Monday August 4th 2008

Marketers want to improve the effectiveness & ROI of their marketing investment. It's a strong working hypothesis and a good starting assumption. But the market place evidence from near & far proves that for a disturbingly large number, their preference is for the status quo of uncertainty, ignorance and "we like it the way it is"

Here's just two examples from my long collection of rejections of cost effectiveness improvement.

For the launch of our then MPMA media evaluation service in the US, all prior research proved worthwhile except in one key matter. That was the assumption that the majority of advertisers would welcome a service to help them reduce the money spent on media - whilst delivering the same reach/frequency etc, & therefore a much improved cost effectiveness. We were so wrong. The subsequent success of the endeavour came from the enterprise of the management team & entrepreneurial advertisers. This success came despite the push back from many advertisers who liked the long established relationships they enjoyed with the TV Networks & their media buyers and resented new ideas that might challenge their current unsubstantiated value claims.

At the launch of a major marketing sciences endeavour, we were plagued with marketing management who set unacceptable pre conditions on our appointment. My long time working colleague David Bridges recounts an early client skirmish. On the brink of proceeding the client commented "If there is any danger this work may prove the advertising is less effective than I currently claim, we wont' do it"

And these experiences are not confined to my inadequacies alone. For major wide scale confirmation turn to the 2008 Marketing Accountability study by the ANA (Association of National Advertisers) in the US. They found that "33% of marketing companies said there were no written goals of any kind to guide marketing strategy"

Amazingly, "less than half the companies have some kind of marketing accountability program in place"

40% said "ROI goals were formulated by the marketing department, using internal benchmarks" (Wow! Being judge and jury on your own case, rejecting external evidence, is a 100% guarantee of self - delusion marketing effectiveness)

The ANA report that "almost 100% of the marketing effectiveness metrics are backward looking" with "hardly any claiming to use forward-looking insights that guide business decisions" (Our #15 of 25 Things..  of July 21st highlighted exactly this need for built-in research operations)

Ending on a note of optimism the need for marketing cost effectiveness has never been greater. And an increased number of marketers are changing and accelerating their endeavors. And the techniques for measuring and effecting change are much more user friendly and suitable than ever before.

But if we want marketing to be recognized as a contributor to company success, a builder of shareholder value and deeper consumer satisfaction, we still have a long way to go.

I dreamed there is a fairy godmother waving her wand and granting me one wish. I closed my eyes, crossed my fingers and said "Marketers this is a serious business, please take it seriously".

For a range of commentary on advertising, media & marketing issues, John Billett's personal "Blogit with Billett" is at www.johnbillett.com (& click on "Blog" on the Home Page) or go direct to http://blog.johnbillett.com.