BRAND INFLUENCE REPORT

The Cross Channel MeTriC for MarkeTing iMpaCT

AUTHORS:

Joanna Seddon Brandon evanS

BRAND INFLUENCE REPORT

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The marketer’s job has become increasingly more difficult over the last five years, and the pace of change is accelerating. Successful marketing used to be a fairly clear formula that went like this: 1. Identify a core consumer insight 2. Develop an eye-catching advertising campaign 3. Identify mass media channels with high concentrations of your target market 4. Purchase those impressions as cheaply as possible

everyThing haS Changed,
exCepT thE mEAsUREmENt mEtRICs!

Today,

In addition to the traditional outlets of TV, radio, print and out-of-home, we now have digital, social media, word-of-mouth, mobile and countless variations on each of these. The staid metrics of reach and impressions simply lack the same clarity they once had when spread across a now endless myriad of channels and type of marketing activities. Smart marketers like Coca-Cola CMO, Joe Tripodi, see the need to move away from impressions as it no longer is a good barometer of the impact that marketers seek. While some other metrics have surfaced such as “engagements,” they have failed to help marketers understand the relative impact of their various marketing initiatives. For instance, an engagement has come to stand for everything from clicking on a banner ad, to watching a video, to spending two hours in a friend’s home learning about a new product. Clearly not all engagements or impressions are created equal. With the vast array of brand interactions that consumers now experience, marketers need to better understand their media purchases and the estimated impact before they spend, in real time.

The CroSS Channel MeTriC for MarkeTing iMpaCT

BRAND INFLUENCE REPORT
InTRODUCIng A nEW METRIC FOR MEASURIng MARkETIng IMPACT In TODAY’S WORlD To address this immense marketing problem, a new metric is required. This metric needs to factor not only quantitative inputs (impressions/engagements), but also the qualitative components of each marketing channel in driving actual marketing impact. To solve this need, Brand Influence was developed specifically to allow marketers to understand the estimated output or impact of nearly any type of marketing activity. Brand Influence factors in three key determinants of marketing impact previously ignored by universal metrics. These three factors, when multiplied by reach, provide the total impact or the “Brand Influence” of the marketing activity: Quality Quantity

INTENSITY
how involved is the audience in the message?

X

PROXIMITY
how close and trusted is the source?

X

EXPOSURE
how long is the audience exposed?

X

REACH
how large is the audience?

=

BRAND INFLUENCE
estimated brand impact of marketing spend

This new Brand Influence metric enables marketers, for the first time, to understand the overall impact of their intended marketing mix before implementation. When integrated into marketing platforms, marketers will also be able to monitor results in real time and evaluate post campaign to determine how they delivered against the estimated Brand Influence. This metric can be tracked across any marketing channel and can be directly linked to changes in brand equity and intent to purchase.

ThE BRAnD InFlUEnCE RESEARCh TEAM The Brand Influence metric was developed by Joanna Seddon, former CEO of Millward Brown’s marketing consulting practice, and her team of experts, in partnership with Brandon Evans, CEO and founder of Crowdtap, the first on-demand brand participation network. Over a period of nine months, the team explored the key factors that drive significant change to the core metrics for any marketer, brand equity and ROI. The research began by exploring the key channels frequently used by marketers to understand what factors most influence marketing impact. The three factors identified were proximity, intensity and exposure, each of which is detailed further in the body of this report. Through surveys, the researchers determined the weight of each factor by marketing channel. Through this understanding of both the qualitative (proximity/intensity) and quantitative factors (exposure and reach), marketers can now determine the total Brand Influence of nearly any marketing activity or media buy. This measure tells marketers how much any marketing channel or activity will likely influence the audience around their brand.

The CroSS Channel MeTriC for MarkeTing iMpaCT

BRAND INFLUENCE REPORT

The last piece of the research focused on identifying how Brand Influence impacts ROI and the brand equity pyramid, which includes familiarity, favorability, purchase intent and advocacy. To understand this impact, five case studies were conducted on Crowdtap over a period of six months. This research focused on pre- and post-analysis to determine the impact that each Brand Influence point achieved to a marketer’s core metrics. Crowdtap was selected as the platform to conduct the research on, as it allowed the researchers direct access to a variety of social marketing activities on demand (e.g. peer-to-peer sharing of content, online discussions, product sampling and brand-sponsored house parties). This enabled the testing of discrete social marketing activities to gauge their performance vs. other media channels. Some key findings of this research are listed below. The in-depth findings and more detailed methodology of this research are summarized within the body of this report.

nEW METRIC EnABlES nEW FInDIngS On MARkETIng MIX AnD EFFECTIVEnESS While traditional media still provides great value due to its reach capability, most social channels deliver deeper consumer interactions, providing marketers with the greatest ROI and lift to key brand metrics. As Brand Influence measures the total weighted impact of a marketer’s spend, marketers should look at spend by how many Brand Influence points they can purchase, as this relates more directly to lifts in brand equity and ROI than channel agnostic measures such as impressions and engagements. Marketing channels that mix on and off line sharing, such as peer-to-peer sampling and branded house parties deliver on average 10,000 and 1,700 times more Brand Influence points per person reached than TV respectively.

reaD The fUll reporT for More on These finDings

The CroSS Channel MeTriC for MarkeTing iMpaCT

BRAND INFLUENCE REPORT

STUDY APPROACh AnD FInDIngS
The measurement model centers on the idea of Brand Influence. Brand Influence measures the power of any marketing action to impact consumers’ advocacy of the client’s brand and willingness to purchase its products. This power is measured in points of Brand Influence, creating a common denominator that can be used to judge the value of different types of marketing activity. The value of a Brand Influence point is then established through ROI measurement based on pre- and postmeasurements of Brand Advocacy and Purchase Intent to enable marketers to understand the value of Brand Influence.

hOW BRAnD InFlUEnCE IS CAlCUlATED The Influence metric is a composite measure based on a combination of message impact (quality of interaction) with exposure and reach (quantity of interaction).

CoMposiTion of The branD inflUenCe MeTriC
Quality Quantity

INTENSITY
how involved is the audience in the message?

X

PROXIMITY
how close and trusted is the source?

X

EXPOSURE
how long is the audience exposed?

X

REACH
how large is the audience?

=

BRAND INFLUENCE
estimated brand impact of marketing spend

The CroSS Channel MeTriC for MarkeTing iMpaCT

BRAND INFLUENCE REPORT
A foundation study was conducted to compare the degree of impact of messages (quality of interaction) delivered through different types of media. This leveraged the ability of the Crowdtap platform to provide instantaneous identification of, and overnight feedback from, target audiences. The survey was designed to quantify the quality measurements of each marketing channel and activity that included: • Intensity - how involved is the audience in the message? • Proximity - how close and trusted is the source of the message? Areas of exploration included consumers’ level of trust in information received via different channels, how relevant they found the information, their enjoyment of the time they spent engaging with each channel, the memorability, and their degree of recall of each experience. Enjoyability and Recall results were used to create the measure of involvement (Intensity); data on Trust and Relevance was combined to measure the degree of intimacy (Proximity). The initial research was conducted in October 2010 and included the following sample: general population, n=500; blend of males and females; blend of age groups, 13-75. The objective was to obtain information about the perceptions of consumers toward different media channels’ effectiveness, across both social and traditional media, on line and off line. The two charts below show results for Intensity and Proximity across a variety of channels. The research also allows results to be calculated for many individual Crowdtap actions—from participating in a poll or a discussion, to sharing a Web page or video, to receiving a sample, to attending a sponsored house party. As the diagram below illustrates, the findings from the cross-channel analysis show that social channels, in particular Sampling and house Parties, create much greater quality interactions than traditional media, and that messages delivered through these channels consequently have significantly higher impact on the audience.

The CroSS Channel MeTriC for MarkeTing iMpaCT

BRAND INFLUENCE REPORT
exhibiT 1: MeDia effeCTiveness by Channel
Trying a sample Attending a house party
55% 43% 40% 18% 32% 22% 31% 29% 17% 10% 15% 8% 6% 5% 76% 68% 75% 68%

Online discussion with peers

Video link sent Blog posts

Webpage link sent Magazine ads

Intensity Proximity

TV ads

Online banner ads

The survey results on quality of interactions with different types of media are combined with data relating to the quantity of interactions (Exposure and Reach), to provide a total measure of influence. Two metrics are used: Exposure, i.e. how long was the audience exposed, and Reach, i.e. how many consumers interacted with the message. For Crowdtap interactions, actual numbers can be pulled from the database for each action in a campaign. For comparison with other channels, industry averages are used. After conducting this research, the research team created standard metrics to look at Brand Influence across a variety or marketing activities. These metrics are provided below and the framework developed could easily be applied to any other marketing activities or extrapolated based on similar actions.

The CroSS Channel MeTriC for MarkeTing iMpaCT

BRAND INFLUENCE REPORT
branD inflUenCe by MarkeTing aCTiviTy

The takeaway—traditional media, such as TV, reaches more people, but social campaigns have a more significant influence on the audience.

lInkIng BRAnD InFlUEnCE TO BRAnD EqUITY AnD PURChASE InTEnT The next step of the research centered on tying Brand Influence to ROI. To do so, the research focused on tying Brand Influence points to lifts in direct impact and indirect impact. Pre- and postmeasurements of brand familiarity, brand favorability, purchase intent and brand advocacy were calculated across five client campaigns launched on the Crowdtap platform and were used to establish the linkage between ROI and Brand Influence. First, consumers’ attitudes toward the client’s brand and product were established before the brand launched any actions on Crowdtap. This created a baseline against which increases resulting from the campaign could be quantified. Research was then conducted among people who have participated in each individual action (attended a house party, shared a video, received a sample etc.), to measure how attitudes and perceptions toward the brand and willingness to purchase the product have changed.

The CroSS Channel MeTriC for MarkeTing iMpaCT

BRAND INFLUENCE REPORT
This baseline survey is designed as a straightforward brand equity measurement, with sufficient sample (n=400) to allow the measurement of respondents’ relationship with the brand. The number of respondents is traced at each level of brand equity, from Familiarity, through Favorability, to Purchase Intent and Brand Advocacy. The net Promoter question, “how likely are you to recommend to your friends?” is used to determine the level of Brand Advocacy, to enable easy comparison with industry benchmarks. The output is a brand equity pyramid, representing the proportion of respondents at each level of the pyramid. The percentage of total respondents at the top level provides the baseline metric for Brand Advocacy; the percentage reaching the second level provides the baseline for Purchase Intent.

illUsTraTive exaMple of branD eQUiTy pyraMiD

Brand pyramids: leading fashion retailer (pre and post Crowdtap Campaign)

The above graphic shows one client example of pre- and post analysis. Four case studies in total across various verticals were measured in order to establish the connection between Brand Influence and ROI. Post campaign, the brand equity pyramid was measured again and the uplift over the baseline measurements for Advocacy and Purchase Intent levels were calculated. While Crowdtap’s database enabled measurement of g0s (Crowdtap members) and g1s (people influenced by g0s), the additional effect on g2s (people influenced by g1s) was calculated as a percentage, using a decay rate based on research norms.

The CroSS Channel MeTriC for MarkeTing iMpaCT

BRAND INFLUENCE REPORT
The improvements were dramatic, especially at the higher levels of the pyramid, with advocacy increasing by 48%, and purchase intent increasing by 57%. The output from this research is an uplift across the brand equity pyramid. Through these pre/post measurements, a linkage to ROI can then be established.

hOW ROI IS MEASURED The financial inputs for calculating the ROI are profit per new customer and the cost of the marketing activity. These are combined with the calculations of uplift in the brand equity pyramid from the research analysis. These uplifts combine to produce a total uplift in willingness to purchase. The uplift in Purchase Intent metric equates to the Direct Impact or short-term increase in willingness to purchase; the uplift in Brand Advocacy equates to the Indirect Impact or increase in willingness to purchase (both short term and longer term) as a result of greater affinity for and loyalty to the brand. For the purpose of this analysis, the assumption is that the increase in willingness to purchase is equivalent to uplift in purchases. To determine the increase in number of units sold as a result of the campaign, we determine the total uplift for each action by multiplying the uplift percentage by the number of people reached by the action. We then simply apply the profitability number for each unit of the profit generated by a new customer to arrive at the total profits generated by each action and for the total campaign. The campaign costs are then deducted from the profit number to give us return on investment.

DIRECT
What is the immediate change in purchase behavior?

Measured by % change in “intent to purchase.”

+

X

REACH

X

UNIT

=

ROI

INDIRECT
What is the impact on brand equity?
Measured by % change in “advocacy.”

The CroSS Channel MeTriC for MarkeTing iMpaCT

BRAND INFLUENCE REPORT
STUDY FInDIngS On BRAnD InFlUEnCE IMPACT TO ROI This research enabled the team to show how Brand Influence impacts a marketer’s core metrics, the change in brand equity and intent to purchase, which together, result in ROI. Based on the four campaigns studied for this report, estimated lifts in brand equity and ROI were calculated. The study found the below correlation between Brand Influence and these core marketing metrics:

The CroSS Channel MeTriC for MarkeTing iMpaCT

BRAND INFLUENCE REPORT
COnClUSIOn Prior to Brand Influence, marketers were limited to input-focused calculations such as impressions and engagements that don’t factor the unique impact of each channel to influence the consumer. now with Brand Influence, marketers can better view their spend by a metric that factors in the quality of the channel and activity along with the quantity providing a closer connection between spend and ROI. Marketing is at the very early stages of a complete overhaul in strategy, approach, tactics, channels and measurement that brands will need to employ to be successful. The shift started with the Internet and rapidly accelerated with social technology. Marketing is rapidly moving from focus on attention and eyeballs to influence – where success is determined by brand participation. To make the requisite changes, brands must adopt a measurement methodology that allows them to look not only at inputs, but also at the expected impact of their marketing activities on core brand metrics, and they must do so in real time. Marketers have long spent first and evaluated later. While never ideal, the speed and breadth of marketing activities now requires marketers to have a much better handle on the impact of their budget before it’s spent. Brand Influence is a first step in that evolution.

The CroSS Channel MeTriC for MarkeTing iMpaCT

BRAND INFLUENCE REPORT

APPEnDIX
1. About the Researchers 2. Case Studies 3. glossary of Terms 4. Sources 5. Inquiries

The CroSS Channel MeTriC for MarkeTing iMpaCT

BRAND INFLUENCE REPORT
ABOUT ThE RESEARChERS Joanna Seddon Joanna has over 20 years of expertise in developing and implementing methodologies for the measurement of brand and marketing ROI. For the last five years she has been CEO of Millward Brown’s global consulting practice, dedicated to helping companies maximize the financial returns on their brand strategy and marketing investments. Before founding this practice, she was EVP of global Brand Strategy for FutureBrand. Recent clients for whom Joanna has conducted brand and marketing measurement work include P&g, Citi, Coca Cola and Microsoft. Joanna also developed the BrandZ Top 100 study of the world’s most valuable brands, published annually in the Financial Times, and is a well known writer and speaker on brand strategy and marketing measurement issues, including venues such as Cannes and the AnA. Joanna’s education includes a PhD from Oxford University, visiting fellowships to the Smithsonian, and guest lectureships at Columbia Business School. Brandon Evans Brandon is the founder and CEO of Crowdtap - the network for Brand Influencer Communities that allows marketers to easily collaborate, mobilize and market with their targeted brand crowd of influential consumers. Crowdtap’s game driven platform excites a rapidly growing member base to participate in a variety of crowdsourced marketing activities that drive brand innovation and peer-to-peer marketing via social channels on and offline. One of the pioneers in word-of-mouth and social media marketing, Brandon Evans is well versed in emerging technology, consumer collaboration, and the evolving marketing landscape. his work has spanned three successful startups, as well as the development and execution of results-driven social marketing strategies for the likes of Pepsi, Microsoft and P&g. Previously, as Mr Youth’s Chief Strategy Officer and Managing Partner, Brandon helped to build the agency from 3 to over 120 employees in his 5 years there and establish Mr Youth as a leading social marketing agency. In 2010 Mr Youth was named as one of Fast Company’s Top 10 Most Innovative Marketing Companies and as Mashable’s Social Media Agency of the Year. Brandon is a regular contributor to leading publications on the topics of social media, crowdsourcing and marketing. he has also written several white papers on the topics: Consumer 2.0, Millennial Mom 101 and Millennial Inc. he is a graduate of The Red McCombs Business School at the University of Texas – Austin.

The CroSS Channel MeTriC for MarkeTing iMpaCT

BRAND INFLUENCE REPORT
CASE STUDIES In order to tie Brand Influence directly to ROI, three case studies were measured in order to determine the average relation between Brand Influence points and ROI. Overall, across the three case studies, it was determined that a Brand Influence Point (BIP) on average, equates to an ROI $2.83 per BIP. lower priced CPg products were on the lower end of the range at around $2.00 per BIP while higher priced retailers saw close to $5.00+ per BIP. On average brands saw ROIs of $5.28 per dollar spent with higher ROIs for those brands that created ongoing campaigns vs. one off projects receiving higher ROIs. As more data is reviewed, the association between ROI and BIPs will become more precise, enabling marketers to better understand the estimated ROI of marketing activities based on the mix of activities chosen and through key assumptions. Four case studies measured for this report are:
1 2 3 4

lEADIng FEMInInE hYgIEnE BRAnD lEADIng FAShIOn RETAIlER lEADIng BEAUTY BRAnD lEADIng SnACk FOOD BRAnD

The CroSS Channel MeTriC for MarkeTing iMpaCT

BRAND INFLUENCE REPORT
1

lEADIng FEMInInE hYgIEnE BRAnD

A feminine hygiene brand was looking to support their new product launch by connecting directly with their target consumers to get people talking on and offline about the brand. Their PR Agency identified Crowdtap as an ideal platform to identify and mobilize advocates around the new product launch and built out a campaign that maximized the platform for the brand. With Crowdtap, the brand was able to target and identify advocates in three distinct demographics and speak to each with separate communications: 13-17 year-old girls, 18-24 year-old girls, and moms with teenage daughters. In total, the brand engaged a “crowd” of over 13,000 from September 2010 through May 2011; the dates over which the campaign was measured. A “crowd” is the people a brand has engaged through Crowdtap’s pay-per-action brand participation platform. This crowd could then be mobilized to share on and offline with their social networks. Over the 8 months measured, the brand tapped their crowd to test and iterate packaging designs, identify preferred product scents, spread the word on line around Facebook and Twitter promotions, as well as drive word-of-mouth on and offline via a sampling campaign with crowd members from each demographic receiving samples and communications materials to share with friends. During the period measured, the brand achieved 767,637 BIPs (Brand Influence Points) with a reach of over 4.8MM. The brand also saw lifts of 54% to purchase intent and 55% to brand advocacy for a total ROI of $1.76MM* or $4.41 ROI/$ spent, which equates to $2.3 of ROI per BIP, inclusive of estimates of all agency fees and non-Crowdtap spend. *An estimate based on industry data was also used for estimating the profit per customer

The CroSS Channel MeTriC for MarkeTing iMpaCT

BRAND INFLUENCE REPORT
2

lEADIng FAShIOn RETAIlER

One of the country’s largest fashion retailers was searching for a solution to engage deeply with their advocates and most influential consumers. The brand had millions of Facebook fans, Twitter followers and CRM recipients but sought a way to mobilize and acknowledge their top supporters. Their agency worked with them to develop a brand influencer community of VIP customers on Crowdtap. leveraging Crowdtap, the brand created a crowd of passionate consumers in their core target demo of women 25-35. Participants poured in from the brand’s existing communities including CRM, Facebook and Twitter as well as pre-existing brand enthusiasts within Crowdtap’s member base. From February 2011 – May 2011 over 20,000 women joined the brand’s crowd and participated in the brand’s actions on Crowdtap. Over the four months measured, the brand tasked the Style Council with weighing in on new dress designs, promotion ideas and shopping habits. The brand’s crowd was also given their latest commercial first to share with friends before it aired on TV. The brand’s crowd was also among the first to hear about and receive samples for the brand’s newest and hottest products, which they shared with friends and even hosted sponsored parties in their homes to show off their latest line of accessories and in-store parties at their local retail location. During the period measured, the brand achieved 771,959 BIPs (Brand Influence Points) with a reach of 3.5MM. The brand also saw lifts of 57% to purchase intent and 48% to brand advocacy, for a total ROI of $3.75MM or $9.39 of ROI/$ spent which equates to $4.86 of ROI per BIP, inclusive of estimates of all agency fees and non-Crowdtap spend. *An estimate based on industry data was also used for estimating the profit per customer

The CroSS Channel MeTriC for MarkeTing iMpaCT

BRAND INFLUENCE REPORT
3

lEADIng BEAUTY BRAnD

A household name in beauty was looking to connect with girls 18-24 years old, an audience especially hard to reach via traditional channels. The brand needed more than just awareness but sought to connect with girls and get them using their products, in particular their new sunscreen and after-sun lotion. Their PR agency along, with the brand, sponsored in home parties or “Beauty Soirees” where girls participated in a variety of beauty-related activities. Through Crowdtap, the brand recruited 18-24 year-old girls to host the Soirees. Thousands of girls applied and 1,000 top applicants were selected to throw the parties. The selected party hosts received a kit full of free products from the brand and other fun goodies to share with their guests. The parties resulted in thousands of tweets, blog posts, Facebook posts and pictures showcasing the parties and new lotions. Close to 10 people attended each party on average and hosts submitted detailed recaps and pictures of their events. Through the sponsored parties, the brand achieved 515,714 BIPs (Brand Influence Points) and reached over 1.5MM people. The brand also saw lifts of 39% to purchase intent and 60% to brand advocacy, which equated to a total ROI of $422,442 or $3.38 of ROI/$ spent which equates to $.82 of ROI* per BIP, inclusive of estimates of all agency fees and non-Crowdtap spend. *An estimate based on industry data was also used for estimating the profit per customer

The CroSS Channel MeTriC for MarkeTing iMpaCT

BRAND INFLUENCE REPORT
4

lEADIng SnACk FOOD BRAnD

A classic American snack food brand sought to build their community of mom advocates for the healthy children’s snacks. The brand focused not just on their great snacks, but on helping moms raise healthy children in mind, body and spirit. The brand partnered with a leading child psychologist to develop content activities that these womencould share with their kids and fellow moms. looking to build a true network of advocates across the country, their social marketing agency along with the brand, developed a network of thousands of moms to spread this enriching content. Through Crowdtap as well as their existing newsletters and social communities, the brand recruited passionate moms to participate. These influential moms participated in discussions on a variety of topics around parenting helping to develop content for wider distribution, answered polls that helped inform the brand, and shared activities and content with their personal mom networks both on and offline. Through their marketing activities, the brand achieved 183k BIPs (Brand Influence Points) and reached over 1.9MM people. The brand also saw lifts of 24% to purchase intent and 14% to brand advocacy, which equated to a total ROI of $393,244 or $3.93 of ROI/$ spent, which equate to $2.15 of ROI* per BIP, inclusive of estimates of all agency fees and non-Crowdtap spend. *An estimate based on industry data was also used for estimating the profit per customer

The CroSS Channel MeTriC for MarkeTing iMpaCT

BRAND INFLUENCE REPORT
glOSSARY OF TERMS Brand Influence – metric created by this study to measure marketing impact of any marketing channel or activity. Brand Influence is calculated by Proximity x Intensity x Exposure x Reach. Proximity – the measure of how relevant and trusting the marketing channel or activity is, measured as a percent based on consumer surveys. Intensity – the measure of how enjoyable and memorable the marketing channel or activity is, measured as a percent based on consumer surveys. Exposure – the amount of time a consumer spends with a particular marketing activity, measured in minutes. Reach – the audience size in contact with a particular marketing activity, measured in number of people. qualitative Factor – Proximity and Intensity combine to make up the qualitative measurement of a marketing channel. quantitative Factor – Exposure and Reach combine to make up the quantitative measurement of a marketing channel. Direct Impact – calculation of the direct impact to ROI based on increase in sales, measured by change in purchase intent pre and post campaign. Indirect Impact – calculation of the indirect impact to ROI based on increase in brand equity, measured by change in advocacy pre and post campaign. ROI – return on investment based on profits and costs of each action, measured by (direct impact + indirect impact) x unit cost – campaign costs. Brand Equity – increase in brand advocacy, measured utilizing the net Promoter Score via pre and post surveys.

The CroSS Channel MeTriC for MarkeTing iMpaCT

BRAND INFLUENCE REPORT
SOURCES Custom Survey Data • Crowdtap Survey of channel effectiveness (Conducted October 2010, n=500, general population ages 13-75) • • Crowdtap Baseline Poll of consumer perceptions (Poll conducted October 2010, n=150-250, Females, ages 13-17, 18-24, moms with teen daughters) Crowdtap Pre and Post-Action Polls of consumer perceptions (with individual clients)

Published Sources • • • • • • • Augie Ray, “The ROI of Social Media Marketing: More than Dollars and Cents”, Forrester.com, Oct. 7 2009. Marketnorms, quarterly Reports, Dynamic logic 2009-2010. MRI Doublebase Reports, 2009, 2010. “Calculating Your Communication Dividend”, BzzAgent, Sept. 2008. Chris Murdough, “ Social Media Measurement: It’s not Impossible”, Journal of Interactive Advertising, Vol 10 no. 1 Fall 2009, pp. 94-99. Chorus Media, “ Insights Re-Contact of MRI Responders”, Point logic 2009. Dan Zigmond, Sundar Dorai-Raj, Yannet Interian, Igor naverniouk, “ Measuring Advertising quality on Television. Deriving Meaningful Metrics from Audience Retention Data”, Journal of Advertising Research, Dec. 2009. Elaine Wong, “how Profitable is Word-of-Mouth?”, Brandweek, Oct. 10 2010. Fluent. The Razorfish Social Influence Marketing Report, 2009. Irfan kamal, “ Introducing Conversation Impact- Social Media Measurement for Marketers”, Ik on Digital, Sept 9 2010. Jacques Bughin, Jonathan Doogan & Ole Jorgen Vetvik, “A new Way To Measure Word-OfMouth Marketing”, Mckinsey quarterly, April 2010. John Zappe, “The ROI of Social Media”, Journal of Corporate Recruiting leadership, March 2010 katie Delahaye Paine, Measure what matters, Wiley, 2011 Markus Pfeiffer, Markus Zinnbauer, “Can Old Media Enhance new Media? how Traditional Advertising Pays Off For An On-line Social network”, Journal of Advertising Research, March 2010. Oliver Blanchard, Social Media ROI, Pearson, 2011

• • • • • • •

The CroSS Channel MeTriC for MarkeTing iMpaCT

BRAND INFLUENCE REPORT
SOURCES • • • • • • • • • • • • • • Pat Conroy & Anupam narula, A new Breed of Brand Advocates, Social networking Defines Consumer Engagment, Deloitte, 2009. Shiv Singh, “Social Media Metrics-SIM Score vs. net Reputation Score (nRS)”, Social Commerce Today, Oct. 2010. Shiv Singh & Chris Bowler, The Future of Social Influence Marketing, Publicis-Razorfish, 2010 Shiv Singh, Measuring Social Influence Marketing, Publicis-Razorfish/TnS, 2010. Powered, 2008 Social Marketing ROI Report and Benchmark guide, next Century Media, Jan. 2009. Rex Briggs,” The Momentum Effect. Creating Brand Value in the Social networking Space”, never Ending Friending Research Summary, April 2007. Sue Elms, James galpin, “Maximizing Media Synergy for Cost Effective Brand Building”, Admap, July/August 2009. The nielsen Company, “Advertising Effectiveness: Understanding the Value of a Social Media Impression”, Special Report for Ad:tech, April 2010. The nielsen Company, The State of Social Media, Reference guide for WOMMA Summit Attendees, 2009 “Valuing Advertising’s Original Medium: The Conversation”, BzzAgent, March 2008 “Valuing Word of Mouth in the Sales Funnel”, BzzAgent, April 2008. Walter J. Carl, Barak libai, Adam Ding, “Measuring the Value of Word of Mouth”, ARF Audience Measurement 3.0 Conference, June 2008. William J. havlena, Alex kalluf, Robert J. Cardarelli, “ Building Cross-Media norms”, Esomar 2008. WOMMA. Measurement and Metrics guidebook, nov. 2009.

The CroSS Channel MeTriC for MarkeTing iMpaCT

BRAND INFLUENCE REPORT
InqUIRIES

To learn more about this study, or invite Brandon or Joanna to speak at your next event, email us at:

info@branDinflUenCeMeTriC.CoM

To learn more about Crowdtap, go to:

CroWDTap.CoM

The CroSS Channel MeTriC for MarkeTing iMpaCT

Sign up to vote on this title
UsefulNot useful