The Power of Context of TV GRPs

Advertising on Television comes naturally to every advertiser. It must be a rare advertiser who has the money to do a TVC but doesn't. In this note though, I am not debating the merits or de-merits of TV advertising. I want to focus on those who do decide to advertise on TV - and how do they thereafter use the Television medium.

Now, there are various ways of interacting with target consumers on television, But, I am not going to discuss the possibilities and the pros and cons of the options. We will  just talk about the most widely used method  - of airing the Brand TVC in the commercial break. I believe that over 95% of the monies spent on TV advertising are on the TVC so, that is what we should try to unravel.

It starts with a client brief for airing the TVC and all sorts of action start at the media agency end to propose the operating levels, edits to be used, phasing of the edits, weeks on air, genre structure, etc etc. While, all of the above decisions have a rationale and a process - all science here is based on the aggregation of thousands of TVC exposures. 

The TV Spot
Each insertion of the TVC is termed as a "spot". Each spot has views, termed as "impressions". The number of impressions depend on the number of people watching that channel at that point of time. These impressions expressed as a percentage of the total size of the target group are termed as the "rating or TVR" of the spot (simplistic view). So, there are multiple spots in a campaign, each resulting into impressions and delivering some TVRs and the sum total of these TVRs are what we call the GRPs (Gross Rating Points). As these GRPs accumulate over the campaign period, depending on the unique number of people who have seen the TVC and how many times each has seen the TVC, we derive the reach and frequency of the campaign. The rate at which a campaign reaches new people gives us what we call the reach build-up curve for the campaign.   

You see that in all of the measures above, there is no qualitative value attached to an exposure. Each exposure is like a grain of sand - each one same as the other. And, that is what I think needs to be fundamentally understood and realized before we start debating on the operating levels of any campaign.

The Right GRP
And, this is where the dilemma lies as there are different schools of thought about this. On the one hand, is the belief that each exposure is the same while, on the other hand the difference of each exposure is appreciated. 

For those who believe in the former, life is easy and it is all simple arithmetic to build a campaign - the objective often being to get the maximum GRPs or Reach@Frequency in the minimum cost. They are ignore to the nature of the GRPs as long as the aggregate of the GRPs delivers to them their campaign operating levels. In achieving the cheapest - their is a conscious disregard to an extent to spillovers, extent of over/under exposures, market intricacies, etc.

If we look at the school of thought that recognizes the difference in the GRPs - their life is certainly more complex.  The value delivered by each exposure depends on various dimensions of the exposure, such as the nature of programming, time of day, day of week, etc. These dimensions provide what we call "Context" for the exposure.

Understanding Context
The deliverable that we want from a TVC exposure is that it should be seen by the desired people and that these people should understand the messaging. So, the selection of the context should be based on whether it targets the right kind of people required for the brand in the right state of mind. The premise being that if the viewers are engaged in the context, they will also be engaged in the advertising and hence the probability for them to notice the TVC and to understand the TVC will be higher as against an exposure in a context which is not of high interest to them. Just like "a picture is worth a thousand words" - the right context is worth a whole lot of non-contextual GRPs.

Of course! there is always the pricing argument as most often than not, getting the right context is a compromise between cost, reach and quality.

The Measurement Challenge
But, all such discussions are limited by the nature of the syndicated TV measurement study which only provides data on the demographic audience so, one really does not know the equation between cost, reach and quality for the right brand audience. So, for an advertiser to have the right media plan one has to resort to planning metrics beyond what are provided by the syndicated TV measurement system.

The current TV system never advocated absolute reliance on its metrics for constructing the TV plan. All it provides are measures that are an aid to creating and measuring the TV plan deliveries, and on limited dimensions. These dimensions are adequate for trading of TV GRPs as the currency. However, it would be an injustice to media planing to rely just on this data for arriving at the construct of the plan.

Thus, the plan is only as good as the logic for its construct. And, once we have the construct one needs to translate this construct into a plan based on the limited dimensions available in the TV planning system. While, many attempt to do this but, in an effort to optimize investments in the TV planning system they often loose the construct of the media plan.

To illustrate - do we optimize on reach for the demographic audience as available in the measurement system or do we build in a factor of the reach among the real brand audience? Do we evaluate the efficiency of the plan on the cost per rating in the demographic audience or the cost per rating in the desired audience?  

Optimizing the Construct
The plan optimization needs to go beyond the TV measurement system to draw a balance between - total plan GRPs, total cost of the plan, cost per desired audience (not just the demographic audience) of the plan, reach and reach build-up in the desired audience, the engagement score of the plan, spillover in terms of audience & over-exposure, etc.

Unless, we build beyond the demographic measurement, we may be very happy with the plan deliveries but, what the campaign delivers for business is quite another matter - often not measured, if measured not calibrated and if calibrated, often based on the same belief of sameness of GRPs. Those who have been able to unravel the power of the context of TV GRPs are the ones who will get the most out of TV advertising.

The rest will keep rolling the drum without achieving the real objectives of the brand.. at least not in the most efficient way.

Are Clients really serious about Media ROI?

I have spent more than a decade now in the media industry and as a media agency representative, I have had the opportunity to work with scores of clients who invest crores of rupees on advertising. And, during this journey "Media ROI" has always been an item that has been discussed again and again.

Media ROI management is an exact science and there is a huge bank of knowledge that exists in academia on the subject. Globally, extensive work has been done by leading brands and agencies on establishing the ROI of media. However, there is very limited applied work that is available with any advertiser or agency in India to showcase Media ROI in action.

"Accountability" is the buzzword and the whole industry keeps talking of the need for media agencies to become accountable for the media investments being recommended for the clients. And, yes that is the right direction for the industry to move in. But, driving accountability requires an ecosystem that encourages this change. Unfortunately, I do not think any of the stakeholders in media are taking any significant or concrete steps to move in this direction.

Media ROI Management first of all requires establishing a relationship between the media investments and tangible business results; and, at the second level there is a need for attribution of the business results to various elements of the media mix thus deriving the ROI of each element of a campaign. However, these apparently simple steps are extremely challenging to execute in reality today and all the constituents of the media ecosystem (Clients, Agencies & Media Owners) are responsible for this situation. However, I am limiting this note only to the role that the Agencies and Clients have to play and shall deliberate on the Media Owners part at another time.

No, I am not shying away from the responsibility that the agencies have. Of course! the ultimate onus of establishing the Media ROI is on the media agencies as it is their business which is at stake but, they cant do it on their own. Over the years the media agencies have invested considerably in developing methods and tools and built statistical capabilities to be ROI-Ready.

But, there are certain responsibilities that have to be taken up by the advertisers to quantify Media ROI and there are three primary requirements that the advertisers need to provide towards this mission.  

First, is having a clarity on what is the measure that a particular campaign needs to drive. Of Course! revenue, profit margin, increased sales and market share are the final goals but, these are the financial goals which are generic to every business. A deeper investigation into the brand challenge is required to identify the specific objective that the campaign must deliver on. These specific objectives could be increasing the consumer base or driving higher per capita consumption, etc. Going a step further, advertisers need to have a diagnosis of what are the barriers to these objectives being achieved. 

The second requirement from the advertisers is to setup a system to measure and record the state of the brand on the measures referred to above, on a continuous basis. Yes, there are some advertisers who are quite evolved in this but, most others have still a long way to go.  There are clients that very generously invest in measuring market sales (for self and competitors) using syndicated retail audits and/ or setting up consumer panels. Also, some advertisers invest in Usage & Attitude Studies and Awareness Tracking studies which deliver a lot of the mind measures required to understand the brand challenges. 

The third and the last requirement is for the advertisers to record all the market interventions and changes in the marketing mix in a systemic manner (for self, and if possible for competition) as this data is very vital input to drawing inferences related to the attribution of cause of the movements in the state of the brand in the market. 

The media agencies have data and information that is limited to the media research available in the industry and all data beyond this has to be provided by the advertiser. With the growth of digital new data sources such as web-traffic, search volume data, volume of brand mentions, etc are becoming available which can also be accessed by the media agencies, but as of now that data has its limitations. It is also very critical that there be an integrated approach to develop this data ecosystem such that all these data are aligned to each other and can be used seamlessly for any further analysis. 

While crores get spent on advertising, there is an apparent resistance to make investments to setup the above mentioned systems even though these investments would be a very minute percentage of the advertising budgets. There is often an expectation from some clients that these investments should be borne by the agencies. But, looking at the media agency business model it is very unlikely that the agencies would ever be able to make these client specific investments. 

So, if Media ROI really matters to clients and they are serious that it should be an integral part of the evaluation of the performance of media, then that expectation has to be backed by these investments and this data should be seamlessly and continuously shared with the agencies. Of Course! there will never be perfect information and ultimately the agencies will work with what is finally available. Even today, work on establishing a relationship between media investments and business results continues across clients; but, with adequate data systems such work can become an integral part of the planning process.

And, lastly Clients need to realize that Media ROI management is a resource-intensive occupation and cannot come as part of the current client-agency remuneration arrangements.

I hope that all constituents will make due efforts to evolve and in the near future continuous measurement of Media ROI will be a feasible reality leading to higher investment efficiency and higher profitability for the Clients.

My TVC is ready. Now give me the Media Strategy!!

Yes, this is the classic approach that almost every advertiser is guilty of.

No, this is not a personal crib by a media agency guy because the client gives precedence to the TVC over the media strategy. I feel sad for the advertisers who behave in this manner, I feel sorry for the shareholders of the company whose money is not being spent prudently.

I am in no way suggesting that a TVC is not an important part of the media assets that build value for a brand; only that a TVC is not always the way to furthering the brand. In the current media landscape, there are scores of opportunities for brands to interact with consumers and to tell them about the strength of their brands. Before a decision is made about the manner of interaction that a brand chooses, a lot of investigation is required to understand the challenge for the brand in the market and the suitability of the various touchpoints available. It is only after such an elaborate investigation that a Brand should decide if a TVC is the best way forward.

Am I suggesting that advertisers do not investigate well enough before they decide to spend crores of Rupees on airing their TVCs. Yes, I am. 

Of course! there are some who are very elaborate in their analysis; but, for most advertisers, a TVC is the default way to express the brand idea. 

Every Brand has its unique situation in the market and according to the ambition of the brand in the market it has its specific challenges that it needs to overcome for the consumers to prefer it over competing brands. This challenge is a result of the nature of the category that the brand operates in; the mindset of the consumers that the brand is targeting and the type of competition that the brand faces in the category. While, for some it could be the lack of awareness about the brand; for others it could be the "perceived price-value" equation that a brand offers. The adverse "price-value" equation itself can have multiple dimensions and hence, multiple avenues which the brand can resort to for redress. It is imperative for the brands to arrive at the specific challenges that are a hurdle to their progress. The nature of interaction that a brand must have with the consumers is totally dependent on this challenge that a brand identifies. 

At the next level, there needs to be a comprehensive analysis of the options available to the brand to discuss this challenge with their prospective consumers and to arrive at the best way to interact with the consumers. I have great respect for the "creative" and I am sure that a good creative can solve any challenge even with the TVC approach. However, brands have the choice of a multitude of touchpoints; each having its own strength for different kinds of brand challenges. So, unless, there is some strong reason not to utilize touchpoints other than the TVC; brand need to go beyond the default TVC approach.

Media Strategy by definition, does all of the investigation stated above and proposes a structure for the communication campaign that the brand needs to execute for achieving the brand goals. This Communication Campaign is an enumeration of a set of activities, each of a specified intensity and duration that need to be triggered at specific times across different touchpoints to achieve the desired effect on the mindset or behaviour of the targeted set of consumers. A TVC may well be one of the activities in this set that the Media Strategy recommends.

It would do good to the brands to get their media agency to work with them to craft a comprehensive media strategy (also, in partnership with the creative agency and other stakeholders). And, if the recommended Communication Campaign calls for a TVC, so be it.

A TVC is a very powerful tool and if used effectively in the communication plan, it can change the fate of brands. Let us use it prudently. While, this article talks of a TVC, the same applies to many other media options that so often intrude in our daily life without affecting us in any meaningful way.

Sponsorships should deliver much more than brand exposure.

Sponsorships have a very respected place amongst the various advertising formats available to brands across media. As a tool, Sponsorships are excellent but ultimaltely it is the manner of application that determines its success. Many brands have used sponsorships very effectively to strengthen their relationship with consumers. However, not all instances of sponosrships that we see around us are as effective. Let us delve a little deeper into what one should expect from a sponsorship. But, first we must understand the state of regular advertising today.

 

The most common format is what we all know as an 'advertisement'. This is the spot in a commercial break either in Television, Cinema, Radio or a ad-space in Newspapers, Magazines, Website, etc. These ads are a very rude interjection by a brand into the media consumption experience of the consumer. However, as these are a means of funding for the content - the consumers express their gratitude to them by way of their attention.

 

These ads are content-agnostic. At its best, this advertising format only delivers the encoded brand message independent of the message or leave-behind of the content that they are riding. As long as the content does not grossly violate any serious brand directive and is acceptable to their consumer segments - ads can be placed along with such content. Brands use the content either to reach specific target groups or as as a context and brands that are related to this context are expected to have a better return on their investments than those that are not related to the content in any way.

 

This advertising format is over-used, abused and as a virus has started eating into content itself. Often TV programs loose their viewers during the commercial breaks; Newspaper pages with a high clutter are often skipped. Of Course! only those ads which are very high in either their information quotient or entertainment quotient get some attention while the others are punished with Ad-Avoidance. Getting noticed in such clutter is quite a challenge for brands today.

 

In this scenario, generally speaking - Sponsorships are used more as a means of standing-out in this extreme advertising clutter. Using such a wonderful tool as a sponsorship only to be "seen" is gross under-utilization of its capabilities. Given the premium at which sponsorships are available these days, one must really think hard before taking on sponsorships only for driving premium exposure.

 

Brands serve a purpose in the life of their target consumers and add value to their experiences. We often term this as the brand-benefit. The sponsorship too, must add value to the experince of the consumer and this "value" ideally should be in tandem with the benefit that the consumer expects from the brand itsef.

 

A sponsorhip as a visible entity is only a "brand logo" and hence does not have a tangible brand message attached to it. The brand message is a take-out by the consumer of the experience that the consumer gets interacting with the property. The message that a Sponsorships expresses is a function of the choice of the property being sponsored and the manner of association of the brand with the sponsored property.

 

One should consider multiple factors in deciding on a sponsorship but, the strength of association of the brand with the property is the most critical to ensure success. At the minimum, the brand provides the funding for the property and gets a sponsorship tag or logo presence. The extent of branding depends on the amount of funding. Whether a brand is a title sponsor, associate sponsor it really does not matter to the consumer. Whether the program is :"brought to you by" or "powered by" really does not interest the consumer. These are only jargons that allow media sellers to excite brand managers and enhance their own revenue. What matters is if the brand is just present as a logo or is the brand involved in delivering the experience. The higher the involvment of the brand in delivering this experience, the stronger the association and hence better the chances of the sponosrship being a valuable asset for the brand.

 

What should be this experience that the sponsorship delivers to the consumer is a million dollar question. I have seen many sponsorship executions where the connection between the experience delivered and the desired brand objective is so remote and convoluted that only the brand manager understands the connection while the execution does not deliver any brand-benefit to the consumer. The brand custodians involved in the decision need to clearly understand the communicatoin task for the brand and hence select, design and execute the property to then deliver the desired experience which can easily be associated by the consumer  - with the brand.

 

Do not use sponsorship only for brand exposure. If you only need brand exposure - regular advertising with a well crafted message and a well-designed media plan is the optimal way forward. But, if you want to go beyond brand-exposure and brand-talk and let the consumer himself taste the brand benefit in some form, then Sponsorships is the way ahead. Self-realization of the brand benefit by the consumer is far more powerful than a score of ads trying to tell him what the brand stands for.

 

Sponsorships must provide a tangible value to the desired consumer segment so that the brand gains their solidarity in return.

Client gets the work it deserves.

Media Agencies started as back-end print releasing departments of creative agencies many many years ago. The task of media releases was a menial task that the then industry leaders granted only 2.5% commission of the 15% that was available for the creative agencies.

As the media landscape has become more and more complex, the media agencies have risen to the challenge. Since then, the media agencies have evolved - upgraded their toolkit, added skill sets, increased the scope of services they can deliver and have come up as a formidable component of the advertising and communication industry.

 

Yes, the media agency still does media releases but a media release is just the tail end of all the valuable functions that a media agency performs.

 

No other entity has a better understanding of the media landscape of India. The largest media research agencies, the eminent consultancies, the rate-focused auditors, the tv-skewed creative agencies and the self-biased media houses - all barely skim the surface in understanding the media consumption patterns of today's consumer. A media agency is capable of a very clinical analysis of what media the consumer consumes and which touhpoints are best suited for brand communication.

 

Media Strategists today, are armed with databases and tools superior to what any other communication industry entity can either afford or has the commitment to develop. These tools enable media agencies to diagnose brand & consumer relationships and setup media tasks with great precision.

 

It is no longer about a TV or a Print Schedule but the design of the overall architechture of how the multiple media touchpoints included in a brand campaign are programmed to interact and influence the minds of consumers. Creativity is no longer the domain only of develpoing ad-creatives and is inherent in the methods by which media agencies design these media solutions for brand campaigns.

 

Overall, media agencies have skill sets and tools that are a fusion of consumer understanding, category & brand diagnosis, media understanding, creative solution design - all culminating into the function of preparing media-wise schedules (media plans), optimizing these plans to deliver cost-efficiency, releasing and monitoring each component of a brand campaign.

 

So much is available for a client when it signs on a media agency as an AOR. But, what a client is able to extract from the agency is directly related to the strength of their belief in what a media agency can/ should deliver; the focus of the senior management on working with the media agency as a partner; and an understanding of the overall deliverables that a media agency is capable of.

 

The media agencies have evolved over the past decade and are ready to deliver total communication solutions. The Client needs to review what he/ she is getting out of the media agency today and work towards getting more..getting more beyond implmentation planning & buying.

 

Ultimately, the Client will get what it demands (deserves).

Know Your Customer (KYC)

KYC is a very talked about term theses days amongst most sales oriented organizations. In fact, among some domains (Telecom, Finance, etc) this is actually being enforced by the regulatory authorities. However, this is one aspect that agencies have to take up on a war footing.

No, no.. I dont mean to say that agencies dont know their customer.. it is a bit deeper than that..

It is one thing to know the people who "man" the various stations/ offices but quite another to know the business that they are in. And, that is what I mean that agencies need to understand the business because, it is the business or the brand who is the Customer for the agency.

Yes, no one will admit that they dont understand the business of their Client; but, conversely if I were to ask the Clients if they think that the people at their agency understand their business - the answer may not be a very sweet one. So, lets accept it - we know very little about our clients businesses.

And, this I believe is at the core of the usually publicized commoditization of agency deliverables.

In the absence of suitable knowledge about the business, the communication recommendations from the media as well as the creative agency would be limited to some very superficial idea about how their inputs and efforts would affect the business. The dialogue between the agency and the client is limited to only "media language" and does not graduate to "business talk" that really matters to the client. Unless, the Client appreciates our knowledge and understanding of his business - he/ she wont really give any weightage to any inputs in the realm of strategy.

Doing a campaign is a very transactional thing and we do these by the score - however, strategy is something which is very integral and cannot be done on the basis of the media knowledge only.

But, it is a chicken and egg story. Unless, we understand the business, the client wont involve us in the strategic process and unless we get involved in the strategic process - we wont really be able to understand the business. Anyways, the onus for change is on the agency - unless, the agency is happy just delivering vanilla media campaigns and over a period of time getting more and more marginalized and commoditized.

So, the new mantra of "KYC" has to be taken up by the agencies in earnest and impute the learnings into the process of media solution design. This stance of KYC would need re-orientation of skillsets and resources so that the focus is on the strategic and not just the transactional deliveries.

Lastly, I would say that the ultimate beneficiaries of an agency that understands their business - shall be the clients themselves. Hence, the Clients must encourage this shift and not keep the agency at arms-length when it comes to sharing knowledge and information about their business.

Only, an agency that knows your business can grow your business!!

Media Strategists - To Be Hired

Media is evolving...changing.. adapting.. we all know that.. there is enough said and written about it and continues to be written.... That is not what I intend to talk about in this writeup. What is more interesting is what the 'stakeholders' are doing about these changes.. or maybe rather what they are not doing about it.

The Media Ecosystem is comprised of the Media Owners, Media Agencies, Creative Agencies and Media Researchers and some other emerging and secondary businessess too. For all of them these changes that are happening in media are affecting their business at the core and each is responding to the challenges in their own way. But what is affecting the lives of all of the above the most is the way in which the 'Advertisers' are responding to the changes in media.

The increasing number of brands catering to similar need sets with ever decreasing differentiation in the functional deliverables has consistently increased the imporance of creating brand value for the advertisers. Communication and Media have palyed a pivotal role in aiding the brands in strengthening brand value. Media is increasingly becoming an even more important ingredient for the brands. In terms of the spends on various elements for a brand in its marketing efforts - the percentage allocated to media has been gradually increasing.

As the leverage that media therefore has in transforming brands has increased what has also increased is the absolute amount of money being spent by the advertisers on media. And, it is the latter that has triggered off more reactions amongst the advertiseres as it is a more tangible effect. 'Increassed levarage on the brand' is a very debateable claim but 'increased media spends' is recorded in every balance sheet. Now, this increased media spending has kicked off a series of changes at the advertisers end.

1. With the increasing time and media knowledge required to manage the media purchase the advertisers created the position of a 'media coordinator'.

2. The 'finance/ procurement' departments of companies started taking an active interest in the buying of media

3. There is an increased involvement of the brand managers in the actual buy of media

While, I do have a perspective on how each of the above are dealing with the challenge of buying media and how they can do better, I will leave that for another day.

What is important to understand is that all of the above are genereally speaking intersted in the act of 'media buying'. However, there is an important aspect that needs more focus from the advertisers and that is the aspect of 'media strategy'.

I define media strategy as the role of structuring the right media solution to address the brand challenges. At present, this task of media  design is falling somewhere between the 'brand manager' and the 'media coordinator' and is in no way being aided by the transgression of the procurement department into the buying of media.

Media startegist as a role requires to take inputs from the brand managers, media coordinator, media agency, OOH agency, digital agency, creative agency, analytics team and other components of the marketing mix to deliver integrated communication solutions for the portfolio of brands. At present, this function which is inherent to a media agency is not getting its due because, there is no one on the advertisers side to resonate with this approach to media solution design. The current point of daily interaction for a media agency is the media coordinator who has a totally different KRA while the Brand Manager just does not have enough bandwidth to address this requirement.

So, while the advertisers continue to spend more and more on media, they are yet not reliazing the full potential of media. I look forward to advertisers addressing this and creating this role of 'Media Strategists' in their ranks.

In my subsequent posts, I will talk more of the current baises in making media plans and how the nature of media solutions can change with the intervention of media strategists.