Trying to identify the most popular public relations KPIs for 2022? The use of public relations metrics by agencies and in-house teams to measure PR success has evolved over several years. We’ve got a treasure trove of global data on the most popular public relations metrics used in coverage reports and how this has changed over the course of six years.
While Releasd is a platform for creating what has traditionally been known as PR coverage reports, it can more broadly showcase all the modern activities undertaken by PR agencies and in-house teams. With over 100,000 reports created by PRs using Releasd, we have a pretty solid understanding of which KPIs professionals are consistently using to evaluate their work.
Our dataset consists of a mind-blowing 400,000 individual KPIs used by PRs on our platform – along with more than 1.5 million pieces of PR content. There is plenty to unpack here. Without wasting any time, let’s dive in!
How are PR pros really evaluating their work?
Activity-Based KPIs
Here are just a handful of activity-based KPI examples:
- Webinars confirmed
- Awards entries completed
- Press releases distributed
- Samples shared
- Blogs in progress
In 2015, only 19% of reports included one or more activity-based KPIs. Interestingly, in the last year, this has shot up to 77%. In the context of the global pandemic, this makes sense – as there are more webinars and virtual events than ever before. While activity-based KPIs may not evaluate business outcomes, they clearly illustrate the journey the PR industry has been on.
Output-Based KPIs
Here are some examples of output-based KPIs:
- Twitter posts
- Facebook posts
- Broadcast coverage
- National coverage
- Regional coverage
In terms of popularity, output-based KPIs have remained relatively consistent – and we believe this will continue. These metrics focus on the type of coverage and its volume. While these are not inherently useless as PR metrics, AMEC is keen for PRs to move beyond these. However, they do potentially show that a certain volume of content has reached the target audience.
Does AVE still lurk in the shadows?
18% of all reports created in 2015 featured AVE. In the last year, that number has dropped to only 6%. When we broke this down into agency use of the PR metric versus in-house, things got interesting. 34% of coverage reports featuring AVE were created by agencies. The remaining 66% of reports featuring the PR metric were created by in-house teams.
Why the discrepancy? Based on anecdotal evidence, we do not believe the challenge lies in educating PR professionals. They already understand and recognise why AVE is problematic. It’s often executives pressuring PR teams to include the ‘currency value’ of coverage in their PR reports. Naturally, it’s hard for the PR teams to push back against instructions from up top.
Out-Take-Based KPIs
Here are some examples of out-take-based KPIs:
- Video views
- Comments
- Clicks
Back in 2015, 87% of PR reports included one or more ‘out-take’ KPI. These have become a staple of PR reporting. In the last year, 94% of PR reports included one or more ‘out-take’ KPI. This type of metric has evolved over time. A few years ago, ‘out-take’ KPIs were primarily focused on reach and engagement at a high level. Now, with an abundance of data attached to any given URL, PRs can identify and include a range of ‘out-take’ KPIs in their reports.
Outcome & Impact-Based KPIs
‘Outcomes’ are truly meaningful actions taken by the target audience. ‘Impacts’ are business or social benefits. With the definitions out of the way, here are some examples of outcome and impact KPIs:
- Leads delivered to sales team
- Webinar registrations
- New commercial partners
- New product or service reviews
Our evidence shows there’s been some progress in this area over time – but there’s still a long way to go. Interestingly, the number of coverage reports featuring outcome and impact KPIs back in 2015 was negligible. In the last year, we paid particular attention to who received reports featuring outcome and impact KPIs. Here’s a breakdown of the recipients:
- Enterprise brands (9%)
- SME brands (16%)
- Individuals (1%)
Behind closed doors, the industry still seems to find this quite challenging. When we spoke to some of the Releasd customers that did include outcome and impact KPIs, there were three common elements at play:
- Strong awareness and understanding from all parties of what PR can and cannot do.
- A set of realistic expectations and targets were established from the outset.
- A clear sense of access to the right people and resources.
How should we evaluate PR success? (Closing Thoughts)
In this guide, we’ve explored the distance between recommendations and reality. Taking a step back, there’s a significant number of positives to unpack from our findings. The recent explosion of activity-based KPIs shows the industry is diversifying its offerings to clients. We feel this is a sign of strength for the industry, particularly against the backdrop of COVID-19.
Even small PRs have access to powerful and insightful metrics that were inaccessible just a few years ago. When it comes to demonstrating business outcomes and impacts in PR KPI reporting, our dataset reinforces our belief that there are still some challenges. Overall, we feel the industry is moving in the right direction in using PR metrics to measure PR success.
Tired of pulling inconsistent URL data from SimilarWeb to populate coverage reports with PR metrics? Having access to a robust coverage reporting tool has the potential to transform client relationships. It’s time to consider using our next-generation coverage reporting tool. Book a 15-minute Releasd demo today.
