Communications as Ikor

PR프로그램 플랜및 분석방법< ?xml:namespace prefix = o ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" />

 

제가 일천한 PR 지식을 가지고, 케이스를 모아서 보여드린지도 벌써 두달이 되어가는것 같습니다. 여러분들로부터 많은 피드백을 받으며, 정말 제가 이일을 잘하고 있는 건가에 대한 생각을 해보았습니다.

 

제가 이 케이스들의 게재를 시작한 이유는 미래의 PR인을 꿈꾸는 무한한 가능성의 후배들과, 현장에서 지식적 정보가 부족하여 고민하는 도전적인 동료들을 위해서였습니다. 얼마나, 저의 케이스들이 그들의 고민을 해결하는 유용한 수단이 되었는지는 영원한 의문이 되겠지마는, 저에게 보여주신 많은 격려와 사랑은 제가 가슴깊이 고마움을 가지고 이글을 계속 하게하는 원동력이 되고있습니다.

 

제가 케이스들을 이리저리 뒤져가며, 가장 맛깔스러운 케이스를 고르려 애쓴다는 것을 아시는 분도 계실텐데, 이런 맛난 음식을 차려 놓고 여러분이 방문하셔서 드실때, 어떤 방법으로 드시고 계시는지에 대한 의문이 갑자기 생겼습니다.

 

케이스(영문)의 길이가 너무 길지는 않은지, 내용을 이해하기는 쉬우신지, 또 올바른 케이스 분석방법을 몰라 따분하지는 않으신지…

 

그래서 저는 PR 케이스 분석방법에 대한 유용한 참고자료를 찾았습니다.

 

제가 게재한 몇몇편의 케이스도 PRSA에서 개최하는 Silver Anvil이라는 유명한 PR프로그램 시상대회에서 성공적 사례로 뽑힌 것들이 있었습니다. 그 시상대회의 심판으로 계시는 Mr. Larry Chiagouris가 쓰신 좋은 PR프로그램 플랜및 분석방법에 대한 짧은 글입니다.

 

이글을 읽으시고, 과연 어떻게 세워지는 PR 프로그램 플랜이 완전한 것인가와 함께, 다음부터 계속될 여러 케이스들을 어떤 시각으로 분석해야 하는지에 대한 큰 그림을 얻어보시기 바랍니다. 이와 관련하여 질문이 계신분은 연락 주십시오. 친절히 알려드리겠습니다. Good Luck.. 홍보~!

**********************************************************************

Confessions of a Silver Anvil Judge

 

By Larry Chiagouris

Reprinted from The Public Relations Strategist, Winter 1998

 

The Silver Anvil is the most prestigious award a public relations professional can win. But it doesn’t come easy.

 

This year, I had the privilege of serving as a judge for the PRSA Silver Anvil awards. As a marketing strategist and researcher with more than 25 years in the business, I have judged numerous competitions.

 

The Silver Anvil award selection process is as good as or better than any other professional awards program. And the winning entries were all worthy of the awards bestowed upon them.

 

What concerns me, however, is the quality of the entries that did not win Silver Anvils. In some cases, they were so far off in conveying a strong program, that one might conclude that many industry professionals need to revisit what constitutes a successful public relations program.

 

The entry criteria for the Silver Anvils is very specific, requiring documentation in four major areas -research(연구조사), planning(기획), execution(실행) and results(결과). To win an award, an agency must demonstrate that its entry delivered in all four areas.

 

WHERE IS RESEARCH?

Many agencies failed to quantify their entry’s contribution to each of the four areas. Research was clearly the area with the most room for improvement. Several submissions stretched the definition and in the process devalued the role that research can play in defining the goals and target audience of a public relations program.

 

For example, many entries seemed to support the notion that research consists of talking to a few editors about their perception of a company and its products. Other submissions relied heavily on what a top executive said was important to the progress of the product or company. While media soundings and senior executive interviews can be important factors in determining the parameters of a public relations effort, they do not begin to go far enough in terms of research.

 

A strategic public relations program will address the audience that is relevant to the public relations campaign. Many campaigns have multiple audiences, including endusers, employees, members, investors, suppliers, and government officials. Research, when properly utilized, will define the target audience of the campaign and help set priorities.

 

It will often delineate the existing perceptions, needs and opinions of the program’s target audience. Research initiatives should link this understanding to the marketing and brand situation of the product or company. In the process, it should provide a benchmark from which to judge the impact of the public relations program.

 

WHAT ARE THE GOALS?

Not every research effort has to be extensive or expensive. We have developed a number of quick and relatively inexpensive research tools to use when resources are limited. They include qualitative samples, in-house research panels and sophisticated analysis of existing data.

 

The planning stage is the second area addressed on the entry form.

 

Here, the most frequent problem was that the choice of goals and objectives was not justified against the client’s business goals. A public relations program should be developed to support the broader needs of the client, with emphasis on corporate reputation and brand building.

 

The program goals should be articulated in a manner that enables the client to easily evaluate the effectiveness of the program. Many of the entries did not provide any way to quantify progress made towards the program’s objectives – making it impossible to evaluate whether or not the program achieved its goals. The classic example is a statement indicating that a program was designed to “establish the company as a leader.” Again, the lack of documentation leads one to question the relevance of a program based upon poorly articulated goals and objectives.

 

WHERE’S THE SUPPORT?

The third area addressed on the Silver Anvil entry form is the execution of the public relations program. This was where the real fun began.

 

Copies of press kits, videotapes, audiotapes, and collateral of all kinds filled submission binders to the brim. The problem for many entries, however, was the lack of information regarding how promotional materials supported the program’s key messages.

 

Material generated by the creative team often demonstrated a complete disconnection between the creative and strategic elements of a program. The material looked slick but failed to convey key messages to the target audience. Lavish creative efforts on behalf of a low budget campaign points to a lack of planning and poor execution on the part of the staff responsible for the program. It may be hard to imagine, but it is possible overspend on production!

 

The final area on the Silver Anvil entry form is program results.

 

Stating that top management “liked the program” hardly constitutes results befitting a Silver Anvil award winner. To most professionals, letters received from the sales force or customers are also insufficient to be considered for an award.

 

WHAT IS SUCCESS?

After opening several submissions that included clip reports as proof of a program’s impact, I was forced to wonder how some public relations professionals are measuring success? Clips are an indicator of interest on the part of the media, not necessarily of influence on the purchasing behavior or attitudes of the public.

 

To be considered a successful public relations program, there must be evidence that the goals and objectives of a program have been met. For instance, if the stated goal of a program is to raise brand awareness, the public relations agency needs to provide documentation demonstrating that the goal was achieved. A brand awareness survey conducted before and after the public relations campaign would clearly illustrate whether the brand experienced increased consumer recognition or not.

 

Some other examples of quantifiable objectives are a 5% increase in sales, 10,000 new hits a month at the company Web site or one million dollars donated to a nonprofit organization. Not every public relations program is well suited to the Silver Anvil awards. Entries are intended to represent the best a public relations program has to offer in a given year. Submissions that are clearly lacking in one of the four entry criteria devalue not only the awards, but also the public relations industry itself.

 

Programs that win Silver Anvils almost always demonstrate a tight linkage between the goals of the business and the program results. Failing to do that, other efforts will remain nothing more than submissions.