CAMPAIGN TEST SUMMER CAMPAIGN NETHERLANDS SUMMER 2013 INNOVASJON NORGE JUNE 2013

Transcription

1 CAMPAIGN TEST SUMMER CAMPAIGN NETHERLANDS SUMMER 2013 INNOVASJON NORGE JUNE

2 Background And Purpose In March and April 2013, Innovasjon Norge launched a campaign in the Netherlands about Norway as a summer holiday destination. In order to evaluate the campaign, as well as providing input to future campaigns, Epinion has conducted a test of the campaign. The campaign test was conducted through an internet survey in May THE PURPOSE IS TO ANSWER: What is the aided and unaided recollection of the campaign? How is the campaign rated? What is the Tone of Voice (TOV) of the campaign? What effect does the campaign have in regards to involving and persuading the audience? What is the campaign s branding effect? Nature based target group The test is conducted within the nature based target group (see page 32 for definition). Only people who fit the target group participated in the test of the campaign. A total of 962 respondents were invited for the study with 734 of these falling within the target group. 618 respondents completed the interview. The survey collected interviews from respondents who remembered having seen one of the tested elements as well as respondents who did not. Benchmark This report analyses the effect of the campaign and benchmarks it against other non-scandinavian Innovasjon Norge summer campaigns in Europe 2013 a solid base with 3,086 completed interviews. The Scandinavian campaigns are not included in the benchmark. 2

3 Conclusions And Recommendations The unaided recollection of the campaign for Norway as a holiday destination is 25%. The aided recollection is between 20% and 11%. During the campaign period, Norway s Share of Voice (SOV) in the Netherlands does not show substantial growth. Norway s SOV hits a slump right after the launch of the campaign, but it seems that the campaign produces a slight increase in the SOV at the end of the campaign period. Nonetheless, it cannot be concluded that the campaign produced an overall positive effect in the Norwegian SOV. The campaign s Tone Of Voice (TOV) is informative, beautiful and credible and hardly any respondents used negative words to characterize it. Furthermore, the TOVs beautiful and credible also have a substantial effect on the likelihood of going to Norway on holiday. To some extent, it seems that all platforms have changed the target group s mind about Norway as a holiday destination and are more likely to go to Norway on holiday after seeing the campaign. However, none of the platforms perform better than the benchmark. Looking more closely at the communication effects, the campaign has produced a positive effect. The campaign effect is very substantial. In particular, the campaign has influenced targets like Norway is closer than you think and A holiday in Norway offers you a lot of experiences that you will not forget which also have vital importance for people to consider a holiday in Norway. Thus, the campaign effects are very positive and also outperforms the benchmark for all non-scandinavian campaigns. Considering the branding effects, the general conclusion is that the campaign produced quite limited effects. First of all, the net branding effects were relatively low, while the campaign also struggled to produce positive effects across all targets. The campaign had some impact on active targets (i.e. hiking and cycling) and gastronomy, but overall the branding effects were limited and performed below the benchmark. 3

4 Elements Tested Internet Banner 1 Newpaper Section Internet Banner 2 Online Advertorial 4

5 RECALL AND RATING OF CAMPAIGN 5

6 Recollection Of The Campaign Channels UNAIDED AND AIDED RECOLLECTION CHANNELS, UNAIDED RECALL Unaided recall, general 25% Aided recall, Online Advertorial 20% Aided recall, Newspaper Section 15% Aided recall, Internet Banner 1 13% Aided recall, Internet Banner 2 11% 0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30% On television 60% Advertisement 33% On an Internet banner 26% In a brochure 21% On Facebook 13% Supplement in a newspaper 12% In an online newsletter 9% On an outdoor advertisement 6% In a film on the Internet 6% At a travel agency or tour operator 5% In the cinema 5% On the radio 5% Do not know 4% At a fair 2% Elsewhere 0% 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% N =618 n=157 The unaided recall is 25%. This means that 25% of the target group remembers having seen an advertisement for Norway as a holiday destination within the past month. The channels show that the unaided recall primarily comes from television (60%), while recall also originates from advertisement in a newspaper, magazine or similar (33%), an internet banner (26%) and a brochure (21%). The aided recall for the Online Advertorial is 20%, which is the highest of all campaign elements. Thus, when shown the Online Advertorial, 20% of the nature target group remembers having seen it before. The aided recall for the Newspaper Section is 15%, while Internet Banner 1 has a recall of 13%. Internet Banner 2 has the lowest aided recall (11%). 6

7 Norway s Share of Voice NORWAY S SHARE OF VOICE IN NETHERLANDS (NATURE BASED TARGET GROUP) 40% 35% 30% 29% 27% 25% 24% 24% 20% 22% 15% 10% 5% 0% Norway Denmark Italy Iceland Sweden Finland Germany n=1.863 (lowest n=115) The respondents were asked whether they, during the last month, recall seeing any advertisements for countries where you can go on holiday. The respondents could choose one or more countries. The campaign was conducted in March and April 2013, and as the figure shows there is a slight increase in Norway s SOV from April to May. In the aftermath of the campaign, Norway s SOV decreased considerably to 22% and is surpassed by both Italy and Germany. 7

8 Rating Of The Different Platforms In The Campaign HOW WOULD YOU RATE THE CAMPAIGN? 100% 6% 6% 7% 90% 80% 3% 36% 13% DO YOU THINK THE CAMPAIGN IS BETTER OR POORER THAN OTHER CAMPAIGNS YOU REMEMBER? 100% 3% 2% 4% 2% 9% 90% 19% 27% 24% 80% 29% 70% 60% 56% 49% 51% 50% 70% 60% 34% 50% 50% 53% 40% 30% 20% 31% 33% 10% 0% 2% 6% 2% 2% 44% 33% 30% 9% 2% 5% 7% 3% 2% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% Internet Banner 1 Newspaper Internet Banner 2 Online Advertorial Benchmark n= 618 Section n= % 3% 16% Internet Banner 1 49% 50% 6% 5% Newspaper Section 4% 10% 13% 15% Internet Banner 2 Online Advertorial 46% 5% 5% Benchmark Very positively/much better Positively/Better Neither positively/better nor negatively/poorer Negatively/Poorer Very negatively/much poorer Don't know On an overall basis, the campaign elements do not perform better than the benchmark. All campaign elements are rated positively within the Dutch target group, but none of them outperform the benchmark in rating. Internet Banner 1 gets the most positive rating of the campaign elements with more than 60% assessing the campaign element positively. Thus, it is not surprising that none of the campaign elements perform impressively when compared to other campaigns that the target group remembers. The two internet banners are rated better than other campaigns by 30% or more. However, this is not sufficient to perform on par with the benchmark. 8

9 MESSAGE AND TOV 9

10 Tone of Voice Across Platforms Bigger Font Size Indicates More People Using The Word To Describe The Campaign Catalogue n=618 10

11 Tone of Voice Across Platforms Compared To The Other Campaigns TONE OF VOICE FOR THE DUTCH CAMPAIGN COMPARED TO BENCHMARK Informative Beautiful Credible Attractive Creative Serious Fun Modern Usable Challenging Entertaining Do not know Uninteresting Different Innovative Irritating Confusing Unethical Patronising 1% 1% 0% 1% 3% 2% 3% 3% 5% 5% 6% 8% 8% 8% 10% 11% 12% 13% 14% 15% 14% 18% 17% 20% 21% 22% 23% 24% 26% 29% 33% 33% 33% 31% 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 35% 40% 41% 48% Netherlands Summer Campaign Benchmark N=618 The campaign is primarily perceived as informative, beautiful and credible. The campaign solidly outperforms the benchmark with regard to being informative. Furthermore, a substantial proportion of the target group describes the campaign as fun (21%) a description which is much higher than in other campaigns. Negative words like uninteresting and irritating do not get mentioned often in the target group. 11

12 Tone of Voice Of Each Platform Top Seven TONE OF VOICE OF EACH PLATFORM Informative 35% 33% 47% 50% Beautiful 20% 44% 47% 49% Credible 27% 30% 35% 38% Attractive 15% 35% 37% 38% Creative 12% 22% 30% 32% Serious 18% 22% 26% 25% Fun 13% 22% 24% 25% 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% Internet banner 1 Newspaper section Internet banner 2 Online advertorial n=618 This figure shows the top seven dimensions across the four platforms. As the figure illustrates, Internet Banner 1 and the Online Advertorial primarily promote the informative TOV of the campaign. However, the Online Advertorial is rarely described in terms like beautiful, attractive or creative. 12

13 The Effect Of The Campaign s Tone of Voice On The Probability Of Going To Norway On Holiday The chart shows how the TOV affects the respondents selfreported probability of going on holiday in Norway. WHICH TONE OF VOICE HAS THE GREATEST EFFECT? Only the TOVs with a statistically significant effect are shown in the chart. The percentages in the figure indicate how much the probability of going on holiday in Norway increases/decreases when respondents describe the campaign by that tone. Beautiful Credible 6% 6% We suggest that these results should be interpreted with caution, especially when counter-intuitive results occur. Serious -5% Beautiful and credible are TOVs with a positive effect, which means that if the target group described the campaign in these terms, they are more likely to go on holiday in Norway. Uninteresting -6% Respondents who rated the campaign as creative are surprisingly less likely to think of going to Norway on holiday. It is less surprising that an uninteresting assessment of the campaign has a large negative effect. Creative -7% -10% -5% 0% 5% 10% n=617 13

14 Low or negative impact The Priority Map Which TOVs Can Increase The Propensity To Go On Holiday In Norway Most Effectively? ADEQUATE TOV mentioned by: Many Impact: Small or negative TOVs located in this area can be downgraded without a major, or perhaps even with a positive, impact on the propensity to go to Norway TOV mentioned by: Few Impact: Small or negative TOVs located in this area should be monitored and can advantageously be kept downplayed if their impact is negative MONITOR TOV used by large share of respondents TOV used by small share of respondents TOV mentioned by: Many Impact: Large and positive RETAIN TOVs located in this area can advantageously be maintained as a decrease is expected to have a major negative impact on the propensity to go to Norway TOV mentioned by: Few Impact: Large and positive If more people could be made to use TOVs placed in this field to characterise the campaign, a significant positive contribution to the propensity to go Norway would be expected PRIORITIZE Large and positive impact The priority map organises the various campaign goals in four boxes according to the share of respondents who use a given TOV to characterise the campaign and the TOV s impact on the respondents propensity to go to Norway. Items in the boxes to the left have a low or negative impact on this propensity, while items to the right have a higher and positive impact. The expected impact of a decrease or increase in the share of respondents who use a respective TOV to characterise the campaign are spelled out in the four boxes to the left. This priority map only focuses on TOVs which have shown a statistical importance for the propensity to go on holiday in Norway. 14

15 TOV mentioned by small share of respondents TOV mentioned by large share of respondents TOV Effects: Did The Campaign Do The Right Things? ADEQUATE RETAIN Beautiful The priority map shows that the TOVs beautiful and credible have a substantial positive impact on the probability of going on holiday in Norway. As a large share of the target group also characterised the campaign in these terms, it indicates that the campaign has chosen the right TOV. Credible Retain: The TOV was used by a large share of respondents to characterise the campaign and it had a high positive impact on the propensity to go to Norway. Creative Serious Prioritize: The TOV was only used by a small share of respondents to characterise the campaign, but had a high positive impact on the propensity to go to Norway. Adequate: The TOV was used by a large share of respondents, but only had a low or even negative impact on the propensity to go to Norway. Monitor: The TOV was used by a small share of respondents to characterise the campaign, and it had a low or even negative impact on the propensity to go to Norway. MONITOR Uninteresting Negative impact on probability for holiday in Norway PRIORITIZE Positive impact on probability for holiday in Norway The priority map only include statements with a statistically significant effect on probability for holiday in Norway 15

16 The Message Of The Campaign Open Answers Coded In Categories WHAT DO YOU THINK THEY ARE TRYING TO SAY ABOUT DESTINATIONS AND HOLIDAY ADVENTURES IN NORWAY? Showcasing Norway as an attractive and popular destination 34% Impressive nature experiences Different possibilities and experiences 15% 14% Other 10% A destination not far away 6% Active and sporty holiday Recreational and restful holiday Something for everybody Family vacation and child friendly environment 4% 4% 3% 2% Do not know 7% 0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30% 35% 40% N=618 The figure shows how the target group perceives the message of the campaign. More than one in three perceives the message to be that Norway is an attractive and popular destination, while another 16% find the message to be about Norway s impressive nature. 16

17 EMOTIONS 17

18 Emotionel Statements About Holidays In Norway This table shows that the respondents agree with the statements On holiday in Norway, I can feel completely liberated and On holiday in Norway, I can feel full of renewed energy. Fewest respondents agree with the statement On holiday in Norway, I can feel special and stand out from the crowd Statements On holiday in Norway, I can feel completely liberated On holiday in Norway, I can feel full of renewed energy 54% 37% If we use conventional significance levels in statistical tests, none of these statements have an impact on the probability of going to Norway on holiday. On holiday in Norway, I can expand my horizon 35% On holiday in Norway, I can spend quality time with my family 29% On holiday in Norway, I can restore my inner harmony and balance On holiday in Norway, I can immerse myself in local life On holiday in Norway, I can avoid surprises and feel safe On holiday in Norway I can feel special and stand out from the crowd How the table should be read: 24% 19% 13% 10% n=618 The table shows how many percent of the target group agrees with the statement 18

19 CAMPAIGN EFFECTS 19

20 Campaign Effects Internet Banner 1 Newspaper Section Internet Banner 2 Online Advertorial Netherlands Difference to benchmark Netherlands Difference to benchmark Netherlands Difference to benchmark Netherlands Difference to benchmark Do you think the advertisement(s) have provided you with new knowledge about Norway as a holiday destination? Have you changed your attitude to Norway as a holiday destination after seeing the advertisement(s)? Do you think the advertisement(s) has made you want to go to Norway on holiday within the next year? Have you looked for information about Norway as a holiday destination after seeing the advertisement(s)? Have you visited Visitnorway.de after having seen the advertisement(s)? n= How the table should be read: The campaign s scores are placed on a scale from 0 to 100. A score of 100 would imply that all respondents fully agree with the statement/answer yes while a score of 0 indicates that all respondents fully disagree with the statement/answer no. The table shows the campaign s mean score on this scale. All platforms are compared to the same overall benchmark of all campaigns. The table shows the difference between the platform s score and the overall benchmark. First and foremost, the campaign elements have been persuasive. More people in the target group agree that they have changed their attitude towards Norway as a holiday destination. Nonetheless, none of the campaign elements have been very successful compared to the benchmark. In particular, the campaign performs below average when it comes to increasing the likelyhood of the target group to go to Norway. The only exception is Internet Banner 1, which seems to have created more visits to Visitnorway.nl. 20

21 AD EFFECT HIERARCHY The Ad Effect Hierarchy Explanation Persuaded and active - holiday (+ campaign recollection + involved + persuaded) Is more inclined to go to Norway on holiday The respondent is more likely to be active by going on vacation to Norway Persuaded and active - contact (+ campaign recollection + involved + persuaded) Has searched for information about Norway as a holiday destination The respondent is active by searching information about Norway as a holiday destination. Persuaded (+ campaign recollection + involved) Thinks better of Norway as a holiday destination after seeing the campaign The campaign has changed the respondent s attitude towards Norway as a holiday destination. Involved (+ campaign recollection but NOT persuaded) The campaign is rated better than other commercials The respondent thinks that the campaign is better than other campaigns he or she remembers. Only campaign recollection (but NOT involved or persuaded) Recollection of the campaign without any other effect The respondent can recall the campaign, but is not involved or persuaded. 21

22 The Campaign s Ad Effect Hierarchy The table displays how the campaign elements succeed in moving people to higher levels in the hierarchy. Neither of the campaign elements are very successful in moving the target group to the top of the hierarchy compared to the benchmark. Effect Persuaded and active holiday Persuaded and active contact Internet Banner 1 Newspaper Section Internet Banner 2 Online Advertorial Benchmark 13% 11% 11% 6% 26% 12% 12% 12% 8% 6% The Online Advertorial primarily stands out as priming Norway as a holiday destination, while it struggles to persuased or make the target group more active. The higher recall of this element should be kept in mind though. Persuaded 40% 31% 32% 20% 36% Involved 24% 33% 33% 24% 17% On the other hand, the internet banners and the Newspaper Section are better at making the target group more inclined to go to Norway on holiday. Recollection 10% 14% 12% 42% 15% N (% of total) 82 (13%) 94 (15%) 73 (11%) 123 (20%) 22

23 Statements About Norway The PDI Score Internet Banner 1 Newspaper Section Internet Banner 2 Online Advertorial Norway is easily reached from the Netherlands A holiday in Norway offers you a lot of experiences that you will not forget I would like to know more about Norway as a holiday destination Norway has tasty and fresh seafood and local food specialties In Norway, you can combine nature and city life, as both are close by Norway is truly different from other countries 62% 65% 52% 59% 79% 71% 70% 69% 60% 59% 52% 50% 68% 66% 67% 65% 53% 43% 44% 38% 71% 67% 67% 60% How the table should be read: The table shows statements about Norway related to the campaign. The respondents are asked whether or not they agree with the statements: Fully agree, agree, neither agree or disagree, disagree, fully disagree and don t know. The table shows the PDI score. The PDI score is the difference between the two positive statements (fully agree and agree) and the two negative statements (fully disagree and disagree). A PDI score of e.g. 50 would imply that there is 50 percent point more respondents who agree with the statement than there are respondents who disagree. Across platforms, respondents agree most with the statement A holiday in Norway offers you a lot of experiences that you will not forget. Furthermore, statements which emphasise the exceptionality of Norway (i.e. Norway is truly different from other countries) and food (i.e. In Norway, you can combine nature and city life, as both are close by) have higher PDI scores. n=

24 COMMUNICATION EFFECTS 24

25 Branding And Campaign Effect Compared To The Other Campaigns ADJUSTED ACCORDING TO SPENDING PER HEAD NETHERLANDS BENCHMARK DIFFERENCE NETHERLANDS BENCHMARK DIFFERENCE Communication effect Campaign effect Branding effect How the table should be read: The average communication effect is the sum of the average campaign and branding effect. Hence, the average communication effect is the average of how well the campaign is doing in meeting the overall target. The branding effect reflects how the campaign has affected the long-term perception of Norway as a holiday destination. The campaign effect reflects how the campaign has affected the current campaign goals. When the branding and campaign effects are positive, the campaign has had a positive effect on the target group s perception. When they are negative, the campaign has had a negative effect on the target group s perception. The adjusted effects and benchmark show the effects adjusted according to spending per head compared to the average of all the campaign. On an overal basis, the campaign produced a positive campaign effect, while the branding effect was non-existent. Furthermore, compared to the other non-scandinavian summer campaigns, both the campaign and branding effect are below average. When adjusted according to spending per head, however, the campaign equally outperforms the other campaigns by a fair margin. 25

26 Net campaign effect Net Campaign Effect: What Did The Campaign Do? Norway is closer than you think 10% In Norway, you can combine nature and city life, as both are close by 6% A holiday in Norway offers you a lot of experiences that you will not forget 6% Norway has tasty and fresh seafood and local food specialities n (campaign) = Norway is truly different from other countries Norway is a perfect destination for an active holiday Norway is easily reached from the Netherlands 4% 4% 4% 5% 0% 2% 4% 6% 8% 10% 12% How the figure should be read: The net effect is the difference in the perception of Norway as a holiday destination between people who recall having seen the campaign and the overall target group. Consequently, the net effect is the change in the perception of Norway as a holiday destination caused by the campaign, adjusted for the effect that any other publicity might have had in the period of time. If people who have seen the campaign are more inclined to associate Norway with a campaign value than people who have not seen the campaign the value will be positive. If people who have seen the campaign are less inclined to associate Norway with a campaign value than people who have not seen the campaign the value will be negative. The campaign had a solid and positive impact on all campaign messages. In particular, there is a large net impact on the messasge related to the geographical proximity of Norway, while the campaign also had a substantial impact on the targets involving diverse activities and unforgettable experiences in Norway. 26

27 Small impact The Priority Map Which Factors Can Increase The Probability Of Going On Holiday To Norway Most Effectively? Large net effect ADEQUATE Net effect: Large Impact: Small Items located in this area can be downgraded without a major impact on the probability for holiday in Norway Net effect: Small or negative Impact: Small Net effect: Large Impact: Large RETAIN Items located in this area can advantageously be maintained as a decrease is expected to have a major negative impact on the probability Net effect: Small or negative Impact: Large Large impact A priority map organises the various campaign goals in four boxes according to the overall net effect and the goals impact on the probability of going on holiday to Norway. The net effect is the difference in the perception of Norway as a holiday destination between people who recall having seen the campaign and the overall target group. Items in the boxes to the left have a low impact on the probability while items to the right have higher impact on the probability. The expected impact of a decrease or increase in the net effect for items in each boxes are spelled out to the left. Items located in this area can advantageously be monitored and prioritized if their importance increases MONITOR An increase in the net effect with elements placed in this field is expected to provide a significant increase in the total probability PRIORITIZE This priority map only focuses on areas which are important for the probability of going on holiday to Norway. Items with small impact can easily be important in other contexts. Small or negative net effect 27

28 Small/negative net campaign effect Large net campaign effect Campaign Effect: Did The Campaign Do The Right Things? ADEQUATE Norway is closer than you think RETAIN The priority map indicates that the campaign fulfilled the right goals. The campaign had the greatest effect on the targets which have the strongest influence on the probability to go to Norway on holiday. Thus, it is important for future campaigns to preserve this focus. Norway is easily reached from the Netherlands Norway is truly different from other countries A holiday in Norway offers you a lot of experiences that you will not forget Retain: The campaign had a large net campaign effect on the campaign targets which have high impact on the probability for holidays in Norway Prioritize: The campaign had a small or negative net campaign effect on the campaign targets that have a high impact on the probability for holidays in Norway Adequate: The campaign had a large net campaign effect on the campaign targets that have a low impact on the probability for holidays in Norway MONITOR Norway is a perfect destination for an active holiday PRIORITIZE Monitor: The campaign had a small or negative net campaign effect on the campaign targets that have a low impact on the probability for holidays in Norway The priority map only include statements with a statistical significant effect on probability for holiday in Norway Low impact on probability for holiday in Norway High impact on probability for holiday in Norway n (campaign) =

29 Net Branding Effect: What Did The Campaign Do? NET BRANDING EFFECT It offers good hiking 4% It has great cuisine and local specialities 4% It offers good cycling 3% It has new and interesting places 3% Experience natural phenomena 1% Offers a wide range of sustainable alternatives 1% It has spectacular natural scenery 1% It has exciting cities 1% Easy to book all the elements of a holiday 1% It offers good angling 0% Norway is easy to get to -1% It offers excellent skiing, snowboarding, etc. -1% It has an exciting culture and history -1% It is easy to plan a trip to Norway -1% Experiences that you cannot find elsewhere -10% -15% -10% -5% 0% 5% How the figure should be read: The net effect is the difference in the perception of Norway as a holiday destination between people who recall having seen the campaign and the overall target group. Consequently, the net effect is the change in the perception of Norway as a holiday destination caused by the campaign, adjusted for the effect that any other publicity might have had in the period of time. If people who recall having seen the campaign are more inclined to associate Norway with a given branding value than people who do not recall having seen the campaign the value will be positive.. If people who recall having seen the campaign are less inclined to associate Norway with a given branding value than people who do not recall having seen the campaign the value will be negative.. n (campaign) = The campaign had a positive net impact on most brand dimensions. In particular, it has promoted active brand dimensions such as It offers good hiking and It offers good cycling and gastronomy (It has great cuisine and local specialities). However, the campaign has not managed to promote the feature of Norway having experiences you cannot find elsewhere. 29

30 Small/negative net branding effect Large net branding effect Branding Effect: Did The Campaign Do The Right Things? ADEQUATE It has new and interesting places RETAIN The brand targets It has new and interesting places and It has exciting culture and history have the largest influence on the probability of going on holiday to Norway. As the campaign only had a positive impact on the former, it was only somewhat successful regarding branding It has exciting cities It is easy to plan a trip to Norway Norway is easy to get to It has an exciting culture and history In the future, the campaign should prioritize promoting Norway s exciting culture and history and also monitor whether the campaign promotes Norway as a holiday destination with unique experiences. Retain: The campaign had a large net branding effect on the branding targets which have a high impact on the probability of holidays in Norway Prioritize: The campaign had a small or negative net branding effect on the branding targets that have a high impact on the probability of holidays in Norway MONITOR It offers experiences that you cannot find anywhere else in the world PRIORITIZE Adequate: The campaign had a large net branding effect on the branding targets that have a low impact on the probability of holidays in Norway Monitor: The campaign had a small or negative net branding effect on the branding targets that have a low impact on the probability of holidays in Norway The priority map only include statements with a statistically significant effect on probability for holiday in Norway n (campaign) = Low impact on probability for holiday in Norway High impact on probability for holiday in Norway 30

31 Platform Efficiency Section In A Newspaper: 122 The campaign achieves an overall platform efficiency score of 72. This is much lower the average of the other campaigns. The Online Advertorial in particular contributes to a lower overall platform efficiency. On the other hand, the internet banners are more efficient than the other platforms. What platform efficiency means Online Advertorial: 44 Overall platform efficiency: 72 Internet Banner: 134 The platform efficiency measures how successful the campaign was in transforming the attention into interest, and in the end into a wish to go to Norway on holiday The better the platforms are at transforming the interest into a desire to go to Norway (with reference to the effect hierarchy), the higher the efficiency score becomes. On the other hand: Those platforms that only generate recall, but don t do anything else for the target group, get the lowest efficiency score. The overall platform efficiency score is calculated by considering all platforms together. An overall platform efficiency score of 100 means that the campaign was on par with the other campaigns in persuading the target audience. The efficiency scores for each platform are calculated by their contribution to the overall platform score. A platform efficiency score of 100 means that the platform contributed as much as the other platforms on average. As such, the platform efficiency is a very direct measure of how well the platforms perform regarding ad effect 31

32 Platform Effectiveness Online advertorial Section in a newspaper Platform effectiveness: 129 Internet banner The campaign achieves a platform effectiveness score of 129. This is above the benchmark score of 100. This confirms that the campaign elements have been very successful in achieving a division of labour. The Online Advertorial has especially primed Norway as a holiday destination, while the other platforms have been more persuasive and successful in affecting behaviour. What platform effectiveness means In a successful campaign, it is necessary to reflect on how the platforms should work together. Which platforms should spur the first interest, which platforms should be used to communicate the core messages, and which platforms should be used to generate action? As such, it is necessary to consider what the division of labour between the platforms should be. This especially applies in connection with complex products like holidays in Norway. If all platforms were to do the same, there would be no need for most of them. Instead, one could simply choose the most successful platform and discard the other platforms. The platform effectiveness measures the division of labour between the platforms, i.e. the ability of the platforms to reinforce each other s strengths instead of trying to do the same. In technical terms, the platform effectiveness is calculated by combining the standard deviation of the effect hierarchy of the individual platforms with the overall persuasion rate of the campaign: A division of labour is desirable and necessary, but is not enough if the campaign fails to succeed. A score of 100 is equal to the average platform effectiveness of all campaigns. 32

33 ? METHODOLOGY 33

34 Methodology NATURE BASED TARGET GROUP Respondents must have been on at least one holiday abroad in the last three years not paid for by an employer with at least one overnight stay. Respondents must be interested in a holiday abroad within the next three years, which is not paid for by an employer in order to experience: Dramatic and wild nature as well as beautiful scenery Outdoor activities such as hiking, fishing or cycling Clean and unspoiled nature or Local art, culture and lifestyles The campaign test was conducted through an internet survey collected in May The survey was conducted with a representative sample of Dutch people over 18 years of age who are in the Innovasjon Norge summer (nature based) target group (see box on the left). A total of 618 interviews were completed within the nature target group. 34

35 EPINION COPENHAGEN EPINION AARHUS EPINION OSLO EPINION STAVANGER EPINION MALMÖ EPINION SAIGON RYESGADE 3F 2200 COPENHAGEN N DENMARK T: E: TYA@EPINION.DK W: NORDHAVNSGADE AARHUS C DENMARK T: E: TV@EPINION.DK W: BISKOP GUNNERUS GATE OSLO NORWAY T: E: MRB@EPINION.NO W: HOSPITALSGATA STAVANGER NORWAY T: E: SM@EPINION.NO W: ADELGATAN MALMÖ SWEDEN T: E: HAL@EPINION.SE W: 11TH FL, DINH LE BUILDING, 1 DINH LE, DIST. 4, HCMC VIETNAM T: E: OFFICE@EPINION.VN W: