Reviewing the ‘march to standards’ in public relations: a comparative analysis of four seminal measurement and evaluation initiatives

Buhmann, A; Macnamara, J; Zerfass, A

Reviewing the ‘march to standards’ in public relations: a comparative analysis of four seminal measurement and evaluation initiatives

Buhmann, A Macnamara, J

Zerfass, A

Permalink

Publication Type:: Journal Article
Citation:: Public Relations Review, 2019, 45 (4)
Issue Date:: 2019-11-01

Open Access

Copyright Clearance Process

Recently Added
In Progress
Open Access

This item is open access.

The embargo period expires on 2 Aug 2022

Adobe PDF

Download Acceptable ManuscriptAdobe PDF (745.95 kB)

View on publisher's site

View statistics

Full metadata record

Field	Value	Language
dc.contributor.author	Buhmann, A	en_US
dc.contributor.author	Macnamara, J https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1387-3882	en_US
dc.contributor.author	Zerfass, A	en_US
dc.date.issued	2019-11-01	en_US
dc.identifier.citation	Public Relations Review, 2019, 45 (4)	en_US
dc.identifier.issn	0363-8111	en_US
dc.identifier.uri	http://hdl.handle.net/10453/135871
dc.description.abstract	© 2019 The Authors To many, development and adoption of professional standards for measurement and evaluation (M&E) is one of the most promising approaches for advancing public relations practice. In recent years, there has been a surge in efforts to develop standards for M&E in different parts of the world. Prominent examples of this include standard terminologies, metrics, principles for best practice in the field, and evaluation frameworks. Regardless of their alleged importance, however, the acceptance and application of such M&E standards in the practice varies significantly. To better understand the process by which standards in this field are developed and adopted, this article draws on recent concepts from organization studies (cf. Slager, Gond, & Moon, 2012) to analyze the trajectories of four seminal standards attempts: The Barcelona Principles and the AMEC Integrated Evaluation Framework on an international level, the DPRG/ICV Framework used in German-speaking countries, and the GCS Framework in the United Kingdom. The article reveals, by way of an interpretive qualitative approach, the various strategies undertaken to a) develop common sets of terms and rules, b) engage relevant actors in the design, promotion, and implementation of proposed standards, and c) to reinforcing standards symbolically.	en_US
dc.relation.ispartof	Public Relations Review	en_US
dc.relation.isbasedon	10.1016/j.pubrev.2019.101825	en_US
dc.rights	info:eu-repo/semantics/embargoedAccess
dc.subject.classification	Communication & Media Studies	en_US
dc.title	Reviewing the ‘march to standards’ in public relations: a comparative analysis of four seminal measurement and evaluation initiatives	en_US
dc.type	Journal Article
utslib.citation.volume	4	en_US
utslib.citation.volume	45	en_US
utslib.for	2001 Communication and Media Studies	en_US
utslib.for	15 Commerce, Management, Tourism and Services	en_US
utslib.for	19 Studies in Creative Arts and Writing	en_US
utslib.for	20 Language, Communication and Culture	en_US
pubs.embargo.period	Not known	en_US
pubs.organisational-group	/University of Technology Sydney
pubs.organisational-group	/University of Technology Sydney/Faculty of Science
pubs.organisational-group	/University of Technology Sydney/Strength - CPCE - Centre for Creative Practices and the Cultural Economy
utslib.copyright.status	open_access	*
utslib.copyright.embargo	2022-08-02T00:00:00+1000
pubs.issue	4	en_US
pubs.publication-status	Published	en_US
pubs.volume	45	en_US

Abstract:

© 2019 The Authors To many, development and adoption of professional standards for measurement and evaluation (M&E) is one of the most promising approaches for advancing public relations practice. In recent years, there has been a surge in efforts to develop standards for M&E in different parts of the world. Prominent examples of this include standard terminologies, metrics, principles for best practice in the field, and evaluation frameworks. Regardless of their alleged importance, however, the acceptance and application of such M&E standards in the practice varies significantly. To better understand the process by which standards in this field are developed and adopted, this article draws on recent concepts from organization studies (cf. Slager, Gond, & Moon, 2012) to analyze the trajectories of four seminal standards attempts: The Barcelona Principles and the AMEC Integrated Evaluation Framework on an international level, the DPRG/ICV Framework used in German-speaking countries, and the GCS Framework in the United Kingdom. The article reveals, by way of an interpretive qualitative approach, the various strategies undertaken to a) develop common sets of terms and rules, b) engage relevant actors in the design, promotion, and implementation of proposed standards, and c) to reinforcing standards symbolically.

Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item:

http://hdl.handle.net/10453/135871