data & attribution in a multi-channel...

Data & Attribution in a Multi-Channel Marketplace

www.cdrfg.com 301-858-1500

Today’s Consumer … • Receives multiple

touches

• Across multiple channels

• On multiple devices

Outd

oor A

dvertising

Tele

mar

keti

ng

MULTI- TOUCH,

CHANNEL, DEVICE

MARKETING

New Marketing Ecosystem

Why does it matter?

In a recent survey of 1,000 marketers conducted by AdRoll, their top reasons for tracking attribution…

• 71% Understanding our customers

• 56% Understanding where to apply marketing spend

• 44% Justifying marketing budget

• 43% Optimizing campaign performance

And yet only HALF of marketers say they have an attribution in place! This is likely a much smaller number for non-profits.

Two Major Steps

1. Identifying the Paths 2. Allocating the Credit

DRTV Paths

TV Commercial

Landing Page

DRTV Sustainers Join Source

We know that out of the over 200,000 sustainers attributable to DRTV: % join through the Call Center % join through the Microsite % join through the Main Website % join through Direct Mail

Daily DRTV Airtime Levels

DRTV Microsite Donations by Day

Main WWP Web Donations by Day

DRTV Impact on SEM Conversions

-

5,000

10,000

15,000

20,000

25,000

$0

$500,000

$1,000,000

$1,500,000

$2,000,000

$2,500,000

$3,000,000

$3,500,000

Oct

ober

Dec

emb

er

Feb

ruar

y

Ap

ril

Jun

e

Au

gu

st

Oct

ober

Dec

emb

er

Feb

ruar

y

Ap

ril

Jun

e

Au

gu

st

Oct

ober

Dec

emb

er

Feb

ruar

y

Ap

ril

Jun

e

Au

gu

st

Oct

ober

Dec

emb

er

Feb

ruar

y

Ap

ril

2010 2011 2012 2013 2014

Media Spend

Conversions

DRTV Impact on Direct Mail

DRTV Sustainers Join Source

We know that out of the over 200,000 sustainers attributable to DRTV: 42% join through the Call Center 44% join through the Microsite 12% join through the Main Website (10 minute window around a spot airing)

2% join through Direct Mail

* While this is important to know it gives all the credit to the Last Touch *

• First Touch/Last Touch – whatever the first or last channel of outward communication was with the respondent receives 100% credit for donation

Fractional Allocation MAIL EMAIL PHONE EMAIL AD



100 0 0 0 0

0 0 0 0 100

Matchback Example

Museum Acquisition Mailing in Sept 2013

Confirmed Response:

Mail Qty #New

MembersResp Rate AVG Gift

Gross Revenue Total Cost

Net Revenue

Cost to Acq R.O.I

Coded Mail 311,587 296 0.09% $119.68 $35,425 $124,242 ($88,817) ($300.06) -71%

Museum Matchback Example

Acquisition Mailing in Sept 2013

Confirmed Response:

With Matchback:

Resulted in 300% increase in Net Revenue!

Mail Qty #New



Net Revenue

Cost to Acq R.O.I

Coded Mail 311,587 296 0.09% $119.68 $35,425 $124,242 ($88,817) ($300.06) -71%

Mail Qty #New



Net Revenue

Cost to Acq R.O.I

Coded Mail 311,587 296 0.09% $119.68 $35,425 $124,242 ($88,817) ($300.06) -71%Matchback 2,534 $111.56 $282,706 $282,706 $111.56TOTAL 311,587 2,830 0.91% $112.41 $318,131 $124,242 $193,888 $68.51 156%

Museum Matchback Example

What originally looked like a 13% Direct Mail allocation is in reality much greater as Direct Mail impacted all other join sources

39.9%

25.6%

17.0%

12.9%

4.6%

Onsite (Lobby)

Online

Retail (All Stores,eCommerce, Mail Order)

Mail / White Mail

Back Office / Phone

A Donor’s Experience is NOT One Touch

Email

Email

Email

Ads

Direct Mail

Direct Mail

Direct Mail

Tele- marketing

Tele- marketing

$

Thoughts about Last Touch

• So many of us use Last Touch Allocation • “if the gift comes in the mail, than Direct Mail gets the

revenue”

• What we found for WWP DRTV Sustainers*: • Almost 1,000 attended a WWP event prior to joining

• Almost 6,000 received an email 30 days prior to joining

• Almost 8,000 received an Acquisition mailing 60 days prior to joining

• Over 18,000 received a Donor mailing 60 days prior to joining

*Numbers above do not account for overlap. Many received a combination of touches.


• Linear – each touchpoint in the conversion path shares credit for the donation





20 20 20 20 20



• Position Based – more weight is given to the first and last touchpoints with midstream touchpoints marginalized


30 15 10 15 30

Response Decay




• Tiered or Time Decay – the touchpoints closest in time to the donation get most of the credit







0 10 20 30 40






0 10 20 30 40

100 0 0 0 0

0 0 0 0 100

20 20 20 20 20

30 15 10 15 30

One big math problem

Mail Email Phone Email 2 Cookie Ad Donation

$100

3/18/14* 3/27/14 4/1/14 4/3/14 3/18-4/12/14 4/10/14

Recency (Tiered)

Attribution

Allocation

based on 1 month shortened timeframe

• Drop date*, not in home



$100

3/18/14* 3/27/14 4/1/14 4/3/14 3/18-4/12/14 4/10/14

Recency (Tiered) 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 1 3.6

Attribution

Allocation




$100

3/18/14* 3/27/14 4/1/14 4/3/14 3/18-4/12/14 4/10/14

Recency (Tiered) 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 1 3.6

Attribution 13.9% 16.7% 19.4% 22.2% 27.8%

Allocation $13.90 $16.70 $19.40 $22.20 $27.80 $100







$100

3/18/13* 3/27/13 4/1/13 4/3/13 3/18-4/12/13 4/10/13

Recency (Tiered) 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 1 3.6

Attribution 13.9% 16.7% 19.4% 22.2% 27.8%

Allocation $13.90 $16.70 $19.40 $22.20 $27.80 $100


This example does not take into account differences in Channel responsiveness

Control Groups No Touch – randomly selected targets withheld from all direct touches

Single Touch – randomly selected targets given a single touchpoint (i.e. mail, email, Facebook Custom Audiences, Cookie Matches, phone)

Bucket Test Multi Touch – combination touchpoints (i.e. mail and email) to test if effects are additive versus multiplicative compared to the control

*For best results, no other correspondence should be

directed to these audiences for 60 days after the touches!

Controlled Experiment

Channel Weights

Mail Email Phone Cookie Ad

Single Touch Response Rates 1.25% 0.4% 8% 0.1%

Control (organic) 0.09% 0.09% 0.09% 0.09%

Difference* 1.16% 0.31% 7.91% 0.01%

Weight 0.49 0.13 3.37 0.004

*collective average difference 2.35%

Email Ads Direct Mail

Tele- marketing


$100

3/18/13* 3/27/2013 4/1/2013 4/3/2013 3/18-4/12/13 4/10/2013

Recency 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 1

Channel Weight 0.49 0.13 3.37 0.13 0.004

Adjusted Weighting 0.99 0.73 4.07 0.93 1.004 7.724

Adjusted Attribution 12.82% 9.45% 52.69% 12.04% 13.00%

Allocation $12.82 $9.45 $52.69 $12.04 $13.00 $100

Putting it all together

Mail Email Phone Email 2 Cookie Ad

Last Touch – – – – $100.00

Fractional Allocation $13.90 $16.70 $19.40 $22.20 $27.80

Weighted Allocation $12.82 $9.45 $52.69 $12.04 $13.00

Our 3 Examples

Moving from Theory to Practice

• Baby Steps: Walk before you Run • Select a Single Path or Path Component

• Select a Single Channel

• Take Advantage of the Tools You Have: Google Analytics

• Controlled Experiments are a Must

• Coding is Queen

Google Analytics

Google Analytic Path Reports

Customize Your GA Model

• Select your Base Model

• Select Your Lookback Period

• Select Credit for User Engagement

- Time on Site or Page Depth

• Apply Custom Rules

Source: Occam’s Razor – blog by Avinash Kaushik

Google Analytics Model Comparison Tool

Considerations

•Withholding prospects during

testing

•Some organic donations will be made no matter what

•Still need to look at campaign results “the old fashioned way”

•Will need to update model yearly as communication preferences change

•Ability to act on the information

•SPAM and digital privacy issues will make online communications tougher

•Don’t know which people are particularly channel responsive

•Additional channels complicate the equation

•Need a sophisticated data warehouse and tracking system in place

Thank you! Questions and/or comments?

www.cdrfg.com 301-858-1500

data & attribution in a multi-channel...

Documents