Chapter 6 - Research and Evaluation

Chapter 6 discusses various methods of research and evaluation of an event or campaign. Johnston & Zawawi provide examples of research methods and highlight the importance of what kind of research to conduct and when to conduct it.

This chapter made a lot of sense to me. I will be voluntarily participating in event research and evaluation of two Newcastle events - Maritime Festival and the Mattara Festival. Research methods include initial face to face contact where we are to request email addresses. At the end of the research process, we are hoping to have collected around 100 email addresses. Email addressees will receive a questionnaire which they can fill out and return via email. This form of research method was deemed to be the most appropriate because it remains anonymous and emails are quite convenient for the majority of people. Another reason the electronic method was selected is because people do not have to carry around a questionnaire with them all day and it does not interrup their day too much by simply asking for their email address, as opposed to completing a whole survey.

Johnston & Zawawi quote Seitel (2001: 106) as saying 'management requires more [such as] facts and statistics from public relations professionals to show that their efforts contribute not only to overall organisational effectiveness but also to the bottom line'. I think this quote is important for a couple of reasons.

Firstly, if you were to run an event or campaign, wouldn't you want to know how effective it was? And not just by asking a few participants on the night/day of their opinion, but thoroughly researching into the strengths and weaknesses of the campaign/event, how it could have been improved, were the facilities adequate etc. From researching these areas, PR practitioners can evaluate their tactics, planning and organisational methods to determine their success or otherwise.

Additionally, I think research is important not only for the current event, but also for future events, and as Seitel mentions, 'the bottom line'. By using various research methods, such as qualitative (interviews, focus groups, communication audits etc) and quantitative (audience analysis, readability studies, response mechanisms etc), PR practitioners can gain a better understanding of areas which perhaps were not as effective in previous campaigns. This understanding might help to re-evaluate tactics for the next campaign, or to implement better strategies and tactics.

Johnston & Zawawi also mention ethical considerations in research (Johnston & Zawawi, 2004, p. 161). Perhaps a bit naive of me, (or maybe i'm too ethical!), but I would never imagine misreporting statistics or research findings to make my event/campaign appear more successful! Maybe one reason research findings have been altered or misreported was because historically those people conducting the research was in fact the PR practitioner, not a trained researcher (Lindenmann, 1990, p. 4).

I think it's important for PR practitioners, and anybody for that matter, to remember that one unsuccessful campaign and poor research results can be a positive. It will help the practitioner understand what areas to improve on. It also makes for a great research tool for future practitioners - they can look back on past events and results and realise things which didn't work and what could work better.

This week's chapter made me think more about PR Theory and Practice by highlighting the importance of research and evaluation. Both are vital tools for practitioners to gain an overall understanding of how effective their campaign was, which also reiterates the importance of tactics, excellent organisational skills, and effective planning methods. Dr Lindenmann conducted research and he found that "three out of every four of the 253 respondents agreed strongly or somewhat that research today is widely accepted by most public relations professionals as a necessary and integral part of the planning, program development and evaluation process. Only 24.1 percent disagreed" (Lindenmann, 1990, p.5). While this research was conducted 17 years ago, it demonstrates that 17 years ago research was considered of high importance in the PR industry - one could only assume research would be considered even more important in the current day.

I think the key points to remember from this week's reading are that there are various methods, qualitative and quantitative, of research and different campaigns require a different method of evaluation. Research and evaluation are not only important tools practitioners need to implement, it must also be remembered they need to be considered from an ethical perspective and research results must be kept accurate and distributed freely and widely (Johnston & Zawawi, 2004, p. 161).

I have posted a comment on http://www.cmns1290erynsullivan.blogspot.com
I have posted a comment on http://taeganreidcmns1290.blogspot.com


References

Johnston, J. & Zawawi, C. (2004) Research & Evaluation, in Public Relations Theory and Practice, 2nd edn, pp. 137-168, Allen&Unwin, Sydney, Australia.

Lindenmann, W. (1990) Research, Evaluation and Measurement: A National Perspective, in Public Relations Review, 16(2), pp. 3-16. Retrieved on 17 September, 2007, from http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/B6W5W-4MV8F6X-1/2/0cb16d0aeb13d282358df5d35baa4dc6