It's Time For Industry To Change The Way TV Is Measured

 

• by Dave Morgan, November 20, 2014, 5:35 PM

It may seem a bit like piling on, but I think that it’s finally time for the TV industry to change the way audience and ads are measured, bought and sold. Its measurement is broken and needs to be fixed. Just this past week, quite uncharacteristically, even Nielsen made a case for fixing things. In a post in MediaDailyNews, Megan Clarken, Nielsen’s EVP, Global Watch Product Leadership, delineated the failures of existing measurement protocols to keep pace with consumer changes. She concluded with a call for new measurements:

“We believe that the fundamental changes occurring in today’s viewing landscape call for the industry to adopt a new set of ratings standards:
1. Total Audience, which combines the total audience for a program or content regardless of the mode of access, including SVOD.
2. Total Commercial, which includes ratings for the ad campaign regardless of where and how it’s consumed, providing flexibility for dynamic ad insertion.”

Nielsen executives have long talked about the fact that they are the only custodians of measurements (TV’s C3/C& Ratings) owned and controlled by the TV media industry that transacts on them. So it was quite surprising to see Nielsen step up so publicly with a call to media owners to change the ratings. However, given everything that is going on in the broader video/media business today -- from massive audience fragmentation, to the rise of subscriber online services, to mobile and tablet viewing -- it’s clear that change is needed.

Personally, I like the holistic approach of Nielsen’s proposed framework and hope that the industry takes steps to move it forward. However, I also hope that the industry goes further. As I’ve written before, I believe that it is critical for the media industry to transact not only on “media outputs,” but to also measure and deliver against specific “business outcomes.”

For media to survive and thrive in the commercial communication mix, it needs to be self-evidently valuable not only to advertisers’ heads of media, but to their chief marketing officers,  CFOs, COOs, and CEOs, as well as boards and shareholders. Those folks don’t care about GRPs and sex/age demos and “viewable impressions.” They care about real business outcomes, like sales.

While Clarken is 100% correct that our industry needs to bring new, holistic, modern approaches to creating ratings and measuring commercial exposures, we also need to link those media impressions to their ultimate business impacts. I hope that we move both reach and reaction metrics forward in parallel. What do you think?

FCC Postpones Vote On Net Neutrality Until Next Year

By Wendy Davis Thursday, Nov. 20, 2014

To the disappointment of net neutrality advocates, it looks like the Federal Communications Commission will put off a decision on net neutrality until at least next year. The agency's tentative agenda for its Dec. 11 meeting, released this afternoon, doesn't include a vote on open Internet rules. FCC Chairman Tom Wheeler initially said that he hoped to issue new open Internet rules by the end of the year. But last week, after President Barack Obama publicly urged the FCC to reclassify broadband as a utility service, Wheeler indicated the agency would need additional time to consider the legal  questions posed by reclassifying broadband. “The more deeply we examined the issues around the various legal options, the more it has become plain that there is more work to do,” Wheeler said last week in a statement. That stance appears to mark a setback for net neutrality advocates, who are pressing the FCC to forge ahead with rules this year, while momentum seems to favor treating broadband as a utility. "The FCC should have all of the information and motivation it needs to make the right decision and protect Internet users by reclassifying broadband providers as common carriers,” Free Press President and CEO Craig Aaron said Thursday in a statement. The FCC has struggled for years to craft neutrality rules that will hold up in court. In 2005, the agency issued open Internet principles, which said that consumers were entitled to access the content and applications of their choice. Several years later, the agency sanctioned Comcast for violating those principles by throttling peer-to-peer traffic. Comcast challenged that move, and an appellate court vacated the FCC's ruling on the ground that principles -- unlike regulations -- aren't enforceable. The agency tried again to enact neutrality rules in 2010, when it passed regulations that prohibited wireline providers from blocking, degrading or unreasonably discriminating against content, services and apps. Those regulations essentially subjected Internet service providers to the same kinds of common-carrier rules that require telephone companies to put through all calls. But earlier this year, an appellate court ruled that the FCC lacked authority to impose common-carrier regulations on ISPs, given that broadband is classified as an “information” service, as opposed to a “telecommunications” service. Given the prior court history, advocates say that the FCC must reclassify broadband as an information service in order to pass enforceable rules. Wheeler, however, hasn't so far shown an inclination to proceed that way. Earlier this year, he proposed issuing new regulations without first recategorizing broadband. Those rules -- which proved highly controversial -- would have allowed ISPs to charge companies higher rates for speedy delivery of their material. Almost 4 million people commented on that proposal, with many of them voicing opposition to Wheeler's plan. The FCC can still revise its agenda until Dec. 4. But if the agency doesn't vote on net neutrality at its meeting next month, the next opportunity won't be until Jan. 29, 2015.

Bad Practices From The Front Lines Of Sales

Wednesday, Nov. 19, 2014
By Cory Treffiletti

“It was the best of times, it was the worst of times" -- for salespeople.  I should actually rephrase that to “they were the best of tactics, they were the worst of tactics,” because there are some pretty poor tactics employed by salespeople these days, which is funny given all the tools and insights available to them.  

 

The ability to create qualified leads -- either through outbound calls, emails or inbound lead management -- has become a science, but even that science still employs some artful tactics that are sometimes completely disregarded.  What you say to a prospect is just as important as who you say it to.  Knowing your audience and knowing their top challenges so your solution can align with one or more of them will ensure you are successful.  Ignoring those kinds of pre-qualifications simply leads to some awkward and obviously silly interactions.

 

For example, my favorite sales faux-pas these days is when I get an email from a seller that starts with “I left you a voicemail yesterday and wanted to follow up.”  That’s a lie and I know it.  I don’t have a desk line and haven’t had one for almost nine years.  I operate with 2 cellphones, one for work and one for personal calls.  It’s easy to see who has called and left a message and who hasn’t, and I know for a fact it wasn’t whoever sent that email.  This is a simple tactic cold callers take to send email en masse and not have to pick up the phone. They try to guilt you into responding by making you feel like you forgot to check your voicemail.  Sorry -- it doesn’t work.

Another great example: I get emails asking me about whether I would be interested in “buying an email list of x, y or z targets.”  My favorites are the ones who ask me if I am interested in buying a list of the “top 150,000 customers for Oracle software.”   I work for Oracle, so I'm pretty sure I can get that list easier than you can!  When you send out a cold call email, at least de-dupe the list against the recipient and content and don’t try to sell me my own customer list.  Doing this ensures I will never do business with you -- pretty much ever.

 

I also love it when salespeople actually get me on the phone (maybe they did their homework and actually got the right number) and start going on and on about the product they want to sell me, but they never stop to ask me if I'm the decision-maker for that product.  I get people trying to sell me everything from hardware to events catering -- and yet when I try to explain that I have no involvement with those purchase decisions, salespeople persist in at least trying to send me more info.  Their quota of outbound emails for the week obviously hasn’t been met and they are desperate.  I try to be nice, but at some point I have to cut them off. 

 

Sales-qualified and media-qualified leads are where outbound communications should begin.  Content development aligned with marketing automation creates a very viable, very scalable solution for pipeline growth. 

 

If you are employing a cold call or cold email strategy, at least align the content with vertical messages that have been researched and tested to ensure they align with the needs of that customer, and try your best to ensure you’ve acquired the right contact when reaching out.  If you can demonstrate at least some knowledge about my challenges before the “ask,” I am willing to give you some attention vs. the communications that are clearly bucketed into large groups.  I realize there is a numbers game to be worked, but as with everything else in our business, personalization drives performance -- so spend the extra time and do the extra work.  The payoff will more than exceed the investment.

 

Data is your friend, and pre-qualification ID your most important tool. Leverage this wherever you can.  Help us stop these horror stories from happening again

Maybe Radio Does Have A Sales Problem

RADIO INK

by Wayne Ens
November 18, 2014
In a recent Radio Ink article, Editor Ed Ryan wrote “With 242 million people listening, and radio revenue only growing slightly, maybe our problem is a sales problem. But that's an entirely different article.” This is that article. With that simple statement, Mr Ryan has hit the nail on the head! (Einstein said “Genius is making the complicated look simple”).

As I work with stations across the continent, I’m embarrassed by the calibre of most of the local sales people and local sales efforts I witness. Virtually every big business started as a small local business. If these small local businesses grow without radio as a key component to their success, they almost certainly are not going to put radio at the top of their list when they become ‘national’ accounts.
I could have written a series of incredulous articles about the pitiful radio sales efforts I’ve witnessed in the past few months alone. Let’s start at the top, with management. Ed Ryan’s article said “It sounds like radio is sold out all the time just from the volume of spots we're now airing. But is every radio station getting top dollar for those spots?” The answer is a resounding ‘no”. Weak sales people have found it easier to sell even weaker managers on a low rate than it is to sell an advertiser on the right rate.

And then there is the misguided manager who wears being ‘sold out’ like a badge of honor. Being sold out simply means you’ve cluttered your airwaves, driven away audience, undersold your station, and invariably turned away good money for bad. Many of the independent broadcasters have promoted their best sales people to sales managers, with no management training whatsoever, as if the skill sets for management was the same as for sales. This is a double-edged sword because we’ve taken a good salesperson off of the street, and created a bad manager for the rest of our sales people.
At the other end of the scale, the big conglomerates have their managers slaving over forecasts, spread sheets and reports to justify their existence rather applying their talents to growing revenues! And then there some who deliberately cut the throat of the radio brothers. In one market recently we uncovered a broadcast group that would offer a discount to any advertiser who promised not to buy any other local radio stations. In another market, the sales manager sent out a fax and email blast over her signature with a “Make me An Offer” sale!

Assuming management is also in charge of marketing, where are the radio marketing initiatives? Check out most radio station websites and you wouldn’t even know we sell advertising for a living, let alone find a way to make it easy for prospective buyers to invest in radio. We have such little faith in our own medium that I seldom hear on air messages promoting the power of radio advertising….let’s just fill those spots with crappy bonuses instead.

The bulk of our ‘educational’ radio advertising seminars  are merely glorified package sales presentations, and every station’s claim to be number one makes us all look like liars. In most markets, our remuneration systems result in the top local used car salesperson making more money than our top radio sales person. Hello!  Used car salespeople sell to pre-qualified prospects who come onto their lots looking for a car.  Our sales people have to go into the market searching for prospects and have the harder task of persuading businesses with shrinking margins and tight budgets to spend more on ‘an intangible.’

Now on to our front-line marketers….those sales ‘professionals’ with whom we expect advertisers to entrust huge sums of cash. Take a look at the way they package and present themselves. You would expect someone in advertising to understand a little about branding. But I see radio sales people driving old beat-up cars, showing up in jeans and sweat shirts, trying to convince already-successful business owners that they can make them more successful.

And that’s just the packaging. Branding goes beyond superficial packaging and walking the talk. Many radio sales people don’t understand how to create successful campaigns for their clients. Their answer to increasing their clients’ sales is simply ‘buy more spots.’In some markets I even see people who don’t want to be selling, hitting the streets part time to supplement their low on-air salaries. How passionate and professional are most of these desperate soles?

Our survey of 540 business owners makes it clear that the number one reason business owners advertise is “to increase sales.” Yet 86% of the radio presentations we audit talk about format, signal, rankers and personalities as if those things matter, with no mention what-so-ever of how the proposal will help the advertiser increase sales. That same survey revealed the average business decision maker hears from sixteen vendors a week, from customer relations management software sales people to sales trainers and advertising sales people claiming their product will increase sales.
The mall leasing manager who talks your main street retailer into cutting his advertising in favor of moving to their mall doesn’t sell cost per square foot….they sell sales per square foot. Yet radio sales people still sell cost per thousand or cost per spot instead of sales per campaign. Most radio sales people focus more on their personal monthly target than on helping the advertiser achieve their monthly targets, and then we despair at our high client attrition rates.

Much of what falls under the banner of radio sales training still revolves around old-school business-to-consumer models focusing on tactics like cold calls, handling objections and closing the sale. Modern business-to-business sales practices focus on building customer relationships and how to create results for our clients. But behind every cloud there is a silver lining. With 80-85% of radio sales efforts being pathetic, there is lots of room for progressive professional radio marketers to break from the pack and make a ton of money; for their stations and their clients.

Nielsen Calls For Industry To Adopt New Ratings Standards

Commentary

by Megan Clarken, November 14, 2014, 8:00 AM 

Over the past two years, we have seen a decline in traditional live TV ratings, first starting among younger demos. Beginning in April, that decline began to accelerate to include most demos, leading broadcast and cable networks to ask questions about their missing viewers.

These questions come at the same time we are witnessing a real-time evolution of the broadcast and cable industry. Today, consumers have more control than ever before — and media companies are being forced to adapt to the new realities of what people watch, and when they watch it.
The growing penetration of new devices and the popularity of subscription-based streaming services, time-shifted and over-the-top viewing — as well as cord-cutting and cord shaving — are fundamentally changing the TV industry.

At the same time, the industry continues to trade on C3/C7 ratings for national TV. Nielsen recently made smartphone and tablet viewing eligible for inclusion in the ratings. However, this does not solve the dilemma that the underlying industry trading metric has not kept pace with consumer behavior or the business models being adopted by today’s media companies.

The C3/C7 ratings reflect the average audience of commercials within a specific program, and are based on eligibility rules, which were originally defined and agreed upon by the industry in May 2007. These rules require that the national advertising load be the same in all versions of a program viewed within playback mode up until three or seven days, in order to get Nielsen Commercial Ratings credit. Under industry definitions, the ads cannot be changed or delivered differently to various audiences in that window. They must all be the same.

While much of the television program and ad viewing today meet that criteria, more and more video content is being viewed outside of the C3/C7 window via different devices, including connected TV technologies like Apple TV or Roku boxes, gaming consoles and digital devices, PCs, tablets and smartphones.

In many of these cases, ads are being dynamically inserted and changed from the original broadcast, which means neither the program content or the ads are being included today in the “Nielsen ratings” for traditional TV — even if Nielsen is measuring that viewing.
We believe that the decline in traditional TV ratings can be attributed to the following four factors. Of these, three are real declines and one is due to a Nielsen methodology change:

• The growing shift of audiences to time-shifted digital content, including both SVOD (subscription video on demand), such as Netflix, and digital properties distributing traditional television programming, such as Hulu. Neither of these are included in the current TV ratings under industry definitions
• Increased viewership of TV programs on devices such as tablets and smartphones, which became eligible for inclusion in Nielsen ratings this fall.
• Growing time and attention spent on newer sources of video content, such as YouTube
• The addition of broadband-only viewing to the TV ratings universe

In September 2013, at the behest of the industry, Nielsen expanded the definition of what constitutes a television household to include any home with a TV set that can receive video on that TV via a broadband source, but without a broadcast antenna or cable subscription.

This definition change artificially increased the denominator (the total number of households that our measurement represents) upon which the ratings are based. However, because much of the television video content viewed by broadband-only homes is not encoded by our Nielsen watermark, this broadband-only activity did not contribute to traditional TV viewing.

At Nielsen, our charter is to deliver comprehensive measurement — to follow consumers wherever they go, and however they view, across all platforms and devices. Today, we are measuring a wide variety of video content and advertising viewed on the TV set and on digital devices.
Our goal is to create a total measurement of all content and all ads — regardless of how they are accessed and the ad model that they’re supporting. Nielsen’s vision is to create an environment where all video content can be consistently measured with ratings for both the content and the advertising.
We believe that the fundamental changes occurring in today’s viewing landscape call for the industry to adopt a new set of ratings standards:

1. Total Audience, which combines the total audience for a program or content regardless of the mode of access, including SVOD.
2. Total Commercial, which includes ratings for the ad campaign regardless of where and how it’s consumed, providing flexibility for dynamic ad insertion.

The television industry is the custodian of the greatest professionally produced content available. But as viewers continue to shift to digital devices, competition for time and attention is intensifying.
The challenge is to retain and build audiences and to prove their value to advertisers. To do this, Nielsen is prepared to present the total picture of the consumer — one that fully reflects their viewing of all content available and delivers a proven return to our clients on their investments. Nielsen is committed to measuring the total audience.

Ways Millennial Moms Are Using Their Smartphones Smarter Than You

By Chad Haus Monday, Nov. 17, 2014

The other day, I was standing in line at Target when this child in line caught my eye — or rather, my ear. He was going bananas — yelling, screaming, grabbing just about everything in sight and heaving it to the floor. Meanwhile, his young Mom couldn’t be bothered. Instead of paying attention to the needs of her child, she had her eyes fixated on the screen of her new iPhone6, no doubt checking out how many of her fellow Millennials decided on Pumpkin Spice Lattes that morning. Or was she? Millennials are arguably more comfortable with the digital world than most of us, but their constant connection and reliance on smartphones, tablets, etc., doesn’t necessarily translate into “missing out” on life or being a bad parent either. They, too, have the around-the-clock work emails, flashing notifications, and social media profiles begging for non-stop attention. But their gravitational pull toward everything digital is being put to better use than you may think. Research shows that an overwhelming number of moms feel that technology helps them to be better moms. And there is a plethora of rhymes and reasons why these moms rely so heavily on technology to make daily life more efficient and more rewarding. Keeping Tabs on Life As mobile becomes the first screen across the board, moms are increasingly using both smartphones and tablets as mobile filing cabinets to organize and manage her life (and junior’s). From day-to-day growth monitoring and medical record-keeping, to sleep patterns, and potty training, mom can now track it all and store it in once place. For example, apps like Pull-Ups "Time to Potty" helps toddlers and parents through the potty training journey and others like "The Bump" or "Baby Connect" track things like fetal development, health information and doctor appointments. All of these help keep mom’s mind at ease and create a level of control through the daily chaos of life. They also provide a critical link to instant education and solutions to problems that any mom knows can pop up at any time. Sharing Moments We all love to share our personal views, experiences and life milestones with friends and family. And today’s Millennial moms are doing so without thinking twice — it’s the only way they’ve known. This mom is no stranger to mobile devices or social media. According to a recent study by Weber Shandwick, "Digital Women Influencers: Millennial Moms," this group has an average of 3.4 social media accounts (vs. 2.6 for moms in general). So if they’re online all the time, why not share what’s going on in their lives? Helpful site BabyCenter even reports that 92% of Millennial moms share family milestones on Facebook. It’s now the easiest and quickest way to share important pictures with everyone that matters to them. As digital natives, it’s simply their “normal.” Saving Maximizing Time There never seem to be enough hours in the day. For Millennial Moms, this is about as obvious a statement as you can make. Like most of us, they’re trying to define themselves in the world, pack in more meetings and conference calls, but on top of all that, there’s all the fun, excitement, and challenge of being a Millennial Mom. This is an instant recipe for chaos if not managed correctly. Don't worry, there’s an app for that! From list-making apps (like "Todolist" and "Google Keep") and shared family calendars to mobile shopping and subscription-based services, such as Amazon and their "Subscribe and Save" program, she not only saves time driving and shopping in retail stores, but she saves money, too.   Inspiration On-The-Go Not only is today’s Millennial Mom turning to the web to manage and share, she’s also gaining inspiration and motivation to be an even better Mom. One out of three Millennial Moms says smartphones play a key role in research and finding ideas, and one-fifth make a purchase because of it! So whether it’s better birthday party ideas, ways to cram in that workout, or easy ways to make a house a home, today’s Millennial Mom is without a doubt using everything she can to be (and feel) better. So the next time you’re in line and you see that Millennial Mom on her phone typing furiously or scrolling until the screen starts smoking, just remember there’s a good chance she’s just searching for today’s “little victory” in her own way. It’s what being a Mom is all about.

Why Traditional Media Isn't Dying, and 4 Other Myths of the Digital Era Dispelled

ADWEEK

Are copywriters really dinosaurs?

Tom Doctoroff is CEO of JWT Asia Pacific and author of Twitter Is Not a Strategy.

November 11, 2014

"We are no longer creative people. We are inventors!"

The cyber jury president at Cannes Lions International Festival of Creativity proclaimed this four years ago, but today I argue it couldn't be further from the truth. Contrary to conventional wisdom, and despite the disorientation that digital technology has wrought, "traditional" conceptual thinking is still fundamental to marketing.

Today's digital era calls for change—but not to bow to the algorithmic salvation of big data, or to the gee-whiz draw of viral video. Our mandate now is to achieve harmony between timeless brand-building truths and new digital technology opportunities.

To do this, we marketers must debunk these five platitudes:

• 10 Print

Tom Doctoroff is CEO of JWT Asia Pacific and author of Twitter Is Not a Strategy.

"We are no longer creative people. We are inventors!"

The cyber jury president at Cannes Lions International Festival of Creativity proclaimed this four years ago, but today I argue it couldn't be further from the truth. Contrary to conventional wisdom, and despite the disorientation that digital technology has wrought, "traditional" conceptual thinking is still fundamental to marketing.

Myth 1: Traditional media is dying.

Marketers spend more than $250 billion a year on broadcast advertising. Now, our goal must be to align yin and yang—or "top-down" (broadcast) and "bottom-up" (interactive) platforms. When digital and traditional creative are conceived separately, brands lose focus, which confuses people. In addition, each achieves complementary objectives. Top-down shapes preference. Bottom-up deepens engagement—or time spent with an idea—that leads to loyalty.

Myth 2: The "brand idea" is an anachronism. 

The brand idea is not a static positioning statement. It's a commercial life force—a product's soul, invisible but omnipresent. It forges order from chaos as new media burgeon. The brand idea is long-term, a relationship between consumer and brands that remains consistent over time. And relationships are mutual. They are "interactive." So are digital media. Brand ideas therefore are the underpinning of two-way engagement between consumers and brands.

Some brands get it. In both digital and traditional media, Axe deodorant promises "irresistible attraction" to guys looking to score. In both digital and traditional media, Coca-Cola transcends the physical plane of quenching thirst to embody "moments of happiness." If there is no brand idea, engagement devolves into transactional carpet-bombing.

Myth 3: Copywriters are dinosaurs.  

True, technology and creativity must be fused in new ways. The old-fashioned partnership between copywriter and art director is indeed approaching its sell-by date. But in a world transformed by digital, today's marketing needs a similarly cohesive partnership between creatives and experts on today's broader range of media platforms. One suggestion from R/GA's chief creative officer Nick Law is for agencies to be populated with pairs of "conceptual distillers" and "systemic designers." The former ensures a brand's thematic focus. The latter enables a brand to blossom in the full range of three-dimensional experience.

Myth 4: Big Data will save us.

Big Data has become invaluable to media buying and planning. Algorithms can target consumers precisely, in real time, and can even predict behavior—for example, which website a surfer will go to next. But good old consumer insights, not data, best answer the question "why?" Compelling creative is about ideas that motivate people to change behavior. Marketers can't reach consumers if they lose sight of how to inspire them.

Myth 5: We are all inventors now.

New forms of technological engagement are not, in and of themselves, creative ideas. Technology must be harnessed to make ideas more powerful. The Nike+ ecosystem resonates because it breathes life into a brand idea. Through technology, "Just do it" is always on. Google Glass makes the world a small place, adding dimension to Google's mission of "bringing the world together through technology."

Marketers have always been consumer advocates; they will always be idea masters. And that's not just reassuring. It is something to be proud of.

U.S. Marketers To Spend $103 Billion On Interactive Media By 2019

• by Laurie Sullivan, November 10, 2014, 3:20 PM
• 
  
• 
  

Overall, marketers in the U.S. will spend more than $103 billion on search, display, social media, and email marketing by 2019 -- growing at a 12% compound annual growth rate (CAGR) -- but search will remain the largest share of interactive spend, per a study from Forrester Research released Monday.

The study -- U.S. Digital marketing Forecast, 2014 to 2019 -- points to search as the largest share, social media investment will grow faster than any other interactive channel. The growth should prompt some interesting changes in marketing such as introducing personal networks for promotion and commerce, signaling brand supporters, and making agencies realize the importance of marketing clouds.

In fact, the latest Forrester forecast showcases rising investments in interactive marketing during the next five years and outlines what this means for marketers. It's important to note that while interactive marketing will overtake television advertising in 2016, its pace of growth is starting to slow slightly. Forrester attributes the change to upward and downward pressures affecting projected digital investment.

Three factors will contribute to an increase in interactive investments through 2019 -- for starters, a recovering economy that boosts tech confidence, followed by more media for advertisers to buy  and a marketer's ability to prove performance, which has become extremely important. 

During the next five years paid search and organic optimization will top $45 billion by 2019, per Forrester. The report highlights the growth in Google's ad revenue: a 17% increase in 2014 Q3, despite declining ad costs. Forrester attributes the growth to the fact that Google click volume has seen double-digit growth each quarter since 2007.

Forrester points to an increase in click rates by 20% between Q1 and Q2 in 2014 for product listing ads (PLAs) -- directory results based on product feed data that had been gratis prior to May 2014, and now generate a higher volume of absolute clicks from fewer impressions than Google's standard paid listings do, and cost about 50% more per click.

Forrester forecasts that U.S. email marketing will reach $2.3 billion in 2015; social media, $9.7 billion; display advertising, $23.6; search marketing, $31.6 billion. Next year in the U.S., digital marketing will contribute 17% to all digital marketing ad spend.

To remain consistent with guidance from Forrester's mobile marketing playbook, the research firm now represents mobile as a deployment option similar to desktop for search, display, or social ad impressions. The report does call out that mobile accounts for 66% of the growth in interactive spend during the next five years. Investment in mobile for smartphones and tablet search, display, and social media will top $46 billion by 2019.

Forrester interviewed 20 vendor and companies, including 360i, Custora, CQuotient, DEG, Epsilon, iCrossing,  IgnitionOne, LiveIntent, Movable Ink,  MyBuys, Rise Interactive, StrongView, and TellApart.

How To Use Social Media Ads To Increase Holiday Sales

by Ellen Jantsch , Wednesday, Nov. 12, 2014

With more and more consumers expected to search on social media for gifts and promotions this holiday season, many retailers hoping to reach shoppers online will put paid social media at the center of their marketing efforts this season. The result, no doubt, will be a very crowded social space. Here are some tips on creating the most effective holiday campaigns, taking into account this increased competition for the shopper's attention on social media channels. Pulse your presence. Although certain days are more critical than others, more familiarly Black Friday and Cyber Monday, brands with the most social success this season will create a lasting customer experience throughout the entire six-week period. In order to achieve this while keeping costs down, lock in your ad prices by booking “non-holiday” days early. Not only will these prices be considerably lower, but they will also provide you with the necessary scale needed to stay relevant before, during and beyond Black Fridayand Cyber Monday. Expert tip: Engagement on social is 32% higher on the weekends, according to a recent ExactTarget study, "Why Social Media Managers Shouldn't Rest On Sunday." Look to increase your company's involvement during “cheaper” non-holiday time periods and Sundays to achieve maximum value from minimum means. Focus on mobile. 50% of consumers access Facebook in-store while shopping, and of that group, 28% are in search of an immediate deal or offer -- this according to a Millward Brown Digital and Firefly Millward Brown study, "The Impact of Mobile and Facebook While Shopping." Take advantage of this elevated mobile usage during the holiday season by driving in-store conversions with relevant marketing messages in real-time. To do this, maximize Facebook’s reach capabilities with short bursts of high reach activity the day before and day of heaviest holiday shopping. Then, once you’ve built awareness of  your promotion, use Twitter targeting capabilities to continue the conversations you started on Facebook with Twitter users who are actively shopping. Deliver relevant communications. Instead of sending out just one message to your entire audience, experiment with creating different executions for different segments. This approach will allow you to target custom audiences based on interests, preferences and behavior, and ultimately deliver more conversions. Here are a few specific ways to consider segmenting prospects: Behavioral groups: Grouping individuals based on the way they react to, understand, or use a particular product, is one of the most fundamental lessons that every marketer learns. Data like channel preferences, benefits sought, usage patterns:  all of this will help you shape the ideal customer profile based on actual consumer interest. It will also help you snag customers and market share directly from competitors. Using third-party data, brands can target consumers who have a history of buying competitor products with exclusive promotions. Website activity: Using Twitter’s Remarketing Pixel and Facebook’s Website Conversion Audience pixel, brands can retarget consumers who have previously visited a retailer's website, increasing the chance of converting buyers further down the funnel. The same can be said for segmenting individuals based on email campaign activity. For example, brands can segment individuals based on things like whether a subscriber opened or clicked pn a particular email campaign. E-commerce purchase activity: Segmenting individuals based on e-commerce activity is one of the most effective ways to send more targeted communications. There is nothing more powerful and revealing than first-party retailer-based shopping data. Connexity just proved that in a recent test. Using this data, brands can improve their offerings and services to existing customers, as well as reactivate lapsed customers with incentive and promotions. Using social media to generate awareness and excitement during the holiday season is universally considered to be an effective way to boost sales, especially when brands can reach shoppers while they are in an acquisitive mindset. The right message at the right time will yield the right increase in sales.

Programmatic: Everyone Uses It, Not Many Trust It (Yet)

• by Tyler Loechner, 5 hours ago
• 
  
• 
  

Two reports about programmatic advertising came out this week that appear to be in stark contrast to one another.

On the one hand, Chango released surveyresults that found that 75% of brand advertisers are using programmatic technologies, with another 16% planning to do so in the future. On the other hand, another report from Strata found that 20% of agencies “trust programmatic buying to properly execute ad dollars.”

So nearly all (91%) of brands use or plan to use programmatic, but only 20% of agencies -- which typically, but not always, do programmatic buying on behalf of brands -- trust the technology? What gives?

For starters, the Strata report puts the 20% figure in a positive light: that’s actually up 153% from Q2 2014 (the fresh data is from Q3). Plus, more agencies trust the tech (20%) than distrust it (12%), and the number of agencies that don't trust programmatic tech is decreasing, per Strata.  

Yet the 20% mark still seems low -- it certainly caught my attention. However, it's not shocking that more people use the technology than trust it. Isn't that the case with all forms of technology? I can’t prove that, but think about it for a second: Do you trust Siri? Do you use Siri?

Exactly.

Joking aside, it does seem a bit contradictory to note that only 20% of agencies trust programmatic while at the same time programmatic trades are projected to account for 63% of all display ad spend by 2016, or $20 billion. In order to actually reach those projections, the tech will probably need to be trusted more than it is today. (And as previously mentioned, trust in the tech is on the rise.)

That's not to say skeptics are wrong or bad here. I actually think it’s good for the industry, having written before that critical self-examination is required to push the digital ad industry -- including programmatic -- forward.

Plus, the programmatic tech providers likely brought some of these trust issues upon themselves, with all the companies tripping over themselves to come up with new acronyms, proclaim a first or otherwise disrupt the space with groundbreaking algorithms that revolutionize the way media is bought and sold, or so they say. Just look at the growing list of Hyperbabble of the Daysfor some examples.

"Trust" image via Shutterstock.

Leadership: an evolutionary journey

Managementissues.com

by Duane Dike  |  10 Nov 2014

Human evolution via Shutterstock.com

Have we learned anything new about the relationships between leader behavior, morale, workmanship and turnover over the past few decades? Are we touting the same mantras over and over just because, well, that’s the way it is, or have we started to behave any differently? The short answer is “I hope so”, but the longer answer is more interesting. Thus, a history lesson.

In an article I wrote a few years ago titledLeadership, Morale and Employee Turnover, I said manager behavior is the most important factor for employee morale. That’s a principle that I have repeated over and over ever since. A manager’s job is to propagate positive cultures where employees are free to share their frustrations and be part of the process to solve problems. Most importantly from my angle, employees (all levels) need to be generally happy to be productive. Managers who act ‘boss-like’ (dictating, ordering people about and focusing on the negative) and happy cultures don’t mix.

Pre-Morale: The Leadership Dark Ages

But, it wasn’t always that way. Once upon a time, managers were expected to act boss-like; totalitarianism was all the rage. What changed? How did we move from authoritarian rule to our current day, more compassionate approach to leadership? The transformation was a relatively quick evolution of about a century.

The industrial revolution kicked into gear in the late 19th and early 20th Centuries. Before then, smaller shops produced society’s goods and services. Along came the Fords, Carnegies, and Rockefellers. They rode the first waves of new production methods and caught the world unprepared. The quest: produce things.

More and more employees were hired as cogs in the industrial machine. Leaders, if you can call them that, weren’t expected to be friendly. They demanded loyalty and, often, back-breaking work. That kind of boss-like behavior was a by-product of the times: a couple of world wars and several minor scrimmages, union movements, anarchy, socialist developments, technology improvements, and a growing population. Society was in a time of massive flux. Employee conditions didn’t have a prayer of getting any better. Sweat shops, depressing assembly lines, and Dickensian cultures proliferated. Workers endured.

Morale and its relationship to productivity wasn’t even touched in early 20th century management literature. Instead, early theories wrapped around compensation as the main motivator: pay employees well and they’ll return the favor with lifelong dedication (conformity and servitude). And, to a point, even today, compensation is an important factor in how employees look at their jobs but it’s nowhere near the top of the morale pyramid.

The Change Begins: WWII

Fast forward to post-WWII. The U.S. sprouted as the land of bountiful. Millions of servicemen hit the streets looking for work. Factories previously producing arms quickly changed to pumping out washing machines, refrigerators, and cars. These newly blessed factory bosses were more than happy to hire the fresh-from-the-battlefield loyalty-fused workforce. Ex-military, mostly males, understood dictatorial leadership styles. It’s what they survived on in the military.

Slowly, this flux of employees began to see they were no longer fighting for God and country but for human consumption. Intangible fight-for-the-human-good motivating factors disappeared and reality sunk in. Instead of defending freedom, the new workforce worked day in, day out in often routine, boring jobs. So, naturally, it took increasingly more effort on the part of business leaders to motive these transformed workers.

Morale Revisited

Morale, which was barely discussed in the early days, shot to front and center. (Definitions of morale are too diverse to discuss here, but assume it means feelings of general well-being, security, and freedom.) Bosses had to change their (sometimes evil) ways or risk losing the business. Movies, new-fangled TV and radio programs, and literature were heavy on the emotion of humankind’s struggle.

Some contributors, like Steinbeck (one of my favorites), hit readers square between the eyes of the inhumanity of human relationships (that light hearted ditty Grapes of Wrath (1939) comes to mind). Increasingly more prevalent, the benefits of good behavior, like in the 1946 Jimmie Stewart movie, It’s a Wonderful Life, edged to our mental forefront. Over time, employees shouted, “Hey, I’m getting screwed.”

Root of all (Business) Evil: Behavior

It wasn’t until the 1990s that management/leadership theorists headed a totally new theoretical direction (another result of social evolution). Under these new ways of explaining human relationships, employees were no longer to blame for poor workmanship and productivity. Bosses could no longer blame employees for being lazy, indifferent, or unproductive. Instead, and this is a pretty powerful statement, all evil in the workplace boiled down to one primary factor: leader behavior.

Leader behavior is essentially my entire theoretical platform (gee, I hope I’m right). Every move you (leaders) make, every decision, every glance, every word is scrutinized, dissected, torn apart, and reconstituted in the break room. Boss behavior at all levels determines corporate brand and reputation. Official corporate brand isn’t as important for company reputation as the human behavior kind. In short, behavior needs to propagate cultures that are friendly, supportive, collaborative, and fun.

Reputation and Brand

Reputation extends way beyond corporate walls. Your ability to attract new employees is partly the result of how the organization is perceived to the outside world. Once employees are hired, bosses can never let up on positive socialization. Behavior must be consistently outward focused, aimed toward others before self. Selfish behavior damages productivity. Inconsistent behavior, from good to bad and back, is possibly the worst condition of all. The carrot/stick metaphor is simply not good for business. Workers are more likely to forget the carrot and remember in perpetuity the stick.

Thanks for skipping down memory lane with me. A few thoughts in closing. Be nice, inspire, care for individuals and the group, prevent problems, be emotionally sensitive, walk the floor (be visible), highlight employee strengths, enjoy laughter, think freedom, and create cultures where employees (our cohorts) learn, experiment, and grow.

“For getting to know people’s names. For being fun to be with. For sending somebody a note to tell them that they were doing a good job. For bothering to learn about people’s interests and having a conversation with them about their interests. It is the human touches combined with all the formal systems that builds confidence, because ultimately, confidence comes from the belief that you personally are supported and cared about.” Rosabeth Kanter.

ABCs Of The Retailer's Q4 Customer Journey: Coffee Is For Closers

Dave Morgan's recent post, "TV Ad Industry Terrible At Marketing," received a number of responses.Krista Niess commented, "This was a very interesting article. Myself being a millennial, I agree with you that it is a myth that no one is watching TV, especially millennials. I believe that television will remain a huge part of every ages' life for a while.... Many people try to avoid ads on television, but we are all consumed by ads at some point during the day whether we think we are or not. I do think that television show view[ership] is collapsing... simply because there are so many different shows that one person can watch.... I think that advertisers have woken up and know the correct ways to go and target that audience, they have adapted a digital strategy, and as much as we want to avoid ads, they are never going to be able to disappear."

Wednesday, Nov. 12, 2014  By Cory Treffiletti There are two movies I, and probably most people around my age, quote when referring to marketing and sales: “Glengarry Glen Ross” and “Boiler Room.” “Glengarry” gets quoted more often, so I decided to focus on only one analogy from that movie to discuss the marketer’s role in this retail-heavy period of the year. The ultimate rule of “Glengarry” is A-B-C: Always Be Closing.  That is what marketer should be doing regardless of where they are in their examination of the customer journey. This time of the year, which is filled with flyers and display ads touting deal after deal after deal, everything you do should be about closing.  As they say, coffee is for closers  -- and your retail site is going to be striving for a LOT of coffee in the coming weeks. The tricks of the trade are simple: Lead with action-oriented offers and promotions.  This time of year the customer journey becomes a shortened path, with every step focused on either closing customers or reducing the time for them to make their decisions. There’s very little leeway, because retailers have about seven weeks from today to sell everything they can sell.  It’s about conversion -- from the considered purchase to the impulse buy.  It’s about consumers with lists of people they need to buy for, and you offering up your products to match their list before they decide to buy something else. Search and display are the most likely suspects to do this work, but don’t overlook social.  Social influence and paid social placement are huge because of the implied consent of associating your brand with feelings of positive sentiment.  In other words, when people are perusing Facebook and seeing pictures of their friends’ families, they get all warm and fuzzy -- and your ad can be slid right alongside those feelings.. Referrals from friends who’ve used the product can also go a long way. Mobile is going to be huge this holiday season, as more consumers are shopping on larger screens.  I can already tell that using my iPhone 6 screen is far easier than looking at my iPhone 5.  The additional real estate gives me space to see products and consider buying them. As I make my shopping lists and save them to Evernote, proximity to that list will help get me ready to pull the trigger and buy a product for my loved ones. Holiday season is about clearing the shelves and generating the lion’s share of revenue for the year.  Many retailers drive as much as 80% of their revenue in Q4. So always be closing!