Media Intelligence and Reputation Management Training Course

Participants can identify the stakeholder expectations that shape organisational reputation.

• Stakeholder salience model assesses power, legitimacy and urgency
• Expectation mapping links stakeholder concerns to organisational commitments
• Corporate character dimensions: products, conduct, citizenship and leadership
• Trust drivers assessed through competence, reliability, openness and care
• Segmenting stakeholders by exposure, influence and information needs
• Reputation driver matrix prioritises issues for intelligence collection

Participants can write focused intelligence requirements for a priority reputation issue.

• Priority intelligence requirements derived from strategic communications decisions
• Key intelligence questions separate known facts from decision uncertainty
• Collection plans specify subjects, sources, frequency and responsible owners
• Assumptions logs record evidence gaps and analytical limitations
• Decision calendars align reporting cycles with leadership and governance meetings
• Writing intelligence requirements for a live organisational issue

Participants can design a monitoring architecture matched to organisational risks and audiences.

• Source universe built from media, social, regulatory and stakeholder channels
• Tiering publications by reach, relevance, authority and agenda-setting influence
• Journalist beat mapping identifies specialist reporters and editorial priorities
• Broadcast, print, online and social sources require different collection rules
• Search cadence matches issue velocity, business risk and reporting purpose
• Monitoring governance assigns query ownership, quality checks and archive rules

Participants can create and maintain Boolean searches that return relevant, usable results.

• Boolean operators combine brand, executive, issue and competitor search terms
• Proximity operators reduce false positives within ambiguous brand searches
• Exclusion terms remove irrelevant results without concealing material coverage
• Query trees document synonyms, product names, locations and common misspellings
• Precision and recall tests diagnose weak monitoring query performance
• Version control records query changes, rationale and resulting data effects

Participants can apply a defensible coding framework to media coverage data.

• Codebooks define variables, categories, decision rules and examples
• Inter-coder reliability checks expose inconsistent classification decisions
• Tone coding separates explicit evaluation from neutral factual reporting
• Prominence measures capture headline treatment, placement, length and visual emphasis
• Message pull-through coding identifies accurate, partial and absent organisational positions
• Data cleaning removes duplicates, syndicated items and irrelevant mentions

Participants can identify the narratives and frames influencing stakeholder interpretation.

• Narrative analysis identifies recurring actors, causality, conflict and resolution
• Framing analysis distinguishes responsibility, economic, human-interest and conflict frames
• Message maps connect organisational position, proof points and stakeholder concerns
• Comparing stated messages with media interpretation reveals credibility gaps
• Quote analysis assesses spokesperson authority, accuracy and contextual treatment
• Narrative shifts tracked through language, associations and source patterns

Participants can assess influence without relying on volume or advertising value equivalency.

• Reach, readership and impressions: different measures with distinct limitations
• Source credibility assessed through expertise, independence, relevance and audience trust
• Agenda-setting influence identifies outlets that shape wider media discussion
• Network mapping reveals amplifiers, brokers, critics and community clusters
• Share of voice compared by issue, sentiment, prominence and influential sources
• Advertising value equivalency limitations explained in executive reporting

Participants can interpret sentiment and audience response with appropriate analytical caution.

• Sentiment analysis distinguishes polarity from intensity, emotion and intent
• Manual validation tests automated sentiment classifications against contextual meaning
• Emotion coding identifies anger, anxiety, trust, contempt and hope
• Engagement signals interpreted by audience quality, not interaction totals alone
• Comment analysis separates genuine concerns, coordinated attacks and irrelevant noise
• Sampling methods produce manageable datasets for qualitative review

Participants can connect intelligence findings to coordinated earned, shared, owned and paid activity.

• PESO model assigns channel roles within reputation-building communications programmes
• Earned coverage informs owned content priorities and spokesperson preparation
• Shared media signals identify community questions requiring verified responses
• Paid amplification supports message testing without distorting intelligence findings
• Channel integration matrix connects audiences, objectives, messages and evidence
• Cross-channel dashboards prevent isolated interpretation of media performance

Participants can monitor and manage the distinct reputation risks associated with senior leaders.

• Executive reputation linked to organisational trust, strategy and accountability
• Leadership visibility criteria balance opportunity, risk and stakeholder expectations
• Biographical, behavioural and performance narratives require separate monitoring categories
• Spokesperson scorecards assess credibility, clarity, empathy and message discipline
• Personal social media risks assessed against organisational governance requirements
• Succession and absence scenarios address leadership reputation continuity

Participants can identify emerging issues and distinguish them from routine criticism.

• Issue lifecycle maps latent, emerging, current, crisis and dormant stages
• Signal detection combines volume changes, source shifts and narrative escalation
• Baseline trends establish normal attention levels before alerts are triggered
• Threshold models define alert, escalation and executive notification points
• Horizon scanning identifies policy, social and market drivers of concern
• Weak signals assessed for plausibility, impact, velocity and stakeholder exposure

Participants can assess misinformation risks and select proportionate communications responses.

• Misinformation, disinformation and malinformation: distinct intent and harm profiles
• Verification protocols assess source provenance, evidence and content manipulation
• Rumour tracking separates organic uncertainty from coordinated amplification activity
• Prebunking prepares audiences for predictable false claims and manipulation tactics
• Correction decisions consider reach, risk, credibility and unintended amplification
• Fact sheets establish approved evidence, citations and response language

Participants can produce time-sensitive intelligence reports that support crisis decisions.

• Crisis monitoring objectives change as facts, impacts and stakeholders develop
• Situation reports present verified facts, unknowns, risks and recommended actions
• SCCT links crisis responsibility perceptions to response strategy choices
• Issues-room dashboards prioritise stakeholder harm, operational impact and media momentum
• Rumour logs record claim origin, spread, verification status and response
• Briefing cadence aligns intelligence updates with incident management meetings

Participants can establish response governance for routine issues and high-risk incidents.

• RACI matrices assign monitoring, analysis, approval and response responsibilities
• Escalation protocols specify triggers, recipients, response times and authority
• Legal, regulatory and operational inputs tested before external statements
• Holding statements provide verified acknowledgement without speculation or premature commitments
• Decision logs record options, approvals, evidence and unresolved issues
• Spokesperson protocols align authority, expertise and stakeholder credibility

Participants can design evaluation measures that connect communications activity to outcomes.

• Barcelona Principles 3.0 guide objective-led, transparent communications measurement
• AMEC Integrated Evaluation Framework links inputs, outputs, outcomes and impact
• Logic models connect communications activities to stakeholder behaviour changes
• SMART objectives specify intended awareness, understanding, attitude and action
• Output measures separated from outcome measures in reporting plans
• Measurement plans define sources, frequency, owners and quality controls

Participants can create concise reports that support senior management decisions.

• Executive dashboards present material trends, implications and recommended decisions
• KPI selection reflects intelligence requirements rather than available platform metrics
• Trend charts use baselines, annotations and clear comparison periods
• Traffic-light indicators require explicit thresholds and supporting narrative evidence
• One-page briefings distinguish facts, analysis, assumptions and recommendations
• Data visualisation choices prevent misleading comparisons and unsupported conclusions

Participants can benchmark reputation performance against relevant competitors and comparators.

• Comparator selection considers market position, stakeholder overlap and issue exposure
• Competitive media audits compare visibility, narrative ownership and source quality
• Share of search and share of voice answer different strategic questions
• Peer benchmarking normalises results for news volume and organisation size
• Issue ownership analysis identifies credible positions competitors already occupy
• Benchmark reports distinguish strategic insight from superficial ranking tables

Participants can plan reputation recovery and capture lessons after an incident.

• Recovery objectives address stakeholder confidence, behaviour and relationship repair
• Post-incident reviews examine decisions, evidence, timing and governance performance
• Root cause analysis distinguishes communications failures from operational causes
• Stakeholder listening informs repair commitments and progress reporting
• Trust recovery indicators track credibility, sentiment, advocacy and reduced concern
• Lessons-learned registers assign actions, owners, deadlines and verification methods

Participants can build, review and present a complete media intelligence and reputation management plan for a defined organisational priority.

• Define the priority issue, stakeholders, decisions and reputation objectives
• Build intelligence requirements, source architecture and Boolean query structure
• Specify coding rules, narrative measures and influence assessment criteria
• Set issue thresholds, escalation routes and crisis reporting arrangements
• Design dashboard measures using AMEC and Barcelona Principles 3.0
• Present the plan, receive review feedback and document implementation actions