Proving Our Worth

Monitoring and Evaluation Panel

The Panel

Susie Hall: Accident Compensation Corporation

Kimberley Brady: NZ Army

Anna Kominik: Ideas Shop

Laurie Edwards: Accident Compensation Corporation

Proving our WorthMedia Monitoring and Evaluation

Laurie Edwards, ACC11 August 2009

Why monitor/evaluate the media?

• Critical source of information for most people

– it impacts what they think and how they behave• which is important if you need their cooperation

– monitoring allows us to hold the media accountable

Why monitor/evaluate the media?

• Measure key message penetration

– that’s why they pay us – to use the media as a channel to our audiences.

– at two levels• campaign

• corporate

– have to be able to articulate those messages

Why monitor/evaluate the media?

• Manage issues and

– correct the media if they have it wrong• there’s no point otherwise!

– or fix the issue if they have it right• “It’s not a media issue, it’s a business issue. Fix the business

issue and the media will go away.”

• “If you mess up, fess up.”

Why monitor/evaluate the media?

• Inform future activities

– what worked, what didn’t, what could we do better

– set new targets

– identify who is working for and against us

Monitoring – what?

• Technology lets us monitor everything

– subject to volume you might as well – often free– builds a fuller picture– talkback, blogs etc don’t always flow into mainstream but have some

legitimacy– international as well

• Same doesn’t apply to evaluation

– with a few exceptions, the smaller audiences, lower credibility and lack of moderation minimise the impact of blogs, talkback etc compared to mainstream

– Also blogs tend to be opinion driven rather than fact driven

Monitoring – how?

• Technology and agencies will quickly tell you what was in the media. That’s good.

• Also possible to know in advance! That’s better.

– teach your business to recognise media risk

– create relationships that encourage media to come to you first – must be available

– NQX, Scoop etc – provide simultaneous alerts

Evaluation

Media evaluation should:

• be independent– if we do it ourselves we take things into account that the reader won’t.

• measure against pre-agreed– key messages– performance standards

• not averse to positive, balanced, neutral

• relate to one of your corporate objectives, e.g. public trust and confidence

Evaluation

Media evaluation should:

• be weighted– a story on the front page of the Ellesmere Echo just isn’t worth the same as the

NZ Herald

• allow consistent comparisons over periods of time– there are usually patterns, trends

• segment for different– parts of the business– key messages– spokespeople (internal and external)– media outlets and reporters

Evaluation - timing

• Coverage of an issue– immediate, qualitative

– get an external opinion if possible

• Coverage of a campaign– during (if long enough) to allow adaptation and at completion

– based on pre-set goals – volume, placement, messages

– quantitative (media analysis) and qualitative (research as part of campaign evaluation)

• Coverage of corporate messages– quarterly to allow adjustments if required

– annual to feed into next year’s media strategy

Evaluation - issues

• How do we factor in:– all those bad stories that didn’t appear because of our good work– the bad ones that became balanced or balanced that became positive

• We can’t control what they write, so should we be held accountable?– ensure management understands you’re evaluating the organisation’s

media performance – not just your own – no media advisor can save an organisation that continues to fail

• but we have a responsibility to point out the failure

Proving our worth panel

Discussion, questions and answers:• Susie Hall, ACC

• Kimberley Brady, NZ Army

• Anna Kominik, Ideas Shop

• Laurie Edwards, ACC