Archive for the ‘Measuring Engagement’ Category

Visitor Retention Mapping

Friday, January 30th, 2009

The following is from the January 2009 Drilling Down Newsletter.  Got a question about Customer Measurement, Management, Valuation, Retention, Loyalty, Defection?  Just ask your question.  Also, feel free to leave a comment. 

Want to see the answers to previous questions?  The pre-blog newsletter archives are here.

Q: The research folks in my company are trying to convince me that measuring sessions and Page Views per Session is more effective than using Recency and Sessions, as you advocate in your book, for a retention metric.

A: For a content site, the Page Views / Session measure can be used as a measure of visitor quality and appropriate marketing to the right audience – a customer acquisition idea – not retention.  And it really needs to be broken out by Source – the average has little actionable meaning.  You want to know the Visitor Sources, and then look at this metric by Source.  This is still Frequency though  – what about visitors who don’t come back?

Q: I am having some difficulty in making a decision regarding this. They want to give me a matrix with Page Views per Session on the Y axis and Total Sessions on the X axis as the “customer retention map”.

(more…)

From Audience to the Individual

Wednesday, January 21st, 2009

Prompted by Avinash’s post on Recency (if this topic interests you, there is much more here), I have to return to an idea that keeps running through my head:

Why do so many Marketing people fail to understand the basic underlying dynamics of Interactive / Online Marketing?  Relative to the Comments on Avinash’s post, why would Marketers not be interested in the Recency metric?  If the Marketers are not aware of it, why would Analysts not push it to them, show them the power of it?

The more I think about this issue, as I have been for several years now, the more confident I become the answer is quite simple: Nobody ever taught most Marketers how to communicate properly to Individuals.  Their training, their experiences, their peers, their conferences, all of it is about Marketing to Audiences.  The nameless, faceless hordes represented by GRP’s.

They simply don’t know how to do it any other way. 

And as a result, neither does whoever they report to. 

Which means any Marketing Accountability or Productivity Metrics, if they exist, are about Audiences, not Individuals.

So, all the Marketers care about are Audiences, these one-off blips on the screen, as opposed to Individuals, who carry longer-term, Potential Value to the Company that can be measured with Recency.

That’s why they allow the blasting of e-mails, they buy untargeted impressions.  They repeat what they know from offline, online.

Sad, really.  A one-way thought process in a two-way world.

What can we do about it? 

I’m going to talk about these concepts with a few Marketers during the AMA’s Digital Marketing Lab at M.planet next week.

I’ll let you know how it goes…

Update: I should probably skip Marketing, go straight to the CFO.

NCDM 08: What was Hot?

Friday, December 12th, 2008

With two very intense days of 5-track sessions going at NCDM 08, it was difficult to pay attention to everything that was going on.  Still, by picking up handouts from sessions I did not go to, I could get a sense of what the hot topics were this year:

1.  Web Plays Data Friendly - Almost every session had a web component in it, the BI folks are getting it done.  The data is coming off the web / out of web analytics and into the data warehouse so everybody knows what is really going on. 

Much of this work is being done by the big service bureaus, not the companies themselves, as far as I could tell.  Web Intelligence, baby.

2.  Media Mix Models – which typically show online Display advertising as a poor choice for allocating marketing budget to when you are also running offline media; the yield is quite poor versus almost every other media.  Search, as you might expect, Rocks on Productivity, though TV still rules for Productivity and moving the needle.

The implication here is you’d be much better off running TV to generate / amplify Search behavior than running Display to do the same.  Offline for Awareness, Online for Intent / Desire

3.  Contact Optimization – I’ve written before about what ultimately happens when you don’t have a Contact Strategy.  At some point, BI will measure the bottom line impact of every division in the company pounding customers with the division’s own contact strategy (Hint: you are driving your customers crazy).  Then, move all customer contact to a centralized model which controls contact by source of new customer and value generated, measured through controlled testing.

This movement should not be surprising, given the whole “customer in control” and “social” movements which onliners give so much lip service to but never take action on.  Well, not never, but rarely.

4.  Measuring Engagement – yes, Engagement.  OFFLINE, as well as online.  The overwhelming message was this: it does not make any sense, and actually costs you money, to keep pounding your customers with any kind of communication when they don’t respond / interact.  You can measure dis-Engagement, and when you see it, you should stop communicating – online or offline. 

And these folks proved it, over and over, with real math.  See related #3 above.  If you’d like to see a detailed e-mail example of this concept, check out this case study.

And of course:  Models and more models.  Like Hierarchical Bayesian and Disaggregate Discrete Choice.

Boy, I love it when you talk like that.

 

NCDM Show – you going?

Wednesday, December 3rd, 2008

Next week I will be moderating a panel at the NCDM show. 

Don’t know NCDM?  If you’re a web analyst interested in what happens in BI from a Marketing perspective, this is the show for you – National Center for Database Marketing

I’m moderating a “shootout” panel titled Web Analytics Solutions Showdown: How Do You Measure Customer Engagement? with panelists Barry Parshall from WebTrends, John Squire from Coremetrics, and David Kirschner from Omniture (Jon Gibson / ClickTracks had to drop out).

No right or wrong answers for this session, mostly a demonstration of how different WA platforms approach the challenge of “Measuring Engagement” differently.  Just tell us what you believe “Engagement” is and how it is measured with your tool using a case study.

(more…)

Offline Engagement Modeling

Wednesday, November 26th, 2008

The following is from the November 2008 Drilling Down Newsletter.  Got a question about Customer Measurement, Management, Valuation, Retention, Loyalty, Defection?  Just ask your question.  Also, feel free to leave a comment. 

Want to see the answers to previous questions?  The pre-blog newsletter archives are here.

Offline Engagement Modeling

Q:  In our business (airline) – particularly on the loyalty side – we’ve been using both RFM as well as lifetime and current cumulative totals.  For instance in our mileage program, we look at both lifetime miles earned and used as well as current balance. 

Does that seem appropriate?

A:  Well, I guess the question is appropriate for what purpose, what action are you driving to?

For example, if you were to divide metrics into “strategic” and “tactical”, meaning “for management / long-term planning” and “for campaigns / taking short-term action” then you get different answers.

(more…)

Social Media Questions

Tuesday, July 29th, 2008

I have some questions on social “media” prompted by Mike’s post and in particular the comments the post received.

First, can we please agree that social applications and social media are different ideas that sometimes happen together?  I think creating this difference would dramatically help the social discussion along by focusing it and making sure people understand exactly what is being discussed in context.

Now, I suppose you could argue that the comments, pods, and so forth are “media”, to which I would ask, then what is your definition of Content?  You can’t have it both ways.  If Comments are Content, how about Social Content and Social Media as two different ideas?

(more…)

Friction Model

Wednesday, July 16th, 2008

There’s been another eruption of discussion on Engagement.  If (like me) you’re more interested in the higher level ideas not so oriented towards the “tool” aspects of this discussion, make sure you catch this post and hefty comments.  For more, also herehere, and here.

Friction in Campaigns

At a high level, there really are 2 kinds of Engagement, and I think it would be helpful for us to start differentiating between them.

(more…)

Offline Path Analysis

Friday, July 11th, 2008

It’s always a treat to work with bright, committed people and I’m happy to say this was the case with the folks at the Oriental Institute.  These higher ed environments can be exceedingly complex from a Marketing perspective, and the OI is way up there on the complexity scale.  So much to do, so few resources to do it with.

That said, we came up with a crackerjack plan that should significantly boost paid Membership at the OI without additional time or money resources.  How?  Path Analysis.

Personally, I have never understood why many web analytics folks don’t care for Path Analysis; I can only surmise these folks are simply not doing it correctly.  For one thing, Paths don’t make any sense without the context of a behavioral segmentation – entry page, campaign, etc.  Just like any other web data, Path is useless without segmentation.  Or perhaps these folks don’t know how to interpret the data they see because they can’t survey a Path for the answers. 

(more…)

Marketing Bands: the Numbers

Sunday, June 29th, 2008

(A post by post index of this Marketing Bands Series is here.)

Just wanted to add a quick piece about the results of Optimizing the Bands (see Band Model) - this is the Marketing Productivity Blog after all!  Thanks Moe for the reminder

As we Optimized, there were changes in budget allocation by Band, and as a result there was an increase in Net Customer Value – the goal of the Optimization program in the first place.  For those of you not following the whole story, the budget remained constant, we simply allocated it to the highest and best use through testing.

(more…)

Optimizing End of LifeCycle (Bands 6 – 8)

Wednesday, June 25th, 2008

In the Band 5 Optimization for HSN, we looked for high ROMI special situations in the database.  This is really classic database marketing stuff, you’re looking for segments, and you’re looking for ways to Optimize those segments.  You could spend the rest of a career doing this kind of thing; there are always new segments like FIPS being revealed if you have an active analytical staff.

There were other programs in Band 5 based primarily on product-related transition phases in the LifeCycle; I won’t go into these here.  If you are interested in these ideas, I wrote one detailed example, which combines Customer Experience Management / Band 3 – Customer Comment Analysis / Math / Product / Marketing right here.

(more…)