Realistic Ad Valuations & Quality Improvement Process for PR Activities

Advertising value equivalents for PR exposures have, generally, been calculated using a conventional, simple formula ('card rate x space') without regard for key factors, such as if the exposure had a visual image or not, and the richness of information provided. Therefore, it can not be said that the value of PR exposures has been measured appropriately. It is also the situation whereas there is no specific methodology that tries to improve the quality of PR exposures.

In addition, the ad value equivalents for PR exposures, calculated using the conventional formula, does not represent 'true values' to the organization. With the assumption that there must be some key information that should be communicated with any and all PR activities, and that it is important that this information is communicated precisely and effectively, then these qualitative factors should be included in order to measure 'true value'.

To not grasp the 'true value' means to not understand what was successful and what was a failure. That is to say, you have no real idea as to what activities or approaches to continue and which to cease. In contrast to the current situation whereby there has been a reduction in the effectiveness of advertising, the importance and effectiveness of PR activities are being stressed due to their high credibility and receptivity. In this situation, there is a rapidly increasing necessity to reveal what are the more effective PR exposures.

Due to the demand of a client to grasp the 'true value' of PR exposures and to improve their quality, SPI set out to develop a process that made it possible to calculate an appropriate advertising value equivalent for PR exposures, as well as a system to feedback ways on how to improve their quality by setting up a criteria for their qualitative evaluation.

1. Set a basic formula: real media cost x qualitative score(%) = Realistic Advertising Value Equivalent
2. Define some parameters that construct the qualitative score's evaluation, for example;
   1. Parameter A ('celebrity usage')
   2. Parameter B ('message content')
   3. Parameter C ('synergy with the media')
3. Weight the parameters based on their contribution levels to some KPI, such as sales or purchase intention
   
   
    
4. Use the set parameters, and have three people evaluate the quality of the each PR piece to compute their Realistic Advertising Value Equivalent = RAVE

In the case of this client, Parameter B (message content) was given the highest weight since it showed the highest contribution to sales. However, the scores for Parameter B were consistently the lowest in terms of quality evaluations. So, according to these results, it was confirmed and recognized that Parameter B (message content) was important to improve and have reflected in future PR activities.

In the near future, SPI plans to use complied data collected using this process to investigate how and how much qualitative improvement in a PR exposure, based on RAVE, influences the investment efficiency of PR activities.

Author: SPI

Please contact us with questions or for more detailed information.
spiindex@spi-consultants.net