Most in the PR industry reading this would applaud the creative ideas Edelman came up with and the high-profile coverage generated. However, I can't help but question whether the strategy really met Microsoft's key objective - to challenge the negative consumer attitudes towards the company.
The decision to build the campaign strategy around Microsoft's HR leadership confuses me. As a user of Microsoft products, I'm not concerned whether it is a good place to work.
The results of a perception audit into exactly how consumers form opinions about a company and the extent to which its internal best practices, such as HR leadership, improve overall perceptions might have resulted in a different media relations strategy.
What's more, I would have liked evidence of how consumers' views had shifted as a result of the campaign.
Don't get me wrong - I'm not saying that Bill Gates's charitable ways, the company's CSR programmes and HR initiatives aren't a good thing, but they are not enough to divert attention away from its well-publicised reputation issues.
With these points in mind, Edelman's campaign may have reduced Microsoft's recruitment costs, but has it salvaged the image that consumers have of the company?