As marketers spend their communications dollars in numerous media, the need to determine the effectiveness of these expenditures becomes increasingly important. In this chapter, we discuss some reasons firms should measure the effectiveness of their IMC programs, as well as why many decide not to. We also examine how, when, and where such measurements can be conducted. While evaluative research may occur at various times throughout the promotional process (including the development stage), it is conducted specifically to assess the effects of various strategies.
Reasons to Measure Effectiveness -
1) Avoid costly mistakes - If the program is not achieving its objectives, the marketing manager needs to know so he or she can stop spending (wasting) money on it. Just as important as the out-of-pocket costs is the opportunity loss due to poor communications.
2) Evaluating alternative strategies - Companies often test alternate versions of their advertising in different cities to determine which ad communicates most effectively. They may also explore different forms of couponing.
3) Increasing the efficiency of advertising in general - Sometimes as advertisers know what they are trying to say, they expect their audience will also understand. Conducting research helps companies develop more efficient and effective communications.
4) Determining if objectives are achieved - In a well designed IMC plan, specific objectives are established. If objectives are attained, new ones need to be established in the next planning period.
Reasons not to Measure Effectiveness -
1) Cost - Perhaps the most commonly cited reason for not testing (particularly among smaller firms) is the expense. Good research can be expensive, in terms of both time and money. Many managers decide that time is critical and they must implement the program while the opportunity is available. Many believe the money spent on research could be better spent on improved production of the ad, additional media buys, and the like. However, spending more money to buy media does not remedy a poor message or substitute for an improper promotional mix.
2) Research problems - A second reason cited for not measuring effectiveness is that it is difficult to isolate the effects of promotional elements. Each variable in the marketing mix affects the success of a product or service, and thus it is often difficult to measure the contribution of each marketing element directly.
3) Disagreement on what to test - The objectives sought in the promotional program may differ by industry, by stage of the product life cycle, or even for different people within the firm.
4) The objections of creative - It has been argued by many (and denied by others) that the creative department does not want its work to be tested and many agencies are reluctant to submit their work for testing. This is sometimes true. Ad agencies’ creative departments argue that tests are not true measures of the creativity and effectiveness of ads; applying measures stifles their creativity; and the more creative the
ad, the more likely it is to be successful.
At the same time, the marketing manager is ultimately responsible for the success of the product or brand. Given the substantial sums being allocated to advertising and promotion, it is the manager’s right, and responsibility, to know how well a specific program—or a specific ad—will perform in the market.
5) Time - A final reason given for not testing is a lack of time. Managers believe they already have too much to do and just can’t get around to testing, and they don’t want to wait to get the message out because they might miss the window of opportunity. Planning might be the solution to the first problem. While many managers are overworked and time-poor, research is just too important to skip.
Conducting the Research : What to Test
Source Factors - An important question is whether the spokesperson being used is effective and how the target market will respond to him or her.
Message - Both the message and the means by which it is communicated are bases for evaluation. In some cases, the message never provided a reason for consumers to try the new product. In other instances, the message may not be strong enough to pull readers into the ad by attracting their attention or clear enough to help them evaluate the product. Sometimes the message is memorable but doesn't achieve the other goals set by management.
Media Strategies - Media decisions need to be evaluated. Research may be designed to determine which media class (for example, broadcast versus print), subclass (newspaper versus magazines), or specific vehicles (which newspapers or magazines) generate the most effective results. Another factor is the vehicle option source effect, “the differential impact that the advertising exposure will have on the same audience member if the exposure occurs in one media option rather than another.” A final factor in media decisions involves scheduling.
Budget Decisions - A number of studies have examined the effects of budget size on advertising effectiveness
and the effects of various ad expenditures on sales. Many companies have also attempted to determine whether increasing their ad budget directly increases sales.
When to Test
Virtually all test measures can be classified according to when they are conducted. Pretests are measures taken before the campaign is implemented; post-tests occur after the ad or commercial has been in the field. Some of the testing methods are as given below -
Where to Test :
The tests may take place in either laboratory or field settings. In laboratory tests, people are brought to a
particular location where they are shown ads and/or commercials. The testers either ask questions about them or measure participants’ responses by other methods—for example, pupil dilation, eye tracking, or galvanic skin response. The major advantage of the lab setting is the control it affords the researcher. The major disadvantage is the lack of realism. Perhaps the greatest effect of this lack of realism is a testing bias.A second problem with this lack of realism is that it cannot duplicate the natural viewing situation, complete
with the distractions or comforts of home.
Field tests are tests of the ad or commercial under natural viewing situations, complete with the realism of noise, distractions, and the comforts of home. Field tests take into account the effects of repetition, program content, and even the presence of competitive messages. The major disadvantage of field tests is the lack of control.
How to Test :
Our discussion of what should be tested, when, and where was general and designed to establish a basic understanding of the overall process as well as some key terms. In this section, we discuss more specifically some of the methods commonly used at each stage. First, however, it is important to establish some criteria by which to judge ads and commercials. Consider the one below :
PACT (Positioning Advertising Copy Testing)
Testing Process :
Concept Generation and Testing :
One of the more commonly used methods for concept testing is focus groups, which usually consist of 8 to 10 people in the target market for the product. Companies have tested everything from product concepts to advertising concepts using focus groups.
While focus groups continue to be a favorite of marketers, they are often overused. The methodology is attractive in that results are easily obtained, directly observable, and immediate. Avariety of issues can be examined, and consumers are free to go into depth in areas they consider important. Also, focus groups don’t require quantitative analysis. Unfortunately, many managers are uncertain about research methods that
require statistics, and focus groups, being qualitative in nature, don’t demand much skill in interpretation. Weaknesses with focus groups are shown below -
Rough Art, Copy and Commercial Testing
Rough tests must indicate how the finished commercial would perform. Some studies have demonstrated that these testing methods are reliable and the results typically correlate well with the finished ad.
Rough Testing Terminology -
Popular tests include comprehension and reaction tests and consumer juries.
1. Comprehension and reaction tests - One key concern for the advertiser is whether the ad or commercial conveys the meaning intended. The second concern is the reaction the ad generates. Obviously, the advertiser does not want an ad that evokes a negative reaction or offends someone. Comprehension and reaction tests are designed to assess these responses. There is no one standard procedure as such. Personal
interviews, group interviews, and focus groups have all been used for this purpose, and sample sizes vary according to the needs of the client; they typically range from 50 to 200 respondents.
2. Consumer juries - This method uses consumers representative of the target market to evaluate the probable success of an ad. Consumer juries may be asked to rate a selection of layouts or copy versions presented in pasteups on separate sheets.
Pretesting of Finished Ads :
Pretesting finished ads is one of the more commonly employed studies among marketing researchers and their agencies. At this stage, a finished advertisement or commercial is used; since it has not been presented to the market, changes can still be made.
Pretesting of Finished Broadcast Ads :
Physiological Measures A less common method of pretesting finished commercials involves a laboratory setting in which physiological responses are measured. These measures indicate the receiver’s involuntary
response to the ad, theoretically eliminating biases associated with the voluntary measures reviewed to this point.
1) Pupil Dilation
2) Galvanic Skin Response
3) Eye Tracking
4) Brain waves : Electroencephalographic (EEG) measures
Market Testing of Ads
PostTesting of Print Ads -
Inquiry Tests Used in both consumer and business-to-business market testing, inquiry tests are designed to measure advertising effectiveness on the basis of inquiries generated from ads appearing in various print media, often referred to as “bingo cards.” The inquiry may take the form of the number of coupons returned,
phone calls generated, or direct inquiries through reader cards. More complex methods of measuring effectiveness through inquiries may involve (1) running the ad in successive issues of the same medium, (2) running split-run tests, in which variations of the ad appear in different copies of the same newspaper or
magazine, and/or (3) running the same ad in different media. Each of these methods yields information on different aspects of the strategy. The first measures the cumulative effects of the campaign; the second examines specific elements of the ad or variations on it. The final method measures the effectiveness of the medium rather than the ad itself.
Recognition Tests Perhaps the most common posttest of print ads is the recognition method, most closely associated with Roper ASW. The Starch Ad Readership Report lets the advertiser assess the impact of an ad in a single issue of a magazine, over time, and/or across different magazines. But many researchers have criticized other aspects of the Starch recognition method (as well as other recognition measures) on the basis of problems of false claiming, interviewer sensitivities, and unreliable scores.
Recall Tests There are several tests to measure recall of print ads. These recall tests are similar to those discussed in the section on pretesting broadcast ads in that they attempt to measure recall of specific ads. In addition to having the same interviewer problems as recognition tests, recall tests have other disadvantages. The reader’s degree of involvement with the product and/or the distinctiveness of the appeals and visuals may lead to higher-than-accurate recall scores, although in general the method may lead to lower levels of recall than actually exist (an error the advertiser would be happy with). Critics contend the test is not strong enough to reflect recall accurately, so many ads may score as less effective than they really are, and advertisers may abandon or modify them needlessly.
PostTests on Broadcast Commercials -
Factors that Make or Break Tracking
Studies
juwai teer result Today
ReplyDelete