<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: PR pros in Europe less powerful than in the US</title>
	<atom:link href="http://stedavies.com/2009/01/pr-pros-in-europe-less-powerful-than-in-the-us/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://stedavies.com/2009/01/pr-pros-in-europe-less-powerful-than-in-the-us/</link>
	<description>the blog of consultant Stephen Davies</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Mon, 16 Aug 2010 13:02:45 +0200</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	
	<item>
		<title>By: Christian</title>
		<link>http://stedavies.com/2009/01/pr-pros-in-europe-less-powerful-than-in-the-us/comment-page-1/#comment-2098</link>
		<dc:creator>Christian</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 07 Jan 2009 09:31:59 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.prblogger.com/?p=1459#comment-2098</guid>
		<description>Interesting stuff, and a very broad remit of research - one to digest at leisure. However, it&#039;s not tremendously well presented, and whilst I salute them for using ANOVAs, they don&#039;t use them all the way through, or point out where the findings *aren&#039;t* significant. That&#039;s really just as important as where they *are* - so for example, the findings you&#039;ve quoted aren&#039;t statistically significant, nor do they really explain what those numbers in the chart above really mean!

Also, looked at their methodology - they don&#039;t actually mention surveying PR people in the USA at all - and it&#039;s not entirely clear where they got that data from.There&#039;s a reference at the back (and poorly footnoted on p16) to a US study, but it&#039;s not very well explained. In short, I&#039;m not entirely convinced - there are a lot of graphs, and very little in-depth explanation. A few paragraphs for ten graphs doesn&#039;t count!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Interesting stuff, and a very broad remit of research &#8211; one to digest at leisure. However, it&#8217;s not tremendously well presented, and whilst I salute them for using ANOVAs, they don&#8217;t use them all the way through, or point out where the findings *aren&#8217;t* significant. That&#8217;s really just as important as where they *are* &#8211; so for example, the findings you&#8217;ve quoted aren&#8217;t statistically significant, nor do they really explain what those numbers in the chart above really mean!</p>
<p>Also, looked at their methodology &#8211; they don&#8217;t actually mention surveying PR people in the USA at all &#8211; and it&#8217;s not entirely clear where they got that data from.There&#8217;s a reference at the back (and poorly footnoted on p16) to a US study, but it&#8217;s not very well explained. In short, I&#8217;m not entirely convinced &#8211; there are a lot of graphs, and very little in-depth explanation. A few paragraphs for ten graphs doesn&#8217;t count!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Weekly CyberFootprints Jan 6 2009 &#124; CyberFootprint</title>
		<link>http://stedavies.com/2009/01/pr-pros-in-europe-less-powerful-than-in-the-us/comment-page-1/#comment-2097</link>
		<dc:creator>Weekly CyberFootprints Jan 6 2009 &#124; CyberFootprint</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 07 Jan 2009 00:00:56 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.prblogger.com/?p=1459#comment-2097</guid>
		<description>[...] Communication Monitor released a survey on power of the PR managers in 2008. Stephen Davies gives a gist of the [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] Communication Monitor released a survey on power of the PR managers in 2008. Stephen Davies gives a gist of the [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Craig McGill</title>
		<link>http://stedavies.com/2009/01/pr-pros-in-europe-less-powerful-than-in-the-us/comment-page-1/#comment-2096</link>
		<dc:creator>Craig McGill</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 06 Jan 2009 23:30:36 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.prblogger.com/?p=1459#comment-2096</guid>
		<description>Stephen, it would look bad for us if we boasted about our influence as people would then be more distrusting, so this is our way of telling people not to be scared of us :-)</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Stephen, it would look bad for us if we boasted about our influence as people would then be more distrusting, so this is our way of telling people not to be scared of us <img src='http://stedavies.com/wp-includes/images/smilies/icon_smile.gif' alt=':-)' class='wp-smiley' /> </p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: renaissance chambara &#124; Ged Carroll - Links of the day</title>
		<link>http://stedavies.com/2009/01/pr-pros-in-europe-less-powerful-than-in-the-us/comment-page-1/#comment-2095</link>
		<dc:creator>renaissance chambara &#124; Ged Carroll - Links of the day</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 06 Jan 2009 00:05:17 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.prblogger.com/?p=1459#comment-2095</guid>
		<description>[...] PR pros in Europe less powerful than in the US &#124; PRBLOGGER.COM - Not terribly surprised by this, many foreign companies run PR in very much a command and control style and press clippings are still the overwhelming preferred measurement metric [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] PR pros in Europe less powerful than in the US | PRBLOGGER.COM &#8211; Not terribly surprised by this, many foreign companies run PR in very much a command and control style and press clippings are still the overwhelming preferred measurement metric [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Andrew Bruce Smith</title>
		<link>http://stedavies.com/2009/01/pr-pros-in-europe-less-powerful-than-in-the-us/comment-page-1/#comment-2094</link>
		<dc:creator>Andrew Bruce Smith</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 03 Jan 2009 12:31:05 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.prblogger.com/?p=1459#comment-2094</guid>
		<description>Thanks for the tip on the report - interesting stuff.  I see press clippings still remain the key measurement criteria everywhere - by a mile. In fact, it&#039;s quoted companies that place highest reliance on this - 88.4pc.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Thanks for the tip on the report &#8211; interesting stuff.  I see press clippings still remain the key measurement criteria everywhere &#8211; by a mile. In fact, it&#8217;s quoted companies that place highest reliance on this &#8211; 88.4pc.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
