In this, the 100th year of the ANA, there are still lots of questions surrounding which 50% of advertising is “wasted”. I find that astounding. That 100 years later we’re still having this debate.
Maybe it’s because the very nature of advertising defies certainty.
Or maybe the definition of “wasted” is too broad.
Or maybe the reality is that the actual waste factor has been reduced to significantly less than 50%, but no one famous ever said that “15% of my advertising is wasted, I just don’t know which 15%.” And it wouldn’t make for a provocative PowerPoint slide even if they did.
It’s difficult to ignore the many signs of great progress we’ve made as an industry towards better understanding the financial payback of marketing and advertising. For example:
- Research techniques have improved and the frequency of application has increased to provide better perspective on how actions affect brands and demand.
- We’ve not only embraced analytical models in many categories, but have moved to 2nd and even 3rd generation tools that provide great insight.
- We’ve adopted multivariate testing and experimental design to test and iterate towards effective communication solutions.
- We’re learning to link brand investments to cash flow and asset value creation, so CFOs and CEOs can adopt more realistic expectations for payback timeframes.
All of this is very encouraging. Most of the presenters at this year’s conference included in their remarks evidence that they have been systematically improving the return they generate on their marketing spend by use of these and other techniques. So where is the remaining gap (if indeed one exists)?
First off, it seems that we’re often still applying the techniques in more of an ad-hoc than integrated manner. In other words, we appear to be analyzing this and researching that, but not actually connecting this to that in any structured way.
Second, while some of the leading companies with resources to invest in measurement are leading the charge, the majority of firms are under-resourced (not just by lack of funds, but people and management time too) to realistically push themselves further down the insight curve. In other words, the tools and techniques have been proven, but still require a substantial effort to implement and adopt.
Third, not everyone agrees with Eric Schmidt’s proclamation that “everything is measurable”. Some reject the basic premise, while others dismiss its applicability to their own very non-Google-like environments.
So what will it take to put John Wanamaker out of our misery before the 200th anniversary of the ANA?
- Training – exposing more marketing managers to more measurement techniques so they can apply their creative skills to the measurement challenge with greater confidence.
- A community-wide effort to push down the cost of more advanced measurement techniques, thereby putting them within reach of more marketing departments.
- An emphasis on “integrated measurement”. We’ve finally embraced the concept of “integrated marketing”. Now we have to apply the same philosophy to measurement. We need to do a better job of defining the questions we’re trying to answer up-front, and then architecting our measurement tools to answer the questions, instead of buying the tools and accepting whatever answers they offer while pleading poverty with respect to the remaining unanswered ones.
- We should eat a bit of our own dog food and develop external benchmarks of progress (much like we do with consumer research today). Let’s stop asking CMOs how they think their marketing teams are doing at measuring and improving payback, and work with members of the finance and academic communities to define a more objective yardstick with which we can measure real progress.
As we embark on the next 100 years, we have the wisdom, technology, and many of the tools to finally put John Wanamaker to rest. With a little concerted effort, we can close the remaining gaps to within a practical tolerance and dramatically boost marketing’s credibility in the process.
From Time’s a Wasting – for more information visit anamagazine.net.