Good point, John.
It's not the number of leads you generate, but the quality of leads you generate. In every communications we do, the end result is to get a sale. While we may not have a direct impact on that, we do play an indirect role -- whether that deals with the company's reputation, product awareness or education, etc.
-- Mike
Mike Driehorst | Homepage | 01.05.06 - 4:41 pm | #

Size isn't everything... size of audience, that is. Maybe it's the marketer in me, but Return on Investment is something that always needs to be taken into account. Who is your target? What do you want your target to do (buy, etc.)? Compelling one target to action is much more important than aimlessly shouting your message at a million people, with no results at all.
Paloma Cruz | Homepage | 01.05.06 - 6:50 pm | #

Mike and Paloma:

Excellent points ... thanks for chiming in.

This is one of the reasons I have such difficulty believing in many of the measurement tools we use as PR people. They aim to measure reach and not action, and I would argue -- and I do -- that reach is no longer important.

It's sometimes hard to us as PR people to grasp -- and for clients, too -- but the most effective communications is often the quiet, direct, grassroots efforts rather than the splashy, 6 p.m. newscast efforts.
John Wagner | Homepage | 01.06.06 - 8:19 am | #