 
avant|marketer: You just alluded to this matter, but expand on it a bit: What sorts of new technologies are needed in order to accurately quantify the branding/awareness effects of Internet Advertising campaigns?
Nick Nyhan: The first thing to say is that this is not merely
a technology question. There is also a serious issue of trust and credibility, here. Good online ad research must come from a party the advertiser trusts and one where the data is used for research purposes only - not for marketing purposes. Now, in terms of the technology itself, there are a few approaches to getting the research done. This is more about using the best possible methodology, and being able to execute a methodologically sound system, than it is about raw technology. Speaking for Dynamic Logic, we use a control/exposed methodology that isolates the variable of online advertising from offline. But, we do so in a way that allows the advertiser to compare to offline in an apples-to-apples way. I think that enabling the marketer to make such comparisons to their offline advertising efforts is going to be critical. It helps the advertisers make smart decisions in the future, and ultimately adds value to online campaigns.
avant|marketer: Everything we are saying here is, of course, predicated on the assumption that the Internet is effective for brand building. And that, of course, is the question on every traditional advertiser’s mind these days. How effective is the Web as a brand/awareness medium?
Nick Nyhan: It is effective. But - important caveat - not in all cases.
We’ve seen brand awareness lift by 6% on average and message association by 12%, on average. That is based on our own normative database. In general, our research has shown that it’s harder to move the needle on persuasion metrics such as purchase intent and brand favorability using online advertising - but those metrics do move with increased frequency.
Also, the IAB and MSN research we have done has showed the larger formats are 3 to 6 times more effective than banners on awareness and message association, but banners still work in moving the needle on these metrics. [Editor’s Note: The Dynamic Logic site contains an array of additional original Internet Advertising effectiveness research that is clearly worth reviewing. See: http://www.dynamiclogic.com/white_papers.php]
avant|marketer: Surveys have shown that most advertisers believe that the Internet provides a lower ROI than the traditional advertising media. What’s the most cost-efficient branding/awareness medium that exists right now? Is the Internet more or less cost-efficient for branding/awareness than the traditional branding/awareness media - for instance, Television and Print?
Nick Nyhan: This is a very important question, and one that was examined recently with regards to banners specifically in a Morgan Stanley Dean Witter report. The report said: “At today’s prices, we believe banners are cost-effective in generating brand recall and brand interest but they are only a moderately effective direct marketing tool.”
The truth is, the answer to this question depends a great deal on who you are - automotive versus toothpaste. Each company must seek to develop its own norms and effectiveness benchmarks, because there are going to be significant differences in effectiveness from one company’s product to another’s due to the nature of those products.
avant|marketer: Talk, finally, about the role of content publishers, going forward, in this move toward measuring the branding/awareness impacts of Internet Advertising. Many content publishers are hearing the news that there may be a coming shift from the current direct response metrics such as CTR toward the branding/awareness metrics we have been discussing, but remain confused about what exactly to do about this. What do publishers need to do now to get on top of this shift? Should they all follow CBS MarketWatch.com’s lead and discontinue providing CTR reporting to advertisers? Is this even going far enough?
Nick Nyhan: If I were a publisher or worked for one, I would ask the boss what are we doing to accommodate the traditional advertiser. Look at the packages, look at the metrics in the measurement and reporting components, look at the stated benefits of the site. Bottom line: help the advertiser achieve their objectives and if direct-response is not part of those objectives, then you don’t need CTR. But don’t bash CTR, just put it in its appropriate place: an immediate conversion - however “conversion” is defined. And, even in cases in which a conversion is the objective, considering that 99% of ad impressions will not get clicked on, ask the advertiser if those impressions are important to them, and if that value should be realized. If so, use branding metrics as well.
|
