Content area
Full text
Introduction – three key challenges
Measurement and evaluation (M&E), referred to as evaluation for brevity in this discussion, has long been recognized as an important and even essential part of the practice of corporate communication and public relations (PR). In a historical review of the field, Likely and Watson (2013) noted that evaluation has received intensive focus over the past 40 years. In a review of ten years of data collected for the European Communication Monitor, Tench et al. described evaluation as “the alpha and omega of strategy” (2017, p. 91).
However, despite four decades of research and industry debate, evaluation in the corporate communication and PR field has been described as being in a state of “stasis” (Gregory and Watson, 2008; Macnamara and Zerfass, 2017), or even in a “deadlock” (Macnamara, 2015. Industry journals consistently discuss evaluation as a challenge facing corporate communication and PR practitioners (e.g. Comcowich, 2018).
This critical analysis examines three key issues that are raised in discussion of evaluation and, drawing on a transdisciplinary literature review and a review of frameworks and models for evaluation of corporate communication and PR, presents conclusions and recommendations that offer a contribution to overcoming stasis in the field and advancing the evaluation theory and practice.
The first issue examined is what was optimistically described at the 2012 Summit on Measurement hosted by the International Association for Measurement and Evaluation of Communication (AMEC) in Dublin as the “the March to standards” (Marklein and Paine, 2012). Standards are applied in many professional fields and industries, as reflected in ISO 9000 standards for quality management and quality assurance (https://www.iso.org/iso-9001-quality-management.html) and the Global Reporting Initiative (GRI) standards for reporting on a range of economic, environmental and social impacts (https://www.globalreporting.org/standards). In corporate communication and PR, proponents of evaluation have advocated standards to help establish and maintain rigor, comparability and transparency. For example, Michaelson and Stacks (2011) reported that more than two-thirds of PR practitioners believe that standards for evaluation are necessary. Michaelson and Stacks noted that standards allow “comparative evaluations” over time, and they ensure appropriate methods are used (2011, p. 4). However, despite a number of attempts, the so-called “March to standards” has floundered, as will be discussed. Analysis of evaluation literature in corporate communication and PR...