One of the biggest challenges for communication managers is the measurability and thus evaluability of past and planned communication activities. This applies equally to content marketing, online PR, and social media marketing. Digital communication struggles with measuring its success and defining its KPIs. Inaccurate, meaningless, or not planned at all in advance, ignorance, uncertainty, and pure disregard converge here. I would like to dedicate a few lines today to explain why this does not have to be the case, and indeed, should not be.
From Data Anxiety to Ignorance – The Problem of Success Measurement
I am not sure whether it is fear or respect that prevents many marketers from delving deeply into the subject matter. Is it the Excel spreadsheets? Is it the fear of not being able to prove success? Or is it simply ignorance? Do marketers know what and how they should measure to present meaningful analyses of their campaigns?
Ultimately, it does not matter what causes these inhibitions. What is important is that, firstly, they are unfounded, and secondly, they represent a real problem. If you cannot demonstrate your relevance to the company's success, you will eventually be cut back! An unpleasant prospect.
Another facet of this problem is that while you can measure a great deal on the social web, by no means everything has significance. Overwhelm? Probably also. But even that is no reason to turn a blind eye to the topic. Eventually, the regular meeting will come where your manager will want to see facts.
In the Beginning Was the Concept
To ensure that digital communication measures have the desired impact, this impact must be recorded somewhere – ideally in the strategy section of an overarching plan. The question of KPIs already begins with the definition of corporate goals, which are reflected in the (hopefully existing) communication concept.
Unfortunately, there is no one-size-fits-all approach for defining KPIs. These must be individually adapted and derived from the communication goals. Factors such as business area, budget, target audience, previous experience, and available resources also play an important role here.
Metrics That Say Nothing
As already mentioned, we can measure a great deal on the social web. Some metrics have developed into standard repertoire in the field of digital communication – unfortunately, completely undeservedly. This is because they say almost nothing about the value, quality, and reach of the measures to be pursued. Which metrics should we therefore not take into the new year?
- Facebook fan numbers, Twitter followers A long, long time ago (measured in digital time spans), the number of fans and followers was indeed a value with which one could convince managers and congratulate oneself. Those times are now definitely over. Purchasable fans (yes, that is still offered!), falling organic reach, and massive newsfeed density are just a few points that make these metrics irrelevant as key performance indicators. Any marketer who has not yet understood this fact should urgently do something about it.
- Page views Oh yes, I am serious. 🙂 It is nice to track ever-increasing traffic figures on your analytics dashboard, but page views alone say absolutely nothing – at least nothing that could be of interest to communication managers and marketers.
Just because someone has visited a particular page does not mean they are interested in what the company does or sells. Who is this person, where do they come from, what prompted them to click, and did they find what they were looking for? These questions remain unanswered. - Bounce rate Bounce rates of 80% cause many marketers to despair. The only question is, why? The general assumption is that a user bounces when the content on the website does not meet the reader's expectations. The truth is, however, that this statement is not generally true. From my own experience, I know that there are different reasons for leaving a website. Of course, it could be due to "wrong" content, but perhaps I found the answer to my question and leave the online presence as a satisfied visitor. Or perhaps I have only read the latest blog post and close the page to devote myself to other subscribed newsletters? Are my page views therefore to be interpreted negatively? Certainly not.
- Time on site The time spent on a website is just as uninformative a metric as those mentioned so far. Perhaps this person is simultaneously watching their favourite series or has several pages open at once to do some research. Time-on-site can be a value for good online content, but it does not have to be.
Expanding the KPI Horizon
Apart from the "usual suspects", there are a handful of interesting KPIs that are still relatively rarely measured and evaluated, although in my opinion, they provide good insight into the success of communication activities. Here are five of my favourites:
- Content longevity How long is the (expensively) created content actually relevant to the target audience? Is it an evergreen that consistently attracts visitors over months, or is it more like a New Year's rocket that flashes brightly and beautifully for a moment and then fizzles out forever? A communication goal that might consider this value relevant is, for example, positioning oneself as a thought leader in the industry. Is the company consistently a opinion leader? Are the created contents considered online basics?
- Backlinks from thought leaders Backlinks, yes, I know, have been declared dead many times. Well, I see that a little differently. Links can indeed be very valuable if they come from the "right" sites. Therefore, it is not the sum of backlinks that is relevant, but whether the appropriate/relevant people, i.e. current thought leaders, have referred to your own content. A communication goal that could be confirmed by this is the desire to establish a respected place in the online community.
- Number of returning readers High page visits are certainly not bad, but how many of the visitors are regularly found on the website? Is there a loyal readership? Why is that important? If, for example, you have defined the goal of building a stable relationship with your readership through content marketing, then this value is indeed relevant.
- User engagement The term may read a little strangely, but it includes several well-known metrics that can be assembled into a complex matrix. Starting with shares and comments (as the simplest form of participation), through reviews to user generated content, a relevance framework can be defined that, when viewed over a longer period, can show interesting developments. A suitable corporate goal would be, for example, stronger involvement of customers and fans through social media.
- Time savings in pre-sales Peculiar KPI? I would rather say that it is very specific, but definitely one of those that are often overlooked when evaluating content marketing measures. Yet, especially with very explanation-intensive products and services, content marketing offers a real advantage. Instead of investing expensive working hours in personal sales conversations, a large part of the information requirement can now be shifted to the internet. The "Zero Moment of Truth" can save companies a massive amount of time – and this is precisely what should be measured. Which communication goal could be proven with this? For example, the specific desire to invest fewer human resources in pre-sales and thus gain more time for customer care.
Conclusion: Measure What Needs Measuring
On the web, you can indeed measure a great deal, and that is often quite practical. Nevertheless, it makes no sense to throw around an infinite number of metrics and key figures. It is far more effective to consider specific KPIs for your individually formulated communication goals, consistently monitor them, and prepare them in a high-quality and visual manner.
On that note, Happy Measuring 2016!
