Solutions

Brand Tracking

Manage, track, and grow your brand with always-on, actionable insights.

Marketing Mix Modelling

Monitor and optimise the long and short-term effects of your marketing efforts.

Campaign Evaluation

Measure and track your campaign’s performance before, after, and as it happens.

Our Company
Thinking
Investors
Explore more
Log In
Contact us
Home / Blog Posts
Blog Posts
Back

Do-it-Yourself CX Software: What you don’t know can cost you

June 06, 2019

Sam Richardson

Share this article:

In advance of next week’s Forrester conference – CX NYC: Change the Game – Leading Radical CX Innovation – we caught up with Nepa US Managing Director Ken Peterson to discuss a critical issue in CX – why Do-it-Yourself systems often aren’t as cost-effective as advertised and how the human element makes all the difference in creating actionable insights for companies.

Q. What is the origin of the “Do-it-Yourself (DIY) CX Software” or “Customer Experience Measurement” approach to CX?

A. Companies started to measure Customer Satisfaction at scale in the 2000s at the dawn of online research. Market Research teams would build bespoke platforms for clients to distribute these reports across the organization to democratize information about customer experience. Several Software as a Service (SaaS) firms built platforms that standardized feedback collection and reporting.

Q. How does this work in the real world?

A. It initially made it more efficient for companies of all sizes to measure customer satisfaction. Theoretically, it should be less expensive as well – though customer experience measurement platforms have invested in marketing a premium price that outpaces the value it delivers.

On the negative side – it’s boxed many companies in to a less dynamic approach and put the emphasis on quantity of feedback rather than quality or actionability. Many platforms over-emphasize tactical solutions to customer pain points, causing clients to invest in fixing one-off problems rather than addressing strategic issues.

If all you want is to measure CX performance, a DIY system should work. If you want to develop an experience advantage or deliver truly actionable insights, you’re likely to find its utility limited.

Q. How does this differ from a more consultative approach?

A. Ownership of the system delivering value – a consultative approach puts a seasoned CX leader at the heart of an engagement who takes responsibility for its success. The right technology is pulled in, eliminating waste or misuse of features. This saves money and adds value. It brings the art into the process that allows for greater focus and ultimately the kind of differentiation that creates competitive intelligence.

Q. How responsive is a DIY CX software approach to tactical shifts in a retailer’s market strategy or market conditions? The launch of a new advertising or email campaign, for example?

A. It offers the promise of allowing the user to quickly gain feedback to changing conditions. However, there are limits. It may insert unintentional bias to the data collected. Questions may be added until no one wants to complete the survey. Often, data continues to be collected whether or not the report is being used.

Ultimately, the CX measurement program may stop connecting to any internal KPIs. A DIY CX approach can also result in every department doing their own thing, without a holistic view of CX. Transactional CX, relationship CX, contact center CX and Digital CX end up living in their own worlds.

One final point can’t be emphasized enough – the CX program often is the wrong environment to measure and/or test new concepts or changes in business strategy. The CX program measures the execution among customers; however the program does not effectively measure the marketplace – it is a “customer only” view.

Q. What would you say are the insights that are most frequently missed by DIY CX Software?

A. The insights about the holistic end-to-end experience when programs are not properly connected. Strategic insights that include an external view of the marketplace at the corporate level. Strategic insights that can be used at the local/branch level. Finding the “right measure” for the company because there hasn’t been a review of the programs (individually or across the company) from an external perspective.

Q. What about the impact of Brand on the buying decision? How is that accounted for?

A. The Brand (with a capital “B”) usually isn’t accounted for properly in a CX program. When these programs start to fall under marketing teams, this will be viewed differently than when they sit with IT, operations and/or customer care. Unless a marketing team is deeply involved in the roll-out, there is almost no analyzed connection between Brand and CX. It is another silo within the organization that results in inefficiency.

Q.  What kind of in-house resources does it take to support a tech-only approach to CX?

A.  The DIY tech-only approach to CX is advertised as a cheaper alternative. The reality is that it takes many resources to execute on just the technology portion of the program. It often requires a full-time, experienced CX project manager who manages the deployment across the company, frequently with additional internal support for analytics and operations.

Then there are usually additional FTEs that must contribute from IT data operations, IT infrastructure, CRM/Loyalty department and company operations. Also, the tech-only approach will result in the organization having to build and maintain a training program to make sure program output is understood across the organization. This is often overlooked and when it is the result is that the outputs of the program are used in the wrong way for the wrong reasons.

Q. Taken as a whole, are DIY CX systems really as cost effective as advertised?

A. In our view, no. There are both less than obvious expenses and the cost of what they don’t uncover – the actionable insights they’re not designed to produce. It’s hard to put a price on that, but it’s very real and can be hugely expensive for an organization. What you don’t know can hurt you.

Interested in setting up a CX program? Or identifying and prioritizing insights from your existing one? Reach out to Ken Peterson directly to set up a call.

New call-to-action

Blog Posts
Back

7 Trends from the 2019 Path to Purchase Summit

May 29, 2019

Sam Richardson

Share this article:

The 2019 Path to Purchase Summit hosted leaders from Consumer Goods and Retail in Fort Lauderdale around the theme of “Unraveling the Complexity of Today’s Commerce Through Collaboration”

Nepa was featured in the Solutions Gallery – demonstrating the role of shopper-centric Path to Purchase Analytics in unraveling the complexity of fragmented, omnichannel shopper journeys. Our recent eBook goes deep on how Path to Purchase analytics is helping brands to win shoppers and grow categories.

The agenda featured powerful content and allowed for great discussions among industry leaders – here are the top 7 trends we observed:

1. Traditional retailer / brand power dynamic

The traditional retailer / brand power dynamic is being tested in new ways and with new tools and tactics. For example, retailers are expecting deeper and deeper investment from brands in their own programs and platforms, while CPGs are increasingly collaborating across company lines to create brand-driven events and campaigns with critical mass designed to achieve strong retailer support.

2. Measurement challenge

There is a growing measurement challenge – Non-linear shopper journeys, walled gardens, and a multitude of online and offline touchpoints are leaving shopper marketers with basic questions like “are my pre-shop touchpoints even measurable?” as well as more strategic questions around driving growth. Retailers and brand owners often resort to less sophisticated measurement approaches, undermining learning and trust across stakeholders.

3. Focus on Conversion

Focus on Conversion across the journey – Shopper satisfaction metrics (unconnected to sales) was mentioned in several talks, but there is increasing focus on converting shoppers on the path to purchase. While accepting his place in the Shopper Marketing Hall of Fame Peter McGuiness, CMO at Chobani, spoke of his emphasis on shopper marketing because “in-store and digital shopper activations are inextricably linked with volume.” And another speaker mentioned, “shoppers can convert from any place along the path to purchase.”

4. Amazon was in the room

Amazon was in the room even when it wasn’t mentioned by name. Speakers from multiple retailers emphasized their (often Amazon-inspired) initiatives as exciting new programs, but many are playing catch up. For example, retailers largely focused on non-traditional revenue streams, improving the customer experience in physical stores, and efficiency / cost reduction initiatives.

5. Omnichannel shopping

Omnichannel shopping is being given air time – ‘Online’ and ‘Offline’ are connected liked ‘PB&J’ – you won’t hear one without the other in a presentation – yet there is still a limited understanding of how one influences the other on shoppers’ path to purchase. For example, there’s a big appetite to understand digitally-influenced sales that occur in brick-and-mortar stores. And, vice-versa.

6. Smart Labeling and Circular supply chain

Consumers demand for sustainability and personalized diets are driving a need for transparency and corporate social responsibility. Smart Labeling is providing supply chain and ingredient information to shoppers. TerraCycle is launching a new company, Loop, to create a circular supply chain, to transform waste management behaviors and economics.

7. Influencer marketing

The role of influencer marketing and reviews are attracting more investment along the path to purchase, because as Joel Warady from Enjoy Life Foods puts it, “people trust strangers more than brands” – yet, it’s another investment where attribution is extremely difficult to prove without shopper-centric P2P analytics.

Thanks to the P2P Institute for organizing a great event and to made it great by sharing their experiences and challenges from stage or in conversations in the Solutions Gallery.

Blog Posts
Back

3 Key Takeaways from CXPA’s Insights Exchange 2019

May 29, 2019

Sam Richardson

Share this article:

Last week, Nepa sponsored the Insights Exchange 2019 in Salt Lake City. The theme of “Moving Mountains” was quite fitting and while there were many positive takeaways, I found the following insights to be the most impactful between the presentations and conversations I had with peers:

1. Customer Experience Still Needs to be Intentional

In ways, this ties in with my next point, but by itself it is still very relevant. I’ve often said to peers and clients that CX is an ongoing journey, not a destination. It doesn’t end with identifying the customer journey, measuring their emotions toward the experience or even connecting it with insights. I couple quotes from Ian Golding’s presentation:

• “It’s our job as CX professionals to educate on the importance of embedding the science of customer experience to enable differentiation.”

• “Courage – to be a CX Professional you need to have an exceptionally thick forehead for bashing against the wall. Courage, persistence and passion to do the right things for the right reasons.”

2. Tech Only Has Limitations

For years, I watched the industry gravitate towards “speed in insights,” however it was really just “speed in data.” Putting technology in place that will measure and report data that informs CX is a noble goal, but as I mentioned earlier, it is not the destination. It’s important to view data from one source for what it is, which is data from one source. A quote from Nepa CEO Fredrik Östgren reflects my core belief and reason for being in CX: “Research shouldn’t be conducted in isolation of the business, it should connect to business data and – ultimately – drive profitability.”

That often means more than one partner in supporting that CX journey. There are a variety of tools in the market place to help you along the journey, but it doesn’t mean they are all the right fit. In addition, is the tool being properly used? In speaking with a CX Industry Analyst recently, she mentioned in her view, 80% of companies are paying for technology features they don’t use or aren’t using properly. If you want to read more about this, I encourage you to read this short post.

3. Convergence of Brand Experience and Customer Experience

If you go back 50 years, the “brand image” was almost completely controlled by the brand messaging, which was controlled by the brand itself. Today with reviews, social media and earned media I would estimate that less than 10% of brand image is actually controlled by the brand.

One of the biggest factors emerging in brand image is the customer experience with the brand – which informs the reviews, social media and earned media. Surely we all have examples where an experience as a customer was broadcast to a group of individuals in some way. When I first entered the industry, I was told to estimate that a negative experience was discussed with ten people – usually close friends or family. Today, that can be shared with 100’s or 1000’s of individuals from our own couch. That’s brand power – but is it positive or negative? I’ve seen this convergence for quite some time, but I’d encourage you to read more about it here.

Blog Posts
Back

CX: The Art Behind the Science

May 08, 2019

Sam Richardson

Share this article:

CX measurement software has made it possible for virtually any company to collect feedback from its customers and distribute it to the organization. The efficiency and scalability of customer experience input has been welcomed by CX practitioners and insight professionals – attracting multi-billion-dollar valuations and acquisitions. While this has been a positive development for the CX discipline, many companies have not realized the Customer Experience and financial gains they expected. Why? Because technology alone is not enough to drive results. Here’s a few reasons why:

It Takes More than Tech to Maximize the Value of CX

Measuring and understanding Customer Experience (CX) can be as much of an art as a science, something lost with a “tech-only” approach.  Technology is a tool in the process and an indispensable one, but in and of itself it’s not enough to maximize the value of CX for companies and brands.

What do you lose?  A lot. This “one-size-fits-all” approach means you give up the ability to evolve and customize your program right out of the gate and as the market changes.  Behind the tool there is, or should be, an advisory process that helps fine-tune questionnaires, integrate the data, and apply the appropriate analytics for each brand’s specific needs.  A  tech-only platform puts a heavy burden on the company, which may or may not have the internal resources to follow through. The result is an incomplete picture of the customer journey.

What, not why

Technology platforms are built for operational customer experience management. They’re fast and effective at providing feedback to managers in the field.  But they lack the strategic dimension that a knowledgeable insights firm brings to the task. They talk only to current customers ( “during” the journey), and fail to capture data on the “before” and the “after” of the customer experience.  They don’t have the capability to incorporate the longer-term influences of ‘brand’ in the process, and brand, as we have repeatedly seen, is a critical element in influencing buying decisions.

The result is that the  operational CX program delivers little or no insight into the company’s potential customers and their movement along the customer journey. This translates into lost sales.  Much the same is true of former customers: there’s no ability to answer the critical question “why”?  Why are they no longer customers?  Could something have been done to prevent their defection?  Is there an offer that would potentially win them back?  The platforms can identify who is no longer a customer but the critical insight into the motivation behind the churn is lost.

There is also the question of “future proofing.”  A tech-only platform will only evolve so fast in keeping with broader market demands.  CX measurement software firms   are reluctant to make changes just to accommodate a single user.  Once again, companies are forced to rely on their own internal resource to address versioning issues, another example of how what is billed as a relatively simple solution can quickly spiral into something much more complex and demanding.

Data is everywhere

At this point, capturing CX data is no longer an issue for most companies.  Platforms in place are delivering massive amounts of information to brand teams and marketing managers in something approximating real time.  Maximizing the insights derived from that data will separate companies that are capable of delivering an exceptional customer experience from those that are just average. That can’t be done with technology alone.

Brand Health Measurement: Developing Your Brand's Core Strength

Blog Posts
Back

Brand is back

April 29, 2019

Sam Richardson

Share this article:

For marketers, tactics often trump brand as companies seek new ways to track and activate short-term sales.  There’s nothing wrong with that; we’ve written extensively on the benefits of omnichannel path-to-purchase analytics in this regard.  But it does overlook one key point: when investing in communications, a strong, sustainable brand is a critical component in generating long-term sales.

So you just can’t ignore brand.  CMOs are recognizing this, according to a report from Forrester, with half now saying they plan to bring brand back as a top .  That would be a big change. The current share of market spending for tactical vs. brand is 72%/28%, while an (Field and Binet – 2017).  There’s plenty of evidence that the failure to support brand can hurt both short-term sales and the brand itself. For example, an electronics retailer that reduced its above the line spending in brand-related media by about 30% saw sales fall by 9% while the value of brand fell by 18%.  An unfortunate result all around.

In reallocating resources in the direction of brand there has to be a plan, and it has to be based on data and an understanding of how brand impacts both long- and short-term sales. That means having well-defined ownership of media and putting in place a platform to continuously measure KPIs, including brand, that allows you to isolate the impact of brand and connect it to long-term sales.  Media Mix Modelling (MMM) can be a good tool for this when brand health measurements are associated with media spend to provide insight into the best places to put money to support brand development and sales.

Through years’ of marketing analytics experience, including MMM, we’ve found that some media tend to have greater impact on brand than others – TV and web TV, to name two (where there’s time to tell a story) – while search and banner ads are much less effective.  At the same time, short- and long-term strategies will produce a different set of media priorities.  But what really matters here is ongoing tracking of the impact of each approach on brand and sales to see which delivers the best results over time.  You can’t optimize what you don’t measure.

We’ve done the tracking, and here’s what we’ve found: while both approaches can improve sales, the monetary value of the long-term, brand-oriented approach can be much higher than that of a short-term approach that focuses almost exclusively on activations.  Short-term tactics drive online and store sales, but fall short in longer-term, brand-driven sales.

A lot of resources have been dedicated to short-term activations, in part because the result is immediately apparent and easy to measure. The effect of brand is more difficult to capture, but longer lasting. But when you track brand impact more closely it quickly becomes clear that investing in brand works.  The bottom line: brand is back.

Blog Posts
Back

Catch the Second Wave

April 10, 2019

Wave

Sam Richardson

Share this article:

When digital commerce began its ascent, it looked like we were living in a binary world: Online vs. offline, with the smart money mostly on the former.  In the first wave of Omnichannel (more like a “dual” channel), Amazon was going to take over the brick and mortar universe as all commerce went digital.

It turns out that this view of the world was a little simplistic. Brick and mortar retailers were seriously challenged, and some disappeared if they were unwilling or unable to adapt. but they didn’t all disappear.  Shopper behavior evolved away from this “either/or online/offline” framework to something more dynamic and intertwined.  For example, Amazon started opening physical locations and bought a grocery chain with hundreds of stores. Some brands became retailers, marketing direct to consumers and seeking to own the sales channels to shoppers (and the first party data that provides).

Shoppers researched items online and went to the store to buy them, and vice versa. They went from websites to Instagram to check out influencers and back to a third-party website for a price check. Having looked at a dress, they responded to an email offer of a swatch sample to get a feel for the fabric, and then went to the store to try it on.

All this activity is giving rise to what we call the Second Wave of Omnichannel. Now the framework is no longer “either/or;” “it’s either/and.”  This scenario recognizes that the path to purchase has become infinitely more complex, as has the challenge of measuring and understanding shopper behavior across all the touchpoints that  influence buying decisions and brand perception.  Many retailers and CPG companies have yet to understand the full implications of this new phase and what it means for marketing strategy and measurement.  One reason: Measurement in particular often remains siloed in organizations, with one group tracking digital and another responsible for more traditional marketing mix metrics, for example.

This approach doesn’t fully appreciate, or capture, how the world has changed.  A better way is to adopt a whole new perspective – the shopper’s – and to track the omnichannel path to purchase (P2P) from his or her point of view. This allows you to collect data on all the touchpoints along the way – including digital, social, in store, out of home and more – and quantify their impact on purchasing decisions.  It also puts all behaviors and need states in context. For example, you’d learn that when someone who goes to a website, looks at a product, and doesn’t buy it there, that doesn’t necessarily represent an abandoned sale.  The shopper may have completed their online research preceding a purchase in a physical store. An omnichannel P2P measurement approach has to be able to close the loop on purchases, no matter where the purchase happens.

As the Second Wave of Omnichannel keeps rolling, many organizations are looking for a way to accurately understand the entirety of shoppers’ behaviors while distilling the data into actionable insights that drive strategy, tactics, and profitable growth. Embracing the “either/and” framework opens the door to a better understanding of what matters most shoppers and to your bottom line.

Blog Posts
Back

Thriving in a Transformational Time

April 09, 2019

Sam Richardson

Share this article:

This year’s Food Marketing Conference at Western Michigan University focused on the ongoing transformation of the industry, which is being driven by the maturation of omnichannel shopping behaviors and expectations. Below are some important takeaways that resonated with me during my time at the conference:

1. Learning isn’t hard; forgetting the old ways of doing things is hard

The fact is, the new realities call for lots of letting go. Among the most important things to forget? Thinking that (a) “channel” comes before “shopper,” (b) today’s competitors are your biggest threats, and (c) your brand is tied to a specific physical product. As an example of this last item, one alcohol beverage company is riding the wave of cannabis legalization by transforming its purpose to “mood management.”

2. There’s a big difference between digital sales and digitally-influenced sales

The first may be small for many brands, and the second may be large. Today’s omnichannel path to purchase (P2P) creates many interactive touchpoints, with instore and online research and purchasing influencing each other. As a result, many ecommerce teams are misreading shoppers’ online research as missed sales when they are actually a purposeful part of the P2P. Understanding this interaction is critical to mastering the omnichannel P2P.

3. The Customer Experience (CX) grading curve isn’t the same as the academic grading curve.

The speaker’s example: 99 – 100 = A; 96 – 98 = A-; 93 – 95 = B; 91 – 92 = C; < 91 = F. He further suggested that this “Tiger Mom” scale is going to further tighten as shoppers raise their expectations based on the best customer experiences they encounter. If you’re not creating better and better customer and brand experiences, you’re falling behind.

4. Know whether your Brand is in line with the experiences your customers are expecting

Customer Experience is the new Brand, and vice versa. Brands are becoming retailers through direct-to-consumer platforms, and retailers are becoming (stronger) brands through their own-label products and an increasing array of services, like delivery. Brand equity is created – and tested – through every experience in which consumers and shoppers experience the brand. Is your premium brand is found in off-price stores, that’s a disconnect. And if your “better for the environment” brand is advertised on a show or network that downplays the risks of climate change, that’s a disconnect, too.

5. When it comes to omnichannel, are you all in, or just all over the place?

As businesses accelerate and execute their omnichannel strategies and tactics, there’s often more emphasis on activation than integration. Make sure your efforts are coordinated and evaluated holistically. Being “all in” in omnichannel means seeing it and building it from the shopper’s perspective, making the most of each touchpoint, and knowing which ones matter most to shoppers and your bottom line.

Blog Posts
Back

Lessons From Retail Smarter 2019 – University of Florida

April 05, 2019

Sam Richardson

Share this article:

Occasionally it’s good to go back to school. Last week, I had the opportunity to attend Retail Smarter 2019 at the University of Florida in Gainesville. As we read about the retail apocalypse, with as many as 5,800 stores already scheduled to close in 2019, it would be easy to say that retail is dead.  After a few days discussing with leading academics and experts, it’s clear that retail isn’t dying – it’s just changing.

Challenges today bring about opportunities for retailers to be on the forefront of innovation. Here are my four key takeaways from experts in topics spanning trends, best practices, technology, e-commerce, customer experience and HR:

1. Kim Kaupe, Co-founder-The Superfan Company, brought a unique take from a sport’s perspective. It’s all about the “SuperFan.” Reviews are good, but “braggable” and “Instagramable” moments make a strong personal connection that makes a recommendation real.

2. Jake Annear from Louis Vuitton/Moët Hennessy focused his conversation on consumer and customer driven insights.  His perspective – there should be no decisions made without consumer/customer inputs.  Some memorable comments included:

  • Often retailers try to “drive the customer strategy” instead of letting the customers dictate the future.  A great example of that is where retailers try to push customers online, rather it is more important to just make the omnichannel experience exceptional.
  • Avoid timed communications. Too often we focus on frequency of communications, when really we should be focused on tailoring the offer for the customer’s needs. There are billions of conversations between brands and consumers on an annual basis (CRM, Social Media, Interactions), but very few of them are truly engaging.

3. Kevin Moffit, Chief Retail Officer at Office Depot, stated that they have to go beyond being just an office supplies retailer by becoming a place that serves to inform and educate their small business clients to help them succeed.  Furthermore, he emphasized that organizational change shouldn’t (and in their case doesn’t) come just from the top. Rather, the change must come from the front-line employees and the rest of the team as a whole.

4. Finally, Steve Knopik, Chairman & CEO at Beall’s Inc., had one of the most insightful statements regarding the Death of Retail; “While stores and retailers are facing some fundamental challenges, no industry has seen more disruption in the past 50-75 years, yet retail is still alive.”

Overall, it was a great week of insights from significant thought leaders in the industry. We’d like to thank University of Florida Warrington College of Business for a great event and we hope to see you at Retail Smarter next year!

Blog Posts
Back

Omnichannel Revolution Requires New Marketing Measurement

April 04, 2019

Sam Richardson

Share this article:

The new solutions that help marketers thrive

Marketing measurement and analytics needs a new playbook. Learn how understanding the new omnichannel Path to Purchase and a revamped Marketing Mix Modeling strategy can tee up your organization for success in today’s omnichannel environment. Enjoy the following sections:

– Looking beyond traditional methods and metrics to map a better understanding of the shopper journey

– A shopper-centric approach to understanding the omnichannel Path to Purchase

– A better understanding of Marketing Mix Modeling, which has had a breakthrough of improvements powered by advances in technology and data integrations

Download here



Blog Posts
Back

When Season Ticket Holders Don’t Renew

April 02, 2019

Sam Richardson

Share this article:

Getting repeat customers is the holy grail of most businesses, and what’s better for that than a sports fan and season ticket holder? Fan loyalty is huge, and for many franchises tickets are hard to come by. In some cases, families pass them down from generation to generation. So when fans stop renewing it suggests something is going seriously wrong.

What does it take to drive these people away? Losing games isn’t usually enough. In fact, some of the worst-performing teams have some of the most loyal fans. For these folks a game is more than a game – it’s a social event, it’s a part of who they are. Most realize that teams will have their ups and downs and they’re willing to tolerate that, even when there’s more downs than ups.

But there are other aspects to the fan experience besides on-field performance, and they can alienate even the most loyal of customers. For management, the question is: how do you identify these issues?  How do you know what’s motivating your fans? What circumstance or combination of circumstances finally drove them away? Answer:  you have to measure it.

Fan Experience (FX) is the new battleground

The reality is that Fan Experience (FX) is the new battleground in sport.  Every sports organization needs actionable Fan Intelligence to compete and to maintain and build loyalty.  Questions management needs to ask (and answer) include:  what are fans saying online and in the stadium? How does that correlate with ticket purchasing?  With stadium behaviors? What are they saying about the food, the concession stand lines, the cost of tickets? And these need to be answered in as close to “real time” as possible.

Today’s CX technology allows sports teams to track fan reactions and the path to purchase across multiple channels and to correlate the data with business outcomes. It provides tools for understanding what works and what doesn’t and for quickly moving that information to the place in the organization where it can have the greatest impact. It has an Artificial Intelligence capability incorporating predictive behavior analysis to anticipate future fan needs.  All of this  reflects a simple principle: loyalty is built when management responds to customer issues – whether that’s at a department store or on the soccer pitch.

CX program gives better understanding

And this doesn’t just apply to season tickets. Sponsors are looking for better ways to measure their investments in on-field, broadcast and online advertising. They want to know the ‘true’ value – in dollars – of their sponsorship. They want to know how the fans react, and they want to see the numbers. A CX program can provide the framework essential to this understanding.

One recent example illustrates the point. Nepa was brought in by a sports franchise for purposes of sponsorship validation. We used multi-channel research (social media, TV, digital) along with traditional surveying to analyze and measure the impact of sponsorship on fan buying behavior. In this instance we found that the franchise was charging just $100,000 for a sponsorship that was delivering value worth more than $500,000.  A lot of money was being left on the table.

In another instance, our Sports Optimizer platform gave a franchise the ability to directly connect with its supporters and  gather feedback from thousands of regular fans and high value season ticket holders. Through this, we identified new ways for sponsors to interact with fans inside and outside of the stadium. And with real time analysis throughout the season, the team’s business management team could track progress after each home game. The result was a $1.3M increase in sponsorship value and an 18% boost in season ticket renewals.

In the past, teams mostly measured in-game exposure to signage and TV viewership and called it a day.  But now the competitive stakes have been raised.  For many franchises, it’s time to re-think the fan engagement process. A good way to get started is to establish a benchmark from which to measure progress for your organization in all areas including fan experience, retail and hospitality optimization, and sponsorship valuation. This can help identify problem areas and open the door to actionable and revenue-drive solutions.