Many marketers lack the capabilities or budgets to track performance of events and sponsorship activities adequately, according to a new survey conducted by the Association of National Advertisers (ANA) and sponsorship research/consultancy/training services supplier IEG.
The online survey was conducted in May among a sample of 102 client-side marketers in companies that are actively involved in sponsorship and/or event marketing activities and actively measure the performance of these at least some of the time.
Nearly 8 in 10 respondents said that the need for validated sponsorship/events marketing results has increased in the past two years because of the need to justify expenditures to senior personnel.
Yet 65% are not taking all of the steps needed to measure results adequately. Specifically, only 35% "always or almost always" measure returns on these activities -- although nearly half of companies with annual revenues of $5 billion or more do so, compared to just 25% of those with revenues under $5 billion.
Fully 59% do not have a dedicated sponsorship/event marketing measurement budget, and 53% do not have a standardized process for measuring sponsorship initiatives.
Among marketers that do have a standardized process, 14% are completely/very satisfied with their abilities to measure sponsorship/event marketing ROI, and 18% are completely/very satisfied with their abilities to measure those programs' ROO (return on objective).
"This survey should serve as a wake-up call to marketers, urging them to define ROI/ROO metrics for success and hold themselves accountable, as upper management is sure to do," observed ANA president/CEO Bob Liodice.
The survey found no universal tool for measuring effectiveness of sponsorship initiatives.
The metrics most widely used by respondents include sales activity (61%), TV logo exposure (55%), lower customer acquisition cost (49%) and lead generation (48%).
In comparison, the metrics most widely valued by respondents are sales activity (93%), attitudes toward brand (81%), lead generation (78%) and response to sponsorship/event-related promotions and ads (76%). Despite being the second-most-used metric, TV logo exposure ranks among the lowest in terms of value (52%).