The 2019 JOTW Communications Survey | Trends in Corporate Communications and Public Relations

The 2019 JOTW Communications Survey
Second annual survey of more than 200 communications professionals surfaces trends and
best practices in corporate communications and public relations
Conducted in Partnership between Ned’s Job of the Week (JOTW)
and Sword and the Script Media, LLC

Introduction
The “Job of the Week” network began as a simple experiment to build a community of communication professionals
that could help each other find employment opportunities.
Today we have more than 5,700 communicators in the network (and growing), and we engaged them to share some of
their thoughts on the state of communications. This survey demonstrates the value of the JOTW network and the
importance of networking to the profession.
The JOTW newsletter comes out every Monday. To join the JOTW network, send me an email at
lundquist989@cs.com. It’s free.
Ned Lundquist, ABC, IABC Fellow
Captain, U.S. Navy (Ret.)
Editor and Publisher
The Job of the Week Network LLC
It’s an interesting time to build a career in public relations (PR) and communications. Some say there’s never been a
better time. I’m a subscriber to that idea, however, as this survey makes it clear, it’s not a career without challenges.
It’s not necessarily that the work is harder or easier, it’s that it’s changing. The organizational structure, the strategies
used, the tactics employed and the way it’s measured are all evolving, morphing and in some cases blurring.
In some small way this survey – by communicators and for communicators – is a pulse check on the state of
communications.
Frank Strong, MA, MBA
Founder & President,
Sword and the Script Media, LLC
frank@swordandthescript.com

Table of Contents
Executive summary……………………slide 4
Grading past efforts……………………slide 5
Outlook for the next year………………slide 8
Documentation…………………………slide 11
Top challenges…………………………slide 15
Hiring and firing agencies…………….slide 18
Tactics and techniques………………..slide 23
Challenges in media relations………..slide 30
Social media in PR…………………....slide 35
PR and comms measurement……..…slide 38
Comms budgets.....…………………....slide 44
Organizational structure……………....slide 46
Employment and mobility……………..slide 49
PR and comms vendors………………slide 51
In their own words……………………..slide 54
Demographics………………………….slide 57
Survey methodology…………….…….slide 62

Executive Summary
Ned’s Job of the Week (JOTW) newsletter and Sword and the Script Media, LLC conducted an online survey of PR and communications professionals in
January and February of 2019. Most respondents were experienced in-house or corporate communications professionals with 10 or more years of
experience. Detailed demographics can be found at the end.
• PR gives itself good grades but worries about the future. Most communicators (64%) said their communications efforts over the last year were
successful. Sentiment suggests those that take chances are more likely to say their efforts were successful than those with less tolerance for risk.
Respondents were surprisingly less sanguine about the future.
• Comms strategies documented, but crisis plans not so much. Most organizations (59%) have a documented communications strategy; less than
half (45%) report having documented crisis communications plans.
• Budget is the top communications and PR challenge. Budget (59%) was the top challenge for the second year in a row. This was followed by
limited staffing or headcount (55%); ever-expanding duties (52%); balancing priorities (49%); and measuring the impact of comms (49%). Just 18%
anticipate budgets rising; 51% say they will remain flat and 29% expect budgets to fall.
• More PR work is being taken in-house. Some 47% of respondents said they’ve observed more PR work being taking in-house. This mirrors
broader trends in marketing, where CMOs have slashed agencies in favor of in-house teams. The top reasons for hiring an agency are: execution,
expertise and for strategic projects; the top reasons for firing a firm are cost, poor client service and an inability to measure ROI.
• Storytelling, analytics and thought leadership are the top tactics and trends. The respondents identified storytelling (76%); data & analytics
(75%); thought leadership (70%); measurement (66%) and content marketing (64%) as growing more important. While not a majority, those with the
most votes for less important were press releases (33%), award programs (31%) and white papers (36%).
• Media relations continues to get harder. Most respondents (68%) said media relations is harder or much harder – up from 51% last year.
Respondents cited reporter turnover, veteran reporters being replaced with junior ones, and “in-your-face-journalism” as contributing causes. Money
and standards distinguish media relations from influencer marketing.
• Top metrics PR pros track. About one-third (29%) think they do an adequate job of communications measurement while 46% say it needs
improvement. The most common metrics comms pros said they track includes web traffic (73%); impressions (66%); estimated site traffic (60%);
mentions (57%) and email open rates (52%).
• More communicators report to the CEO than to marketing. More respondents (38%) say the comms function reports to the CEO, versus 35% that
say they report to marketing. This was followed by the chief operating officer (9%), strategy (7%) and human resources (5%).

Communicators give themselves good grades on past efforts

Most communicators (64%) put
their efforts over the last year in
the “success” column.
N = 223

Comfort with risk central to success
Most respondents (64%) categorize their efforts over the last year as successful, including a subset of 14% who said their efforts
were very successful. About one third said (29%) indicated their work had about the same results and the rest (7%) said their
efforts were not successful.
We asked “Why?” as an open-ended and optional follow-up question. Seventy-five respondents – about one-third of the total –
wrote in answers. The sentiment centers around risk: those that take chances are more likely to say their efforts were successful,
than those with less tolerance for risk. Here is a sampling of those answers:
Those that said their efforts were successful:
• “Some really talented people, who work cooperatively with one another...and a brilliant CMO who isn't afraid to take chances.”
• “My CEO seems more receptive to my counsel. In addition, a budget increase has also made our efforts more effective.”
• “We tried some new things. We had some success, but I think there is more we can do to build our brand.”
Those that said their efforts were about the same:
• “New boss who ‘doesn't get it’ and fears it.”
• “Limited resources and restrictive budgets. Lack of priority and willingness to expand communication channels.”
• “Difficult to answer but at its core, apathy from the target audience.”
Those that said their efforts were unsuccessful:
• “Overly cautious posture.”
• “Lack of a commitment by senior leadership.
• “We're in a very competitive market.”

Less sanguine about the next year

This doubled from the previous
question on past efforts.
Respondents were surprisingly less
sanguine about the future given most felt
their efforts last year were successful.
N = 223

Why the less sanguine?
Most respondents (52%) think the next 12 months or so will similar to the previous year in communications – not better and not
worse. About one-third (34%) are more optimistic about the future while 14% are downright pessimistic. If communicators say their
efforts last year were successful, why aren’t they more optimistic about capitalizing on last year’s success? Again, we asked
“Why?” in an open-ended and optional question. Seventy-nine respondents wrote in and here’s a sample:
Those that said things would be better:
• “Budgets appear to be growing and more people are being hired.”
• “Increased understanding in leadership on the importance of including PR in business development and government relations
actions to be effective in a really crazy environment.”
• “Pull rather than push – earned [media] rather than paid media – are getting the importance they deserve.”
Those that said things would be about the same:
• “I'm somewhat on the fence with this question. I'd like to believe that 2019 will be better than 2018; however, the derisive and
divisive atmosphere in the news information arena carries over to the PR/Communications area.”
• “It's increasingly difficult to get noticed, short attention spans, clutter, noise, etc.”
• “This will not be a year of increasing budgets and I expect companies to be a bit more cautious in the current environment.”
Those that said things would be worse:
• “Economic slowdown.”
• “Mergers. Impact of the government shutdown. Communication and PR is always the first to get cut. Last to get funded.”
• “The news cycle is constantly covering the turmoil of the presidential administration. It's hard to get a word in edgewise.

Are communications strategies documented?

Most organizations have
documented comms strategy but…
N = 223

…fewer have documented crisis
comms plans.
N = 223

Why document a strategy?
Most organizations (59%) have a documented communications strategy. That the number was this high, was a little surprising, but
perhaps it’s a testament to the growing importance of the communications function.
By contrast, complementary (and perhaps overlapping) functions, like content marketing aren’t even close. For example, the 2019
Content Marketing Benchmarks, Budgets and Trends report by the Content Marketing Institute and MarketingProfs found 39% of
B2B organizations and 33% of B2C organizations. have a documented content marketing strategy. The study found the most
successful content marketers had a documented strategy.
However, fewer organizations have documented crisis communications plans – less than half (45%) of respondents said they do. In
time and age when information and misinformation can spread far and fast over digital and social platforms, crisis preparation is
increasingly important.

The top challenges in communications and PR

Limited staffing or headcount
Budget
Ever expanding duties
Project scope creep
Complicated or prolonged review process
Gaining executive buy-in
Proving ROI
Effectively measuring impact of comms
Balancing priorities
Fostering alignment with marketing
Resources (other than budget or staff)
Fostering alignment with the sales team
Fostering alignment with the creative team
N = 223
The top challenge, two
years in a row.
The top seven challenges affect
about half of respondents and are
consistent with the previous year.
This suggests there are some fairly
common, if not enduring, challenges.

A lack of understanding
The top challenges facing communications professionals remained consistent from last year: while the list of duties and
stakeholders expands PR pros aren’t getting more budget or staff even as they are asked to prove value.
Part of what makes the role of modern communicators so challenging is that executives and business leaders lack a basic working
knowledge of digital media. As one respondent wrote in, the challenge isn’t “executive buy-in but lack of understanding how it works
especially digital.”
It’s really hard to have a discussion about investing in tactics to carry out a communications strategy, when the leadership isn’t
familiar with those tactics or the capabilities.
Some of the write in comments included:
• “Drop everything, and now do this, and this, and this!”
• “Getting companies to value PR experience...places seem more focused on getting cheap help.”
• “Lack of understanding that communications is a professional discipline and not just sending emails or writing stuff and making it
sound pretty.”
• “Weak confidence of practitioners, unwillingness of professional associations to make a convincing case for investment in
comms services and training.”
Rank 2019 Top Challenges 2018 Top Challenges
1 Budget (59%) Budget (63%)
2 Limited staffing or headcount (55%) Ever expanding duties (57%)
3 Ever expanding duties (52%) Proving ROI (54%)
4 Balancing priorities (49%) Limited staffing or headcount (52%)
5 Measuring impact of comms (49%) Measuring impact of comms (51%)
6 Proving ROI (48%) Balancing priorities (44%)
7 Gaining executive buy-in (45%) Gaining executive buy-in (40%)

Execution (extra pair of hands)
Transactional or short-term project help
Strategic projects (i.e. launches)
Niche or vertical expertise
Outside objectivity and advice
Planning and strategy
Monitoring and measurement
Existing relationships and connections
Better cost-to-value vs. headcount
Geographic reach or scale
N = 223
The top three answers this year are nearly identical to the
results last year. When corporate communicators hire an
outside agency, it’s most often because they need an extra
pair of hands or special expertise to solve a problem.

Inability to execute on big or creative ideas
Inability to tie programs to business strategy
Too traditional in approach
Weak digital skills
Leadership turnover (i.e. new CMO)
High agency staff turnover
Lack of accountability
Slipping enthusiasm
Cost
Required too much “hand holding”
Cannot demonstrate ROI
Poor client service
To take more work in-house
Stopped bringing new or creative ideas
Cost
Poor client service
Leadership turnover (i.e. new CMO)
High agency staff turnover
Slipping enthusiasm
Cost
Poor client service
N = 223
Budget is the top challenge, so
the cost of an agency will be a
contributed factor.

N = 223
PR taking more work in-house is a reflection of
broader trends in marketing that have been
underway for the last few years.

Hiring, firing and taking PR work in-house
Taking more work in-house has been a significant trend in marketing, particularly around media buying and creative services the
last few years. It appears, PR and communications are following suit and it’s a reflection of broader trends.
For example, in 2018, consumer packaged goods (CPG) company Proctor & Gamble (P&G) was one of the more vocal proponents
of taking marketing work in-house. According to reporting by PR Week, in February 2019, the largest independent PR firm,
Edelman, cited the in-house trend among CPG brands as a cause after reporting disappointing earnings for the year ending 2018.
If the in-house trend continues to develop in PR, the agencies that will be best positioned to grow are those that execute well or
maintain some specialized capabilities. According to respondents, the top reasons for hiring an agency are: execution (64%), niche
or vertical expertise (58%), strategic projects (38%), transactional or short-term help (38%), and planning and strategy (37%).
Understanding why agencies get fired is just as important as why they get hired. Again this year, cost (81%) was by far the biggest
reason for letting an agency go. Rounding out the top five reasons included poor client service (47%), inability to measure ROI
(41%), too much “hand-holding” (32%) and – new to the survey this year – taking PR work in-house (30%).
The sentiment in open-ended comments provides color around the data. Here’s a sample of what respondents wrote in:
• “Inability to grasp what the organization really needs -- instead, trying to disguise a cookie-cutter approach.”
• “Young account leads with little experience.”
• “Too slow or suggests stupid ideas just to make money off of me or bills creep up over time. I once asked for help in an
emergency and the agency I was using ($1M a year) wanted to charge me $800 for a poster. Their contract came up at the end
of the year and I didn't even consider them. They had an opportunity to help me and they took advantage. Bye Bye.”

The most and least favorable PR tactics, techniques and procedures

The next few pages are busy but they are also packed with
information. If you look closely, you can see which areas your
peers are most deserving of time and budget.
Here’s the key to interpreting the data:

76%
75%
70%
66%
64%
59%
63%
52%
56%
52%
0% think
measurement will
be less important
41%
40%
46%
36%
33%
34%
29%
26%
23%
22%
Chart 1 of 3
on tactics
These tactics are
more important.
Including “infographics”
on the next chart there
are 11 aspects of
communications that
50% or more of
respondents think will
be “more important” or
“much more important.”
N = 223

Business social
responsibility / philanthropy
1st party events
(i.e. customer conferences)
Analyst relations
(i.e. Gartner)
Native advertising
and sponsored content
Executive speaking
opportunities
48%45%
53%
45%
41%
40%
35%
37%
45%
53%
42%
50%
29%55%
27%60%
59% 24%
53% 28%
These tactics have
about the same
importance. From
brand journalism
through the bottom of
the list of 26, you see
50% or more say these
aspects will have the
same importance over
the next year.
N = 223
Chart 2 of 3
on tactics

53%
66%
56%
28% 31%41%
52%33%
53%31%
36%
36%
15%
15%
13%
19%
14%
26%
21%
Chart 3 of 3
on tactics
N = 223
The venerable press
release is at the
bottom of the list
again this year.

Note: These are sorted by the weighted
average. We removed “not applicable”
answers for the ranking, though N value for
each tactic is available under the “total”
column.
Generally this meant 15 (median) or fewer
answers, and for functions that sometimes
fall outside of the communications role in a
given organization.
For example, 60 respondents marked analyst
relations as not applicable, which was the
most, followed by first party events (42) and
native advertising (41).
Details on tactics

Storytelling, analytics and thought leadership
The survey this year presented 26 tactics to survey takers (up from 20 last year) and ask them to rank each one on a five-point
scale. Though it’s not a tactic per se, measurement is important to improve the overall communication effort and it’s an example of a
new entry on the list this year.
Among the top five that respondents identified as “more important” or “much more important” included:
• Storytelling (76%)
• Data & analytics (75%)
• Thought leadership (70%)
• Measurement (66%)
• Content marketing (64%)
These tactics are all complementary and perhaps interrelated. They also fall well within the PR bailiwick. These selections are
consistent with the same survey last year, where storytelling, thought leadership and content marketing ranked as the top three.
While no single tactic earned 50% or more of the votes for “less important” or “much less important” the three that were listed at the
bottom were the same three as last year: press releases (33%), award programs (31%) and white papers (36%).

Media relations and influencer marketing

N = 223
68% of respondents said
media relations is getting
harder or much harder.

“In-your-face-journalism” affecting media relations
A majority (68%) of PR professionals say media relations is getting harder or much harder. This is up from last year where 51%
said it was getting harder. The caveat is this year we listed possible answers on a five-point scale, whereas last year it was three.
It’s conceivable if this survey had listed the answers the same way as last year, more respondents would have selected “about the
same” but we don’t think that’s likely.
This is because the open-ended comments around this question overwhelmingly said media relations was overwhelmingly more
difficult and cite hard hitting reasons why. Just one comment came from a person who said it was easier (“Anyone can become an
influencer these days so there are more options for gaining coverage.”).
Some of the verbatim comments included:
• “It's harder to know who is media and who isn't. And there used to be rules of engagement - behavior, fairness. Now, it's say
whatever you want about whomever you want.”
• “Traditional media with professional reporters is quickly disappearing, and being replaced with blog influencers which need
completely different approaches.”
• “Fragmentation of media leads to challenges of measurement and dilution of impact of ‘3rd party endorsement.’ We may
celebrate a big media hit, but C-suite asks, ‘What's this do for my business?’ That reflects weak correlation to business results,
perception of media relations being a waste of resources.”
• “Journalists are increasingly strident toward, instead of partnering with, PR professionals. It's virtually impossible to have an
actual conversation with a writer. Social media has fragmented the landscape and ‘citizen journalists’ and ‘influencers’ are
muddying the pay-to-play picture on top of it all.”
• “Journalists are no longer objective, they are much more subjective and if you do not fall within their lane or their bias, they are
not interested and you are left by the wayside. The days of objectivity are gone and the days of combative, aggressive,
argumentative ‘in your face’ journalism has taken its place.”
• “Presidential administration and turmoil dominate news cycle.”

N = 223
“Because it's all pay-to-play. And many influencers do
not operate at the same level with the same standards
as conventional media.” (Verbatim comment).

With influencers the difference is standards and money
The survey received 47 comments about the difference between media relations and influencer marketing. Many of them pointed to
money and standards as the reason behind their answer.
Here is a representative sample of the viewpoints explaining the difference:
• “Although hits sometimes occur on mainstream media outlets via influencer marketing, by dint of its name this is a type of ‘paid’
promotion whereas media relations is still likely thought of as ‘earned.’ Although you do pay firms and individuals to ‘earn’ the
coverage, this is where the money flow stops.”
• “Good media relations is relationship based and earned. No $ changes hands. Influencer marketing is purchased.”
• “Influencer ‘marketing’ is paid – influencer communications is organic, and doesn't usually involve gatekeeper or editors. There’s
a need to clearly make the influencer mutually accountable – so the two sides both benefit. Influencer marketing is a transaction
– pay to play.”
• “Influencer marketing is riskier.”
• “Influencers aren't reporters. Most of them expect to be paid by us. There are more of them than there are reporters. And,
they're even less accountable if you're not paying them.”
• “Influencers don't have to pretend to be neutral. Allies and advocates, not just friends with pen-efits.”
• “Let's not Kardashian this too.”
• “While still based on developing relationships, influencer marketing – at least in my experience – tends to be more transactional
in nature.”

For now, social media is still worthwhile
PR and communications professions still see value in social media, for now. We did not ask about individual platforms – though if
we did we suspect we’d see varying levels of enthusiasm as brand visibility diminishes. On the whole, social media still seems
worthwhile.
Some of the comments we received around this question places this in context:
• “That is how much of our audience gets their news.”
• “Still helpful when building a network – but harder than ever to do so organically. Depends on the nature of the industry and your
place in it.”
• “To the degree that social platforms have made it difficult to be organic, you can argue the answer is ‘no.’ But if your brand has
an iconic status, people find you, hence making organic social media a centerpiece in your social strategy.”
• “If you are not part of the conversation or monitoring what people or competitors say about you, you are missing out.”
• “Social media platforms, specifically Facebook, are making it harder and harder for customers to see your organic posts.”

We kind of, sort of,
measure stuff
This is cause for concern.
Communications costs money and at
some point, someone is going to want
to know the value for the spend.
N = 223

Estimated site traffic
(i.e. Similar Web)
Number of 3rd party
mentions or placements
These represent the top 10 measurement
techniques – each with 30% or more of the
votes. There is more detail on the next page.
N = 221

These choices here
represent the gap in
measurement for many
organizations. It’s really
hard to tie the impact of
communications to a
change in behavior like
sales. It takes time and has
to be set up in advance.

29% or about one-third think their organizations do a
pretty good job of communications measurement.
46% believe their organization has work to do
on measurement.
N = 223

Correlation is not causation
Almost half of the respondents (48%) say they have measurement programs in place. That an additional 41% “sort of” measure is
understandable given the effects of communications – tying efforts to a direct result like a sale, vote or behavior change is hard. – is
notoriously difficult to measure
As one respondent wrote in to say, “Ours is a business where business usually comes in via referrals or business development
efforts. PR is the ‘icing on the cake’ but no PR on its own is going to convince a client to ask us to build a $100 million project.”
Add to the mix that different organizations value aspects of PR differently. You can always do more, so gather metrics and
anecdotes methodically, put a framework around linking objectives, efforts and outcomes – and continuously strive to refine and
improve the measurement process.
Here are some of the verbatim comments we received around measurement:
• “Impossible to draw a solid connection between our outcomes and business outcomes. We can only show alignment.”
• “They [measures] seem flimsy and not always well connected to the business.”
• “We measure the basic things, website traffic, intranet traffic, engagement – but we don't really do deeper dives which could be
beneficial, but are also more costly in some ways.”
• “We try to ‘bake’ the measurement into the plan – but clients are resistant to paying for it – probably because they are afraid of
being proven wrong. For our agency, we are very small and judge success by wins.”
• “People within organizations have their own agendas and this translates into what gets measured and how. Determining the
value of these focal points to the organization is sometimes suspect.”
• “There's a lot of competing info about what the right measures are. There are also so many more channels that developing the
right analytics set can be challenging.”

N = 223
Earlier we saw that budget was the
top challenge and that isn’t likely to
change. While about one-fifth (18%)
anticipate their budgets growing,
about one-third (29%) say they will
shrink. However, most expect their
budgets to remain flat.

Who does PR and communications report to?

Human Resources
Go peeps!
Legal /
General Counsel
Communicators are more likely to report
to the CEO than the CMO.
“No comment.”
N = 223

A variety of reporting structures
Where communications reports to the CEO, chances are it is a strategic business function, whereas those that report to marketing
are likely to fulfill a marcom role. One isn’t necessarily better than the other because every organization chooses what works best
for their needs.
However, who communications reports to will have an effect on strategies, tactics and measurement. For example, a CEO’s
communications metrics will be different than a CMO’s metrics. CEOs worry about employees, investors and boards of directors,
where many CMOs are focused on brand awareness, leads and sales.
No single reporting structure earned a majority of the votes. This demonstrates the wide variety of ways organizations integrate
communications and PR into the structure.
Some of the comments (47) we received around reporting included:
• “We report to the corporate VP for communications who reports to the CEO.”
• “I report to a Dean, because I work in higher ed, but we'll call her the CEO.”
• “CIO [chief information officer].”
• “Chief of staff.”
• “Superintendent/School Board.”
• “I am the Chief Communications Officer with a team of 15. I report directly to the president.”
• “The Corp comms function reports to marketing, but I am embedded in HR, report to HR and am funded by HR.

State of employment in PR and communications

Employed full-time and
NOT looking
Employed full-time but open to
new opportunities
Employed part-time and
NOT looking
Employed part-time but open to
new opportunities
In between gigs and
looking for work
In between gigs and
NOT looking for work
I’m retired. But I like
Ned and the JOTW
Despite the tight labor market, there
seems to be plenty of communications
talent willing and able to change jobs.
N = 223

The vendor landscape: which vendors are familiar and favorable

N = 218
It’s a little surprising to see awareness of
some of these vendors is so low. Awareness is
one objective PR solves very well, so it might
be a good idea to pump up the
communications budget. Also, if you aren’t
aware of these vendors, it’s a good idea to set
up some demos and see what technology can
do and how it has changed.

Cision owns four of the brands on
this list. The company recently
acquired Trendkite for $225 million.
Others included: EurekAlert,
Factiva, Nasdaq IR Insight,
Mention, Talkwalker, and
TargetSmart.

In their own words:
How would you explain what you do for a
living in simple terms?

How communicators describe what they do in their own words
Here is a representative sample of the answers we received.
• “Make sure that employees, customers and the market understand our company, its services and goals.”
• “I help our executives and sales leaders convince their audience why they should trust our firm to manage their assets.”
• “I make complicated things sound simple so people can understand them.”
• “I advocate on behalf of people with chronic conditions.”
• “I say that it's my job to discover stories and try to convince journalists to cover them for their outlets.”
• “I communicate with the public to enhance awareness about important issues, news campaigns, research and reports, by writing
key messages to communicate information effectively and consistently, both externally to press, partners and influencers, to help
spread the message and reach a wide audience, and internally with all colleagues for their communications.”
• “I help organizations and individuals improve their communication skills and activities and measure the results.”
• “I make sure our communications to employees are clear and that employees know what they need to know or do.”
• “I build mutually beneficial relationships with people and organizations that help us do our job, and explain our organization's
actions and plans to the public.”
• “Communication strategy that aligns organizations with targeted public to position products and services to attain goals and
objectives.”
• “I would explain the new Paid, Earned, Shared, Owned model and spend more time explaining earned media and how those
relationships generate coverage - hopefully.”
• “I help our leaders talk to our employees about our company by sharing stories about what we are doing, what's changing in our
business and where are headed, by recognizing employees and celebrating our successes.”

I’m a freelancer,
baby! Booya!
I’m an independent consultant.
I don’t use the word “freelancer.”
The majority of respondents are in-house
communicators. About one-fifth (22%) of
respondents have their own businesses,
whether or not they consider themselves a
freelancer or a consultant.
N = 223

Business to government
(B2G)
Government (including federal,
state and local)
Those that selected “other” cited higher
education, trade associations, or some
combination of B2B and B2C, for example.
N = 223

11-20
(I walked to school uphill when I was a kid.)
20+ years
(I walked to school uphill when I was a kid too...
and it was uphill both ways!)
This is a very senior group of
professionals. 90% report having
10 or more years of experience.
N = 223

97% of respondents are
employed in the U.S.
N = 223

Survey methodology
The survey was a joint effort between Ned’s Job of the Week (JOTW) and Sword and the Script Media, LLC. Subscribers to the
JOTW, a weekly newsletter and online community of communications professionals, were solicited to take the survey. Respondents
were asked to take the online survey through mentions in the weekly newsletter, dedicated email requests and on social media. In
total 223 respondents took the survey online from Friday, January 11, 2019 until Friday, February 9, 2019. Survey takers were
incentivized to take the survey with an offer to be entered for a chance to win one of three gift cards ($100, $50 and $25). The 2019
edition of the JOTW Communications Survey marks the second year this survey has been conducted.

Still here?
Subscribe to the JOTW by sending
an email to lundquist989@cs.com

“Effective communication is complicated:
Just because a message is sent doesn’t mean it’s been received.
Just because it’s been received doesn’t mean it’s been understood.
Just because it’s been understood doesn’t mean it will affect behavior.
Just because it affects behavior doesn’t mean it will affect it in the
manner in which we had hoped.”
Sword and the Script Media, LLC
www.swordandthescript.com

Good reading
• The 2018 JOTW Communications Survey
• Is Media Relations Getting Harder?
• 38 Things PR Professionals Wish they Could Get Senior Management to Understand about Corporate Communications
• New Study: Should Brands Take a Public Stand on Politics?
• 7 Media Statistics from an Annual Survey of Reporters that Gives PR a Glimpse of their Mindset
• PR and Content Marketing Insights from the Edelman Trust Barometer
• This is How the Sorry State of Media Relations Ends
• Amid the Rapid Pace of Change, These 5 Fundamentals of PR are Still Essential
• 3 Creative Ways Public Relations can Partner with Human Resources and Recruiting to Attract Talent
• 5 Proven Ways PR can Develop Client Media References in B2B Organizations
• Prerequisite to Magic: 6 Ways to Get More from Analyst Relations
• Dispelling 6 Myths PR Sometimes has about Content Marketing
• How Long Should a Blog Post be in 2019? [And Other Key Blogging Statistics You Should Know]
• A CMO Survey Shows Us How Classic 4Ps of Marketing Are Changing

The 2019 JOTW Communications Survey | Trends in Corporate Communications and Public Relations

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

What's hot

What's hot (20)

Similar to The 2019 JOTW Communications Survey | Trends in Corporate Communications and Public Relations

Similar to The 2019 JOTW Communications Survey | Trends in Corporate Communications and Public Relations (20)

More from Frank Strong

More from Frank Strong (6)

Recently uploaded

Recently uploaded (20)

The 2019 JOTW Communications Survey | Trends in Corporate Communications and Public Relations