12/9/2009Posted by Steve Schildwachter, SVP, Group Management Director, Draftfcb Chicago
Measurement and accountability are favorite topics of mine because they are the keys to the future of our business. Technology now permits us to know a lot more about the results of what we do.
Even so, it seems many executives don’t want to know the results. Perhaps they don’t trust the mysterious black box marketing mix analyses that impugned their efforts in the past. Perhaps the idea of understanding an algorithm (or even spelling the word) is intimidating or boring. Or maybe it’s just a lack of familiarity with the methods old and new we can all use to figure out what worked and what didn’t.
We’d all better get familiar fast. Even if we provide the smartest strategy and the greatest creative, it won’t mean much without analytics. As described in the short history of advertising, there are plenty of consultants who are willing to fill the void.
Fortunately the Draftfcb Model includes Customer Intelligence – the data analysts, or, as their leader says, the marketing geeks. On my business we are using them more and more – with great results.
The rest of the industry has caught on to these topics. Open any trade publication or business website and you’ll see a lot of interesting news and discussion. Here are just three examples plucked from the news last week alone.
1. It’s possible to measure TV advertising’s effect.
Let’s start with some fuzzy math. Or, in the words of Lucas Donat, “fuzzy analytics”. Donat wrote about a method of measuring TV advertising’s effect on sales. It’s very simple from a mathematical standpoint: establish a baseline that estimates what sales would be if you did not advertise for the time period in question. What’s the baseline? This is the fuzzy part. You are making a 21st Century dart throw, a guesstimate. But why not? You have to start somewhere. As Donat explains, you must attend to this model over time and learn its rhythms, constantly measuring your actual sales curve to understand the marketplace effect. Does this sound daunting? Ask Customer Intelligence for some perspective.
Years ago when I worked on McDonald’s we used this model to understand whether a promotion like Two Big Macs for $2 was driving a sufficient lift in transactions to justify the lower average check we expected from the discount. Step one was to establish a baseline. We treated these monthly case studies very seriously, and referred back to them for the planning of each new program. You’ve never known accountability, by the way, until you’ve explained store sales and profit to a committee of QSR franchisees.
2. The “secret weapon” should now be standard equipment.
Draftfcb resulted from the merger of an ad agency and the world’s premier direct marketing agency. I love the way my direct marketing colleagues think about measurement; it’s a product of decades measuring their work in direct marketing. Before the merger, direct marketing was something I only read about. For example, “Ogilvy on Advertising”, David Oglivy’s 1983 book, included a chapter titled “Direct mail, my first love and secret weapon”. It’s either quaint or prophetic that in just the third paragraph he mentions “computers” as a major advancement in the discipline.
3. Isn’t digital supposed to be measurable?
Recently, there was also an article about IRI, Dynamic Logic, ComScore and X+1 teaming up to offer a platform to analyze consumer purchase data and plan more effective online campaigns. Part of the news here is that they seek to tie purchase data to consumer segments such as loyalists and switchers. An intriguing example was the diagnosis of a packaged-goods brand campaign that attributed sales lift to incremental purchases by existing customers, as opposed to bringing in new buyers.
These are just three examples from one week in business journalism. There are thousands more.
Amidst all this activity, we offer something truly unique. We were the first major agency to elevate accountability to the same level as creativity. Customer Intelligence is critical to this effort.
5/22/2009Posted by Sid Liebenson, EVP, Director of Marketing
On Tuesday, May 19, I participated in the first round of judging for the International ECHO Awards. As a member of the ECHO Board of Governors, I’m obligated to a day of judging, and I chose the first day – when you can see the good, the bad, and the ugly.
ECHO is among the top awards for direct and interactive marketing. Successful entries must demonstrate superior achievement in strategy, creative execution, and response. Beyond these criteria, the judges look for original, innovative ideas. And the judges are tough.
Still, there was a lot more good than bad and ugly. Overall, there were more positive reviews of entries than negative (which isn’t always the case). Perhaps the economy made agencies more selective about the work they submitted.
I judged the Product Manufacturing and Distribution category, dominated by packaged goods campaigns, so I got to see a lot of elaborate, well produced work. On my judging panel were two creative directors from Chile, one from San Francisco (by way of Spain), and one from Chicago. I was very surprised by some of their critical evaluations:
- A beautifully produced dimensional mailing, with a sound chip no less, was derided as being an example of creative overkill. The strategy wasn’t particularly original and the sales points could have been made just as effectively without spending so much money. (At that point, I wanted to check business cards to make sure these judges were actually Creatives!)
- If there wasn’t some kind of online engagement element, why not? The judges were looking for examples of comprehensive integration. Entries lost favor for not taking full advantage of interactive channels. And if there were interactive elements they were expected to be out of the ordinary, captivating, etc.
- Campaigns based on a clever gimmick raised suspicion. Judges wondered if they agency had come up with some cute creative idea and then went out and found a local company to do the work for – just to enter the work in award shows. In such cases, the results were tightly scrutinized.
Maybe the tough economy and the real world workday rigors of constantly having to do more with less made these judges look beyond the merely good and pretty to find what is exciting and special in a real marketing sense. Unfortunately, we did not find many “knockouts.” But the quality of discrimination exercised by the judges gives me hope that the ultimate award winners will be highly impressive. (Let’s hope some of them are from Draftfcb.)
I left my judging day with some interesting takeaways:
- Some really great ideas can be found in campaigns that are not likely to win an ECHO. For example, I saw a truly original out-of-home execution in a campaign with weak response elements and results that could have been driven by factors other than that particular campaign.
- Doing a tried-and-true strategy and execution very well can generate outstanding results for your client. But unless you put a new spin on it, you won’t win an ECHO award. Nevertheless, I’d still be proud to deliver that kind of hard-working campaign. Sometimes the obvious strategy – done well – is the most effective solution.
- Direct marketing is harder to define than ever. Measurable consumer activity is engrained in brand building campaigns that feature promotional offers that lead to ongoing consumer dialogue…and so on. And the more integrated, the more we like it – because, often, the most integrated campaigns are the most effective. (But you all know that.)
Final takeaway: awards judging can be tedious, but its worth the effort. You really get to see what’s out there and (for direct or promotional marketing awards) what’s working. And if you’re lucky, you can pick ups some valuable new ideas.
|
|
|
|