cprs 2011: study of pr writing by entry-level practitioners reveals significant supervisor...
TRANSCRIPT
![Page 1: CPRS 2011: Study of PR Writing by Entry-level Practitioners Reveals Significant Supervisor Dissatisfaction](https://reader036.vdocuments.site/reader036/viewer/2022071816/55aa933d1a28ab903e8b45eb/html5/thumbnails/1.jpg)
Mount Royal University, Michigan State University
Study of PR Writing by Entry-level Practitioners Reveals Significant
Supervisor Dissatisfaction
Jeremy Berry, APR, Dr. Richard Cole, Dr. Larry Hembroff
This study was funded by Mount Royal University’s
Faculty of Communication Studies, Michigan State
University’s Department of Advertising, Public
Relations and Retailing and the Communications +
Public Relations Foundation
INTRODUCTION
Background &Significance
Most PR practitioners and educators agree that
writing is an essential skill for a public relations
professional. Unfortunately, writing is one of
the skills employers are often complaining
about. Much of the evidence for this is
anecdotal - we set out to change that by
collecting data from across the country and
making comparisons to similar data collected in
the US (Cole, Hembroff& Corner, 2009)
Purpose
To provide educators and practitioners
real data related to entry-level writing –
data which will serve as a baseline moving
forward.
Specific Aims
To collect meaningful data related to
entry-level writing and start a discussion
about writing for the profession.
SUBJECTS
We had five research questions,
four of which were specific to
writing skills. In almost all cases,
when comparing the Canadian data
to that of the US, there was little or
no difference*.
Sample
The CPRS forwarded an introductory memo
from the principal investigators to 1542 CPRS
members (6700 in US study). This effort yielded
109 (848 in the US sample conducted) completed
questionnaires producing a crude response rate of
7% (US response rate was 13%).
METHODS
We included questions to examine skill
components of PR writers, and to determine
whether senior practitioners perceive decline or
improvement of the preparation of entry-level
professionals over time, and whether PR writing
tasks are increasing in variety and complexity.
In most cases, respondents were asked to respond
to questions on a standard Likert-type scale
ranging from a score of one (for the lowest level)
to five (for the highest), or on a “yes, no, don’t
know” format for a series of questions.
Generally, we use percentages to report findings.
DISCUSSION
Conclusions
This comparative descriptive study
confirms the largely negative and
nearly identical impressions of
Canadian and US public relations
supervisors of their perception of
the writing competency of their
junior level colleagues. These
negative impressions should be
cause for alarm to both the North
American public relations industry
and to the academic institutions that
are being increasingly relied upon to
supply trained practitioners.
Limitations
We made no attempt to reveal and explore the root
causes of this majority negative impression of seasoned
PR professionals. Speculation about this condition in
reaction to the initial release of the US only data ranged
from the notion that as PR is becoming increasingly
sophisticated, fewer journalists are making the
transition into the practice.
Another notion begging for further study, and also
noted in the American study, suggests that the current
generation of entry-level PR practitioners have been
raised in a generation in which television, Internet,
texting and video games have been substituted for
reading.
RESULTS
Setting &Recruitment
Working with the CPRS national office, we issued
a survey to all members, excluding educators,
students and retirees. We excluded these groups
because we wanted to focus on people currently
working in public relations.
Table 4. Average GPA* given by Canadian and US respondents to new graduates entering PR field for four writing skills, overall and
by experience in PR field
US Respondents Canadian Respondents
Writing Skill All Respon-
dents
5 Years in
Field or Less
Supervisor with 11+
Years in Field
All Respon-
dents
5 Years in Field
or Less
Supervisors with 11+
Years in Field
Use of proper
grammar
1.96 2.49 1.82 1.82 2.06 1.68
Correct spelling
and punctuation
2.01 2.55 1.84 1.83 2.38 1.63
Ability to
organize ideas
1.95 2.4 1.78 1.94 2.56 1.77
Use of
Associated
Press (CP) or
other style
guidelines
1.71 2.17 1.55 1.79 2.56 1.61
*Letter grades A to E/F converted to numeric grade points 4.0 – 0.0
Table 2. Mean rating(out of five) of capability to produce clean, final copy the first time seen for various
types of writing by experience in the field
All Respondents
Respondents with < 5 Years in
Field
Supervisors with 11+ Years in
the Field
Type of
Writing Task US Canada US Canada US Canada
Web Site
Content2.87 2.86 3.15 3. 2.74 2.70
Business
Letters/Intern
al
Memoranda
2.59 2.50 2.96 3.27 2.46 2.25
Newsletters/A
nnual Reports2.56 2.56 2.90 3.27 2.42 2.42
Fundraising
Appeals/Prop
osals
2.28 2.42 2.58 3.21 2.15 2.26
Blogging/Oth
er Social
Media
3.19 3.18 3.51 3.53 3.08 3.02
Conversationa
l E-mail3.17 3.12 3.53 3.53 3.03 2.88
Press
Releases/Bac
kgrounders
2.73 2.58 3.09 3.27 2.61 2.41
We asked respondents to rate
entry-level writing capability
on a scale from 1 to 5 with the
number 1 being “incapable”
and 5 being “very capable.
Table 2 (right, as reported in
the study) shows the mean
capability ratings respondents
gave new entry-level
employees for each of the
seven types of writing tasks.
Table 4 (below, as reported in the study) shows a significant
difference between how entry-level employees rate their
writing and how their supervisors rate their writing. In both
the US and Canada it appears entry-level PR writers
believe they are better writers than they are.
Table 6.
Percentage distribution of responses and mean response to opinion questions about entry-level
practitioners: US and Canadian respondents
Percent of Respondents Who . . .
Question about Entry-Level
Writers
Strongl
y
Disagre
e 1 2 3 4
Strongly
Agree
5 n=
Mean
Respon
se
US Respon-
dents
They are good
writers11.2% 30.0% 45.1% 12.3% 1.4% 832 2.63
The variety of
writing tasks is
increasing
1.8% 5.1% 16.5% 43.1% 33.5% 836 4.01
The complexity
of writing tasks
is increasing
4.2% 14.7% 25.2% 39.1% 16.8% 834 3.50
Entry-level
professionals are
better prepared
each year
14.2% 34.7% 41.9% 8.2% 1.0% 825 2.47
I am reducing
my expectations
of writing skills
10.2% 16.9% 25.7% 31.3% 15.9% 836 3.26
Canadian
Respon-dents
They are good
writers7.5% 34.6% 39.3% 16.8% 1.9% 107 2.71
The variety of
writing tasks is
increasing
2.8% 9.2% 14.7% 47.7% 25.7% 109 3.84
The complexity
of writing tasks
is increasing
5.5% 12.8% 34.9% 34.9% 11.9% 109 3.35
Entry-level
professionals are
better prepared
each year
15.2% 33.3% 39.0% 10.5% 1.9% 105 2.50
I am reducing
my expectations
of writing skills
9.3% 13.0% 24.1% 29.6% 24.1% 108 3.46
Table 6 from our study (right) shows the
percentage distribution of responses and the
mean response to five opinion questions.
Canadian respondents generally shared the
same assessments as their US counterparts. In
Canada we found strong overall disagreement
(42.1%) and corresponding weak agreement
(18.7%) with the description of entry-level
professionals as “good writers” and even
stronger disagreement (48.5%) with the
statement that entry-level professionals seem
better prepared, in general, each year. Of
significant interest is the degree to which
practitioners appear to be expressing their
frustration with what they perceive as
declining writing skills among entry-level
practitioners by reducing their expectations of
good writing.
*This presentation reports the writing specific findings of our study. For more details on
the differences we found between the use of PR internships in Canada and the US please
see the inaugural edition of the Journal of Professional Communication (June, 2011)