#1Generally GAP Accepted Practices Report 1: Corporate Findings GAP VIII: Eighth Communication and Public Relations Generally Accepted Practices Study (Q4 2013 data) USC Annenberg School for Communication and Journalism Strategic Communication and Public Relations Center Draft 6/12/14#2GAP Generally Accepted Practices About the SCPRC ▪ Launched 2002 USC Annenberg ■ Mission: Advance the study, practice and value of the communication/public relations function Serve as COM/PR Think Tank • Conduct applied research in partnership with other like-minded . . organizations Help bridge the academic/practitioner gap Inform/drive PR/COM curricula 2 Strategic Communication and Public Relations Center#33 Generally GAP Accepted Practices About the SCPRC: Partners and Supporters ☐ Founding Partners Annenberg Foundation ■ AT&T ■ Avery Dennison ■ Council of PR Firms ■ GM ■ Raytheon ■ SC Johnson Co. ■ Weber Shandwick USC Annenberg Subsequent Partners ■ Home Depot ■ HP ■ Ketchum ■ Nissan ■ Occidental Petroleum Toyota ■ Waggener Edstrom ■ Edelman Strategic Communication and Public Relations Center#4Generally GAP Accepted Practices About GAP: Background and Goals Compiled and published biennially by SCPRC • USC Annenberg Think tank, drive curricula, bridge the academy/professional gap ■ 8 studies over 10 years ■ The largest, most comprehensive study of its type ■ A free service to the profession and the academy ■ Goals • Track and analyze the interrelationships between PR/Communication and organizational mission, strategy, character, management, etc. • Provide CCOS with: o Actionable data on key management issues • Key trends Best Practices • Meet the need for a global framework via partnership with Global Alliance for Public Relations and Communication Management 4 Strategic Communication and Public Relations Center#55 LO Generally GAP Accepted Practices About GAP: Going Global USC Annenberg ■ Global framework being built through partnership with Global Alliance for Public Relations and Communication Management ■ GAP-like studies underway in Australia, Brazil, Canada, South Africa, New Zealand ■ Local partners: Field studies and analyze local data ■ SCPRC: Analyze and report on combined meta data, serve as guide and counselor ■ Results at Global Communication Forum, Madrid, September Strategic Communication and Public Relations Center#6GAP Generally Accepted Practices GAP VIII: The Team Jerry Swerling, M.A. Director, PR Studies Director SCPRC Kjerstin Thorson, Ph.D. Assistant Professor Research Director SCPRC USC Annenberg Burghardt Tenderich, Ph.D. Associate Professor Associate Director SCPRC Aimei Yang, Ph.D. Assistant Professor USC Annenberg School for Communication and Journalism Zongchao (Cathy) Li PhD in Strategic Communication ('15) University of Miami. Emily Gee, Emily Savastano Masters in Strategic Public Relations USC Annenberg ('14/'15) In Consultation With David Michaelson, Ph.D., Managing Director, Teneo Strategy Forrest Anderson, MBA, Communications Research and Strategy Consultant 6 Strategic Communication and Public Relations Center#77 Generally GAP Accepted Practices GAP VIII: Professional Support USC Annenberg GAP VIII has been supported by these leading professional organizations: Arthur Wage The Arthur W. Page Society, the ARTHUR W. PAGE SOCIETY IPR Institute for Public Relations FOUNDED 1956 400+ members of which are generally the heads of communication in major U.S. organizations Institute for Public Relations (IPR), which serves as research partner, contributing its expertise in researching the science underlying the practice of communication IABC International Association of PRSA Public Relations Society of America Business Communicators (IABC), with its 13,000 member global network of communicators Public Relations Society of America (PRSA) with its 21,000 members Strategic Communication and Public Relations Center#8Generally GAP Accepted Practices GAP VIII: Sample, Methodology, Etc. USC Annenberg More content re. role of the function in culture, values, strategy, etc. More emphasis on large (vs. very small) organizations Believed to be the largest and most comprehensive ongoing study of senior- level PR/Comm practitioners in the US Sampled from combined, multiple lists of senior-level practitioners • Each received multiple invitations to participate Tightly screened for status, level of responsibility, etc. Online survey, Q4 2013; 1000+ responses; 347 qualified participants Believed to be representative of the broad population of senior practitioners. Note 1: Direct Y/Y comparisons may be problematic due to changes in sample. Nonetheless, cumulative findings are generally consistent and compelling, particularly with regard to the relationships between specific practices and beliefs, and specific successful outcomes. Note 2: While correlation does not prove causality consistent patterns across multiple studies are highly compelling and should not be dismissed. Note 3: To be deemed statistically valid, combinations of variables were tested to achieve a strength (coefficient, or r² ) having a degree of significance (probability, or p) of .05 or greater. For more information email [email protected]. Strategic Communication and Public Relations Center 8 00#9Generally GAP Accepted Practices USC Annenberg Respondents' Roles in their Organizations (Screened) Senior communication professional responsible for operating unit 9% Most senior internal communication professional 2% Communication Professional reporting to a senior communication executive 6% Report directly to most senior communication professional 21% 9 Strategic Communication and Public Relations Center Most senior .communication professional in organization 62%#1010 Generally GAP Accepted Practices Respondents' Organizational Settings USC Annenberg Non-profit 20% Other 13% Government Agency 15% Private 20% Strategic Communication and Public Relations Center Public 32%#1111 Generally GAP Accepted Practices Respondents' Company Size by Revenue Public Companies USC Annenberg Private Companies $40B +, <$1B, 12% 19% $20B - $40B, 14% $10B - $1B - $4.99B $19.99, 15% $5B - $9.99B 23% " 17% Strategic Communication and Public Relations Center >$2.5B, 36% <$2.5B, 64%#1212 USC Annenberg Generally GAP Accepted Practices Respondents' Organizations: Geographic Scope Global (home country plus more than four others) 36% U.S. local or regional 36% Multinational (home country plus up to four others) 9% U.S. National 19% Strategic Communication and Public Relations Center U.S. Local or Regional: Down from 42% in GAP VII Global or Multinational: Up from 37% in GAP VII#1313 Generally GAP Accepted Practices USC Annenberg Respondents' Areas and Scope of Responsibility 100% 80% 60% 46.60% 37.10% 40% 20% 0% 11.80% 3.40% 1.10% Enterprise-wide responsibility for MARCOM, PR/COM, etc. Enterprise-wide responsibility for PR/COM but not MARCOM Corporate COM responsibility only PR/COM within a PR/COM within a business unit business unit (specific products, (specific geography) services or brands) Strategic Communication and Public Relations Center#14Generally GAP Accepted Practices Respondents' Academic Degrees Marketing, 7% USC Annenberg Communication, 30% Journalism, 29% Public Relations, 21% Business Administration, 13% 80%: Degree in Journalism, PR or Communication; 75% in GAP VII 14 Strategic Communication and Public Relations Center#15Generally GAP Accepted Practices GAP VIII: Corporate Data - Topics by Section USC Annenberg 1. Roles, Perceptions and Expectations of the COM/PR Function 2. Organizational Integration 3. Organization and Reporting 4. Budgets 5. Staffing 6. 7. 8. Functions and Responsibilities The Media Environment Measurement and Evaluation 9. Agency Relationships 10. Excellence and Best Practices 15 Strategic Communication and Public Relations Center#1616 O GAP VIII, Section 1 Roles, Perceptions and Expectations of the COM/PR Function Strategic Communication and Public Relations Center#1717 Generally GAP Accepted Practices USC Annenberg PR/COM is Involved in Organizational Strategic Planning (Internal Credibility Factor 1) 100% 38.50% 80% 60% 40% 20% 46.40% 15.10% 0% Strongly Agree ■Neither Agree nor Disagree About 40% report that PR/Com actively participates in corporate strategic planning, while over 45% view this as grey area. Over 15% report they are uninvolved in such planning. ■Strongly Disagree Actively participates in long- term, organization-wide strategic planning Strategic Communication and Public Relations Center Measured on a 7-point Scale. 'Strongly agree' equals 1/2. 'Strongly disagree' equals 6/7.#18100% Generally GAP Accepted Practices USC Annenberg PR/COM Recommendations are Taken Seriously by Senior Management (Internal Credibility Factor 2) 18 80% 59.20% Strongly Agree 60% ■Neutral 40% Strongly 31.90% Disagree 20% Measured on a 7-point Scale. 'Strongly agree' 0% 8.90% GAP VIII equals 1/2. 'Strongly disagree' equals 6/7. Strategic Communication and Public Relations Center#19100% GAP Generally Accepted Practices USC Annenberg C-Suite Believes that PR/COM Contributes to Financial Success (Internal Credibility Factor 3) 80% 44.20% Strongly Agree 60% ■Neutral 40% ■Strongly 49.70% Disagree 20% 19 6.10% 0% GAP VIII Strategic Communication and Public Relations Center Measured on a 7-point scale. 'Strongly agree' equals 6/7. 'Strongly disagree' equals 1/2.#20Generally GAP Accepted Practices USC Annenberg Important Because All Three Internal Credibility Factors Correlate With Other Factors that are Beneficial to the PR/COM Function and the Organization, both Internally and Externally Confident PRACTICES AND BELIEF CORRELATIONS Role in strategic planning Recommendations taken seriously Contribution to financial success XXXXXXXX XXXXXX XXX X X X X X XXXX XXX X X X X X 20 Strategic Communication and Public Relations Center#2121 Generally GAP Accepted Practices USC Annenberg Role in Defining Identity, Values, Business Strategy, etc: The Belief/Adoption Gap (Aspirational Rather than Actual) % ADOPTION (YES) % STRONGLY AGREE (6-7) PR/COM should play a key role in defining identity and core values. 40.1% PR/COM should play a key role in assuring adherence to identity and core values. 82% 54% PR/COM's primary role is to serve as an advocate in support of organizational goals. PR/COM should play a key role in defining overall business strategy. 13% 45% 95% 65% PR/COM's primary role is to serve as mediator between the org. and its stakeholders. 78% Higher scores for Adoption than Agreement may indicate disagreement with terminology, i.e. "We have adopted this practice but I don't see it as our 'primary' role.". 70% 30% PR/COM's primary role is to formulate, rather than to communicate, policy. 81% 75% Strategic Communication and Public Relations Center#2222 Generally GAP Accepted Practices USC Annenberg Important because adoption of those functions and beliefs correlates with other factors that are beneficial to the PR/COM function and the organization, both internally and externally PRACTICES AND BELIEFS CORRELATIONS Mean (1-7) PR/COM should play a key role in assuring adherence to identity and core values. 6.09 % Strongly Agree % Adoption Successful Good External Reputation Innovative Flexible Democratic People-First Ethical Proactive Long-Term Strategic Aggressive Confident 78.3% 54.2% XXXXXXXXXXXX PR/COM should play a key role in defining overall business strategy. 5.24 45.20% 13.60% X X X X X X X X PR/COM should play a key role serving as a mediator between the organization and its stakeholders. 4.48 30.30% 70.20% X X X X X X PR/COM should play a key role in defining organizational identity and core values. 6.15 81.60% 40.10% X X X X X X X X PR/COM should play a key role as advocate in support of 5.65 64.90% 95.70% ☑ X X X X X organizational goals. *Correlations apply to companies adopting specific practices, beliefs, etc. Strategic Communication and Public Relations Center ☑#23Generally GAP Accepted Practices USC Annenberg Other Beliefs and Practices that Correlate with Beneficial Factors Mean (1-7) % Strongly Agree Successful Good External Reputation Innovative Flexible Democratic People-First Ethical Proactive Long-Term Strategic Aggressive Confident PRACTICES AND BELIEFS We are making increasing use of audience research Senior management is comfortable with (reduced) degree of control over messaging. There is a need for COM/PR pro's who can interpret data and use it to plan campaigns. We use social media to engage in conversations with members of the public COM/PR's responsibility is to develop and maintain org. voice across all channels. We are tracking and analyzing the conversations stakeholders are having among themselves. 4.01 18.90% XXXXXX 4.35 18.90% X X X X X 5.83 68.00% X 4.93 49.10% X X X X X 5.69 68.00% 3.98 22.90% ☑ X X X ☑ X X X XXX ☑ X X X X X Social media pervade every aspect of our business. 3.52 17.10% XXXX X X X 23 Strategic Communication and Public Relations Center#2424 Generally GAP Accepted Practices USC Annenberg A role/belief that correlates with negative factors PRACTICES AND BELIEF CORRELATIONS Senior management expects our primary focus to be on traditional media relations Mean (1-7) % Strongly Agree 4.08 23.50% X Strategic Communication and Public Relations Center Rigid Х Conservative ☑ Poor External Reputation#2525 O GAP VIII, Section 2 Organizational Integration and Coordination Strategic Communication and Public Relations Center#26Generally GAP Accepted Practices USC Annenberg Intra-Functional Integration/Coordination Among Communication Functions 100% 80% 53% Very Coordinated 65.70% 60% 40% ■Neither Very Coordinated nor Very Uncoordinated 36.80% ■Very Uncoordinated 20% 26.10% 8.10% 10.30% 0% Public Private ■ Solid integration/coordination among COM functions 26 Strategic Communication and Public Relations Center#27Generally GAP Accepted Practices USC Annenberg Inter-Departmental Integration/Coordination Between COM/PR and Marketing 100% 80% 39% 44% 60% 40% 20% Very Coordinated Neither Uncoordinated nor Coordinated Very Uncoordinated 53% 49% 8% 7% 0% Public Private Integration and coordination between the PR department and marketing have much room for improvement 27 Strategic Communication and Public Relations Center#28Generally GAP Accepted Practices USC Annenberg Inter-Departmental Integration/Coordination Between COM/PR and Other Corporate Functions 100% 80% 41.20% 52.20% 60% Very Coordinated Neither Uncoordinated 40% 50% nor Coordinated ■Very Uncoordinated 43.20% 20% 4.50% 8.90% 0% Public Private Integration and coordination between the PR department and other corporate functions have much room for improvement. 28 Strategic Communication and Public Relations Center#29Generally GAP Accepted Practices USC Annenberg A Culture of Integration/Coordination: All Three Measures 60.0% 50.0% 40.0% 30.0% 20.0% 10.0% 54.7% 0.0% Cultural of integration 4.5% No cultural of integration Culture of integration defined as Top 3 Box on all three integration measures. 54.7% of corporations report all three kinds of integration, i.e. a "Culture of Integration/Collaboration" 4.5% are not integrated at all. 29 Strategic Communication and Public Relations Center#3030 7.00 6.00 5.00 4.00 3.00 2.00 1.00 Generally GAP Accepted Practices USC Annenberg The Benefits of Integration/Coordination Among COM/PR Functions 5.41 5.83 5.66 5.73 5.45 0.00 Good external reputation Successful 5.13 3.13 3.20 2.79 Recommendations taken seriously ■Unintegrated 5.42 Organizations where the COM/PR functions are better integrated and coordinated are much more likely to score high on internal success factors, suggesting that the function has a more valued role internally. BUT, such integrated organizations are no more likely than unintegrated to score high on external success factors, suggesting that such integration does not, in itself, make a difference re. reputation, etc. Role is strategic planning Contributes to financial success Integrated Strategic Communication and Public Relations Center#3131 3 2 1 Generally GAP Accepted Practices USC Annenberg The Benefits of Integration/Coordination Between COM/PR and Marketing от 5 4 7 ■Unintegrated department Integrated department 5.94 5.97 6 5.84 5.74 5.66 4.19 5.01 3.97 3.63 5.51 0 Good external reputation Successful Recommendations taken seriously Role in strategic planning Contributes to financial success Strategic Communication and Public Relations Center Organizations where the COM/PR function is better integrated and coordinated with Marketing are much more likely to score high on internal success factors, suggesting that the function has a more valued role internally. BUT, such integrated organizations are no more likely than unintegrated to score high on external success factors, suggesting that such integration does not, in itself, make a difference re. reputation, etc.#3232 Generally GAP Accepted Practices USC Annenberg The Benefits of Integration/Coordination Between COM/PR and Other Corporate Functions (Finance, Law, Ops, etc.) 7 5 4 3 2 1 ■Unintegrated department 5.93 Integrated department 5.81 5.73 5.71 5.38 3.33 2.86 5.06 3.71 5.33 Organizations where the COM/PR function is better integrated and coordinated with other corporate functions are much more likely to score high on internal success factors, suggesting that the function has a more valued role internally. BUT, such integrated organizations are no more likely than unintegrated to score high on external success factors, suggesting that such integration does not, in itself, make a difference re. reputation, etc. 0 Good external reputation Successful Recommendations taken seriously Role in strategic planning Contributes to financial success Strategic Communication and Public Relations Center#33Generally GAP Accepted Practices USC Annenberg The Benefits of a Culture of Integration/Coordination 7 6 5.99 6 5.73 5.78 5.64 5 LO 4 33 3 2 1 4.68 5.63 5.29 4.47 Organizations where there is a Culture of Integration and Coordination are much more likely to score high on internal success factors, suggesting that the function has a more valued role internally. BUT, such integrated organizations are no more likely than unintegrated to score high on external success factors, suggesting that such integration does not, in itself, make a difference re. reputation, etc. 3.86 ■Unintegrated department 0 Good external reputation Successful Recommendations taken seriously Role in strategic planning Contributes to financial success ■Integrated department Strategic Communication and Public Relations Center#3434 GAP Accepted Practices Generally USC Annenberg ▪ DATA BEG THIS QUESTION: Why are all forms of collaboration associated with three powerful internal success factors, but no more likely to be associated with important external success factors (e.g. good external reputation)? WHEN CONSIDERING THE ANSWER REMEMBER THIS: Per the following slide, all three internal success factors associated with greater internal collaboration are themselves associated with multiple internal AND EXTERNAL success factors. Strategic Communication and Public Relations Center#35GAP Generally Accepted Practices USC Annenberg All three internal success factors associated with higher levels of integration/collaboration correlate with other factors that are beneficial to the PR/COM function and the organization, both internally and externally Successful Good External Reputation Innovative Flexible Democratic People-First Ethical Proactive Long- Term/Strategic Aggressive Confident PRACTICES AND BELIEF CORRELATIONS Role in strategic planning X X X X X X X X X X X Recommendations taken seriously X X X X X X X X X X X Contribution to financial success X X X X X X X X X X X 35 Strategic Communication and Public Relations Center#36Generally GAP Accepted Practices USC Annenberg HYPOTHESIS: A Process for Optimizing the CCO Role and the Communication Function In many organizations, championing coordination/collaboration (i.e. fostering a culture of integration/collaboration) is an effective strategy for creating an internal environment in which the PR/COM function can be optimized... • Such optimization can lead to an enhanced role in organizational planning, internal credibility for the function, etc... That enhanced role leads to greater influence on external factors such as Success, External Reputation, etc. 36 Strategic Communication and Public Relations Center#3737 GAP VIII, Section 3 Organization and Reporting Strategic Communication and Public Relations Center#38100% 80% Generally GAP Accepted Practices USC Annenberg Organization and Reporting: Solid Reporting Lines 60% 43% 40% 20% 26% 0% 3% CEO/President Operations 3% Finance Marketing HR 7.3% 1% 6% 2% 38 Strategic Communication and Public Relations Center Sales Legal Investor Relations Strategic Planning Region Operating Unit 3% 0% 1%#39100% Generally GAP Accepted Practices USC Annenberg Organization and Reporting: Dotted Reporting Lines 80% 60% 43% 40% 31% 31% 35% 20% 0% CEO/President 39 Operations Finance Marketing HR 23% 27% 28% Strategic Communication and Public Relations Center Sales Legal Investor Relations Strategic Planning Region Operating Unit 27% 27% 29% 31%#40Generally GAP Accepted Practices USC Annenberg Organization and Reporting: The Benefits of C-Suite Access 7 6 5.6 5 4 3 2 1 0 4.87 4.19 3.3 5.14 4.88 C-Suite Access No C-Suite Access Recommendations Taken Seriously Role in Strategic Planning Contributes to Financial Success ■ As has been the case in all eight GAP Studies the value of a C-Suite reporting line cannot be overstated. 40 Strategic Communication and Public Relations Center#41Generally GAP Accepted Practices Factoids: Organization and Reporting USC Annenberg 97% of COM/PR departments have a single solid reporting line 86% have a line (solid or dotted) to the C-Suite C-Suite reporting line (dotted or solid) seen as much more appropriate than others (score of 5.0 on a 7 point scale vs. 3.3; Marketing: 4.04) The key is access, not solid vs. dotted line 49% strongly agreed that their reporting line is appropriate 21% strongly disagreed. 50% have more than one dotted reporting line Multiple reporting lines don't diminish perceived appropriateness 41 Strategic Communication and Public Relations Center#4242 Generally GAP Accepted Practices USC Annenberg Factoids: The Relationship Between Reporting Line and Integration/Coordination Respondents with access to the C-Suite (solid or dotted line) report: • ● • A higher level of intra-departmental integration/coordination than those who do not (5.5 vs. 5.15) A higher level of integration/coordination with marketing than those who do not (5.1 vs. 4.4) A higher level of integration/coordination with other corporate functions than those who do not (5.3 vs. 4.8) ■ Bottom line: · • • C-Suite access is associated with higher levels of internal collaboration Higher levels of internal collaboration are associated with higher levels of internal influence, credibility, etc. Higher levels of internal influence, credibility etc. better enable PR/Comm to influence reputation, success, etc. Strategic Communication and Public Relations Center#4343 GAP VIII, Section 4 Budgets Strategic Communication and Public Relations Center#4444 $ Millions Generally GAP Accepted Practices USC Annenberg Budgets: Public Companies, 2013 vs. 2012 by Self-report $60.00 $50.00 $40.00 $30.00 $20.00 5.47% 1.46% $55.10 4.06% $23.69 $10.00 $16.34 3.84% 0.67% $9.43 $2.20 $2.78 $0.00 Less than $1B $1B-$4.99B $5B-$9.99B $10B-$19.99B $20B-$40B $40B + -2.58% -$10.00 Mean budget 2013 ■Yearly budget change 2012-2013 Strategic Communication and Public Relations Center#4545 $ Millions Generally GAP Accepted Practices USC Annenberg Budgets: Public Companies, 2014 vs. 2013 by Self-report $60.00 $50.00 $40.00 $30.00 $20.00 5.79% $55.10 1.18% $23.69 $10.00 $16.34 9.84% $0.00 $2.20 Less than $1B 0.00% $2.78 $1B-$4.99B $9.43 $5B-$9.99B $10B-$19.99B $20B-$40B $40B + -6.50% -1.00% -$10.00 Mean budget 2013 Yearly budget change 2013-2014 Strategic Communication and Public Relations Center#4646 Generally GAP Accepted Practices USC Annenberg Budgets: 2014 Expectations by Scope of Respondents' Responsibilities U.S. local or regional U.S. national Multi-national Global Scope: Your Responsibilities % Expecting Budget Increases 42.9% Strategic Communication and Public Relations Center 50.0% 58.3% 46.3%#4747 Generally GAP Accepted Practices Budgets: Allocations USC Annenberg 100% 80% 60% 49% 40% 31% 20% 14% 6% 0% Staff Salaries and Related Costs PR/Communication Measurement & Evaluation Outside Agency Fees PR/Communication Program Execution Strategic Communication and Public Relations Center#48GAP Accepted Practices Generally USC Annenberg Budgets: PR:GR Comparison, Large Public Companies, 2013 vs. 2011 (PR/COM Budget as % of Gross Revenue) 0.30% 0.25% 0.20% 0.15% 0.10% 0.06% 0.05% 0.04% 0.00% 2011 2013 48 Strategic Communication and Public Relations Center#4949 Generally GAP Accepted Practices Budgets: Expectations, 2014 vs. 2013 USC Annenberg 100% 80% 60% 40% 40% 20% 64% 25% 16% 35% 19% 0% Expect an Increase Expect No Change Expect a Decrease Public Private Strategic Communication and Public Relations Center#5050 GAP VIII, Section 5 Staffing Strategic Communication and Public Relations Center#5151 Generally GAP Accepted Practices Staffing: All Companies, Q4 2013 140 120 100 80 60 40 20 7 Average staff size 21 18 USC Annenberg 53 47 127 0 Less than $1B $1B-$4.99B $5B-$9.99B $10B-$19.99B $20B-$40B $40B + Strategic Communication and Public Relations Center#5252 Generally GAP Accepted Practices USC Annenberg Staffing: All Companies, Change, 12 Months Prior Average percentage change 7.00% 5.00% 3.00% 1.00% 4.81% 3.94% 1.31% 7.14% Less than $1B $1B-$4.99B $5B-$9.99B $10B-$19.99B $20B-$40B $40B -1.00% -3.00% -0.15% Strategic Communication and Public Relations Center -2.75%#5353 Generally GAP Accepted Practices USC Annenberg Staffing: All Companies, Change, 12 Months Ahead Average percentage change 12.00% 10.00% 8.00% 6.00% 10.52% 3.89% 4.00% 2.00% 4.59% 1.79% 1.08% 0.07% 0.00% Less than $1B $1B-$4.99B $5B-$9.99B $10B-$19.99B $20B-$40B $40B + Strategic Communication and Public Relations Center#54Generally GAP Accepted Practices USC Annenberg Staffing: 12 Month Expectations, by Geographic Scope Expect Increase Expect Decrease No Change Total Geographic Scope % N % N % N U.S. local or regional 40.0% 8 45.0% 9 15.0% 3 N 20 U.S. national 58.8% 20 17.6% 6 23.5% 8 34 Multi-national 57.1% 12 33.3% 7 9.5% 2 24 21 Global 45.7% 43 28.7% 27 25.5% 24 94 54 Strategic Communication and Public Relations Center#55Generally GAP Accepted Practices USC Annenberg Staffing: 12 Month Expectations, by Industry Category (For informational purposes only except where total N may be adequate, i.e. 8+) Expect Increase Expect Decrease No Change Total Industry Communications Construction College or University Energy/Natural Resources % N 100.0% 2 33.3% 100.0% % N % N N 0% 0 0% 0 2 2 16.7% 1 50.0% 3 6 1 0 0 1 62.5% 5 12.5% 1 25.0% 2 8 Entertainment Finance: Banking 25.0% 62.5% 1 25.0% 1 50.0% 2 4 5 25.0% 2 12.5% 1 8 Finance: Insurance (excluding health insurance) 55.6% 5 33.3% 3 11.1% 1 9 Finance: Brokerage and other services 40.0% 2 40.0% 2 20.0% 1 5 Government/Public Administration 0% 0 100% 2 0% 0 2 Healthcare: Providers 50.0% 3 16.7% 1 33.3% 2 6 Healthcare: Payers (health insurance, etc.) 0% 0 0% 0 100% 1 1 Healthcare: Manufacturers (pharma, device, etc.) 33.3% 3 22.2% 2 44.4% 4 Manufacturing or marketing: Consumer products 41.7% 5 16.7% 2 41.7% 5 12 Manufacturing or marketing: B2B products 54.5% 12 45.5% 10 0% 0 22 Media 80.0% 4 20.0% 1 0% 0 5 Professional services (accounting, architecture, consulting, etc.) 50.0% 8 25.0% 4 25.0% 4 16 Retailing (restaurants, consumer products, etc.) 50.0% 4 37.5% 3 12.5% 1 8 Technology 44.4% 12 33.3% 9 22.2% 6 27 Tourism/Travel 66.7% 2 33.3% 1 0 3 Transportation/Shipping 75.0% 6 12.5% 1 12.5% 1 8 Utility-Public 20.0% 1 40.0% 2 40.0% 2 5 55 Strategic Communication and Public Relations Center#56GAP VIII, Section 6 Functions and Responsibilities 56 Strategic Communication and Public Relations Center#57Generally GAP Accepted Practices USC Annenberg Functions, and Responsibilities: Core*, 2013 Function/Responsibility % 70.0% % Function/Responsibility Media Relations 92.8% Employee/Internal Communications Corporate Communication/Reputation (Other 85.0% Corporate Image (Logo Usage etc.) 67.1% than Advertising) Crisis Management 83.0% Issues Management 66.0% Social Media Participation 81.3% Community Relations 65.4% Social Media Monitoring 79.0% Marketing PR/Product PR 64.8% Executive Communication 76.4% Public Affairs 59.4% Measurement and Evaluation of 73.2% Advertising-Corporate Image, Issues 58.8% Communication Effectiveness Social Media Measurement 72.0% Multimedia Production 53.6% Corporate External Website 71.5% 57 'Core = More than 50% of respondents have responsibility Strategic Communication and Public Relations Center#58Generally GAP Accepted Practices USC Annenberg Functions and Responsibilities,* Significant Changes, GAP VII vs. VIII Function/ Responsibility* 2011 2013 Change Issues management 58% 71% +13% Social media participation 66% 74% +8% Multimedia production 40% 47% +7% Search engine optimization 31% 37% +6% Social media monitoring 70% 72% +2% Internal communications 80% 77% -3% 15% 12% -3% Customer relations Web-related functions continue to show growth, reflecting fundamental changes in the profession. Increase in Issues Management can be seen as web-related, given that issues often first emerge on the web *Primary budgetary responsibility 58 Strategic Communication and Public Relations Center#59Generally GAP Accepted Practices USC Annenberg Functions and Responsibilities: Use of Storytelling Techniques Question: In the past 12 months has your organization's PR/COM department used narrative storytelling techniques? Yes: 71.5% No: 21.3% Don't Know: 7.2% Purpose of Using Storytelling To engage with external audiences To engage with internal audiences N % 217 63% 172 50% To communicate across a variety of media channels 158 46% In transmedia campaigns 14 4% To convey each part of the overall story on the most appropriate platform for that part 89 26% To facilitate creation of content in partnership with external audiences 66 19% A large majority of respondents use narrative storytelling techniques, and they communicate brand content via a variety of channels. This practice indicates some form of transmedia storytelling, even if very few organizations (4%) use this terminology. 59 Strategic Communication and Public Relations Center#60GAP VIII, Section 7 The Media Environment 60 Strategic Communication and Public Relations Center#6161 USC Annenberg GAP Generally Accepted Practices The Media Environment: Establishing Context Extent of Usage (1-7); Core = 4.0+ Mean Mean Creating content designed to be spread via 5.16 social media Multimedia content for mobile devices Television 3.72 3.31 Twitter 5.11 Radio 2.81 Production of online videos 5.01 Google Plus 2.68 Facebook 4.77 Online audio (e.g. podcasts) 2.62 Print newspapers 4.75 Instagram 2.37 Using two or more social or sharing media 4.72 Crowdsourcing 2.19 platforms in one campaign Pinterest 2.01 Print magazines 4.70 Wiki 2.02 Sharing of online videos 4.65 Vine 1.87 YouTube 4.64 Other 1.64 Search Engine Optimization 4.58 LinkedIn 4.36 Creating content in partnership with 4.27 external audiences Online editorial web sites 4.09 *1=Didn't use; 7=Used significantly Strategic Communication and Public Relations Center#62GAP Generally Accepted Practices USC Annenberg The Media Environment: Establishing Context Scope of Social Media Use: Minimum vs. Maximum We use social media to engage in conversations with members of the public. Social media pervade every aspect of our business (i.e. customer relations and support, tech support, management, int. com, etc.) 62 Strategic Communication and Public Relations Center Mean % Strongly (1-7) Agree (6-7) 4.93 49.1 3.52 17.8#63Generally GAP Accepted Practices USC Annenberg The Media Environment: The Degree to which Use of Specific Platforms Correlates with Positive Outcomes Digital/Social Practice Good Reputation Successful Spreadable content Significant Significant Twitter Significant Insignificant Producing Online Videos Insignificant Significant Facebook Insignificant Insignificant Linkedin Very Significant Significant SEO YouTube Co-creating content Insignificant Significant Insignificant Insignificant Very Very Significant Significant 63 Strategic Communication and Public Relations Center#6464 Generally GAP Accepted Practices USC Annenberg The Media Environment: Changes, GAP VII - VIII Digital/Social Practice 2011 2013 +/- Spreadable content ΝΑ 5.16 NA Twitter 4.33 5.11 .78 Producing Online Videos 4.19 5.01 .82 Facebook 4.75 4.77 Flat Using two or more digital/social NA 4.72 NA platforms in a campaign Sharing online videos 4.48 4.65 .17 Linkedin NA 4.63 NA SEO 4.48 4.58 .10 YouTube NA 4.56 NA Co-creating content NA 4.27 NA Online editorial web sites ("Corporate" NA 4.09 NA or "Service" Journalism) Strategic Communication and Public Relations Center#6565 Generally GAP Accepted Practices USC Annenberg The Media Environment: Use and Management of Social Media Department Reported to Use SM to Communicate with Reported to Have Extensive Control Over External Audiences SM (6-7 on 1-7 scale,) PR/Communication 88.8% 72.6% Marketing/Sales 65.1% 43.8% Customer Relations 35.4% 6.6% Human Resources 34% 5.4% Information Technology 9.5% 8.9% Technical Support 4.6% 72.6% Risk of multiple voices, lack of consistency? Totals do not equal 100 due to multiple choices. Strategic Communication and Public Relations Center#66Generally GAP Accepted Practices USC Annenberg The Media Environment: Coordination of Social Media (1 - 7 Scale) Level of coordination Percentage of respondents Well coordinated 33.3% Moderately coordinated 55.3% Poorly coordinated 11.3% * 86% moderately/well coordinated reduces risk of inconsistency 66 Strategic Communication and Public Relations Center#6767 GAP VIII, Section 8 Measurement and Evaluation Strategic Communication and Public Relations Center#68Generally GAP Accepted Practices USC Annenberg Measurement and Evaluation: Context, Overall Approach % 1. We use measurement and evaluation methods developed by our in-house communication team. 49.3 2. We use the standard measures that have been recommended by professional organizations within the field (e.g. Institute for Public Relations). 25.9 3. We use proprietary measures recommended by our agencies and communication consultants. 20.5 4. We are considering adopting recommended standard measures but have not yet implemented these measures. 13.0 5. We do not measure or evaluate public relations activities. 11.2 68 Strategic Communication and Public Relations Center#6969 Generally GAP Accepted Practices Measurement and Evaluation: Context USC Annenberg We are making increasing Mean (1-7) % Strongly Agree (6-7) use of audience research 3.96 21.9% in planning and executing our campaigns We are tracking and analyzing the conversations our 3.77 30.5% stakeholders are having among themselves There is a need for COM/PR professionals who can interpret data and use it to plan programs 5.94 71.4% Strategic Communication and Public Relations Center#70Generally GAP Accepted Practices USC Annenberg Measurement and Evaluation: Core (4.0+) and Top Ten Tools CORE (4.0+) Influence on Reputation 5.01 Total Circulation NON-CORE 3.98 Social or Online Media Metrics 4.87 Relevance to Stakeholders 3.93 Content Analysis of Clips 3.86 Total Number of Clips Total Impressions 4.65 Share of Discussion 4.35 Knowledge Levels Among Stakeholders 3.65 4.3 Return on Investment 3.62 ■ Social metrics ascending, ad equivalencies disappearing ■ As in all prior GAPS the most frequently used metric barely exceeds 5.0. Implications of the continued lack of faith in available tools? · 70 Strategic Communication and Public Relations Center = 1 Don't use; 7-Use significantly#71GAP Generally Accepted Practices Measurement and Evaluation: Factoid USC Annenberg Those who do not measure or evaluate PR/COM activities are much more likely to describe themselves as being: Rigid Autocratic Reactive/Short-Term Tactical (rather than Strategic) Conservative 71 Strategic Communication and Public Relations Center#72GAP VIII, Section 9 Agency Relationships 72 Strategic Communication and Public Relations Center#7373 Generally GAP Accepted Practices USC Annenberg Agency Relationships: Percentages Working With Agencies 100 100 100 97.4 90 90 90 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 Small Private Large Private Small Public Large Public Agency relationships continue to be nearly universal Strategic Communication and Public Relations Center#74USC Annenberg Generally GAP Accepted Practices Agency Relationships: Top Reasons - Two Tiers 74 Creative thinking 5.56 Additional arms and legs 5.55 Objective, independent council 5.44 Strategic insight 5.41 Expertise, media relations 4.72 Expertise, digital and social media 4.55 Limit on internal headcount 4.25 Expertise, crisis management 4.24 Expertise, specific product markets 4.23 Expertise, specific geographic markets 4.22 Cheaper than adding staff 4.20 Increase geographic reach 4.08 Expertise, measurement and evaluation 3.93 Expertise, research and analysis 3.82 Expertise, socially diverse audiences 3.40 Strategic Communication and Public Relations Center#75Generally GAP Accepted Practices USC Annenberg Agency Relationships: Fee Allocations as % of Total Budget 100% 90% 80% 70% 60% 50% 40% 30.30% 30% 24.90% 23.60% 18.00% 19% 20% 10% 0% GAP 2002 GAP 2004 GAP 2009 GAP 2011 GAP 2013 ■ The percentage of total budget allocated to agency compensation may have flattened out 75 Strategic Communication and Public Relations Center#76Generally GAP Accepted Practices USC Annenberg Agency Relationships: Type, Public Companies, 2002 - 2013 ■ 100 90 80 70 60 47.2 50 57.4 53.1 43.6 39.9 36.1 40 30.2 30 24.6 20.6 20 14.9 13 21.3 16.1 16 13 10 3.7 5.6 6.2 9.6 6.5 0 Single Agency of Multiple Ongoing Pre-Approved Projects Ad Hoc Projects Record 2002 2007 2009 2011 2013 Agency of record relationships continue to decline Ongoing relationships with multiple agencies: the new norm 76 Strategic Communication and Public Relations Center#77GAP Generally Accepted Practices USC Annenberg Agency Relationships: Number of Agencies Used, 2002 - 2013 LO 5 4.8 4 3.6 3.2 3 2.5 2.4 2 1 0 GAP 2002 GAP 2004 GAP 2009 GAP 2011 GAP 2013 Increase is partially related to higher frequency of larger companies in the sample, but overall trend is clear 77 Strategic Communication and Public Relations Center#78GAP VIII, Section 10 Excellence and Best Practices 78 Strategic Communication and Public Relations Center#79GAP Generally Accepted Practices USC Annenberg Excellence and Best Practices: Insights for Success Measurement: use it to enhance PR/Communication's internal position of strength: . • Adopt a rigorous approach to strategic planning tied to business goals/strategies, data, etc; objectively assess sacred cows. Focus on measurable objectives tied to business strategy and goals; measure business outcomes rather than communication outputs. Use the best available, most credible measurement tools. Media environment: • • Recognize that the traditional mass media relations model is no longer the overriding priority. Embrace a two-way engagement model of communication. Assess the usefulness of specific platforms based on strategy and data rather than buzz or popularity Agency relationships: Focus on strategic and creative ROI rather tactical execution and/or arms and legs alone. 79 Strategic Communication and Public Relations Center#80GAP Generally Accepted Practices USC Annenberg Excellence and Best Practices: The Communication Leadership Cycle: A Hypothetical Model for Optimizing the Function An attempt to create a hypothetical five-factor cyclical model linking practices associated with positive outcomes in a logical way. • Hypothesis 1: Factor 1 is the optimal entry point, but will vary by situation. . Hypothesis 2: The Factors follow a logical pattern or sequence. Factor 1: Given that when the PR/communication function has access to the C-Suite, it is in a stronger position to help define the overall business strategy, identity and core values of the organization: Earn (through results) meaningful access to the C-Suite. Factor 2: Given that (1) when PR/Communication has C-Suite access it is in a stronger position to help define the overall business strategy, identity and core values of the organization, and (2) enhanced integration and collaboration are associated with enhanced. internal influence for PR/Communication: Champion internal integration and collaboration, with the PR/Communication function showing the way. Factor 3: Given that enhanced internal influence for PR/Communication will enhance its ability to affect organizational policy and behavior: Have, or obtain, the organizational, business and professional skills necessary to use that influence wisely and effectively. 80 Strategic Communication and Public Relations Center#8181 GAP Generally Accepted Practices USC Annenberg Excellence and Best Practices: The Communication Leadership Cycle: A Hypothetical Model for Optimizing the Function Factor 4: Given that the ability to influence organizational policy and behavior will strengthen PR/Communication's ability to affect internal and external perceptions of success, reputation, etc: Optimize PR/Communication people, processes and procedures to successfully take advantage of the opportunity. Factor 5: Given that successfully taking advantage of the opportunity will enhance the value of PR/Communication's access to the C-Suite, its contribution to defining the overall business strategy, identity and core values of the organization, etc: Continually reinforce and strengthen each of the Five Factors. Strategic Communication and Public Relations Center#82Generally GAP Accepted Practices Excellence and Best Practices: USC Annenberg Most Importantly, Embrace Change; The Transition from Old School to New School is Gaining Speed Old School Perspective limited by experience, • training • Lacks C-Suite access • Communicates, doesn't formulate, policy • Is non-integrated, silo'd • Doesn't seriously measure • Emphasizes tactics over strategy Uses agencies primarily for arms and legs • Is satisfied with limited role • • . New School Constantly seeks, evaluates and adopts. beneficial practices, characteristics Embraces full potential of social media - not shiny objects Uses the best of available measurement tools, and pushes for better ones Has C-Suite access Formulates and communicates policy Champions integration/collaboration Has strong business, organizational and professional skills Emphasizes strategy over tactics Recognizes and seeks to achieve the discipline's full potential 82 Strategic Communication and Public Relations Center#8383 GAP Generally Accepted Practices USC Annenberg FIN Strategic Communication and Public Relations Center