Nielsen Campaign Ratings – Revisiting the GRP

Posted: October 13, 2010 in Audience, Data Driven, Datanomics, Metrics & measurement, Trends
Tags: , , ,

I posted a short piece on the latest Nielsen product in the Laredo Group newsletter in response to many agencies wondering what Nielsen’s new Campaign Ratings system means for them. here’s the answer…

Mention online GRP’s to a group of marketers or agencies and you’ll get reaction ranging from relief to rage. The notion of using the traditional media metric of GRP (technically TRP) has been the source of much debate, and in the crosshairs of the industry’s leading media measurement companies, Nielsen and Comscore, for years.

Let’s remember that the GRP is used in two facets of advertising:

A)  predicting the outcome of specific levels of media weight during planning; and

B)  confirming ratings after campaigns have run

The launch of Nielsen Campaign Ratings is big news, and the tool focuses on the latter measurement.

Nielsen will be working with large web publishers, including Facebook, who will provide anonymous aggregate reach and frequency data in age and gender buckets, which will be combined with Nielsen data from its TV and online panels, resulting in a single report showing R/F and GRPs for specific campaigns. Quantcast had tried to plant the same stake in the ground, from a solely digital perspective, and with a vastly different methodology. Nielsen takes a giant leap forward by partnering with large publishers, and combining the reports with the industry standard Nielsen TV panel.

What Nielsen created here is most valuable to brand advertisers who are trying to maximize R/F against specific audiences across a media mix. The big caveat is that this only uses broad age and gender buckets (and falls short of all the wonderful psychographic profile data used in other tools like @plan) – but that normalizes against the TV targets of most brand advertisers.

With the difference in media currency between digital and traditional media, and previous attempts at comparing cost per point, we can expect to see online buys showing less GRP coverage than planned. In some instances this will result in an increase in digital budget allocation to close the gap, and in other cases, a decrease in budgets due to inefficiency in reaching certain targets as compared to other media. It is generally accepted that a diverse media mix will maximize the realization of R/F goals, but the ideal mix model is not an easy nut to crack.

Nielsen’s new Campaign Ratings system definitely represents the progression of cross media R/F and GRP measurement, however, in the grand scheme of the GRP conversation, I’d argue that the predictive nature of planning with GRP’s is more important.

Official announcement.

Advertisements

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s