Use LEFT and RIGHT arrow keys to navigate between flashcards;
Use UP and DOWN arrow keys to flip the card;
H to show hint;
A reads text to speech;
10 Cards in this Set
- Front
- Back
|
The 3 phases of evaluation |
Strategic development - planning - defining the problem/product/consumer/competitor Campaign development - pretesting/in-market testing - refining message/channels before/during implementation Evaluation - post-campaign evaluation - evaluating campaign against its objectives and ROI |
|
|
The importance of measurement |
For: - avoid costly mistakes - need to know if not meeting objectives so can stop wasting money/losing potential gain - can evaluate multiple strategies and decide, inarguably, which will be most effective - increases efficiency of IMC by fine-tuning messages to develop more efficient/effective communication - can determine if objectives are achieved, modifying if not to obtain desired effects Against: - costly in terms of both time/money - could be better spent on ad/media - research methodology problems - often difficult to measure the contribution of each communication element directly - Disagremeent on what to test dependent on different objectives e.g. sales manager vs. top management vs. creatives - Objections from creatives - argue tests not true measures of creativity/effectiveness and stifle their creativity - Time-delay - don't want to miss window in market |
|
|
What to test (usually dependent on objectives) |
Source Factors - source of marketing communication - is spokesperson effective & eliciting response from target market - is he a credible source of message? Message Variables - both the message and means by which it is communicated - strong enough to attract attention? clear enough to help evaluation? memorable? Media Strategies - determine which media class/vehicles generate the most effective results - differential impact of the media vs. another - identify opportunities for scheduling Budgeting decisions - effect of budget size on communication effectiveness - effect of various ad expenditure on sales |
|
|
When to test |
Pretesting - can identify specific shortcomings and make changes to enhance effectiveness - can identify winners and eliminate bad ads - important to know probable effect ad will have before committing to its use - low cost of changes based on feedback vs. lower accuracy of feedback on early-stage ads Posttesting - designed to determine if campaign is achieving objectives & input into next campaign planning |
|
|
Where to test |
Laboratory - provides control: can manipulate changes inexpensively and measure differential impact of each - lack of realism: testing bias as people scrutinise ads more than they would naturally - fails to duplicate natural viewing environment Field Tests - tests in natural viewing environment - takes into account effects of repetition/program content/presence of competitive messages - however lack of control: hard to isolate causes of consumers' evaluations, more time consuming/expensive Online - faciliated by recording and analysing usage patterns (e.g. ad clicks/views/numbers of visitor) - online panels can perform same testing functions as lab/field but quicker/cheaper - social listening to blogs/communities etc. |
|
|
Concept generation research |
Conducted very early in campaign development process to explore target consumers' response to potential ad or evaluate alternatives - may include: - evaluating material by just a headline/rough sketch of ad - focus groups (however results not quantifiable, small sample size, group influences may bias responses, one or two may dominate discussion) - mall intercepts - approach consumers in shopping centers and ask to evaluate adcopy - over internet (thanks to new technology) |
|
|
Rough, prefinished art/copy/advert testing |
Used to refine concepts at early stage to avoid money wastage on ad production 3 categories: animatic rough (still frames of drawings with simulated movement), photomatic rough (still frames of photographs with simulated movement), live-action rough (low-budget mockup) May include comprehension/reaction tests or consumer juries (consumers representative of target market evaluate probable success of idea) Issues: - consumer may become self-appointed expert (overly critical) - limited number of ads can be evaluated before tedium (effects usefulness of feedback RE middle ads) - possible halo effect (rate good on all aspects because a few are liked) - personal preferences may shadow objectivity |
|
|
Finished art/advert pretesting |
Conducted so can make any final changes/refinements - information more reliable as consumers exposed to something so close to finished ad
Print messages: - portfolio tests - expose respondents to control and test print ads, then test recall - however other factors e.g. saliency may influence recall, and recall may not be best test (recognition better for low-involvement products) - readability tests - tests communication efficiency of copy in a print ad using Flesch Formula, and can also consider human interest appeal - eliminates many biases however tests format more than content (creativity) - dummy advertising vehicles - interviews to determine response to ads placed in dummy magazines in terms of recall/interest-generation - provides a more natural setting than portfolio test, but shares same disadvantages Digital ads: - theatre tests - consumers view ads in theatre setting and evaluate on variety of dimensions (e.g. changes in preferences/reaction/recall/brand interest) - provides control but artificial environment and bias effect of group influence - on-air tests - insert ads into actual tv programs in specific test markets - concerns regarding specific measures taken (day-after recall scores found to be unreliable/invalid) - physiological measures - measure receiver's involuntary responses to ad (avoid biases) e.g. pupil dilation/eye tracking/galvanic skin response |
|
|
Market testing of adverts (post-testing) |
Conducted to establish effect of communication in marketplace - to validate pretests conducted on smaller samples Print ads: - inquiry tests - number of inquiries generated - limited by weaknesses in methodology (e.g. may not be true measure of attention-getting/information-providing) - recognition tests - determine recognition/aided recall - vulnerable to false-claiming, interview biases and reliability of recognition scores - recall tests - designed to measure advertising recall through interviews - vulnerable to interview biases and respondent involvement in product Broadcast/digital ads: - day-after recall tests - realistic as field test, and can now measure additional metrics - but limited samples, high costs, risk of exposure to competitors and may favour unemotional appeals with respondents asked to verbalise message - persuasive measures - take brand preference before/after ad viewed - diagnostics - measures designed to determine evaluations of ad (how clearly creative idea understood, rational/emotional reaction etc.) - test marketing - testing ads in specific test markets before wider release - provides realism but at high time/monetary cost and risk of exposure to competition - single-source tracking studies - track behaviour of consumers from tv to supermarket checkout counter - high control, and can directly measure impact on sales - however focus too narrow on short-term sales, high cost - tracking print/digital ads - assess effects on awareness/recall/interest/attitudes towards ad and purchase intention - capacity to tailor to specific campaign/situation and to determine effects of each medium, and highly reliable/valid - however potential for many external influencers |
|
|
The need for further measurement in IMC |
Agencies - need to make communications as effective as possible Media - need to prove value of medium Advertiser - need to justify communications expenditure All - need for all media measurement to speak common currency |
