Adobe / Econsultancy Quarterly Digital Intelligence ... · Market Data / Supplier Selection / Event Presentations / User Experience Benchmarking / Best Practice / Template Files

Market Data / Supplier Selection / Event Presentations / User Experience Benchmarking / Best Practice / Template Files / Trends & Innovation

Quarterly Digital Intelligence Briefing: Making Sense of Marketing Attribution

in association with Adobe

Quarterly Digital Intelligence Briefing: Making Sense of Marketing Attribution in association with Adobe

Econsultancy London

4th Floor, Farringdon Point

29-35 Farringdon Road

London EC1M 3JF

United Kingdom

Telephone:

+44 (0)20 7269 1450

http://econsultancy.com

[email protected]

Econsultancy New York

350 7th Avenue, Suite 307

New York, NY 10001

United States

Telephone:

+1 212 971 0630

All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be

reproduced or transmitted in any form or by any means,

electronic or mechanical, including photocopy, recording

or any information storage and retrieval system, without

prior permission in writing from the publisher.

Copyright © Econsultancy.com Ltd 2012

Published November 2012

Quarterly Digital Intelligence Briefing: Making Sense of Marketing Attribution in association with Adobe Page 3

All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopy, recording or any information storage

and retrieval system, without prior permission in writing from the publisher. Copyright © Econsultancy.com Ltd 2012

Contents

1. Foreword by Adobe .......................................................... 4

2. Momentum for attribution grows as marketers reap benefits ............................................................................. 5

3. Mobile and social drive adoption .................................... 9

4. Single touch point models dominate but technology is evolving ........................................................................... 11

5. An unexpected danger; the internal politics of attribution ...................................................................... 14

6. ‘All models are wrong, some are useful’ – finding the right starting point ......................................................... 16

7. Digital attribution is a great start ... but online is only part of the picture .......................................................... 18

8. Looking ahead: the unifying principle for achieving success and the future of attribution ............................. 22

9. Appendix: Respondent profiles ..................................... 25

9.1. Geography ............................................................................... 26

9.2. Business sector ........................................................................ 27

9.3. Business focus ......................................................................... 28

9.4. Size of company by revenue .................................................... 29




1. Foreword by Adobe We are delighted to bring you our last Quarterly Digital Intelligence Briefing of 2012, which is

devoted to the fascinating but sometimes complex topic of attribution.

Our current advertising campaign is aimed at debunking a range of myths which plague

marketing, such as ‘social media is worthless’, ‘half of your ad spend is wasted’ and ‘marketers

hate Big Data’.

The importance of attribution in helping to dispel these myths is obvious, and our range of

solutions, including Adobe Analytics, Adobe Media Optimizer and Adobe Social, are aimed

squarely at helping marketers derive maximum understanding and value from their marketing.

There are two main factors which we see as driving interest in marketing attribution. Firstly, in an

increasingly multichannel world, the path to purchase is becoming more complex with companies

keen to gain insight around the interplay of different channels across both online and offline, and

paid-for and ‘earned’ media.

Secondly, in difficult economic times, attribution has become an important tool for businesses

wanting to understand how they can more effectively apportion budgets. Marketers are becoming

more accountable for their activities and are under increasing pressure to reduce and optimise

their spending. For the largest businesses, small improvements in the efficiency of their

marketing can translate into millions saved.

It is encouraging to see that most companies surveyed are now carrying out some form of

attribution, and that those who are doing so are reaping a tangible benefit. However, it is also

apparent from the research that significant numbers of companies are struggling with attribution,

especially the largest organisations within the sample (with annual revenues of more than £50m).

The larger companies are more likely to cite technology limitations as a barrier to attribution, and

less likely to be integrating offline touch points into their modelling.

At Adobe, we believe that we are perfectly positioned to offer the best enterprise solutions for

attribution because our platforms encompass a full range of channels, with the ability to scale as

our clients add more data and to translate this information into something marketers can action.

Our technology also brings with it the flexibility which is necessary for success with attribution.

The research shows that companies with a flexible attribution model are significantly more likely

to reap substantial benefits. Our attribution solutions offer both flexibility as well as the ability to

optimise models quickly by making iterative improvements.

Those looking for attribution technology should also keep one eye on the future. Predictive

analytics will play an increasingly important role in helping companies improve their digital

campaigns without the need for analysts and marketers to interpret huge swathes of data.

Neil Morgan

Senior Director, Digital Marketing Solutions, EMEA

Adobe




2. Momentum for attribution grows as

marketers reap benefits This briefing, based on a survey of more than 700 companies and agencies carried out in October

2012, provides a useful perspective on the extent to which businesses are using and benefiting

from marketing attribution.

In product lifecycle terms, marketing attribution is now past the ‘early adopters’ phase and well

into ‘early majority’ territory, with just over half (54%) of responding companies doing this in

some shape or form and a quarter (26%) now allocating credit on the basis of more than just the

last click [Figure 1].

Figure 1: Do you (or your clients) typically carry out any type of marketing

attribution?

The next two charts show why more companies are taking attribution seriously. The vast majority

of respondents say that attribution has benefited their organisation, of whom between a quarter

and a third (29%) say that the benefit has been ‘major’.




Figure 2: Has the marketing attribution you (or your clients) have carried out

benefited your (or their) organisation?

The reasons for marketers carrying out attribution are highlighted in Figure 3 which shows the

three main benefits, namely ‘justifying digital spending’ (cited by 70% of responding companies),

‘building an understanding of the customer journey’ (66%) and ‘optimising the media mix’

(58%).

What is the most significant change you (or your clients) have made as a result of marketing attribution management?

“As we only use last click it has opened up more questions that we are now attempting to answer by bringing in a

more robust attribution model/solution.”

“We have discovered that Facebook works much better as an awareness source i.e. first click and Google works best as an assisted/last source. Hence, we divided our budgets accordingly.”

“Looking at ways we can track all of our activity – everywhere. Now moving to work out the dependencies between the various channels and calls to action to try and identify an attribution model.”

“Changing from a simple last click attribution model and positioning the benefits of a multichannel approach.”

“The main changes have been operational and cultural. One particularly large client has installed a global program to recruit local market individuals to champion attribution management.”

“Slightly more informed consideration of media influence upstream of PPC last click. A renewed appraisal of premium display’s role, value of reach and frequency.”

“The clear demonstration that different channels and keywords work alongside one another and together. This prevented budgets being cut from areas that were actually performing a key assist role.”

“Understanding the role of each media and attributing spend based on the value of each touch point. It also has

an effect on bringing tracking into best practice for campaigns and reinforcing the importance of accurate tracking, robust reporting and reducing ‘knee-jerk’ optimisations mid campaign.”

Survey respondents




Figure 3: How has marketing attribution benefited your organisation / clients?

These significant benefits beg the question as to why many companies are either not carrying out

marketing attribution whatsoever (the ‘laggards’) or relying entirely on the last click approach.

Is there any specific approach to marketing attribution which has been particularly effective?

“Telephone tracking from online to offline and integration of software with database for full ROI.”

“A more granular approach to decision making – it’s easy to assume a channel isn’t working when the overall CPA is high, but if you can see down to an individual campaign level you can optimise your campaigns.”

“Determining the points of interaction and the digital marketing mix necessary to generate conversions (multiple sources of visits prior to conversion).”

“Daily monitoring is rather more effective than weekly. Each day of the week has its own behaviour.”

“Not just relating actions and success to ‘sales’ but also understanding the value of negative / positive sentiment and other values.”

“Specific phone numbers for specific web pages and individual codes in Google Analytics for individual

ads/projects.”

“Trying to get as much data as possible to understand all of the touch points.”

Survey respondents




The reasons for this inertia are seen in Figure 4 below, principally a lack of knowledge (around

what is involved and what can be achieved) and also technology limitations (especially among the

largest companies).

By relying solely on last-click attribution many companies are sub-consciously making a bet based

on Pareto’s Law, namely that they are getting 80% of the benefit based on 20% of the effort.

The last-click-wins approach has served the digital industry well, and is a tidy and effective way of

allocating credit in a digital environment where direct response and performance have flourished

using this formula.

However, in an increasingly multichannel and data-driven world, a reliance solely on last click

now represents a major gamble when more granular (and actionable) information is readily

available.

Client-side respondents

Figure 4: What is the main reason you don’t carry out marketing attribution?

Note: This cross-tabulation is based on the annual revenue of responding companies.




3. Mobile and social drive adoption For many companies, the proliferation of devices, including smartphones and tablets, has

accelerated the adoption of attribution technology.

Marketers will always strive for a ‘single customer view’ which relies on successfully incorporating

all channels and touch points to map consumer behaviour along the entire journey to purchase.

Mobile has moved to centre stage because of its ability to bridge the gap between offline and

online channels. A consumer can see an outdoor ad, and research the product online immediately

on their phone, or scan a QR code to be taken directly to a site. Emailed online vouchers can also

be redeemed in an offline store, using a mobile code or coupon.

Of course, the all-pervasive nature of mobile is a mixed blessing for marketers trying to build

accurate attribution models, with more respondents agreeing than disagreeing that ‘increased use

of mobile makes attribution very difficult’.

Cross-device tracking is an issue not easily solved, though attribution vendors are working on

ways to help companies understand an individual’s behaviour across different devices.

Figure 5: Impact of mobile and social on attribution




Social has also been instrumental in building the momentum of attribution marketing. With more

internal resources and media spend being diverted to social platforms, marketers have turned to

attribution to explain social’s return on investment in terms of directly and indirectly driven sales,

rather than just counting the number of ‘likes’ or sometimes woolly analysis around ‘engagement’.

Attribution is enabling marketers to back up their hunch that investing in social channels makes

sense, whether they are focusing their efforts on building a Facebook brand page or Twitter

account, or investing significant media spend on social network display advertising.

Figure 5 on the previous page shows opinions on whether the focus on attribution has been

increased by mobile and social. Agency respondents felt most strongly about the impact of mobile,

with 65% agreeing that the rise of mobile had concentrated minds in this area. Just under half

(49%) of client-side respondents felt the same way.

Slightly fewer respondents felt that social was driving more attention to attribution, with 58% of

agency respondents and 43% of client-side respondents agreeing that this was the case.

In summary, the desire to understand what impact these less understood channels have on

purchase behaviour is driving the adoption of attribution solutions, which can help to assign

actual value to each channel’s contribution to a sale. Increases in budgets for the newer channels

means that marketers are being held more accountable for their spend, therefore proof of ROI is

vital.

Has marketing attribution given you any specific insights about social media marketing?

“It’s not just an engagement forum but also a relevant conversion driving factor.”

“At least for Facebook, we’ve been able to correlate brand advocacy with purchase frequency.”

“Not social media marketing in particular, rather social media advertising. Facebook advertising represents

almost 60% of our digital spend and has a very high conversion rate.”

“Not really other than there does not appear to be a strong correlation between social media marketing and

conversions, or even support in mid-funnel strategies.”

“Social media is less of a transactional environment at the moment, even with the rise of f-commerce. It remains

an important touch point for relevant engagement and updates on the brand / products. In turn this drives

traffic to other media channels and increases the propensity of purchase.”

“Not to focus on ROI, and to rethink why they are on those pages. It’s very 101, but it hits home when you show

them the numbers.”

“Some but it’s still difficult to prove how social media has influenced a certain number of sales.”

“Trying to quantify the spend specifically with Facebook in terms of building relationships is still challenging, but

the concept is easier to push with this data.”

“Social media whilst not being the most profitable channel is a definitive requirement for the customer journey

and enhancement of brand advocacy.”

Survey respondents




4. Single touch point models dominate but

technology is evolving Like any marketing performance analysis tool, attribution is most effective when you define

marketing goals and closely examine the typical customer journey (including the average number

of touch points and time to conversion). However, most organisations get stuck with the most

common attribution models because they’re satisfied when these methods validate their current

theories.

As shown in Section 2, over half of those carrying out marketing attribution still attribute the

entire conversion value to the last channel with which the customer interacted before converting.

The choice of attribution model influences the perceived value of a campaign, but also affects

future budgets in terms of how much money marketers allocate to a specific channel versus other

channels (either digital or traditional).

Separate Adobe research1 showed that, for search, there is a 38% increase in the value per visitor

when moving from a last click model to first click attribution. Social had similar results, meaning

that last click attribution undervalues those channels that are more influential in generating

awareness rather than in triggering a purchase decision.

Figure 6: Apart from ‘last click’, what methods do you (or your clients) use for

marketing attribution?

1 http://success.adobe.com/en/na/programs/digital-index/1205_18011_social_media.html

http://success.adobe.com/en/na/programs/digital-index/1205_18011_social_media.html




The frequently mentioned fragmentation of the media landscape has started to undermine the use

of last-touch methods of correlating conversions to marketing efforts, with major implications for

budget allocations and ultimately marketing effectiveness.

Despite the limitations associated with using a single touch point attribution model (such as

undervaluing marketing efforts that influence the middle portion of the funnel), first click and

first touch are some of the most popular methods used by marketers surveyed [Figure 6].

Experimentation is essential when it comes to effective attribution and the best attribution

modelling tools now allow marketers to explore alternative attribution models, such as:

Position-based – assigns credit based on the position in the customer journey, with first

and last interactions typically getting the most credit.

Time decay – assigns the most credit to interactions that occur nearest to the time of

conversion. This model is best suited for campaigns with short sales cycles, such as time-

sensitive promotions or deals.

Even allocation (linear) – every marketing touch within a defined period of time receives

an equal share of credit for the conversion.

Custom approach – create custom credit weightings based on position, type of interaction,

traffic source etc.

Organisations that seek to move beyond basic, single touch point models, typically face two key

challenges: a traditional corporate culture that rewards success of an individual channel rather

than the company’s overall success and a lack of consolidated data warehouses.

Figure 7: How do you (or your clients) typically carry out marketing attribution?




Despite recent advances in attribution modelling technology, around two in five organisations

surveyed either carry out attribution manually or using spreadsheets. Figure 8 shows that

marketing attribution is most likely to benefit organisations who use custom-built technology,

with almost half (46%) of these saying that the benefit has been ‘major’. This compares to just

18% of those who use spreadsheets.

Our analysis also revealed that larger organisations (earning more than £50m each year) are

more likely to carry out marketing attribution using vendor technology (31% compared to a fifth

of smaller companies).


Figure 8: How do you typically carry out marketing attribution?




5. An unexpected danger; the internal

politics of attribution Among the highest barriers to effectively implementing attribution are two human factors; the

availability of analysts and internal politics.

The first has become a routine challenge to all types of marketing organisation as they grapple

with new priorities around data and technology and the people they require. Finding analysts can

be difficult, but is essentially a straightforward HR problem and meanwhile the market is slowly

but surely increasing the supply of skilled people.

The issues involved when attribution runs into internal politics are often more intractable,

because they go to the core of how a marketing operation is organised, and worse,

implementation can collide with human nature.

Figure 9: What are the two greatest barriers to / preventing your clients from

using attribution more effectively?

Channel politics are like any other kind, boiling down to money and influence. When marketing is

confined to silos, influence and compensation naturally coalesce around key budget areas.

Although overarching strategic goals should transcend channels’ self-interest, specialists will

naturally emphasise the role that their tactic plays in the marketing mix.

The perceived danger of attribution is that it can rock the boat, undercutting the perceived value

of a channel’s role in the customer journey and endangering continued or increased investment.

Frequently, concerns arise at the point where an organisation is transitioning from a single click

model (first click or last click) to one that examines more of the funnel (linear, custom, etc.). It’s




assumed that any single click model will over-reward whatever channels naturally fall in that

point of the purchase process that the model studies (display and first click, for example, or paid

search and last click).

In reality the dangers to channel operations appear to be slim, at least for people on the digital

side of the marketing fence. Most attribution studies tend to benefit digital as a whole, bolstering

investment across the board, at least for now. As online spending comes in line with audience

media consumption, the rising tide will find equilibrium.

However, perception is reality when it comes to self-interest. Organisations need to get ahead of

channel-level concerns before problems arise. Companies have successfully confronted these

issues in a number of ways:

Reorienting bonus compensation away from specific channels by setting goals that reflect

the entirety of the customer journey. If there’s one lesson of most attribution studies,

it’s that no one marketing event carries the load in most purchases, online or offline. As this

understanding grows, it makes sense to align marketing compensation with better optimising

the whole of the process instead of isolated metrics.

‘Selling’ attribution internally as a positive for all. Change is generally a scary prospect,

especially when jobs are theoretically on the line. Attribution should be positioned as a better

way to understand customers and the contribution of marketing to sales, because it is. By

making it clear that attribution usually leads to more budget for marketing (offline media

notwithstanding), understanding can outweigh concern.

At a macro-level, shifting away from silos entirely. Fortunately, many companies are

already moving away from a highly structured to more flexible models where digital is

integrated instead of broken into silos. In these organisations, analytics and testing are often

already acculturated, making the transition to attribution a smooth one.

For organisations looking at the future of implementation of attribution, dealing with politics is a

sunken log, unnoticed until the leak is sprung. While roughly 30% of all respondents described

internal issues as critical, only 8% of respondents say that politics is keeping them from adopting

attribution.

This disparity represents a significant lack of knowledge and preparedness. This danger is

especially acute for larger organisations, where institutional momentum can make a rapid

response challenging.

For those in more vertical corporate cultures, thinking ahead about the human interests involved

will accelerate the process of adopting an attribution-based budgeting system.




6. ‘All models are wrong, some are useful’

– finding the right starting point It was the statistician George Box who said in the late 1970s that ‘all models are wrong, some are

useful’.

This is particularly true in the world of marketing attribution management, where marketers and

analysts are often relying on imperfect attribution models. The majority of marketers (58%)

surveyed for this research [Figure 10] believe that ‘a perfect attribution model is impossible’

compared to only 17% who disagree.

With respect to those who believe in the flawless model, attribution can rarely be a perfect

science. The more complex the attribution model, the more likely it is to be flawed or partly based

on unscientific assumptions.

Attribution comes in all shapes and sizes, ranging from the optimisation of paid search, affiliate

marketing and (or) display to more sophisticated modelling which incorporates offline CRM.

Figure 10: ‘A perfect attribution model is impossible’

While the blend of technology and data can help, there is no one-size-fits-all approach or single

formula for success.

Crucially, the right approach depends on what you are trying to achieve, as neatly described by

Mike Teasdale2 who compares attribution to an in-car SatNav: “The analogy I like is that this

2 http://econsultancy.com/blog/11038-new-attribution-report-helps-marketers-identify-the-right-supplier

http://econsultancy.com/blog/11038-new-attribution-report-helps-marketers-identify-the-right-supplier

http://econsultancy.com/blog/11038-new-attribution-report-helps-marketers-identify-the-right-supplier




technology is like GPS – it can get you to your destination but you still need to decide where you

want to go.”

Marketers want tangible answers to tangible questions, without having to re-build their

organisation from the ground up in order to overcome barriers to a more holistic approach to

attribution.

Here are some examples of some channel-specific questions around media mix optimisation

which attribution can help to solve:

To what extent is the affiliate channel truly adding incremental sales? Are certain types of

affiliate being too generously (or insufficiently) remunerated?

Can we more accurately value the role of display advertising by incorporating impression-

level as well as click-through data?

How is our Facebook brand page publishing activity impacting on the performance of our

paid-for Facebook advertising?

If we stop bidding on brand terms, how will that impact our combined paid search and

SEO activity?

It is no surprise that companies dipping their toes into the water are starting with more basic

attribution modelling which focuses on a specific digital channel (or a relatively narrow selection

of digital channels).

At best, this type of isolated attribution, for example focusing on the relationship between display

advertising and paid search, at least focuses the minds of marketers with the promise of tangible

outcomes relating to relative media spend.

For many companies starting out, the KISS acronym applies (‘keep it simple stupid’).

At worst, it could be argued that a channel-specific approach to attribution is inherently flawed,

especially when driven by technology associated with channel-centric platforms.

The nirvana for attribution modelling is a single view which takes into account as many touch

points as possible, without an inherent bias to one type of channel. Is the ad serving or search

technology company providing the attribution tool the best option for a holistic approach?




7. Digital attribution is a great start ... but

online is only part of the picture The chart below shows the extent to which a range of online and offline channels are incorporated

into marketing attribution.

It is evident that companies are much more likely to be focusing on digital. The reasons for this

are obvious. Digital is inherently easier to track, with internet users leaving a trail of data which

enables web analysts to map the customer journey in a way which leaves marketers who

remember the pre-digital world licking their lips.

And it is no surprise to see email, paid search and natural search (SEO) towards the top of the

leader board, since these channels are most likely to be playing an integral role within the online

marketing mix.

In the case of paid search, budgets are likely to be highest, something which focuses minds on the

channel’s ROI and relationship with other channels, most notably SEO and display. In the case of

email, one of its strengths is the ability to track its effectiveness and role within the customer

journey, with interaction easy to associate with named individuals.


Figure 11: What channels are included as part of your marketing attribution?




Attribution within a limited range of digital channels can be difficult enough. Moving away from

the online sphere, it can become fiendishly complicated for a number of practical, political and

technical reasons explored in other sections of this report.

This difficulty is evidenced by Figure 12 below, which shows that marketers surveyed are more

likely to disagree than agree that they ‘incorporate offline touch points into their attribution

models’. And it is no surprise that survey respondents from the largest companies are significantly

more likely to disagree [Figure 13].

Figure 12: ‘We / our clients incorporate offline touch points into our / their

attribution models’

When judging the effectiveness of their offline channels, some companies are no further away

from the day when Viscount Leverhulme famously said that he wasn’t sure which half of the

advertising budget for his soap and cleaning products empire was wasted.

Brand marketers seeking to address this problem have historically carried out econometric

modelling to try to understand what happens to sales when they change the balance between

different types of media spending.

Attribution technology can now bring marketers closer to the holy grail of a single customer view,

by joining up data from the online and offline world, relating to both brand advertising and direct

response marketing.

Of course, it is never possible to know exactly what magazine advert someone saw, or verbal

recommendation they had from a friend, but some companies are getting closer to a fuller picture.





Figure 13: ‘We incorporate offline touch points into our attribution models’

Note: This cross-tabulation is based on the annual revenue of responding companies.

How are companies joining up data for multichannel attribution?

Joining up online and offline data. Multichannel attribution involves building an

understanding of the customer journey, informed by web data and CRM data which are

commonly disconnected. Those companies able to harness web data to improve offline

marketing (and vice versa) can gain a competitive advantage.

In the world of retail, including point of sale (POS) data within the attribution model to

understand online to in-store is a huge opportunity.

According to a BestBuy / Adobe Insight case study3 (link to PDF), the retailer’s mobile

websites and apps are the ‘glue’ which bind the online and offline channels. Their data

analysis found that the lifetime store value of the multichannel mobile customer increases by

over 45% if they visit any Local Store or Store Finders online.

QR codes can play an important role, and these will gradually be superseded by near-field

communication (NFC) technology which is less clunky.

Of course, it isn’t just retailers who can join up online and offline data. Other examples

include marketers using special URLs or suggested search terms on television adverts and

outdoor advertising to understand the impact of TV on search and online activity, or

customised telephone numbers on their websites to help them understand the customer

journey as it moves from online to offline and back.

Attribution across multiple screens. Consumers are viewing multiple streams of content

simultaneously, across a range of devices, including smartphones, tablets and TVs. Web

3 http://adobe.ly/Xg4Id4 (PDF)

http://adobe.ly/Xg4Id4

http://adobe.ly/Xg4Id4




analytics expert Avinash Kaushik gives a good example of a conundrum facing marketers

here4:

“An example [of multichannel attribution across multiple screens] is the ability to

understand that a search I did on my tablet computer while watching a television

commercial resulted in a click on a paid search ad to a camera site which logged into

my memory which later caused me to read reviews of the camera on my Nexus S while

stuck in traffic and that finally caused a sale for Sony when I got home and happened to

be on my laptop.”

The harsh reality, according to Kaushik, is that accurately describing how credit should be

apportioned in this instance is not possible. Of course, there are ways of building a picture of how

customers are behaving across devices (and allocated credit for conversions), for example if

visitors log into your website across different devices or you have a loyalty programme which

helps to bridge the chasm.


Figure 14: ‘We incorporate offline touch points into our attribution models’

4 http://www.kaushik.net/avinash/multi-channel-attribution-definitions-models/

http://www.kaushik.net/avinash/multi-channel-attribution-definitions-models/




8. Looking ahead: the unifying principle

for achieving success and the future of

attribution Attribution presents a significant challenge that’s worth overcoming. At its apex, the practice can

excavate the truth about how people relate to marketing, and how marketing channels relate to

each other. In the relatively new terrain of multichannel marketing, it’s more common to vastly

over-count or under-count the impact of these relationships than it is to get it right, and that’s

expensive.

This report has identified a number of keys to attribution success, all of which contribute beyond

the practice itself by raising the game of the marketing organisation. For example, mastering

attribution also means having to come to grips with technical hurdles (Section 4), integrating

offline and online knowledge (Section 7) and even addressing structural issues in the organisation

that hold back innovation (Section 5).

The recipes for meeting these disparate challenges appear to include the common ingredient of

flexibility – in business adoption, technology and, of course, in attribution modelling and how it’s

applied.

Figure 15: How flexible is your (or your typical client’s) attribution system?

Attribution is about people; how they think and react to different circumstances at different

times. That’s why we’re never finished in conducting attribution studies, nor can we arrive at a

perfect model (see Section 6). This suggests that analysts are best served by being able to apply

and build from different models as circumstances require them.




However, most organisations aren’t yet approaching attribution with this mindset. Only 31% of

marketers describe their modelling as ‘very’ or ‘somewhat flexible’ while over 43% describe

themselves as ‘not flexible at all’. Somewhat surprisingly, larger organisations are more

entrenched, despite having presumably greater analytical and technical resources – 51% of

respondent companies with over £50 million in revenues self-describe as ‘not flexible at all’

compared to less than a third of smaller organisations.

Underscoring the importance of a nimble approach to attribution modelling, Figure 16 shows a

clearly defined correlation between the ability to bring multiple schemes to bear (‘very flexible’)

and extracting a ‘major benefit’ from attribution overall. Those describing their approach as ‘not

flexible at all’ are less than half as likely as their most flexible peers to experience the most

powerful benefits of attribution.


Figure 16: How flexible is your attribution system?

Flexibility is one of the dimensions with which we can describe the evolution of attribution. Other

aspects of that evolution include the move from a single click approach to more holistic models,

and the progression of related technologies, as well as the integration of channels beyond search,

and ultimately beyond digital.

This evolution is by no means predictable, nor does it progress at even intervals, but in general

terms, we can see organisations moving away from the black and white of last click attribution

toward the multi-hued nuance of custom models and from spreadsheets to integrated

technologies.

But, the industry is just beginning to understand where the pursuit of attribution will take it.

Today we look at audience and segments, and are limited in our ability to explore online/offline

effects. The future of attribution is one-on-one and truly multichannel. And, like business

analytics as a whole, it’s moving from a mix of describing the present and predicting the future

toward an ultimate goal of suggesting what to do with that information.




Even in the age of Big Data and the widespread use of instant analytics, the majority of the

metrics that marketers access are simply descriptive – they tell us what’s happened in the past,

and like weather forecasters in the 1970s, we’re left to assume that what happened yesterday is

the most likely outcome for tomorrow. Anyone who has lived through the first decade or so of the

digital revolution in marketing knows very well how incorrect that assumption can be.

Fortunately, many disciplines have already moved, or are moving, into the standardisation of

predictive analytics, where descriptive data are processed using algorithms and/or additional

data to determine what outcomes are probable and how probable they are.

But, knowing the future (or a limited, blurry version of it) is only helpful if you know how to

change the outcomes you’re interested in. Prescriptive analytics take the next step by asking the

question ‘why’ and using the answer to suggest and evaluate actions that can take advantage of

predicted outcomes by optimising opportunity or mitigating risk.

For attribution, prescription is a natural and important step, but one that’s going to take many

organisations significant time to support. Assembling the experience and information to correctly

evaluate and respond to future-looking business analytics is a demanding step, but one that’s

likely to be a real leap for marketing as a discipline.

Ultimately, attribution will incorporate the ability to predict future outcomes with the original

promise of digital; one-to-one marketing. With sufficient data and insight coupled with

processing power, marketing will move beyond generalising about segments and channels.

Individual behaviours and characteristics will be integrated into the attribution model itself,

giving marketers not just insights, but specific and successful actions with predictable outcomes

at the customer level.




9. Appendix: Respondent profiles This seventh Quarterly Digital Intelligence Briefing is based on an online survey of more than 700

client-side and agency respondents, carried out in October 2012.

Figure 17: Which of the following best describes your company or role?




9.1. Geography The majority of respondents are based in the UK. Just under a fifth (17%) of respondents are

based in North America and 16% in Europe (non-UK). Other countries and regions represented

include Australia, South America and the Middle East.

Figure 18: In which country / region are you (personally) based?




9.2. Business sector Respondents work across a wide range of different industry sectors. The best represented sectors

are retail and mail order (16%), financial services (12%), professional services (10%) and education (9%). Just over a quarter of respondents (27%) specify ‘other’ as their sector. Other

sectors included public sector/not-for profit and IT.

Figure 19: In which business sector is your organisation?




9.3. Business focus The chart below shows to what extent businesses are focused on B2B, B2C, or both. Just under

half of respondents (46%) are exclusively focused on B2C, while around a third (32%) are B2B

focused. Just over a fifth (22%) are focused on both B2B and B2C.

Figure 20: Is your business focused more on B2B or B2C?




9.4. Size of company by revenue The chart below shows the annual revenue of responding (client-side) organisations.

At the upper end of the scale, around half (51%) of client-side respondents outside the UK earn more than £50m each year.

Client-side respondents Figure 21: What is your annual company turnover?

Documents

Adobe / Econsultancy Quarterly Digital Intelligence ... · Market Data / Supplier Selection / Event Presentations / User Experience Benchmarking / Best Practice / Template Files