the importance of the sector - the key is to agree a common methodology. if the ad industry can do it with the TVR then its got to be doable - right?

[Jamie Burke]

Hi Mike,

I and David Cushman held an event yesterday for existing clients and new biz to serve as a mass education of the basics.

One element was ROI which I think was fantastically covered by Luke Brynley-Jones. I will share the video and slide-deck as soon as its up online (hopefully today) as I think it will start as a great foundation for debate.

I think the biggest take away for me was many things can be achieved via P2P activity from brand building, direct sales, improved CRM to the most common theme which was cost savings as a comparable with the traditional method of doing things. Big leap for a client who isn't used to quantifying a lot of this stuff. So its working closely with the client to create a set of real KPI's and not catering to their old success measures.

But I totally agree that is the make or break of P2PR. We will only see proper financial reward if we crack it and it will immediately filter out the cowboys and better our industry.

[Gareth Davies]

Just to add my two pennies worth here..... from talking to different agencies both ad hoc and via the PRCA Digital PR group it seems that each agency is moving forward with their own take on measurement and ROI. My agency has developed its own tools for this but I absolutely agree that we as an 'industry' need to set some standards.

[Rowan McAlister]

I'd say that the potential key is establishing, certainly in the current economic climate, what correlation exists between the standard social media measurements such as sentiment, volume, etc, and sales. At that point, online pr and measurement of buzz becomes much more 'sellable' from a sales generationpov rather than just an insight gatehring one. So, I'm not altogether sold on the need to generate one 'master measure' -just the need to scientifically understand what those things which we can already track actually mean for our clients.

[Jonny Stark]

Hi Mike - I know you're using TVR as an example of industry collaboration, rather than its effectiveness as a methodology, but I thought it worth saying that TVR still looks at how many people you actually reach rather than the effect you actually have on those individuals. It's one of the reasons old skool marketing evaluation is so 'wrong'.

If we genuinely want to understand the impact our campaigns are having on individuals' perceptions (which is what, in my view at least!, we should be doing), then we need to look at qual techniques alongside quant when it comes to measurement.

One way of doing this, would be to observe a select number of people's online behaviour, who have shown interest in the campaign (so those who have read/heard/seen/played with content - do they go off and set up their own groups, discuss the brand positively on forums/networks, blog about it, or even buy the product or service etc).

But obviously this can be time intensive, not to mention expensive! And I am aware that the above generates a lot more questions - who to measure, how do you find them etc etc.

But this is just an idea I'm throwing into the pot for initial consideration, all that comes later!

[Jamie Burke]

You might have seen this video I posted on P2PR a while back. Talks about the important data and an approach similar to that offered up by Jonny

[Ben Mason]

The problem is that clients are still fixated with this old model of reach (and associated ad value), and it will take time to migrate them away from this. But we need to bring in alongside it the new measures of depth of engagement and actions taken as a result, both in terms of discussion / interaction with the content and actions beneficial to the brand - registrations, sales etc

There's a good amount of work that has been done on this topic here - http://measurementcamp.wikidot.com/start. Their purpose is to share resources rather than agree a consistent approach, but still a useful resource...

[mike mathieson]

So that was a cracking start and diverse sets of opinion. I think measurement comes back to 3 basic things:
1. What do our clients want and need?
2. How can it be simple and easy to understand
3.How can we make the toolbox universal

[Jamie Burke]

This is the link to the presentation I was talking about where you can watch the video that accompanies the presentation.

Otherwise here...

New measures of success: ROI in social media

View more presentations from BrandoSocial. (tags: social media)

Luke Brynley-Jones "New measures of success" from Brando Social on Vimeo.

[Roger, C&M - Online PR Agency]

i think the metrics will depend on the client (budget holder) and his/her needs.

* if they're part of the digital team, then the context will be coversion-like (SEO thinking)

* if they're part of the PR team they'll probably agree to anything (measurement isn't their strong point).... and i'd suggest SEO-like metrics are a rock solid place to start them off

* if they're part of marketing/advertising, then i think it gets tough and this is the focal point for debate. getting something meaningful but parallel to trad media measurement. the first two are no brainers

i know this doesn't answer the Q, but i think jamie would agree here - it's about being responsible and giving meaningful data in the first instance. then we earn the right to do more...

[Jamie Burke]

Roger I do agree. Given we have explored general ROI in P2P I think the focus here should now be to drill more specifically into how to give measurement and metrics relevant to a PR Director.