It is stressful to manage a PR crisis, for a variety of reasons. The volume, the negativity, the damage to brand reputation, and the general unknowns all contribute to a general feeling of a loss of control.
To rather broadly paraphrase Winston Churchill, the only way to get through a crisis is to keep going.
Whether a crisis is long and drawn-out or short and quick depends on a number of factors, some of which are in a PR professional’s control and others that are not.
Measuring the effectiveness of crisis communications is something that you can control. Learning which messages and communications efforts are working best and then using that knowledge to guide subsequent efforts can help to mitigate the worst effects of a crisis, potentially shortening its duration.
Which metrics are best to measure in real time?
The most obvious metric to measure in real time during a period of crisis is sentiment. It will mostly be negative—that is always going to be the case in a crisis.
However, that will make it easier to find and analyse any supportive content, positive sentiment, or neutral mentions.
Examining the positive and neutral mentions, communicators should be able to identify supporters and defenders. This then will help to determine which messages or aspects of the crisis they are commenting on, providing a key point of information about where communications stand at the outset.
Beyond straight sentiment, consider sentiment + volume. This can be particularly useful when examining social media content, but applies to traditional media as well.
Most PR crises follow a bell curve. At the beginning, volume and sentiment are low; then as news of the problem or issue spreads, a rapid increase in volume and negative sentiment is observed. The peak is able to be determined after volume and sentiment begin to decline for a protracted period.
Using the information pulled from crisis metrics
The objective for communicators is to either flatten this bell curve, or hasten the point at which the peak is reached—or both.
Using information pulled from real-time analysis of crisis data can help to shorten a crisis.
Refine messaging – One way to use real-time data is to analyse what is resonating with key audiences and refine messaging to match. During a crisis, key message points are developed quickly, and sometimes with the input of non-communications professionals, such as legal counsel. This can lead to opaque messages that might fall flat with key audiences. Observing what is working and then tailoring and adjusting language so that your messages are heard is an important benefit of real-time monitoring.
Correcting misinformation – Crises tend to move quickly, and that tends to generate and potentially amplify misinformation. Monitoring in real-time provides communicators the opportunity to address incorrect information quickly, before it gains too secure a foothold in media reports or on social platforms.
Learn more about your audiences – During a crisis, it is important to understand how different audiences are reacting. This will help you to respond effectively. When a crisis begins to unfold, it can be difficult to determine what the brand damage might be. Audience analysis can help to put the crisis in proper perspective, by showing who is reacting and how. Although it is important to manage every crisis and not appear to downplay a real issue, knowing who is reacting does matter.
For example, let us say a fashion brand targeted at young people in their 20s releases a tee shirt bearing a phrase that some people find offensive. In this instance, taking the time to analyse coverage to learn more about those who are voicing a problem with the shirt is warranted. If young people are the ones complaining online, the brand has seriously misjudged how its target audience would respond to the shirt—that is bad, and a real crisis. If it is older people complaining, this might not be categorised as a crisis at all. It could even result in more of the shirts being sold, with an “okay boomer” type-vibe prevailing and driving sales.
Determining effectiveness
The effectiveness of using this information to shorten a crisis will be determined by measuring changes in each of these areas. If you have adjusted messaging based on identifying what appeared to be working, you should observe a continued downward trend in negative sentiment, with volume following. If negative sentiment remains constant or increases, more analysis is needed (along with a potential need to adjust tactics).
Correcting bad information is essential, both for slowing the progress of a crisis and for brand reputation. Measurement for this aspect will be determined by the disappearance of words and phrases associated with misinformation, and replaced by messages with correct information instead.
Audience analysis is an ongoing effort. Sentiment tracking within key audiences can show how a crisis is shifting and hopefully slowing.
Conclusion
Real-time analysis can help PR and communications professionals shorten the length of a crisis, and prevent long-term damage to a brand. The primary benefit of measuring the effectiveness of crisis communications as it happens is the ability to refine and adjust tactics in order to maximise positive results.
