How Ad Effectiveness Tools Can Help Optimize Your Media Strategy May 2012

  • 1,029 views
Uploaded on

 

More in: Business , Technology
  • Full Name Full Name Comment goes here.
    Are you sure you want to
    Your message goes here
    Be the first to comment
    Be the first to like this
No Downloads

Views

Total Views
1,029
On Slideshare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
1

Actions

Shares
Downloads
9
Comments
0
Likes
0

Embeds 0

No embeds

Report content

Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

Cancel
    No notes for slide
  • Now we’ll cover the second cause of limited visibility. We’ll kick off again with a poll question.
  • Your campaign/site analytic system . <walk through sitecatalyst dashboard>If it doesn’t then you really should look into it. We use sitecatalyst for our own site.
  • Your funnel is also a tunnel. A lot of the most important stuff goes on inside this tunnel. But when you see something happen or change inside this tunnel you don’t have any way to know what factors outside the tunnel might have contributed to what you’re seeing in the tunnel. And you can’t see outcomes that happen outside this tunnelT: A panel-based view is a vital resource if you want to see outside this tunnel. Let’s say you see an increase in conversions during a campaign. Seems great. But what if your competitors are seeing a bigger increase?
  • P: Panel allows us to understand performance in the broader market contextThis is what we’re known for….
  • “we’ve got all this great data….but we have some feelings of skepticism.
  • With a panel, we’re able to see what people would have done in the absence of your campaign.You got your yield, but just like some of these trees would have fallen down on their own, some of the people whom you reached would have come to you anyway.

Transcript

  • 1. How Ad Effectiveness Tools Can Optimize Your Media Strategy A look at how panel-based measurement can maximize your advertising effectiveness May 2012w w w . c o m p e t e . c o m
  • 2. Today’s presenters • Alyssa Maine • Marketing Coordinator, Marketing • Nick Gaudio • Associate, Advertising Effectiveness Solutions2 w w w . c o m p e t e . c o m
  • 3. Webinar logistics • Today’s webinar will be recorded. You will be emailed a link. • Please enter your questions in the Questions box. We will answer as many as possible at the end. • If you have technical difficulties, try logging back in or use a different browser3 w w w . c o m p e t e . c o m
  • 4. Agenda • Webinar (25-30 min) • Who is Compete? • Tunnel vision • Compete Data Methodology • Lurking leanings • Ad effectiveness case study • Q&A (10-15 min)4 w w w . c o m p e t e . c o m
  • 5. Introduction to Compete • Founded in 2000, joined WPP/Kantar in 2008 • Passionate about understanding consumers to inspire great marketing • Fastest-growing operating company within Kantar in terms of revenue and new customer growth • World-class advertiser, agency and media clients • Strategic partnerships to enable marketing optimization and provide holistic view of consumers • Largest panel in the industry with 2.3 million US consumers5 w w w . c o m p e t e . c o m
  • 6. Tunnel vision6 w w w . c o m p e t e . c o m
  • 7. 7 w w w . c o m p e t e . c o m
  • 8. 8 w w w . c o m p e t e . c o m
  • 9. Artist: Peikwen Cheng9 w w w . c o m p e t e . c o m
  • 10. 10 w w w . c o m p e t e . c o m
  • 11. Data Methodology • Bigger, more diverse, more actionable data • When it comes to online panels, size matters • Panel diversity is key • Not all data are created equal 2.3 million11 w w w . c o m p e t e . c o m
  • 12. Site Side Analytics vs Panel Based Analytics • How do Compete’s analytics compare with local analytics (e.g. Google Analytics, Omniture)? Compete Local Log Unique Visitors Yes Yes Deleted Cookies Overstatement No Sometimes Bots/Spiders/Agents No Sometimes Pingbacks No Sometimes RSS Update Traffic No Sometimes US/International US, UK & France US & International Estimation Method Panel-Based Cookies, IP Address, User Agent Strong Demographical/ Behavioral Segments Yes Yes12 w w w . c o m p e t e . c o m
  • 13. Let’s recap what we learned • You still love your campaign analytics system • You will not see the macro view in your tunnel • A panel-based view provides vital awareness of out-of-funnel outcomes and market context13 w w w . c o m p e t e . c o m
  • 14. Lurking leanings14 w w w . c o m p e t e . c o m
  • 15. 15 w w w . c o m p e t e . c o m
  • 16. From a recent RFP:“For the past several years, <our client> has beenchallenged by how to measure the sales impact oftheir online media campaigns. Through the use of<internal systems>, were able to measure the e-commerce sales associated with banners--both thesales that resulted from a click (click-through) and thesales that resulted from people who merely viewedour banners (view-through). The view-through salesfar exceed the click-through sales, which is notsurprising when one considers the volume ofimpressions we deliver, and the low click-trough ratesassociated with display campaigns. However, thisalso leads to a fair degree of skepticism….How many of those purchasers who merely viewed abanner made that purchase because they saw thatbanner?”16 w w w . c o m p e t e . c o m
  • 17. From a recent RFP:“For the past several years, <our client> has beenchallenged by how to measure the sales impact oftheir online media campaigns. Through the use of<internal systems>, were able to measure the e-commerce sales associated with banners--both thesales that resulted from a click (click-through) and thesales that resulted from people who merely viewedour banners (view-through). The view-through salesfar exceed the click-through sales, which is notsurprising when one considers the volume ofimpressions we deliver, and the low click-trough ratesassociated with display campaigns. However, thisalso leads to a fair degree of skepticism….How many of those purchasers who merelyviewed a banner made that purchase becausethey saw that banner?”17 w w w . c o m p e t e . c o m
  • 18. 18 w w w . c o m p e t e . c o m
  • 19. What we’re hearing from marketers “Can I measure “I need to determine advertising beyond the correct “I can’t find cost-effective and simple- impressions and advertising mix.” to-understand tools that allow me to clicks?” accurately measure my advertising.” “I need 3rd party “I need to know the validation.” human reaction to my advertising.” There has to be a better way… “Will a social component “Did my campaign help help my advertising my competition?” campaign?” “What is the value of “I need to minimize “I need more information to impressions that never get my waste.” make relevant connections to clicked on?” my consumers.”19 w w w . c o m p e t e . c o m •19
  • 20. Compete’s ad effectiveness offerings Ad R/F Ad Impact Ad R/F measures the Ad Impact measures how audience reached by an exposure to online advertising online advertising campaign impacts consumer behavior • 2.3 Million person panel, the largest in the industry • Connected to other Kantar data assets • 15,000 behavioral segments20 w w w . c o m p e t e . c o m
  • 21. Ad ImpactCaseStudy Measuring the Impact of display advertising on behavior21 w w w . c o m p e t e . c o m
  • 22. Compete shines new light on online ROI Did my ad drive Did my social consumers to a campaign have an competitor? impact? How much did this Which segments were campaign impact visits to most likely to convert my site over time? within this audience? Were exposed consumers Did the campaign drive an more likely to visit product- increase in brand-term consideration sites? searches?22 w w w . c o m p e t e . c o m 22
  • 23. Ad Impact Methodology Control vs. exposed comparisons create a richer view of ad performance Compete identifies all panelists who visited a …and identifies others who visited the same publisher site and saw designated ads… publisher site during the same timeframe, but never saw a campaign ad… Exposed group Control group …enabling precise measurement of behavioral “lift” by comparing the exposed group’s activities (search, site visit, KPI) with the control group’s activities.23 w w w . c o m p e t e . c o m
  • 24. Return on Investment Key Brand Funnel Activities What is the cost per exposed How much should consumer I be spending to Branded search queries who views through drive branded search To the brand site? behavior? Viewthrough to advertiser site KPI activities on brand What is the How can I optimize and site optimal level of exposures scale future online required to drive a lift in KPI marketing efforts based activities and what is on my current campaign? the cost?24 w w w . c o m p e t e . c o m 24
  • 25. Agenda & Specifications Agenda: 1. Campaign Overall 2. Performance by Tactic 3. Frequency Performance Metrics: Viewthough: Visitation to the advertiser site Key Performance Indicator (KPI): Upper funnel activity performed on brand site Brand Search: Branded search query performed on an search engine *All activities were performance across the campaign period +4 weeks25 w w w . c o m p e t e . c o m 25
  • 26. Engagement: Viewthrough (Campaign Overall) Takeaway: Approximately 7% of all consumers Advertiser Site Visitation Rate FULL CAMPAIGN (Rate for exposed vs. control and lift, campaign + 4 weeks) exposed to the display campaign viewed through to the advertiser site +4.8%pt** Success: 6.7% Overall campaign drove an additional 48 consumers to the brand site for every 1,000 consumers reached 1.9% Control Exposed Control Exposed *Statistically significant difference at a 90% confidence level **Statistically significant difference at a 95% confidence level26 w w w . c o m p e t e . c o m 26
  • 27. Engagement: Viewthrough (by Tactic) Takeaway: When isolating performance by tactic, Advertiser Site Visitation Rate By Tactic (Rate for exposed vs. control and lift campaign + 4 weeks) consumers exposed to retention placements were more likely to viewthrough to the brand site vs. all +3.4%pt** +0.5%pt +7.4%pt** +2.5%pt** other placements 13.4% Implication: 10.9% Baseline viewthrough rates on 9.1% retention sites however were the strongest resulting in lower lifts. Exposure to awareness and BT 4.1% 2.7% 3.2% placements were more influential in 1.7% 0.7% changing consumer behavior Awareness Retargeting BT Retention Control Exposed *Statistically significant difference at a 90% confidence level **Statistically significant difference at a 95% confidence level27 w w w . c o m p e t e . c o m 27
  • 28. Dynamics: Viewthrough by Exposure Frequency Takeaway: Advertiser Site Visitation Rate by Exposure Level to Ad Visitation to the advertiser site was (Viewthrough rate by exposure level campaign + 4 weeks) highly correlated with exposure to Average Rate of Exposures by Placement display ads; Exposure to retention Awareness Retargeting BT Retention placements consistently drove the 12.0 7.0 5.0 8.0 strongest rates of viewthrough at each 20% level of exposure vs. other 18% placements 16% 14% 12% Action: 10% Determine if the incremental lift 8% achieved at each level of exposure is 6% worth the cost 4% 2% 0% Control 1 impression 2 impressions 3-4 5-7 8+ impressions impressions impressions Awareness Retargeting BT Retention28 w w w . c o m p e t e . c o m 28
  • 29. Engagement: KPI: Upper Funnel (Campaign Overall) Takeaway: Exposed consumers engaged in KPI: Upper Funnel Activity Rate FULL CAMPAIGN (Rate for exposed vs. control and lift, campaign + 4 weeks) upper funnel KPI activities at a rate nearly 2X greater than the control group +0.7%pt** 1.6% Success: Campaign was successful at increasing traffic to key product pages 0.9% Control Exposed *Statistically significant difference at a 90% confidence level **Statistically significant difference at a 95% confidence level29 w w w . c o m p e t e . c o m 29
  • 30. Engagement: KPI :Upper Funnel (by Tactic) Takeaway: Awareness, BT and retention KPI: Upper Funnel Rate By Tactic (Rate for exposed vs. control and lift campaign + 4 weeks) placements were most successful at changing shopping behavior post +1.1%pt** +0.4%pt +0.9%pt** +0.8%pt** exposure 3.3% Implication: Despite similar deltas, Retention 2.5% placements drove approximately 2X 1.8% greater rates of activity among 1.5% 1.4% exposed consumers vs. all other 1.3% placements; costs associated with 0.6% these placements may not be as 0.2% efficient Awareness Retargeting BT Retention Control Exposed *Statistically significant difference at a 90% confidence level **Statistically significant difference at a 95% confidence level30 w w w . c o m p e t e . c o m 30
  • 31. Dynamics: Upper Funnel KPIActivity by Exposure Frequency Takeaway: Retention and BT placements KPI Activity Rate by Exposure Level to Ad (KPI rate by exposure level campaign + 4 weeks) continuously drove incremental gains in KPI activity with each impression Average Rate of Exposures by Placement served; Retargeting exposures were Awareness Retargeting BT Retention maximized after 2 exposures in which 12.0 7.0 5.0 8.0 10% diminishing returns were obtained 9% thereafter 8% 7% Implication: 6% Performance for retargeting 5% placements could be optimized if 4% 3% frequency of exposures was reduced 2% 1% 0% Control 1 impression 2 impressions 3-4 5-7 8+ impressions impressions impressions Awareness Retargeting BT Retention31 w w w . c o m p e t e . c o m 31
  • 32. Engagement: Brand Search (Campaign Overall) Takeaway: Branded search rates increased 2X Brand Search Rate FULL CAMPAIGN (Rate for exposed vs. control and lift campaign + 4 weeks) as the result of exposure to the display campaign (+122% lift) +1.1%pt** Action: Display campaigns increase overall 2.0% search behavior, make sure to maintain a strong SEM strategy 0.9% Control Exposed Control Exposed *Statistically significant difference at a 90% confidence level **Statistically significant difference at a 95% confidence level32 w w w . c o m p e t e . c o m 32
  • 33. Engagement: Brand Search (by Tactic) Takeaway: Approximately 2% of all consumers Brand Search Rate By Tactic (Rate for exposed vs. control and lift campaign + 4 weeks) exposed to retention, BT or retargeting placements engaged in a branded search query +0.8%pt** +0.7%pt** +1.2%pt** +1.1%pt** Implication: 2.4% Despite stronger rates of activity for 2.1% 1.9% the other placements, exposure to 1.4% 1.3% awareness placements were also 1.2% influential in changing consumer 0.7% behavior (3X increase in search 0.4% queries) Awareness Retargeting BT Retention Control Exposed *Statistically significant difference at a 90% confidence level **Statistically significant difference at a 95% confidence level33 w w w . c o m p e t e . c o m 33
  • 34. Dynamics: Brand Search Activity by Exposure Frequency Takeaway: Retargeting placements were the Brand Search Rate by Exposure Level to Ad (Search rate by exposure level campaign + 4 weeks) most successful tactic in driving search behavior to for up to 4 Average Rate of Exposures by Placement exposures, thereafter retention Awareness Retargeting BT Retention yielded the strongest rates of search 12.0 7.0 5.0 8.0 5% activity 4% 3% 2% 1% 0% Control 1 impression 2 impressions 3-4 5-7 8+ impressions impressions impressions Awareness Retargeting BT Retention34 w w w . c o m p e t e . c o m 34
  • 35. What is the ROI for Key Brand Funnel Activities Despite the higher CPM paid for Retention placements, cost per viewthrough and cost per KPI activity performed was lower than both awareness and retargeting strategies. BT placements were also success in driving key brand activities at a lower cost vs. all other placements • However BT placements had the lowest average rate of exposure Campaign Basics Awareness Retargeting BT Retention CPM $ 2.10 $ 5.10 $ 3.60 $ 6.55 Exposure Frequency per UV 12.0 7.0 5.0 8.0 Reach per 1,000 83 143 200 125 Campaign Strategy Comparison - Cost Per Consumer Awareness Retargeting BT Retention CPM $ 2.10 $ 5.10 $ 3.60 $ 6.55 Viewthrough to Advertiser Site $ 0.61 $ 1.12 $ 0.20 $ 0.39 KPI: Upper Funnel $ 1.94 $ 1.98 $ 1.20 $ 1.59 Brand Search $ 2.10 $ 1.70 $ 0.95 $ 2.1835 w w w . c o m p e t e . c o m
  • 36. Overall Takeaways • Ad Effectiveness tools such as Ad Impact can demonstrate the value of your media strategy • Examination of impact of frequency and placement can help optimize performance • True ROI can be established!36 w w w . c o m p e t e . c o m
  • 37. Thanks! Questions? Alyssa Maine Nick Gaudio Marketing Coordinator Associate, Marketing Ad Effectiveness Solutions 617-933-5754 617-933-5647 amaine@compete.com ngaudio@compete.com www.compete.com www.compete.com37 w w w . c o m p e t e . c o m