Qualitative methods in communication controlling: The MAIE Model
Jim Macnamara, professor for Public Communication at the University of Sydney, unveiled his MAIE Model at the sixth AMEC Summit on Measurement in Amsterdam. His approach focuses on the combination of qualitative and quantitative methods in the context of communication controlling.
Based on the question why so many PR people and companies still have doubts to install evaluation standards, Macnamara identifies typical challenges and proposes a four-step-approach to meeting them. communicationcontrolling.de already interviewed Jim Macnamara for the series of interviews “thought leaders” in October 2013.
Three obstacles on the way to value creation
Macnamara identifies three major reasons that, from his point of view, prevented the adoption of adequate measurement and evaluation standards in professional life.
1. Macnamara criticizes the focus on quantitative methods that are not able to provide information about human feelings and perceptions. However, Macnamara emphasizes that most of “outtakes” and “outcomes” cannot be represented in numbers.
2. The author states that common approaches and theoretical frameworks do not sufficiently distinguish between measurement and evaluation. Often these terms lack their original definition: measurement is about data collection and data analysis, whereas evaluation means to identify the creation of value.
In traditional approaches measurement and evaluation are being arranged side by side.
3. Finally Macnamara recognizes a lack of insights that allow a deeper understanding of stakeholders’ views and attitudes.
Four steps break deadlocked ways of thinking – The MAIE Model
Jim Macnamara created his new model to invoke a shift from scientific quantitative methods towards interpretative ones. The MAIE Model is supposed to address and overcome the obstacles defined above. Four steps are meant to pave the way.
1. Measurement: The first step in the MAIE model consists of data collection and a first analysis of the collected data. Here, quantitative as well as qualitative data are considered to be suitable for representing human feelings and perceptions.
2. Analysis: Subsequent to the data collection, the model proposes further deep analysis. The author suggests to look beyond measurement metrics collected by the organization. External data like research literature or case studies should also be taken into consideration when analyzing. Macnamara says, that deep analysis provides a deeper and richer data pool to produce more reasoned findings.
The new MAIE model is supposed to strengthen motivation to establish measurement and evaluation standards in professional life by providing connectivity to the organization strategy.
3. Insights: The author puts a focus on the creation of insights that can bridge the gap between corporate communication and organization strategy which is sensed by Macnamara. In doing so, insights are able to offer added value.
4. Evaluation: The final step is the evaluation itself which helps to identify future potentials for creating added value when using qualitative as well as quantitative methods. This is the reason why Macnamara postulates a much higher level of appreciation for the MAIE model than in any backward-looking approaches.
MAIE Model as a new paradigm?
Jim Macnamara wants his MAIE model to include qualitative methods in measurement and evaluation as well as to connect communication to the organization strategy. As a matter of fact, Macnamara manages to provide a different view on the field of measurement and evaluation by stating that the investigation of “outtakes” and “outcomes” requires qualitative research designs. Nevertheless, the MAIE model is not able to solve some problems that Macnamara has identified: a plethora of metrics and numerous diverging definitions of key terms. On the one side, by adding qualitative to traditional quantitative methods the findings become more significant and meaningful. On the other side, the pool of key performance indicators and procedures becomes more and more unmanageable for PR people and companies.
Besides this issue, Macnamara’s demand for an integration of the communication strategy into the organization strategy is not new. Various approaches and initiatives dealing with this topic can be found in the German research environment. The framework for communication controlling, published from the DPRG in collaboration with the ICV in 2009, already urged the linkage of communication with the organization strategy. In this theoretical framework, the final level of impact, named “outflow”, is meant to measure the creation of value by communication. Furthermore, in his article “Der Wert der Kommunikation” (meaning “The value of communication”) that was published in the magazine “pressesprecher” 2012, Christopher Storck proposes a circular model linking organization strategy with communication by passing the levels of impacts twice. With this being said, Jim Macnamara’s central claim is no innovation in Germany, nevertheless it can be seen as a further sensitization.
About Jim Macnamara
Jim Macnamara, Ph.D., is professor of Public Communication at the University of Technology Sydney. Macnamara started his academic career after having worked in the field of communication for 30 years spanning journalism, public relations and media research. He is internationally recognized for his work on PR evaluation.
back to News
