Evaluating public relations (PR) campaigns is an essential part of the strategic communication process. Organizations rely on accurate evaluation methods to measure the success of their messaging, stakeholder engagement, and reputation management efforts. However, amidst the growing number of tools and techniques, confusion often arises regarding what constitutes a proper evaluation method and what does not.
In this blog, we will explore in detail the most commonly discussed methods for evaluating public relations campaigns, as well as examine which approaches do not belong in that category. By the end of this article, you’ll have a clear understanding of effective PR evaluation and be able to confidently answer the question: “Which of the following is not a discussed method for evaluating a public relations campaign?”
Table of Contents
Understanding the Purpose of PR Evaluation
Before we identify non-standard methods, it’s important to understand why evaluation matters in public relations. Evaluation helps professionals:
- Assess the effectiveness of communication efforts
- Determine return on investment (ROI)
- Improve future campaigns based on actionable insights
- Demonstrate value to stakeholders and executives
Without clear evaluation metrics, PR becomes speculative, subjective, and unaccountable. Therefore, evaluation must be based on established and accepted measurement standards within the field of public relations and integrated marketing communications (IMC).
Commonly Discussed Methods for Evaluating PR Campaigns
Several well-established frameworks and tools are widely discussed in the PR industry. Let’s review the most prominent ones.
1. Output Measurement
This method involves tracking quantitative outputs, such as:
- Number of press releases distributed
- Media mentions
- Social media posts
- Events organized
While output measurement is often considered basic, it provides an essential starting point. It shows how much content was generated or how much effort was invested, but it does not indicate effectiveness or impact.
2. Outtake Measurement
Outtake measures assess whether the audience has received, understood, or retained the intended message. This includes:
- Audience recall
- Awareness surveys
- Message comprehension
- Media impressions
Outtakes are especially valuable for campaigns focused on informing or educating an audience.
3. Outcome Measurement
This is one of the most critical evaluation approaches, as it measures the change in behavior, attitude, or perception resulting from the campaign. Key indicators include:
- Increase in brand favorability
- Changes in public opinion
- Website traffic from PR sources
- Lead generation through PR efforts
Outcome measurement aligns closely with strategic business goals and is heavily discussed in both academic and industry literature.
4. Media Analysis
Media analysis, or media content analysis, looks at the quality and tone of media coverage. This method evaluates:
- Sentiment (positive, negative, neutral)
- Key message inclusion
- Spokesperson mentions
- Prominence and placement in media
Media analysis helps determine how well a campaign message was conveyed through media channels.
5. Barcelona Principles
Established in 2010 and revised in 2015 and 2020, the Barcelona Principles provide a global standard for PR measurement. These principles advocate for:
- Goal-setting as a prerequisite
- Measuring outcomes over outputs
- Use of both quantitative and qualitative methods
- AVEs (Advertising Value Equivalents) being invalid
The Barcelona Principles are among the most discussed evaluation frameworks in PR and IMC circles.
6. Digital and Social Analytics
Digital evaluation methods focus on online engagement metrics, such as:
- Click-through rates (CTR)
- Shares, likes, comments
- Social sentiment analysis
- Influencer engagement
These techniques are essential in today’s digital-first PR strategies, especially for campaigns involving influencer partnerships or online brand reputation.
So, Which of the Following Is Not a Discussed Method for Evaluating a Public Relations Campaign?
To answer this critical question, we must now differentiate between effective, discussed methods and those that don’t meet the standards of legitimate evaluation. Here are some non-discussed or discredited methods:
1. Advertising Value Equivalency (AVE)
AVE attempts to quantify the value of PR coverage by comparing it to the cost of purchasing equivalent advertising space. While once popular, AVE is widely discredited because:
- It fails to account for message credibility and context
- It over-simplifies the impact of earned media
- It violates the Barcelona Principles
Because of these shortcomings, AVE is not a recommended or widely discussed method anymore. If you come across it as an option, it would be the correct answer to: “Which of the following is not a discussed method for evaluating a public relations campaign?”
2. Gut Feelings or Intuition
While experienced PR professionals may have good instincts, intuition is not a valid measurement tool. Evaluation must be based on data, not gut feelings. Any method that relies purely on anecdotal evidence or internal perception does not qualify as a discussed or reliable method.
3. Relying Solely on Vanity Metrics
Vanity metrics such as follower counts, likes, or page views without context or analysis are not effective indicators of campaign success. While they can provide supporting data, they are not sufficient alone and are generally discouraged in serious PR measurement discussions.
4. Internal Awards and Recognition
Winning internal awards may boost morale but does not reflect public impact. These accolades are not evaluation methods and hold little weight in objective campaign assessment.
Common Scenarios and Questions in PR Evaluation
Let’s consider how the question—”which of the following is not a discussed method for evaluating a public relations campaign?”—might be presented in real-world contexts or exams.
Example Question
Q: Which of the following is not a discussed method for evaluating a public relations campaign?
A. Media Analysis
B. Advertising Value Equivalency (AVE)
C. Outcome Measurement
D. Digital and Social Analytics
Correct Answer: B. Advertising Value Equivalency (AVE)
AVE is discredited by industry bodies and is no longer considered a legitimate or discussed method.
Industry Endorsements of Evaluation Standards
Organizations such as AMEC (International Association for Measurement and Evaluation of Communication), PRSA (Public Relations Society of America), and IABC (International Association of Business Communicators) strongly advocate for transparent, ethical, and data-driven evaluation methods. These associations support the abandonment of AVE and encourage practitioners to align with modern practices like:
- Goal-based KPIs
- Mixed-method evaluation (quant + qual)
- Stakeholder feedback
- Business outcome mapping
Why Correct Evaluation Methods Matter
The integrity of public relations as a discipline depends on its ability to prove value through credible evaluation. When professionals misuse or misunderstand evaluation tools, it affects:
- Client trust: Stakeholders expect accurate insights, not guesswork.
- Campaign optimization: Poor evaluation limits learning and refinement.
- Budget justification: Decision-makers require clear metrics to support investment in PR.
Knowing which tools are valid and widely discussed is not just academic—it’s essential for success in the field.
Practical Tips for PR Evaluation
If you’re involved in planning or evaluating a PR campaign, consider these actionable tips:
- Set measurable objectives from the start – Define what success looks like.
- Use a mix of metrics – Include output, outtake, and outcome indicators.
- Avoid AVEs and vanity metrics – Focus on substance, not surface numbers.
- Report with context – Don’t just list numbers—explain their relevance.
- Tie metrics to business goals – Show how PR supports organizational growth.
Final Thoughts
In the ever-evolving landscape of public relations, accurate evaluation is non-negotiable. Understanding the difference between legitimate and non-legitimate methods ensures your campaigns remain credible, accountable, and strategically sound.
So, the next time someone asks: “Which of the following is not a discussed method for evaluating a public relations campaign?”, you’ll know the answer is Advertising Value Equivalency (AVE)—a relic of outdated thinking that has no place in modern PR.
Stay informed. Stay analytical. And always question what you’re measuring—and why.
