The Infinite Dial

Jaye Albright posted a great piece on her blog a few days back called "Getting On The "Brand" Wagon" about the danger of monkeying with a successful brand (especially just because some trendy research suggested it!) Jaye's advice--"be what you are, intensively"--harkens back to what my old boss Frank Cody used to tell me--"if you can figure out what people expect you to be, and then be that thing, you will be successful."
In her article, there is a quote worth revisiting:

The concept of researching brand loyalty is based on a truism - the average person will listen to three radio stations per week. Arbitron and BBM researchers claim that 96% of all radio listening is encompassed by these three positions on the average radio listener's hierarchy of usage. PPM usage data has shown that the average listener actually visits more than twice as many radio frequencies in the average week.

The interesting bit, to me, is the last sentence, which we have certainly observed to be true in our PPM analysis work. Most of the Branding Gurus in our industry duly read their Godins, their Long Tails, their Good to Greats and Pursuits of Excellence, repackage, reexamine and revise these insights (along with their own) to glean the relevant wisdom for radio (which is not necessarily easy--I mean this with respect), and go on to help their stations win--in a diary world, that all works fine.

But what about when PPM hits your market, and the success metric is no longer what stations people recalled listening to, but what stations people actually listened to? Some people smarter than I am will correctly note that this will make strong brands even more important, to encourage listeners to choose your brand to listen to out of a crowded consideration set. But the consideration set for the average listener (in terms of terrestrial radio) is not getting more crowded--they aren't getting the PPM memo. Instead, that second choice, second favorite soft AC that usually gets buried by the market leader's big "Live In It To Win It Birthday Key In The Glove Box" extravaganza contest might turn out to not be doing so bad, after all, despite brand awareness measures that might say otherwise.

All this really means, of course, is that different measures yield different results. "Brand Awareness" and some of the other tried-and-true measures of a station's health will continue to be measured, of course, but just as PPM will change some of the answers, so too must radio stations and their research partners change up the questions. Edison currently sits on the Advertising Research Foundation's Experiential Marketing Council, which is currently in the midst of a significant study to develop a metric for events and promotions that factors in engagement, along with awareness, reach and frequency. When consumers are exposed to as many brands as we currently are, reach, frequency and awareness don't tell the whole story. What advertisers really need is a measure of emotional involvement--not just "have you ever heard of brand x" or "have you seen this spot," but are consumers engaged on a more visceral level? Are they actively "co-creating" the meaning and experience of the brand (note--this is not "consumer generated media," but engagement can certainly lead to that behavior)?

I started with a Frank Cody quote, I'll end with one--"people don't fire their friends." Or, one could add, stop listening to them. When you start to think about your strategic studies and other bits of market research next year, be sure you are thinking beyond awareness--and thinking about measuring engagement. Don't be afraid to monkey with a classic brand if universal awareness hasn't translated to emotional engagement.