| Thanks Katherine, your point re number of hours in the day reminded me of a key quote sent to the list a few months back (by Richard Bates, Consumer Focus, UK).
“Consumers are however pressed for time and spend on average only 3.2 hours a week on all consumer tasks. To ensure that consumers remain empowered in the face of the growing information overload and increasing lack of time for shopping, new shortcuts and comparison tools need to be found.”
That quote came from a research study across more than 55,000 individuals, so pretty robust. European Commission Staff Working Paper (2011): Consumer Empowerment in the EU (SEC [2011] 469 final), Brussels: European Commission – http://bit.ly/J45aRl
Add to that, one of the main effects of The Internet on the individual being that they typically have an awful lot more supplier/ service provider relationships to manage than they did before, and you therefore have a huge volume of 'permissioned' advertising being squeezed into what amounts to a very small amount of time.
In that respect, our job is to build tools that help get a better return out of those 28 minutes, and maybe even one day increasing the time spent because the return on it is much improved.
Iain 3.2 hours a week is 192 minutes, or almost 28 mins per day.
On 17 Feb 2013, at 15:28, Katherine Warman Kern <
">
> wrote: Sylvan and Chris,
As a practicing planner who takes pride in being a trusted advisor, I'd like to share some insights from the perspective of my clients.
The reality the consumer has an overabundance of choices and a marketer has an overabundance of tools to choose from.
But the number of hours in a day to make those choices has remained exactly the same.
As the number of choices have increased, the odds that bad choices are made increases.
Share of Voice, as many measuring sticks, is flawed from the start because there is no truly accurate way to measure or project it. One marketer can spend the same amount of dollars much more effectively than another. And since few marketers publish their mistakes, no one really knows what really happened. In fact most published accounts of marketing case studies have very little resemblance to what really happened.
I continue to be shocked that no new entry capitalizes on digital technology and social media to offer an improvement over Nielsen to monitor integrated marketing in real time.
K-
Katherine Warman Kern
www.comradity.com
@comradity
203-918-2617
On Feb 17, 2013, at 9:37 AM, sylvain willart <
> wrote:
This "tragedy of the commons" made me think when you first posted about it.
The sheep example you mention is well-studied in economic game theory,
and there are some writings as well in Public Economics sudies dealing
with scarce resources,
But I very rarely read this kind of thinking in advertising/marketing.
Only perhaps in "Store Wars" (Corstjens & Corstjens , 90's). Actually,
the hypothesis of the consumer brain being a scarce resource is
sometimes discussed, but never measured. And media planning relying
heavily on measures and metrics, this hypothesis does not well fit in
traditional approaches.
Moreover, you can expect people to protect scarce natural resources
(even if they loose direct advantage) for the sake of a "bigger cause"
involving altruism (a long studied effect in game theory); but who
really cares about the exhaustion of conusmer brain? there is nothing
here a good night of sleep can't fix... (the consumer himself may be
the only one to care, hence the importance of VRM tools IMHO).
Media planning is also competitive by nature, and while planning you
have to care more about your competitors' expenses than your
consumers' ability to process all those ads. An important metric in
media planning is for example the "share of voice" (your expenses
divided by the market expenses), perhaps the dumbest metric ever
invented, as it is known from long it is not robust at all (meaning it
can lead you to make stupid planning choices)
The entropy hypothesis however may be quite appealing, and this metric
is often used in other field of marketing (for measuring variety of
assortments for example). I'll try to dig into it to see wether it has
been used in advertising/intrusiveness research.
Sylvain
2013/2/17 Chris Savage <
>:
Sylvain,
Thank you, this is very helpful. I will ponder a bit more.
I have mentioned, perhaps on this list, my sense that there is a "tragedy of
the commons" effect going on among those who would sell me stuff. Just like
in the Garrett Hardin story where each shepherd looks at the common field
and thinks, "Oh, letting one or two extra sheep from my flock graze won't
e-mail:
">
blog: www.iainhenderson.infotwitter: @iainh1 This email and any attachment contains information which is private and confidential and is intended for the addressee only. If you are not an addressee, you are not authorised to read, copy or use the e-mail or any attachment. If you have received this e-mail in error, please notify the sender by return e-mail and then destroy it. <a href=" http://miicard.me/b0F1Jsy5">Identity assured by miiCard : Click to Verify</a> |