10Fold Communications

One of the things I pay closest attention to in communications reporting is whether the conclusion actually matches the evidence. A big number can look impressive without telling you very much. Fifty pieces of coverage can mean something very different depending on where they appeared, who they reached, whether the right messages came through, and how much of that coverage was actually original versus syndicated. The same discipline applies when we connect communications to website activity, pipeline, or AI visibility. Those signals can add valuable context. The important part is being clear about what we observed, what the evidence supports, and where we still have uncertainty. That is what credible measurement looks like to me. It gives leadership a more accurate view of what is working and gives the communications team a stronger basis for deciding what to do next. In the third video in The New Rules of Communications Measurement, I talk about the signals I think matter most and how I evaluate whether communications reporting is actually useful.

I’ve had quite a few conversations with CEOs and senior marketing leaders about what they actually want to see in communications reporting. The questions are usually pretty practical. Are we reaching the audiences that matter? Are we becoming associated with the messages we want to own? Are we gaining ground against competitors? And can we see how communications is contributing to website engagement, qualified interest, pipeline progress, and other business outcomes? What I’ve found is that leaders are much more interested in the context around the numbers than the numbers themselves. A strong month of coverage or engagement only tells part of the story. They want to understand what changed, why it matters, and what they should do with that information. It is time that communications is held to the same level of rigor as other marketing investments. That does not mean claiming credit for revenue or other outcomes that communications did not create on its own. It means being clear about where communications is contributing and having the data to support that view. For me, the most useful reporting helps leadership make a better decision while there is still time to act.That’s what I’m discussing in the second video in The New Rules of Communications Measurement: what CEOs and other C-suite leaders actually want to understand from communications data. #CommunicationsMeasurement #MarketingMeasurement #StrategicCommunications

87% of marketing leaders say their CEO or board trusts integrated communications metrics. Only 35% have fully integrated reporting. See how 400 marketing leaders measure impact across PR, content, social and AI visibility, plus the five-level scorecard that connects visibility to business growth.

Revenue impact is the metric CEOs and boards trust most (34%). Share of voice ranks at 11%. If your comms report leads with activity, it may not be speaking the language of the business. See what 400 marketing leaders say executives trust, and what to report instead.

Measurement is already changing strategy and budget decisions for most marketing leaders. Only 49% are very confident in the data behind those decisions. See how 400 leaders are closing the gap between measurement and proof.

Visibility, trust, action, business growth. Can your reporting connect them? Inside 10Fold's study of 400 marketing leaders: the five-level communications scorecard that links earned media, content, social and AI visibility to pipeline influence and revenue.