• by Karlene Lukovitz , June 25, 2010

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%).

Other findings:

• On average, roughly 2% of sponsorship expenditure is budgeted for measurement.

• 62% believe it's extremely/very important for the property sponsor or event organizer to provide measurement information.

• The information that respondents most often seek from partners include audience demographics (85%), audience research on sponsor recognition/recall (72%) and audience research on attitudes toward sponsors (70%).

• 34% report that they outsource the measurement of their sponsorship initiatives. Outsourcing measurement is more prevalent among B-to-C companies (41%) than B-to-B companies (28%).