Presentation given at eMetrics Summit in San Francisco on April 1, 2015. Covers PR measurement through three specific tactics - share of voice, competitive benchmarking and correlations.

1. DATA-­‐DRIVEN
PR
MEASUREMENT
Sandra
Fathi
President
Affect
@sandrafathi
web:
affect.com
blog:
techaffect.com
email:
sfathi@affect.com
eMetrics
Summit
San
Francisco,
March
29-­‐Apr
2,
2015
Slides:
www.slideshare.net/sfathi

2. ABOUT
ME
• Sandra
Fathi
• President,
Affect
• Public
RelaJons,
Social
Media,
MarkeJng
• Council
of
PR
Firms
• PRSA
Past
PosiJons:
– Tri-­‐State
Chair
– NY
Chapter
President
– Technology
SecJon
Chair
2

3. ABOUT
AFFECT
3
Technology
Healthcare
Professional Services:

4. PR
MEASUREMENT
Three
Concepts
for
Discussions:
• Share
of
Voice
• CompeJJve
Benchmarking
• CorrelaJons
@sandrafathi
4

5. PART
I:
SHARE
OF
VOICE

6. DEFINITION
Share
of
Voice:
Comparing
your
crucial
performance
metrics
against
those
of
compeJtors
or
the
market.
• You
have
to
measure
something
• What
you
measure
needs
to
be
analyzed
proporJonately
against
compeJtor
data
(or
market
data)
to
establish
market
share
@sandrafathi
6

7. THE
FORMULA
Number
of
ConversaJons
Including
Your
Company
=
X
*
100
=
%
SOV
Total
ConversaJons
on
a
Topic
@sandrafathi
7

8. ADVERTISING
CONCEPT
25%
SOV
75%
SOV
@sandrafathi
8

9. SHARE
OF
VOICE
I
72%
28
%
ConversaJons
Talk
About
Me
@sandrafathi
9

10. SHARE
OF
VOICE
II
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
Q1
Q2
Q3
Q4
CompeJtor
C
CompeJtor
B
CompeJtor
A
Our
Company
@sandrafathi
10

11. SHARE
OF
VOICE
III
300
ArJcles
MenJon
My
Company
145
ArJcles
MenJon
CompeJtor
589
Industry
ArJcles
87
ArJcles
MenJon
Both
51%
SOV
in
the
Industry
@sandrafathi
11

12. KEEP
IN
MIND
• Share
of
voice
should
be
defined
for
a
period
of
Jme
(finite
start
and
end).
• Share
of
voice
is
oien
most
useful
when
limited
to
a
single
plajorm
or
medium.
For
example,
business
press
coverage
or
Twiler.
• Share
of
voice
can
be
overwhelming
if
trying
to
look
at
too
large
a
segment
or
industry.
Try
choosing
SOV
among
top
compeJtors
or
in
key
interest
areas.
@sandrafathi
12

13. SOV:
SOCIAL
MEDIA
ANALYTICS
PLATFORMS
@sandrafathi
13

14. SOCIAL
MENTION
@sandrafathi
14

15. SIMPLE
EXCEL
FORMULA
@sandrafathi
15

16. ONLY
PART
OF
THE
STORY
• Doesn’t
consider
senJment
• Doesn’t
consider
sources
(exclude
self
produced/owned
media)
• Doesn’t
consider
quality,
only
quanJty
(Is
NYT
blog
same
as
obscure
geek’s
tweet?)
• Don’t
accept
the
data
blindly
–
human
verificaJon
is
required
with
any
tool
@sandrafathi
16

17. OTHER
APPLICATIONS
&
CONSIDERATIONS
ConsideraJons:
• Apply
senJment
or
tonal
filters
(posiJve/negaJve)
• Apply
qualitaJve
measures
(by
Jer
or
by
type)
ApplicaJons:
• Industry
trends/hot
topics
(i.e.
SOV
on
cloud
security)
• Specific
products
or
services
• Broken
down
by
geographic
or
demographic
parameters
(i.e.
SOV
in
18-­‐25
market)
@sandrafathi
17

18. PART
II:
COMPETITIVE
BENCHMARKING

19. DEFINITION
CompeJJve
Benchmarking:
The
conJnuous
pracJce
of
comparing
a
company’s
pracJces
and
performance
metrics
against
the
most
successful
compeJtors
in
the
industry.
• You
measure
processes
and
results
• You
must
idenJfy
a
‘benchmark’
or
indicator
that
will
be
a
unit
of
measure
to
compare
• The
desired
outcome
is
to
understand
which
processes
lead
to
greater
success
(best
pracJces)
in
order
to
improve
your
company’s
performance
@sandrafathi
19

20. COMPETITIVE
BENCHMARKING
• IdenJfy
my
compeJJve
set
for
comparison
• Choose
my
units
of
measure:
press
coverage
• Set
parameters:
top
20
business
and
trade
• Define
a
Jme
period:
6
months
• Choose
a
tool
(news
monitoring
service)
or
begin
manual
research
@sandrafathi
20

21. EXAMPLE:
RADWARE
ObjecJve:
• Build
&
Maintain
Radware’s
PosiJon
as
a
Thought
Leader
on
ADC
and
Security
• Maximize
Radware’s
Overall
Public
RelaJons
Results
Strategy:
• Compare
and
Contrast
Radware’s
Press
Release
Output
with
Top
3
ADC
and
Security
CompeJtors
• Compare
and
Contrast
Radware’s
Coverage
with
Top
3
ADC
and
Security
CompeJtors
• Analyze
Results
• Apply
Best
PracJces
and
Lessons
Learned
to
Radware
to
Improve
Overall
Performance
@sandrafathi
21

22. EXAMPLE:
RADWARE
ApplicaJon
Delivery
Network
Security
@sandrafathi
22

23. • Analysis
of
press
release
strategy
and
resulJng
coverage
over
6
month
period
• Specifically
as
it
relates
to
relevant
products
or
business
units
• Only
in
top
20
business
and
industry/sector
publicaJons
METHODOLOGY
@sandrafathi
23

24. METHODOLOGY
II
@sandrafathi
24

25. RADWARE
PRESS
RELEASES
Security
43%
ADC
27%
Both*
12%
Other*
18%
Press
Releases
*
‘Both’
includes
releases
related
to
both
security
and
ADC,
‘Other’
includes
non-­‐product
releases
(e.g.
company
news,
financial
announcements
etc.)
Press
Releases
Security
14
ADC
9
Both
2
Other
6
@sandrafathi
25

26. ADC
COMPETITORS:
SECURITY
&
ADC
*
‘Both’
includes
releases
related
to
both
Security
and
ADC
11
11
2
15
46
39
31
92
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
Radware
A10
Citrix
F5
Press
Releases
ArJcles
PRESS
RELEASES
VS.
NUMBER
OF
ARTICLES
@sandrafathi
26

27. 9
11
2
7
44
16
31
38
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
50
Radware
A10
Citrix
F5
Press
Releases
ArJcles
ADC
COMPETITORS:
ADC
ONLY
PRESS
RELEASES
VS.
NUMBER
OF
ARTICLES
@sandrafathi
27

28. ADC
COVERAGE
BY
TYPE
0
20
40
60
80
Radware
A10
Citrix
F5
Other
Report
Commentary
AcquisiJon
Partner
Customer
Product
Product
Customer
Partner
AcquisiJon
Commentary
Report
Other
Radware
7
2
1
0
1
34
1
A10
1
1
10
0
1
0
26
Citrix
27
0
0
0
2
0
2
F5
24
0
3
0
12
0
37
@sandrafathi
28

29. COVERAGE
QUALITY
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
Radware
A10
Citrix
F5
74%
10%
23%
50%
26%
90%
77%
50%
MenJons
Features
FEATURE
VS.
MENTION
@sandrafathi
29

30. ADC
CONCULSIONS
• Number
of
press
releases
did
not
correlate
to
number
of
arJcles
• Radware
was
leading
in
SOV
on
key
topic
(ADC)
amongst
compeJtors
and
the
quality
of
coverage
by
comparison
was
significant
(ValidaJon!)
• Overwhelming
majority
of
Radware’s
ADC
coverage
was
generated
by
reports
(ValidaJon!)
with
product
and
customer
news
trailing
far
behind
• CompeJtors
were
leading
with
product
news
and
capturing
media
alenJon
(Opportunity!)
• No
one
was
successfully
telling
the
customer
story
(Opportunity!)
@sandrafathi
30

31. SECURITY
COMPETITORS
14
23
28
10
84
164
68
68
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
160
180
Radware
Arbor
Imperva
Prolexic
Press
Releases
ArJcles
PRESS
RELEASES
VS.
NUMBER
OF
ARTICLES
@sandrafathi
31

32. SECURITY
COVERAGE
BY
TYPE
0
50
100
150
200
Radware
Arbor
Imperva
Prolexic
Other
Report
Commentary
Alack
AcquisiJon
Partner
Customer
Product
Customer
Partner
AcquisiJon
Alack
Commentary
Report
Other
Radware
8
9
6
0
28
22
11
2
Arbor
19
1
1
18
29
44
52
0
Imperva
2
1
1
0
8
18
19
19
Prolexic
0
0
0
0
43
2
14
9
@sandrafathi
32

33. COVERAGE
BY
QUALITY
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
160
180
Radware
Arbor
Imperva
Prolexic
MenJons
Features
35%
65%
31%
69%
34%
66%
54%
46%
FEATURE
VS.
MENTION
@sandrafathi
33

34. SECURITY
CONCLUSIONS
• Radware
is
#2
in
overall
SOV
but
the
quality
is
not
as
strong
(more
menJons
vs.
features)
• Leading
customer
and
partner
conversaJons
(ValidaJon)
• Good
job
at
Story
Hijacking
(responding
to
security
hacks)
but
room
for
improvement
(ValidaJon)
• CompeJtors
winning
at
report
coverage
and
commentary
(Opportunity!)
@sandrafathi
34

35. CONSIDERATIONS
• Good
for
understanding
what
worked
but
not
necessarily
‘how’
it
worked
• Costs
for
research
may
outweigh
benefits
of
insights
• Once
you’ve
idenJfied
the
‘best
pracJces’
you
may
or
may
not
be
able
to
replicate
them
• Consider
non-­‐compeJtor
companies
to
benchmark
• Do
you
want
to
‘emulate’
or
‘innovate’?
@sandrafathi
35

36. PART
III:
CORRELATIONS

37. DEFINITION
CorrelaJon:
A
mutual
relaJonship,
or
interdependence,
between
two
or
more
things.
• In
the
absence
of
being
able
to
prove
‘causality’
you
may
be
able
to
demonstrate
a
‘correlaJon’
to
demonstrate
the
impact
of
a
PR
or
markeJng
program
• A
correlaJon
is
posiJve
when
the
values
increase
together
• A
correlaJon
is
negaJve
when
the
values
decrease
together
@sandrafathi
37

38. TYPES
OF
CORRELATION
Source:
MathisFun.com
38

39. THE
FORMULA
39
Pearson’s
CorrelaJon:
@sandrafathi

40. FUNCTION
IN
EXCEL
40
@sandrafathi

41. CORRELATION
IN
EXCEL
41
@sandrafathi

42. FUNCTION
IN
EXCEL
42
@sandrafathi

43. SCATTER
CHART
43
@sandrafathi

44. LINE
CHART
44
@sandrafathi
AcquisiJon

45. 3-­‐D
LINE
CHART
45
@sandrafathi

46. MULTIPLE
DATA
SETS
46
@sandrafathi
0
500
1000
1500
2000
2500
3000
3500
4000
4500
Q1
Q2
Q3
Q4
Sales
Web
Traffic
Press
Coverage

47. SPURIOUS
CORRELATION
47
@sandrafathi
Source:
TylerVigen.com

48. 48
@sandrafathi
Source:
TylerVigen.com
SPURIOUS
CORRELATION

49. CONSIDERATIONS
• User
correlaJons
cauJously
and
don’t
trust
the
math
blindly
• The
visuals
oien
tell
a
story
as
well
• Remember
that
correlaJon
is
not
causality,
it
can
only
help
as
an
indicator
or
potenJally
predict
probability
• Data
is
sJll
beler
that
your
opinion
49
@sandrafathi

50. FINAL
THOUGHTS
• In
measurement,
speak
the
language
of
the
C-­‐Suite
• Excel
is
sJll
the
best
dashboard
for
data
visualizaJon
• Don’t
be
afraid
to
learn
that
you
are
wrong
• Don’t
be
afraid
to
change
direcJon
• Use
the
data
to
gain
execuJve
support
– Strategy
– Resources
– Headcount
– Budget
50
@sandrafathi

51. THANK
YOU
CONTACT:
Sandra
Fathi
President
Affect
@sandrafathi
web:
affect.com
blog:
techaffect.com
email:
sfathi@affect.com
Slides:
www.slideshare.net/sfathi