Research Renewal

Ah, yes, it is time to talk about one of the more forgotten aspects of the marketing accountability equation – research – and the quality of research.

Let’s put this subject in context and talk a little bit about marketing accountability. Whewww… this is something we’ve talked about so, so much …. and still have such a long way to go. That’s good!!!! Keep it coming.

In my mind, the primary objective of “marketing accountability” is to improve the productivity of the entire marketing supply chain to:

• Build brand equity

• Drive short term business results

• Enhance long term performance potential

• Streamline and increase the productivity of the marketing process

• Improve the marketing decision making process across all platforms

We can dig deeper for what all of these mean in greater detail – but we’ll save that for another time. Suffice it to say, that driving marketing accountability forward advances the “capability” of the entire marketing network. Decisions get made with greater precision, improving the odds of marketing success. Net, we get a greater return on our marketing investments. That’ll bring a few grins to the CEO and CFO – don’t you think?

The ANA has fielded three marketing accountability surveys and written two white papers based on the findings of the ANA Marketing Accountability Taskforce What we found is that to advance the marketing accountability continuum, organizations need to:

• Develop and nurture the core competencies of people – so they learn how to be “accountable”

• Manage data as an asset – and use data to create a common language throughout the company

• Create and leverage metrics for understanding and profitably growing brands and sales

• Proactively plan and deploy campaigns with well developed marketing management processes

• “Standardize behavior” by improving foundation enterprise tools for data aggregation, reporting and analysis

Okay, so where does “research” fit into this equation? Well, it should fit magnificently into this framework because the foundation for marketing accountability is knowledge and information. When I think of research, that’s exactly what comes to mind.

But research seems to be in a “state of flux.” As technology has changed the “rules of the game,” I’m not sure that we are leveraging research at the speed and pace that we should be. Have we lost “respect’ for research? Perhaps. This is a tough, tough arena.

In my simplistic way, I look at two core buckets of research:

• That which is used to develop consumer insights

• That which is used to determine the effectiveness of our media assets

Bucket #1 – Consumer Insights

My sense is that whatever we used to do 5-10 years ago is far less relevant in this world of technology and marketing accountability. The amount of standardized research that consumer product companies are using seems to be varied and differentiated.

What I do appreciate is that we seem to know where to look and what information we need to improve marketing decision making. This is exemplified in the following:

• Brand valuation models have sprung up and are becoming far more sophisticated. I like the fact that we are getting greater commonality in thinking in this area. However, I feel many of them are backward looking. I believe we need more predictive modeling that will help us understand the brand impact of our marketing decisions.

• Consumer / media interaction. Project Apollo has established terrific direction in that we have a better ability to connect how consumers directly react to our marketing messages and the delivery vehicles that carry them.

• The ARF / ANA / AAAA project on “engagement” will yield some further insights on moving the analytical function from the sterile analysis of GRP delivery to a more psychological / emotional connection of marketing and the brand.

• Retail analyses are becoming more useful in understanding how point-of-purchase advertising is influencing consumer behavior – on the spot!

• Marketing and media mix modeling has given us outstanding perspectives on how marketers must budget and manage the growing array of available vehicles to advance short-term brand and revenue objectives.

Bucket #2 – Industry-wide Measurements

Are we getting the information we need from industry measurement providers – namely Nielsen, Arbitron, The Audit Bureau of Circulation and others? These are the organizations that are supposed to provide industry-wide measurements that tell us the impact of our media investments. In this day and age of technology, it is hard to understand why we do not have the granular information we need to answer to this basic question, “how many people actually had the opportunity to see my TV spot?”

I truly know and understand that there is a concerted effort across all media to try and get at these answers. But, my goodness, does it have to be so slow? We have been asking these questions for years – and the responsiveness has been far less than desired. There is an increasing level of dissatisfaction and frustration with the quality of the measurement equation across media platforms. This could be one of the reasons marketers are gravitating to those media that can provide the necessary insights through relevant and valuable measurements.

It is my belief the future role of marketing research will be wedded to the amazing data accumulating abilities of the Internet. The Internet will transform the cumbersome research function of yesteryear into an instantaneous form of marketplace feedback – one that enables marketers to continuously monitor and adjust the performance of their campaigns. It won’t be long before this happens. In fact, my expectations are that 2007 will be the year that marketing research, across all platforms, takes a major leap forward – in step with the reinvention that’s transforming every other part of our profession!

Comments

[burnley vest]

thank you for a highly thought-provoking article.

i think you are absolutely right about the internet transforming our capability to gather information. the world wide internet is a phenomenal tool...yet it is also the mother of all haystacks. and while google is very helpful in bringing a needle to the surface, it will also extract many other needles, not to mention random metallic objects, in the process.

fortunately, there are talented human beings at every company who can sift through the incoming surplus of information, distill the most relevant and helpful items, and synthesize it all for internal consumption. then, the goal you mentioned — “use[ing] data to create a common language throughout the company” — is within grasp.

but there is another rub. how to deliver this “data gospel” in a rewarding, dynamic and succinct way to the rest of the company? how can you capture and hold the attention of the internal audience?

i believe more attention and care should be paid to the internal communication of consumer intelligence and insights to ensure cross-functional alignment.

burnley vest, director
www.digprojects.com

[robbo65]

A truly Excellent Article.

Thank you very much, it was most thought provoking to bring some metric analysis to financially justify --in a rational way-- the capital allocation that marketing demands. What financial people will like is the ability for this to go towards, "de-risking" the marketing cap-ex spend -- and to see the intangible but real --intrinsic value-- that this brings to bear to the organization's various brand sub-sets which are requiring a "buy in"-- and a collaborative integrated marcom approach.

Again, many thanks.

Kindest Regards,

Robbo.