I published a report called The Hallmarks Of High-Performing Integrated Marketers In Financial Services which analyzes the integrated marketing practices of 175 firms across a range of industries. I thought I’d share some interesting findings from the report, which looked at just the financial services respondents.
Not surprisingly, 83% of financial services firms said that they have made a strategic commitment to integrating marketing campaigns across the channels in which they market in. Interestingly, financial services firms are split — almost down the middle — between those that have achieved a 10% or greater lift in their marketing performance as a result of their integrating marketing efforts, and those firms that haven’t.
My report looks at the business practices and strategies that distinguish the high-performers from the rest of the pack. One finding that I’ll share here relates to the use of performance metrics: High-performers have a different view of what constitutes integrated marketing success than other firms.
High-performers are more likely to measure the lift in customer satisfaction and average customer spend than other financial services firms. And less likely to measure likelihood to refer the brand and brand awareness.
My take: Measurement costs money. It doesn’t matter how simple the metric is. The act of collecting data, measuring results, and making a metric actionable and usable takes time, effort, and money.
The findings from the survey shows that high-performing firms put their emphasis on measuring the metrics that matter — those that measure and drive bottom-line performance. The under-performers can continue to look at NPS and brand awareness at their own risk.
Technorati Tags: Banking, Marketing, Marketing ROI, Net Promoter Score
Ron, I could not agree more with your closing comments “The findings from the survey shows that high-performing firms put their emphasis on measuring the metrics that matter — those that measure and drive bottom-line performance.”
These are those metrics that are actionable or “tell you” what to do.
Good job Ron.
The firms that are succeeding using multiple channels including email, phone, statements, ATMs, etc. are always those that are measuring the impact to the bottom line. In today’s environment, if it doesn’t contribute to sales and revenue there is not room for the investment.
We have seen lifts of 30% or more for those firms that reinforce their messages across channels, especially where the customer has helped to determine which channel they want to hear from us from.
It costs money to measure, but it costs more if results are not measured against the investment made.