Marketing does so many things though and does them so differently at different companies. How do we put all that into a framework that makes sense to CMOs – our target audience?
Luckily, many clever people have thought about that before.
The Strategic Marketing Framework presented on MindofMarketing.net (see below) was one of many frameworks that seemed especially appropriate for a CMO audience. It should serve as a great starting point.
It’s just beautiful how this framework:
There are a number of things, however, that are so strategic to digital marketing that they should be better emphasized in our framework. Namely:
While digital can’t beat traditional advertising media on reach, its unique strength is interactivity. So, let’s expand the traditional marketing mix’s classic 4 Ps: Product, price, placement, and promotion. Namely, let’s drill open promotion to show just how much is possible within that one P in digital. Let’s add the Ps that are so key to digital marketing: persuasion, permission, personalization, multiple web presences, net-promoters, etc.
Rumors of the death of advertising in the digital age are greatly exaggerated: ads are everywhere on the net. But there is an immense amount of unique know-how within each of the digital ad channels. We should call out the most important channels in the framework to do that justice.
Digital media are fantastically measurable. Optimization within a channel can sometimes even be automated. That creates the illusion that it should be almost automatic to measure overall ROI / returns across digital and allocate your investments appropriately. Not so easy! Therefore let’s add ROI measurement and optimization to the framework explicitly.
Below is the resulting strategic marketing framework with the modifications for Digital.
Does this framework do a good enough job to encapsulate all that goes into measuring and increasing ROI (with marketing initiatives and customer relationships) in digital?
Once we have the framework down, we can proceed to the next step and explore the details with the help of DigitalMarketingOne’ers from all corners of Digital.
A number of folks deserve credit for their inspiring works that went into this framework. Namely:
By the way, do you think it will be 5 or more like 10 years before all TV will be much like the Internet?
That is to say, you will turn on the tube and a big bing or google box will appear in the middle of the screen. You’ll type in “Kevin & Jim webcast” and get your multichannel marketing fix while sipping a cup of old fashioned tea.
Unless, of course, you see my PPV (pay-per-view) ad show up towards the right of your TV screen and click on it to read this blog.
Meanwhile, recommendations will appear at the bottom of the screen that are targeted to your remote control behavior.
Hopefully, something better than “Meet exciting online and offline marketers in <your city>”. 😎
These are great times for friends of business analytics. There are many telltale signs that after all these years, business analytics are still a rising star. Especially so, when it comes to advanced analytics such as predictive modeling.
In 2007 we were given the eye opening book Competing on Analytics by authors Davenport and Harris. While mostly a compilation of all the various kinds of analytics that have been used in the enterprise, its claim to fame is to motivate that analytics can be more than just rear-view mirror reporting.
Analytics can and should form the strategic basis on which companies compete.
The kind of math that Davenport and Harris find deserving of the name analytics are in fact predictive analytics, i.e. data mining and discovery of unexpected insights in data. In contrast, the kind of math used within most of today’s web analytics and business intelligence merely deserve the name reporting in Davenport and Harris’ description.
For the very first time next month, conference chair Eric Siegel and team are bringing us the Predictive Analytics World conference. The timing couldn’t be better!
Now more than ever, businesses require leadership from their analytics teams. We are all asked to do more with less. If predictive analytics are the top of the line, the kind of analytics that are most likely to form the strategic basis on which our companies can compete, then we all need to learn how, and we need to learn asasp.
In my Multichannel Marketing book I review
But most importantly, I touch on practical challenges with getting predictive analytics right.
Why attend the Predictive World Conference?
I couldn’t imagine a better opportunity than the upcoming Predictive Analytics World conference for practitioners to learn first hand how to turn the theory into practice.
My personal prediction is that the math is the least difficult part of predictive analytics.
If nothing else, modeling software can take care of the math anyway and make it user friendly to Marketers.
What is much more critical however is to know how to apply the analytics for generating business value.
Of the many things you could analyze, where do you start and how do you go about it? Rather than spending 2009 doodling in the data, here is an opportunity to make predictive analytics a work horse for your company.
Are Predictive Analytics Worthwhile?
Companies that have competed successfully on predictive analytics include for example Capital One. They used to be a tiny, peripheral player and grew to be a dominant giant by getting predictive analytics right.
Take the survey
Predictive Analytics World starts being educational even before you attend. I encourage you to take the informal survey that they just put out. It doesn’t take more than 4 minutes but it will already teach you something, namely about more business applications for predictive analytics than you ever knew. I certainly learned something.
Plus, you can request to receive a copy of the survey results once the polls are closed. Then you will really know how your peers are using predictive analytics.
Get a 15% discount on Predictive Analytics World
The Predictive Analytics World organizers were kind enough to extend a 15% discount to readers of Multichannel Marketing Metrics. Use registration code
when you get your ticket and save a big chunk of money.
Not a bad start!
So you think you know what this “online-offline” marketing thing is all about? Forgive my presumptuousness–but I bet you don’t know the half of it!
The electronic Retailer magazine published an article in the October issue that I have been burning to write for a while.
When I meet marketers from the online or the offline sides they both tend to come with ready made assumptions about the “online-offline” thing.
Yet, from having had the chance to talk to both sides, I came to realize that both camps usually fall short in their views. They can learn so much from each other.
Hope you may find the article a fun read.
I love it when metrics worlds overlap! All the time, different marketing disciplines are coming up with comparable metrics but calling them different names, unaware of each other.
Did you catch MediaPost’s article that TNS Media has released a new offering for in-store metrics? Below is an excerpt where MediaPost captures the value prop:
“Dashboard combines information about where shoppers are in a grocery store at any given time, tracking the number of seconds they spend at any display, the amount of time they spend with other products, and then overlaying it with sales information. “A display’s stopping power is a good thing when it generates a lot of purchasing, but if people are spending many seconds there and not buying, something isn’t speaking to customers properly,” he says.”
Online marketers will dig this. What TNS is offering here is to calculate a view-through metric for in-store displays.
Now, TNS will answer the question: Based on how much viewing/attention/engagement the in-store display is achieving, what is the releative sales success for the products that it is advertising? If people are buying without paying much attention to a particular store isle, the display shouldn’t get as much credit, probably. If people however pick the product out of a special display area after studying it longer on average, the display probably should get more credit. Such displays should be used in other stores of the same chain.
I could not spot whether TNS will measure the interaction with the displays by putting people into the grocery store isle, evaluating cameras, or using a panel of volunteers and something like the portable people meter. Let me know if you have more info about this.
Go multi marketing discipline aware analysts!
There is something in there that is even more alert worthy than the study that disagrees with the “Long Tail” idea. Namely, the community of Internet Marketers is criticized for talking up amongst ourselves a biased view towards business.
Ross Fadner brings this concerning warning to the point in his Media Post summary:
“He says the Long Tail theory flattered readers, who were mostly techies, into thinking that the Internet was changing everything. That group tends to have a “contemptuous” view of mass media anyway, he says, and was thusly predisposed to appreciating anything undermining its power.”
That is a bucket of ice cold water over our heads in the Internet space.
Yet another wake up call that we should take off the blinders and look at the world from multiple perspectives, not just the online perspective.
A recent post highlighted the central idea behind the book Competing on Analytics: Namely, many companies employ analytics (business intelligence) merely in a tactical role, i.e. for improving ROI, while a few others use analytics so cleverly that they become the basis of their differentiation.
Then, another post had a similar observation about the way that companies use multichannel marketing. Namely, for most companies the existence of multiple marketing/business channels is just the way things are done in their industry. Yet a few other companies are able to use channels so cleverly that they become the basis of their differentiation.
Well, given those two dimensions, analytics vs. multichannel marketing, let’s see what happens when we juxtapose both in a quadrant chart. Is there anything to be learned from companies employing both of these in either a tactical fashion or as a strategy that forms the basis of their competition?
Here we go.
In the chart below, the use of analytics, as a tactic vs. a strategy, forms the Y axis. The X axis stands for the use of multiple business channels as a mere tactic vs. as a strategic differentiator.
Let’s place some companies that we all know on this chart.
The old Blockbuster was arguably in Quadrant I, i.e. there was no differentiating use of business intelligence nor multiple channels that an outsider could spot.
In came Netflix as a competitor in Quadrant II. Netflix used the online channel as a differentiator, namely a video store that offered infinitely more choice than any Blockbuster branch ever could. Plus better terms on top.
Blockbuster countered by matching Netflix’s terms and capability for rent online / deliver by mail. But in addition Blockbuster also added the weight of their 5000+ stores into the battle. Now customers could rent online as with Netflix but also return and rent in stores on the spot. That moved Blockbuster also into Quadrant II, competing on channels.
NetFlix has an Ace up their sleeve though. Namely, as discussed in the book Competing on Analytics, Netflix is honing their analytics behind movie recommendations. The analytics for providing more relevant movie recommendations are expected to become the basis on which NetFlix will now compete with BlockBuster going forward. At the same time its online channel advantage is being matched and therefore eliminated. That moves NetFlix from Quadrant II to III.
Can either company move into Quadrant IV where they differentiate on both the basis of analytics AND the basis of channels? How?
Note that if Netflix merged with, say, Safeway, to match Blockbuster’s store channel strategy, it would not move Netflix into Quadrant IV. Rather, the store channel would become a non-differentiator for either company. Blockbuster would move back into Quadrant I while Netflix would stay in III, at least until Blockbuster can match its movie recommendations. The take away from this observation is that the Quadrant is not just determined by a company’s own actions but also those of its competitors.
So, can you think of a way that one of these companies could cross into Quadrant IV before the other one does?
For Netflix it would require a way to make use of channel advantage in a way that Blockbuster can’t immediately match. For instance, this could be to pass on to its customers the cost savings from having no brick & mortar stores to maintain.
For Blockbuster it would require a way to use analytics in a way that Netflix can’t immediately match. Maybe some kind of analytics on what is going on in their stores? For example, market basket analysis to recommend the best candy that goes with each movie? (Just kidding).
As online marketers evolve to become multichannel marketers, might their path of evolution turn out like the well known image below?
Point is: A beginning online marketer may ignore that the customers coming to her web site are often the same ones that also view her company’s TV commercials, shop in her stores, and interact with the call center. An upright walking online marketer on the other hand may look at the web site as just one out of many, many channels.
But as marketing sophistication grows, we may come to look at the online as a very special channel. Seems like whichever channel a marketing dialog begins on (say with the viewing of a TV commercial), the online channel is where hand raisers flock to for learning more, comparison shopping, maybe ordering, and maybe later registering for self-service.
The “online-only” marketer may come full circle, to become an “online-centric” marketer.
We shall see…
|The first master of multichannel marketing in this mini series was Hurol Inan. He is from the online marketing world. Next came Kevin Hillstrom whose background is from direct marketing. So, in the name of multichannel consciousness, it is high time now to pick a guru from the brand marketing world.|
Erwin Ephron is my favored guru and writer from that brand marketing world. I know Ephron only from his website EphronOnMedia.com. Watch out web analysts and direct marketers! This site is a dream come true with easy to read and understand articles that provide a glimpse into a media planners world.
Erwin Ephron is the father of modern media planning, as far as I understand. What does that mean? It means for example scheduling the frequency and intensity of advertising methodically so to drive up results. Given a budget constraint, should ads be scheduled frequently to hit viewers multiple times per week or should the budget be spread across the year so to reach as many first time viewers as possible?
Much research has been done on the topic. Ephron’s contribution seems to be especially in the area of analyzing the benefit of recency of ad exposures for driving results. He is sometimes referred to as the father of “recency planning”. Read how Ephron teaches tap to this elephant.
Media planning of course also means choosing the channels that will improve outcomes. How is it done? With analytics of course! Multichannel analytics.
Clearly Ephron’s focus across his long carreer have been the traditional offline channels, TV, radio, print, etc. These are the ones he has written about. Not a bad idea, since TV is still – today – the channel where marketers are spending the largest chunk of their budget, namely thirty to fourty percent.
Priceless Ephron moments include:
Maybe as a sign of the traditional media from which Ephron comes, his site is not a blog. But you can subscribe to his articles by email, and I highly recommend doing so.
|For these and many other excellent lessons that I learned on Ephron On Media let me humbly nominate Erwin Ephron for the Master of Multichannel Marketing award. Thank you for writing things down!||