Commentary
What's In A Number?
- by Cory Treffiletti , Featured Contributor, February 10, 2010
There are two ways to look at the numbers: quantitatively and qualitatively. The quantitative numbers tell you a story based on volume while the qualitative numbers tell you a story that's based on impact and effect (beyond that of sheer volume). These two vantage points can merge together to tell you the whole story and can influence what steps you take in your marketing. You can't make decisions on just one set of data, because they would only show you half the picture.
For example, let's pretend to be Heidi Montag and take a peek at the two most important recent numbers in her life: 10 and 658. Ten is the number of plastic surgery procedures she recently had in one day, while the number 658 refers to how many albums she sold in the first week of the album's release. If I were her and added up those two numbers, I'd surmise it might be time to get out of Hollywood because her personal insecurities have gotten the better of her. I have more friends on Facebook than she has album sales, which cannot be a good sign. Is there a strategy to fix that situation?
advertisement
advertisement
When it comes to Facebook, how many friends or fans are enough? If you check out a site like Twitterholic, you see the leading accounts on Twitter, led by celebrities and a few publishers, but only a few brands -- most noticeably Whole Foods, with more than 1.7 million followers. That's a powerful brand, but does that number translate to sales? Is Whole Foods the number-one grocery store chain in the U.S? What kind of messaging does it place in Twitter, and does that messaging affect growth?
On Facebook you can look up your favorite brands and see how many followers they have, but what do these numbers really mean? The TGI Friday's page has 342,000+ fans, but the Woody The Bartender page has 927,000+ fans for the same kind of content -- which is more valuable? The Most Interesting Man In The World has 88,000+ fans, while the Dos Equis brand has more than 180,000+ fans, but which is more valuable? Of course if you search for Dos Equis, you find 14 different results that match the brand, so who has control in that environment? If I'm one of these brands, I'd surmise that my fans are very active in social media and that I need to take some initiative to be the leading representation of my brand in that space, or I lose total control and miss opportunities to speak to my audience.
What about in paid media? Is a $1 CPM a fair price to pay to reach my audience? Is a 35% share of voice on a campaign enough to generate the reach that I need and the frequency that will drive impact? If that SOV is placed in television, does it have the same weight and impact as it would in digital media, where the audience is naturally more inclined to interact with my brand? Is it smart to spend $3 million to place an ad to reach 107 million people one time, like on the Super Bowl? Many will say yes, but what if that money could be spent to generate 5 million email addresses and spur a viral outreach that could be used for ongoing CRM with my audience instead of blowing it on one TV spot? Would that be an efficient way to spend my money? Is that the right path to choose?
What about the number four, which is used in the 4-second rule? That's the one stating the average amount of time users will wait for a page to load before they give up and click away -- which could create a missed opportunity if your site isn't up to par. What about the number 77, the largest number that cannot be written as the sum of distinct numbers whose reciprocals add up to 1? I know that has nothing to do with marketing, but it's geeky and tells you something you may not have known -- which is what good marketing does as well!
The fact is, numbers can be massaged to say whatever you want them to say. Numbers tell only half the story. You need strategy to make the numbers actionable, and strategy can direct the way numbers will react. Many people ask the question, is marketing a science or an art? The answer is, it's both. You can't have one without the other, and you can't have effective marketing without knowing what's behind the numbers.
So next time you decide to crunch the numbers, be sure to take a step back and think of the strategy. Oh, and if you're Heidi Montag: Please don't take yourself so seriously, and please, please don't record any more music.
Well said!
Excellent post. But I do take a bit off issue with one part - numbers can be massaged to say whatever you want them to say. This is true, but only to degrees.
A classic example is the correlation is NOT causation point, frequently lost on the uninitiated. The fact that a football team winning a game kneels to end a play more often than those which are not winning could lead to the reasoning:
winning teams kneel more frequently
the more teams kneel, the more they win (almost 100% correlation)
kneeling helps win ballgames, so teams who want to win should kneel more.
The illogic of this is easily captured by anyone familiar with football OR football statistics. But what does it say for the uninitiated who comes along, reads the stats, and makes the wrong conclusion. It says everyone needs statistical help at some point.
In this industry, I see things regularly that make absolutely no logical sense whatsoever, and it's always backed up by numbers. After I've reviewed those numbers, I always see the flaw in the reasoning (that incessant kneeling just won't stop), but it's very hard to tell a client "you're wrong and here's why". In fact, in sales, it's deadly to do this.
We are fascinated by numbers, but very few of us really understand them at all, and what value they provide.
In keeping with the football theme - this year featured 2 football "greats" - Favre and Peyton Manning. Both have struggled mightily in the playoffs, despite both being Super Bowl Winners. Both threw interceptions which essentially cost them their final game.
There is an ongoing debate over their "greatness" given their playoff struggles. Anyone familiar with the value of statistics would never let a single play or game decide for them the value of either player. Both are true greats of the game. But many people (often influential people) use barstool logic and stipulate that failure in KEY moments or KEY games is the indicator which decides all else.
A numbers person would look at all QBs, all games, and say "if your QB is good enough to get you to these games frequently enough, he is very likely to win eventually, and this is what makes him a great QB". The numbers bear this out. The use of this qualitative reasoning, in conjunction with the quantitative analysis backing it up, lays to rest any discussions which revolve around a single game or single pass.
But, for the fervent believers, you can never get them to overcome their bias. Trying to do so rarely leads to a good end.
For most marketers they simply need to have their agencies help them turn data (metrics) into stories that will help them become better marketers. This means optimizing across the web and leveraging the data and understanding the power of that data. Relevancy is key for targeting an audience with a real product interest and a propensity to buy. Think about this before you reply.