Effectiveness in a changing media landscape

Previous research and this

• How has the changing media landscape modified earlier media observations?

• Part 1 of 4

• 500 for profit cases, 120 in 2014/16

Penetration is still the main driver of success

0.9

1.8 1.9

0.0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1.0

1.2

1.4

1.6

1.8

2.0

Existing customerpurchasing only

New customeracquisition only

Both

nu

mb

er

of

oth

er

very

larg

e

bu

sin

ess e

ffects

rep

ort

ed

Very large effect observed on:Base: 2014-16 cases

So reach is still vital

Cinema

Subscriber VoD

Internet at work

Online video

Messaging

Shopping online

Search Newsbrands

Social media Other online

TextingEmail

Radio Broadcast TVTotal video

OOH

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 3.5 4.0 4.5

We

ekl

y re

ach

%

Average daily hoursSource: IPA Touchpoints UK 2016

TV has become more effective

27%

40%

0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

25%

30%

35%

40%

45%

1998-2006 2008-2016

% in

cre

ase

in a

vg. n

o. V

L b

usi

ne

ss e

ffe

cts

fro

m a

dd

ing

TV is best for market share growth

1.1%

2.1%

2.6%

0.0%

0.5%

1.0%

1.5%

2.0%

2.5%

3.0%

No TV DRTV TV ads

Avg

. mar

ket

shar

e p

oin

ts

gain

ed

pe

r an

nu

m

Base: 2012-16 cases

VoD makes TV more effective

27%

36%

0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

25%

30%

35%

40%

TV without VoD TV with VoD

Incr

eas

e in

avg

. no

. of

VL

bu

sin

ess

eff

ect

s fr

om

ad

din

g

Base: 2014-16 cases

Online video makes TV more effective

25%

32%

54%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

Online video only TV only Both

% in

cre

ase

in a

vg. n

o. V

L b

usi

ne

ss e

ffe

cts

fro

m a

dd

ing

Base: 2014-16 cases

Effectiveness has fallen

1.0

1.1

1.2

1.3

1.4

1.5

1.6

1.7

1.8

1.9

2.0

2006 2008 2010 2012 2014 2016

Nu

mb

er

of

very

larg

e b

usi

ne

ss

effe

cts

10 years ending

Sale

s u

plif

t o

ver

bas

e

TimeSource: Binet & Field 2013

The deception of short-termism

Sales activationShort term sales uplifts

Brand buildingLong term sales growth

Short term effects dominate ~6 months

Short-termism in action

5248

Short-termChannelshare forbrand-buildingobjectives

Channelshare foractivationobjectives

62

38

Long-term

Short-termism in action

38

62

Short-term

Video-based

Non-video

58

42

Long-term

Short-termism has been rising

0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

25%

30%

2006 2008 2010 2012 2014 2016

% c

ase

s sh

ort

-te

rm

10 years ending

Reducing ESOV boosts ROI

312%

386%

0%

50%

100%

150%

200%

250%

300%

350%

400%

450%

ESOV > median ESOV < median

Ave

rag

e R

OI

Larger budgets Smaller budgets

ESOV has been falling

0%

2%

4%

6%

8%

10%

12%

14%

16%

2006 2008 2010 2012 2014 2016

Ave

ESO

V

10 years ending

ESOV all

ESOV long cases

ESOV is getting more important

6%

12%

0%

2%

4%

6%

8%

10%

12%

14%

1998-2006 2008-2016

% g

row

th e

pxl

ain

ed

by

shar

e o

f vo

ice

alo

ne

Even long cases have lost efficiency

0.0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1.0

1.2

2006 2008 2010 2012 2014 2016

SOV

Eff

icie

ncy

(ca

ses

> 6

m)

10 years ending

Balancing brand and activation for best success

62

38

Very large share growth casesChannel share forbrand-buildingobjectives

Channel share foractivationobjectives

64

36

Most efficient cases

Base: 2016 cases

5842

Strongest brand-building cases

64

36

Very large profit growth cases

Activation levels have exceeded optimum

31%

47%

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

50

2014 2016

Ave

rage

% o

f co

mm

sb

ud

get

spe

nt

on

act

ivat

ion

Case study year

Summary1. Penetration, not loyalty, is still the main driver of brand growth.

2. So broad reach media are still crucial for effectiveness.

3. Share of voice is more important than ever.

4. Video is the most powerful medium for long term success.

5. TV, VoD & online video work together to boost effectiveness.

6. So effectiveness should still be growing across the board - but it isn’t.

7. Short-termism and an excessive focus on ROI are partly to blame.

8. They encourage lower share of voice levels, but efficiency has fallen too.

9. They also lead to a focus on activation rather than brand-building.

10. Budget allocations are now activation over-weight, and are sub-optimal.

Conclusions• Marketers need to return to a more balanced

perspective on long vs. short term objectives.• The activation/brand-building pendulum has swung

too far towards activation.• Dial up brand-building instead of activation, especially

with newer channels. Value video over non-video.• Design campaigns and evaluation for long-term effects• Monitor and restore ESOV – the link with growth is

getting stronger.Thank you