Research is a crucial part of any public relations campaign that cannot be overlooked. Any plan or strategy that lacks proper research is more often than not, doomed to failure.
"Research
is to see what
EVERYBODY
has seen and to think what
NOBODY
has thought."
- Albert Szent Gyorgyi, Hungarian bio-chemist.
The research process can be divided into three main stages during a PR campaign.
The first stage is during the input stage, before the actual plan is carried out. The focus of the research done here is mainly to determine the WHO, WHAT, WHY, WHEN and HOW of the campaign itself. These are some of the questions that the research will attempt to answer:
- Identifying the issue/opportunity
- Who are the target audience/consumer?
- What does the consumer need/want/expect?
- Where do we draw the line on what is considered ethical?
- What does the plan want to achieve?
- What are the benchmarks that can be used to measure success (or failure)?
- What strategy shall be used? Which media is most suitable? Etc.
The second stage of research is ongoing throughout the campaign itself. This research includes the measuring and monitoring of statistical elements as the campaign progresses, quantifying them to see if they meet the campaign's intended benchmarks/expectations and adjusting the campaign if necessary to produce the best possible results. For example, a campaign done through a website might measure the number of hits on the site to determine if there is enough participation.
The final stage of research is done after the campaign has been run and is largely used to evaluate and determine the overall result of the PR campaign. This can be determined by asking questions like "Did the consumers react/do what we wanted them to do?" or "Has the problems and issues previously identified been addressed?".
Let us observe a case study featuring the launch campaign of the launch of Match.com in Australia. Match.com is an online dating sites where singles can sign up and find a suitable date.
INPUT
The first step the PR agency did was to do research on the current situation. The website was to be launched on a Valentine's Day. Based on their research, they determined that there would be a lot of media noise that would distract their target audience from their website. As such, they took steps in order to overcome this.
They also identified various other issues associated with the launch date and proceeded to plan measures that would address these problems. Competitors were also identified and any issues related to these were also accounted for. Goals and objectives were also reviewed and steps were taken to ensure that these goals would be met.
Also, a full-on survey was conducted on the target audience to find out things like their perception of online dating and what they thought were the pros and cons of online dating.
IMPLEMENTATION
One of the interesting things that they did during the campaign itself was to release the statistics provided by AC Neilson to the media. Now, I've been going on about how research is important to determine many things, but to use the positive results obtained via research as a tool for marketing?? That was definitely something I did not think of.
Traffic on the Australian Match.com website was of course constantly being monitored and measured to determine if the campaign was working.
EVALUATION
The PR agency divided the evaluation research into two categories, QUALITY and QUANTITY. Quality will refer to the campaign's success in leaving a positive impression on consumers and how deep the impact of that impression was. This could be done through surveys and interviews. QUALITY is simply about measuring the number of visitors to the website and to see if there was indeed an increase.
To end off, here is an advert done by Match.com on Youtube.
Hi Syaz,
ReplyDeleteI fully agree with you that the research component in PR practice is very important. Although it may sound very boring or technical, it is the process which allows us to understand fully the situation faced, and minimize any risks involved due to the lack of knowledge or data.
Reading about the case study of Match.com makes me ponder about the research that was done by them. It must be based on research results that Match.com decided on such a strategy in their campaign, and also in the commercial. I will talk about the commercial since I'm not entirely sure what the statistics by AC Neilson is about. Maybe you can explain more about that.
For the commercial, Match.com uses a light hearted approach portraying a real first date. It may be because they found out that the reason why people are reluctant to apply for Match.com is that they have the impression that blind dates always end up awkward.
Just my two cents worth. :)
Hey Joane,
ReplyDeleteDespite the rather obvious importance of reserach, the reason to cut down research is also obvious - more money spent on research = less money to spend on the campaign itself.
Personally, I believe that it would be more worthwhile to invest in research as the results of that research itself would dictate how your campaign is run in the first place.
A PR agency can spend a bomb and produce the most happening campaign ever, but if the target audience does not react to it, then it defeats the purpose, doesn't it?
However, I'm merely a student harping on theoretical concepts. Things would probably be more complicated in real life and more factor would be involved. Perhaps Miss Tanya may be able to share some of these scenarios in class. Haha.