Case Studies:
Government
How the State of NH Used Research to Improve its Image
Once every four years the media spotlight shines on the tiny state of New Hampshire and its one million residents. In the span of six months, thousands of reporters, camera crews, news analysts and a handful of candidates converge on the state in preparation for the first-in-the-nation presidential primary.
If New Hampshire were a corporation, the Corporate Communications Department would take one look at that level of media attention and start planning events about three years in advance. Briefing books and press kits would be written, t-shirts, coffee mugs and tote bags would be printed with the key messages on them, designated spokespeople would be media trained on the key messages, and by the time the first reporter crossed the border, their visits--and the messages they communicated--would be carefully scripted.
But because New Hampshire is a state (a politically and economically diverse one at that) and not a corporation, things there are a little different. Candidates come to the state and point to its economy as an example of the evils of the other party or the benefits of their own. Reporters traditionally arrive in New Hampshire, get out of their heated vans, find someone who looks "typical" (i.e., spoke funny and wore a flannel shirt), interview them just long enough for their fingers to get numb, hop back in the van and file their stories. And you were far more likely to trip over a moose than key messages.
The results were not particularly surprising. In 1992, the Democrats used the state's failing economy to make their argument against the incumbent Bush administration. "Look at New Hampshire," they said over and over again, "It's got the highest rate of bankruptcies, the highest welfare roles, the highest unemployment- and the worst economy in the country." It was a corporate communications director's nightmare, but because the state didn't have a corporate communications director, no one lost much sleep.
In 1996 the economy had improved, but no one noticed. Reporters still came in and looked for the nearest plaid flannel shirt, confirmed that everyone in New Hampshire was a little odd (the most frequently heard message was "persnickety") and returned home to write about how weird the New Hampshire primary phenomenon was.
Then along came former Governor Hugh Gregg and an organization called the Library and Archives of New Hampshire's Political Tradition. Essentially, it was an organization dedicated to celebrating New Hampshire's "first-in-the-nation" status and ensuring that it continued.
The Library's first mission was to understand what the primary meant in economic terms to the state. The assumption was that it was a huge economic windfall. The Library contracted with the University of New Hampshire (UNH) to quantify that "windfall."
Step one was to identify the various sources of revenue that the primary might generate, including taxes, monies paid for hotel rooms, rental cars, signage, etc. Step two was to attempt to quantify what the campaign and media organizations spent. Organizations were interviewed; the Business and Industry Association (BIA) and UNH examined campaign records; and the state provided data on tax revenues generated by the rooms and meals tax. Every conceivable source was interviewed, checked and scrutinized. The conclusion was that one day at the car racetrack in Loudon, New Hampshire, generated more revenue than an entire season of primary activities. Not exactly what the Governor and the Library had in mind.
However, in order to identify which media organizations had been in the state during the primary season, the University of New Hampshire hired a media analysis company to analyze all the media coverage about the state. They conducted a Lexis-Nexis search of all articles and television reports that specifically mentioned New Hampshire and its first-in-the-nation primary. Articles were further culled down to ensure that they specifically discussed the state, and did not just make passing reference to a locale. That analysis showed that 370 different reporters wrote stories that specifically referenced the first-in-the-nation primary; some 200 million potential readers saw news about the state; and most of that news did very little for the state's image. In fact, the major message communicated in the 1996 season was how atypical the state was. The resulting conclusion? Why should this little state have so much influence on who rules the country?
Additionally, when the state's economists looked at the results they noticed the 22 million favorable impressions that the primary had generated. The state's 10 percent positive rating was abysmal compared to the average corporate PR campaign. This was hardly surprising, given the fact that this was a state and not a company. But the economists also knew that for every 100 people who saw a favorable mention of the state, three would be likely to visit the state, and, of those, another two percent would eventually start a business or open a plant in the state. So the media coverage could be a clear windfall if the state could improve the tone and image that was being portrayed.
The results were released at a press conference in July of 1999 and the study received widespread coverage within the state. Former Governor Gregg also presented the results to the current Governor, Jeanne Shaheen and her executive council. There were two clear conclusions. The first was that if the state wanted to maintain its "first-in-the-nation" status, it had to be perceived as more representative of the rest of the country. The second was that New Hampshire had a good story to tell but no one was telling it.
As it happened, the state's economy had turned around by 1996, and by the time reporters began to roam across the borders in the summer of 1999, New Hampshire had the lowest unemployment rate, the highest percentage of high-tech jobs, and one of the fastest growth rates for new business. Additionally the demographics of the state had changed. High-tech workers had moved into the southern half of the state in record numbers, women had started businesses all over the state, and top ranking in surveys such as "best place to raise a child" and "best cities to live in" were boosting the population after years of decline. Perhaps the biggest outward sign that things were changing was that the state had elected its first woman governor ever, and the first Democratic governor in 16 years.
At a brainstorming session, the research team came to the realization that when reporters wanted to find information out about the state, they had no single, reliable source. Typically, their first calls went out to the Governor's Office, DRED (the unfortunately named Department of Resources and Economic Development) the University of New Hampshire, the Business and Industries Association and the Library and Archives. It was easy to coordinate messaging among those groups because we were all working on the project together. But what about the reporters who weren't making those calls? The answer was a web site, www.NHFIRST.com, where reporters could find all the background information they needed about the state and the primary.
Buoyed by battles royal in both parties and a full slate of candidates, the 2000 election drew more reporters than ever before. Nearly twice as many covered the state and its primary in 2000 as wrote stories in 1996. Those reporters also generated in excess of 28 percent more coverage than the previous primary season. But the question remained: Did the state get its message out?
To answer that question, the University of New Hampshire repeated its research using the identical terms and criteria that it had used to study the 1996 primary. The results showed that if this were a corporation, the head of communications would have deserved a big fat raise. While the state hadn't boosted its overall positive exposure, it had cut the negatives by two-thirds and had communicated the right messages more often than not. The most frequently communicated message was that New Hampshire residents were informed and engaged in the political process and, therefore, deserved their position in the election process. The second most frequently communicated message, was that this was "the new New Hampshire," home of the highest percentage of high-tech jobs, a hot economy, and a very civically engaged citizenry.
In the postmortem, once the primary and the study were both behind them, the research teams brainstormed about why their ad-hoc program had worked so well. For someone familiar with the ways of corporate America it was all a no-brainer. They got buy-in from top management (both current and former governors), they focused on two clear messages that were grounded in reality and they "trained" their spokespeople well. The amazing part of the achievement, however, is that this was not a corporation, but a state with a highly unwieldy government structure, a tremendous amount of disagreement between parties and factions, and a huge divide between regions of the state. And yet they pulled it off. How? By following the rules of basic PR.
Five reasons why KDPaine & Partners should be measuring your success in social media or traditional public relations:
- All our research is custom designed and performed by human experts: Sometimes computer-aided, always human-coded.
Our team has been measuring and evaluating communications for 25 years.
- We measure the tough stuff!
It's not just about media relations anymore. We measure image, public relationships, reputation, outcomes, and social media conversations.
- We don't just give you numbers -- we give you advice.
We are your partners in continuously improving your programs.
- Scaleable research and services to meet any budget.
Our solutions start at $3,600.
- Proven science, proven techniques, proven results.
We adhere to the Institute for Public Relations Guidelines for Measuring Public Relations. We never provide Advertising Value Equivalency or any numbers based on inexact science.
Click here to purchase the newly released
Social Media Measurement White Paper
8th Annual Summit on Measurement
Portsmouth, NH
October 6-8, 2010
Follow us on Twitter
