Personalisation and adtech are mainstream trends in programmatic media buying, driven by an embrace of consumer data. However, Jerry Daykin posits in an op-ed piece in Marketing Week that less might be more when it comes to data. The author highlights that while the industry tends to lean towards hyperpersonalised communications and endlessly accumulating consumer data, the effectiveness of this approach may not always justify its cost. Some industry insiders are wary of contradicting this paradigm for fear of appearing technologically backward.
According to Daykin, one of the motivations behind the drive for data is competition, with many companies looking to keep up or outdo their rivals. He likens the situation to high school sex education, where everyone talks about it, but few really comprehend or apply it effectively. He describes instances at GSK where hype or press about a rival’s data strategy would set off a cascade of restructuring around data acquisition and personalisation.
However, the author points out the discrepancy between strategies employed for different product categories. For instance, brands like Pampers have incredibly detailed data strategies. Still, mass-market brands like Tide might not be as concerned about data signups and hypertargeting.
The author also highlighted a 2023 report by the ANA showing that only one third of the money spent on programmatic media reaches the final consumer. A higher proportion is lost to non-viewable or fraudulent impressions or landing on low-quality sites. The remaining third is spent on adtech and data.
The notion of collecting as much first-party data as possible to understand and target consumers better seems attractive, but the real costs of data collection are rarely considered, including the costs of maintaining CDPs(Customer Data Platforms) and data infrastructure. Moreover, as more data is added to a media buy, the cost per thousand impressions increases, and one must consider how accurately data represents consumers and the misleading signals that can be given.
Daykin argues for the potential effectiveness of reaching a broader pool of consumers. While the idea of reaching the right consumer at the right time with the right message is tempting, it may be beneficial to reach a slightly wider audience at a slightly less perfect time. He believes in the possibility of “personal connections at scale,” which leans towards individualized communications, but posits a more nuanced approach that doesn’t require individualized messages for every consumer, and one that doesn’t overlook the power of big, unifying creative ideas.
Source: More data does not always mean more effective marketing.
