Are you working in internal communications and suffering from FOFO – the Fear of Finding Out?

We’ve all heard of FOMO – the Fear of Missing Out – but take a moment to think if you’re actually more concerned about finding out.

What if the data and measurements for your communication campaigns went deeper than “likes” and “views” and you began to look at responses, engagement and business value gained?

Do you want to know the reality? Or are you happier remaining ignorant and waving the “vanity metrics” – the likes and views – around?

PR measurement expert and strategy advisor Jesper Andersen relates the story of an agency CEO at a communications conference who declared his company doesn’t do measurement. Why? Because; “I’d rather forgo to the chance to be proven a success to be sure I’m never proved a failure”.

That CEO is the epitome of someone with FOFO.

Andersen says it’s not an uncommon mindset in the world of communication and is typical of risk-adverse organisations.

“There are people out there who use communication measurements as a means to get their boss off their back,” he said.

“These are the type of people who I find usually buy a tool that delivers some nice numbers, what we call vanity metrics. Reach, and number of followers for instance. Then they just give that report to the boss and say; ‘Look, we’re doing fine. Look at these great statistics’.

“If you give them the proposition that with even more sophisticated measurement, they go beyond the vanity metrics and they might actually really look at outcomes and impact, they become fearful that it will be exposed that maybe they haven’t really been contributing.

“Maybe they’ve created a lot of buzz, a lot of noise, but they haven’t really moved a needle in terms of what have we done to actually support the organisation reaching its goals.”

Andersen is a staunch believer that measurement and evaluation of campaigns is key to learning, and learning is key to growth.

Without analysing campaigns and truly measuring their impact on reaching goals, the chance of growth in your business is hit or miss.

Andersen explains there are, generally speaking, two mindsets related to analysing internal communications campaigns.

1. Using measurement to document results.

2. Using measurement and evaluation as a way to identify and realise the potential for learning, improving and growing.

He says people who are concerned with documentation are usually risk adverse, and more inclined to work in a risk-adverse organisation that does not reward taking chances.

“They don’t see failure, or having a bad campaign, as something you can learn and grow from,” Andersen said.

“It very much comes down to what culture you have in your organisation. If you have a culture where the upper management level of the executives say we acknowledge that in order to learn and grow you also have to make mistakes, so it’s okay to, as long as you don’t keep repeating mistakes, then you have room to manoeuvre and experiment – and possibly fail at some things.

“Other organisations only want to see positive numbers. If you work in a risk adverse company that frowns on risk taking, or having this learning curve, then you’re forced into a corner as a communication manager where you feel pressured to only deliver positive results.”

Which means, Andersen says, management is basically asking to be lied to.

“They’re forcing their communication managers to come up with spin and positive numbers and sweep the rest under the carpet,” he said.

Andersen says FOFO really isn’t that people don’t want to know what’s happening, rather they’re afraid of the consequences if upper management finds out about a failed campaign.

“I think the whole fear of finding out as a professional dilemma for our industry comes from what sort of risk adverse, or risk willing, culture you have in your organisation,” he said.

“If we want to see more communication measurement as something we can learn from and grow from, we first need to acknowledge that most communication will never be a guaranteed success. And in order to find out what works and what doesn’t, a little trial-and-error as we build our experience is needed.”

By identifying mistakes, or even failures, in internal communications, they can be addressed. Once you know the problem, it can be fixed.

Identifying success, or failure, with analytics

Success or failure in internal communications can be measured with data but SWOOP Analytics Chief Scientist Dr Laurence Lock Lee says it’s important to know what metrics identify success - and it’s not the vanity metrics.

He says it’s important to measure engagement in internal communication campaigns, rather than views or likes, especially when you need employees to engage with a message, or take action.

Dr Lock Lee says it’s not about whether everyone receives the message, but rather ensuring employees can engage in conversation. SWOOP will measure the breadth and depth of that conversation. Engagement in the conversation is arguably a much stronger measure than the views and likes.

“Think about the actual real measure of the success of the campaign,” Dr Lock Lee said.

“It’s not how many people have read a post. If there’s an active or heated debate around the message, then that’s a much stronger indicator of engagement than metrics that show how many have viewed the post.

“Discussion and debate and sharing ideas is a good thing.”

At SWOOP Analytics, our focus is on measuring and improving digital workplace relationships to reach better business outcomes. Watch this two-minute video to learn how to measure and compare internal communication campaigns. Sign up for a free trial of SWOOP.