Advertising pre-testing or copy testing evaluates advertising in terms of impact, communication and appeal, and measures shifts in disposition towards brand from pre to post exposure. It is suited for taking go/no-go decisions, and can reveal insights on how to improve the effectiveness of the advertisement.
By and large copy testing is a two-stage — quantitative and qualitative — interviewing process. The quantitative stage usually consists of 125 to 200 respondents who are shown a clutter reel comprising the test ad and some 8 to 10 other commercials, at a hall in a central test location. A second viewing where only the test ad is shown follows the first viewing.
The test ad many be in finished, animatic or stealomatic format for TV/cinema, or in print (electronic) for press/poster.
Animatics/other unfinished formats are economical to use for testing, especially when the strategy and the creative ideas are to be assessed and validated. Finished formats, on the other hand, are used when the objective is to tweak and further improve the commercial before airing.
With over 107,000 ads tested since its launch in 1989, Millward Brown’s LinkTM is the most widely used copy testing solution in the industry. The name ‘Link’ is derived from the notion that effective ads link the brand and the message with the most involving elements in the creative. So when people recall the ad, the brand comes to mind.
Link uses a comprehensive set of evaluative and diagnostic questions to assess the different ways that advertising may be intended to build a brand. Taking advantage of advances in neuroscience, it also uses facial coding and eye tracking to analyse customer reactions to advertisements.
Amongst other leading research suppliers, Ipsos ASI’s Next*TV solution adopts a rigorous approach that uses both in-home viewing of the ad and day-after-recall. Participants are asked to review a 30 min television programme broadcast on an unused cable channel in their homes. The actual intent, however, is to evaluate the commercials embedded within the programme. Responses are collected a day after exposure. Though relatively expensive compared to a central location test, in-home viewing methodology better simulates the natural viewing environment.
In general, respondents are interviewed three or four times during the quantitative stage — at recruitment (screening questions), before the first viewing, after the first viewing and after the second viewing. The questions test for advertising awareness and brand recognition, attention to brand, purchase intent, comprehension, recall of messages, and various diagnostic questions and measures. These metrics, and the methods deployed to measure them are described in the sections that follow in this chapter.
Purchase intent is gauged through pre-post exposure measurement of the respondents’ disposition to buy the product. In the case of the Ipsos test, prior to watching, respondents are asked what brand they are likely to buy on their next purchase occasion. After exposure, they are asked what brand they would prefer to win.
By asking essentially the same preference question in a different context, masks the purpose of the question, limiting any bias that this might cause.
The qualitative stage consists of a subset of about 25 to 30 respondents with relatively strong opinions on key questions. These respondents participate in group discussion/in-depth interviews where projective techniques are employed to elicit insights from their thoughts and feelings.
Similar metrics and methods are used for testing of print advertising. To test a magazine ad, respondents are given fake magazines with the test ad imbedded, and asked to flip through and give their initial reactions. In the first round of questions, they are asked what ads they recall seeing. They are then given more time to look through the magazine and asked questions pertaining to recall, persuasiveness of the ad and message recall. Respondents are then directed to the test ad itself, and asked to read it. The final set of questions which follow, pertain to ad comprehension and diagnostics.
Copy testing is rich in diagnostics and can guide advertising creative development. As it does not replicate real life, unmotivated viewing and long term memory, it should not be used for making predictions on the performance of the test ads. It does however, provide a ballpark view of how a commercial will perform on-air, and is used for taking go/no-go decisions.
Marketing has changed. More so in practical terms, and marketing education is lagging.
The fundamental change lies in the application of analytics and research. Every aspect of the marketing mix can be sensed, tracked and measured.
That does not mean that marketers need to become expert statisticians. We don't need to learn to develop marketing mix models or create perceptual maps. But we should be able to understand and interpret them.
MarketingMind helps. But the real challenge lies in developing expertise in the interpretation and the application of market intelligence.
The Destiny market simulator was developed in response to this challenge. Traversing business years within days, it imparts a concentrated dose of analytics-based strategic marketing experiences.
Like fighter pilots, marketers too can be trained with combat simulators that authentically reflect market realities.
But be careful. There are plenty of toys that masquerade as simulators.
Destiny is unique. It is an authentic FMCG (CPG) market simulator that accurately imitates the way consumers shop, and replicates the reports and information that marketers use at leading consumer marketing firms.
While in a classroom setting you are pitted against others, as an independent learner, you get to play against the computer. Either way you learn to implement effective marketing strategies, develop an understanding of what drives store choice and brand choice, and become proficient in the use of market knowledge and financial data for day-to-day business decisions.