Successfully reported this slideshow.
We use your LinkedIn profile and activity data to personalize ads and to show you more relevant ads. You can change your ad preferences anytime.

Accenture, Comscore, Dunhumby CPG & Digital White paper


Published on

Are Your CPG Brands
Maximizing the Return on Your Digital Investment?
Research Shows Direct Correlation between CPG Brand Website Usage
and In-Store Purchase Behavior

Published in: Business, Technology
  • Be the first to comment

Accenture, Comscore, Dunhumby CPG & Digital White paper

  1. 1. Are Your CPG BrandsMaximizing the Return onYour Digital Investment?Research Shows Direct Correlationbetween CPG Brand Website Usageand In-Store Purchase Behavior
  2. 2. According to the Interactive Advertising Bureau, the Internet now attracts more advertising dollars than cable TV, newspapers or magazines.1 This, coupled with the astounding growth in consumers’ use of social networks and the creation of user-generated content, has consumer packaged goods (CPG) companies scrambling to learn how best to engage and interact with consumers in this digital age. 1. IAB Internet Advertising Revenue Report:Page 1 2010 Full Year Results, April 2011
  3. 3. CPG manufacturers have invested millions The Accenture/comScore/dunnhumbyUSA “Finally some tangibleof dollars in their brand websites and social research highlights the significant potentialmedia presence, yet they struggle to show for brand websites to become key drivers observations pointing to ahow their brand websites are influencing in building customer loyalty and preference return on our members’ brandbrand purchases in stores. for CPG brands by creating unique online digital spend…looking forwardTo address this challenge, Accenture, brand experiences (see Figure 1). The study found that: to the next phase that addscomScore and dunnhumbyUSA collaboratedon a groundbreaking study to help CPG • Visitors to CPG brand websites spend 37 social media as well!”executives better understand the link percent more than non-visitors on thebetween consumers’ usage of brand brand in retail stores. Patrick Walshwebsites and their brand purchases in • Brand website visitors are heavier buyers Senior Vice President,retail stores. (For more information onthe research methodology see “About the within a brand’s product category, Industry Relations, spending 53 percent more than non- Education and ResearchResearch.”) Specifically, the research was visitors on the category in retail stores.designed to accomplish three objectives:• Quantify the retail sales value of the The study also concluded that to maximize Food Marketing Institute impact, the most important website visitors to various brand websites. features include compelling brand value• Identify the most valuable features and messaging, frequent content updates, content that can be provided on CPG and content that engages visitors such as brand websites. promotions, philanthropic appeals, product• Provide insights and opportunities to demonstrations, surveys, and downloadable further explore online destinations where applications and games. Internet marketers can best reach their These findings are explored in greater detail brand buyers and prospects. below and include the implications for CPG companies and retailers attempting to maximize the return on their digital investments.Figure 1: Comparison of In-Store Performance Metrics for Website Visitors andNon-Visitors (Indexed Such That Non-Visitors = 1.0*) Average Minimum Maximum * Interpretation of Indexed Findings for Monthly Brand Spend:Monthly Brand spending 1.37 0.83 2.05 • Average: Web visitors spent 37 percentCategory Spend 1.53 0.79 3.19 more than non-visitors on the brands in retail stores.Brand Units 1.48 1.05 2.00 • Minimum: For the bottom brand in theCategory Price Per Unit 0.97 0.70 1.59 study, web visitors spent 83 percent of what non-visitors spent on the brands in retail stores.Source: Accenture/comScore/dunnhumbyUSA research, 2011 • Maximum: For the top brand in the study, web visitors spent 105 percent more than non-visitors on the brands in retail stores. Page 2
  4. 4. About the Research brand, deliver services and generate In contrast, “Brand J,” another food sales. The AWE includes a library of 350 brand, had only 100,000 monthlyThe Accenture/comScore/ leading global sites and evaluates 52 unique visitors to its website anddunnhumbyUSA research study was metrics across nine attribute categories visitors spend on average only twobased on an integrated panel of one (navigation, branding, engagement, minutes per visit. However, this websitemillion U.S. Internet users who have information, globalization, relationship possessed 64 percent of the attributes,given comScore explicit permission to building, service, commerce and social). including coupons and fresh content. Itshave their online activities continuously brand buyer reach index was averagemeasured and matched to their in- Utilizing the comScore-dunnhumbyUSA among brand buying behavior provided database, the study examined tenby dunnhumbyUSA. This integrated individual food and beverage as well as In comparing Food and Non-foodpanel provided a single-source, privacy- household product brands with annual participants, Food Brands tendedprotected data mart containing each sales between $40 million and $3 to have a higher number of websitepanelist’s online activities and their billion and website unique visitors of attributes. They also averaged a 1.5in-store buying behavior. between 100,000 and 2.3 million per more time spent by consumers visiting month. These brands also had at least a their websites.Leveraging comScore’s knowledge of 5 percent household buyer penetrationthe digital user, dunnhumby’s shopper as measured by dunnhumbyUSA shopper The research was conducted withunderstanding, and Accenture’s data. The study covered the time period the endorsement of the Groceryexperience in operating and maintaining from September 2010 through February Manufacturers Association (GMA) andconsumer packaged goods websites, the 2011. For confidentiality, individual the Food Marketing Institute (FMI), andstudy quantified the linkage between brands’ results will not be disclosed but the results presented at their joint boardCPG brand buying at retail stores these brands represent a wide range of meeting on January 29, 2012. A secondand digital behavior by comparing website and buyer behaviors. study is planned for 2012 and a researchthe in-store purchase behavior of solicitation inviting brands to participatewebsite visitors and non-visitors and For example, “Brand A,” a food brand, in the study will be released soon.identifying the common components had a brand website that receives overof successful CPG brand websites. For two million unique visitors a month, pluswebsite performance scoring criteria, these visitors are spending over eightthe Accenture Web Evaluator (AWE) minutes on average engaging with thewas used. It provides a comprehensive website during each visit. Not surprising,assessment of how well companies use this brand’s website possessed moretheir websites to attract and retain than 90 percent of the website attributescustomers, support and reinforce their studied. Brand A also enjoyed the strongest brand buyer reach index.Page 3
  5. 5. The In-Store Behaviors of Brand Website VisitorsTo determine if consumers who • CPG brand website visitors spend more on • Surprisingly, the study found that despitevisited the brand website purchased the brand in retail stores: Website visitors greater engagement with the brandmore in-store than non-visitors, spend an average of $2.86 per household, and the category, website visitors pay 8 $0.72 more than non-visitors (see Figure percent less per unit than non-visitors.the study compared the in-store 2) and on an indexed basis they purchase Conventional wisdom would say thatpurchase behavior of brand website 48 percent more units of the brand. since they are more engaged with thevisitors with that of non-visitors brand, visitors would be more likely to • Engagement with the brand does notalong four dimensions: How much pay a higher unit price than non-visitors. translate to exclusivity, as brand websitethey spend on the brand and in the visitors are also highly engaged in the It is likely that these visitors were visitingoverall category, how many units category and are more likely to be heavy websites to download coupons, thusthey purchase of the brand and the category buyers than non-visitors, reducing their net price paid. In contrast,category, how often they purchase thus indicating upside potential for the for two of the ten CPG brand web sites,the brand and the category, and at brand to further engage with their best website visitors paid 2% more per unit customers. Compared with non-visitors, than non-visitors. These two web siteswhat price they purchase. brand website visitors spend 53 percent had a web content strategy focused onIn comparing the purchasing habits of more category dollars and purchase 58 “brand value messaging” rather thanvisitors and non-visitors, the study found percent more units in the category. “coupon downloads”.that CPG brand website visitors were • Brand website visitors have morehighly engaged, valuable customers and purchase occasions than non-visitors forfrequent purchasers of the brand. They both the brand and the category, makingspend more on the brand in retail stores,purchase more units and have more brand 35 percent more purchase trips for the “Creating a better understanding brand and 39 percent more in the overallpurchase occasions than non-visitors. More category. of the relationship betweenspecifically: a brand’s online presence and real-world shopping isFigure 2: Absolute Differences in In-Store Performance Metrics important, relevant and timely to our membership and their Website Visitors Non-Visitors future growth potential.”In-Store Performance Metric (Average) (Average) Difference Denny BelcastroMonthly Brand Dollars $2.86 $2.14 $0.72 Executive Vice President, IndustryMonthly Category Dollars $6.86 $4.83 $2.03 Affairs and Collaboration Grocery ManufacturersNumbers of Brand Buying 3.2 2.3 0.90 AssociationOccasions in Six Month PeriodSource: Accenture/comScore/dunnhumbyUSA research, 2011 Page 4
  6. 6. The Relationship between • Younger brand buyers may be engaging with the brand elsewhere Age and Brand Website online, such as on social networks. Visitation • There is the opportunity to drive This research study compared brand additional brand website traffic by website visitors against the general offering features that cater to the Internet population and brand buyers younger audience segment. against the average shopper across Analysis of other key demographic several demographic dimensions. metrics, such as household size and Visitors to the brand websites tended to income, did not reveal any consistent be older than the average buyer of the relationships. brand. This suggests:Page 5
  7. 7. The Online Behaviors of CPG Brand BuyersA second goal of this study was to A fourth metric was also created that • Brand Buyers were also very activeglean insight into the online behavior incorporated both Reach and Pages as a in content-rich categories such asof consumers who buy CPG brands measure of engagement. This metric (which News, Portals, and Weather; they were was dubbed the “Intensity Index”) was particularly attracted to AOL, MSN,in retail stores (whom we call “Brand calculated for each Brand Buyer segment Weather Channel, WebMD, Gannett, andBuyers”): What types of websites do by multiplying the reach of each website Demand Media sites.Brand Buyers visit and how much (or site category) by the number of pages • Somewhat unexpectedly, the Politics sitetime do they spend there? And, consumed on that site (or site category) category was of great interest to Brandbased on this behavior, what can be and then dividing by the same metric for Buyers, with these consumers spendingsaid about their lifestyles, interests the average Internet user. This Intensity over two times more time (minutesand passions? (For more on visitor Index was then the primary metric used for per visitor) with this category than thedemographics see “The Relationship describing the Brand Buyers’ web behavior average Internet user.between Age and Brand Website relative to the general web population, with the average Internet user defined as 100. If • Brand Buyers were relatively experiencedVisitation.”) users of the web, with strong indices Brand Buyers scored over 100, they over- indexed, reflecting a greater orientation exhibited across all metrics in Technology,In order to address these questions, several than average to a particular site or site Online Trading/Banking, and eCommerceanalyses were executed to identify how category. Conversely, if their index score website categories.Brand Buyers differed from the averageU.S. Internet user. Initially the research was under 100, they were less oriented to • The Coupon category over-indexed onteam examined differences between Brand that site (or site category) than the average Reach, but under-indexed on Time andBuyers and the average U.S. Internet user Internet user. Using this approach, several Pages. On one hand, these results areacross three variables: key findings surfaced: in line with comScore data showing • The Beauty/Fashion/Style website that consumers who search for coupon-• Website reach or unique visitors per category exhibited by far the strongest related terms on search engines are month (“Reach”). Intensity Index among website categories. more likely than the average Internet• Minutes per visitor (“Time”). user to visit CPG Brand websites. It also• Number of pages viewed per visitor • Brand Buyers tended to tap the dovetails with the finding that, “coupons” (“Pages”). communication and networking capabilities or coupon-related searches were of the Internet more than the general web consistently in the top 10 referring search population, over-indexing in Intensity, terms for the 10 brand websites analyzed Pages and Time within the eCards, and in this study (even though only 5 offered Community website categories. coupons). This leads us to believe that • Family/Parenting Community sites were the deal-seeking segment is “fleet of particularly strong. And, not surprisingly, click” and they tend to quickly depart a Brand Buyers in particular over-indexed property when no coupons or relevant in number of Pages consumed in the coupons can be found. Food Community category (such as recipe sharing sites). Page 6
  8. 8. Compelling Features of Successful Brand WebsitesThe ability to quantify the The length of time that visitors spend on a The analysis of brand buying offers severalrelationship between digital brand’s website was the key determinant lessons relative to the most importantmarketing expenditures and in-store of their likelihood to purchase that brand website attributes that drive in-store sales. in the store. In other words, as time on the Overall, four website attributes correlatedsales is of paramount importance brand website increases, brand purchasing most closely with a higher brand purchasewithin the CPG industry. To maximize in the store increases. The presence of a index (greater brand spending in-store forthe return from their digital social cause on the brand site also increases website visitors than non-visitors):investment, CPG companies must the likelihood of in-store brand purchase. • A compelling brand value message thatunderstand the features, functions Furthermore, content scroll—whether a user provides a persuasive reason, other thanand content that are most valuable has to scroll down the page (a proxy for a coupon, for a website visitor to buy thein driving brand website visitors to amount of content)—contributes to in-store brand.have a deeper engagement with the purchase. • Fresh content updated at least weeklybrand and to increase their in-store Given the strong correlation between time to encourage visitors to engage andpurchasing. Therefore, this study spent on the site and in-store purchases, participate and return frequently.analyzed the attributes of brand the research team examined the factors that influence whether visitors spent • Content that creates an engaging onlinewebsites that are associated with experience such as a pulse survey on more time on the site. The most importanta higher likelihood that visitors will the home page, or an opportunity to attribute is fresh content that is updatedvisit the site, will spend more time frequently—for example, content relevant rate a new product or product attribute,on the site, and will buy the brand in for the season or new daily recipes. The or user generated content like recipesretail stores. presence of brand value messaging (reasons or weight-loss planning. Content to buy the brand) also increases the time with a philanthropic appeal such as spent on the site. Value-added tools such sustainability or participation in a food as product ratings, user generated content, bank also was shown to create greater recipes and other tools increases time engagement. spent on the site. Finally, the presence of • Well designed site navigation that is a click-to-buy feature (such as helping intuitive, uses simple menus and has clear facilitate the purchase of hard to find SKUs) site maps. increases length of stay as well.Page 7
  9. 9. The Untapped Potential of CompellingBrand WebsitesA review of the best brand sites While this research highlights the The study also demonstrates that someamong the research base offers significant potential of brand websites CPG companies are missing revenuedramatic evidence that a compelling as drivers for building engagement and opportunities and may be losing market preference for CPG brands, most CPG share due to underinvestment in the digitalonline brand experience is enabling companies are missing the opportunity to channel. Online CPG brand experiencea few companies to be extremely influence brand engagement and brand influences between 1 percent to as much aseffective in generating incremental buying behavior on their brand websites 35 percent of a brand’s total USA in-storeand profitable sales in the store. simply because not enough consumers visit sales, highlighting a direct correlationAnalysis shows that consumers their site (see Figure 3.) For example, 64 between CPG brand web sites visitation andvisiting the best of the ten CPG percent of the top 25 CPG brands (defined in-store purchase behavior. We hope thesebrand websites evaluated in the by household buyer penetration) average insights will help CPG brand managersresearch study, spent over 200 less than 100,000 unique visitors to their benchmark performance of their website,percent more on the brand than brand website per month (this compares quantify the in-store sales potential of to more than 300,000 for two of the top investments in brand websites and othernon-visitors. Moreover, the research brands). To the extent that this study digital marketing activities, and furthershows that the price paid per unit quantifies the potential of websites to capitalize on the full potential of the digitalof the brand at the best of the ten influence brand engagement and in-store channel.CPG brand websites was two percent purchase, CPG company efforts to increasemore than for non-visitors in brand. traffic to the brand website offer tangible return on investment.Figure 3: Average Monthly Visitors to Top 25 CPG Brand WebsitesWebsites of 25 Largest CPG Brands(Defined by Buyer Penetration) 100% 64%% ofBrands 24% 8% 4% 0% Under 100 100-199 200-299 300 + Number of Monthly Unique Visitors (000)Source: © 2011 comSource. All rights reserved. Page 8
  10. 10. About Accenture About comScore About dunnhumbyUSAAccenture is a global management comScore, Inc. (NASDAQ: SCOR) is a global dunnhumby is the leader in personalizingconsulting, technology services and leader in measuring the digital world the world’s experience of retailers andoutsourcing company, with more than and preferred source of digital business brands. Analyzing data from over 350244,000 people serving clients in more analytics. comScore provides syndicated million people in 28 countries, we helpthan 120 countries. Combining unparalleled and custom solutions in online audience companies put customers at the centerexperience, comprehensive capabilities measurement, e-commerce, advertising, of every decision. We use our insightacross all industries and business functions, search, video and mobile. The company to improve customers’ experience ofand extensive research on the world’s also offers an extensive portfolio of stores and communications to earn theirmost successful companies, Accenture services for multi-media copy testing lifetime loyalty. Our work with some of thecollaborates with clients to help them and tracking, digital media planning and world’s biggest retailers and brands hasbecome high-performance businesses and analysis, campaign delivery verification, demonstrated that companies which delivergovernments. The company generated net and advertising effectiveness measurement. value to customers through personalizationrevenues of US$25.5 billion for the fiscal Advertising agencies, publishers, marketers become and stay their customers’ firstyear ended Aug. 31, 2011. Its home page is and financial analysts turn to comScore choice. This strategic approach to for the industry-leading solutions needed the customer first in business improves to craft successful digital, marketing, our clients’ like-for-like sales and profit sales, product development and trading margins – or, put simply, their brand strategies. For more information, please value. dunnhumbyUSA is a joint venture of visit The Kroger Company and London-based dunnhumby. Employing more than 1,900 people in 30 offices in Europe, Asia and the Americas, dunnhumby serves a prestigious list of companies including The Kroger Co., Tesco, Coca-Cola, General Mills, Kimberly- Clark, Macy’s, Panera Bread Company, PepsiCo and Procter & Gamble. dunnhumby also includes the word of mouth marketing experts BzzAgent and price optimization company KSS Retail. For more information, visit 9
  11. 11. Contact UsFor further information, please contact:Jerry LohseAccenturegerald.l.lohse@accenture.com561 704 9443Mike GorsheAccenturemichael.a.gorshe@accenture.com630 461 1745John LaRoccadunnhumbyUSAjohn.larocca@us.dunnhumby.com513 632 0613Mike ZemancomScoremzeman@comscore.com312 775 6630 Page 10
  12. 12. Copyright © 2012 Accenture,comScore, dunnhumbyUSAAll rights reserved.