Survey Results Are In: Here’s a Sneak Peak

Many of you may recall participating in Wallop’s PR survey that wrapped up in November. Well, after much analysis and sifting through survey responses, I wanted to share a few key points that stood out to me.

I was very happy to see an almost equal representation of agency-affiliated respondents (37%) and corporate professionals (42%). This was very helpful in learning the differences and similarities between the two groups. The final 21% of respondents classified themselves with titles such as independent consultants, non-profit agencies, analysis providers and interns.

Breakdown of Wallop! Survey Respondents

Which Best Describes Your PR Role?  

  • Agency Professional:  37%  
  • Corporate PR Professional:  42%  
  • Other:  21%

Out of all the respondents we learned that a majority of them are tracking their own PR coverage in-house.  But of the two groups, corporations are more likely to outsource their tracking.  Even though most were not out-sourcing, it was agreed by most that a major benefit  of out-sourcing media tracking would be to free up skilled team members to do more value-added PR work.

Results of Coverage Tracking Questions

  • 76% of coverage tracking for all organizations takes place in-house
  • 6% of agency respondents out-source tracking
  • 19% of corporate respondents out-source tracking
  • Over 75% of organizations across all levels feel that out-sourcing would free skilled team members to do more value-added PR work!

If so many agree that out-sourcing would be beneficial, why are so few doing it?  One of the main reasons is monetary.  Over half agreed that there would need to be a cost benefit before they would consider switching from in-house tracking.  So is it costly to out-source your tracking?  This seems to be an area that participants were divided on.  Some thought in-house was most costly, others cited external tracking as being the most costly and many thought they were about equal in cost.

Participant Thoughts on Costs

  • 58% of all respondents said:  “There would need to be a cost benefit over doing those tasks in-house.”

Which do you feel is a greater expense for an agency/corporate PR team?

  • 39% Internal cost of using skilled team member
  • 34% External cost of outsourcing
  • 27% Equal

After taking a close look at the responses regarding outsourcing, it occurs to me that there could be a perception that tracking in-house is more beneficial and less costly (or that some don’t really know.)  I believe it would be well worth it for PR teams to examine this more closely and weigh their options.  The initial price tag of outsourcing is an additional cost, but do the benefits outweigh the costs?  Consider what could happen if part of your PR staffs’ salaries didn’t have to go toward measurement.  What if they had more time to work on skilled PR work?  Could this result in more revenue?  This sounds like it could be the subject of another blog.  What do you think?

Thank you to all who participated in our survey.  I look forward to sharing more survey insights with you in the future.

Advertisements

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: