Brave, New Multi-Channel World – Implementing & Measuring Integrated, Multi-Channel Campaign Strategies PRESENTED BY RICHARD BECKER, PRESIDENT–TARGET ANALYTICS 10/27/12 Footer 1
AGENDA • The Marketer’s Dilemma: How to Measure Cross Channel Effectiveness • The Impact of On-line Advertising on Direct Mail Response • Use Case Review #1: International Relief Organization Targets Active & Lapsed with Gift Request #2: Animal Welfare Organization Targets Active & Lapsed with Sustainer Request • Best Practices in On-Line Advertising & Multi-Channel Marketing • Q & A 10/27/12 Footer 2
THE MARKETER’S DILEMMA: HOW TO MEASURE CROSS CHANNEL EFFECTIVENESS 10/27/12 Footer 3
ADVERTISING EFFECTIVENESS IN QUESTION GM Will Remove $10 Million Worth Of Ads From Facebook Wednesday, May 16 th – Wall Street Journal Mere days before Facebook goes public, General Motors announced that it will pull $10 million in advertising from the social media site. GM execs told the Wall Street Journal they're not getting appropriate bang for their buck from Facebook's paid ad content. 10/27/12 Footer 4
TRADITIONAL MEASUREMENT TECHNIQUES Typical On-line Advertising Results 4 clicks per 10,000 Click Thru 0.4% impressions served 1-2 conversions per 100,000 Conversion 0.005% impressions served 25 cents per $1 Return-on-Ad-Spend 0.25 : 1 spent 10/27/12 Footer 5
TRADITIONAL MODELS OF ON-LINE ADVERTISING Topic and Interest Targeting Target users from predefined interest categories, inferred from a user browsing history Keyword Contextual Targeting Use keywords to find web pages for your ads across your ad network Remarketing / Retargeting Target ads to people who have previously visited your website as they browse other web sites Self Reported Data Targeting Target ads based on information volunteered by the user via a membership form or user profile Location Based Targeting Target ads based on a user’s geographic location Demographic Targeting Target ads based on a user’s estimated age, income, gender, etc. 10/27/12 Footer 6
LIMITATIONS OF TRADITIONAL ON-LINE ADVERTISING Key Limitations Advertising based on inferences of affinity, interest, and capacity, not previous philanthropic behavior or organizational affinity Advertising is delivered to unknown recipients , limiting the ability to measure its effectiveness on stimulating other on-line and off-line channels Advertising is centered on the on-line actions of web users, such as previously visiting your website, a very limited perspective that does not account for previous philanthropic related behavior or affinity 10/27/12 Footer 7
THE IMPACT OF ON-LINE ADVERTISING ON DIRECT MAIL RESPONSE 10/27/12 Footer 8
MOVING TO TARGETED ADVERTISING • Targeting moves from “Where they are on-line” to “Who they are.” You no longer have to rely on inferences or demographic profiling to determine who received advertising. Now, you can target prospects based on philanthropic behavior driven predictive modeling. • Target the same prospects on-line as you do off-line. Reinforce your brand with the same prospects you are mailing, telemarketing, or targeting with other 1:1 marketing channels. Create response lift across all channels by using true integrated, multi-channel marketing. • Measure on-line advertising effectiveness. Understand exactly how brand impressions on-line affect donor behavior across all solicitation channels. For example, measure how brand impressions on-line lift direct mail performance. 10/27/12 Footer 9
HOW IT WORKS - CONCEPTUAL • Your Active Donor File • Your Lapsed Donor File Your Organization’s Target • Your Acquisition Marketing List Prospect List • Any List Source Consisting of Name & Postal Address • Matches Your Input List to On-line On-Line Matching Users to a Network of On-Line User Profiles • Wherever your Target Prospect Advertising Served to Your Goes on the Web, Serve Them Target Prospect Advertising 10/27/12 Footer 10
WHY IT WORKS Reinforcing the brand to build awareness, favorability, and consideration is often overlooked Direct Marketer focus is focused on the transaction 10/27/12 Footer 11
USE CASE REVIEW 10/27/12 Footer 12
USE CASE #1 - INTRODUCTION Client • International Relief Organization Campaign Objective • Complement direct mail campaign targeting active & lapsed donors with on-line display advertising, serving direct mail recipients advertising impressions during 3 month direct marketing campaign • Improve overall campaign response and donations as a result of on-line advertising • Realize a minimum 1:1 return on advertising spend (ROAS) Campaign Scope # of Household Records – Mail File 1,006,374 Campaign Duration 3 Months Campaign Timing October 3, 2011 – December 31, 2011 Digital Campaign Spend $50,207 Cost per Thousand Impressions $9.60 10/27/12 Footer 13
USE CASE #1 – BRAND EXPOSURE Brand Exposure Total Mail File - # of Households 1,006,374 Total # of Households with Cookies 518,402 % of Mail File with Cookies 51.5% Total # of Households Served Ads During Campaign 183,160 % of Mail File Served Ads 18.2% % of Mail File with Cookies Served Ads 35.3% # of Ads Served 5,229,916 Average Number of Ad Impressions Per Household 28.6 Average Number of Ad Impressions Per Household Per Month 9.5 183,160 Households were delivered 5,229,916 Ad Impressions Over 3 Months 10/27/12 Footer 14
USE CASE #1 – ON-LINE PERFORMANCE Click Thru & Click View Activity Total # of Households Served Ads During Campaign 183,160 # of Ads Served 5,229,916 Total Unique Households with Click Thru 2,003 Households with Click Thru as a Percent of Total Households Served Ads 1.09% Click Thru Based Conversions 16 Conversion % (Click Thru Based Conversions as a Percent of Total Click Thru) 0.8% Click Thru Based Revenue $1,244 View Based Conversions 644 Conversion % (View Based Conversion as a Percent of HH Served Ads) 0.4% View Based Revenue $93,091 On-Line Only Activity Associated with Connection360 produced 660 donors and $94,335 in donations, yielding an “On-Line Only” Return on Ad Spend of 2:1 10/27/12 Footer 15
USE CASE #1 – TOTAL CAMPAIGN LIFT Test vs. Control – Affect of Advertising on All Channels Control Test Lift Cookie No Ad Served Cookie Ad Served Unique Households 183,160 183,160 - Total Conversions 12,999 16,642 3,643 Total Revenue $906,729 $1,165,136 $258,407 Total Conversion Rate 7.10% 9.09% 28.0% $ Per Household $4.95 $6.36 28.5% Average Gift Per Donor $69.75 $70.01 0.4% Total Activity Associated with Connection360 produced 3,643 donors and $258,407 in donations, yielding an Total Return on Ad Spend of 5:1 10/27/12 Footer 16
USE CASE #1 – PERFORMANCE SUMMARY Return on ad spend of 5:1 . $258,000 Return on AD $50,207 cost against Spend Incremental Revenue $258,000 in incremental (ROAS ) $50,207 revenue 5:1 ROAS Ad Spend Response rates were 28% 9.09% Response higher for those that were Test Group: Rate Digital Ads Served served banner ads than the 7.10% control +28% Control Group: No Digital Ads The $69 average donation was $6.36 $ per comparable between test and Test Group: Household Digital Ads Served control; $$ per HH was 29% $4.94 higher for the test group +29% Control Group: No Digital Ads 10/27/12 Footer 17
USE CASE #2 - INTRODUCTION Client • Animal Welfare Campaign Objective • Complement direct mail campaign with on-line display advertising, serving direct mail recipients advertising impressions during 3 month direct marketing campaign • Improve overall campaign response and donations (and specifically optimize sustainer donations) as a result of on-line advertising • Realize a minimum 1:1 return on advertising spend (ROAS) Campaign Scope 1,399,508 # of Household Records – Mail File 3 Months Campaign Duration December 20, 2011-March 12, 2012 Campaign Timing $75,756 Digital Campaign Spend $9.00 Cost per Thousand Impressions 10/27/12 Footer 18
USE CASE #2 – BRAND EXPOSURE Brand Exposure Total Initial Mail File 1,399,508 Total # of Targetable Households after DLX match 1,343,963 Total # of Targetable Households with Cookies 867,695 % of Targetable Households with Cookies 65% Total # of Households Served Ads During Campaign 306,027 % of Targetable Households Served Ads 23% % of Targetable Households with Cookies Served Ads 35% # of Ads Served 8,417,329 Average Number of Ad Impressions Per Household 27.5 Average Number of Ad Impressions Per Household Per Month 9 306,027 Households were delivered 8,417,329 Ad Impressions Over 3 Months 10/27/12 Footer 19
USE CASE #2 – TOTAL CAMPAIGN LIFT Test vs. Control – Affect of Advertising on All Channels Test Gift Type Conversions % Conversions Avg. Donation 12 Month Value Total Revenue One-Time 15,895 89.6% $38 $38 $605,067 Sustainer 1,799 10.1% $30 $362 $651,124 Other 41 0.2% $27 $27 $1,113 Total 17,735 $1,257,303 Control Gift Type Conversions % Conversions Avg. Donation 12 Month Value Total Revenue One-Time 15,181 91% $38 $38 $577,874 Sustainer 1,478 8.9% $30 $362 $534,972 Other 30 0.2% $27 $27 $822 Total 16,689 $1,113,667 Total Activity Associated with Connection360 produced 321 additional sustainer donors and $143,636 in donations, yielding an Total Return on Ad Spend of 2:1 10/27/12 Footer 20
Recommend
More recommend
