본문 바로가기
KERD
논문KCI 등재

국내 PR효과 측정 및 평가 현황에 관한 연구

Measurement and Evaluation of Public Relations Effectiveness

백혜진|오미영
한국PR학회 (Korean Academic Society For Public Relations)|2015.02|PR연구 (Journal of Public Relations)|제19권 제1호|pp. 327-354|DOI 10.15814/jpr.2015.19.1.327

0

조회

0

다운로드

12

인용

0

참고문헌

키워드

evaluationoutputmeasurementoutcomePR효과PR효과 평가PR효과 측정PR대상 수상작public relations effectivenessouttakePR award winners
주제분류신문방송학

초록

본 연구에서는 국내 조직이 PR효과를 어떻게 평가하고 있는지를 점검하기 위해 2005년부터 2014년까지PR협회 PR대상 수상작들에 대한 내용분석을 실시하였다. 연구결과에 의하면, 먼저 PR대상 수상작들의 상당수는 PR목표를 구체적으로 명시하고 있었으며, 목표 중에서도 주로 행동과 관련된 목표를 제시한 경우가가장 많았다. 또한, PR대상 수상작들은 PR효과를 프로그램 아웃풋 차원과 조직 아웃컴 차원에서 평가하는경향이 상대적으로 높은 반면, 아웃테이크와 프로그램 아웃컴 차원에서 평가하는 경향은 매우 낮은 것으로나타났다. 또한 PR대상 수상작들이 평균적으로 사용한 평가지표의 수는 약 10개였으며, 그 중 반 이상이 아웃컴 차원의 평가지표인 것으로 나타났다. PR효과를 측정 및 평가하기 위해 주로 사용하는 조사방법으로는설문조사와 2차 자료가 가장 많이 사용된 반면, 내용분석은 가장 적게 사용된 것으로 나타났다. 더불어 조직성격 (기업/정부 및 공공기관/비영리 조직)에 따라 PR효과 평가차원과 조사방법에 차이가 있는지를 살펴본결과, 비영리 조직은 기업과 정부/공공기관에 비해 아웃테이크 평가를 그리고 기업에 비해 프로그램 아웃풋평가를 더 많이 하고 있었다. 마지막으로, 지난 10년간 PR효과 평가차원 및 조사방법에 차이가 있는지를 살펴본 결과 일부 조사방법을 제외하고는 PR효과 평가차원 및 평가방법에 있어서 큰 차이를 보이지 않는 것으로 나타났다. 이러한 연구결과는 국내 PR업계에서 PR효과 측정 및 평가의 개선을 위해 어떠한 노력이 필요한지 이에 대한 시사점을 제시해 준다.

Abstract

Through a content analysis of PR case award winners from 2005 to 2014, this study investigatedhow public relations effectiveness was measured and evaluated. Findings show that most ofthe cases presented clear public relations objectives, which were mainly related to behavior. In addition, the cases tended to evaluate public relations effectiveness with respect to programoutput and organization outcome rather than outtake and program outcome. Tenmeasurement indexes, more than half of which were output-related, were used to measureand evaluate PR effectiveness. The research methods most frequently used for measurementand evaluation were survey and secondary data analysis. Furthermore, measurement andevaluation of PR effectiveness varied by type of organization, which included for-profitorganization, government/public organization, and non-profit organization. Finally, during thepast decade there have been no major changes in these measurement and research methods. This study provides insights on improving how to measure and evaluate public relationseffectiveness.

참고문헌 (66)

  1. Bae, S., "An analysis of behaviors and attitudes towards measurement and evaluation of corporate PR effectiveness in Korea : perceived by PR practitioners", Master, pp.2003
  2. Baskin, O., "Perceived effectiveness and implementation of public relations measurement and evaluation tools among European providers and consumers of PR services", Public Relations Review, 36, pp.105~111 (2010)
  3. Bissland, J., "Accountability gap : Evaluation practices show improvement", Public Relations Review, 10, pp.3~12 (1990)
  4. Broom, G. M., "An overview : Evaluation research in public relations", Public Relations Quarterly, 28(3), pp.5~8 (1983)
  5. Broom, G. M., "Using research in public relations : Applications to program management" (1990), Prentice Hall
  6. Center, A., "Public relations practices" (2003), Prentice Hall
  7. 차희원, "정책 PR의 평가 지표 개발에 관한 연구:국정홍보처 실무자와 외부 전문가 의견 비교를 중심으로", 홍보학연구, 9(1), pp.126~169 (2005), 한국PR학회
  8. Choi, Y., "Contemporary public relations" (2003), Nanam
  9. 정인태, "PR 캠페인 평가 방법에 대한 현황 연구: PRSA Silver Anvil Award 수상작 중심으로", 한국광고홍보학보, 9(4), pp.257~290 (2007), 한국광고홍보학회
  10. Cutlip, S. M., "Effective public relations" (2000), Prentice-Hall
  11. Dozier, D. M., "Public relations research annual (Vol.2)", pp.3~28 (1990), Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc
  12. Dozier, D. M., "Excellence in public relations and management" (1992), Lawrence Erlbaum Associates
  13. Gregory, A., "Public relations and evaluation: Does the reality match the rhetoric?", Journal of Marketing Communications, 79(3), pp.171~189 (2001)
  14. Grunig, J. E., "Guidelines for measuring relationships in public relations", The Institute for Public Relations, ~ (1999)
  15. Grunig, J. E., "Public relations as relationship management" (2000), Lawrence Erlbaum Associates
  16. Grunig, J. E., "Managing Public Relations" (1984), Holt
  17. Grunig, L. A., "Excellence in public relations and communication management" (1992), Lawrence Erlbaum Associates
  18. Hause, D., "Measuring impact of public relations : Electronic techniques improve campaign evaluation", Public Relations Journal, 49(2), pp.14~21 (1993)
  19. Hon, L. C., "Demonstrating effectiveness in public relations; Goals, objectives, and evaluation", Journal of Public Relations Research, 10(2), pp.103~135 (1998)
  20. Hon, L. C., "What have you done for me lately? Exploring effectiveness in public relations", Journal of Public Relations Research, 9(1), pp.1~30 (1997)
  21. Hutton, J. G., "The definition, dimensions and domain of public relations", Public Relations Review, 25(2), pp.199~214 (1999)
  22. International Public Relations Association, "Public relations evaluation : Professional accountability" (1994), IPRA
  23. Judd, L. R., "Importance and use of formal research and evaluation", Public Relations Review, 16(4), pp.17~28 (1990)
  24. 김봉철, "PR회사 선정을 위한 평가모형 구축에 관한 연구 - AHP(Analytic Hierarchy Process)의 적용", 광고연구, (92), pp.332~354 (2012), 한국광고홍보학회[DOI]
  25. 김천수, "한국 PR산업 특성에 대한 탐색적 연구: 적소이론을적용하여", 홍보학연구, 10(3), pp.126~160 (2007), 한국PR학회
  26. Kim, S., "Research of perception of PR practitioners about effectiveness of PR and evaluation of PR effectiveness", Master, pp.2002
  27. Kirvan, L., "Showing what we do makes a difference", Public Relations Quarterly, 28(3), pp.22~27 (1983)
  28. Laborde, E., "Public relations program evaluation and encroachment effect in the for-profit sector", Public Relations Review, 32, pp.77~79 (2006)
  29. Lattimore, D., "Public relations: The profession and the practice" (2008), McGraw-Hill
  30. Lee, J., "A studv for the differences between public relations and publicity in the light of developmental processes of public relations and creativity as one of the desirable quality of the practitioners", Journal of Public Relations, 5(2), pp.42~80 (2001)
  31. Lindeborg, R. A., "The IABC excellence study : Excellence communication", Public Relations Quarterly, 39(1), pp.5~11 (1994)
  32. Lindenmann, W. K., "Research, evaluation, and measurement : A national perspective", Public Relations Review, 16(20), pp.3~17 (1990)
  33. Lindenmann, W. K., "An effectiveness yardstick to measure public relations success", Public Relations Quarterly, 38(1), pp.7~9 (1993)
  34. Lindenmann, W. K., "Guidelines and standards for measuring and evaluating PR effectiveness", The Institute for Public Relations (1997)
  35. Lindenmann, W. K., "Guidelines for measuring the effectiveness of PR programs and activities", The Institute for Public Relations (2003)
  36. Lindenmann, W. K., "Public relations research for planning and evaluation", The Institute for Public Relations (2006)
  37. Macnamara, J., "The New Australian and New Zealand Public Relations Manuak", pp.100~135 (2002), Tymson Communications
  38. McElreath, M. P., "Priority research questions in the field of public relations for the 1990: Trends over the past ten years and predictions for the future", Paper presented at the meeting of the Speech Communication Association (1989)
  39. Matilla, K., "The accountability gap : The use of preliminary and evaluative research in Spain", Public Relations Review, 38, pp.825~830 (2012)
  40. Michaelson, D., "Standardization in public relations measurement and evaluation", Public Relations Journal, 5(2), pp.1~22 (2011)
  41. Oh, D., "Public relations communication" (1991), Nanam
  42. Park, J. M., "A study on the perception of Korean PR practitioners about PR effectiveness measurement :Co-orientation between PR company practitioners and clients", Master, pp.2003
  43. Park, J. S., "Professional standards in Korean public relations : A comparative approach between corporate practitioners and public relations agency practitioners", The Korean Journal of Advertising and Public Relations, 7(5), pp.41~56 (2005)
  44. 박종민, "PR 효과 측정 도구 개발을 위한 일 연구 : 신문 퍼블리시티를 중심으로", 홍보학연구, 8(1), pp.339~371 (2004), 한국PR학회
  45. Park, H., "A comparative study on perception and practice of the U.S. and Korean PR practitioners about scientific factors of PR practice", Master, pp.2000
  46. Peiczka, M., "Objectives and evaluation in public relations work: What do they tell us about expertise and professionalism?", Journal of Public Relations Research, 12(3), pp.211~233 (2000)
  47. Perreault, W. D., "Reliability of nominal data based on qualitative judgments", Journal of Marketing Research, 26, pp.153~148 (1989)
  48. Piekos, J., "Roles and program evaluation techniques among Canadian public practitioners", Public Relations Research Annual, 2, pp.95~113 (1990)
  49. Pohl, G., "Handbook of Public Relations", pp.357~368 (2001), Sage Publications
  50. Reeves, B., "Now you see them, now you don’t:Demonstrating effects of communication programs", Public Relations Quarterly, 28(3), pp.17~21 (1983)
  51. Rust, R. E., "Reliability measures for qualitative data : Theory and implications", Journal of Marketing Research, 31, pp.1~14 (1994)
  52. Shin, S., "How can we measure the effectiveness of public relations?", Material presented in the Seminar of The Korean Public Relations Consultancy Association (2002)
  53. Smith, H. L., "Accountability in PR : Budgets and benchmarks", Public Relations Quarterly, 41(1), pp.15~19 (1996)
  54. Sutton, S., "(1988, March 29∼April 3). Are we measuring the right things?", PR Week, 9, ~ (1988)
  55. Swinhart, J. W., "Evaluating public relations", Public Relations Journal, 35(7), pp.13~16 (1979)
  56. Walker, G., "Communicating public relations research", Journal of Public Relations Research, 6(3), pp.141~161 (1994)
  57. Walker, G., "Public relations practitioners’ use of research, measurement and evaluation", Australian Journal of Communication, 24(2), pp.97~113 (1997)
  58. Ward, K. L, "Evaluating Public Relationships", nstitute for Public Relations Research and Education, ~ (1998)
  59. Watson, T., "Output measures rule in evaluation debate", IPR Journal, 12(5), pp.13~14 (1993)
  60. Watson, T., "Public relations evaluation: Nationwide survey of practice in the United Kingdom", Paper presented to the International Public Relations Research Symposium (1994)
  61. Watson, T., "Public Relations: Principles and practices", pp.283~299 (1997), International Thompson Business Press
  62. Watson, T., "Handbook of Public Relations", pp.259~268 (2001), Sage Publications
  63. Watson, T., "An initial investigation on the sue of return on investment in public relations practice", Public Relations Review, 37, pp.314~317 (2011)
  64. Watson, T., "Evaluating public relations: A best practice guide to public relations planning, research, & evaluation" (2005), Kogan Page
  65. Weiss, C. H., "Evaluation research : Methods of assessing program effectiveness" (1972), Prentice Hall
  66. Xavier, R., "Using evaluation techniques and performance claims to demonstrate public relations impact : Australian perspective", Public Relations Review, 31, pp.417~424 (2005)

관련 논문AI추천

정책 PR의 평가 지표 개발에 관한 연구:국정홍보처 실무자와 외부 전문가 의견 비교를 중심으로김영욱, 신호창, 차희원한국PR학회 · PR연구2005 · 제9권 제1호정량적 조사방법 기반 PR연구의 경향과 과제강예나, 김지혜, 박진우, 이형민한국PR학회 · PR연구2015 · 제19권 제1호PR 효과 측정 도구 개발을 위한 일 연구 : 신문 퍼블리시티를 중심으로김경은, 박종민, 이두희한국PR학회 · PR연구2004 · 제8권 제1호PR학에서의 우수이론의 전개와 우리나라에서의 연구경향신호창, 유선욱한국PR학회 · PR연구2014 · 제18권 제1호조직ᐨ공중 관계성 이론의 우수성 평가: 한국 조직ᐨ공중 관계성 논문을 중심으로배지양한국PR학회 · PR연구2020 · 제24권 제2호한국 조직의 홍보 부서 진단에 대한 연구 전략, 체계, 구성원, 위상 등을 중심으로신호창, 유선욱한국PR학회 · PR연구2010 · 제14권 제3호

이 간행물의 다른 논문 (13건)

뉴스프레임 유형과 정부 신뢰도가 금연정책 지지도와 금연의도에 미치는 영향.김도훈, 차수연, 남유진, 백혜진pp. 1-29지역 연고기업에 대한 공중관계성 연구. (지역인식과 지역 애착성을 중심으로)이수범, 신일기pp. 30-60국정소통 담당 공무원의 정부PR 역량평가 및 전문성교육 필요성 인식 비교정지연, 박노일, 김희진pp. 61-84공공캠페인 메시지 수용에 영향을 미치는 개인의 반항심과 메시지 프레이밍에 대한 연구(심리적 저항 이론과 예상이론 중심으로)김현숙pp. 85-121PR회사 보상제도에 대한 탐색적 연구(대리이론 접근을 중심으로)김장열, 유선욱pp. 122-161
원문 보기