Millward Brown Perspectives. Volume 6: Issue 2
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in...5
×
 

Millward Brown Perspectives. Volume 6: Issue 2

on

  • 2,484 views

The second issue of Perspectives, our quarterly magazine, is now available for iPad and as a PDF. If you missed the first issue, don’t miss this one. It’s full of valuable content about building ...

The second issue of Perspectives, our quarterly magazine, is now available for iPad and as a PDF. If you missed the first issue, don’t miss this one. It’s full of valuable content about building Meaningfully Different brands, social measurement, and the brand impact of mobile advertising

Statistics

Views

Total Views
2,484
Views on SlideShare
2,484
Embed Views
0

Actions

Likes
3
Downloads
48
Comments
0

0 Embeds 0

No embeds

Accessibility

Categories

Upload Details

Uploaded via as Adobe PDF

Usage Rights

© All Rights Reserved

Report content

Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

Cancel
  • Full Name Full Name Comment goes here.
    Are you sure you want to
    Your message goes here
    Processing…
Post Comment
Edit your comment

Millward Brown Perspectives. Volume 6: Issue 2 Millward Brown Perspectives. Volume 6: Issue 2 Presentation Transcript

  • PerspectivesVOLUME 6 | ISSUE 2
  • Inthisedition Volume 6, Issue 2 Can Marketing and Research Become Better by Design? Point of View Published Articles Knowledge Points Amazon Tops Walmart in Ranking of Most Valuable Brands Why China’s Changing Media Landscape is an Opportunity to Build Brands Marketing to Diversity: Lessons from US Politics SXSW Interactive 8 Top Trends of 2013 What’s Behind the BrandZ Top 100 Ranking and Seemingly Unbeatable Apple? It Works for Coca-Cola and Google and it Can Work for You Too Advertising: How to Maximize the Long-Term Effects Why is it Always Price Before Volume? Understanding the Brand Impact of Mobile Advertising Social Measurement Depends on Data Quantity and Quality Marketing Cars: Change Media Gear Navigating the New Path to Purchase The Power of Being Meaningful, Different and Salient What Does ‘Meaningfully Different’ Actually Mean? Relentlessly Relevant Brands What’s in a Name? How to Name a Company in the Global Economy How Do I Use Online Video Effectively in my Campaign? Tracking at the Crossroads Delivering a Meaningful Brand Promise Digital: The Power and the Peril Characteristics of a Passionate Brand Digital & Media Predicitions 2013 Optimizing Ads: Is Less Always More? Effective Advertising: Harnessing the Power of Creativity Reports of Apple’s Demise are Largely Exaggerated The Joy of Six Acknowledgements
  • Key to the rise of design has been the growing understanding that successful design is user- centric—that is, a product or service must be optimized around the needs of the people who are going to use it. This focus on the needs of the end user has helped design become a factor not only in the development of products, but also services, organizational structures, and brands. At its best, design encompasses form and function, utility and aesthetic appeal. The power of good design as a means to create value is epitomized by the success of Apple. The visual and tactile appeal of Apple’s simple, intuitive products has helped Apple become the most valuable brand in the world, according to the 2013 BrandZTM Top 100 Most Valuable Global Brands Ranking. Similarly, good design lies at the heart of the success of Amazon, where it enables both operational efficiencies and a positive shopping experience. Market research has something in common with the field of design. Like designers, market researchers set out to uncover insights into human behavior that are relevant to client objectives. And like designers, market researchers rely on research. (Designers might say they are making “observations,” but their observations are, essentially, ethnographic research.) Thoughthesesimilaritiesexist,thefortunesofdesignandmarketresearchhave gone in opposite directions in recent years, and marketing, the discipline that depends on market research, has struggled as well. We all know the statistics: most new products fail, most viral videos go nowhere, and click-through rates are laughably low. Is it any wonder that a study by the Fournaise Marketing Group finds that 73 percent of CEOs think marketers lack business credibility and fail to drive financial growth? MARKETING AND RESEARCH: DIVIDED WE FALL I believe that one issue underlying many of the problems faced by marketing is the approach that marketers and researchers take to teamwork and collaboration. Contrasting marketers’approach with that of designers may be useful. In the design process, the same group of people is involved from the definition oftheproblemthroughideation,insight,andimplementation.Thecontinuous involvement of the same team of designers creates a seamless process and ensures that the insight remains central to the implementation. By contrast, the practice of marketing is often distanced from the research function that ought to enable its success, and different developmental stages often involve different people. This can result in misunderstandings, inefficiency, and a dilution of purpose. What starts off as a racehorse of an idea often ends up looking like a camel of a product. In my experience, the most successful research projects are those that involve the same team of people during the discovery, analysis, and implementation phases. Bringing together multiple stakeholders with different backgrounds and expertise helps minimize the effects of personal bias. It also helps ensure commitment when a final solution is implemented. To shift toward this type of approach will take time and effort, and there will be a cost involved. But if marketers and researchers learn to work more like designers, the result will be more effective implementation of new and valuable marketing initiatives. DESIGN THINKING: WHAT’S IN IT FOR US? What else can marketers and researchers gain from studying the example of designers? Besides their collaborative methodology, is there something genuinely distinct about their approach to problem solving? What are the hallmarks of “design thinking,” and do they have any applicability to our disciplines? Make it your business Never delegate understanding. – American designer Charles Eames Like many creative people, the influential modern designer Charles Eames is reputed to have avoided the “market research” of his time. But I take Eames’ command to mean that, whether you employ researchers or not, if you don’t have a thorough understanding of a need and its context, you will reduce your chances of implementing an effective solution. One of the biggest problems facing marketing and consumer insight today is the expectation that “insight” is the responsibility of a specific department or agency. If we learn anything at all from design thinking, it should be that without all the stakeholders–and particularly marketing–being involved in the definition of the central question, the risk that research investment is wasted will be high. If you do not really understand what question needs to be addressed, your research is all too likely to produce vast amounts of information and very little understanding or action. The practice of marketing is often distanced from the research function that ought to enable its success NIGEL HOLLIS Chief Global Analyst Millward Brown POINT OF VIEW CanMarketingandResearch BecomeBetterbyDesign? Over the last decade, the importance of design has grown beyond the traditional concept of making an artifact look good to take a more central role in business, academia, and government.
  • Ask stupid questions Question: How many designers will it take to screw in a light bulb? Answer: Why a light bulb? – from a review of design thinking in Fast Company The quip above may be funny, but it contains more than a grain of truth. An open, curious, and questioning mindset characterizes design thinking. Designers don’t accept a brief at face value; they step back and ensure that the definition of the problem is correct. Don Norman, in his article“Rethinking Design Thinking,” suggests that there is great power in the ability to ask “stupid” questions, the ones that no one inside an organization would ask because they are blinded by what seems obvious. A friend of mine who works in new product development confirms this, saying,“Designers go back to zero – minus five, even – and work to re-envisage and reengineer, not just amend what already exists.” Are consumer researchers equally willing to step back and look at the big picture? We researchers are a challenging and curious bunch, but we may be too quick to accept the premise that is offered to us. That is, instead of asking “Why a light bulb?”we may be more likely to ask“What type of light bulb?”We need to be brave enough to ask the stupid questions and to keep on doing so until we get good answers. Fully understand your customer To create good designs, you first have to understand people—what they need, want and enjoy, as well as how they think and behave. – Bill Moggridge, co-founder of IDEO Designersputhumanneedsatthecenteroftheirapproachtoproblemsolving. ButBillMoggridgecautionshumandesignersaboutassumingtoomuchabout their human end users.“They will probably be surprisingly different from you,” he said, “so it will only be by understanding them that you can avoid the trap of designing for yourself.” Marketers and researchers also strive to understand people, but we need to go beyond their behaviors to understand their underlying motivations if we are to build meaningful and well-differentiated brands. So we need to ask ourselves: Do we really know the people who use our brands, not just as people to be sold to but as people to be served? And if not, how will we go about getting to know them? Designers tend to rely solely on observation to gain insights and so risk misinterpreting why people behave as they do. By contrast, researchers have traditionallygravitatedtowardaskingquestions,usingverbalorwrittenprobes to understand attitudes and behavior. Ideally we would combine observation of both physical and digital behavior with questions designed to elucidate these behaviors. New tools such as facial coding and other implicit techniques can add a deeper understanding, which is particularly useful when people may not be able to vocalize why they do something. Our job as researchers is to draw on the combination of methods that can best help us understand people’s motivations and instinctive responses. Embrace your constraints One of the most interesting design tensions today is between cost constraints - especially given the economic crisis - and sustainability constraints, or the impact on the natural environment. Some of the most attractive design solutions are driven by both constraints. – Tim Brown, CEO of IDEO, Interviewed for strategy+business by Art Kleine All design is about working within constraints. No one should know that better than those who design research projects. What can we use as stimulus material? What interview methodology is feasible? What budget do we have? Designers understand that constraints help produce better solutions, even when the constraints are budgetary. That understanding applies equally well to marketing and research. None of us have the budget we think we need. But constraints go far deeper than mere budgets. Marketers are constrained by people’s ability to appreciate their offer. Time after time, failed “innovations” prove that it is truly difficult to get people to adopt new habits. Brands that are not aligned with consumers’ experience and expectations—even if they offer real health benefits or are environmentally friendly—are not going to succeed. Make it tangible Stupid question: What’s the difference between the outcome of a design process and the outcome of a consumer research project? The simple answer, which may evoke the response“So what?”, is that a design process produces something tangible, such as a package, product, or process, while a research project doesn’t. Research delivers potential. The ideas and insights we present will have value only if they are acted upon. Too often the potential of research is not realized. So how can we increase the chances that our marketing insights will be acted upon? We can work to convey our research findings through something more tangible than a slide presentation. At the very least, we can weave our facts and findings into a compellingstory. ButwemightalsogobeyondPowerPointtomoreexperiential methods. For example, we might try to engage our audience in a task, such as drawing up a map of the consumer path to purchase, brainstorming scenarios usingPost-it®Notes,orpresentingthekeyresearchfindingintheformofaslice of cake. Above all, we must move people beyond superficial head-nodding to deeply felt understanding. BACK TO THE FUTURE In writing this Point of View, I have been dogged by the feeling that some of the practices outlined above were once regarded as accepted best practices. Maybe for some companies they still are, but I suspect that for the majority they are not. Why? Because the business of marketing has become overly siloed, fragmented, and data driven. At a time when researchers have more tools than ever to help create insight in a timely manner, we are faced with an evenbiggerchallenge—howtopromulgateunderstandingandinspireaction. Maybe the most important thing we can take away from design thinking is the fundamental question:“Does it have to be this way?” POINT OF VIEW CanMarketingandResearch BecomeBetterbyDesign?
  • Perhaps the answer lies in a need for short-term results brought about by shareholder pressure, a “now” mentality that needs to see results yesterday, along with a business culture in which people advance quickly through positions, creating a lack of continuity in senior marketing roles. Whatever the cause, the result is a disconnect between short-term volume boosts driven by price cutting (which are easily and immediately measured), and the long-term brand investment that can sustain a price premium and secure margins. We have consistently seen, even during recessions, that consumers are willing to pay more for brands that they perceive are worth it. That is one reason why the share price of the most valuable brands consistently outperforms the S&P 500, even during tough economic times. In fact, during the 2008 global recession the value of the top 100 brands increased by 2 percent to $2 trillion. While pressure from key stakeholders may be considerable, marketers should not make pricing decisions based on short-term targets. Rather, they should invest in research to quantify the role of price in their long-term brand strategies. The understanding gained will result in much better-informed pricing decisions. PRICE ASSOCIATIONS CAN GENERATE DEMAND Most marketers acknowledge that strong brands benefit from positive brand associations in the minds of consumers. However, associations with price are often considered separately from other equity-driving perceptions; price is frequently seen as a different type of influence. But as Gordon Pincott argued in his Point of View “Brand Equity: What’s Price Got to Do with it?”, perceptions of price can in fact be a critical part of the association set that determines brand equity and the resulting long-term volume demand. In the UK airline category, for example, we have found that associations relating to low cost (such as offering more acceptable prices and offering good deals and promotions) are the second most important group of brand associations for generating demand. This importance is driven by the low-cost airlines such as easyJet. However, in spite of the fact that low price is a key factor in generating demand, there are some brands that won’t benefit from an association with low price. For example, for Singapore Airlines, demand is generated by the associations of exclusivity supported by perceptions of high price. There are also some brands that need to avoid strong associations with either high or low prices; British Airways is an example.The airline needs to avoid too strong an association with high prices in order to maintain volume demand for cheaper European hops, but it must also maintain some sense of exclusivity to support demand for long-haul business and first-class flights. Brand ASSOCIATIONS CAN SUPPORT A PRICE PREMIUM Even when marketers recognize that price perceptions may have a role in securing volume demand in the long term, they often still fail to ask themselves what mix of brand associations will best justify a premium price point for their brand. When trying to measure and build brand equity they still default to drivers of preference and volume. But for many brands, the main financial return delivered by brand equity is the ability to charge a price premium. To ensure the long-term financial health of these brands, managers must understand and manage the associations that support this ability. Though there is some overlap between the brand associations that generate volume demand and those that support a price premium, the optimum brand strategies for each task will rarely be identical. We generally find that the best way to drive volume demand is to build very strong associations with core category needs, whereas to justify a price premium, brands usually need to go beyond core needs to show that they offer a meaningful difference—that they are unique or a step ahead of the competition in some way. They may do this by offering exclusive product features or cutting-edge innovation; often, however, a brand may establish a meaningful difference that justifies a price premium through establishing intangible associations that are unique to them. With British Airways, for example, the sense of connection that their customers feel with one another makes the brand stand out from other airlines, thus making consumers willing to pay more. If brand owners continue to design their strategies solely around what drives volume demand while ignoring the perceptions that can defend a price premium, they will inevitably struggle to justify high price points, and even if the brand penetration grows, profits will suffer. Consequently, Millward Brown has developed two metrics to measure equity: “Power,” to measure the equity that delivers volume; and “Premium,” to measure the equity that justifies a higher price. Using the concepts represented by Power and Premium, you can understand your brand’s situation and shape and optimize your pricing strategy. For many brands, the main financial return delivered by brand equity is the ability to charge a price premium Rachel Leaver UK Head of Marketing Science Josh Samuel European Development Director Brand Equity Point of View WhyisitAlwaysVolume BeforePrice? It has been 10 years since McKinsey published proof that a price increase of 1 percent will produce an 8 percent increase in profit, assuming that all other things remain equal. So why are companies ignoring this and focusing on chasing volume instead of securing margins through well- informed pricing strategies?
  • DETERMINE PRICING STRATEGY USING BOTH POWER AND PREMIUM Figure 1 illustrates the possible relationships between Power and Premium scores and shows how a brand’s standing on these dimensions can help to identify a pricing strategy. For a brand like easyJet, Power far exceeds Premium; thus it would sit in the lower right-hand box. A brand in this position would be right to maintain its primary focus on driving volume (both through equity-driven demand and in-market deals). However, brands like Singapore Airlines, which are low on Power and high on Premium, would sit in the top left-hand box. Brands like these deliver returns by charging a premium price; thus they should keep their price high and focus on building the associations that will justify that premium. Plotting brands on the Power/Premium axes can help managers of brand portfolios ensure that each brand occupies a different position. If we looked at Unilever brands in the U.S. shampoo market, for example, we would see Nexus occupy the top left-hand corner, meaning that it can continue to position itself as a premium brand. Suave, which targets the value shopper, would be situated in the lower right-hand box. Dove and TRESemmé would be right in the middle. Brands in this position couldconceivablybemovedtowardmorepremiumormorevalue-for-money positions.To do this, they would have to increase relevant brand associations and possibly adjust their prices while taking care that the brands remain differentiated from other Unilever offerings. Don’t accept the status quo A brand’s position on the Power/Premium plot is not necessarily its destiny. As discussed earlier, the key is to understand which image associations can generate volume demand and which ones justify a price premium, and then feed that information into your brand strategy. Specifically, you should follow these steps: Having gone through this process, you are in a position to tailor a brand strategy and communications plan that supports your chosen pricing strategy. Actual in-market pricing Finally,onceyouhaveselectedapricingstrategyandtailoredcommunication to support it, you need to understand the in-market price points that any given product variant or SKU can command. A conjoint or econometric sales model will provide you with the tools to answer this question by pinpointing the prices and promotions to use to obtain your sales and profit targets. Too often this type of analysis is done with the objective of deciding what tactics to use to meet short-term targets. The overall brand strategy is not kept in view; hence the current situation of short-term price cutting and possible negative impact on the brand. However, this information, combined with your overall brand-building strategy, will provide you with concrete facts and a strategic plan with which to negotiate terms and build good relationships with suppliers and/or retailers, while supporting the long-term success of your business. Conclusion All too often, pricing decisions are made for specific products based only on a consideration of the short-term return that different price points will deliver. And even when price is considered as a key feed into long-term brand equity, the focus is usually on the impact this future equity will have on volume demand. There has been a lack of emphasis on the role of brand equity in supporting a price premium, and hence potential for further profit has been lost. A holistic understanding of the most suitable pricing strategy for a brand can only come with an understanding of the brand’s dual roles: generating volume and supporting a price premium. Only with that understanding can we make informed decisions about specific price points that will optimize both short-term volume and long-term brand health. When you combine all of these elements in your approach to pricing, you are in a good place to deliver long- and short-term sales targets while at the same time reassuring all stakeholders that your strategy is based on solid research and facts. Point of View WhyisitAlwaysVolume BeforePrice? Identify the images that contribute most to generating volume demand and justifying a price premium in your category, as well as those that may be uniquely important to your brand Understand the current strength of associations for your brand in these areas. Is there room to increase them? Consider the feasibility of your brand owning one or more of these associations and actually communicating them. 1 2 3 Power Premium Brands Underperforming Brands Premium Brands Value Brands POWER PREMIUM Keep price high Keep price high Use tactical price promotions to drive additional volume Keep price lowRefocus brand Best returns at high price point Good returns at any price point Lower returns at any price point Best returns at low price point Figure 1: Pricing Rules Based on Power and Premium
  • But for those of us behind the wheel of continuous tracking, that’s how it feels at the moment. We are still moving forward well enough, but signs we pass along the road are warning of tough conditions ahead. Are the wheels really going to fall off around the next bend? THE DRIVE SO FAR Continuous tracking was invented by Maurice Millward and Gordon Brown in the 1970s to address specific client questions. Clients commissioned our early studies because they needed insight and actionable advice about marketplace events, such as the launch of new competitors or the start of new advertising campaigns, and continuous tracking enabled them to make informed marketing decisions that helped grow their brands. In time this longitudinal data also proved its value by revealing the underlying dynamics of how marketing worked. It became clear, for instance, that the majority of ads did not wear out in the way marketers anticipated, and that the most important attributes in a category are often the most difficult to change. Learning built up around the measures and how they could be used to predict the sales impact of marketing activity. Over time, another distinct use for tracking emerged: to monitor Key Performance Indicators (KPIs) on an ongoing basis. Because tracking was proving to be so valuable, the demand for tracking studies increased, and soon they became an essential part of the marketing and research landscape. CHALLENGES PAST AND PRESENT Tracking continued to be an invaluable tool in the decades that followed. But as marketers relied on it more and more, some problems became apparent. For example, the dual purposes of tracking cited above (tracking advertising as well as monitoring KPIs) created tensions. As KPI output from tracking became part of dashboards and was reported to senior management, the focus on the immediate actionability of tracking data was often relegated to the backseat. This in turn led to questions about the need for such large studies to produce top-line metrics. Tracking’s versatility, when exploited, actually became a drawback. Tracking studies seemed to be convenient vehicles for carrying any and all questions relatedtomarketing,butasthestudieswereloadedup,theybecameunwieldy. At the same time, pressure on costs led to a reduction of sample sizes, limiting fast,reliablefeedback.Forcedtocarrymoreweightwithalesspowerfulengine, the tracking study struggled to perform as it once had. Tracking also encountered new challenges as the media and research environments changed. For example, a major need has emerged in the last few years: to evaluate the performance of media channels. Existing multipurpose tracking studies can provide a high-level read on two or three major media, but sample sizes and questionnaire space limit the depth of the analysis. Similarly, the broad definition of a tracking sample and the limited sample size make it difficult to give detailed guidance on many digital campaigns. One of the most recent challenges to tracking is the ready availability of data scraped from theWeb. Online data—from social media in particular—provides cheap continuous feedback about brands and their marketing. Thus some advertisers have new reasons to question the value of large-scale tracking surveys. THE VIEW AT THE CROSSROADS The signs are clear: The world is changing and research needs to change with it. Respondents are harder to reach, especially those in the most desirable demographic groups, and they don’t want to engage with long, repetitious surveys. We need to adjust to that reality. But not every blinking light warns of a real hazard. For example, unstructured data from online sources is not going to nullify the need for structured survey data. Social media data is crucially important for certain types of brands, such as those that conduct business online, and service brands that have customer or community relationships to manage. But for most brands, coverage on social media is typically at a low level, is often generated by a vocal minority, and frequently relates to events (marketing or otherwise) rather than to the brand itself. While this information has value, if it is evaluated in isolation it may present a distorted and partial view. Businesses need to know what is changing, and a self-appointed online group will not usually provide the consistent frame of reference that is needed to discern if real change is occurring. GORDON PINCOTT Chairman, Global Solutions POINT OF VIEW TrackingattheCrossroads No one wants to hear that the car that has always felt safe and comfortable now needs a major overhaul.When the ride has always been smooth, it’s hard to believe that the engine will soon be straining to get the car up hills.
  • THE WAY AHEAD To compete in today’s fast-moving, competitive, and complex markets, brand stewards need regular, timely, and reliable feedback. Now more than ever, they need to monitor the underlying long-term trajectory of their brands as well as the short-term effects of in-market activity. The question is how to capture this information most efficiently. Many improvements and modifications have already been made to tracking over the years. In web-based markets, the look and feel of tracking studies have changed enormously. Questions are designed to make interviews more engaging and enjoyable for respondents, and questionnaires have been shortened. Further remodeling is already under way, as interviews on mobile phones need to be shorter still. But old-style tracking has never been able to cover every aspect of marketing activity, nor was it best placed to do so. As the pressure on questionnaires to become shorter has increased, it has become obvious that there are better ways of tackling some of the important marketing questions. REENGINEERING FOR HIGH PERFORMANCE We need to think about moving from“tracking studies”to“brand performance programs.” A single study can no longer answer all marketing questions, but a brand performance program can employ the individual tools that are best suited to address each issue. To understand how a new ad campaign has broken through, a program can include a short study, executed over two or three days, with a robust sample. To quantify the contribution of individual channels to short- and long-term sales, a program can have a CrossMedia study running over the duration of the campaign with enough questionnaire space to ask the relevant media questions. A program, however, cannot be a series of disconnected ad hoc projects; the components of the program must provide a platform for integrated storytelling.They should be glued together by the brand, not just conceptually but by consistent brand measures selected by the brand and research teams to address the central questions, such as how marketing activities are expected to influence the brand and what attitudes or ideas about the brand need to be changed. The components of a research program will vary according to brand, category, and circumstances, but an effective program should include the following elements: A detailed understanding of brand equity Underpinning the entire program and dictating its components should be brandequityinsightsthatidentifytheprocessthroughwhichassociationsbuild brand equity and how that equity manifests itself in the financial performance of the brand. This understanding will make it clear what marketing actions needtobetakenandwhatKPIsneedtobecapturedintheongoingmonitoring of brand performance. A continuous monitor The second essential piece will be a sleek continuous monitor of the KPIs that signal changes in the health of the brand. For web-enabled studies (via computers or mobile devices), the results will flow automatically to a web-delivered dashboard. Pen-and-paper markets will need more manual intervention but will still be able to input the data to a dashboard via an automated analysis engine. This monitor will cost less than a traditional tracking study, thus freeing up funds to be deployed against other elements of the program. Insights into channel effectiveness and creative power CrossMedia studies and digital deep dives can identify the effectiveness of channels. Feedback on executions and campaigns can be provided either continuously or on an intermittent, fast-turnaround basis immediately after the start of the campaign. Either method will allow timely adjustments to be made if necessary. A complete picture of the brand activities will need to harness social media data as well as survey data. READY FOR THE ROAD AHEAD Cars today serve the same purpose as cars 40 years ago. But today’s cars look and feel different; they go faster, they’re more efficient, and the components and technology that power them have radically changed. And just as cars have evolved to meet today’s driving conditions, research solutions must be adapted for the complexity of our current era. Brand performance programs are, in spirit, totally in tune with the idea that gave birth to tracking 40 years ago. Action oriented and designed to give timely advice on important investment decisions, brand performance programs will provideasetoflinkedsolutions,eachsolutionchosenbecauseitisthebestone to answer a specific question.They will harness the latest available technology to be cost-efficient and timely. And because the most crucial factors for the category will be identified early on through detailed brand equity work, the questionnaires that make up the rest of the program can be short and tightly focused. When designed and implemented effectively, brand performance programs will help brands negotiate the complex interchanges faced at every point of decision-making. Moving smoothly down the highway, through a landscape of challenging and changing conditions, they will carry brands safely and efficiently to profitable outcomes. A single study can no longer answer all marketing questions, but a program can apply the individual tools that are best-suited to address each issue POINT OF VIEW TrackingattheCrossroads
  • President Obama was reelected due in large part to the strength of his support from Latinos (71%), African Americans (93%), and Asian Americans (73%). Together these groups represented close to 30 percent of the total votes cast, compared to roughly 10 percent in the 1990s. The lessons for politicians are clear, but there is a lesson for marketers as well. Brands that continue to focus their marketing on the traditional non- Hispanic white mainstream will become niche brands—just as Mitt Romney was, in the end, a niche candidate. He had strong support among those who looked like him, i.e., non-Hispanic white males, but that group is no longer large enough to send a candidate to the White House. To stay relevant and grow in today’s America, brands need to change and adapt. While we are not a majority-minority nation yet, ethnic segments already have significant influence on the country’s social, cultural, economic, and political life, and therefore should be treated not as siloed segments but as a fundamental part of a brand’s mainstream marketing strategy. This lesson is applicable for marketers everywhere, since brands all over the worldfacethechallengeofappealingtoincreasinglydiverseaudiences.Thefirst step in meeting this challenge is to develop a research-based understanding of the type of strategy needed for a particular brand. CROSS-CULTURAL OR MULTICULTURAL? OR BOTH? In reaching the different racial and ethnic groups that comprise the new mainstream, two main approaches are considered: cross-cultural marketing and multicultural marketing. While the former aims across demographic groups by appealing to consumer similarities rather than differences, traditional multicultural marketing targets a specific demographic group such as Hispanics. The debate between defenders of each approach has been quite passionate in recent times. Both sides present compelling arguments to support their respective views; consensus has yet to be reached.Why?The business interests of agencies that specialize in one or the other approach are a contributing factor, to be sure. But another obstacle is the assumption that cross-cultural and multicultural marketing are mutually exclusive practices. They are not, and in fact, a combined approach is often needed to achieve the best return on marketing investment. Intheidealworldofone-on-onemarketing, brandswouldaddresstheindividualneeds and desires of one consumer at a time, but this isn’t possible in the real world, so brands need to balance their efforts. They need to develop campaigns that appeal to consumers of different racial or ethnic backgrounds without being so broad and general that they are relevant to no one in particular.The fruitful middle ground is the place where a“total market” perspective leverages similarities and respects cultural nuances. THE ROLE OF RESEARCH Finding the right balance between customization and standardization can be difficult, but some companies, including McDonald’s, Diageo, Coca-Cola, MillerCoors, Kellogg’s, and General Mills, are doing it quite successfully. How? By incorporating the ethnic perspective early on in their brands’foundational research. Before making a major investment such as developing a new product or advertising campaign, they first identify the real role of race or ethnicity in product and brand preference. Only then do they decide if they need a targeted approach for a particular segment, or if their strategy can be based on a universal insight. When cross-cultural and multicultural methods are used together, the cross- cultural insight usually defines what the overarching message should be, while multicultural knowledge informs how the message will be delivered in different settings. In the presidential campaign, a cross-cultural “insight” was easy for both sides to identify—the economy. The economy was clearly the number one issue for the vast majority of voters, regardless of race or ethnicity. And both candidates were able to communicate their perspectives in a relatively consistent way when speaking at national (i.e., cross-cultural) forums such as the debates. However, Mitt Romney’s campaign missed opportunities to effectively tailor his message to targeted forums. One particularly glaring error was his communication with Latinos, who are generally more optimistic than other groups. Seemingly ignorant of this ethnic nuance, Romney continued to hammer away with negative campaigning when he would have done better to adopt a positive tone in describing better days to come. Cross-cultural and multicultural marketing are not mutually exclusive practices; a combined approach is often needed DAVID BURGOS Vice President of Cultural Strategy POINT OF VIEW MarketingtoDiversity: LessonsfromU.S.Politics The 2012 presidential election confirmed something we’ve known for quite some time:There is a new normal in the United States, and that new normal is multiracial, multiethnic, and multicultural.Though Mitt Romney got 59 percent of the non- Hispanic white vote, the highest total for a GOP nominee since 1988, he was not victorious.
  • But we would suggest that this debate has been misguided. Drawing on learning from thousands of brand equity studies as well as a recent, groundbreaking pilot that linked neuroscience and survey data to consumer shopping behavior, we have established that financial success for brands depends on all three of these qualities. The ideal balance for a specific brand is a function of both the product category and the primary mode of financial return—sales volume or premium pricing. Three Qualities, All Important Successful brands are meaningful, different, and salient. Each of these three elements comes with its own theory and history. Difference (aka differentiation) has been widely adopted as a cornerstone of successfulsalesandmarketingsincethe1940swhenRosserReevesintroduced the term“Unique Selling Proposition”(USP) to the marketing lexicon. And yet, as true differentiation has become more and more difficult to achieve in increasingly commoditized markets, marketers have pursued alternate brand-building strategies. For example, in recent years, many marketers have embraced the idea that brands have to build relationships with consumers, so they have worked to make their brands meaningful, usually by improving product perceptions and strengthening emotional affinity. Other practitioners prefer to rely on salience. Though building brand awareness has always been accepted as a fundamental objective of brand marketing, there is ongoing discussion over whether awareness is important simply as a precursor to brand equity, or if the concept of salience, which goes beyond basic awareness, is actually the most important driver of brand choice. The Proof: Brands, Brains, and Behavior Characteristics of Successful Brands The strongest brands don’t rely only on being meaningful or only on being different or only on being salient—they weave all three qualities together. In his Millward Brown Point of View titled “China’s Top 50: Much Progress but More to Do,” Peter Walshe details the striking success of Chinese brands that are meaningful, different, and salient. A similar analysis of the global BrandZ database, in which we compare brands that are low on all three qualities with those that are high on all three, shows the same pattern. Brands that are meaningful, different, and salient derive three times more of their volume from the strength of the brand, as opposed to factors like availability and promotions. Furthermore, they command a price that is 14 percent higher, and their growth in value share is, on average, six percentage points higher than brands that are low on meaning, difference, and salience. Understanding Consumer Brains We know that successful brands are meaningful, different, and salient, but to maximize the power of marketing, we need to know more than that.We need to understand how these brand qualities act on the minds of consumers to affect purchase decisions. It is relatively easy to understand the effect of salience. Salience gives a brand an advantage because of the habitual nature of much human behavior. In shopping, consumers rely on mental shortcuts or heuristics when they make their brand decisions. One such heuristic is to assign greater importance to things that have ready mental availability, the effect of which is to choose the most salient brand. Comparedtobrandsalience,theroleofbrandmeaninginconsumerdecision- making is complex, as it involves both cognition and affect. However, we have learned that we can measure how meaningful brands are by using some simple and straightforward questions. In his book The Branded Mind, Erik du Plessis builds on the ideas of Antonio Damasio to suggest that simple questions about how the brand makes you feel and how well it satisfies your needs can be used to summarize the overall impact of functional associations and feelings on brand decisions. We use questions like these to measure and define how meaningful brands are. So du Plessis’interpretation of Damasio’s theory helps us understand how brand meaning influences consumer choice. Of the three critical elements, difference is the one that is most often overlooked, with some arguing that being different is just a special case of being meaningful. The argument is that differentiation is delivering a brand property that others don’t deliver, and the effect is the same as delivering a brand property better than others. In either case, the brand just becomes more meaningful. However, experiments in behavioral psychology have demonstrated that when similar alternatives compete against each other, they all become less attractive, while if one option stands apart from the rest, even if the difference is not particularly meaningful, that option becomes more attractive. These experiments have tended to focus on considered human decisions involving relatively unfamiliar objects or concepts. Therefore, this learning is most applicable when for some reason a consumer’s normal habits are disrupted and he or she is considering less familiar brands. This may help explain why difference is one of the strongest markers of future growth, as Helen Fearn notes in her 2010 Point of View, “Growing a Strong Brand: Defining Your Meaningful Point of Difference.” Josh Samuel European Development Director, Brand Equity Point of View Brands that are meaningful, different, and salient derive three times more of their volume from the strength of the brand Of the three critical elements, difference is the one that is most often overlooked ThePowerofBeingMeaningful,DifferentandSalient Members of the marketing community have long debated the secret to marketing success. Many practitioners assert that differentiation is the key factor. Others maintain that salience is uppermost during critical purchase moments, while a significant group believes that great marketing builds positive consumer sentiment by delivering on a meaningful brand promise.
  • BEYOND RACE AND ETHNICITY Consumers are defined by many things beyond race and ethnicity, including age, gender, life stage, religion, and sexual orientation. In many consumption situations,thefactthatapersonisgayorMuslimortheparentofyoungchildren may be the most important motivator, regardless of whether he or she is black, white, or brown. Understanding how these dimensions are manifested across cultures enables brands to uncover more relevant “human insights” and use them to develop strategies that transcend ethnic boundaries. When this happens, we see cross-cultural advertising in its finest form. P&G’s much-acclaimed Olympic campaign, “Salute to Moms,” was based on the universal instinct of mothers to sacrifice for their children. The ads, which featured mothers and athletes of every color and nationality, were believable, relevant, and heart-warming precisely because this role of mothers is universal and well understood. Unfortunately, many brands try to engage ethnic consumers with “culturally relevant” messages without understanding those consumers holistically. As a result, the campaigns developed tend to focus primarily on racial or ethnic factors and often lapse into stereotypes; thus they fail to connect with their intended audience. Both presidential candidates made this type of mistake whencourtingLatinovoters.Succumbingtomediapressure,theyoftenlimited the conversation with Latinos to the issue of immigration reform, in spite of numerous polls that showed that the economy was actually their biggest concern. Ironically, Romney lost the most due to this oversight because his position on other topics—such as the dangers of big government, trading with Latin America, and abortion—could have resonated quite well with many Latinos. CROSS-CULTURAL INSIGHT CAN BE FOUND ANYWHERE The human insight that forms the foundation of a cross-cultural campaign doesn’thavetocomefromworkdoneamongthenon-Hispanicwhitesegment. An insight can very well originate among ethnic consumers, who are often at the forefront of consumer trends. Two high-profile campaigns of the 2012 Summer Olympics originated this way. The big ideas underlying both “Salute to Moms”and Kellogg’s“From Great Starts Come GreatThings,”which included an ad featuring Olympic swimmer Rebecca Soni, came from research done among the Hispanic population. Sadly, the work done by P&G and Kellogg’s is more often the exception than the rule. It is still common practice for many brands to develop their marketing strategy based solely on the needs of non-Hispanic white consumers. Then, when they have created an entire marketing program, they call their “ethnic” agency and start thinking about how they can adapt it for ethnic segments. As suggested before, the resulting strategy is frequently irrelevant to ethnic consumers, and it is likely to become less relevant to non-Hispanic whites as well, who expect advertising to reflect the diversity of the world they live in. Cross-pollination of creative ideas is feasible even when cultural differences are significant, such as between Muslims and the mainstream in Europe, or the Chinese and Malay segments in Malaysia. Brands just need to go deep into the core human values that shape consumer attitudes and behaviors. HIRING FOR DIVERSITY IS A SMART BUSINESS DECISION If an organization is dominated by people of one race or ethnicity, it is likely that campaigns will be built around insights that are relevant to that group. Therefore, companies should put their own houses in order before making any major attempt to engage with the new mainstream. They must be fully committed from the top down to the idea that the new mainstream is multicultural, and they ought to make serious efforts to build organizations that are as diverse as the markets they serve. Obama’s campaign team seemed to understand this. Whether it was intentional or not, the President assembled such a diverse group of volunteers that pundits and voters alike often commented on how hard it had been for them to find“white people”at the party’s convention in September. This was in stark contrast to what they saw at the Republican convention, where minorities were virtually nonexistent. For the architects of the Obama campaign, keeping the ethnic perspective top of mind was no doubt made easier by the exceptional level of diversity among the campaign workers. We see the same thing happening in the corporate world. Organizations that have a culturally diverse workforce often perform better in a multicultural marketplace thanks to the empathy and life experience that ethnic employees bring to the table. Companies seem to recognize this, as 60 percent of Fortune 500 companies currently have Chief Diversity Officers (CDOs). However, to effect real change and reap all of its benefits, the CDO needs to promote diversity at every level of the organization—the mid and upper levels as well as the lower ones. At this point, we are not certain that most CDOs have the power to do that, as only 25 percent of them report directly to their CEOs. DON’T GO FROM MAINSTREAM TO MARGINAL It is as clear for marketers as it is for politicians. The new normal is here to stay, and it needs to be accepted and embraced. But brands differ from politicians in one important way. A brand is up for reelection every time a consumer goes shopping—so your efforts to engage ethnic consumers should be ongoing and consistent, not seasonal. You can’t succeed by reaching out to African Americans only during Black History Month. Hispanics consume your brands on the 364 days that are not Cinco de Mayo, and Chinese Americans spend money all year, not just before Chinese New Year. Brands that recognize and celebrate diversity will not only continue to grow by winning the hearts and wallets of ethnic consumers, but they will succeed in staying relevant to the ever-evolving non-Hispanic white segment, too. Changing demographics don’t have to be a threat to long-established leading brands—not here in the United States, and certainly not in other parts of the world that are experiencing similar shifts, such as Europe, Latin America, and several countries in Asia. When armed with insights gleaned from comprehensive “total market” research that looks at both the whole and the parts, today’s most flexible and creative marketers can successfully shepherd their brands from the old mainstream into the new. Your efforts to engage ethnic consumers should be ongoing and consistent, not seasonal POINT OF VIEW MarketingtoDiversity: LessonsfromU.S.Politics
  • Brands stand to gain even more when they offer points of difference that are truly important, even if the importance is only temporary or fleeting. Consider my relationship with three different soft drinks back in my student days. I wasn’t a great fan of Red Bull. I didn’t feel a personal connection with the brand, and I didn’t particularly like the taste. On the other hand, I felt reasonably warm toward Pepsi and did like the taste. Overall, Pepsi was more meaningful to me. However, the trouble for Pepsi was that I felt even warmer toward Coca-Cola and preferred the taste of that, so I tended to choose Coke over Pepsi. But on certain nights out, Red Bull felt like the only drink that delivered the desired combination of an energy hit and social cachet. The result was that I barely ever bought Pepsi, but did occasionally buy Red Bull, and when I did I was willing to pay a high price for it because there was no substitute. It is probably true to say that I was choosing Red Bull because it was the most meaningful brand for my need state at that moment, so in a sense its difference was “just a special case of meaning.” However, for marketers, the crucial point is that brands that achieve this special state of offering something truly different are chosen more often and can charge a higher price. Observing Consumer Behavior Our knowledge of the characteristics of successful brands and the latest thinking on human decision-making underscore the importance of meaning, difference, and salience. But can we quantify the influence of each of these elements on consumer purchase volume and price paid? To investigate this, we ran a groundbreaking global pilot. We linked respondents’ survey responses with their actual purchase behavior as well as neuroscience data to get a full picture of how raw emotional response in the brain links to how brands are perceived, and how that in turn influences their purchase choices. This study helped identify the best ways to measure how meaningful, different, and salient brands are, and confirmed that these are the three most important brand influences on purchase behavior. The contribution of each of the three qualities was different depending on whether we were looking at purchase volume or price paid. To drive volume, it is most important for a brand to first be meaningful and then be salient. Difference is slightly less important. Being meaningful is also the most important quality in justifying a price premium; after that, being different is next in importance, while being salient matters less. The exact proportions vary by category; we can quantify these to help focus marketing efforts. IMPLICATIONS FOR MARKETERS Marketers, ask yourselves: Do you expect your brand to make money by selling a greater volume of product or by selling at a higher price? Only a handful of brands are compelling enough to do both, i.e., to deliver high volume at a premium price. Make Your Brand Meaningful Whether your objective is volume or price, in either case your brand needs to be meaningful, so ask these questions: Does your brand meet the functional needs of consumers? Are you communicating your brand’s story in a meaningful way? And does your combination of story and functional delivery make people feel good? Of the brands we measured in our pilot work, Coca-Cola and British Airways were among the most meaningful. Both achieved that status through great product delivery that met consumers’ core needs, as well as marketing that elevated the brands into emotional territory and made consumers feel good about them. Grow Volume through Being Salient If growing volume is the goal, then salience is the next most important consideration after meaning. But salience is not simply top-of-mind awareness triggered by the category name; our pilot work confirmed that salience is best measured in association with category needs. For example, BritishAirwayswasthestrongestbrandontraditionaltop-of-mindawareness for the airline category in the UK. But when we applied a needs-based approach to salience, it was easyJet that came through as the most salient brand. That’s because easyJet has built an extremely strong association with low price, one of the most important category needs. So, to build salience, you must not only shout louder than the competition, but you must shout about things that relate to category needs. To Command a Higher Price, Be Different Ifyourobjectiveistosellyourbrandatahigherprice,focusonbeingdifferent. For an example of great brand differentiation, we can look to Apple, the most valuable brand in the world according to the 2011 BrandZ Top 100. Though Apple does well on each element, its most outstanding performance in nearly every category and country is on being different. The basis for this success is Apple’s consistently great product innovation, but Apple also goes beyond functional differentiation to project a unique personality and a clear set of values. Not all product innovations can capture people’s imaginations as the Macintosh, the iPhone, and the iPad have done, but all brand owners should work to establish genuine points of meaningful product differentiation. And even where there is limited scope for functional differentiation, brands should still strive to differentiate through their personality and values. CONSIDER THE POWER OF THREE The most successful brands are not just meaningful, just different, or just salient—they are all three. Don’t sell your brand short by using a myopic model of brand building that only acknowledges one of the three ingredients. Instead, acknowledge the importance of all three and use consumer insight, knowledge of the category, and brand objectives to identify the best area of focus. POINT OF VIEW ThePowerofBeingMeaningful, DifferentandSalient Whether your objective is volume or price, your brand needs to be meaningful
  • Since faster, cheaper, and better is the goal, it’s not surprising that last summer’s release from Nielsen describing their neuro-compression technology generated a flurry of articles in the North American research press. According to the release, “This proprietary technology enables the most effective scenes within a TV spot to be identified and edited into a shorter and often more neurologically impactful version.” It certainly sounded good—the promise of ads that would be shorter (and therefore cheaper) and“more impactful”(according to brain activity recorded on an EEG). The problem is, making ads shorter and “more impactful” does not necessarily make them more effective. The goal of advertising is to build brands. Advertising is effective when it creates or reinforces positive brand associationsinconsumers’minds,andthatcanhappenonlywhentheattention generated by an ad is linked to a brand. So it’s not enough to just light up the brain; an effective ad must cast some light on the brand too. Millward Brown has been helping clients optimize their creative for more than three decades. Our work is based on our empirical understanding of how advertising works, which we have developed through years of in-market observation,testing,andvalidation.Originallywereliedontraditionalresearch that asked direct questions to elicit conscious and introspective reactions from respondents, but in recent years, we have extended our approach to reflect new understanding of how the brain works. We now incorporate a variety of indirect measurement techniques, including some with roots in neuroscience, when they can add depth and nuance to our assessment. But whenever we have advised clients on optimizing any aspect of their communications, including ad length, our recommendations have always been based on a holistic understanding of how an ad is intended to work against its specific objectives. Attention Is Just the Beginning Of course, the first thing an ad has to do is capture the attention of viewers. Advertisers are right to focus on this necessity. But an ad can capture all kinds of attention—and be highly engaging for viewers—without being effective. As Figure 1 clearly shows, there is no correlation between involvement and persuasion. But what is more telling (because not all ads have direct and immediate persuasion as an objective) is what Figure 2 shows: There is no relationship between involvement and branding1. So advertisers should not be satisfied with maximizing attention, whether they measure it by brain scanning or direct questioning. They should set their sights on maximizing branding. Dede Fitch Editor, Global Solutions Point of View FIGURE 1: INVOLVEMENT vs PERSUASION 1.75 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 2.00 2.25 2.50 Persuasion Mean Score InvolvementMeanScore 2.75 3.00 3.503.25 r=0.56 UK TV Ads FIGURE 2: INVOLVEMENT vs BRANDING UK TV Ads 2.50 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 3.00 3.50 4.00 Branding Mean Score InvolvementMeanScore 4.50 5.00 r=0.26 1 The data shown is from the United Kingdom, but all regions we have tested show the same lack of correlation between involvement and either branding or persuasion. OptimizingAds: IsLessAlways More? It’s the relentless imperative of our age: Do everything better, but also faster and at lower cost. Marketers confront this challenge as their own discipline becomes ever more difficult. Not only are their financial resources limited, but the consumer attention they seek is scattered and fragmented across a myriad of media.Therefore, advertising practitioners are understandably eager to explore any option that might help them reach consumers with maximum effectiveness and minimal expense.
  • BRANDING BASICS Good branding ensures that people will connect an ad with the brand being advertised. But branding cannot be accomplished by brute force.“Brand early, brand often” is not a winning strategy. We know that there is no relationship between the first appearance of a brand in an ad and how well-branded the ad is. Neither is there a correlation between the branding score and how often the brand appears in the ad. The fact is, there are no general rules about branding that apply to all ads. There are no formulas to be applied. But that doesn’t mean that any branding approach can work in any ad. Rather, it means that the critical elements of branding—the when, where, and how—must be optimized for each individual execution. The way in which these crucial factors are handled will depend on the style of the creative, the communication objectives, and the history and personality of the brand being advertised. Poor branding not only limits the power of an ad to build associations, but can also impede understanding. Fortunately, when copy testing points up subpar branding, even on finished film, there are a number of post-production fixes that can be applied. Voiceover can be added or changed. Music can be added or changed. Pack shots, brand logos, and other brand cues can be added. And film can be re-edited to increase the emphasis on key story elements, including the brand. WHAT’S THE BEST APPROACH TO BRANDING? THE ONE THAT WORKS. The appropriate action to take to improve branding depends on the style of the ad. Sometimes the brand needs to be introduced earlier. Sometimes just a hint about the brand provides the necessary cue. And sometimes the brand needs to be held back until later in the ad. It all depends on the role of the brand in the story. When the brand is the object of desire An action-packed ad for a large, established carbonated soft drink in Canada intended to highlight the brand as an object of desire, but was ineffective because the brand was not shown early enough. In the ad, a dehydrated man races across a bleak, sun-scorched urban landscape looking for a drink. Viewer engagement was high, but the absence of brand cues prevented viewers from taking away the key message: that only Brand X would slake his thirst. The ad was improved by adding the product and the logo to the action early in the ad. Engagement declined for the revised version (from above average to average), but branding and advertising efficiency were 100 percent improved. When the brand ties ideas together Someadsworkbymakingthebrandtiethestorytogether.AUKadforSurewith FineFragrances(anewbrandvariantintheSurelineofwomen’santiperspirants) used this approach to explain the inspiration behind the product, which was the realization by a creator of fine perfumes that his fragrances were useless if busy, active women were going to“sweat them out.” For this style of ad to be effective, viewers must appreciate the significance of the brand to the story, but the first version of the Sure ad did not make the brand’s role clear.Though viewers were intrigued and involved with the scenes of the designer being chauffeured to Paris, branding and understanding were low. To strengthen the connection between perfume and antiperspirants, the ad was revised in two important ways. First, signposting was improved. A voiceover of a title card reading “The Story Behind Sure with Fine Fragrance” set the stage, while an application shot near the end reminded viewers of the functional benefit. Second, the voiceover was stripped down to sharpen the focus on the essential points. Involvement slipped slightly in the re-edited version but remained above average,whilebranding,understanding,appeal,andnewsallsharplyincreased. The short-term sales indicator increased from very low to very high, and its prediction was borne out in the market. When the brand is the solution Athird,verycommontypeofadpresentsthebrandasthesolutiontoaproblem. In this style, the approach to branding will vary according to the needs of the story. We tested several versions of such an ad for Johnson & Johnson’s 24 Hour Moisture Body Lotion in the UK. The story of the ad featured a woman floating in an underwater world where dry skin is never a problem, and offered 24 Hour Moisture Body Lotion as the real-world solution. Branding was low for the passive and dreamlike execution, in part because the distinction between the fantasy sequence (a woman in an underwater world) and the real world (the woman in her bathtub) was not clear enough. A revision made this scene change sharper by bringing the music to a climax as the woman’s head emerged from the bath water. Distracting elements in the voiceover were eliminated, most notably the last line of the ad (which alluded to the fantasy “world of hydration” from the opening). The version which ended with viewers hearing the brand name while seeing the bottle on the side of the tub had the strongest branding score by far. POINT OF VIEW OptimizingAds:Is LessAlwaysMore? There are no general rules about branding that apply to all ads.The when, where, and how of branding must be optimized for each individual execution
  • A STORY NEEDS HIGHS AND LOWS Maintaining the right degree of tension is a critical factor in effective storytelling. The trick is to hold back just enough information to maintain viewer interest, but not so much that viewers become confused. None of the ads we’ve described were improved by adding exciting, high-impact elements. Rather, their effectiveness was enhanced by relatively small modifications to scenes that would likely have registered as low-impact points on a neuro- compression test. In two of our three examples, the ads were improved by reducing the number of words in the voiceover. The revised ads weren’t shorter; they just included fewer words on the audio track. The fact that these changes were so effective points to the importance of something known as the brain’s “attentional blink.” As described by Professor Jane Raymond and Millward Brown EVP Graham Page in their award-winning 2006 paper, 3 attentional blink is a lapse in attention that sometimes occurs as the brain is processing information.This can cause a highly compelling scene to dominate viewers’ attention to such an extent that the information in the subsequent scene does not register at all. The existence of the attentional blink phenomenon would seem to be an argument for slowing an ad down, not speeding it up. The second of silence that accompanied the closing shot of the revised ad for 24 Hour Moisture Body Lotion contributed to stronger branding and enjoyment than did the busier, noisier ending of the earlier version. TIME IS MONEY, BUT ... Clearly, advertisers face pressure to produce the shortest ads that can be effective. Not only does this save money on production and media costs, but it also makes it easier to repurpose ads for online and mobile settings. In analyzing over 90,000 ads, we have found that both long and short ads can be equally effective at generating brand-linked memorability and delivering on primary messages, but short ads are less effective against complex advertising objectives. Ultimately,theoptimallengthof anadwillbeafunctionofthecommunication task. Established brands can often benefit from increasing exposure by using shorter executions, as they often do by using cutdowns of previously aired ads. Cutdowns should include engaging material from the original ads, but must balance high engagement scenes with time for branding and communication points to register. IN THE END, THE STORY COMES FIRST Just as there are no formulas for creating effective advertising, there are no shortcuts to optimizing an individual execution. While the idea of reducing cost by running shorter ads is appealing, optimization cannot be achieved by culling frames that appear to be less engaging. Less can indeed be more—but don’t assume that it is the slow-moving or “boring” scenes that need to be cut. It might be that too much high-impact, high-excitement material is working to the detriment of an ad by impeding understanding and directing attention away from the brand. In those cases, branding and understanding may be improved by cutting back a cluttered voiceover or dropping superfluous messages. Optimize your ad by putting the story first. Your brand has a unique part to play. By understanding its role and cueing it correctly, you will make the most of your chances for advertising success. POINT OF VIEW OptimizingAds:Is LessAlwaysMore? Less can indeed be more. Too much high-impact, high-excitement material can work to the detriment of an ad
  • But can social data yield measurements that are comparable to those from other, more established forms of research? Is it really possible for brand managers to tap into these data streams to gain insight into brand equity? We believe it is too early to say for sure, even though social data have been used effectively by PR and marketing departments for years. For crisis management and on-the-fly campaign assessments, social monitoring involves watching a wide stream of updates in real time and using those to gauge immediate next steps. For these purposes, a qualitative sense of the consumer mood is adequate; the precision of quantitative research is not required. But increasingly, insight and brand strategy teams are interested in using social data, and they would like to place social measurement alongside other types of brand metrics (attitudinal, behavioral, and so on). In this context, social data must be treated with the same rigor we expect of more traditional forms of measurement. Therefore, Millward Brown’s Emerging Media Lab has conducted tests across 60 brands and more than 30 million online conversations to determine the most appropriate methodologies for working with social measurement from a brand perspective. Our conclusion? The future of actionable social media measurement is only as strong as its standards for data quality. THE“SOCIAL”VOICE: HOW IS IT DIFFERENT? Social data are fundamentally different from traditional brand measurement data. We can think of consumers speaking in two different voices. As Figure 1 shows, the “survey” voice of consumers is captured under structured and replicable conditions, while their“social”voice is observed in a fluid state. The challenge is first making these two types of data structurally comparable and then establishing linkages across them. Methodological issues arise out of the nature of the samples available to us in these two data sources. Traditional brand tracking and brand equity measurement rely on observing a statistically similar group of people over time. Individuals in a quantitative dataset may be treated differently—their opinions weighted more or less heavily—to ensure that the sample is representative and consistent. Butthesocialsampleisarollingsampleofactive,notnecessarilyrepresentative, voices. Activists may overamplify topics they care deeply about, while people having positive but ordinary experiences with a brand may not feel compelled to speak up at all. It is not possible to weight these responses effectively because the information needed to profile respondents is not consistently available. Thus it is difficult, if not impossible, to ascertain whether those who post, tweet, or comment on a brand are representative of the population of interest. We expect that social profiling will improve over time as we’re able to derive more of these attributes from implicit relationships. But even with improved profiling, we anticipate ongoing concerns as basic as user duplication—e.g., how can we ascertain whether one individual has posted five times—once each on Facebook, Twitter, Tumblr, Blogger, and a forum—or whether five different individuals posted similar content? DEFINING A SOCIAL UNIVERSE TO MEASURE In the current environment, the only way to address the issues of user duplication and lack of profiling information is to put boundaries on our dataset. We need to make some choices. Our collective eagerness to be perpetually connected has spawned an ever-expanding ecosystem of technology platforms, and as a result, the prevailing methodology for social media listening is to capture as much social data as possible—from Facebook, Twitter, Instagram, Pinterest, Tumblr, etc. But should comments on news articles be considered? What about reviews on sites like Yelp? How do we define the borders of the social universe? It seems that the edges of the social universe are as murky as those of the real universe; in both cases, the boundaries are expanding at an apparently increasing rate. Without an agreed-upon definition of the limits of the universe—or even what “social” means—it’s difficult to know whether we are truly capturing all of the relevant data. Of course, there are also significant differences in the type of data available across platforms. Blog and forum discussion tends to be more composed and “conversationally”oriented than Twitter and Facebook updates, which tend to be short and posted on the fly. And while, to consumers, it may seem like social data points are easily accessible and browsable, from a research perspective, platforms control how those data streams are syndicated at scale. Twitter has monetized its “firehose” and charges for full access to it; Yelp, in contrast, prohibits collection of its reviews for research purposes. Table 1 shows the data fields that are available (or generally inferable) across different types of platforms. ANNE CZERNEK Senior Research Analyst Emerging Media Lab Millward Brown Digital POINT OF VIEW FIGURE 1: SOCIAL VOICE VS. SURVEY VOICE SURVEY VOICE SOCIAL VOICE Structured Replicable Unsolicited Fluid Observational Unmoderated Guided Quantifiable TABLE 1: TYPES OF INFORMATION AVAILABLE ACROSS SOCIAL MEDIA PLATFORMS Full data stream Full text availability Majority public profiles Historical data User-level data User profiles Influence Location Gender Facebook is a special case: Because data is only released in aggregate, none of the measures above are publicly available for research at a user level. TWITTER (TWEETS) FACEBOOK PERSONAL PAGES* BLOGS/ FORUMS (POSTS) * SocialMeasurementDependson DataQuantityandQuality As social platforms proliferate, enthusiastic users are generating more data than ever. Social media data are fast becoming the hottest commodity in market research.
  • TWITTER, THE BEST SOCIAL RESEARCH SOURCE — FOR NOW Because of all the issues we have mentioned thus far, we believe it is necessary to rely on a single source for social data, and to us, Twitter seems to be the strongestcandidate.It’sopen,it’smobile,andit’stheworld’slargestinformation platform. And because the Twitter firehose flows with a good deal of tweet- level information (including the full text, user ID, and timestamp), we’re able to ascertain more not only about the text, but also the users. Thus Twitter meets our requirement for respondent-level information in a bounded dataset. Moreover, because of the way it is used and perceived by users, Twitter seems to us to be most representative of the broader social sphere. Millward Brown’s 2010AdReactionstudyfoundthatconsumersviewedFacebookasbeingabout connecting to friends and family, whereas Twitter was seen as an information platform for discovering, sharing, and learning. Though much has changed in social media in the intervening years, those observations still hold true. Facebook is still the central connection platform, even though consumers are also using smaller, more interest-based social networks to share content related to cooking, photography, sports, or other specialized interests. When the wealth of data from these sites is shared into the broader social stream, it usually comes through Twitter. Thus Twitter seems to us the best aggregation of discovery and sharing. DATA ISSUES But having chosen a data source, our work is not done. Further processing of social data is needed. Even if Twitter is the best source of data for social measurement, not all of the data within it is clean and useable—far from it. Our tests of over 30 million tweets show that up to 60 percent of Twitter data must be removed from the dataset before it is ready for analysis. Twitter tends to have two main issues that can degrade data quality: 1. Keyword ambiguity Social data are generally collected through keyword searches, so when a brand name is also a common word, a large proportion of content returned will not be about the brand. For example, collecting data for the sandwich chain “Subway” returns many mentions of the New York City transit system. This not only distorts the themes of conversation topics tracked, but can also wreak havoc on other metrics, like sentiment. (In this case, a delayed subway train might generate many complaints that are irrelevant to $5 foot-long sandwiches.) 2. Spam There is widespread proliferation of spam content on Twitter. As Figure 2 shows, half of the social media mentions of a particular CPG brand were spam. When spam comments are removed, “net sentiment” tends to go down. (We obtain our measure of net sentiment by adding the percentages of positive andneutralcontent,andfromthatsumsubtractingthepercentageofnegative comments.) This happens because most spam is neutral in tone; e.g., “Check out this coupon”—so removing it leaves negative sentiment proportionally higher, as illustrated by Figure 3. THE FUTURE OF SOCIAL MEASUREMENT Using social measurement effectively will require unstinting attention to the quality of data we consider. The current generation of technology can help aggregate the dataset (through techniques like Natural Language Processing and applying Bayesian rules to cleaning), but human discretion is still needed to evaluate its source, quality, and worth. While we believe social data have value for measuring brand performance, further work is needed to understand the exact relationship—if any— to brand equity. Looking forward, Millward Brown is examining how our proprietary measure of brand performance in social media—which we call “social vitality”—relates to brand equity. We’re assessing its value as a leading indicator of brand performance, as well as its usefulness in understanding the influence of events and media on brand perceptions. Thisresearchisunderwaynow,andweanticipatesharingresultsinthecoming months. The first step in harnessing the brand insights contained in social data is to create a dataset that can be managed by the same principles that govern established, trusted methodologies. We need to be assured that we are working with respondent-level data from a platform that has both breadth and depth, and we need to cleanse the dataset of spam as well as irrelevant references. Only when these steps have been accomplished can brands be confident that they are making defensible decisions based on reliable data. The Emerging Media Lab is Millward Brown Digital’s specialist practice dedicated to research innovation across new media platforms — namely mobile, gaming and social media. POINT OF VIEW SocialMeasurementDependson DataQuantityandQuality 0 5,000 10,000 15,000 20,000 25,000 30,000 CPG brand Tweets Spam Weeks 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 FIGURE 2: SPAM PROPORTION OF TOTAL BRAND KEYWORD MENTIONS Uncleaned 0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30% 35% Net Sentiment* for CPG Brand *Net Sentiment: (Positive + Neutral) - Negative Cleaned FIGURE 3: EFFECT OF CLEANINGON SENTIMENT
  • dvertisers must understand these 5 things if they want to stop wasting money—and alienating consumers—in digital. In spite of the billions spent on digital marketing, Millward Brown research suggests that many ads are ineffective, ignored or, worse, have a negative effect. To change this, advertisers must understand how consumers behave online and how that behavior influences responses to digital marketing. If we understand the motivations and instincts behind people’s digital behavior, then we can create a better return on our investment. To achieve their maximum potential, online communications must make instant connections to impact the many, not simply engage the few. Advertisers must understand the consumer motivations of the spaces their ads inhabit and work within those spaces – not get in the way. The digital space represents a huge opportunity to engage people in new ways, but it comes with many perils. These need to be acknowledged, understood, and considered as digital campaigns are planned and executed. A First published in the June 2, 2013 edition of Fast Company, www.fastcompany.com Digital is OPPORTUNITY Dynamic Logic finds an additional 1.3% of people claim they will buy a brand as a result of being exposed to an online ad. That’s 14 times higher than the click-through rate, and the conversion to a sale is similarly higher. And we can do better. Digital is DANGEROUS Advertisers must consider users’ purple and ease of experience when determiningasplacementandtype.Brandsneedtorecognisethatprominent placement comes at a price/ A brand that gets between a digital user and the content they really want risks a negative reaction. Quite often, users find ads intrusive, irrelevant and obstructive. In fact, 27% of all online ads have a measurable negative effect on purchase intent. A negatively received as experience erodes brand value. This is the hidden cost of online advertising. Behaviour alone is not a good predictor of overall effect since there is no correlation between click though and attitudinal response. Digital is INSTINCTIVE Humans have evolved to react first, think second. Academic research finds thatittakesonetwentiethofasecondforpeopletomakeadecisionaboutthe visual appeal of a web page.Thinking is hard work, and consciously deciding where to click is slow and ultimately tiring. As a result, people quickly and instinctively judge whether the content is relevant, so the first instant of an ad exposure must be as impactful as possible. People’s attention to an online ad is intermittent and fleeting, and ads must command that attention and use it effectively. Digital is DEMANDING Digital is often described as “lean forward” - the user must attend to a smaller screen and is largely in control of content and sequencing. Thus, the experience is nonlinear and user-driven. Ads must be simple and visual to communication brand and message quickly, and they must not assume a linear mindset or an attentive audience. An ad must make a good first impression on everyone who sees it, not just on the few who engage with it at length or click through to other digital assets. Digital is PURPOSEFUL Digital users are usually looking for specific information or content; they have a purpose. Users know what they are looking for and it is not ads. Our eye-tracking database suggests that on average only 50 % of people even look at (defined as the eyes resting for 0.1 second) an online ad. High page engagement on sites with relevant content means longer dwell time and higherlikelihoodthatuserswithnoticeads.thematicrelevancealsoincreases the likelihood that people will give time to advertising communications. Purpose is why brand recognition is crucial in the online environment. The brand is an important cue of personal relevance.
  • trong brands impact much more than revenues and profit margins: They can drive competitive advantage, command a price premium and bolster a company’s resilience to crises. The intense competition among the most valuable brands in some of the categories in the 2013 Millward Brown Optimor BrandZTM Top 100 ranking – released today – affirms the impact a brand’s strength has on its value, with the fiercest battles won by those that combine solid financial performance with great brand equity. In personal care, L’Oréal leapfrogged Gillette and Colgate with a 30% rise in value to become the most valuable brand in this category – all three are worth between $17 and $18 billion, so competition was tight. L’Oréal successfully introduced new, higher-performing products to tempt customers away from private label, including “cosmeceuticals,” which combine cosmetic and medical benefits to appeal to consumers’ desire for products that multitask. The brand continues to be a leader in research and innovation, creating high quality products that give it an attractive product portfolio, which is customized to the local market. Gillette continued to target younger men in an effort to convert new, life-long customers, and received one of the highest scores among all personal care brands for Brand Contribution – a measure of brand equity based on customer sentiment. Meanwhile, Colgate’s healthy brand value growth of 15% was not quite enough for it to maintain its number two spot. Despite an intensely competitive environment, and already having a high global penetration, Colgate increased its market share over the last year, and its brand strength was a facilitator of that growth. The battle for the top is also driving change in the car sector. Toyota has overtaken BMW to regain its position as the world’s most valuable car brand, increasing its value 12% to $24 billion, after its strong brand helped it recover from a number of product recalls in 2009 and 2010. It has a value proposition that people really want, offering luxury features on an affordable, environmentally conscious car. With a significant value increase of 60% in the last year, Zara now stands in front of Nike as the most valuable apparel brand. Fast fashion is in, and the Spanish brand has consistently delivered, while expanding its business to children, men and even home décor. It’s long been expected that online brands will eventually gain supremacy over their brick-and-mortar rivals, and Amazon’s beating of Walmart to become the most valuable retail brand – worth $46 billion, a growth of 34% – may suggest this is happening. As well as having a compelling, consistently-executed promise, Amazon makes S By Robin Headlee, Vice President, Millward Brown Optimor What’sBehind theBrandZTM Top 100Ranking andSeemingly UnbeatableApple?
  • itself available wherever customers are – even establishing a brick-and- mortar presence with its Amazon lockers, self-service delivery locations allowing customers to collect parcels ordered online. Walmart delivers well, too, and has grown its value 5% to $36 billion, but in China, a strategic market, its performance is challenged by the fact that consumers prefer to buy from local markets and shops. Regardless of whether they started as online or brick-and-mortar businesses, retail brands can no longer rely solely on their core channels to market their products, and the most valuable brands in coming years will be those that recognize they need to be present at all possible touchpoints in consumers’ lives. There are insurgent brands in a number of categories that have the potential to catch up with the leaders in the next few years. Apple may appear insurmountable as the highest value technology brand, worth $185 billion, but challengers Google and Samsung are narrowing the gap. Google, which overtook IBM to become the second most valuable tech brand worth $114 billion, keeps diversifying its platforms and has grown from a search engine to become a brand to contend with across many product and service areas. Samsung has risen 51% in brand value to $21 billion, balancing a remarkable period of refined innovation with significant marketing spend. In the U.S. market, which has been dominated by Apple, Samsung outspent Apple on smartphone marketing, bringing a significant rise in Brand Contribution. Luxury brands Gucci and Prada could be battling with Louis Vuitton and Hermès in coming years. Gucci grew by 48% to $12.7 billion: As well as leveraging its strong brand heritage, it continues to embrace the digital world. In February of this year Gucci rolled out its new mobile-optimized site and as of the end of the valuation period for BrandZTM – 1st March 2013 – the mobile site accounted for 27% of total traffic to Gucci.com and 13% of total online revenue. Prada, meanwhile, was the top-rising brand across all categories, with value growth of 63% to $9.5 billion. After years of frugality, shoppers want to spend on luxuries – but spend wisely. Luxury is seen as a good investment, and Gucci and Prada both engage consumers who want to buy classic pieces rather than high fashion. So how can brands become the most valuable brand in their category – and then widen the gap between themselves and the competitors nipping at their heels? Out-advertising everybody else like Samsung will only bring a short-term boost to value. The brands that have risen furthest in the Top 100 all score significantly higher than average on the BrandZTM equity measures of Meaningful, Different and Salient. This means they provide a superior brand experience; creating value that sets them apart from the competition. Apple is the archetypal “meaningfully different” brand. There is clarity about what their brand stands for – positioning, message and values – with a value proposition that’s communicated powerfully and consistently. All of the top risers have a distinctive brand personality, which is more likely to generate passion and create brand advocates. Continuing to renew the brand is essential to remain in contention over a number of years, and the most valuable brands are exceptional at staying relevant to customers. IBM’s reinvention as a greater-margin consultancy which drives a “Smarter Planet” is a good example of this. Finally, achieving salience – becoming a brand that people trust and recommend – requires the consistent delivery of an experience that matches the brand’s promise. Google has built its reputation on continual delivery of the greatest experience. Consumers will stay loyal to brands that meet their needs, are unique in a positive way and are ahead of the game in setting trends. They are more appealing, and contribute most to driving sales – and business value. A solid financial performance is essential; but without also being meaningful, different and salient a brand will never be a contender for most valuable brand in their category. First published in the May 21, 2013 edition of Forbes, www.forbes.com What’s Behind the BrandZTM Top 100 Ranking and Seemingly Unbeatable Apple the most valuable brands in coming years will be those that recognize they need to be present at all possible touchpoints in consumers’lives
  • rands that build positive customer sentiment by being ‘meaningfully different’ from the competition are able to capture five times more volume, command a 13% price premium, and are four times more likely to grow their value share than those that don’t, according to research from Millward Brown. Being meaningfully different is what gives a brand its relevance in the eyes of consumers. It involves delivering a brand promise that meets their expectations and needs, being unique in a positive way, and staying ahead of the curve in setting trends. Brands that can do this are more appealing, and generate the greatest contribution to driving current and future sales. Such ruthless attention to becoming - and staying - relevant to consumers is evident in the results of some of the Most Valuable Global Brands in this year’s BrandZ Top100 ranking. Apple is still the number one brand, despite a big drop in share price and rumours that it isn’t innovating fast enough, which slowed its value growth to 1%. Brand is Apple’s secret weapon. It remains deeply relevant to its fan base, and the ‘love’ that this California - based technology giant generates keeps it in the top spot with a strong brand contribution. Even when the financial performance of a company takes a deep dive, if it has, like Apple, a high brand contribution - the proportion of value generated by the brand’s ability to create loyalty - the business can still boom. Based on the opinions of existing and potential customers, brand contribution is less volatile than investor sentiment: Apple’s brand contribution, for example, is still 18% greater than that of its nearest rival in the smartphone market, Samsung, which grew its brand value by 51% on the previous year. Luxury brands Gucci and Burberry also both showed an increase in brand contribution, having comprehensively met the needs of consumers who are ready to spend on luxuries again, but spend wisely by investing in classic pieces. Gucci has revamped outlets to enhance the consumer experience, while, recognising that consumers are often researching online before they buy, also building a strong online presence. It also announced its first mobile app, further increasing the brand’s accessibility. Gucci increased in value by 48%. Burberry excels at emphasising its heritage and developing compelling and authentic brand stories. It has also made a huge investment in building its brand over the last year, expanding into new products, categories and territories, and merging in-store and digital retail capabilities. Strong, relevant brands also help companies bounce back from reputational damage. Toyota has overtaken BMW to become the world’s most valuable car brand once again, increasing its value by 12%, after its brand helped it recover from a number of product recall crises. The Toyota brand is very clearly defined from a consumer perspective - people believe it offers them something that other car brands don’t. It is incredibly trusted, and considered to provide excellent value. A positive consumer experience has built a core of loyal customers who recommend the brand to others; this is what helps brands maintain their strength in the face of adversity. Brands need to continually renew themselves to remain in contention over a number of years. The enduring success of IBM, which is the most valuable B2B brand in the world, is testament to a leadership philosophy that has always been based on being meaningfully different. The brand has enjoyed many golden moments - from developing artificial intelligence in 1956, to creating the industry standard for personal computing in the eighties - but it has never stood still. It continually reinvents itself to stay relevant to the needs of the day, and its ‘Smarter Planet’ positioning is in perfect harmony with the spirit of the time. IBM achieved an 80% revenue increase in 2012 from its SmartCloud solution, which combines the trend for cloud computing with the need of its business clients to innovate as well as cut costs. Google, which has leapfrogged IBM to become the second most valuable brand in the world across all categories, keeps diversifying its platforms - extending its brand into new services and products to increase its relevance to consumers. It has grown from just a search engine to become an integrated provider of news, social media (Google+) and communications (Gmail). A deeply relevant brand is a strong brand - and a strong brand is a valuable asset to a business, as a source of sustainable competitive advantage and value growth. It’s no coincidence that the brands which rose furthest up the BrandZ Top 100 ranking this year, including Prada (63% value increase), Zara (60%), Gucci (48%) and Amazon (34%), all scored higher than average on the attributes of ‘meaningful’ and ‘different’. They all strive to understand consumers’ needs, and constantly refocus and reinvent themselves to stay relevant and set themselves apart from the competition. B Relentlessly RelevantBrands Coinciding with the release of Millward Brown’s BrandZ Ranking of the 100 Most Valuable Global Brands, Peter Walshe, Global BrandZ Director, explains why a ruthless attention to relevance will boost a brand’s strength First published in the May 21, 2013 edition of Contagious Magazine, www.contagiousmagazine.com
  • peculation about Apple running out of juice – with its focus on small changes to big products and a perceived lack of innovation – continue to circulate and unsettle investors. However, Apple’s steady and continued growth in brand value cannot be ignored. In fact, Apple is the top- ranked technology brand in terms of brand value increase since the 2006 inception of the BrandZTM Top 100 Most Valuable Global Brands study. Apple’s brand value has tracked a 1043 percent increase – from $16 billion in 2006 to $183 billion in 2012. Before focusing on Apple’s demise, analysts should acknowledge this very impressive growth and customer loyalty. The fact is, sustainable brand value is something that brands grow over time. Apple, the Most Valuable Brand in the World in the BrandZTM Top 100 ranking for the last two years, has grown faster than any other global brand in the last seven years. Despite a consumer trend towards austerity, Apple has portrayed premium brand behavior that mimics most luxury brands rather than a technology brand and has created millions of fans that are hugely loyal. Of course, innovation has also been an important driver of brand loyalty, particularly in the last few years where Apple stepped up its new product launches and competitors like Samsung have also started innovating. While innovation remains incredibly important, fans of Apple don’t expect to see frequent large-scale innovations. It’s the longer-term view and their experience with the brand that’s most important to them. And since we believe that consumers are the core component of valuing a brand, then it is those consumers – as every successful business already knows – that are central to the brand’s success. It’s normal for brands to have periods of refinement in between big innovation, and we’ve seen this with Apple since 2006. Dips in share price and market valuations do impact brand’s valuation over time and we have seen that with other technology brands. And of course other brands – such as Samsung in the last few years – have been hugely innovative, so who knows what will happen in the future. Will Apple remain at the top of the heap come May 21 when the 2013 BrandZTM Top 100 will be announced? Watch this space. S By Robin Headlee, Vice President, Millward Brown Optimor First published in the April 30, 2013 edition of Forbes, www.forbes.com ReportsofApple’s DemiseareLargely Exaggerated
  • Among the biggest stories in this year’s BrandZ ranking of the world’s top 100 valuable brands is the rise of the apparel and retail categories, which posted approximately 20% brand value growth over last year. One highlight from this year’s retail story includes Amazon’s gain over Walmart. Amazon, with a brand value of $45.7 billion, saw its value grow by 34%, while Walmart grew by 5% to $36.2 billion. Amazon’s operational swiftness accounts for a good part of its financial success, namely, the retailer’s ability to quickly adapt to market and pricing fluctuations and normalize goods to real market value. Additionally, Amazon has been making the move to in-store selling, with a push in the UK and US to sell merchandise within highly trafficked convenience stores. Walmart’s second place performance comes on the heels of a slowdown in the Chinese market, a major area of focus for Walmart. Despite this, the retailer is poised to gain in brand value over the next few years. With the major advantage over Amazon of owning its brick and mortar stores, the retailer is making great strides in becoming an in-store, online and mobile heavyweight. Perhaps the greatest indication of its auspicious future: a new i-Phone scan and checkout system available at more than 200 locations in the US. This is just one step toward meeting the customer through various mediums and making the shopping experience more interactive. But the battle between Amazon and Walmart isn’t actually about online versus in-store - it’s about being omnichannel - accessible at every touchpoint, competing within all realms of the consumer’s daily routine. As marketers and advertisers have known for decades, the more a consumer interacts with the brand, the greater the bond is. This is particularly important for today’s apparel brands. For example, a consumer who shops BrandZ’s top apparel brand Zara in-store and online and on their mobile device is the brand’s most valuable customer, and in most cases, spends more share of wallet at Zara alone. To Zara’s advantage, third ranked H&M cannot fully play this omnichannel game, as their website currently lacks the function to complete a purchase online. This, in part, may explain why Zara grew by 60% in brand value since last year, while H&M decreased by 6%. This omnichannel phenomenon is not exclusive to retail. In fact, reaching the customer at every opportunity is a tactic well- known by this year’s top growth category (according to brand value) - beer. Global beer brands like Bud Light and Budweiser are pros at constantly meeting their consumers at their most relevant touchpoints. From movie product placement, sports sponsorships, television ad campaigns, print and more - the beer industry is the best when it comes to multi-platform advertising and communications. Budweiser, for example, is one of this year’s biggest winners, with a 28% increase in brand value since last year, advancing the brand 14 spots. So, how can brands access the potential of this omnichannel power? The answer is not to generate as much branded material across every possible platform. This, in fact, leads to overexposure and a decrease in brand value. It is, instead, creating one consistent brand identity across platforms, whereby each interaction enhances the next. That is, shopping at Gucci online enhances the in-store experience, and browsing eBay deals on mobile enables a better experience online. Branding is more complicated than ever, and the discipline to adhere to one voice across varied mediums will be one of the greatest challenges for advertisers of the omnichannel era. B By Pierre Dupreelle, Vice president, Millward Brown Optimor & Kimberly August, Consultant, Millward Brown Optimor Strong Omnichannel Play Sets Retail Brands Apart From Peers First published in the April 22, 2013 edition of AdAge, www.adage.com AmazonTopsWalmartin RankingofMostValuable Brands
  • obile advertising is facing a serious crisis according to many experts and the issue has dominated recent Newsline editorial and MediaTel conferences. So what advice is being given to mobile marketers? Here, Millward Brown’s Hannah Walley shares her thoughts... With 51% of people in the UK owning a smartphone, and penetration increasing by 20% in 2011 alone, the uptake of web enabled mobile phones is increasing rapidly. In terms of spend, mobile advertising was worth £203 million in the UK last year, with display advertising on mobiles more than doubling year on year to almost £69 million. So how can advertisers get ahead of their competitors in the mobile space? THE FRAGMENTATION OF MOBILE ADVERTISING Mobile as an advertising platform encompasses many areas including mobile display ads, in-app advertising, video, gaming, SMS, QR codes, search and location based marketing. Within each of these areas there are multiple stakeholders which makes the process of planning and measuring a mobile campaign very challenging. Looking at the data of over 300 mobile campaigns, across various industry verticals, we know that mobile advertising works and can deliver at every stage of the purchase funnel. However, the fragmented mobile landscape, along with uncertainty among advertisers and media agencies around the ROI of mobile advertising, is collectively slowing the adoption of mobile as an integral part of the media mix for many brands. While research into the effectiveness of online campaigns is now fairly common place, brands are still reluctant to invest in research to evaluate the effectiveness of their mobile activity. Even though Millward Brown’s own research shows that mobile campaigns greatly outperform online on the key branding metrics (from awareness through to intent) brands remain wary about investing money into mobile. Marketers need to adopt an approach that will allow them to navigate the risks of changing established media allocations, allow new channels such as mobile to be given a chance to shine and that will enable their media plans evolve. At Millward Brown we would recommend brands to embrace a 70|20|10 framework for their media and research investments. Used by global mega-brands as a principle for education, training and innovation it can also be applied to brands’ use of media. This concept partly involves placing 10% of your budget into experimenting with new and emerging channels. For many brands, mobile currently falls into this area and by placing 10% of your budget against new and emerging channels you are already preparing the way for innovation. THE POWER OF MOBILE DISPLAY ADVERTISING There are a number of factors contributing to the high performance we see of mobile advertising against traditional brand metrics; the ads are highly visible with the proportion of the screen devoted to the advertisements being much larger than display ads on a PC or laptop screen. Secondly, the ad copy tends to be more focused to fit within the space available. The growing penetration of Smartphones in the UK will undeniably see mobile ad spend quicken with large displays and touch-screen capabilities making it easier for users of mobile devices to access digital content twenty-four-seven while also improving the platform for mobile ads. However, it’s worth bearing in mind that there is a degree of novelty in all emerging media platforms, and it is likely that the impact of mobile advertising will start to stabilise as this wears off. Brands should be taking advantage of the novelty and impact of emerging mobile devices for advertising, before the advantage fades. The size of the mobile screen does restrict what you can do with a standard banner ad, in terms of space to communicate the brand, message and call-to-action. Full screen or interstitial ads are a good alternative when used properly, as they allow more space to communicate key messaging, as well as provide more opportunities to engage the audience and offer interactive features. However, these ad formats are more disruptive and can potentially annoy users, so the content of these ads needs to be well thought through to achieve the maximum impact. Over the coming months we expect to see developments in the types of ad units available, and the variety of targeting options available (by device, location, vertical), which will lead to a significant increase in the number of publishers and advertisers embracing mobile as an advertising platform. As mobile advertising becomes a more accepted part of the media mix and media plans, like online display and social media are now, it will become more cluttered and harder to break through. So it is imperative that brands take advantage of the channel now while it is at its most impactful. MOBILE DISPLAY ADVERTISING BEST PRACTICE Whilst, on average, mobile campaigns prove to be very effective, this is not a guarantee. The creative execution is key and there are a number of things to bear in mind when developing mobile ads: • Start off with clear objectives for the mobile activity; is it to communicate a campaign message, deliver a call to action, build brand engagement or add reach? • Do not simply adopt the same creative approach you are using for your online campaign for your mobile activity. • The location of a brand name or logo within a mobile ad can have a strong impact on advertising recall. • Clear and persistent branding is important for brand awareness. • Encouraging interactivity and engagement are advantageous for mobile campaigns. M By Hannah Walley, Senior Researcher, Media and Digital, Millward Brown First published in the April 15, 2013 edition of MediaTel, www.mediatel.co.uk Understanding the Brand Impact of Mobile Advertising
  • arketers have long debated the secret to marketing success. Many assert that differentiation is the key factor. Others maintain that salience is uppermost during critical purchase moments, while a significant group believes that great marketing builds positive consumer sentiment by delivering on a meaningful brand promise. New research conducted by Millward Brown suggests this debate is misguided. The research, which links neuroscience and survey data to consumer shopper behaviour, reveals that all three elements are important drivers of success. In fact brands that score highly on meaning, difference and salience capture five times more volume, command a 14% price premium, and are four times more likely to grow value share during the next 12 months. To maximise the power of marketing we need to understand how these brand qualities act on the minds of consumers to affect purchase decisions and deliver a financial return. These qualities can deliver a return either by causing people to buy more of the brand (boosting volume share), or justifying a higher price point. Our pilot work showed that to drive volume it is most important for a brand to be first meaningful and then salient. Whereas being meaningful and then different is the key in justifying a price premium where being salient matters less. Coca-Cola and British Airways are among the most meaningful brands. Both achieved that status through great product delivery that met consumers’ core needs as well as marketing that elevated the brands into emotional territory to make consumers feel good about them. Apple, the most valuable brand in the world according to the 2012 BrandZ Top100 ranking, does well on each element but excels at being different, projecting a unique personality and a clear set of values. Once marketers move away from myopic models of brand building that only acknowledge one of the three ingredients of success, and instead use consumer insight to understand the importance of being meaningful, different and salient in determining purchase behaviour for their own brands, they can then fully understand the contribution brand equity is making to their volume share, the price they can charge and to priming future value share growth. Modelling these measures of brand equity, with brand image association can then help marketers hone brand strategy and quantify the financial return the brand can expect once the strategy is successfully activated. What a recipe for success! M By Josh Samuel, European Development Director, Brand Equity First published in the April 11, 2013 edition of M&M Global, www.mandmglobal.com Deliveringa MeaningfulBrand Promise
  • First published in the March 15, 2013 edition of MediaPost, www.mediapost.com XSW has morphed over the years, moving from a music festival to a multipart, multi-industry gathering that spans the technology, film and music sectors. The interactive festival has served as an all-in industry gathering for anyone in digital, ranging from developers to marketers to technology entrepreneurs of all streaks. Brands and their agencies have flocked to Austin, TX, every March to see what’s new and what’s next. (SXSW Interactive played a pivotal role in the launch and growth of Twitter and Foursquare, among others.) But this year was a little different - the festival attracted the old guard and new industries as well. Software developers were side by side with hardware engineers and marketers, next to a growing cohort of journalists and publishers. S We saw eight big changes in 2013: By Anne Czernek, Senior Research Analyst, Emerging Media Lab, Millward Brown Digital SXSWInteractive8 TopTrendsof2013 Some tech trends just won’t die. A few technologies like NFC, RFID, QR codes, and augmented reality have been showing promise without ever seeming to reach their potential for several years now. Experimentation continues, but no one has cracked the mass appeal just yet. Increased focus on content rather than strategy. Viral content and memes were prominent this year, with visits from several Internet sensations such as Grumpy Cat. This drew attention both from publishers like Buzzfeed as well as marketers who feel more comfortable with digital and social strategy, and are now turning to activate with content. Greater international presence. Set in out-of-the-way Austin, the festival has historically been primarily a domestic event. But as it has grown in scale, SXSW Interactive is attracting larger numbers of entrepreneurs and vendors from around the world, seeking global exposure. Convergence of diverse industries. No longer is SXSW Interactive dedicated to Web/software development and digital marketing. Shared talent - and increasingly, shared content with the journalism, health care, and the aeronauticsindustries-havebroughtthemtogetherinsomewhatunexpected and sometimes inspiring ways. Innovation inspiration from outside digital. Elon Musk blew away attendees with his keynote interview about innovation in space and reusable rockets. Musk demonstrated the power of not staying siloed within a single industry: his appeal was as much for his involvement in aeronautics and energy as it was for his past success in digital payments. Impact of social media on technology. Instead of changes in technology fueling new social platforms, social connections are driving the growth of technology. This year was the year of the indie company gaining traction quickly through crowdfunding, driven by social finally operating at scale. Absence of a breakout app. Unlike previous years, 2013 did not have a true breakout app - techies were inspired by what they could do with new hardware, rather than focusing on further developing with the current generation of technology. Many (if not most) of the new apps we saw were redundant with existing platforms and services like Facebook and Spotify. Democratizationofhardware.Whereas past years have focused on software/ app development, 3D printing has made experimenting with new hardware more accessible, more cost-efficient, and faster. Fading are the high costs and long lead times to produce a prototype; hardware design is increasingly iterative and flexible.
  • illward Brown recently released an update to its 20-year-old BrandDynamics solution, incorporating its new Meaningfully Different Framework for brand equity measurement. Josh Samuel reviews the work that went in to the creation of the framework, and explains why ‘power’, ‘premium’ and ‘potential’ will be crucial metrics for assessing brand success. In the same way that brands must innovate to remain relevant, research models must evolve with the times, particularly those that are focused on brands and the consumers that buy them. This is why Millward Brown decided to overhaul BrandDynamics. BrandDynamics has been a leading measure of brand equity for nearly 20 years, quantifying and diagnosing the loyalty consumers have to brands and segmenting their relationships from basic brand knowledge (presence) through to brand loyalty (bonding). While BrandDynamics has certainly been updated and refined over the years, and while there remains a strong correlation between high bonding scores and sales, we wanted to extract deeper insight that related more directly to specific financial outcomes. We also wanted the model to reflect the latest understanding of the human brain and consumer decision-making. We’ve always been able to show how brand impacts sales, but what marketers really need is to quantify the precise financial contribution their brand is making now, what it will deliver in the future, and understand how to optimise that. So we set-out to develop a new equity measurement system, starting with the crucial but often neglected task of clearly defining the ways in which brands constitute a financial asset (or equity) for the brand owner. • The brand delivers greater volume thanks to consumer predisposition to choose the brand more often. • The brand justifies a higher price point because consumers are willing to pay more for it. • The brand provides a platform for future growth because consumers are predisposed to stick to the brand or try it in future. Next we studied our BrandDynamics database of over 100,000 brands to identify the characteristics of the brands that deliver against those three outcomes. Our analysis pointed to three qualities of brands, underpinned by five existing survey metrics that delivered the following financial returns: • Meaningful: the brand has affinity and meets needs. This indicates the extent that brands build an emotional connection and are seen to deliver against consumer needs. • Difference: the brand is unique and sets trends. This indicates which brands set themselves apart from the category by leading the trends or simply offering something that others don’t (can be intangible). • Salience: spontaneous awareness, which indicates how quickly and easily a brand comes to mind. VALIDATING THE KEY DRIVERS Next we needed to ensure that these qualities were actual drivers, rather than simply the outcome of brand success. We also needed to achieve the following: • Validate that these three qualities accounted for the full role of brand in delivering the desired financial outcomes. • Optimise our survey measures of these dimensions and ensure they capture the implicit/automatic consumer decision-making processes. • Quantify the contribution that each of these brand qualities makes to the financial outcome. We embarked on a pilot study in five countries, interviewing more than 8,000 consumers about 400 brands. The study coupled neuroscience measures to survey metrics right through to actual purchase behaviour, for the same individual respondents. The neuroscience metrics allowed us to measure the role of so-called system one processes, such as the automatic emotional response and intuitive brand associations that people have. We then tested a variety of survey-based attitudinal measures to see which best captured these affects and all others. Finally, we were able to monitor the same respondents’ actual shopping behaviour through shopper panels and SMS diaries. Factor regression modelling of the survey metrics was used to predict the volume of brands people bought and the price they paid. This work confirmed that we could summarise the full role of the brand in purchase decisions with the measures of meaningful, difference and salience. This modelling process also allowed us to generate and validate three headline measures of brand equity built from different combinations of meaningful, difference and salience, to predict each of the financial outcomes identified earlier: • Power: This predicts the volume share delivered by brand equity. Generally, we found that being meaningful was most important to this, with salience next and difference less crucial, but this varies by category. Our pilot work showed that brands with high power generate five times the volume share of those with lower power. • Premium: This predicts the price point that the brand equity can justify charging. Again it varies by category, but usually being meaningful is the most important quality although difference is almost as important. Our pilot work showed that brands with high premium score can justify charging a 13% price premium. • Potential: This predicts the likelihood of value share growth in the next 12 months. The pilot work showed that brands with high potential are four times more likely to grow value share than those with low potential. M First published in the April 11, 2013 edition of Research, www.research-live.com By Josh Samuel, European Development Director, Brand Equity WhatDoes ‘MeaningfullyDifferent’ ActuallyMean?
  • Making advertising interesting is the job of the creatives in the ad agencies. Creative departments hire individuals who have a special talent for seeing the world differently. They use the power of creativity to get our attention, and to make products and services interesting and relevant. We can all easily remember our favourite ads. Mine is a Dentyne Frost Bites ad called “Frostbitten”, in which a man in the back of a cab loads a handful of small gum pellets into his mouth, and then his head freezes solid. Creativity is important to advertising for a number of reasons: • It has stopping power. Creativity can make people stop what they are doing and pay attention to advertising - for example, Molson Canadian’s “Made from Canada” commercials. • It fuels the memory. Creativity can leave enduring brand associations that are difficult to forget - for example, the Energizer Bunny. • It generates interest. Creativity can make us curious about brands in a way hay gets us talking about them, searching for more information, or even wanting to try the product or service - for example, Old Spice’s “The Man Your Man Could Smell Like” commercials. • It frames the brand experience. Creativity can enhance perceptions onf the product experience - for example, Viagra commercials. CREATIVE AND EFFECTIVE ADVERTISING But what is creativity, and how do we measure it? There are important questions for those of us in the advertising industry. Every year, the Cannes Lions International Festival or Creativity recognises the most creative advertising from around the world. What criteria do the judges use in making their decisions? There are no rules for producing highly creative advertising, so most would say they they know it when they see it. Dictionary.com defines creativity as “the ability to transcend traditional ideas, rules, patterns, relationships, or the like, and to create meaningful new ideas, forms, methods and interpretations.” As researchers, though, we naturally wanted to know more, so Millward Brown evaluated award-winning advertising to determine if there was a common set of traits that all or most creative advertising possesses. We used our Link™ quantitative copy-testing tool to analyse ads that won Canned Lions between 2002 and 2011 (55 ads across 36 brands). Quantitative pretesting is often criticized for encouraging a cookie-cutter approach to making ads, and for not fully recognising creativity; we wanted to test this perspective. Our Link™ analysis of Cannes Lions winners showed evidence that there are no patterns or rules to making highly creative advertising. However, our analysis did uncover that winning ads scored higher than average on enjoyment, involvement, positive emotions, and being different from other ads - as exhibit 1 shows. The results in this exhibit are indexed against the relevant norm: an index of 105 or more puts the ads into the top third of our database; an index of 114 or more purs the ads into the top ten percent. EXHIBIT 1: Link™ analysis of Cannes Lions-Winning Ads These results make perfect sense. Truly creative advertising - advertising that has stopping power, fuels the memory, generates interest, and frames the brand experience - has to be unlike any other as, differentiating itself in a very engaging way. But is creative advertising always effective advertising? While Cannes Lions recognises creative advertising, campaigns that generate proven business results. Millward Brown also analysed Effie Award-winning advertising from 2007 to 2010 using our Link™ copy-testing tool, including 55 ads across 16 brands. Effie Award winners scored high on the same measures as the Cannes Lions creativity winners (enjoyment, involvement, positive emotions, and being different). In addition, ads that are recognised for effectiveness also scored high on branding and uniqueness of impressions, meaning that the creative was well linked to the advertised brand (see exhibit 2). EXHIBIT 2 - Link Analysis of Effie Award-Winning Ads Brand linkage means more than just repeatedly showing the brand name or packaging throughout the ad. It takes a creative approach to integrating the brand into the heart of the ad’s storyline to deliver strong brand linkage. Take, for example, Guinness’ “Evolution” ad, which won the Cannes Grand Prix award in 2006. In the Millward Brown database, this ad scored in the top 25 percent for branding, yet the brand is shown only once at the beginning and once at the end. It may seem surprising that effective advertising does not necessarily have to be persuasive. Persuasion is a short-term measure of effectiveness. At the moment of seeing the ad, you are either persuaded or you are not. Persuasive advertising typically delivers new and.or relevant information that drives consumers to change their behaviour. Once their behaviour changes, the ad ceases to be persuasive. Millward Brown has also identified ads that are not persuasive in the short term but are effective at brand building (growing the brand’s equity ad market share over the long term). There are the types of ads that typically get submitted for the Effies, so the findings from our analysis should not be surprising. Advertising that is effective in long-term brand building typically generates a strong emotional response in consumers. Emotionally powerful ads are more memorable. Our work in the area of copy testing has shown that a number of different emotions are effective at generating a response from consumers, and therefore no one emotion is necessary to trigger successful advertising. Effective advertising triggers the emotion hay is most relevant to the brand’s positioning. IMPLICATIONS FOR ADVERTISERS Creativity is very important for advertising to be successful. Creativity helps deliver stopping power, fuels the memory, generates interest, and frames the brand experience - all of which are important for advertising to work well. The analysis presented in this article adds the need for strong brand linkage and for emotional response to creativity if advertising is also to be effective in building the brand. Ensuring that the brand has the appropriate strategy driving its creation direction and making sure that the creative efforts are all consistent with the brand’s overall stratify will increase the chances of advertising effectiveness. While creativity is hard to define - most saying they know it when they see it - through this analysis, we know the metrics that help us measure it. BIG IDEA RESEARCH As advertising costs increase, as competition becomes fiercer, and as brands look to globalise their marketing campaigns, many of the world’s advertisers are placing greater importance on creativity to help their advertising be most disruptive, generate buzz, and transcend cultural and geographic boundaries. This response underscores the importance of identifying big, creative ideas at an early stage of creative development. “Big idea” research takes place in the often neglected space between brand strategy research and the copy-testing research that happens late in the creative development process. By knowing the metrics that help measure creativity, advertisers can greatly benefit from involving research earlier in the creative development process, generating bigger, better ideas. Rob Hernandez, global brand director for FireFly Millward Brown, says “There are some who argue that we can’t (or shouldn’t) research our way into a big idea - that big ideas surface spontaneously or come in the form of divine inspiration to agency creatives. I disagree. There are ways to harness consumer research - both qualitative and quantitative - not only to facilitate the co-creation of big ideas, but also to make good ideas even bigger and better.” Big idea research helps advertisers determine how best to say what they want to communicate, identify the most resonant elements of potential ideas, and evaluate their fit with the brand. Millward Brown feels that putting the emphasis on development first and then evaluating quantitatively, using a proven framework for making advertising successful, id the right way to research big ideas. "The real fact of the matter is that nobody reads ads. People read what interests them, and sometimes it's an ad" - Howard Luck Gossage, advertising innovator (1917-1969) First published February 8, 2013 by The Marketing Research and Intelligence Association (MRIA), www.mria-arim.ca Link Norm ADS THAT WIN AWARDS FOR CREATIVITY (CANNES) OVER-INDEX ON BEING DIFFERENT, INVOLVING AND ENJOYABLE... ...different to other ads 102 106 113 115 ...involving ...enjoyable ...different than other brands Link Norm ...WHILE IT IS STRENGTH IN BRANDING THAT MAKES THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN A CREATIVE AD AND AN EFFECTIVE AD Branding Uniqueness Different to other ads Engagement Enjoyment Brand Difference 106 106 102 104 102 102 99 96 115 113 106 102 }Effie winners over-index on Branding and Uniqueness By Paul Gareau, Vice President, Millward Brown Canada EffectiveAdvertising: HarnessingthePower ofCreativity
  • It’s easy to make assumptions about the media in China. That all channels are tightly controlled,restricted and largely ‘closed’ to authentic or creative communication. That if businesses have one big idea, and put it across using one channel – most often TV – they can expect it to reach and influence all their target audiences. This is no longer the case: China’s media environment is extremely dynamic, powerful, complex and fragmented. There are opportunities for businesses looking to enter the market to tell a powerful story that wins customers and builds loyalty, but they need to understand and adapt their marketing to the ways people use media today. Chinese consumers access information via multiple channels and multiple screens. Digital media has grown exponentially, and the number of social media users is rising dramatically – the Twitter- type microblog service Weibo now has more than 600 million users, significantly more than the total number of internet users in the US. Mobile is now the top channel for accessing the internet. As their wealth and sophistication grows, Chinese consumers are becoming increasingly aware of their relationship with brands. To achieve and sustain brand strength, this relationship needs to be developed and reinforced in a strategic way through the media channels they use. Chinese consumers have learned to buy for reasons other than price – they’re looking for choice, more specialised products, and true value. Businesses need to create a strong value proposition: identifying their markets, understanding what they want and creating a package of price, features, positioning and packaging that will engage consumers on a deeper level. They then need to communicate this value proposition, being precise in their targeting and messaging, and understanding which media channels to use and how. Creating and communicating differentiation is also important. According to Millward Brown research across over 1,000 brands in China, both local and international, being considered meaningfully different by target consumers produced a 37 percent higher contribution to brand value. Welldifferentiated brands are also 12 times more likely to grow in value than brands with only average differentiation. Meaningful differentiation is more than “this is new!” – in highly innovative categories like technology loyalty is low because the next ‘best idea’ is often just around the corner. The difference needs to benefit consumers’ lives in a distinctive way that they recognise and appreciate, and businesses need to communicate this in a meaningful way: a memorable ad can easily leave people entertained, for example, but without any clear understanding of why to select one brand over another. Trust is non-negotiable for Chinese shoppers, and it’s on the decline – the Trustworthy Score for the Millward Brown’s BrandZ Top 50 Most Valuable Chinese brands dropped 2 percent in 2012 thanks to recent high profile concerns over food and dairy safety, amplified through the reach and influence of social media. Companies have responded by understanding how to participate in and hold open and genuine dialogues with consumers in credible online environments, and any business looking to compete in China will have to do the same. They can also build sustained consumer trust by creating and communicating a strong and consistent brand identity. Many well- known brands in China lack this foundation, so there’s an opportunity for global companies to steal a march. A clearly defined vision and values, persistently delivered, will boost credibility in the eyes of consumers. The vision should honestly reflect the brand’s reason for being, and the contribution it wants to make to the community it serves and to the consumers it engages. There is also a huge opportunity for global brands to use media to bond emotionally with consumers – Chinese brands are good at providing functional benefits, but few excel at long term emotional engagement. The companies that connect most powerfully with consumers on an emotional level will be those which recognise cultural distinctiveness still persists across China, and seek to isolate the factors that that most contribute to consumer bonding in different areas and cities, as well as understanding differences in media usage – particularly in the high-growth lower tier cities. As the media environment becomes more complicated, marketers may find that creating a bundle of smaller ideas with a consistent brand expression is more effective than looking for that one ‘big idea’. They should consider each target audience and the relevant channels for addressing it, and be willing to invest in separate multi-channel programmes that will drive both audience reach and impact. Businesses also need to create compelling content: journalists and consumers alike are looking for good stories, and respond positively to activities that reflect a commitment to improving Chinese society. Combining traditional media with social media activities can strengthen influence, and brands need to meaningfully incorporate social media touchpoints into their digital marketing strategies – not just listening, but actively becoming part of the conversation. In the BrandZ China Top 50, the Top 20 brands in social media presence average $10 billion in brand value, compared with an average value of $3.9 billion for the other 30 brands. Air China, for example, the country’s 18th most valuable brand, refocused its marketing budget on social media in 2012 to save money and more effectively reach its target audiences. A two-month microblog campaign called ‘The Moment of Reunion’ attracted 450,000 new visitors, while the brand also enabled customers to plan flights and check in using Weibo and Facebook. By creating and posting engaging ‘social objects’ such as videos, cartoons, photos and topical stories businesses can also start conversations with consumers, and build clear and consistent brand images in their minds. China’s GDP is predicted to grow by around 7.5% in 2013 – far above that of most Western economies – so the opportunity to do business there remains enormous. Penetrating this vast and complex market will require a deep understanding of the dynamics of Chinese consumers, markets and media in multiple regions. S First published in the February 21, 2013 edition of MediaTel, www.mediatel.co.uk By Jason Spencer, Managing Director, Shanghai, Millward Brown WhyChina’sChanging MediaLandscapeisan OpportunitytoBuild Brands A clearly defined vision and values, persistently delivered, will boost credibility in the eyes of consumers
  • hile automotive marketers are accustomed to changing the creative content of their campaigns on a regular basis, there is no automatic driver that encourages the adoption of new media channels. Changing established media allocations is risky; weighing the options requires time, effort and skill. The fear of making the wrong decision in today’s economic climate is all too clear. But avoiding innovation in car marketing carries its own risk. The automotive landscape is fast moving, and those who don’t advance with it will be left behind. Automotive marketers need a way to embrace change without being swallowed up by it. Maybe they should follow the lead of the Coca-Cola Company. In its quest to double the size of its business by 2020, Coca-Cola is planning to apportion its marketing spend according to the 70:20:10 investment principle. This will see: 70% spent on low-risk media options, such as TV, outdoor, print, radio and sponsorship; 20% to innovate based on what has worked successfully in the past; and 10% to fund high- risk media content involving new ideas. This 70:20:10 principle has also worked effectively for Google, which applies 70% of its workforce effort to core business, 20% to adjacent products, and 10% to highly experimental innovation for the long-term. The application of 70:20:10 can aid media planning, notably in terms of the allocation of resources to growing channels, such as mobile and social media. But it shouldn’t be considered a strict formula. The precise allocations are not important, but some fixed proportion of spend should be regularly devoted to marketing innovation. This will encourage experimentation in a disciplined and structured way. By using such a framework, car brands can steer a safe and prosperous middle path while evolving both their media and research budgets. The 70:20:10 Allocation 70%: THE COMFORT ZONE Automotive spend is usually a top three category in all countries globally, covering the established channels such as TV, print (newspapers and magazines), outdoor, radio and, increasingly, online. Some digital elements are now firmly established in the 70% – every car brand now has a website, an online search strategy and runs plenty of online display advertising. The critical issue for car advertisers is to ensure that the creative content within and across each channel is effective in its ability to engage and motivate the target audience, be it existing owners or key prospects entering the customer journey to purchase. Since the channels in this zone are well understood, the research challenge here is to identify incremental adjustments, either across media or within an individual channel. Since these campaign elements are taking up a large proportion of the budget, even a small-step improvement can make a big difference to campaign effectiveness – optimising the balance between TV, radio and online video can improve the efficiency of audiovisual delivery. A recent online ad test for an Australian car brand identified two exposures as the optimal frequency level for their campaign, hence saving media investment in unnecessarily high frequency. Another car manufacturer in China was able to identify newspapers and online as the most cost-efficient channels for supplementing TV within their campaign. But to say that 70% of the budget should fund communications in channels that are considered to be safe, familiar, and effective is not to say that 70% of a media budget should remain static from year to year. Based on ongoing learning from cross-media research and evolving brand objectives, channel mix within the 70% could vary significantly over time and from campaign to campaign. 20%: INNOVATING AROUND WHAT WORKS Innovating around media approaches that are known to be effective could include a broad range of options. It could mean taking a small risk, such as increasing your spend on a channel that seemed to work well in your 10% last year, or sponsoring a sporting event, rather than TV sponsorship. For automotive, social media now falls squarely into the 20% category. Car brands have taken to social media with varying degrees of success, and some still have questions about the return on investment. Premium brands, like BMW, Mercedes, Audi and Porsche, have built up huge Facebook fan bases. Infinity is currently the fastest-growing page with an average of 13,200 new followers each day, while BMW has the most ‘liked’ page, with over 12 million fans. The launch of the Ford Explorer on Facebook generated more traffic than a Super Bowl ad, while value brand Kia Soul’s ‘Hamster’ commercial got nearly two million Likes on Facebook and almost 20 million hits on YouTube. VW China People’s Car Project is an example of social media being used as the hub of a customer- focused multimedia campaign, including TV, online films, online advertising, events, PR coverage, augmented reality, mobile apps, giveaways, guerrilla, outdoor and viral video. Now social media has achieved genuine scale, the research challenge is to establish ongoing approaches that enable social media elements to be monitored and optimised over time. This requires qualitative understanding and quantitative measurement. It is no longer a race for fans and followers, rather, car brands need to assess whether and how social media activities are delivering against brand-building objectives among these fans. 10%: INTO THE UNKNOWN The 10% zone is the place where genuine experimentation takes place with new and emerging channels. But this risk-taking should be in line with brand and campaign objectives. For the majority of car brands, mobile falls into the 10% category. The mobile marketing landscape continues to evolve as ownership of smartphones and tablets grows rapidly. But there are dilemmas for car marketers – should they build a mobile app or focus on their mobile website? Make QR codes a central element of their outdoor campaign? There are innovative examples of car brands pushing the boundaries of technology, such as using augmented reality campaigns and interactive ads on different mobile devices to promote both existing models and future product concepts. VW produced an AR app for the launch of its new Golf Cabriolet, creating an AR showroom app for the iPad, iPhone and Android, allowing participants to explore the vehicle and play with its features. Starting with the 10% not only ensures that innovation happens, it also ensures that these projects have a chance to play an integral or guiding role in the overall campaign, rather than being seen as afterthoughts. The research challenge here is to identify which of these are just one-offs, and which have longer-term potential; which deserve to be in next year’s 20% investment. To really understand how a new channel works, it may be necessary to spend as much on research as on the media itself. SUMMARY When assessing how your media budget stacks up against 70:20:10, it is important to consider all the costs involved in a channel. Projects in the 10% zone are likely to be relatively resource-intensive, even if media costs are low. Therefore, to ensure that the 70:20:10 approach is applied comprehensively and fairly across the spectrum of paid, owned, and earned media channels, car brand owners need to weigh all the costs associated with each channel. Marketers need to consider the 70:20:10 channel optimisation every time they plan and implement new marketing campaigns, for example, new model launches, brand campaigns and tactical campaigns. With large organisations competing on the global stage, experimentation should be spread across brand and model portfolios, and across countries. The best time and place for a particular experiment will clearly depend on the objectives of the campaign and media consumption of the target audience – hence the need for consumer insight. Car marketers need to consider channel optimisation every time they plan campaigns. Those that adopt a 70:20:10 approach will know that newer channels, such as mobile and social media, will be given a chance to shine alongside the more familiar and trusted media channels. While these channels may be in the 10% now, they are likely to move swiftly into the 20% category, and eventually the 70% category, as they become more familiar and used. Likewise, there are many examples of car brands integrating traditional channels with new media, such as Honda’s iPhone app designed to catch the characters as they appear on the TV screen in the ‘Unpredictable Life’ TV ad, and new CinePrint technology for the new Lexus ES. The key message for car marketers is to ensure that at least some marketing money is invested in these higher risk areas, to ensure your brands are using all the gears, and not stuck in reverse. W By Nick Bull, Head of Automotive, Millward Brown Article reprinted with permission from Warc, February 2013, www.warc.com MarketingCars: ChangeMediaGear Car marketers need to take some risk with their media placement and ensure that new channels are tested, using a 70:20:10 allocation model.
  • ne of the indicators we use at BrandZ to determine how passionate people are about a brand are the words they use to describe the brand’s personality. Choosing to describe a brand as “rebellious”, “fun” or “creative” from a medley of adjectives that also includes softer options such as “innocent”, “kind” and “friendly”, for example, is a clear indicator of the greater or lesser passion elicited by the brand. Our key measure also assesses whether a brand polarises consumers. The greater the BrandZ “clarity” score, the more a brand divides opinions. It might seem counterintuitive, but polarisation is an important measure of passion; after all, products and services that are all things to all people are generally bland and less distinctive: an unhappy position, as far as brands are concerned. FOUR AREAS OF PASSION So what exactly do consumers think about when they rate some brands more passionately than others? Our studies suggest that there are four key areas: 1. Adventurous/Rebellious 2. Desirable/Sexy 3. Playful/Fun 4. Creative All four areas are active, positive actions that embrace powerful and passionate descriptors of relationships with brands. We know from experience that there is a huge disparity between brands in the degree to which these words are mentioned. This shows us that passion is not something that is just casually given, but rather something that is earned by brands that are meaningfully different and deserving of such accolades. As a recent publication of Millward Brown Optimor’s Top 100 Global Brands shows, there are clear frontrunners in each of these four areas: Adventurous/Rebellious: Red Bull, Nike, Apple Desirable/Sexy: L’Oréal, BMW, Apple Playful/Fun: Disney, Coca-Cola, Apple Creative: Google, Intel, Apple Passion does not only result in sales. The brands that are the most passionately rated are also the ones that earn the most online buzz (which, in turn, feeds sales and brand value). Is this connection surprising? I think not. The social space is where we interact freely on matters of interest, consequence or fun. Brands that participate in this space (without disrupting or interfering with the party) are engaging freely with willing audiences. Finally, a key learning from our studies is that low price does not buy passion. Instead, our data clearly shows that consumers with the greatest passion for a brand name price as their least powerful influence. Only those lacking a passionate relationship put price at the top. A PASSIONATE AFFAIR: 10 KEY RULES 1. A distinctive brand is more likely to attract consumer passion. 2. Passion adds value to a brand. 3. Building a single-minded brand promise entails understanding which passion to emphasise. 4. Tone of voice is vital to underline passion in an interesting way. 5. Media selection not only plays a part in targeting relevant consumers, but also implies the character and passionate nature of the brand. 6. Brand relationships are built on personal experience. 7. Being true to yourself as a brand is essential to a passionate experience. A brand’s entire value chain must deliver on this truth to ultimately affect customers. 8. Passionate users are a brand’s best advocates and should be cultivated. 9. Do not worry about polarising your audience - passion is not about being all things to all people. 10. Think about the brands that inspire your own passion and consider what personal insights can be applied to your brand. O Characteristics ofaPassionate Brand You might wonder why brands care about passion. Why not simply focus on sales? The truth is that the way consumers feel about brands is a proven driver of sales. Peter Walshe, Global BrandZ Director, Millward Brown First published in the January 12, 2012 edition of MediaCom, www.mediacom.se
  • oday most marketers are creating multi-channel campaigns to engage with their customers where they want, when they want and in a format that they prefer. They are accustomed to changing the creative content of their campaigns to suit new formats on a regular basis. But as new media channels emerge, marketers and media agencies are often unclear how to allocate spend among the different and many channel options. Fear of making the wrong decision can make exploration in new channels daunting and weighting options requires time and effort. Yet innovation cannot be avoided. Brands that don’t advance with the world as it moves forward can be left behind. Finding the optimum mix of channels becomes more complicated with the continuous emergence of new media options that requires marketers to continuously innovate. By the time you’ve established whether a new channel is a good investment there’s another three to evaluate. Coca-Cola implemented a new approach for investing in creative content with the adaption of the established 70-20-10 protocol for apportioning resources for investment. In its quest to double the size of its business by 2020, Coca-Cola would apportion its communications spend so that 70% would be low-risk, bread and butter content; 20% would involve innovating but be based on what had worked in the past and 10% would fund high risk content involving brand new ideas. Coca-Cola is not the only company to put this old rule to new use. Google used it to manage innovation and other companies for leadership programmes. There’s no reason why this rule shouldn’t be used to allocate investment to new channels such as mobile, gaming, augmented reality or the latest social media sites to set its eyes on advertisers (Twitter and now Tumblr for example). CREATING SPACE FOR INNOVATION 70-20-10 is not a strict formula and the precise allocations are not important; what is essential is that some fixed proportion of spend is spent on innovation. This will encourage forward thinking and experimentation in a disciplined and structured way. By using such a framework brands can steer a safe and prosperous middle path while evolving both their media and research budgets. For most brands the 70% zone of low risk marketing is likely to involve established channels such as TV, print, outdoor and radio or even, for some brands, word-of-mouth marketing. These channels are safe, familiar and effective. It doesn’t need to remain static from year to year of course. Based on ongoing learning and evolving brand objectives, channel composition within this zone could vary significantly over time and from campaign to campaign. A total of 30% of investment should be focused on innovating. We suggest that most of this - 20% of your total budget - is restricted to media approaches that are known to be effective, but involve some risk because they are new for your brand. It might mean taking a risk by changing the application of something that you’ve done before - for example sponsoring a sporting event rather than a music festival. The insurance brand targeted at women, Sheila’s Wheels, invested 30% of its TV budget into sponsoring drama when it launched in the UK in 2005. This was considered innovative at a time when most insurance brands focused almost exclusively on TV spot advertising. The risk paid off and Sheila’s Wheels reached an awareness level of 75% in just three months, surpassing sales targets by 65% within the first year. For most brands today, the 20% of innovation is usually around social media. Marketers have signed up to the benefit of enabling interaction with consumers, but they still raise questions about return on investment (ROI) and are learning how to create and deliver campaigns that are truly social by design. The remaining 10% of channel investment is for experimentation with new and emerging unknown channels. Although it is relatively high risk, brands should remain in line with their core brand and campaign objectives; iPhone apps and Pinterest pages are right for some brands, but not all. MONITORING PROGRESS As you measure the success of your 70-20-10 strategy, it is likely that some of what begins as innovation becomes a core activity and moves into the 70% comfort zone. After a few years of investing 30% of its budget in sponsorship, Sheila’s Wheels expanded its sponsorship allocation to £10 million with the launch of its home insurance product, making sponsorship its largest channel investment in one of British television’s biggest sponsorship slots: the ITV national weather broadcast. Measurement is critical to reaping the rewards of this strategy and ensuring that there’s always room for investing in the ‘new’. Channel optimisation is a core part of campaign planning. While some marketers are actively involved in the process, others leave the decisions to their media agency. Whichever route you take, it is clear that the 70-20-10 approach will allow you to embrace change without being swallowed up by it. New channels will be given a chance to shine and your brand can continue to use communications to support core business objectives in the most optimal and innovative ways. B By John Svendsen, Global Brand Director, Millward Brown First published in the November 20, 2012 edition of MediaTel, www.mediatel.co.uk It Works for Coca- Cola and Google and it Can Work for You Too: The70- 20-10Rule
  • used to think that Haagen-Dazs meant something. I presumed the origin was Scandinavian. In fact, the name means nothing in any language and originates from the Bronx. But the name does carry implicit meaning, just as founder Reuben Mattus intended when he and his wife started brainstorming names. Faced with a growing price war, Mattus decided not to take part but instead chose to make the very best ice cream he could and charge a premium for it. The Haagen-Dazs name was intended to signal that the brand was imported from Denmark, well-known for its diary industry. As Matthus recognized, a good brand name can be a powerful asset. At the very least a brand name serves to distinguish a product or service from its competitors. At best a brand name can infer meaning that helps define what the brand stands for. And at worst a brand name can open a company up to ridicule. Companies know that brand names have power and these days they are sometimes pay millions to develop a new one. In these days of global commerce getting the right brand name is particularly important. Some names simply don’t travel well. A NAME THAT TRAVELS IS HARD TO FIND If you have ever named a child, you know that choosing a name is not easy. As a school teacher my father was well aware that names can be used for good or ill. Kids will seize on anything unusual and turn it into a nickname that is hard to shake off. So my parents labored long and hard to come up with names for my brother and I. “Nigel” proved to be a good choice, particularly now I reside in the US where it is unusual but easy to pronounce and therefore memorable. The origins of brand names are varied and many. The Nokia name originated in 1871 and was named after a town near one of the company’s original wood pulp mills. In 1933 German chancellor Adolf Hitler ordered Ferdinand Porsche to develop a car for the masses and the Volkswagen was born (literally, the name means “people’s car” in German). In 1946 Tot’em Stores (so called because of the signature totem pole placed outside each store) became 7-Eleven, reflecting the new hours of operation. These names have stood the test of time and language to become well-known around the world. Many familiar brands simply originate from their founder’s names. Henry Ford gave us the Ford Motor Company. Frederick Miller gave us the Miller Brewing Company And Sam Walton gave us Wal-Mart. Brand names like these are simple and straightforward. They are “what it says on the tin.”They tell you who founded the business and what the company does. My own company’s name -- Millward Brown -- shows how difficult it can be to take a local brand international. Millward Brown sounds simple enough to the British. But even in the U.S. the name “Millward” is often abbreviated to “Millard” or turned into “Millwood.” Imagine then, the problems the name poses in Mexico, China or Brazil. The Brazilian alphabet did not even include a “W” until 1990, a double “L” is unheard of, and no words end in a “D.” In many countries Millward Brown is often simply referred to as “MB.” But one solution that worked in Latin America created more problems in another part of the world. The MB abbreviation was impossible to use in Korea, since Korean President, Lee Myung Bak is referred to in the media as simply “MB.” Some of his political initiatives use these initials, like “MBnomics” for his fiscal policy and the “MB Doctrine” for his foreign policy. Our social research division is normally introduced as “MB Social Research.” But that could sound awfully like a Big Brother-ish campaign on the part of the Korean government to research its citizens’ personal lives. So we changed the name, yet again. ACRONYMS AND ACRIMONY Abbreviating a name to its initials is a common strategy when an original brand name proves hard to pronounce, no longer serves its purpose of becomes unwieldy. BP is more suitable for an international company than British Petroleum. Similarly the British Broadcasting Company became the BBC and International Business Machines Corporation became IBM. GSK is less of a mouthful than GlaxoSmithKline. When PricewaterhouseCoopers (itself a combination of Price Waterhouse and Coopers & Lybrand) spun off its consulting unit they chose not to abbreviate but to create a completely new name. PwC Consulting worked with Wolff Olins, a branding consultancy, spending a reported $110m to come up with the name “Monday.” As noted by the BBC noted the name was intended to denote a “fresh thinking and new beginnings, rather than the unwelcome start to the working week.” However, the name was widely greeted with derision with many references to the lyrics from The Boomtown Rats’ “I don’t like Mondays.”The name lasted five months and disappeared when IBM bought Monday and merged it into its prosaically named IBM Global Business Services. The BBC greeted the news with a tongue-in-cheek elegy titled, “R.I.P Monday” identifying the cause of the demise as “Mondayitis, a debilitating ailment associated with hangovers, lack of motivation and the recurring grumble of ‘still four more days to go!’.” Sometimes a brand can turn mispronunciation to its advantage. The name Pepsi reportedly derives from the digestive enzyme pepsin. While it possibly a good thing that the name’s origins remain little known, not everyone wants to think about digestive juices while seeking refreshment, Pepsi also proves difficult for Spanish speakers. They often resort to saying “Pecsi” or simply “Pesi.” In Argentina the brand decided to make the most of this difficulty and developed a campaign announcing that 24% of Argentineans don’t say Pepsi but Pecsi. The ad featured Mostaza (mustard) Merlo, a famous soccer player and coach well-known for adapting English soccer terms to be more suitable for Spanish pronunciation. The TV ad ended with the tagline “Drink Pepsi now. Drink Pecsi also.”The campaign idea resonated well and was subsequently adapted for Spain with soccer player Fernando Torres who pronounces Pepsi as Pesi. “BITE THE WAX TADPOLE” Pronunciation is probably the most common challenge faced by brands around the world. But names that mean something in their original language and culture often fail to travel. A recent article in The Wall Street Journal describes how Redalen, a bed sold by Swedish furniture chain IKEA and named after a town in Norway, sounds far too sexually explicit for Thai speakers. Of course, names do not have to be rude or fail to translate to carry unfortunate connotations. A couple of years ago in Japan I remember being nonplussed when faced with a vending machine selling among other things Pocari Sweat and Amino Calpis. I opted for the safer sounding C.C.Lemon. Finding a name that works in every country is never easy but China may be the most challenging market of all for foreign brands. In China many Western brand names are expressed in Chinese characters (also known as sinographs). Some brands simply translate their brand name so that it will sound the same (or as close as possible) when pronounced. Others take the process a step further and imbue the name with relevant connotations: BMW translates to “precious horse,” while the Chinese name for Ikea conveys “suitable for home.” Perhaps the most famous translation is the one for Coca-Cola. When Coca-Cola was first sold in China local shop keepers tried to express the name phonetically using Chinese characters with sometimes bizarre results. Rather than suffer transliterations like “bite the wax tadpole,” the Coca-Cola Company identified a combination of characters which sounds similar to the English pronunciation but also implies the brand will “permit the mouth to be happy.” Most brand names develop their meaning over time as the company seeks to promote what the brand stands for and the experience of using the brand adds a personal element to that meaning. But there is a lot of truth in the adage that “words have meaning and names have power.”The trouble is that a powerfully constructive name in one context may be powerfully destructive in another. If first impressions count, then history suggests it worthwhile to investing to get the right name for a brand. I What’sina品牌?How toNameaCompanyina GlobalEconomy Every parent and start-up dreads and appreciates the challenge of naming. It’s even harder when your brand has to travel. That which we call Coca-Cola does not, by any other language, sound as sweet By Nigel Hollis, Executive Vice President and Chief Global Analyst, Millward Brown First published in the November 20, 2012 edition of The Atlantic, www.theatlantic.com
  • By Dominic Twose, Global Head of Knowledge Management, Millward Brown First published in the August 28, 2012 edition of Research, www.research-live.com Effective In the Admap paper we also analysed the results of ads deemed highly effective by virtue of receiving an IPA or an Effie award. The ads scored high on all the same measures as the Lions winners, but they also tended to fare well on branding: their creativity was linked to the brand. In 2011 Cannes introduced a new Creative Effectiveness category. This year’s winner, Even Angels Will Fall, epitomised the criteria set out here. It’s a highly engaging distinctive and memorable ad featuring beautiful angels falling to Earth and ripping off their haloes, having been seduced by a young man wearing Axe Excite deodorant. Last year’s Grand Prix winner was a campaign for Walkers Crisps that showed the excitement generated when a host of celebrities, including the racing driver Jenson Button and the actress Pamela Anderson, visited the small English town of Sandwich - the message being, a bag of Walkers crisps has the same effect on your lunchtime sandwich. The ad was also judged a winner by Link, Millward Brown’s pre-testing system. It grabbed attention and was clearly memorable and well branded. Sales increased 26% and endorsement of the statement that Walkers “makes my lunch more enjoyable” rose from 21% to 39% over the course of the campaign. Likeable Imaginative and amusing associations can help people remember things, from grocery lists to random strings of numbers. Advertising also creates associations, linking brands with motivating ideas and concepts - though the means used are usually more subtle and sophisticated than the simple mnemonic techniques described here. The world’s most creative ads are celebrated annually at the Cannes Lions International Festival of Creativity. The question of how to evaluate creativity is an important issue for those of us in the advertising industry. Millward Brown’s study of Cannes Lions award winners (published in Admap in November 2011) found that winning ads scored high on enjoyment, involvement, positive emotions and - crucially - being different from other ads, confirming the notion that there are no patterns, no rules to producing highly creative advertising. The reality is that the most successful ads are those that are unlike any other. They are “creative” in that they transcend traditional ideas to create meaningful new ones. Influential In 2007, at the behest of Washington Post journalist Gene Weingarten, the violinist Joshua Bell entered a Metro station in Washington, DC. Dressed casually, he stood against a wall, took out his Stradivarius and began to play. The “concert” was videotaped with a hidden camera. The film showed that during the time Bell was playing 1,097 people passed by but only five slowed down to listen, and he collected just $32.17. Just three days earlier, listeners had filled Symphony Hall in Boston to hear him play. Good seats went for $100 or more. What was the difference? Context. People expect to hear great music in a famous concert hall, but not in an underground station, and so they are unlikely to recognise it when they do. The way experiences are framed can fundamentally affect the way they are perceived. Anyone who has been involved in product testing will recognise this. A product that produces average results when tested blind might fare substantially better when branded. Framing matters, and vivid advertising memories (maybe through associating particular claims or specific emotions with a brand) can colour perceptions of the brand itself and powerfully enhance perceptions of the product experience. Intriguing Early in the twentieth century, a store owner in New York filled a goldfish bowl with water and placed it alongside a sign that read “Invisible fish from South America”. Before long a crowd had gathered, and the police had to be called to clear the sidewalk of people trying to see the invisible fish. Such displays have been used many times since to generate curiosity in storefronts. The same type of curiosity can be generated by interesting, memorable advertising associations. Such curiosity may lead someone to try a brand, especially if it is a low-risk, low-cost purchase. At the very least, it will encourage them to find out more about a product, particularly if it’s a major purchase like a car. Memorable Simonides of Ceos , an Ancient Greek poet, is credited with developing a system of mnemonics called the ‘memory palace’, whereby you associate information you need to remember with locations on a given route. The story goes that he was attending a banquet when he heard that two young men were waiting outside to see him. As he left the dining hall, it collapsed behind him. During the excavation of the rubble, Simonides was able to identify each guest, crushed beyond recognition, by recalling their positions at the table. Successful mnemonic systems depend on creativity. The more creative and dramatic the images you form to associate with information, the more vivid your memories will be. Memory coach Harry Lorayne, who did a lot to popularise mnemonics, suggests that the links should be ridiculous or illogical, out of proportion, exaggerated or in motion. Ordinary people use mnemonic systems all the time, whether they realise it or not - such as when they recall an advertising jingle. Our analysis shows that when advertising is exciting, intriguing, funny, sexy, surprising, thought-provoking, different or eye-catching, consumers are left with associations planted so deeply they simply can’t forget them. Attention-grabbing A few years ago I had an interesting experience in a cinema. I’d arrived early to get my seat, but the cinema was already nearly full. People were talking and laughing through the ads, waiting for the film to begin. Then another ad started. This one featured two children sitting side by side facing the camera. A lively electro-pop tune kicked in and the children began moving their eyebrows in rhythm to the music. A hush fell over the room as everyone watched the facial gymnastics on the screen. That ad for Cadbury’s Dairy Milk is a good example of one of the benefits of creativity in advertising: unique ideas grab attention. People are bombarded by ads every day, but they mentally screen most of them out, either actively or passively. When people are not interested in hearing about brands - which is, admittedly, most of the time - they’re not interested in looking at ads either. But creativity can help an ad circumvent the normal filtering process. Creativity can make people pay attention. The insurance brand targeted at women, Sheila’s Wheels, invested 30% of its TV budget into sponsoring drama when it launched in the UK in 2005. This was considered innovative at a time when most insurance brands focused almost exclusively on TV spot advertising. The risk paid off and Sheila’s Wheels reached an awareness level of 75% in just three months, surpassing sales targets by 65% within the first year. For most brands today, the 20% of innovation is usually around social media. Marketers have signed up to the benefit of enabling interaction with consumers, but they still raise questions about return on investment (ROI) and are learning how to create and deliver campaigns that are truly social by design. The remaining 10% of channel investment is for experimentation with new and emerging unknown channels. Although it is relatively high risk, brands should remain in line with their core brand and campaign objectives; iPhone apps and Pinterest pages are right for some brands, but not all. TheJoyof Six
  • NAVIGATING THENEWPATH TOPURCHASE
  • Today, the consumer path to purchase is as complex as ever. Shifting consumer attitudes and multiple connected devices create a chaotic reality. The traditional purchase funnel diagram, one which any marketer could sketch from memory, is officially dead. The singular, orderly sequence of purchase stages has been scrambled, and marketers need to conform. In today’s world, where consumers have access to constant information through computers, smart phones and tablets, each person’s path to purchase is complex and unique. Fragmented audiences, distracted consumers and multiple devices fuel different paths. The explosion of digital channels, the always- on media ecosystem, and the emergence of increasingly discerning consumers challenge even the savviest of digital marketers. Marketers are designing a path to purchase strategy based on an outdated model, and there is no objective way to benchmark or measure success in a rapidly evolving digital marketplace. For consumers, there are unlimited opportunities to get distracted throughout the shopping process. Consumers can get to the brink of a purchase and then regress back to researching and browsing— because it’s easy to do. Whether on their desktop, tablet or smartphone, shoppers are just one click away from embarking on a ride far away from their original intent. The good news: A single touchpoint can get them back. For marketers, it’s a challenge to identify and map the ideal shopping behavior for their brand. Each individual path is different—the actual activities vary widely between consumers, across multiple platforms. However, the combinations are not infinite. It’s not just what consumers do that is important; it is also how, when and why they do it. The timing, location, and intensity of consumer behavior indicate levels of involvement within the path to purchase and opportunities for marketers to engage. Digital marketers need to take a hard look into this data trail that consumers leave behind. Analysis of this behavior can provide actionable insight into how consumers arrive at their purchase decision. As consumers use more digital platforms and channels for research and buying, there is a need to invest, strategically and financially, in tools and platforms that measure beyond traditional web analytics. We need to understand engagement activity (e.g. search, review and cross-shopping, mobile/tablet engagement) before, during, and after the customer conversion. The path to purchase model is shifting. Consumers are distracted, but smarter. Marketers can be smarter too. This whitepaper gives marketers context and insight into the evolving path to purchase across several verticals as well as advice on building a strategy to better shape their marketing efforts. NAVIGATINGTHENEWPATHTOPURCHASE
  • FLAT PANEL TV SHOPPERS When shopping for a new Flat Panel TV (FPTV), consumers are looking to upgrade their device, improve their home viewing situation, purchase an FPTV for a new room or home or simply replace a broken television. This data is important—the “why” consumers are shopping for FPTVs helps us determine “what” consumers are doing along their path to purchase. HOW DO FPTV CONSUMERS SHOP? • When purchasing a new FPTV, the desire to upgrade is the strongest motivator. • Shopping for a FPTV typically takes 11 weeks, one of the longest processes analyzed. • Consumers primarily conduct their TV research online, but still visit a physical retail location to purchase. The FPTV consumers’ path to purchase process is lengthy, typically occurring over 11 weeks. The first shopping phase occurs in the first four weeks while consumers are researching brands and determining their price range. Phase two is in the middle four weeks, when they move further down the path and determine which brands and models are the best fit. In the final three weeks, shoppers are compiling their research and have narrowed down brands, models and the best deals. Our path to purchase research has demonstrated that most FPTV shoppers have a tendency to research online and to purchase offline, making both digital and physical channels important pillars of any marketing strategy. The brick-and-mortar retail location is still the most popular place to actually make a purchase, but only one third of shoppers will use only a physical retail location for research. Even during traditionally busy seasons—holidays when online traffic increases by up to three times—online purchase rates stay the same, underscoring the role of retail stores in the purchase. Although our research shows that most consumers are buying in physical retail locations, it’s still critical to allocate resources toward digital efforts, as online experiences help build brand preference and drive shoppers to the store. HOW CAN MARKETERS REACH FPTV SHOPPERS? • Maximize search performance since FPTV shopping starts online. • Enhance web design and improve user experience because manufacturers’ websites are one of the last online touchpoints before a consumer visits a retail location. • Streamline the physical retail shopping experience. Interaction with sales representatives and product displays are the two most influential touchpoints when shopping in brick-and-mortar stores. Search engine optimization (SEO) should drive consumers to the brand website as early in the process as possible - this is the first opportunity brands have to engage their audience. Online search will drive top-of-funnel activity, improve brand credibility, and increase the overall sales pipeline. Manufacturer websites are a key consumer touchpoint in the path to purchase. If consumers prematurely leave the brand site, there is a lost opportunity to direct them to a physical location to buy electronics. Knowing this, brand marketers need to make improvements in the website experience to increase the number of leads walking into a retail location with purchase intent. Once qualified foot traffic is sent to retail locations, the work is not over for marketers. Offline budget needs to be dedicated to ensure that the in-store experience and materials have the same quality treatment and information as all the other brand materials consumers are exposed to during the shopping process. At the in- store level, investments should be made to train sales personnel on product features and other ways to improve the customer experience during the middle-to-late stages of the shopping process. For lesser-known brands, there is an opportunity here to convert FPTV shoppers. While major brands like Sony, Panasonic, Samsung, and LG have traction in the beginning of the shopping process due to better unaided awareness, smaller brands can gain popularity toward the end as consumers understand product specifications better. NAVIGATINGTHENEWPATHTOPURCHASE
  • CONSUMER SHOPPING PATHS The automotive consumer journey is one of the most complex of all industries. Although consumers buy vehicles at dealerships, most of the decision-making process and influential touchpoints are online. How do auto consumers shop? 85 to 90 percent of auto shoppers conduct online research. The typical car shopper begins the process on a search engine or review site and ends at the brand’s domain, before heading to a dealership. The online research process lasts, on average, four months, with an uptick in activity in the last month. More activity at the end suggests the traditional purchase funnel is upside-down. Auto shoppers’ behavior is very diverse, but can be grouped into three distinct online shopper paths, culminating in an “expression of interest” for one or more models. Purchasing a new automobile is a very big decision, and for some consumers, the most costly purchase they will make. There are a myriad of digital touchpoints, from manufacturers’ sites, to third- party sites, to review sites, to enthusiast sites, and even general information sites that have auto sections. Even though we know that every consumer’s path is unique, we are able to identify three distinct paths based on some common characteristics: High Category Involvement: These consumer paths are characterized by a heavy use of auto review sites, search, and competitive brand sites, before reaching the “expression of interest” phase. Brand Pre-disposition: This path category typically begins with visits to auto review sites and search engines, but quickly progresses to expression of interest. High Social Network Involvement: Consumers on this path category rely more on manufacturers’ social media brand pages. The first path typically begins with visits to auto review sites or with queries on search engines, which ultimately lands consumers/ shoppers on automotive brand sites. The process repeats several times during the journey, with increasing visitation to the brand site in the last month before purchase. The second path is primarily composed of consumers predisposed to a specific brand—they start with search and reviews, but quickly narrow down to specific manufacturer pages. This path is distinctly different than the third path, which is characterized by a stronger reliance on visits to social media brand pages; paths one and two have a much lower use of automotive social media. While each is distinct, there are some common patterns across each path. For example, more than half of the shoppers start the process on a search engine. Two thirds of auto consumers that demonstrate intent to purchase begin searching four months prior to purchase, with a noticeable uptick in action in the final month. By the end of the process, 86 percent of those showing signs of purchase engage with a manufacturer’s site, while only 13 percent start there; the 86 percent is good news for automakers and the 13 percent means there are a lot of potential disruptions along the path to purchase. Given the heritage of many automotive brands, brand association is often a powerful influence, and that association can be expressed in multiple and, sometimes, unexpected ways. One brand’s effort to drive consumers exclusively to its YouTube channel resulted in the brand’s homepage getting a wealth of purchase-intending traffic. Social networking, music, and video sites are highly visited categories for multiple auto segments, but a key question is whether they create brand-new relationships or reinforce existing ones. Shoppers kick off the auto research process in several ways: search, social media, and independent reviews. Knowing where and when consumers use them is crucial because those touchpoints influence which brands consumers investigate further. How can marketers reach auto consumers? Understand where and how consumers research vehicles—yours and rivals’—with a focus on the most likely inflection points (e.g. places you are most likely to lock down or lose customers, and places where you have the best opportunity to conquest rivals’ shoppers). Optimize keyword investments to ensure you’re investing in the terms and techniques most likely to drive consumers your way. Search is a strong driver of purchase intent and can aid brand credibility. Quantify how and when consumers use auto review sites, then determine whether deeper partnership relationships with those entities will help drive traffic. The majority of brand site traffic comes from review sites. Find the right balance of keyword activity (including competitive keywords), have a structured presence on social media channels (proven to generate consumer interest and increase automotive research activity) and monitor review sites (shown to engage the audience and maintain traffic flow to conversion). It’s imperative that automotive brand websites are optimized to encourage quick action in driving a buy, or, at least, starting a dialog between dealers and consumers. Ensure your brand site is optimized for a consumer experience based on the research process up until that point. Find the right balance between site flash and allure vs. ease of use. Make sure that consumers who are coming into the brand site (via search or review sites) land on the appropriate page. Your website is often the last chance to interact with consumers, and you need to keep them from defecting to ensure that they head to your dealers. Consumers buy new vehicles at dealerships, but the research process is predominantly online, with 85-90 percent of auto consumers conducting online research. Automotive buyers don’t purchase on brand homepages, but those sites are among the last digital opportunities to influence consumers and encourage them to take the next step and visit a dealer. Engineer your consumers’ paths so what they learn along the way is consistent with what they find in the dealership. NAVIGATINGTHENEWPATHTOPURCHASE
  • HOTEL BOOKERS The online travel marketplace is large and dynamic because consumers spend more money online for travel than any other industry. HOW DO HOTEL BOOKERS SHOP? • An average hotel booker visits 12 travel sites before booking online. • The order, time, and intensity in which consumers visit travel sites vary greatly. • There are shared shopping characteristics between different categories of bookers (e.g. when initial research starts), but the nuances within those groups are different. Our study of traveler behavior found the path to purchase to be comprised of various “stand alone” steps. This reflects that travel often requires distinct elements, such as booking a flight, then selecting a hotel near the chosen airport, then renting a car near the airport and/or hotel. Marketers need to recognize that these distinct points of influence are all intertwined, and streamlining this process will drive travel bookings and set the stage for partnerships and conquesting. We found that the frequency and duration of research changes based on where consumers are in the shopping process, dictating that the marketing approach be nonlinear. Hotel bookers visit a quarter of their pre-purchase travel sites on the same day they book. OTAs (online travel agencies) are the most visited category among hotel bookers, and the average hotel shopper makes 12 visits to OTAs in the same month as booking. More than half of these visits occur during the week of booking and even more occur within the last 48 hours of booking. Flight research paired with airline site visits is one of the few common behavior traits across hotel bookers’ paths. While the instances of flight research adds some structure to understanding the path, the diverse nature of travel sites adds to the complexity. For example, consumers can book hotels on supplier sites (sites operated by the brands themselves). They can also book hotels on OTAs, and once they’re on an OTA, they might also buy a flight and rental car. At the same time, hotel sites often allow consumers to book flights, and airline sites often allow consumers to book hotels. Understanding the optimal places to influence behavior and drive revenue (e.g. search, flight, OTA/hotel, supplier, etc.) enables brands to attract qualified consumers. HOW CAN MARKETERS REACH HOTEL SHOPPERS AND BOOKERS? • Prioritize revenue by reinforcing behavior among consumers already leaning your way, by minimizing conquesting of your consumers by rivals, and by identifying your most valuable lost bookers. • Determine how site tools influence booking choices and how they can be used to measure pre-booking audience quality. • Compare the return on investment (ROI) of using a full path approach vs. a singular point approach to target specific audiences. Path to purchase knowledge incorporates how consumers get to your site and how many of them visit your site but book somewhere else. The latter is called “lost bookings” and is a key element in understanding how to use consumer behavior to unlock low hanging revenue. For example, a hotel can assign a value to adding OTA-style search capability to its site, based on the likelihood of increased conversion by reducing lost bookings. Understanding which tools correlate with travel booking decisions on your site and rival sites can help inform site redesign strategies, such as adjusting site landing pages based on the combination of traffic source and tool use. For example, knowing if consumers are more influenced by search than OTAs could inform landing page tactics from paid search results and advertisements. If the biggest break in the path for a given hotel is the moment after choosing a flight, that hotelier could consider a partnership with an airline with which its lost bookers are already engaged. Companies have the option for a broader effort designed to influence many elements of travel shopping or a more focused approach with rich attention on just one element. Both can influence revenue through the new, evolved path, but need to be cost-effective; the right choice depends on where the biggest loss of consumers is today. NAVIGATINGTHENEWPATHTOPURCHASE
  • ATHLETIC FOOTWEAR SHOPPERS There are several key elements that influence the athletic footwear path to purchase: online retailers, brand properties, consumer reviews, the physical store experience, and online search. HOW DO ATHLETIC FOOTWEAR CONSUMERS SHOP? • Athletic footwear shoppers consult online resources for product and seller information. One in three prefers purchasing online rather than in a traditional store. • Along the path to purchase, shoppers use brand websites for research, but these sites are typically not a purchase destination. • Shoppers choose quickly and don’t spend much time researching. The purchase window for athletic footwear is narrow. Starting with the online experience, we have found that consumers primarily discover new products through site channels (e.g. retailers or online pure plays), consumer reviews, and fitness research websites. The path to purchase is notably short as online athletic shoe shoppers are likely to know exactly what brands and/or products they are interested in from the start. On average, purchasers spend six minutes shopping for athletic footwear, significantly less time compared to other categories. They spend little actual time “researching,” opting instead to search for the best deal. Not surprisingly, a lot of sales are shifting online; in fact, nearly one in three consumers favor purchasing athletic footwear online versus in-store. However, the offline experience is also still relevant: nine in 10 consumers who opt to purchase in-store do so primarily to try the footwear on and secondarily, to get the shoe immediately and avoid shipping costs. Of those who do buy online, 20 percent of these consumers try the footwear on in a store before going online to make the purchase, highlighting the role of the offline channel even in an online transaction. Finally, search is a significant driver of athletic footwear sales and improves brand consideration. Each month, athletic footwear sites receive 16.5 million search referrals, of which online pure plays and department stores capture the largest shares. Manufacturers garner the smallest share of athletic footwear searches, yet have the highest share of paid search. Under Armour, Converse, and Nike, the top three brands driving traffic through branded keywords, generate a substantial portion of those clickthroughs with paid search. Our recommendations for the retail industry revolve around understanding and adapting to the realities of the new path to purchase rather than trying to change it. Looking across the online ecosystem, shoppers who visit a manufacturer’s website are a temporarily captive audience, but eventually move on. HOW CAN MARKETERS REACH RETAIL CONSUMERS? • Engage and convert. With a short shopping process, all touchpoints need to quickly encourage a transaction. • Overcome the consumer obstacles to purchasing online. If you can’t offer free shipping, for example, consider offering additional value like a quality guarantee. • Build experiences on brand and retail sites that link initial research to shopping transactions. The brand website experience can be attention-grabbing, but many consumers travel elsewhere to complete their purchase, influenced by price and convenience. The opportunity lies in how manufacturers and retailers can partner to best influence these in- market consumers. For brands, one way to alleviate consumer hesitancy when shopping directly on a manufacturer site is to promote free shipping and a no-risk, no-hassle return policy. If manufacturers are unable to offer free shipping or flexible returns, there are additional ways to add value and enhance the experience of purchasing on the brand site. The ability to speak with a specialist, lifetime quality guarantees and interactive product viewing abilities can retain consumers and increase purchases made through brand ecommerce efforts. The best strategy for brands and retailers could be embracing their roles in overcoming the obstacles to conversion. Properties should build online experiences that link online search to brand site visits to retail transactions. Depending on the manufacturer, some sites are primarily a research tool that drive traffic to retailers while others focus largely on ecommerce. Both manufacturers and retailers benefit when they enhance their greatest areas of influence and rely on partners to bolster the touchpoints that bring consumers to purchase. NAVIGATINGTHENEWPATHTOPURCHASE
  • CONSUMER SAVINGS PRODUCTS Within the financial category, the process of product selection to account opening is a short one, for which consumers primarily research online, but convert offline. During the initial research phase, online resources, such as review websites, have a larger consumer impact compared to traditional media; 48 percent of consumers only use online resources, and 21 percent rely on offline tools. HOW DO CONSUMERS SHOP FOR FINANCIAL SERVICES? • Online banking consumers move quickly from research to selection, in most cases conducting research online and converting offline. • Within the financial services category, digital impacts not only the consumer’s path to purchase, but also their post-purchase • service experience. • Mobile features have a strong positive influence on consumer preference of financial institutions. Consumer must-haves revolve around the need to see product information quickly, explaining why they go online. To illustrate the speed of this selection, we found that 80 percent of customers have decided on a brand after their first research step, even before visiting a brand website. In contrast to other verticals, financial services marketing success depends on effectively servicing long term clients as much as acquiring them. The good news for financial brands is that there is a significant digital opportunity to engage shoppers across their full consumer journey; customers demonstrate a need for service post- purchase and prefer to do that online. Once a consumer establishes a brand preference, 64 percent of consumers complete an application, and there is a 30 percent increase in consumers engaging with the brand online for customer service. Through all phases of the path to purchase, even post-conversion, consumers consult search engines, bank-owned websites, and financial product comparison/review websites. Our research also shows that there is a large mobile opportunity: financial brand favorability rises when companies have a mobile app that enables account holders to manage their money and account on-the-go. Across the consideration, selection, and recommendation phases of shopping, consumers were more likely to recommend institutions that offered a mobile app. Within the financial category, 29 percent of consumers were more likely to consider institutions with a mobile presence, 28 percent chose a brand with a mobile presence, and 27 percent recommended a brand with mobile presence. For brokerage firms, 27 percent were more likely to consider, 24 percent chose, and 18 percent recommended. For auto insurance companies, 23 percent were more likely to consider, 21 percent chose, and 20 percent recommended. In short, mobile yields a higher impact on consideration and retention rate. Additionally, a mobile presence is good news for advertising efforts as mobile shoppers are most positively impacted by ads on finance-related apps. Financial services is a unique category in that the consumer journey toggles between online and offline, with each phase having distinct roles in attracting and servicing shoppers. Consumers need options, but for brand marketers, this should not be confused with too much available information—financial services selections have to be clear for better prospect retention. Knowing this, making product information quickly and clearly available on every channel is paramount. HOW CAN MARKETERS REACH FINANCIAL SERVICES CUSTOMERS? • Ensure product selection and information is clear and concise on bank-owned websites. • Invest in third party sites to complement brand sites. • Connect the online and offline user experience as consumers move quickly from online research to offline conversion. As review and comparison sites are key online research tools, they merit a place on a bank’s homepage. We recommend incorporating third-party financial reviews on bank websites to further contribute to shopping quality and ease. Esurance is making transparency a priority in their consumer experience, an example that can lead to valuable and usable review content. Schwab and Bank of America have also taken an approach similar to Apple, which allows customers to make an appointment online before physically visiting a branch location—another improvement to consumer experience and, consequently, reviews. The connection between online and offline is particularly clear for opening new accounts. In fact, for every one account opened online, we have found that eight accounts are opened at a physical location. Knowing this about the financial path to purchase, brands need to ensure that the transition between research and conversion is seamless. The messaging and theme of online collateral need to match the consumer experience when an informed prospect walks through a bank’s door. NAVIGATINGTHENEWPATHTOPURCHASE
  • SO... Consumers are changing the way they research and purchase online, and new shopping paths are emerging depending on behavior, device, location, and intent. Marketers have much to gain from re-evaluating existing strategies and identifying ways to improve their brand’s bottom line. The key to successfully decoding this new consumer behavior is pairing an uncomplicated mindset with complex reporting abilities. In adapting to this new path to purchase reality, the best thing marketers can do is make sure their strategy does not depend on a linear sequence of events. When each independent step along the path is improved, the end result will be more purchases, regardless of how consumers got there. We believe the fundamental solution lies inaccepting, then successfully navigating, this new path to purchase. Digital Touchpoints™, is Compete’s new solution that provides insights on actual consumer interactions, enabling our clients to make the most effective marketing decisions. A better understanding of the sequence of shopping events equips companies to deliver the correct marketing message at the right place and at the right time during the shopping process. To do this, we measure the ways consumers interact with shopping touchpoints in three ways: The Engagement Index™ represents the extent of actual shopper engagement with touchpoints. This takes into account the percent of total shoppers interacting with the specific touchpoint, and the intensity of those interactions, including time and number of repeat visits. The Influence Index™ represents the probability of one touchpoint interaction influencing a shopper’s final action. The Opportunity Index™ shows the competitive view of touchpoint interactions (e.g. which brands are getting better or worse traction with consumers at each given touchpoint). The goal of this report is to enable marketers to make strategic shifts in how they approach the new fluid path to purchase, to quantify and qualify consumer behavior, and to take action. The right tools lead to actionable insights and informed digital marketing decisions that drive brand, market share, and ROI. NAVIGATINGTHENEWPATHTOPURCHASE
  • DIGITAL & MEDIA PREDICTIONS 2013
  • The Facebook newsfeeds we will see at the end of next year will look very different from the ones we see now. We will see the rise of bigger, bolder, more interactive – and intrusive – Facebook advertisements in 2013. It was only a matter of time before Facebook sought to monetize and justify its massive valuation. The drive for effective and revenue- generating advertising will draw on its powerful social ecosystem, pushing the creative formats and placements far away from the ads we see today. Brands will be permitted to be more visible on members’ newsfeeds, growing the use of sponsored stories and video ads (which will become highlighted in users’ feeds). Advertisers will also be prominent across more of the landing page – expandable and richer formats will be prevalent by the end of the year. With these new opportunities will come increased responsibility for advertisers to deliver quality content that enhances the user experience rather than invades the platform. Facebook will morph from a relatively private social space to a business entity driven by the bottom line. Brands will need to tread carefully as they explore these new opportunities. Some users will tolerate prominent advertising in return for free access to their friends and social connections, but others may balk at increased commercialization. Seeing their personal data sold for targeted advertising may cause resentment, unless brands deliver engaging content that is appropriate for this personal space. As brands start to invest higher CPMs in more impactful ad units, it will become increasingly important to optimize visuals and messaging. Some of this will be measured in real-time, and copy- testing of Facebook ads will also start to be more widely employed. By the end of 2013 we will better understand users’ reactions to Facebook advertising, and we will know which formats successfully deliver brand impact without alienating users. By Martin Ash, Account Manager, Media and Digital, Millward Brown FACEBOOK’S MONETIZATION DRIVE WILL PROVIDE NEW, RICHER ADVERTISING OPPORTUNITIES FOR BRANDS DIGITAL & MEDIA PREDICTIONS 2013
  • ANALYSIS The current state of social media data collectio is pretty much ‘grab and go.’ Most social listening platforms scrape every piece of social data they can find. Certainly this can be useful for monitoring real- time updates on breaking news and crises.But should all of the social universe be eligible for brand measurement? Privacy settings make it difficult to know how much of the total has been captured – or not. And while traditional research data undergoes a rigorous scrubbing process to eliminate trivial or unreliable data, there is no such quality standard in social media. Our tests show that across over 30 million conversations, as little as 40 percent of the total volume of brand conversations may consist of actual mentions of the brand by humans. This affects every commonly used metric from buzz to sentiment to key themes – it even affects calculations of influence, since brands may be including spambots when assessing their audience’s influence. As brands give more weight to social data in making business decisions, they will also demand greater transparency in the collection of data and greater quality in the insights. Rather than just being alerted of a crisis, marketers need to understand the longer-term implications, and the underlying factors driving that outcome. This can only be achieved when starting with a robust dataset. The current generation of technology can help aggregate the data, but it is not yet effective at assessing more subjective aspects, like sentiment. Social data can start to inform business decisions more broadly across organizations, but it’s only meaningful if it’s cleaned, designed and analyzed in a way that makes it actionable and comparable to other measures. Human discretion is still needed to evaluate the source, quality, and value of results. To find true insight in social data, brands will require a new iteration of social listening that is less focused on fast feedback, and more on reliable research. By Anne Czernek, Senior Research Analyst, Emerging Media Lab, Millward Brown Digital SOCIAL MEDIA LISTENING EVOLVES FROM MONITORING TO INSIGHT DIGITAL & MEDIA PREDICTIONS 2013
  • Picture this... you walk into a room and the ambience instantly adapts to your personal preferences—the lighting dims, jazz music begins to play, and pictures of your favorite beach are projected onto the walls. You set your smartphone down on the desk, and all your information (files, pictures, songs, movies, etc.) are at your fingertips; no more laptop bags, flash drives, or papers—everything is just there. With increased power and capabilities, our mobile devices become the remote controls of our lives, allowing not only active control of electronics, but seamless integration of the world around us. While the milieu described above may be a few years off, we can already see the evolution of mobile in the way we live. The new functionality of our ‘mobile remotes’ utilizes advanced technology to simplify our lives. Anything that needs a processor to operate can use a smartphone as the brain. Brands need to start developing communication plans that adapt to this new world. Marketers must learn to interact with consumers via these ‘mobile remotes.’ Content and advertising must stem from mobile but become adaptable to multiple screens and scenarios. With mobile as the hub, information gathering becomes more centralized as consumers trade personal information for convenience and access to events, offers and premium content. We see this with ‘check- ins’ now, but these will expand to more widespread, dynamic and seamless use. Marketers need to create content that is flexible and smart so that it not only gives information, but receives it as well, and adapts in real-time to become more relevant and appropriate. The information that will be available on our ‘mobile remotes’ facilitates greater possibilities for advanced targeting and for interactive creative executions. By Drew Myers, Senior Business Analyst, Millward Brown EMERGENCE OF ‘MOBILE REMOTES’ MAKE IT A CENTRAL PILLAR OF SMART COMMUNICATION PLANS DIGITAL & MEDIA PREDICTIONS 2013
  • One of the great things about the Internet is that you can access all your favorite content at the touch of a button and all for free, right? Not for much longer. In 2013 we will see an increase in the amount of content shifting away from ad-supported business models to pay- per-view or subscription-based models. Driving the change is the rapid decline in audiences for the big players of traditional media. Newspaper and magazine circulation is in decline and TV audiences are becoming increasingly fragmented, due to the growth of alternative television services as well as online and mobile video consumption. While many of these players have established solid online properties, they have generally been seen as an extension of their traditional audience and are based around a free access, ad- supported business model. To sustain high-quality content, they will need to use some form of subscription-based access to ensure delivery of specialized and exclusive content. The Wall Street Journal led the way as far back as 1997, but ever more established content sites will move towards paywalls and subscription models. What does this mean for brands and marketers? More fragmentation – with consumers now having to pay, you can expect audience sizes for premium content sites to fall as consumers look for alternative free content or go without. Less clutter, tighter targeting but higher CPMs – with a subscription audience, the reliance on ad revenue by content providers will decline. They will instead focus more on quality and an improved user experience to drive subscribers. The result will be less advertising space, but greater audience targeting will drive-up demand and also prices. Brands will need to decide if the ‘premium context’ is worth the price of the premium CPM. There may be an opportunity for fast-moving brands to subsidize content to keep parts of it free. By Mark Henning, Director, Millward Brown THE GREAT PAYWALL MAKES FOR A SCARCITY OF PREMIUM EYEBALLS DIGITAL & MEDIA PREDICTIONS 2013
  • Omnichannel marketing is about being present or available across the consumer’s behavioral path: each potential contact point integrated with all others. The concept started in the retail sector where this behavioral path is easily tracked across online, offline and mobile touchpoints (both marketing and transactional). The digital arena will represent the first stage of more brands adopting an omnichannel mindset, as social and mobile data sources are blended with offline brand experiences. Customer data will be key to these efforts as big data moves from a passive pool of potential insights, into an active mechanism for deepening the meaning behind each individual interaction. This shift in technological connectivity offers marketers an opportunity to sew their conversations with consumers together into a coherent story. It’s not about bombarding people with marketing noise, but rather integrating previous interactions to ensure greater relevance when attention is being paid to a brand’s message. Treading the line between privacy fears and consumer empowerment is going to be a key determinant of success. In 2013 the green shoots of omnichannel strategies will involve companies turning existing datasets into active targeting engines. A retail brand might look to integrate loyalty data with social applications to deliver relevant offers or messages to consumers when they’re in or around store locations. As mobile ad-serving platforms mature, this will transition from social apps into ads running across any mobile content. As well as receiving location data, mobiles have the potential to inform nearby digital screens – Minority Report-style tailored out of home ad content may not be so far away. The implication for marketers is to start building the infrastructure to deliver an integrated experience in the omnichannel world or face the prospect of being left behind. The risk is that your competitors start to have meaningful ongoing dialogues while you shout disjointed slogans at consumers. The technical requirement is to capture meaningful moments of engagement so they can be referenced and built on during subsequent interactions. By Rob Valsler, Regional Director, Millward Brown OMNICHANNEL MARKETING HELPS BRANDS BUILD ON MEANINGFUL MOMENTS OF ENGAGEMENT DIGITAL & MEDIA PREDICTIONS 2013
  • Reports of the death of TV have been greatly exaggerated. Contrary to predictions that the digital age would drag people away from TV, we are watching more TV than ever. Rather than being eroded, people’s viewing experience is being enriched by social networks and dedicated social TV apps like Zeebox. Increasingly, the assumption that a laptop, and a tablet or mobile are the ‘second’ and ‘third’ screens will dissipate. It will not be enough to simply broadcast a hashtag and flag a few tweets on the television screen. Telling stories through multiple screens (and elsewhere) will begin to supplant the notion of broadcasting something on the first screen, and people reacting and responding to it on disconnected supplementary screens. An audience will be able to immerse themselves in content to an extent that suits them. The majority will continue to consume most TV passively, but those more invested in a particular program will be able to access and interact with richer story elements during and between episodes. Unique story elements in different channels will be integrated with audience responses and reactions to become part of a single narrative, which permeates more deeply into people’s lives. These interactive trans-media stories will be tailored to the specific program audience; designed to improve with each episode and series as the barriers between broadcaster and audience are reduced. For brand owners, especially those sponsoring a series or intending to regularly place ads around it, this creates both opportunity and challenge. Getting it right will mean adapting to this narrative approach and interweaving your brand’s story across screens, tailoring it appropriately to those most involved in the content. Brands that fail to ‘join-the-dots’ between screens will fail to capitalize on a more engaged audience. Worse still, those that interrupt or disrupt the story by muscling in without subtlety will antagonize those they most want to impress. By Andrew Jerina, Director - Global Innovations, Millward Brown SOCIAL TV GROWS UP: BECOMES PART OF THE NARRATIVE RATHER THAN A CONVERSATION ABOUT THE NARRATIVE DIGITAL & MEDIA PREDICTIONS 2013
  • TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT APP APP APP The Internet. Always on connections. Cloud computing. These terms are ubiquitous in the modern world and they are becoming increasingly common in Africa too. With almost a 3,000 percent increase in Internet access on the African continent in the last 10 years, and ever more undersea cables each year, this growth is set to continue unabated. What makes Africa’s growth unique is that the majority of this increased bandwidth is likely to be used on mobile devices (since the number of PCs per 1,000 people is still extremely low) with almost 1 billion mobile phone users in the continent by 2015. Hence Africa will epitomize the post-PC era with primarily mobile-based Internet traffic. African marketers will be working hard to establish the best approaches to mobile advertising. The mix of smartphones and feature phones in the market make implementation challenging, as many African users have limited functionality on their device. Thus, brands should begin with text-based search ads, SMS advertising and mobi-optimized sites. In time, this will give way to screen takeovers, location-based advertising, apps and augmented reality. Dependent on the target audience, most marketers will need to take a two-pronged approach, developing mobile ad strategies for both basic phones and the fast-growing smartphone audience. Our recent AdReaction study showed that mobile marketing favorability is higher in Africa than anywhere else in the world. Building on this, some brands have already made mobile the centerpiece of their multi-media campaigns: Carling Black Label in South Africa achieved over 10 million mobile votes in its recent Be The Coach football campaign, and many other brands will be seeking to follow in its footsteps. Online advertising be damned; the future (for Africa at least) is mobile! By Jarrod Payne, Associate Account Director, Millward Brown MOBILE ADVERTISING IN AFRICA TACKLES THE SMARTPHONE DIVIDE DIGITAL & MEDIA PREDICTIONS 2013
  • It is no longer up for discussion. Advertisers have now moved beyond the click and require insight into the brand impact of their online activity alongside their click data. In 2012, we saw the introduction of real-time branding optimization, allowing advertisers to tweak campaigns on the fly, up-weighting successful campaign elements and down-weighting low performers. In 2013, this real-time planning and reallocation will go mainstream, moving from a ‘nice to have’ to an essential feature of digital campaign delivery and evaluation. We are seeing growing demand for actionable in-campaign insight and we are also seeing advertisers reap the rewards. Brand.net measured the effectiveness of its online campaign against key brand metrics in real-time through an online dashboard. It was able to monitor and adjust creative types and frequency levels to optimize the campaign while it was live. As a result, the campaign performed within the top one percent of all online campaigns measured in the retail category. To achieve similar success more consistently, industry players will have to learn to collaborate and not just co- exist: • Research and media agencies will be required to work more closely than ever before, integrating behavioral and attitudinal data to deliver optimizations that maximize brand impact while also delivering cost efficient clicks. • Creative agencies will be required to respond more quickly to these insights by reworking inefficient creative on the fly. • Media agencies will need to find new ways to leverage relationships with publishers so that in-market observations can become in-market optimizations. For those agencies in the business of maximising the return on their clients’ online ad spend, 2013 promises to be a year of exciting collaboration. By Guy Turton, Media Solutions Manager, Millward Brown GREATER COLLABORATION NEEDED TO MAKE THE MOST OFREAL-TIME OPTIMIZATION DIGITAL & MEDIA PREDICTIONS 2013 32% 19% 23% 26%
  • As online media budgets grow, there is an ever-increasing appetite for advertisers to understand how well their online campaigns deliver against objectives. To maximize results, media agencies will need to pay close attention to the growing pool of research which indicates that different online formats deliver different results. • If driving brand awareness is the objective, evidence suggests billboards and wallpapers should feature heavily on a plan, rather than standard skyscrapers and leaderboards. • By contrast, if your objective is to drive preference, wallpapers can have a negative impact. While wallpapers put your brand center stage, bombarding your audience with such an intrusive format can understandably become irritating. • Newer and larger formats are outperforming standard formats in delivering against key brand metrics, but at what cost? Balancing higher costs with achievement against objectives is a talent that media agencies will increasingly be expected to master. Importantly, although some general rules are emerging, these do not always apply. Macro factors such as industry and brand status will play a role, but media planners will also need to consider micro factors such as creative strength, web site context and frequency effects. There will be no standard template for campaign planning against a specific objective. An awareness campaign which just employs billboards and wallpapers will likely drive awareness, but the potential negative repercussions on other brand metrics will need to be considered. We will see even more innovative and strategic online planning in 2013, as advertisers strive for a deeper understanding of how format impacts brand building. In-context eye tracking of digital ads will help more brands identify the best formats for a particular campaign message and visual, and media buyers will compare effectiveness learning with format CPMs to identify value in the marketplace. By Amanda Teefey-Lee, Senior Account Researcher, Millward Brown BETTER ALIGNMENT OF ONLINE DISPLAY FORMATS WITH OBJECTIVES DIGITAL & MEDIA PREDICTIONS 2013
  • Consumption patterns show that more time is already spent in mobile apps than browsing the web. Future in-app advertising spend will be driven by far greater use of rich media. Rich media ads such as Apple’s iAd, other expandable/interactive formats, and even mobile video will draw consumers into highly engaging brand experiences. They will also give brands the opportunity to adapt advertising to meet their business needs. For example, a hotel brand can offer a click-to-call option to allow calling directly from the ad to make a reservation. An auto brand can add a map to help customers find the closest dealership. And a retail brand can even offer the chance to make a purchase directly from the retail site, by integrating that seamlessly within an expanding ad unit. Our recent AdReaction study showed that smartphone and tablet users are looking for brands that engage rather than intrude via their mobile device, and offer something in exchange for their attention. In-app advertising offers great opportunities for brands to engage consumers in actions that are repeatable and meaningful, so we expect a continued surge in rewards-based advertising activity in 2013. While some brands will reward via simple in-app discounts and coupons, branded content may offer even more brand building potential. For example, mobile gamers may be rewarded with in- game currency for using a brand’s product. A beverage brand may sponsor bonus points when players reach a certain game level. Even more innovatively, brands will seek to design this engagement to communicate specific messages as we saw in Honda’s recent collaboration with Zynga’s Words With Friends where players were rewarded for using Honda-related words. Such approaches should be able to increase brand awareness, favorability and perceptions, and are therefore likely to be adopted more widely. By Jenn Okula, Senior Vice President, Millward Brown Digital MORE MEANINGFUL MOBILE ENGAGEMENT VIA APPS AND ACTIONS DIGITAL & MEDIA PREDICTIONS 2013
  • LONG-TERM EFFECTS, WHEN MEASURED, ARE SIGNIFICANT Over the past twenty years, many techniques have been used to examine and quantify the impact of advertising on sales, and while almost all of these analyses find that the short-term effect of advertising is limited and often unprofitable, there is substantial evidence that when brands stop advertising, sales and margin tend to decline. Through our own analyses of short- and long-term effects, we have found that the long- term return on advertising is on average two or three times greater than the short-term return. However, this ratio is highly variable, and much stronger long-term effects are often seen. In an analysis of 94 ads, we found 11 that showed no long-term effect (12% of the total number). However, for 20 percent of the remaining ads—all of which showed some long-term effect—the long-term effect was at least five times greater than the short-term impact. In one campaign for a major multinational client, the longer-term return per GRP from the brand’s advertising was calculated to be almost six times the short-term return. Had we only looked at the short-term return (over the first eight weeks), we would not have found justification for continued investment. But when we added in the returns generated in subsequent weeks, the picture became much more positive: THE REASONS FOR LONG-TERM EFFECTS Several reasons have been given for the existence of long-term advertising effects. Repeat purchase is often a major factor. Advertising encourages consumers to try a product; if they like it, they will continue to buy it. Similarly, when a mobile phone company advertises, even though the recruitment effect will decay away quickly, many of the people recruited are likely to stay and provide revenue for a long time afterwards. In this way, the long-term effect of advertising can build on the short-term effect. But thirty years ago, Gordon Brown proposed other powerful mechanisms that could generate long-term sales effects. First, Gordon observed that advertising, when viewed, was not likely to generate purchase interest among consumers who were satisfied with their current brands. When watching ads on TV, most people are not in the mood to reconsider their shopping habits. But that same advertising might have an effect at a future date, when a consumer is in the mood to try something different. At that point, advertising associations could influence brand choice. Gordon also demonstrated that associations created by advertising could enhance the brand experience, making repeat purchase more likely. BRANDED MEMORABILITY AND LONG-TERM SALES Perhaps not surprisingly then, there is a clear relationship between the Awareness Index (AI) and long-term sales effects. Across categories we have found that the more impactful and memorable the advertising, the stronger the long-term effect. The next chart shows the effects from two different categories, with the sales effects indexed to adjust for the size of the brands and the differing nature of the categories. In the first category (packaged goods), the long-term sales effect increases with the AI. We see a similar picture when we overlay the long-term ad effects for four competing automobile brands: ADVERTISERS TEND TO FOCUS ON THE SHORT-TERM EFFECTS OF THEIR AD CAMPAIGNS, SINCE THEY ARE EASIEST TO MEASURE. BUT MOST ADVERTISING DOESN’T PAY FOR ITSELF IN THE SHORT TERM, SO IT IS ESSENTIAL TO MARKETERS TO UNDERSTAND THE WAYS IN WHICH ADVERTISING DELIVERS LONG-TERM SALES GROWTH AND TO MAXIMIZE THESE EFFECTS WHENEVER POSSIBLE. KNOWLEDGE POINT Case History: Long- vs Short-Term Return per GRP Brand C ReturnperGRP Short-term: Weeks 1-8 Medium term: Weeks 9-26 Long-term: From week 27 on 5.7 x bigger than short-term return 0 10 20 40 60 30 50 110 100 90 70 80 120 Ratio of Long- to Short-Term Sales Effects 30 20 10 0 50 40 1 2 3 4 5+ 53% %Brands 27% 20% Base: 83 brands with detectable long-term sales effects from advertising Ratio of Long to Short-Term Sales Effects Sales Effects Increase with AI Awareness Index minus Category Norm 60 40 20 0 100 80 SalesIndex Below Average Average Above Average High Packaged Goods Automotive SHARE OF AWARENESS RatioofLong-toShort-TermSalesEffects CaseHistory:Long-vsShort-TermReturnperGRP SalesEffectsIncreasewithAI ADVERTISING:HOW TOMAXIMIZETHE LONG-TERMEFFECTS
  • KNOWLEDGE POINT ADVERTISING:HOWTOMAXIMIZETHELONG-TERMEFFECTS THE CONTRIBUTION OF CREATIVE FACTORS Other creative factors also seem to relate to long-term success. In 2011, we analyzed the copy test results for IPA Effectiveness winners. Overall, these results included 153 ads for 46 brands. Compared to our overall average, the TV ads for the winning brands tended to be more involving, enjoyable, and differentiating. They also had slightly better branding. Like the IPA winners, Effie winners, also judged on effectiveness, were more likely to be more involving, enjoyable, differentiating, and well branded. (Ad enjoyment, involvement and branding are all major contributors to an ad’s AI.) Many individual ads across both sets of award winners achieved high scores on generating emotion, but the specific emotions generated varied. This is not surprising, as we know that there is no one specific emotion to trigger to make advertising successful. Rather, a successful ad triggers an emotion that is relevant for the advertised brand and its positioning. THE LONG-TERM EFFECTS OF MEDIA WEIGHT A commitment to advertising, as represented by media weight over time, seems to benefit brands in the long-term. The following example from market mix modelling illustrates this common finding. It shows the relationship between historical advertising weight and the underlying sales trend in the UK’s 10 TV regions. Each diamond represents a TV region, while each box is simply an average across sub-groups of the 10 regions (lowest 3 GRPs per week, middle 3 and top 4). We can see a clear relationship showing that higher spend regions tend to have higher underlying trends, suggesting that media weight is an important factor for long-term sales. This is a pertinent finding because the diminishing returns associated with short-term effects may suggest that media weight should be cut, whereas the long-term effects could still be growing. The preceding chart shows a relationship between raw GRPs and sales trends. The chart that follows (covering 100 brands) looks at changes in market share over a three year period in relation to four different measures of communication: Raw GRPs, Effective GRPs, Raw Share of Voice (SOV) and Effective SOV. (“Effective” GRPs and SOV are weighted by the Awareness Index.) We observe that Effective GRPs explain four times as much change in market share as raw GRPs. Further, we observe that raw share of voice is more useful than raw GRPs. But effective share of voice is even more successful at explaining changes in market share. Individual brands with high spend and strong AIs can be particularly effective at growing long-term share. (It is worth noting that when we have looked at share of voice, it is generally on a year-to-year basis). It is not clear that there is a benefit in maximizing SOV on a short-term basis. Indeed, since we know that the majority of advertising effects are long term, it seems likely that weekly SOV is not a major determinant of advertising success. Additionally, sales modelling generally finds that competitive campaigns have relatively little impact on a brand’s sales. Finally, a number of individual case studies suggest that often a drip campaign is more likely to be effective than a burst campaign of the same weight. All of these observations suggest that the head-to-head SOV in a given week is not a key issue. GRPs per Week vs Underlying Trend across 10 UK TV Regions GRPs per Week 1200 800 400 0 2000 1600 UnderlyingTrend(£) Low TV Regions 2400 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 Med High Change in Long-term Share best Explained by Share of Voice % of change explained 0 10 20 30 Raw SOV Effective SOV Effective GRP’s Raw GRP’s GRPsperWeekvsUnderlyingTrendAcross10UKTVRegions ChangeinLong-TermShareBestExplainedbyShareofVoice
  • KNOWLEDGE POINT ADVERTISING:HOWTOMAXIMIZETHELONG-TERMEFFECTS THE BENEFITS OF EFFECTIVE SOV Effective SOV can be increased either by increasing spend or increasing impact. Ideally, you should aim to do both, but it is possible to grow share with lower budgets and more efficient copy. The chart below summarizes the effects on the brands we studied according to the changes in their share of voice and share of ad awareness. Where both share of voice (SOV) and share of ad awareness (SOA) declined (the lower left-hand quadrant), 20 percent more brands lost share than gained share. Where both SOV and SOA increased (upper right-hand quadrant), nearly a third more grew than declined. When brands increased SOV but had lower SOA, 19 percent more declined than grew. And when ad awareness grows despite a drop in spend, 12 percent more brands grew. SHARE OF VOICE VS SHARE OF MARKET When brands have SOV that is higher than their market share, they tend to grow. In the analysis summarized by the chart below, brands were ranked according to the difference between their SOV and their market share. Then the brands were divided into ten equal groups. Each square on the chart below represents one of those ten groups. The bottom two groups, those with a share of voice that was 10 to 20 percent less than their market share, were more likely to lose share over the following 12 months. In contrast, the top 10 percent of brands, which had SOV 20 percent greater than their market share—were more likely to grow. For the brands that fell in the middle, however, there was little or no relationship between relative share of voice and change in market share. This highlights the fact that there are many other factors besides media weight that affect sales. In particular, the strength of the copy is a crucial variable. (It is also worth highlighting that the absolute weight of investment, as well as the relative SOV (in total annual investment terms), may relate to share growth; for example, in a category where there is little competitive activity, few brands would grow share much if at all with minimal spend, even though they would have virtually 100% SOV.) Clearlythen,increasingyourannualshareofcommunicationsawareness and having a share of communications awareness higher than your market share are both related to increased market share. These two factors are summarized here: Share of communications awareness relates to probability of share growth/decline Share of communications awareness greater than share of market Share of communications awareness higher than previous year? 19% 36% 57% 75% Chances of Share increase When Share of Voice Exceeds Market Share, Share is Likely to Increase Share of voice minus share of market 20% 0% -20% -40% 60% 40% Netbrandsgainingshare 80% -60% -80% r²= 0.77 -20% -10% 0% 10% 20% 30% ShareofAwareness WhenShareofVoiceExceedsMarket Share,ShareisLikelytoIncrease ShareofCommunicationsAwarenessRelates toProbabilityofShareGrowth/Decline
  • ONLINE VIDEO WORKS The case for paid online video is strong: Our MarketNorms® database shows that, compared to standard online display formats, online video delivers greater uplifts on measures such as brand favorability and purchase intent. Not surprisingly, then, online video is set to grow: Kantar Media predicts that by 2015, global spend for online and mobile video will reach $10 Billion (USD). However, while online video still generates increases in awareness, these lifts are not as large as they were when the medium was new. The average lift in online ad awareness (just over 4 percent) is less than half what it was six years ago. The novelty has worn off. Consumers now expect to see video ads online. If an ad doesn’t engage viewers, they will just click away. So it becomes more important to understand how to use this medium to best effect: Our database shows there is huge variation in performance between the best and the worst online campaigns. So to harness this potentially powerful format, you must focus on the content of that video, along with how and where consumers view or interact with it. It is also worth noting that the least successful campaigns can actually have a damaging effect on brand measures; take care not to alienate your audience. THE ADVANTAGE OF ADDITIONAL REACH In terms of reach, currently no other media is in the position to replace TV. From studies conducted so far online, video delivers an average reach of 13 percent, much lower than the reach of TV, which is typically 70 percent or more. However, online video is especially effective at delivering additional reach among light TV viewers. We monitored one campaign for which online video and TV generated reach of 74.1 percent for €1.91m. To achieve that level using TV alone would have cost an extra €200k; the combination of online video and TV delivered reach more cost effectively. FORMAT: IN-STREAM OR IN-BANNER? The term “online video” describes all ad formats utilizing some form of video; these include videos delivered both in-banner and in-stream. In- banner video may play automatically when it appears on a page, or it may require the viewer to click on it. The auto-play version is more arresting but also causes more disturbance; the viewer controlled version tends to generate longer viewing, but this has to be balanced against the decrease in the number of viewers who will choose to watch the ad. In-stream video plays automatically; web users are not able to skip it (although this is changing on sites like YouTube). In-stream is typically used as pre-roll before TV episodes and can be more effective than in-banner video because the audience is captive and highly engaged. However, some viewers may watch several episodes in a row, and if they are bombarded with the same ad over and over again, they are likely to be irritated. Think about frequency capping or delivering different creative messages each time to avoid driving down favorability and purchase intent, In-stream video delivers stronger uplifts in awareness and favorability, but both in-stream and in-banner have a similar impact on purchase intent. HOWDOIUSEONLINE VIDEOEFFECTIVELYIN MYCAMPAIGN? PAID ONLINE VIDEO IS GROWING RAPIDLY AS AN EFFECTIVE MARKETING TOOL. ONE OF ITS KEY STRENGTHS IS IN GENERATING REACH AMONG LIGHT TV VIEWERS. BUT IN PLANNING THE ONLINE VIDEO COMPONENT OF A CAMPAIGN, IT’S IMPORTANT TO REALIZE THAT THE ONLINE SETTING IS VERY DIFFERENT THAN THE TV SETTING, AND THERE ARE NEW CONSIDERATIONS. WHETHER TO USE REPURPOSED TV ADS OR ORIGINAL MATERIAL WILL DEPEND ON YOUR OBJECTIVES: WHILE SUCCESSFUL ONLINE VIDEO ADS SHARE SOME CHARACTERISTICS WITH SUCCESSFUL TV ADS, IN OTHER RESPECTS THEY ARE VERY DIFFERENT. KNOWLEDGE POINT Impact on purchase intent, freq = 1 Source: Dynamic Logic MarketNorms, past 3 years to Q2 2012 Base sizes: Online video (163) Rich media (630) Simple flash (85) Online video Rich media Simple flash 0.4 0.2 0 0.8 1 0.6 Aided brand awareness ONLINE VIDEO EFFECTIVENESS VARIES GREATLY Top 20% of campaigns, middle 60%, bottom 20% -4.3 1.6 9.6 Online ad awareness -5.2 3.1 12.6 Message association -4.5 1.4 8.5 Brand favorability -6.8 0.8 8.7 Purchase intent -4.3 0.8 9.2 Source: Dynamic Logic MarketNorms Worst Average Best 10 5 0 -5 -10 15 PercentImpacted IN-STREAM TENDS TO BE MORE EFFECTIVE Base sizes: in-stream (33-48) not in-stream (316-450) Source: Dynamic Logic MarketNorms Aided brand awareness Online ad awareness Message association Brand favorability Purchase intent 3 2 1 0 5 6 7 8 4 In-Stream Not In-Stream 2.9 2.2 7.1 4.4 3.8 2.3 2.3 1.6 1.3 1.3
  • KNOWLEDGE POINT ADVERTISING:HOWTOMAXIMIZETHELONG-TERMEFFECTS AD LENGTH In general, the longer the ad, the bigger the effect. While longer ads will cost more, they are also more likely to generate awareness and persuasion. However, there are relatively few media placements online where consumers will tolerate long video ads, so brands should mostly seek to condense messaging into formats shorter than 30 seconds to enable maximum online portability and reach. COMPANION BANNERS One common issue is whether to support the video with companion banners. Analysis shows that campaigns that combine online video and display deliver the strongest brand impact. CONTENT: TO REPURPOSE OR NOT? One of the fundamental decisions in implementing online video is whether to create original material or to repurpose TV ads. Repurposed ads can have synergistic impact on ad awareness; a form of the media- multiplier effect. But a successful TV ad may not always work well in an online environment. Online audiences tend to be more engaged in the activity than TV viewers; advertising which is not relevant to the task at hand is likely to be seen as an annoying interruption. So a successful TV ad may not work as well in the online environment. Besides, video content made for the web can be more relevant and useful to the viewer. As an example, if you know the audience has been shopping for specific goods, then you can provide them with more information on that product and convey a key benefit to them. OTHER CREATIVE ISSUES Our database suggests that the presence of humans (adults or children) can boost the effectiveness of online video ads. Qualitative insights from researching a wide variety of online video ads suggest that successful online video ads have several aspects in common with successful TV ads. Most campaigns appear to benefit from consistent and simple messaging. When conveying brand propositions online, aim to keep the communication simple, direct, and consistent. Focus on one or two messages. Funny ads are more likely to be enjoyable and involving than others, and therefore will be more memorable. But, as with all creativity, humor needs to be used with care. To be successful, it must help focus on the brand and the intended communication; otherwise, it can actually detract from the ad’s effectiveness. But successful online video is dissimilar to successful TV ads in other ways. First, for all online video formats, many of the top-performing ads reinforced the message of the voiceover with text or imagery. This ensures that messages can still be absorbed even if the user doesn’t have the audio turned on. Other recommendations relate to the reduced patience for online ads. Online video ads need to engage within the first few seconds. And since many digital video ads are not watched through to the end, early branding is also recommended. In order to convey a more complete brand “story,” two techniques may be useful: sequencing and telescoping. Sequencing conveys a storyline in short installments over a number of exposures. Telescoping uses one short segment to pique the interest of users and then offers them the chance to continue viewing a longer video on the brand’s web site. COMPANION BANNERS CAN BOOST THE EFFECTIVENESS OF VIDEO ADS Source: Dynamic Logic MarketNorms Base sizes: Companion Banner (464 campaigns) No Companion Banner (38 campaigns) Companion Banner No Companion Banner 3.6 2.1 5.9 4.5 4.6 2.2 1.9 1.5 1.3 1.3 Aided brand awareness Online ad awareness Message association Brand favorability Purchase intent However, similar impact seen on persuasion metrics PercentImpacted 1.5 1 0.5 0 2.5 3 3.5 4 4.5 2 REPURPOSED TV IS MORE LIKELY TO IMPACT ONLINE AD AWARENESS, WHILST MADE-FOR-WEB DELIVERS WELL ON FAVORABILITY AND PERSUASION Source: Dynamic Logic MarketNorms Base sizes: made-for-web (156-218) re-purposed TV (65-90) Re-purposed TV ads Made-for-web 0.8 2.4 4 2.9 1.5 1.8 0.4 1.8 0.2 1.2 Aided brand awareness Online ad awareness Message association Brand favorability Purchase intent ONLINE VIDEO: LONGER ADS HAVE MORE EFFECT Base sizes: (range from 79-188 ads) Source: Dynamic Logic MarketNorms 3 2 1 0 5 6 7 8 9 4 0 to 10 secs 11 to 20 secs 21 to 30 secs 31+ secs 1.6 1.1 2.5 2.9 2.4 4.1 0.8 1.3 0.8 1 0.7 0.8 7.9 3.5 2.3 5.1 1.7 2.8 0.9 2.7 Aided brand awareness Online ad awareness Message association Brand favorability Purchase intent
  • Millward Brown experts are available to speak globally. Please contact: Global - Miquet Humphryes miquet.humphryes@millwardbrown.com North America - Jamie Jones jamie.jones@millwardbrown.com www.millwardbrown.com Produced by Miquet Humphryes, Katie Pearce, Alexandra Hill, Dede Fitch Global Communications and Marketing Mike Agee, Lisa Parente, Michael Almon, Amanda Bruhn Global Brand Marketing Dominic Twose Knowledge Management Millward Brown © 2013 Perspectives