Monday, February 03, 2014

Duration-Based Metrics Versus Impression-Base Metrics – Which Is More Effective?

Do you still believe that share of voice leads to share of market?

Or, are you, like me, of the belief that impressions alone are not enough to build a brand anymore.

That today, it’s share of time that leads to share of mind, which then leads to share or market.

By share of time, I mean, what percentage of time each consumer spends deciding which product to purchase – it could be ten seconds, ten minutes or ten hours - did your advertising capture?

The brand that captures the largest share of that time, will probably also capture that consumer’s dollars.

An impression doesn’t measure share of time.  An impression is nothing more than an opportunity to engage with the consumer.  

Share of time measures the actual engagement per opportunity.

Exposed to a thirty-second spot, did the viewer watch all thirty seconds?

Or, only three seconds?

(And no, we shouldn’t be talking forced views here.  We should only be talking about advertising in which the viewer initiates the interaction.)

Chances are, the viewer who watched all thirty, is more likely to be “sold” than the viewer that watched only three seconds.

That’s share of time.

Today, it can be measured for any advertising that runs digitally.

Imagine how the thinking in the advertising community would change if we found out that capturing 5 minutes of a consumer's time would increase sales of a particular brand by 90%.

Impression-based metrics would become irrelevant.

Duration-based metrics would be the new black.

Imagine how the creative would change if advertisers worked towards the goal of duration versus impressions.

Hell, the spots may even become worth watching.

And, who's not for that?

No comments:

Post a Comment