Selecciones - Webs

Belch: Advertising and
Promotion, Sixth Edition
VI. Monitoring, Evaluation,
and Control
19. Measuring the
Effectiveness of the
Promotional Program
these limitations, however, tracking studies are a very effective way to assess the
effects of advertising campaigns.
In summary, you can see that each of the testing methods considered in this chapter
has its strengths and its limitations. You may wonder: Can we actually test advertising
effectiveness? What can be done to ensure a valid, reliable test? The next section of
this chapter suggests some answers.
© The McGraw−Hill
Companies, 2003
Establishing a Program for
Measuring Advertising Effects
There is no surefire way to test advertising effectiveness.
However, in response to pressures to
determine the contribution of ads to the overall
marketing effort, steps are being taken to improve
this measurement task. Let’s begin by reviewing the
major problems with some existing methods and then examine possible improvements.
Problems with Current Research Methods
When current testing methods are compared to the criteria established by PACT (see
Figure 19-2), it is clear that some of the principles important to good copy testing can
be accomplished readily, whereas others require substantially more effort. For example,
principle 6 (providing equivalent test ads) should require a minimum of effort.
The researcher can easily control the state of completion of the test communications.
Also fairly easy are principles 1 and 2 (providing measurements relative to the objectives
sought and determining a priori how the results will be used).
We have seen throughout this text that each promotional medium, the message, and
the budget all consider the marketing and communications objectives sought. The
integrated marketing communications planning model establishes the roles of these
elements. So by the time one gets to the measurement phase, the criteria by which
these programs will be evaluated should simply fall into place.
Slightly more difficult are principles 3, 5, and 8, although again these factors are
largely in the control of the researcher. Principle 3 (providing multiple measurements)
may require little more than budgeting to make sure more than one test is conducted. At
the most, it may require considering two similar measures to ensure reliability. Likewise,
principle 5 (exposing the test ad more than once) can be accomplished with a proper
research design. Finally, principle 8 (sample definition) requires little more than sound
research methodology; any test should use the target audience to assess an ad’s effectiveness.
You would not use a sample of nondrinkers to evaluate new liquor commercials.
The most difficult factors to control—and the principles that may best differentiate
between good and bad testing procedures—are PACT requirements 4, 7, and 9. Fortunately,
however, addressing each of these contributes to the attainment of the others.
The best starting point is principle 4, which states the research should be guided by
a model of human response to communications that encompasses reception, comprehension,
and behavioral response. It is the best starting point, in our opinion, because
it is the principle least addressed by practicing researchers. If you recall, Chapter 5
proposed a number of models that could fulfill this principle’s requirements. Yet even
though these models have existed for quite some time, few if any common research
methods attempt to integrate them into their methodologies. Most current methods do
little more than provide recall scores, despite the fact many researchers have shown
that recall is a poor measure of effectiveness. Models that do claim to measure such
factors as attitude change or brand preference change are often fraught with problems
that severely limit their reliability. An effective measure must include some relationship
to the communications process.
It might seem at first glance that principle 7 (providing a nonbiasing exposure)
would be easy to accomplish. But lab measures, while offering control, are artificial
and vulnerable to testing effects. And field measures, while more realistic, often lose
control. The Seagram and Time study may have the best of both worlds, but it is too
large a task for most firms to undertake. Some of the improvements associated with
the single-source systems help to solve this problem. In addition, properly designed ad
tracking studies provide truer measures of the impact of the communication. As technology
develops and more attention is paid to this principle, we expect to see improvements
in methodologies soon.
647
Chapter Nineteen Measuring the Effectiveness of the Promotional Program