Auditing Multimedia Campaigns -ASI 2008 European Conference - Furlanetto

Auditing Multimedia Campaigns Opportunities and Threats

Paola Furlanetto Managing Director & Founding Partner A+ Advertising Audit

Copyright A+ Ad Audit 2008

Multi-media surveys. A reminder

Multi media surveys were (probably) born in 1970 in UK. 250 HW were writing on a diary products consumption together with TV and Magazines exposure

Since then, MM where conceived more as part of a bigger picture (single source, where media and products consumption were linked together ) than as a specific objective.

In brief the aim was ….

Making a Quantum Leap

MonoMedia Exposure

Multimedia Exposure and Product Consumption

Multi Media Exposure

Instead of climbing each step of the ladder

MonoMedia Exposure

Multimedia Exposure and Product Consumption

Multi Media Exposure

….”Similar leap was attempted by media auditors.”…

5

Traditional Media Auditing on Single Media (5/6 KPI’s, evaluate campaigns vs pool benchmark)

Econometric models based on multimedia campaigns

Making a Quantum Leap

Traditional Media Auditing on multi media performance

In both cases….

The aim was perfect

..but there was so much information to be gathered and consequently resources to invest

..that, at the end, the objective was seldom reached

It is therefore not unusual to…

….Find out that sometimes we are still living in the Jurassic period….

Mono-media Survey Single Media Auditing

Assessment

Reasons why

A+ is working on Media Auditing & Multimedia

3

10

Target Media Consumption

“More and more fragmented every day”

1.

11

Advertisers

“more and more interested in reaching their target

through different media/channels”

2.

12

A multimedia Survey

now available in Italy

3.

13

The GFK Eurisko Media Monitor

As those of you who have followed last Nov ASI Conference are familiar with

GFK Eurisko in Italy has been conducting since Oct 2006 a multimedia survey, called EMM –Eurisko Media Monitor-

The survey is now at its second year of test

Scientific Commettee

Advertisers Media Agencies

The Key Question is:

Q: ”Will multimedia research change Media Auditors

campaign assessment?...

15

Today’s presentation

1. Media Auditing in brief 2. EMM in brief 3. A case history :

how media audits assessment may change moving from single media to multimedia

4. Opportunities and Threats

1. Media Auditing in brief

Media Auditing in Brief

What is it A systematic, constant control activity of media costs & communication results Peculiarity Conducted by third party Institutes, having specific know how in the media planning business When it is done ex-post (at the end of FY or every quarter/six months)

Company Compared to Pool’s

Average

How Auditing Works

Pool = All campaigns addressed towards the same target

Not as expectation but in reality

Methodology

The comparison is based on parameters: - frequently used in media planning/buying

- consolidated in international auditing methodologies

4 Qualitative Parameters (media panning)

1. Effective Reach Percentage of people reached a minimum number of times (e.g. 3, 6,) 2. Position in break / in the book Percentage of pressure in qualitative positions

(e.g. first position in break or stand-alone position) 3. Affinity Concentration of target audience among overall contacts 4. Peak Time Share of advertising pressure developed by the highest audience

time bands (time bands definitions may vary according to target: late morning HWS, afternoon teens, drive time for adults ..etc)

Cost Parameter (Media Buying)

5. Net CPP

Cost of a unit of advertising pressure

The Audit Format: Template

- - - Average + + +

CPP

Reach

Peak Time

Position*

Affinity

TOT KPI

CPP on 15-34yo target – Effective Reach: 3+ - Peak Time: 19.20-23.00 – Preferred Position: First & Last

Less Competitive than the benchmark More Competitive than the benchmark

Key performance Indicators

23


- - - Average + + +

CPP

Reach

Peak Time

Position*

Affinity

TOT KPI



The Performance Scale

24


- - - Average + + +

CPP

Reach

Peak Time

Position*

Affinity

TOT KPI



25

2. GFK EURISKO Media Monitor in brief

The Sample

December)

Media with Passive Measurement

TV RADIO

+ Retailer

Media w/o Passive Measurement

PRINT WEB CINEMA MAIL

Gfk Multimedia - Meter

Microphone

Bar-code Scanner” button

“Voice” button

Red Led: “you have a message!”

Barcode Scanner

Bleu Led: meter works properly

“OK” button: show messages on display and

confirm selections

GPRS for data-transfer and to ask question in

real time

Recognizement of delayed listening

PRINT

WEB CINEMA

MAIL

TV RADIO

PRINT

EMM – METHODOLOGY

Passive measurement (TV, Radio)

Push button + CAPI

(Press, Internet, Cinema)

CAPI (GDO, Direct Mail, Outdoor)

Media Exposure

Individual CAPI Interview

CAPI Interview

Consumptions

Gfk Eurisko Multimedia – Product List

The Analysis: Software and Database

Strengths

Weaknesses

34

EMM

Strengths

Helicopter View

on Multimedia consumption and

Broad Target Net Reach

Weaknesses

Sample: 2.300 ind. / Field: 2 months a year

Do not allow detailed analysis on: - segmented target

- 12 months period campaigns -Low exposure vehicles

35

EMM

Strengths

Helicopter View



Weaknesses


does not allow detailed analysis on: - segmented target


36

EMM

Strengths

Helicopter View



Weaknesses




37

EMM

Therefore A+ conducted an experimental study

aimed at identifying possible changes in media auditing perspective. 37

Strengths

Helicopter View



Weaknesses




38

EMM

Therefore A+ conducted an experimental study

aimed at identifying possible changes in media auditing perspective.

A 2° step will take place next year Based on a wider sample and analysis base. 38

The Case History

Key Findings

The assessment of an advertiser campaign performance may shift from below the average to above the average

By switching from single media to multimedia analysis.

Our case, in a snapshot

The Advertiser must be: Active during the EMM period (Ott7 - Nov 07) On air in Radio e TV Test on Brand X, characteristics: FMCG product Target 15-34yo Investment share (90,2% tv, 9,8% radio)

The Brand “X” Campaign – Flight Overview Oct/Nov

MEDIANET NET

INVESTMENT % INV Target GRP Sales Houses

TV € 926.043 90,2% 410 RAI, MEDIASET

RADIO € 101.150 9,8% 412MANZONI, MONDADORI, NOVE NOVE, OPENSPACE,

RADIO E RETI, RDS

TOTAL € 1.027.193 100%

ADULTS 15-34yo

Media Strategy: Weights

QUALITY COST

30% 70%

NB Same Strategic weight 4 both Tv and Radio

COVERAGE AFFINITY PIB PT

50% 0% 10% 10%

COST

30% 70%

QUALITY COST

30% 70%

QUALITY COST QUALITY COST

30% 70%

QUALITY COST

30% 70%

QUALITY COST

30% 70%

QUALITY COST

TV: KPI versus Benchmark

44

TV: KPI versus Benchmark

- - - Average + + +

CGRP

Reach

Peak Time

Position*

Affinity

TOT KPI


Tv 90%

+13,9%

-2,4%

-21,3%

-30,0%

-1,4%

-2,2%

45

Radio: KPI versus Benchmark

- - - Average + + +

CGRP

Reach

Peak Time

Position*

Affinity

TOT KPI

Radio10%

+4%

+12,6%

+45,9%

-30,8%

+0,3%

+9,0%

CPP on 15-34yo target – Effective Reach: 3+ - Peak Time: 7,00-10,00 – Preferred Position: First & Single in Break

46

The Old Style but “Comfortable” Assessment

Total Advertising KPI: based on MONO MEDIA

Total KPI

Investment Share

Weighted Results

TOTAL MM KPI -1,1%

- 2,2%

90,2%

-2,0%

TV

+9,0%

9,8%

+0,9%

RADIO

48

Overall Performance – Without Multimedia

Overall Performance – With Multimedia

49


MEDIACOST COVERAGE AFFINITY PIB PT KPI % inv.

TV 13,9% -2,4% -1,4% -30,0% -21,3% -2,2% 90,2%

RADIO 4,0% 12,6% 0,3% -30,8% 45,9% 9,0% 9,8%

OVER ALL KPI WITHOUT MULTIMEDIA

12,9% -0,9% -1,3% -30,1% -14,7% -1,1% 100%

50

An up to date approach, based on MM (to be validated)

51


Overall Performance – With Multimedia


TV 13,9% -2,4% -1,4% -30,0% -21,3% -2,2% 90,2%

RADIO 4,0% 12,6% 0,3% -30,8% 45,9% 9,0% 9,8%

OVER ALL KPI WITH MULTIMEDIA

12,9% 2,1% -1,3% -30,1% -14,7% 0,4% 100%


TV 13,9% -2,4% -1,4% -30,0% -21,3% -2,2% 90,2%

RADIO 4,0% 12,6% 0,3% -30,8% 45,9% 9,0% 9,8%

OVER ALL KPI WITHOUT MULTIMEDIA

12,9% -0,9% -1,3% -30,1% -14,7% -1,1% 100%

52

In brief

Only thanks to multimedia surveys media auditing can assess the ability of improving overall net reach using different media.

.. As many of you who are familiar with media planning know … Good performance in overall reach may come from low coverage commercial, with high exclusivity level ….Which is similar to our case where A multimedia reach above the average, may results from 2 single media reach below the average.

Process

Source: Individua Media Surveys (Softwares: AGB Arianna / Mediasoft Theresold. Surveys: Auditel for TV and Audiradio for Radio) 1. Choice of the campaign to be tested

(Brand X, active in Oct/Nov 07, planning both Radio and TV) 2. Selection of reference pools for Radio and TV ( 15-34 yo) 3. Within the pools, Identification of Radio and TV reach benchmark for given # of grps

(average level for grps cluster)

4. Pinpoint, within Radio and TV pools, of benchmark’s representative flights (3.)

Source: Multimedia (Software Memis/Supernova on EMM Survey) 5. Upload of both Brand X campaign and representative flight media plans in EMM 6. Check of flights’ performance in the EMM database 7. Application of "correction factors" to EMM (in order to reduce different methodology bias

and maintain coherence between Brand X performance and TV and Radio benchmarks). 8. Validation of grps and reach results on single media (only TV, only Radio) 9. Analysis of Multimedia reach performance on both Brand X and benchmark flights 10. Comparison between brand X and benchmark flights overall net reach 11. Overall reach performance index is exported in the BRAND X KPI assessment

Traditional approach

Present Test

Q: ”Will multimedia research change Media Auditors

campaign assessment?...

A: Yes. The ability in obtaining

high level of overall net reach can be pursued

-and assessed by media auditors- only through multimedia surveys.

This ability seems to be more and more requested by major advertisers

57

Opportunities Multimedia researches

are in line with target and advertising evolution.

Threats Political barriers

and need for vehicles detailed information

(to fit the fragmented exposure within specific media)

slow down MM development.

58

Opportunities Multimedia researches

are in line with target and advertising evolution.

Threats Political barriers

and need for vehicles detailed information

(to fit the fragmented exposure within specific media)

slow down MM development.

59

The pursuit of perfection is sometimes risky…..

We think in “Matrix” terms..

60

... but we behave in the Flinstone’s way

61

Future Scenarios

Advertisers are moving towards . Total advertising expenditure control/audit . Consistent and measurable Innovation . Optimization on a multi-media level

Media Auditors should be prepared for it

Multimedia solutions are expected to: . feed advertisers need for overall optimization . match with existing in-depth single media surveys

62

Albert Einstein

…. I Never think of the future It comes soon enough”

63

Auditing Multimedia Campaigns -ASI 2008 European Conference - Furlanetto

Data & Analytics

Transcript of Auditing Multimedia Campaigns -ASI 2008 European Conference - Furlanetto