Every communicator wants to prove impact. But in a world of dashboards, KPIs and impressions in the millions, the truth is simple: measuring what matters in PR is still one of the industry’s toughest challenges.
We’ve all been there – a campaign delivers solid coverage, the report looks strong, yet the question still lands: So what did it actually achieve? If that question makes you hesitate, you’re not alone. Across agencies, in-house teams and global brands, measurement remains one of the most debated (and misunderstood) parts of the communications process.
At Ruepoint, we see this tension daily. Teams want clarity, leadership wants proof, and the data doesn’t always connect. Based on our media intelligence work and the industry standards set by AMEC, here are the five biggest challenges PR professionals face in media measurement, and how to move beyond them.
1. Measuring without a clear goal
Too often, measurement starts at the end – not the beginning. Reports get built around what’s easy to count instead of what’s essential to prove.
The result? Vanity metrics. Clip counts, reach numbers, or “potential impressions” that might look impressive, but say little about reputation, trust, or business value.
The fix: Start with alignment, not activity. Before any campaign begins, define the business or communication goal: what outcome are you trying to influence – awareness, credibility, behaviour, or action? Use AMEC’s Integrated Evaluation Framework to link objectives with outcomes and select metrics that show progress toward them.
When measurement is baked into planning, not tacked on afterward, it becomes a strategic asset, not a reporting chore.
2. Legacy metrics still dominate
Despite a decade of progress, many PR reports still feature Advertising Value Equivalency (AVE) – a metric long rejected by AMEC and most serious practitioners. The issue isn’t just methodological; it’s cultural. AVE feels simple and familiar, which is why it lingers.
But measuring PR impact through advertising rates is like measuring storytelling by word count. It misses the point.
The fix: Move from outputs to outcomes. Count quality and influence, not just volume. Metrics like message pull-through, sentiment, and share of voice among target audiences reveal far more about actual impact than AVE ever could.
Blending qualitative and quantitative analysis – for example, coverage tone, journalist influence, and key-message alignment – helps uncover what the numbers alone can’t.
3. Data everywhere, insight nowhere
The modern media landscape is scattered across owned, earned, paid, and social. Each platform has its own metrics, formats, and definitions. The result? Fragmented data that’s hard to connect, and even harder to interpret. One system tracks sentiment, another measures engagement, a third monitors clicks or views. None of them speak the same language.
The fix: Create a single measurement framework that unites data across channels and markets. Define consistent metric taxonomies – what counts as coverage, engagement, or reach, and use one dashboard to integrate it all.
More importantly, make sure human insight stays part of the process. Automated tools can flag trends, but only experienced analysts can explain why something is happening, and what it means for reputation, risk, or opportunity.
4. Linking PR results to business outcomes
Ask most PR professionals what their toughest measurement task is, and you’ll hear the same thing: proving ROI. It’s not that PR lacks impact, it’s that the impact is often indirect, long-term, or shared with other functions like marketing, sales, or HR.
The fix: Begin with clear outcomes in mind.
Ask what success should look like, and how communication is expected to influence it.
For example:
- If our media narrative improves sentiment around sustainability, will that lead to greater stakeholder trust?
- If our executive visibility increases, will that correlate with stronger investor or partner confidence?
Then collect the right mix of data to test those expectations – coverage metrics, sentiment trends, share of voice, perception studies, and digital engagement data.
5. The skills and systems gap
Measurement maturity depends on two things: data capability and communication expertise. Many teams have one, but not both. Some have access to powerful tools but lack time to interpret results; others have skilled strategists but limited tech or integration.
The fix: Build partnerships – internally and externally. Collaborate with analytics, marketing, and insights teams to unify data sources. Invest in training to strengthen data literacy across PR and comms functions. And when capacity is tight, bring in trusted media intelligence partners to bridge the gap.
As the AMEC community often reminds us: measurement isn’t about more data, it’s about better decisions.
Building a fit-for-purpose measurement strategy
Bringing these lessons together, here’s a practical roadmap for PR pros:
1. Define business outcomes first. Anchor measurement in organisational strategy.
2. Use the right frameworks. Apply the AMEC Integrated Evaluation Framework to structure your process.
3. Integrate your data. Connect social, earned, and owned insights into one view.
4. Translate metrics into meaning. Report in business language — impact, not activity.
5. Iterate. Treat every campaign as a learning opportunity to refine how you measure success.
Final thoughts
Measurement isn’t just a checkbox at the end of a campaign – it’s how communicators prove their strategic value and sharpen their future work.The landscape will keep evolving – new platforms, new analytics, new pressures for accountability. But the principle remains the same: measure what matters, not just what’s easy.
As proud participants in AMEC Measurement Month, the Ruepoint team continues to champion smarter, outcome-driven measurement across the global communications industry.
Follow us on LinkedIn for our latest AMEC insights, webinars and reports throughout Measurement Month.
Leave a Comment