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.

Cross media convergence


Published on

Published in: News & Politics, Business
  • Be the first to comment

Cross media convergence

  1. 1. Dynamic Logic Best Practices in Cross-Media Advertising Measurement Return on Marketing Investment 2005 The New Era of Accountable Marketing Miami, FL January 2005 1
  2. 2. Outline 1. Background On Dynamic Logic 2. Trends That Can No Longer Be Ignored 3. CrossMedia Measurement Overview 4. Media Synergy Case Studies • General Motors XUV • Levi’s • Quaker Oats • Tylenol 5. Cost Effectiveness Case Study • Philips 2
  3. 3. Dynamic Logic Background • Founded in 1999 – New York, London, San Francisco, Los Angeles, Chicago • Independent market research company – Focus on measuring marketing effectiveness • We have conducted studies for: – 47 of the top 50 U.S. advertisers – Top US Agencies like Carat, FCB, JWT and Ogilvy – Major Media Companies like Dow Jones, AOL, Disney, Viacom, Yahoo!, Meredith – Millions of surveys and over 1600 studies in all as of Dec 2004 3
  4. 4. Dynamic Logic CrossMedia Experience • We have conducted more than 75 CrossMedia studies to date for leading U.S. and European brands. Including 8 of the Top 10 Advertisers. 4
  5. 5. What People are Saying about DL Research "Developing CrossMedia research tools and insights is the number one research issue among advertisers today", said Bob Barocci, president of the ARF, "and we support unequivocally the intelligent work of Dynamic Logic, a premier marketing effectiveness research company, who has done more crossmedia studies than any other company." (September 2004) 5
  6. 6. Trends 'Frasier' Finale: Amid Nostalgia, A Product Plug “May 12, 2003. In tomorrow night's final episode of the NBC sitcom "Frasier," one guest star is crisp, sweet and inanimate -- and symbolizes the lengths to which marketers and media are going these days to capture consumers' attention.” TV Magazine (TV Guide) Online (Email),,SB108432262147108863-email,00.html 6
  7. 7. Media Consumption Internet Television Magazines Newspaper Radio Total Media Audience By Daypart 100% At Work Users 77% 80% 73% 68% 65% 60% 45% 38% 39% 40% 20% 9% 0% Morning Daytime I Daytime II Early Fringe Early News Prime Time Late Fringe Late Night Internet TV Magazines Newspapers Radio Source: Online Publishers Association/MBIQ Media Consumption Study, May 2003 Q. M1-2/M2-2/M2-5b/M3-2/M4-2: How much time did you spend on the following <media> yesterday between <daypart>? Base: At Work (1053) 7
  8. 8. Multi-Tasking 70% of consumers, at one time or another, use media simultaneously: Radio: 57.3% simultaneously go online, 46.9% read newspaper and 17.7% watch TV. TV: 74.2% read the newspaper simultaneously, 66.2% go online Newspapers: 52.4% watch TV and 49.6% listen to radio Online: When waiting to download something 52.1% listen to radio, 61.8% watch TV, and 20.2% read the newspaper. Source: The Media Center and BIGresearch Oct 2003 Survey, n=13,414 8
  9. 9. Does this look like you? Media Planning Organizational Structure TV Radio Magazine Online 9
  10. 10. Media and Marketing Trends We Can No Longer Ignore • Media Fragmentation • Multi-tasking • Emergence of digital and “new” media • Clutter and consumer push back • Time-shifting and commercial avoidance And… • The “A” word 10
  11. 11. Demand For Branding Measurement "We need a method to determine the effectiveness of our efforts. We need to measure how effective our advertising is at influencing purchase intent -- the ultimate goal.” “We must find a way of measuring holistic marketing...I see e-mails every week on better decisions we're making because of [marketing-mix modeling]," Mr. Stengel said. But while marketing mix does a ‘great job of refining what you know’ he notes that the analysis still primarily looks at how each part of the mix works independently rather than at optimizing how all parts work best together”. Jim Stengel, Global Chief Marketing Officer, Procter & Gamble Source: Wall Street Journal, February 12, 2004 11
  12. 12. Cross Media and Holistic Measurement Today: MSS and CES • Media Synergy Studies – What was the branding effect of the various media components? How well did they work together? – How did that differ across objectives and audiences? – Recommendations for improving integrated campaigns • Cost Effectiveness Studies includes the above, plus: – What was the ROI in various media and in combination? • Cost per impact • Return on Marketing Investment – Recommendations for optimizing budget allocation MSS: Synergy Focus CES: Cost and Optimization Focus 12
  13. 13. The Hierarchy of Advertising Effects How do you measure where consumers are in the continuum? Brand Awareness First, consumers Measures the level of familiarity respondents have with 1. need to be aware the brand (aided and unaided) of a brand Then they need to Message Association understand the Measures the extent to which respondents can match the 2. value to them, or message in the creative to the brand what the product is used for Brand Favorability The consumer Measures the extent to which respondents have a 3. forms an opinion positive or favorable opinion of the brand about the brand Finally, the consumer Purchase Intent considers whether he or Measures the likelihood of 4. she is likely to consume respondents to purchase the brand or use the brand in the future 13
  14. 14. CrossMedia Methodology • Respondents are recruited via web intercepts, reflective of the audience reached by the integrated campaign – Recruitment can be supplemented using phone interviews and subscriber lists • Cross-media measurement is based on opportunity to see (OTS) advertising – Reported media consumption data determines offline exposure opportunity – When Internet advertising is a component, electronic data is used as OTS measure • Comparison of brand attitudes of different respondent groups (cells) is made to determine impact of advertising campaign • Two Types: – Media Synergy Studies (focus on the media, audience, and combinations) – Cost Effectiveness Studies (cost and ROI focus, media mix) 14
  15. 15. Cross Media Methodology: Schematic Magazine Exposure Web Exposure Opportunity Opportunity NO NO Control NO Magazine- Only NO Web- Only Web+ Magazine 15
  16. 16. Cell Assignment/Analysis 16
  17. 17. General Motors – Envoy XUV GM was promoting the introduction of a new model of SUV, the Envoy “XUV” which has a special retractable roof. GM ran a multimedia campaign with TV, Magazine, Online and Out of Home There was a relatively heavy and targeted magazine schedule when compared to the other media. Sample of Online Creative Units Sample of Magazine Creative Units Because TV ran first and with a relatively heavy weight our analysis focused on the combinations of other media in addition to TV. 17
  18. 18. GM Envoy XUV Case Study – Sample Learning It was somewhat surprising that the impact of Online Advertising seemed to impact Heavy TV viewers (over 25 hours per week) more than Light TV viewers (less than 7 hours per week) Aided Brand Awareness Aided Brand Awareness Heavy TV Viewers Light TV Viewers (25+ hrs/week) (< 7 hrs/week) Index Vs. Control Index Vs. Control Control=100 Control=100 +16% +2% 139 136 136 117 TV Only TV + Online TV Only TV + Online 18
  19. 19. GM Envoy XUV - Persuasion Metrics (Magazines) Brand Favorability, Purchase Consideration and Brand Attributes impacted the most by the addition of Magazines in the mix. While we saw that all combinations of media impacted Brand Favorability positively – the biggest increase was seen by those exposed to TV and Magazine. In terms of purchase consideration, Magazine had the biggest impact when combined with TV – however even in this case the biggest lift still came from those exposed to all three media. Brand Favourability Purchase Consideration Total Sample Total Sample Index Vs. Control Index Vs. Control Control=100 Control=100 180 192 171 169 163 159 154 146 TV Only TV + TV + TV + TV Only TV + TV + TV + Online Magazine Magazine + Online Magazine Magazine + Online Online 19
  20. 20. Levi’s Case Study – Excerpt from ESOMAR, Geneva 2004 In the Summer of 2003 Levi’s Celebrated it’s 150th birthday with the launch of “Levi’s Type 1 Jeans”. Levi’s incorporated television, cinema, print and online (Yahoo!) to attract the 13- 24 year old target. The media elements included: Network TV: That 70’s Show, Friends, Will and Grace, and Saturday Night Live. Cable: MTV, Fox Sports, and ESPN. Magazines: Cosmopolitan, FHM, YM, Maxim and Vibe. Cinema: Nationwide ran prior to feature films. Online: Yahoo! Network 20
  21. 21. Levi’s Various Analysis Matrices Cinema/Online TV/Online Control NO NO Control NO NO Cinema only NO TV (with and without other NO offline) Online only NO TV + Online Cinema+Online TV+Print/Online TV+Print+Cinema/Online Control NO NO Control NO NO TV + Print TV + Print NO NO + Cinema TV, Print TV, Print + Online +Cinema + Online 21
  22. 22. Levi’s TV+Print+Online: Awareness Metrics • Online advertising provided significant value in getting respondents to link the brand with the message • While TV+Print created a substantial increase in Ad Awareness; online did not add significant incremental value to this combination of media Message Association Advertising Awareness 30% 90% A 80% 72.2% A 74.7% 25% 19.6% AB 70% 61.6% 20% A 60% 15.5% 50% 15% 10.4% 40% 10% 30% 20% 5% 10% 0% 0% Control TV+Print TV+Print+Online Control TV+Print TV+Print+Online n= n=478 n=688 n= n=478 n=688 1210 B C 1210 B C A A A/B/C = Statistically significant difference at a 90% confidence 22 level
  23. 23. Levi’s Cinema/Online: Female Target Audience In this example when looking at the female 18-24 target audience it appears that exposure to either cinema or online alone has little impact, but the combination of the two created the desired effect, lifting purchase intent by 8.7 points (17% lift) . 80% Purchase Intent (Females 18-24) 70% ABC 60.4% 60% 51.7% 50% 48.0% 46.6% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% Control Cinema Only Online only Cinema+Online n= 497 n=100 n=296 n=106 A B C D A/B/C = Statistically significant difference at a 90% confidence 23 level
  24. 24. Quaker Oats Case Study – Excerpt from ESOMAR, Geneva 2004 In August 2003, Quaker launched the Oatmeal Breakfast Magazine Squares – the first no bowl oatmeal. It unveiled a multi- platform program to present this product as the nutritious, hand held oatmeal ideal for the on-the-go lifestyle. Primarily targeting 35-54 year old adults. The media elements included: Network TV: Third Watch, West Wing, Friends, Alias,Today Show, and Good Morning America. Cable: Food Network, History Channel, TV Land, Sci-Fi, American Movie Classics. Magazines: Good Housekeeping, Redbook, Southern Living, Newsweek, Time, Men’s Journal, and Jet. Online: Yahoo! Network Online 24
  25. 25. Quaker: Awareness Metrics • Combination of all 3 media created strongest brand awareness metrics • After exposure to all three media, average Brand Awareness was at 76% Unaided Brand Awareness (Quaker) Aided Brand Awareness 80% 80% 76% AB 67% A 58% 60% 60% 40% 33% AB 40% 26% 24% 20% 20% 0% 0% Pre-Wave TV/Mag TV/Mag/Online Pre-Wave TV/Mag TV/Mag/Online n=2082 n=483 n=969 n=2082 n=483 n=969 A B C A B C A/B/C = Statistically significant difference at a 90% confidence level 25
  26. 26. Quaker - Target Audience: Cumulative Effect Of All Media Purchase Intent • As with the awareness scores, online created a sizable increase Purchase Intent after exposure for those who have purchased a cereal bar within the last 3 months. Purchase Intent 80% 66% AB 60% 43% 45% 40% 20% 0% Pre-Wave TV/Mag TV/Mag/Online n=396 n=151 n=286 A B C A/B/C = Statistically significant difference at a 90% confidence level *Purchased Cereal/Breakfast bar in the past 3 months 26
  27. 27. ESPN/J&J Case Study – Tylenol 8 Hour and the Weekend Warrior In May 2003, Tylenol launched a new product extension, Tylenol 8 Hour specially formulated for the extended relief of aches and strains associated with active pains. They partnered with ESPN to reach the critical “Weekend Warriors” men 18-34 who exercise. The media elements included: ESPN Television Networks ESPN the Magazine ESPN Radio 27
  28. 28. ESPN/Tylenol 8 Hour Case Study: Overall Results Control ESPN Media Cumulative Effect 100.0 90.0 83.1 80.0 Cumulative means 70.0 63.4 at least one Percentage % 60.5 exposure to each 60.0 56.8 ESPN media: TV, 50.0 48.9 47.7 Magazine, Radio and Online. 37.4 39.5 40.0 Minimal freq. = 4 30.0 27.2 20.6 20.0 10.0 3.6 4.6 0.0 Aided Brand Online Ad Message Sponsorship Brand Purchase Awareness Awareness Association Association FavorabilityConsideration / Intent This particular study highlights the potential benefits of working with a dedicated media partner to pull together a program of various assets or channels. * Control = 501, ESPNMedia = 243 28
  29. 29. Cost Efficiency Calculation Cost Per Spend in Medium or Media Combination Person = Branding Effect x Target Reach • Branding Effect = Exposed minus Unexposed brand scores • Target Reach = Reach X Target market size 29
  30. 30. Media Mix Recommendations: Overall Spend and ROI Based Media Decisions Campaign Allocation Recommended Allocation Radio Web Radio 5% 10% Print 5% Web 8% 5% Print 15% Holistic Measurement: TV ROMI, BCPP 70% TV 82% Recommendations are provided for different objectives and target audiences 30
  31. 31. Dependent Variables: Branding Metrics • Impact of various combinations of media on traditional branding measures • This data can complement brand tracking and media mix modeling TV Online Print TV + TV + Online Online +Print Unaided Brand Awareness $1.65 $2.62 $3.83 $1.85 $1.93 Aided Brand Awareness $1.32 $2.29 $3.58 $1.29 $1.57 Message Association $3.26 $1.85 $2.53 $2.59 $2.17 Brand Favorability $2.62 $2.56 $2.18 $2.29 $2.01 Purchase Consideration $4.45 $2.97 $2.86 $2.36 $1.96 Average per Medium $2.66 $2.46 $3.00 $2.08 $1.93 Target Audience A $2.32 $3.22 $2.45 $2.55 $2.19 Target Audience B $2.45 $1.96 $4.71 $2.09 $2.66 Demonstration Data 31
  32. 32. Brand Metrics by Media Channel • Exposure to two or more media was necessary to produce increases in “Awareness A” Metric 100% Awareness by Media Exposure Question: Which of the following brands have you heard of 80% before? A-DF 60% 59% ABCD ABCD 51% 51% 40% 41% 40% 39% 35% 20% 0% Pre-Control Online Print TV TV + Print TV + Online TV + Print + Online A B C D E F G n=497 n=227 n=173 n=224 n=292 n=523 n=354 A/B/C/D/E/F/G = Statistically significant difference at a 90% confidence level 32
  33. 33. Results: Cost Per Person $$$ Dollars Indexed to Average of Media Sums (100) • Television was generally ineffective when working by itself • Print advertising was extremely cost-effective in this campaign, alone and in combination • Online advertising alone was not cost efficient, but delivered good results when working with other media •Combination of all media (TV+Print+Online) was cost efficient and had highest overall reach Print 41 Online 193 TV+Print 44 TV+Online 163 TV+Print+Online 61 0 100 200 Average per Medium 33
  34. 34. CrossMedia Learning: Magazines, Television, and Online Effect of Medium on Brand Metrics Average Percentage Point Increase over Unexposed Baseline in 8 CrossMedia Campaigns 30 Magazine Internet 11.1 20 TV Avg Delta 5.1 6.0 10 2.8 6.1 7.2 4.2 3.3 11.0 5.5 3.1 1.3 4.4 1.7 2.6 0 Aided Brand Aided Ad Message Brand Purchase Intent/ Awareness Awareness Association Favorability Consideration Average Delta Increase (Percentage Points) Excerpt: Good News for Magazines - By Wayne Eadie, SVP Research for MPA “Importantly, they show that...magazines increase advertising ROI. The Dynamic Logic results support prior studies that speak to how magazines add value to the mix, specifically in their ability to influence purchase behavior.” 34
  35. 35. Think of the CrossMedia Challenge Like a Cake The Right Ingredients: Don’t Guarantee the Best Results: 35
  36. 36. Think of the CrossMedia Challenge Like a Cake You need the right MEDIA PROPORTIONS: 1 _ cups 2 1 stick 2 cups 3 oz. 1 tsp. 2 tsp. 1 cup MEASUREMENT makes it work! 36
  37. 37. Thank You! Tom Deierlein Chief Operating Officer 212-844-3732 37
  38. 38. WIFM: Measurement Breeds Success “Companies that measure marketing results increased their annual marketing budgets an average 11.2% this year, while companies that don’t measure marketing results increased their budgets by only 6%.” LESSON: Those marketing professionals that measure their efforts get budget increases nearly DOUBLE their counterparts who do not regularly measure marketing effectiveness. B to B Magazine, March 8, 2004. Source: Black Friars Communications (n=100 Executives surveyed) 38