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.

Insights from the Cutting Edge of Digital - Stephen DiMarco and George Pappachen

6,730 views

Published on

Originally presented during EducationConnect 2015 on 10/15/15 in NY, Stephen DiMarco, CEO, Millward Brown Digital, and George Pappachen, EVP, Global Strategy, WPP discuss industry trends in digital.

Published in: Marketing
  • Be the first to comment

Insights from the Cutting Edge of Digital - Stephen DiMarco and George Pappachen

  1. 1. Insights from the Cutting Edge of Digital Stephen DiMarco CEO, MB Digital, Milward Brown @sdimarco George Pappachen Executive Vice President Global Strategy, WPP @GPappachen
  2. 2. Digital Media Trends
  3. 3. (c) 2015 Millward Brown Digital. Source: Millward Brown Digital’s Getting DigitalRight study, 2015. Many potential touchpoints No single path to purchase Difficult to quantify impact Marketing state of the union
  4. 4. Marketing execution – the right questions What questions should I be asking? What are the relevant creative messages? Who is the target audience? Where did the ad appear? How much was spent to place it? Who saw the message? What did they do about it? What is the consumer’s media journey? Advertising Intelligence Audience Intelligence Earned Media Intelligence Consumer Intelligence Advertising Intelligence Media Intelligence
  5. 5. Targeting audiences online
  6. 6. Targeting audiences online A TV provider was looking to target existing customers with an offer promoting the ability to watch different channels, in different rooms, on different devices. Create an audience of existing subscribers who watched TV across multiple devices. We refined the target by including those who definitely agreed that ‘PVR technology has changed the way I watch TV’ indicating an interest in TV tech developments Average video viewing time across the target segment was 33% longer than the campaign average. The audience was more engaged as a rich target definition meant we were hitting the right people, with the message, efficiently. Challenge What we did Result
  7. 7. Targeting audiences online Utilize large scale on/offline database target respondents are matched to online cookies and ‘look-alike’ audiences are modelled Panelists are matched to a provider’s database using name, address, email & more seed respondents Look-alike targets made available to ad-serving platforms
  8. 8. 2nd screen Ad Targeting An advertiser was looking to conquest by delivering ads on the second screen in direct competition with the competition's TV ads. The advertiser’s trading platform used real-time ad occurrence data feed to optimize messaging during the campaign. This enabled the advertiser to target online ads within the same time period of competitive ads running on TV. The real-time ad occurrence feed provided a correlation for more precise targeting on the 2nd screen. This capability can be applied to both competitive conquesting and continued message. Challenge What we did Result
  9. 9. 2nd screen Ad Targeting using real-time ad occurrences
  10. 10. Share-of-voice Ad Targeting Challenge An advertiser was looking to combat against ‘brand clutter’ and identify online white-space opportunities for uniqueness of message. What we did Identify concentrations of ads from the same vertical as well as from competitive brands. The advertiser was then able to target sites the target was visiting where there were fewer competitive ads. Result Using ads data, the advertiser gained an ability to employ a more strategic approach. With this information in-hand, the advertiser identified and served ads that commanded a higher share-of-voice of message to the target audience.
  11. 11. Share-of-voice Ad Targeting Competitor Brands Websites Ad Activity Opportunity Zones Moderate Clutter High Clutter Zero Clutter Very High Clutter Low Clutter Ad Spend and Impressions Data
  12. 12. Reaching the Dynamic Consumer in an Evolving Digital Landscape
  13. 13. (c) 2015 Millward Brown Digital. Source: Millward Brown Digital’s Demystifying the Consumer Journey study, 2015. Understanding the consumer journey DEMOGRAPHICS GEOGRAPHICS PSYCHOGRAPHICS Relationship with CATEGORY BRAND TOUCHPOINTS
  14. 14. (c) 2015 Millward Brown Digital. Source: Millward Brown Digital’s Demystifying the Consumer Journey study, 2015. Category influences time investment LENGTH OF PURCHASE JOURNEY Number of days from start of journey to purchase for each category
  15. 15. (c) 2015 Millward Brown Digital. Source: Millward Brown Digital’s Getting Audiences Right study, 2015. Laptop/PC usage goes up with task length 0% 20% 40% 60% 0-5 minutes 5-10 minutes 10-20 minutes 20-60 minutes More than one hour %ofRespondents Device Preference for Various Task Lengths LAPTOP / PCSMARTPHONE TABLET
  16. 16. (c) 2015 Millward Brown Digital. Source: Millward Brown Digital’s Compete Clickstream panel; laptop/desktop unique visitors. Higher Education drives high visitation 0 20,000,000 40,000,000 60,000,000 80,000,000 100,000,000 120,000,000 140,000,000 Higher Education Wireless Carriers Automotive Manufacturers Banking Consumer Electronics Average Monthly UVs (laptop/PC) 4Q14 1Q15 2Q15
  17. 17. (c) 2015 Millward Brown Digital. Source: Millward Brown Digital’s Compete Clickstream panel; top sites for Higher Education behavioral segment (includes Colleges & Universities, Financial Aid, Online Courses, Student Resources. Higher Education receives higher engagement 0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8 2.0 Aug-14 Sep-14 Oct-14 Nov-14 Dec-14 Jan-15 Feb-15 Mar-15 Apr-15 May-15 Jun-15 Jul-15 Aug-15 Time Spent per UV (min) Higher Education Wireless Carriers Automotive Banking Consumer Electronics
  18. 18. (c) 2015 Millward Brown Digital. Source: Millward Brown Digital’s Compete Clickstream panel; top sites for Higher Education behavioral segment (includes Colleges & Universities, Financial Aid, Online Courses, Student Resources. Top 10 Sites Higher Education sites 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. Aug 2015
  19. 19. Optimize through better measurement
  20. 20. The ABC’S help marketers uncover insights Maximize reach, frequency, & viewable brand impact to targets Audience Insights Impact of campaigns on attitudes and brand lift measures Brand Lift Demonstrate how marketing contributes to sales/application Sales Outcomes Analyze actual online behavior and the impact of exposure Consumer Behavior Impact
  21. 21. Total U.S. Adults 25-54 Site A Campaign Delivery Adults 25-54 Targeting Efficiency Audience Effect – Target Consumers Reached The campaign reached 2MM target consumers at a cost per target of $0.05. This translates into roughly 19 target consumers gained per dollar spent. The campaign successfully delivered significant targeting and audience scale. Percent Difference: +5.0% Incremental Target Consumers: (Incremental Efficiency*Reach) 0.025 * 3,823,480= + 95,587 Total Target Consumers: (Efficiency*Reach) 0.53 * 3,823,480= +2,026,444 Return Objective Target Consumers Cost per Consumer* A-Effect ** Audience 2,026,444 $0.05 spent per target consumer 19 target consumers per $ spent +2.5%
  22. 22. Brand Effect – Aided Brand Awareness The campaign drove a 7.4% point increase in Aided Awareness. This translates to an incremental 283K consumers that became aware of Brand X. This cost $0.37 per consumer, meaning about 3 consumers gained per dollar spent. Percent Difference: +10.1% Significance Level: 83% Incremental Aware Consumers: (Incremental Awareness*Reach) 0.07 * 3,823,480 = +282,938 Return Objective Campaign Impact Cost per Consumer* B-Effect ** Brand 282,938 $0.37 spent per target consumer 2.7 target consumers per $ spent +7.4% Non-Exposed Exposed Aided Brand Awareness (consumers aware of Brand X when prompted)
  23. 23. Consumer Behavior Effect – Brand Visits With a +13% increase in brand visits observed over the campaign +4 week period, an incremental 459K consumers went on to the brand site. 5.13% 17.94% Control Exposed +13% Percent Difference: +13% Significance Level: 90% Incremental Visitation: (Incremental Visitation*Reach) 0.13 * 3,823,480 = +458,818 Return Objective Campaign Impact Cost per Consumer* C-Effect ** Consumer Behavior 458,818 $0.23 spent per target consumer 4.3 consumers per $ spent Branded Visitation Activity (Rate of brand visit lift for exposed vs. control)
  24. 24. 8.3% 8.7% Non-Exposed Exposed Penetration Sales Effect - Penetration The campaign drove a 0.4% point increase in Penetration for Brand X. This translates to an incremental 15K consumers that became purchasers. Given the campaign investment of $105,503, this cost $6.90 per consumer. Percent Difference: +.4% Significance Level: 73% Total Incremental Penetration: (Incremental Pen*Reach) 0.004* 3,823,480= +15,294 Return Objective Campaign Impact Cost per Consumer* S-Effect ** Sales +15,294 consumers $6.90 spent per consumer 0.14 consumers per $ spent +0.4%
  25. 25. Measurable returns at every funnel level Holistic programs not only explore the individual measurement elements, but combine them to tell a complete story and achieve maximum results. Total ROI Objective KPI’s Campaign Impact Cost Per Consumer* Consumers per Dollar Spent Targeting Efficiency +2,026,444 consumers $0.05 19.2 Aided Brand Awareness +282,938 consumers $0.37 2.7 Brand Visits + 458,818 consumers $0.23 4.3 Penetration +15,294 consumers $6.90 0.14 Incremental Sales $726,461 = $6.89 per $ spent on advertising **Advertising Spend ($105,503)
  26. 26. What does this mean for Marketers?
  27. 27. george.pappachen@kantarmedia.com George Pappachen Stephen DiMarco stephen.dimarco@millwardbrown.com

×