Agnes Jumah, Marketing Metrics

Agnes Jumah - MA Strategic Marketing Management - Workshop Assignment

Marketing Metrics
Count what is countable, measure what is measurable. What is not measurable, make measurable. Galileo

This paper highlights why marketing metrics and a metric approach to marketing is important. To
clarify a metric approach to marketing is the use of information derived from marketing activity
measurements to make future business and marketing decisions or adaptive organisational learning.
Specific metric measurements or frameworks such as the Balanced scorecard or Economic Value
Added (EVA) will not be discussed or critically evaluated due to space.


Why Understanding the Rise in Metrics is Important
You can’t manage what you can’t measure. A mantra attributed to many business gurus including
Kaplan and Drucker. It is simple yet true. In order to understand where a company is in relation to
competitors and its own strategy and to be accountable, measurements must be taken (Seggie et al
2007).

Ambler and Roberts (2005) state: The productivity of marketing, in this broad sense of inward cash
compared with resources consumed, has become a hot topic. This is in part due to marketing
directors unable to justify marketing spends or explain the marketing ROI at a board meeting (Jeffrey
2010).

The measurement of specific marketing activities is not new; advertising effectiveness has for
example been measured for a number of years. What is relatively new is the holistic approach to
marketing metrics and the elevation of the marketing function as a result of this. In addition, the
immediacy of online metrics such as pay-per-click campaigns has added to the importance and
interest in marketing metrics. The relative low cost of online advertising campaigns and timeliness of
web analytics means that gigabyte after gigabyte of data is gathered and increasingly relied upon to
make decisions.

Why are marketing metrics important? According to Jeffrey (2010) the measurement of marketing
activities is the key to competitive advantage and better financial performance. The measurement of
marketing related activity also appears to be growing. As cited by Jeffrey (2010) the International
Data Corporation has estimated that data storage is increasing 60% year-on-year. More and more
information is being collected and stored. This impact on the marketing function could be significant.
Will marketing departments of the future focus on gathering and processing information for the
purpose of strategic decisions? What would this mean for those in more creative marketing roles?

Another reason why understanding a metric approach to marketing is important is that much of the
data gathered is actually about the consumer. In terms of privacy and data protection laws, this will
have implications for organisations and the ways in which they gather, store and use data about
their customers.

Perhaps most importantly is that a metric approach to marketing has real implications for the
marketing mix, 4Ps or 4Es (Experience, Exchange, Everyplace and Evangelism) as some now refer to
them (Fetherstonhaugh 2009). The way in which marketing metrics are interpreted will affect the
product or service customers receive; how much they pay for it; where it is located and how they
hear about it. This has the potential to increase or decrease the value of a brand. For companies
such as Procter and Gamble or Nestle that compete on the strengths of their respective brand
portfolios with shareholders basing investment decisions on the value of these brands – the metric
approach to marketing is essential to get right. With this potential impact marketing metrics are
worthy of discussion.

This paper will examine the background to the emergence of a metric approach to marketing and its
implications. Recommendations will conclude the paper.


How and Why Metrics have Increased
A number of factors have led to the increase in a metrics approach to marketing. These are outlined
below.

Marketing Accountability

A white paper by the Chartered Institute of Marketing stated “...sometimes marketers are their own
worst enemy, failing to account for their often considerable budgets...floundering when questioned
on the financial impact of their strategies”. A similar view is supported by Seggie et al 2007.
Recessions over the last few decades have seen budgets across organisational departments cut
(Bartram 2002). With the corporate trend of a more accountable viewpoint, marketing like other
departments needs to demonstrate its value added. Unfortunately, measuring the value added by
marketing is not easy. In order to demonstrate and highlight the value that marketing adds to a firm,
marketing expenditure needs to be viewed as a long-term investment (Shultz and Gronstedt 1997).

Of the literature examined; there is a collective agreement that a metric approach to marketing is
required. What appears to be uncertain is the best way to measure the effectiveness or contribution
of marketing activity. Doyle (2001) argues that metrics should be based on how the marketing
strategy adds to the value of the brand as brand investment can increase cash flow; accelerate it;
extend its durability or reduce its vulnerability. As future cash flow is the way in which shares are
valued, this ultimately impacts shareholder value. Doyle’s theory however is only applicable to
companies with brands and shareholders. What should the marketing metrics be for a non-profit
organisation such as Oxfam or Amnesty International - both with significant marketing budgets? The
Stakeholder Values Perspective could be adopted in this case.

In their working paper, The Current State of Metrics, Ambler et al (2001) state that a market
orientated or market-sensing view of metrics is appropriate. They suggest that in addition to internal
benchmarks such as the strategic and marketing plans, external benchmarks assessing competitor
activity, the environment and the market is required. This approach is reasonable as companies or
non-profit organisations do not operate in isolation. Like the SWOT analysis, metrics must take into
account where the company sits in relation to competitors and also where it is in relation to its own
targets.

In the past, marketing spends have been perceived as short term costs; a view often lead by the
finance department (Rust et al 2004; Raman 2010). The Accounting Standards Board has called for
non-financial measures such as those typically found in marketing metrics to be included in annual
reports. This indicates a change in outlook from those in finance positions and may have been
prompted by changes in the ratio of tangible and intangible assets of companies. Sawhney and Zabin
(2002) propose 69% of a company’s value was intangible in 2002 versus 17% in 1978.

The often fragile dialogue between finance and marketing departments in relation to improved
marketing metrics was highlighted by many including Bartram (2002) and Srinivasan and Hanssens
(2008). A meeting in the middle of what finance need measured and what marketing can measure
seems to be apparent and has been achieved by some. Bartram (2002) highlights the case study of
HP Bulmers. Rather than a marketing budget being created and assigned to the marketing
department alone, the cider production company takes a longer-range view whereby a growth
target for the company is established. Collective discussions on the areas that require investment in


order to achieve the target take place. Close monitoring follows with opportunities to adjust the
forecast or assess where further investment is required. Giving both the marketing and finance
teams (and other departments) a joint understanding of each other‘s needs and equal responsibility
for the required outcomes. This alleviates the marketing department of some of the key issues that
hinder its ability to take a metric approach such as the short-term, budget view.

Customer-Centricity
Thehistory of marketing and its services to customers shows a transition from mass marketing to
segmenting customer groups to customer-centricity where the needs of individuals are catered for
(Sheth et al 2000). In order to offer this increased customisation of products and services,
information must be gathered possibly through store cards such as the Tesco Clubcard, stored,
analysed and utilised to make the marketing communications more relevant and valuable to the
recipient (Arikan 2008). Customer-centric marketing has also been referred to as database
marketing or Customer Relationship Management (CRM).

Database marketing or CRM has been one of the drivers of a metric approach to marketing (Farris et
al 2008). The introduction of database marketing and the development of the CRM approach, has
allowed marketers to measure which campaigns have resulted in a higher return on investment,
which customers have made repeat purchases and what type of customer represents the best return
in terms of customer lifetime value. These can collectively be called the evaluation of marketing
investment decisions at the individual customer level (Seggie et al 2007).

Crosby and Johnson (2001) state “with the advent of the CRM era, we have the opportunity to
greatly expand the set of performance measures”. Knowledge garnered by CRM systems has been
beneficial for the companies that have made use of this knowledge and also to their customers.
Amazon.com’s intelligent CRM gathers information about their customers’ online transactions. This
information is then used to customise the service and the website interface for their customers
giving them a better online experience through the recommendation of products, transaction history
information, and flexible delivery options. This results in the potential for more sales for Amazon and
in theory a happier customer. The negative aspect of this supposed win-win situation is the issue of
customer data; the ‘Big Brother’ concerns and headlines on personal data being compromised or
worse still exposed. Facebook and Google have been the latest brands to feature in the headlines
over privacy issues. These issues will influence data-driven marketing. Understanding the
purchasing habits and preferences of the customer can help the company to offer a more relevant
and tailored product and service but ensuring security is essential. These are not issues unique to
large, online powerhouses. Retail outlets, membership organisations, government bodies or
fundraising charities with CRM systems or databases are all at risk of prosecution and negative PR if
data is compromised or legislation ignored.

The Internet and Ecommunications

According to InternetWorldStats.com, the internet penetration rate for the UK was nearly 80% of
households at the end of 2009; surfers were also accessing the internet increasingly via
Smartphones. The internet advertising revenue in the UK exceeded spend on TV, topping £1.75bn in
the first six months of 2009 (The Guardian: Internet overtakes television to become biggest
advertising sector in the UK). The internet is a significant reason for the increase in marketing
metrics. As more people have gone online, advertisers have followed and measured.


Traditional mass advertising media has always presented the advertiser with the issue of wastage.
However, the internet and its use as an advertising medium and ecommunications have changed
this. Search engine optimisation and pay-per-click campaigns can be utilised to guarantee online
presence on websites and searches relevant to the target audience. Tailored, media-rich adverts on
sites such as those on Facebook provide even tighter targeting and customisation. Analytics can be
applied to websites to report on the bounce rates, lengths of time on websites and popular pages or
searches. A fundamental benefit of online analytics is its real time feedback and metrics. Creative
and engaging content coupled with detailed analytics are now a reality and provide information
about customers that advertisers did not have access to previously.

The internet and ecommunications provide marketing managers with objective data as opposed to
subjective data such as that derived from some brand equity or customer equity measures. In
addition, online or digital metrics like database marketing measures offer individual customer
information rather than aggregated (Seggie et al 2007) data from metrics such as the Balanced
scorecard or EVA.

More recently, online word-of-mouth or chatter can be tracked via conversation share of voice
metrics and through social networking sites allows brands to engage with their customers. This type
of engagement in itself could contribute positively to subjective metrics such as brand loyalty.
According to WARC “stimulating online conversations with, and between, brand advocates can
encourage positive word of mouth”. PepsiCo estimates that 90% of shoppers place the most trust
in recommendations from sources like friends and family, while 70% have a similar confidence in
user-generated reviews on the internet (WARC: PepsiCo moves away from "big brand" marketing).

The increase in marketing metrics and performance measure has been the result of many factors. In
addition, increased competition has lead to the need to improve efficiencies, reducing operational
costs and increasing margins. The implication of metrics as a development within marketing far
ranging. Who should collect the data? How often? Who should the metrics be reported to? And how
do we implement the change that the data suggests should be made? The next section discusses the
main implications to be addressed when implementing marketing metrics.


The Implications
The metrics an organisation decides to measure largely depends upon the organisation type, its
culture, the industry it operates in and the organisation’s resources. Ambler et al (2001) propose
four theories outlining why organisations measure what they measure: Control theory; Institutional
theory; Orientation theory and Agency theory. Without knowing an organisation’s culture it is
difficult to assign it to a particular theory. However, it can be suggested that in competitive markets
where market orientation is key, supermarket retailers such as Sainsbury’s or ASDA could follow the
Orientation theory is the extent to which top management is interested in assessing marketing or
market performance measures and depends on the extent to which they are market-oriented. It can
be suggested that supermarket retailers are therefore likely to follow this theory (Ambler, Kokkinaki
and Puntoni 2004).

A metric approach to marketing needs to have a plan and be a part of the organisation’s
infrastructure (Jeffrey 2010). Outlined below are the implications and the factors that can influence
an organisation’s choice of metrics.

Implications Relating to the Internal Dynamics of the Organisation

A benefit of marketing metrics and other forms of company performance measures is the ability to
make more informed decisions and ascertain whether a company is achieving its objectives
(Appendix 1). Assessing the external environment and the company’s plan can help make more
rounded, well-informed decisions. Farris et al (2008) and other authors recommend a gathering a
range of measures and then creating a dashboard of metrics. This allows the management to gain a
multi-faceted perspective of the organisation and the market providing information from different
parts of the business. The theory is that “triangulated” solutions can be arrived at. Farris et al (2008)
also suggest that by using gathering different metrics, marketers can use one metric to check
another increasing the accuracy of the data.

To access and communicate metrics across the organisation, cohesion, co-operation and
communication between departments is required. All departments can benefit if the information
reaches them creating a connected knowledge (Day and Montgomery 1999). This suggests internal
communication and reporting are crucial. Perhaps not so much an issue for small organisations with
one office but potentially problematic for international corporations like Maersk or Shell where
distance, time zones and language can be barriers. Technologies such as intranets and translation
software can help overcome these barriers.

As highlighted earlier, ensuring effective engagement and dialogue between the finance and
marketing team is essential. Accounting performance measures are typically short-term and
retrospective (Chakravarthy 1986): income from the last quarter; money currently in the bank;
profit; debt. Whereas market performance measures in companies are typically longer term and
forward-looking e.g. share holder value or brand equity or for fundraising non-profits like Shelter,
some marketing measures surround a donor’s lifetime value. Overcoming departmental ‘pulls’ can
help the marketing metrics process.


Data Choice and Logistical Implications

Gathering information or data even when internal can be time-consuming. How feasible it is for an
organisation to measure what it would like to? How will small marketing departments or those with
limited resources such as many not-for-profit organisations cope with the number of variables that
can be measured? Does the data need cleaning, analysing or manipulation? How frequently do the
data need to be collected or collated? The choice of data and the logistics of its collection are
important considerations. A realistic cut-off point or trade-off between the number of metrics and
the benefit the knowledge each metric will provide should be established. The number of metrics
and the type is dependent on what the organisation needs to know and what it can realistically
collate. Introducing or migrating to new types of metrics may present some teething problems,
metric gaps or data continuity issues that will need to be considered too.

Data Availability and Implementation Implications

At times the metric required may not be easily gained and a research project may need to be
commissioned. Or, it may be the case that the organisation has the raw data but lacks the in-house
skills to analyse it. Then there is also the question of what to do with the information once it has
been gathered. Information can help make better decisions but only when the information is correct
and utilised and implemented in the right way. Financial investment may be required to set up the
systems for the gathering of information and its implementation into the strategic decision-making
process. Seggie et al (2007) note these additional costs may for some present a barrier for the more
sophisticated marketing metrics “unless other tangible benefits can be found to offset the costs of
data collection”.

Data Reliability, Relevancy, Accuracy and Interpretation

Is the right thing being measured? Is the right measurement being used? There can sometimes be
several ways to measure a certain output. Checking the relevancy of the data may save time – put
simply does it need to be collected? Equally, it is worth spending time ensuring that competitors can
be analysed with similar parameters so that benchmarking can take place.

Following data analysis, interpretations have to be made. It is vital that the right interpretations are
derived. Two plus two may not necessarily equal four. Data-driven decisions may need additional
research. The issue with additional research is that the process of decision-making may be delayed –
which could be potentially risky in certain industries and sectors where speed of decision is vital for
survival. Operators like Top Shop or Zara in the fashion industry works on short, seasonal cycles.
Protracted data analysis and research through focus groups for example may add little benefit; – the
research findings also have the potential to be out of date as soon as the research is conducted.

Balance of Metrics

Some marketing metrics such as online metrics can provide instant data. If the data have not been
collected for very long, a snapshot of activity is provided. Getting the balance right between the
long-term and short-term measures is important. This may require an experienced marketing
manager to ascertain the weight certain metrics have.


As outlined by Mintzberg, Quinn and Goshal’s (1998) theory on strategy, companies have an
intended strategy which they can use long-term metrics to help achieve e.g. long-term cash flow and
brand equity. The short-term measures such as online metrics can provide the ‘here and now’
information can be used to ensure that organisations are on track and if need be to determine
whether an emergent strategy is to be followed (Appendix 2)


Recommendations and Insights
A formal marketing metrics approach may not be suitable for all organisations but for those that
wish to implement it, in order to gain the full benefits metrics need to be integral to the organisation
(Jeffrey 2010).

A number of insights can be drawn about marketing metrics and their collation. The most salient are
outlined below alongside some recommendations.

Organisation Time and Resources

The collation of marketing metrics requires time, staff and financial resources. As it has the potential
to be so consuming of resources, it is recommended that time is first assigned to the planning of its
collection. Marketing metrics are bigger than the marketing function and not all metrics may be
gathered or provided by the marketing team. Metrics may used to make decisions across the
organisation and so buy-in and input from all departments is key; in addition to agreeing what
metrics will be collected; when they will be collected; in what format they will be provided and how
all the metrics can be merged and understood by everyone. Ideally, metrics submission should be in
line with key meetings and planning cycles.

Setting up the right marketing metric systems is important. Some academics such as Andy Neely and
separately, Tim Ambler have created marketing performance assessment questionnaires (Appendix
3) that may help as a first step in establishing which metrics to collect.

Time-saving short-cuts (that do not compromise the integrity of the metric) where possible should
be implemented. These shortcuts could be via the technology used to collect or store the metric. For
example, Google Analytics can provide details of online sales as well as campaign comparisons and
mobile phone transaction tracking. Most CRM systems now provide information dashboards and will
automatically create reports.

Setting up these systems will require some time initially and may require testing to ensure all
stakeholders are happy with the outputs. It may also be worth seeking professional support if the
skills are not available in-house to implement core metrics.

Approach to Marketing Metrics

How can an organisation approach marketing metrics? Like HP Bulmers, companies can establish
inclusive growth targets with all stakeholders and schedule regular meetings to establish the
company’s position in relation to the target. From the marketing team’s view, for quick wins, more
visibility of marketing efforts through successful and unsuccessful campaigns can help the marketing
department’s credibility (See 2007). Marketing teams can also invite feedback from directors and
refer to corporate strategy to ensure that marketing plan is contributing towards it. Standalone
campaigns may also help in demonstrating how marketing activity can provide sales uplift or
generate brand awareness. Considering Marketing Mix Modelling where analytics using multivariate
techniques to measure the incremental volume of each type marketing activity is also recommended
by some (Wattrall).


Data/Metrics Collection

Collecting the right metrics is vital especially as it is so time consuming to collect. The marketing
metrics an organisation collects should be: VARIaTE.

Viable - in terms of their long term collection (V);

Accurate – the right metric collected from the right sources (A);

Relevant - right for the sector or industry the organisation operates in and in line with
corporate/organisational strategy (R);

Important – that is: needs to be collected (I);

Timely – up-to-date (T) and

Economical – or reasonably, economically to collect in terms of resources and the returns that the
knowledge of the metric may provide (E)

A combination of internal metrics and external benchmarking metrics are also recommended.

The metrics an organisation requires will change overtime and so having a flexible metrics plan is
recommended. Some metrics will more beneficial or more important at different stages. For
example, if P&G were launching a new washing powder, metrics on brand awareness amongst stay-
at-home partners and distribution points are likely to be more important than customer satisfaction
at that stage in the product life cycle. Periodically reviewing the metrics collected and their use
ensures that time is not wasted on gathering the wrong data.

Implementation of Findings from Metrics

To ensure a return on the investment in the time and resources spent on collecting the metrics,
metrics need to reach the right decision-makers in a useful format or language they understand in
order for them to make the right decisions. Translating metrics into a competitive advantage does
not happen automatically; information must be carefully interpreted. Constantly updated dashboards
contributing to triangulated strategies may help support more informed decisions. Testing new strategies
based on metrics gathered with a sample and control group prior to a nationwide roll out, for example, could
prevent inaccurate metric findings from harming the organisation.

The Marketing Role and the Future of Metrics

The final insight drawn goes beyond the metrics within the organisation and relates to the marketing
sector as a whole. What is clear is that the case for metrics or data-driven marketing is on the
increase and has been justified by many. There are a number of ways to collect metrics and with the
various software algorithms written each day - these are likely to increase rather decrease. But this
metric approach is different to what marketers have been used in the past and requires a different
skill set. A quick search for marketing positions on reed.co.uk with the term ‘metrics’ returned nearly
100 jobs. This ‘experiment’ is by no means scientific but it is likely that marketing positions requiring
skills in marketing metrics or covering the collection of metrics and their use will increase. More
training of marketing managers to better understand marketing metrics may be required.


In addition, does the rise of marketing metrics equal boring, numbers-driven marketing? A lack of
flair; a reliance on data or the vision of customers as entries on a spreadsheet? This is unlikely to be
the case. As some campaigns have shown, particularly online and direct marketing campaigns,
organisations can harness the power of their data to provide tailored customer-centric campaigns
that are both creative and measureable.

Conclusion
Marketing metrics requires buy-in from all corners of the organisation and a sophisticated flow of
information from the touch points with the consumer to the board meetings where dashboards of
information are referred to. As Jeffrey (2010) suggests marketing strategies should take data and
the organisation’s overall strategic plan into account is recommended. Ensuring all members of staff
across the organisation are aware of the organisation’s metrics will help establish a culture of
reporting that is open, visible and provides a blueprint for the entire company.

Word count: 4230


Bibliography and References
Ambler, T., Kokkinaki, F., and Puntoni, S. (2004) Assessing Marketing Performance: Reasons for
Metrics Selection Journal of Marketing Management, 20, 475-498

Ambler, T., Kokkinaki, F., Puntoni, S and Riley, D. (2001) Assessing Market Performance: The Current
State of Metrics. Centre for Marketing Working Paper, No. 01-903, September

Arikan, A (2008) Multichannel Marketing Metrics and Methods for Online and Offline Success Wiley
Publishing

Bartels, R (1976) The History of Marketing Thought 2 Ed

Bartram, P. (2002) Measure it Prove it. Marketing Business

Carl, W. (2009) Is talking getting you anywhere? Measuring WOM marketing Admap, April, Issue
504, pp.16-19

Chakravarthy S. (1986) Measuring Strategic Performance Strategic Management Journal, 7, 437-458

CIM White Paper The Future of Marketing 2009

Crosby, L. and Johnson, S. (2001) High Performance Marketing in the CRM Era AMA Marketing
Management September/October

Daiberl, S., Agres,S., Moult, B. and Spaeth, J. (2003) Maximising shareholder value by bridging the
metrics of finance and marketing ESOMAR, Congress 2003

Doyle, P. (2001) Shareholder-value-based Brand Strategies Brand Management Vol. 9, No. 1, 20–30
September

Jeffrey, M. (2010) Data-Driven Marketing - The 15 Metrics Everyone in Marketing Should Know. John
Wiley & Sons

Farris, P., Bendle, N., Pfeifer, P. and Reibstein D. (2008) Key Marketing Metrics: The 50+ Metrics
Every Manager Needs to Know Financial Times Series

Fetherstonhaugh, B. (2009) The 4Ps Are Out, the 4Es Are In. OgilvyOne Worldwide Paper

Guardian, The. Internet overtakes television to become biggest advertising sector in the UK -
Wednesday 30 September 2009

www.internetworldstats.com/top25.htm

Neely, A.D. (2002), Business Performance Measurement: Theory and Practice, Cambridge University
Press, Cambridge

Raman, Adam Lecture on Share Holder Value - March 2010


Rust, R. T., Lemon, K. N., and Zeithaml, V. A. (2004). Return on marketing: Using customer equity to
focus marketing strategy. Journal of Marketing 68(1), 109−127

Sawhney, M. and Zabin, J. (2002). Managing and measuring relational equity in the network
economy. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 30(4), 313−332

Schultz, D. E., & Gronstedt, A. (1997). Making Marcom an investment. Marketing Management, 6(3),
40−48

See, E. (2007) Marketing Accountability – are you ready? Admap June, Issue 484

Seggie, S., Cavusgil, E. and Phelan, S. (2007) Measurement of return on marketing investment: A
conceptual framework and the future of marketing metrics Industrial Marketing Management 36
834–841

Sheth, J., Sisodia, R. and Sharma, A. (2000) Antecendents and Consequences of Customer Centric
Marketing Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, Vol. 28, No. 1, 55-66

Srinivasan, S. and Hanssens, D. (2008) Marketing and Firm Value. Metrics, Methods, Findings, and
Future Directions. Working Paper

VOAnews.com , Privacy Concerns Hit Facebook 27 May 2010

Verhoef, P and Leeflang, P. (2009) Understanding the Marketing Department’s Influence within the
Firm Journal of Marketing Vol. 73 March, 14–37

Visionedge – Taking on the Metrics Challenge

WARC PepsiCo moves away from "big brand" marketing- May 31, 2010

Wattrall, R. (Undated) Measuring and Improving Marketing Effectiveness Through Advanced
Analytics CIM Handout


Appendix 1


Appendix 2


Appendix 3

10 Ways to Rate Your Firm's Marketing Assessment System
by Tim Ambler Adapted from"Marketing and the Bottom Line, Second Edition", FT-Prentice Hall.

In the research I've done over the years, I find that most companies do not have a clear picture
of their own marketing performance which may be why they cannot assess it. They prefer to
fumble around in the dark. It's easy to see why: fumbling has a lot going for it. More adventure,
more creativity, more surprises and more fantasies are all possible. But you may not like what you
see when the lights do go on. Clarity of goals and metrics is what separates the professional firm
from the amateur. Professional marketers quantify results against intentions to keep raising the
bar. Professional athletes do the same. So how do you evaluate your firms metrics system? How
do you know if your marketing assessment system is good enough? Here are ten questions to ask
yourself. Check the most appropriate answer for your company, then score and rate your company to find out where you
stand.

1. Does the senior executive team regularly and formally assess marketing performance?
(a) Yearly
(b) Six-monthly
(c) Quarterly
(d) More often
(e) Rarely
(f) Never

2. What does the senior executive team understand by 'customer value'?
(a) Don't know. We are not clear about this
(b) Value of the customer to the business (as in 'customer lifetime value')
(c) Value of what the company provides for the customers' point of view
(d) Sometimes one, sometimes the other

3. How much time does the senior executive team give to marketing issues?
.............%

4. Does the business/marketing plan show the non-financial corporate goals and link them to market goals?
(a) No/no plan
(b) Corporate no, market yes
(c) Yes to both

5. Does the plan show the comparison of your marketing performance with competitors or the market as a whole?
(a) No/no plan
(b) Yes, clearly
(c) In between

6. What is your main marketing asset called?
(a) Brand equity
(b) Reputation
(c) Other term
(d) We have no term

7. Does the senior executive team's performance review involve a quantified view of the main marketing asset and how
it has changed?
(a) Yes to both
(b) Yes but only financially (brand valuation)
(c) Not really

8. Has the senior executive team quantified what 'success' would look like five or ten years from now?
(a) No


(b) Yes
(c) Don't know

9. Does your strategy have quantified milestones to indicate progress towards that success?
(a) No
(b) Yes
(c) What strategy?

10. Are the marketing performance indicators seen by the senior executive team aligned with these milestones?
(a) No
(b) Yes, external (customers and competitors)
(c) Yes, internal, (employees and innovativeness)
(d) Yes, both

Scoring Score yourself according to the scale below. If your total is greater than 90 percent, perhaps you'd care to write an
article or two for this site. If your total is 70-90 percent, congratulate yourself and keep at it. More than 50 percent is good.
Less than 30 percent means what you think it means.

1. Does the senior executive team regularly and formally assess marketing performance?
(a) Yearly - 10
(b) Six-monthly - 10
(c) Quarterly - 5
(d) More often - 0
(e) Rarely - 0
(f) Never - 0

2. What does the senior executive team understand by 'customer value'?
(a) Don't know. We are not clear about this - 0
(b) Value of the customer to the business (as in 'customer lifetime value') - 5
(c) Value of what the company provides for the customers' point of view - 10
(d) Sometimes one, sometimes the other - 10

3. How much time does the senior executive team give to marketing issues?
.............% >30% = 10; 20-30% = 6; 10-20% = 4; < 10% = 0

4. Does the business/marketing plan show the non-financial corporate goals and link them to market goals?
(a) No/no plan - 0
(b) Corporate no, market yes - 5
(c) Yes to both - 10

5. Does the plan show the comparison of your marketing performance with competitors or the market as a whole?
(a) No/no plan - 0
(b) Yes, clearly - 10
(c) In between - 5

6. What is your main marketing asset called?
(a) Brand equity - 10
(b) Reputation - 10
(c) Other term - 5
(d) We have no term - 0

7. Does the senior executive team's performance review involve a quantified view of the main marketing asset and how
it has changed?
(a) Yes to both - 10
(b) Yes but only financially (brand valuation) - 5
(c) Not really - 0

8. Has the senior executive team quantified what 'success' would look like five or ten years form now?
(a) No - 0


(b) Yes - 10
(c) Don't know - 0

9. Does your strategy have quantified milestones to indicate progress towards that sucess?
(a) No - 0
(b) Yes - 10
(c) What strategy? - 0

10. Are the marketing performance indicators seen by the senior executive team aligned with these milestones?
(a) No - 0
(b) Yes, external (customers and competitors) - 7
(c) Yes, internal, (employees and innovativeness) - 5
(d) Yes, both - 10

Agnes Jumah, Marketing Metrics

Recomendados

Recomendados

Más contenido relacionado

La actualidad más candente

La actualidad más candente (18)

Similar a Agnes Jumah, Marketing Metrics

Similar a Agnes Jumah, Marketing Metrics (20)

Más de iQ Student Accommodation

Más de iQ Student Accommodation (12)

Agnes Jumah, Marketing Metrics