Emerging international standards for measurement and evaluation of public relations: A critical analysis

Macnamara, J

Emerging international standards for measurement and evaluation of public relations: A critical analysis

Macnamara, J

Permalink

Publication Type:: Journal Article
Citation:: Public Relations Inquiry, 2014, 3 (1), pp. 7 - 29
Issue Date:: 2014-01-01

Open Access

Copyright Clearance Process

Recently Added
In Progress
Open Access

This item is open access.

Adobe PDF

Download Accepted Manuscript VersionAdobe PDF (164.21 kB)

View on publisher's site

View statistics

Full metadata record

Field	Value	Language
dc.contributor.author	Macnamara, J https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1387-3882	en_US
dc.date.issued	2014-01-01	en_US
dc.identifier.citation	Public Relations Inquiry, 2014, 3 (1), pp. 7 - 29	en_US
dc.identifier.issn	2046-147X	en_US
dc.identifier.uri	http://hdl.handle.net/10453/30560
dc.description.abstract	© The Author(s) 2014. After 30 years of modest progress in measurement and evaluation of public relations since Jim Grunig uttered his cri de coeur about lack of evaluation, a flurry of activity has occurred in the past few years. A new momentum started with the Barcelona Declaration of Measurement Principles in 2010. In 2011, a Coalition for Public Relations Research Standards was formed by three leading international PR and research organizations. In 2012, the group expanded to 11 professional associations which worked in collaboration with advertising and media organizations and companies representing employer perspectives to publish a number of definitions and standards for measurement and evaluation in 2012 and 2013. Concurrently, there have been renewed debates about measurement concepts such as Return on Investment (ROI). As the industry reaches the 20th anniversary of the International Public Relations Association ‘Gold Paper on Evaluation’ published in 1994, it appears that progress is at last being made. This paper welcomes and commends initiatives taken, but presents a critical analysis that reveals continuing gaps and problematic issues to address in the latest efforts to measure the value of PR and a substantial gap between theory and practice.	en_US
dc.relation.ispartof	Public Relations Inquiry	en_US
dc.relation.isbasedon	10.1177/2046147X14521199	en_US
dc.title	Emerging international standards for measurement and evaluation of public relations: A critical analysis	en_US
dc.type	Journal Article
utslib.citation.volume	1	en_US
utslib.citation.volume	3	en_US
utslib.for	2001 Communication and Media Studies	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
pubs.issue	1	en_US
pubs.publication-status	Published	en_US
pubs.volume	3	en_US

Abstract:

© The Author(s) 2014. After 30 years of modest progress in measurement and evaluation of public relations since Jim Grunig uttered his cri de coeur about lack of evaluation, a flurry of activity has occurred in the past few years. A new momentum started with the Barcelona Declaration of Measurement Principles in 2010. In 2011, a Coalition for Public Relations Research Standards was formed by three leading international PR and research organizations. In 2012, the group expanded to 11 professional associations which worked in collaboration with advertising and media organizations and companies representing employer perspectives to publish a number of definitions and standards for measurement and evaluation in 2012 and 2013. Concurrently, there have been renewed debates about measurement concepts such as Return on Investment (ROI). As the industry reaches the 20th anniversary of the International Public Relations Association ‘Gold Paper on Evaluation’ published in 1994, it appears that progress is at last being made. This paper welcomes and commends initiatives taken, but presents a critical analysis that reveals continuing gaps and problematic issues to address in the latest efforts to measure the value of PR and a substantial gap between theory and practice.

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

http://hdl.handle.net/10453/30560