National Economics University
Faculty of Marketing
Chapter 2
Formative Research
PhD. LÊ THỊ THU MAI
Faculty of Marketing
Email: maile@[Link]
Sđt: 0946203410
2–1
At the end of the chapter, students will be able to
• Understand the content and methods of situation analysis in public
relations.
• Understand the content and methods of organizational analysis in
public relations.
• Understand the content and methods of audience analysis in public
relations.
2–2
Contents
2.1 The importance of analysis
2.2 Situational analysis
2.3 Organizational analysis
2.4 Publics analysis
2–3
Phase 2
ORGANIZATIONAL ANALYSIS
2–4
Organizational analysis
• The basis of effective communication is self-awareness.
• Before a successful strategic communication plan can be
created, strategists must have a thorough and factual
understanding of their organization
➢ its performance
➢ its reputation
➢ and its structure
➢ any factors that might limit the plan’s success.
2–5
Organization’s mission statement
• A brief strategic description of the purpose of a company or
nonprofit organization, indicating its major publics and guiding its
decisions
• Focus on the organization’s present circumstances.
➢ What kind of organization are we?
➢ What kind of organization do we want to be?
➢ What kind of organization do people think we are?
Google
………’s mission is to organize the world’s information and make it
universally accessible and useful.
Nike To bring inspiration and innovation to every athlete* in the
………
world. (*If you have a body, you are an athlete.)
2–6
Organization’s vision statement
• Look to the future
• A brief strategic description of what the organization aspires to
become
• Serve as a starting point for positioning, a part of the strategic
planning process.
Amazon
……… Our vision is to be earth’s most customer-centric company; to build a place
where people can come to find and discover anything they might want to buy
online.
Disney
……… To make people happy
2–7
Organization’s value statement
• set of beliefs that drive the organization and provide a framework
for its decisions
• a significant ethical dimension
Coca Cola Our values serve as a compass for our actions and describe how we
………
behave in the world.
Leadership: the courage to shape a better future.
Collaboration: Leverage collective genius.
Integrity: Be real.
Accountability: If it is to be, it’s up to me.
Passion: Committed in heart and mind.
Diversity: As inclusive as our brands.
Quality: What we do, we do well.
2–8
Organizational research: Public Relations Audit
• an analysis of the strengths and weaknesses of an organization
• performed prior to developing an important new campaign, before
rolling out a new product or service or after management changes
within an organization.
• conducted every five to seven years
• conducted following a crisis situation
➢ gain a better understanding of how communications fits into the
organization’s big picture and how you can help the organization succeed
➢ focus on numbers-oriented approach to communications
➢ demonstrate strategic thinking, initiative and business-savvy through your
interactions with upper management
2–9
Organizational research: Public Relations Audit
2–10
Internal environment
quality of the goods and services
Performance viability of the causes and ideas
level of satisfaction of organizational leadership with this quality
Niche what makes it different from other organizations.
purpose or mission of the organization
the role public relations plays within the organization’s
Structure administration.
Is an ethical perspective based on how the organization sees itself,
Ethical base or is it merely the concern of an individual currently on the scene?
Internal impediments or obstacles within the organization that might limit
impediments the effectiveness of the public relations program
2–11
Public perception
• VISIBILITY
➢ The extent to which an organization is known
➢ whether people know about an organization, what they know about it
➢ how accurate this information is
• REPUTATION
➢ how people evaluate the information they have
➢ the general, overall, and long-term impression that
➢ based on both word and deed—that is, on the verbal, visual, and
behavioral messages, both planned and unplanned, that come from an
organization.
➢ part of the social capital of an organization
➢ can be inconsistent, varying from one public to another and from one time
to another 2–12
External environment
• Supporters
➢ people and groups who currently or at least potentially are likely to help
the organization achieve its objectives
Identify groups that share similar interests and values
• Competitors
➢ Fight for difference
• Opponents
➢ groups or people who are against an organization
➢ have the potential to damage the organization by limiting its ability to
pursue its mission and achieve its goals.
2–13
Opponents
• Advocate:
➢ oppose because they support something else, and the organization appear to stand in
the way of their goal. Their tactics are mainly vocal.
➢ find common ground for discussion through public communication
➢ create an alliance between organization and advocates.
• Dissident:
➢ they oppose because of the position you hold or the actions you have undertaken
➢ their opposition is not irrational
➢ communication that addresses their interests and concerns might soften their opposition.
• Anti:
➢ opposition is generic toward any kind of change or toward any established institution
➢ public communication probably would have little impact on them
2–14
Opponents
• Activist
➢ They seek change.
➢ Opposition to your organization may be a by- product of their goal.
➢ Communication might reveal and promote a common basis for at least
limited cooperation.
• Missionary
➢ a self-righteous activist in support of a cause, often operating under the
presumption of moral imperative.
➢ Communication would have only limited potential for moderating the
opposition
2–15
Opponents
• Zealot
➢ a single-issue activist with a missionary fervor
➢ public communication is unlikely to coax zealots out of their opposition.
➢ willing to engage in civil disobedience and risk jail to advance their cause.
• Fanatic
➢ the suicide bombers and terrorist snipers ready to go to any lengths in
their opposition
➢ public communication can have little impact on them, though it may
impact the less fanatical supporters in the cause.
2–16
Case study: Love food, hate food
(Waste and Resources Action Programme [Link])
• Research in 2007
➢ 6.7 million tonnes of food waste is generated in UK homes every year and
➢ a third of all food purchased was thrown away, most of which could have
been eaten
➢ consumers were unaware of food waste as an economic issue
➢ 90 percent of consumers claimed not to waste food
➢ once alerted to the problem, consumers were keen to do take action
=> work with consumers, owners of food brands and retailers to
connect them with the issue of food waste and to stop it reaching
landfill sites.
• Budget: 150,000 pounds
2–17
Client objectives
• raise awareness of food waste and the LFHW campaign;
• encourage consumers to review their own attitudes and
behaviour;
• work with WRAP to reduce the amount of food going to landfill
sites by 100,000 tonnes, by summer 2008;
• provide a solution to the problem and a means to access these
solutions.
2–18
Target audience
• all consumers, but especially families and ‘foodies’.
2–19
Strategy
• use ‘shocking facts’ to grab consumers’ attention;
• personalize the campaign so that consumers engage with the
issue;
• use a variety of ‘enabling tools’ to help people change their
behaviour towards food waste.
2–20
Planning: Stage 1: Pre-launch
Develop editorial ideas for key media, highlighting the ‘shocking facts’
about waste & a range of practical ways to reduce waste
• Shocking facts
➢ £3 billion wasted on good food is thrown away: £430 per person every year;
➢ 5.1 million potatoes, 4.4 million apples, 2.8 million tomatoes, 1.6 million
bananas and 1.2 million oranges – all perfectly wholesome – are thrown
away every year;
➢ one in three bags of food purchased ends up being thrown away.
• Solutions
➢ keeping fruit in the fridge;
➢ using up leftovers;
➢ better portion control;
➢ home composting. 2–21
Planning: Stage 2: Recruiting supporters
• Identify recognized food industry experts
➢ Caroline Mason, ex-cookery editor of Good Housekeeping magazine
help with recipes and offer practical solutions
• Award-winning journalist and broadcaster Richard Johnson
➢ Help to recruit chefs
• Majority of the UK’s leading chefs and food writers
• Love Food champion’s community project was initiated with the
Women’s Institute
➢ Provide practical advice and feedback from local communities.
2–22
Planning: Stage 3: The launch of the campaign
• Launch day was staged at London Borough Market, a venue
synonymous with the campaign’s values
• 30 journalists, crews and key stakeholders acted as campaign
advocates to provide mainstream and ‘foodie’ appeal.
• Cook-offs and web stations
➢ show an information-packed and advice-filled website, provide interactive
elements
➢ play a show reel of chefs and celebrities who all gave their time for free
practical advice to life
emotional depth and personal connections to the issue
2–23
Planning: Stage 4: Maintaining momentum
• BBC Good Food Show regional radio show was a crucial exercise
to meet a ‘warm foodie’ audience through a LFHW stand.
• A Christmas to February campaign focusing on the 230,000 tonnes
of festive food waste, worth some £275 million, providing new
stories, tips on leftovers and advice on making meals go further.
• An April burst, focusing on fruit and vegetable waste using the
banner ‘an apple a day gets thrown away’, to highlight the 4.4
million apples that are discarded daily.
• In May, launching the research-based Food We Waste report to
media and stakeholders
➢ Identify how much food in their various categories we waste
2–24
Evaluation
• 555 pieces of coverage (Objective 1);
• 100% penetration of key media, with 99% of all print coverage favourable
and 98 per cent including at least one core message (Objective 1);
• 43 leading chefs, foodies, journalists and celebrities have actively
contributed to the campaign, free of charge (Objective 1);
• 1.45 million households have committed to throwing away less food
(Objective 2);
• a reduction of 500,000 of carbon dioxide equivalents (Objective 2);
• translates into savings for consumers of almost £240 million (Objective 2);
• reduction of food waste going to landfill of 100,000 tonnes (Objective 3);
• 154,000 people visited and contributed to the LFHW website (Objective 4);
• 54% of all print coverage included practical advice (Objective 4);
2–25
Key take-aways
• potentially high risk: first time food waste was the subject of a campaign,
careful research and close working with respected industry figures and
stakeholders to reduce the risk
• based on solid research that could not be refuted:
➢ the facts of food waste, our relationship with food, consumer habits,
industry practices, practical solutions
a deep insight of the kind of facts that would connect with consumers
without prompting an adverse reaction
• a staged roll-out via obtaining prior buy-in from key individuals &
organizations
• successful follow-up to the launch
• Relatively limited tactics but impactful: focusing on deep engagement
• mix of rational and emotional appeal 2–26
Practice: Tiny Tykes Toys
• Tiny Tykes Toys manufactures toys for infants and toddlers. It
recently voluntarily recalled one of its crib toys, a plush animal doll
with a shiny nose. When babies chewed on the nose, it secreted an
indelible green dye into their mouths and on their faces that lasted for
several weeks. The dye was harmless, but the consumer lawsuits
(minor) and resulting publicity (major and sensationalized) have
caused a decrease in sales of other Tiny Tykes toys.
• The company has 130 union workers and 27 management staff. It
also has a two-person public relations/marketing staff.
• Unrelated to the recall, but happening around the same time, a small
but vocal group of employees began agitating for increased pay and
shorter working hours.
2–27
Public perception
• The recall endangered the company’s reputation for quality
among stockholders, consumers, pediatricians, and other interest
groups.
• The defect has been eliminated in new versions of the toy.
• The company perceives its image as fun, low-tech, inexpensive,
beneficial, and safe.
2–28
External environment
• The business environment for children’s toys is highly competitive,
and it has become more so due to increasing international rivals and
the expansion into the toy market of domestic companies once
associated primarily with children’s clothing.
• Tiny Tykes has several competitors, some of them nationally known
companies with huge promotional budgets. Several of these
companies have products of similar quality and cost to Tiny Tykes;
they currently enjoy a more favorable reputation because of the recall.
• The overall business environment for toys is a growing and highly
competitive market. The dissident employee faction has the potential
for contributing to a wider consumer backlash against the company.
2–29
Internal environment
Basic Questions
➢ What is the quality of your organization’s performance?
➢ What communication resources, including budget, are available?
➢ How supportive is the organization of public relations activity?
2–30
Internal environment - Existing information
2–31
Internal environment - Existing information
2–32
Internal environment - Existing information
2–33
Internal environment – Research program
2–34
Public perception – Existing information
2–35
Public perception – Research program
2–36
External environment – Existing information
2–37
External environment – Existing information
2–38
External environment – Research program
2–39