In Focus

Useless online metrics you might be tracking

Clicks and view-throughs

Click it where the sun don't shine
I had a client who loved search for exactly the reason that search is lovable. CPC pricing is super-efficient and leads are all qualified, so we assume that the ROI must be high. But we dug into the client's search results and found that the first page bounce rate was more than 90 percent. (So much for pricing efficiency.) That's not search's fault; search was doing its job. The search was driving to the site's homepage, and there were a lot of different and very specific terms and short blurbs that were driving consumers there. Essentially, the paid search results were making a promise that the homepage couldn't keep. So, don't just look at clicks -- look at what happens to those clicks once they land.

Of course, there's another issue with clicks as a metric: click fraud. It just keeps getting worse because it's so easy for crooks to automate fake clicks. Search isn't the only channel facing this problem; CPC display is as well. Look for pricing models that are more resistant to game playing.

Success you can't see
An automaker wants to reinvigorate its brand and move metal. The agency plans a great campaign using data tools like BlueKai to target "intenders" -- that is, people planning to buy a car in the next six months. The agency knows that for a brand campaign, click-through is a poor metric, but there needs to be some measurement that shows movement down the purchase funnel. The agency agrees with the client that a visit to the automaker's site to either configure a car or use the dealer locator will suffice, so they set up view-through tags to see how many people who have seen the ad wind up on the automaker's site.

This is guaranteed to under-count the effectiveness of the campaign. The creative might have done a wonderful job of making the audience want the car, but there are a lot of ways to move down the funnel without ever going to the automaker's owned and operated site. Going to Edmunds or Cars.com would furnish the same (or more) information to the buyer but not feel as pushy and limited as the manufacturer's own site. Dealers can be contacted and quotes given through these sites. But people who take these incredibly positive actions will never hit the view-through meter, and the money spent exposing them will often go into the wasted bucket by default.

Instead, consider spending some extra money to do a bit of behavioral research with a panel provider to see whether people exposed to the campaign searched for the brand, visited endemic sites, or took other actions inside and outside the manufacturer's site at higher rates than the non-exposed audience. Spending more money to find out if the money you've spent worked is not wasting money -- it is being strategic.

 

Comments

Sam Diener
Sam Diener August 13, 2010 at 12:27 PM

The other thing is that viewthrough shouldn't be tag based .... but that is a whole nother can of worms.

Sam Diener
Sam Diener August 13, 2010 at 12:25 PM

Very interesting piece.

I think the other issue is that with branding ads (the non-ctr ones) your goal is NOT necessarily to get conversions but to reach people. Sometimes the picture isn't about just the internet... sometimes it's bigger. You have to look at the quantitative effect of all ads....

Click fraud is rampant --- but easy to combat.

Corey Kronengold
Corey Kronengold August 11, 2010 at 11:17 AM

Great piece, Matt.

I love telling people, "You can't measure how much someone weighs with a yardstick." Too many metrics, too many tools, not enough real, actionable insight from them.

Completion rate of pre-roll is one of my biggest pet peeve of a metric. It tells you nothing about the ad or the user's intent, other than how much they wanted to see the content that comes after it.

I often tell clients that they need to look at metrics in their proper context. Advertisers need to look at whether or not they moved the needle that they are trying to move, not an arbitrary benchmark for a vertical category that is irrelevant to the specific creative execution. Why measure CTR if the ad isn't designed to be clicked on?

At Innovid, we're looking at a new breed of metrics that are specific to the ad executions. Instead of looking at the data, we focus on what the data is telling us. We look at the creative and determine what each of the actions or engagements is a proxy for, and lay out a narrative that explains how users are interacting, not just what they clicked on.

The most important point you mention, though, is that all too often, the metrics are too easy to manipulate. And while a higher number may make a client happy in the short term, playing data games is bad for the industry overall. We need to give advertisers reasons to spend more money online, not reasons to go elsewhere.