CAMPAIGN TEST SUMMER CAMPAIGN GERMANY SUMMER 2013 INNOVASJON NORGE JUNE 2013

Transcription

1 CAMPAIGN TEST SUMMER CAMPAIGN GERMANY SUMMER 2013 INNOVASJON NORGE JUNE

2 Background And Purpose In March 2013, Innovasjon Norge launched a campaign in North and West Germany 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 April 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 917 respondents were invited for the study with 684 of these falling within the target group. 621 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 29%. The aided recollection for the included platforms is between 14% and 23%. During the campaign period, Norway s Share of Voice (SOV) in Germany increased from 23% before the campaign to 28%, when the campaign was at its highest in April. After launching the campaign, Norway had the largest Share of Voice in the target group of all foreign countries in Germany. The campaign is rated quite positively especially the TV Commercial is positively rated compared to the benchmark. The campaign s Tone Of Voice (TOV) is credible and beautiful. Hardly any respondents use negative words to characterize it. However, the campaign is not seen as innovative by the target group, even though this would have had a substantial effect on the likelihood of going to Norway on holiday. When the target group describes the message of the campaign in their own words, they primarily say that Norway has impressive nature. In general, the campaign had a substantial effect in making the target group more likely to plan a holiday in Norway. Across all campaign elements, the target group is more interested in planning a holiday in Norway. Considering the effect hierarchy, the campaign is on par with other campaigns when it comes to moving the target group up in the hierarchy except the newspaper section, which performs extraordinarily well, moving 30% of the target group from exposure to actively think of going to Norway on holiday. Looking more closely at the communication effects, the campaign produces an overall positive effect. The campaign effects are positive, and the campaign had a positive net impact on all campaign targets. The campaign especially influences targets like Norway is an attractive offer and Norway as a different and interesting destination, which is important in order to consider a holiday in Norway. Considering the branding effects, the general conclusion is that the campaign has done many things right and outperforms the benchmark. The campaign affects the right branding dimensions regarding Norway as an easy and convenient holiday destination, which carries a positive impact on the propensity to go on holiday in Norway. Unfortunately, the campaign only has a weak effect on dimensions referring to nature, which also has a strong influence on Norway as a likely holiday destination. 3

4 Elements Tested Newspaper Section Advertisement 1 Advertisement 2 TV Commercial 4

5 RECALL AND RATING OF CAMPAIGN 5

6 Recollection Of The Campaign Channels UNAIDED AND AIDED RECOLLECTION CHANNELS, UNAIDED RECALL Unaided recall, general 29% Aided recall, Advertisement 1 23% Aided recall, TV Commercial 18% Aided recall, Advertisement 2 16% Aided recall, Newspaper section 14% 0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30% 35% On television 44% In an advertisement 41% In a brochure 40% On an Internet banner 37% At a travel agency or tour operator 21% On an outdoor advertisement 11% In a film on the Internet 10% On Facebook 8% In an online newsletter 7% In the cinema 7% On the radio 6% At a fair 5% In a special supplement 5% Do not know 3% Elsewhere 0% 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% N=621 n=179 The unaided recall is 29%. This means that 29% 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 comes primarily from television (44%), while recall also originates from advertisement in a newspaper, magazine or similar (41%), a brochure (40%) and an internet banner (37%). The aided recall for Advertisement 1 is 23%, which is the highest of all campaign elements. Thus, when shown this advertisement, 24% of the nature target group remembers having seen it before. The aided recall for the TV-commercial is 18%, while Advertisement 2 has a recall of 16%. The newspaper section has the lowest aided recall (14%). 6

7 Norway s Share of Voice NORWAY S SHARE OF VOICE IN GERMANY (NATURE BASED TARGET GROUP) 45% 40% 35% 30% 25% 29% 23% 24% 25% 28% 27% 20% 15% 10% 5% 0% Norway Denmark Italy Iceland Sweden Finland Germany n=2.247 (lowest n=137) The respondents were asked whether they, during the last month, recall having seen any advertisements for countries where you can go on holiday. The respondents could choose one or more countries. The campaign was sent out in March and April 2013, and it caused an increase in Norway s SOV; 28% (in April) against 23-24% before the campaign was launched (in February). After the campaign, Norway reached the highest SOV of foreign countries in Germany. 7

8 Rating Of The Different Platforms In The Campaign HOW WOULD YOU RATE THE CAMPAIGN? 100% 14% 15% 12% 90% 80% 70% 28% 13% DO YOU THINK THE CAMPAIGN IS BETTER OR POORER THAN OTHER CAMPAIGNS YOU REMEMBER? 100% 4% 5% 7% 9% 90% 20% 80% 34% 38% 31% 34% 70% 60% 50% 60% 59% 54% 47% 50% 60% 50% 38% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% 28% 30% 23% 22% 20% 1% 1% 1% 2% 3% 3% 4% 3% 2% 2% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% Newspaper Advertisement 1 Advertisement 2 TV Commercial Benchmark n= 621 section n= % 47% 53% 34% 46% 6% 3% 4% 3% 5% 6% 6% 5% 4% 5% Newspaper section Advertisement 1 Advertisement 2 TV Commercial Benchmark Very positively/much better Positively/Better Neither positively/better nor negatively/poorer Negatively/Poorer Very negatively/much poorer Don't know More than 70% of the target group assesses the campaign elements positively. Especially the TV commercial is rated positively and is thus higher than benchmark. In general, the campaign elements are not rated better or worse than other campaigns (compared to benchmark). However, this conclusion does not involve the TV commercial, which is rated much better than other campaigns. 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=621 10

11 Tone of Voice Across Platforms Compared To The Other Campaigns TONE OF VOICE FOR THE GERMAN CAMPAIGN COMPARED TO BENCHMARK Credible Beautiful Creative Informative Modern Serious Entertaining Attractive Usable Fun Innovative Challenging Different Uninteresting Do not know Confusing Irritating Unethical Patronising 2% 3% 1% 2% 1% 1% 0% 1% 5% 6% 5% 5% 8% 8% 9% 12% 11% 11% 13% 15% 14% 14% 20% 22% 26% 28% 29% 29% 33% 33% 33% 32% 31% 35% 39% 49% 47% 48% 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% Germany Summer Campaign Benchmark n=621 The campaign is primarily perceived as credible and beautiful; more than 40% use these words. 39% find the campaign creative, while slightly fewer find it informative. On a positive note, quite few (5%) assess the campaign as uninteresting a rating which is below the benchmark. 11

12 Tone of Voice Of Each Platform Top Seven TONE OF VOICE OF EACH PLATFORM Credible 43% 45% 49% 56% Beautiful 42% 45% 51% 49% Creative 29% 35% 37% 52% Serious 26% 30% 34% 36% Informative 30% 31% 35% 34% Attractive 24% 25% 28% 34% Modern 28% 29% 31% 38% 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% TV Commercial Advertisement 2 Advertisement 1 Newspaper section n=621 This figure shows the top seven dimensions across the four platforms. As the figure illustrates, the TV-commercial stands out as being creative and modern. On the other hand, the newspaper section stands out as being more credible than the other campaign elements. 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 STRONGEST EFFECT? Attractive 9% Only the TOV dimensions 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. Informative 8% Attractive, informative and innovative are the TOV dimensions with a positive effect. This means that if the target group described the campaign in these terms, they are more likely to go on holiday in Norway. Innovative Usable -9% 7% Respondents who rated the campaign as usable are surprisingly less likely to think of going to Norway on holiday. It is less surprising that an uninteresting assessment of the campaign has great negative effect. Uninteresting -16% -20% -15% -10% -5% 0% 5% 10% 15% n=621 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 Usable Uninteresting Informative Attractive Innovative RETAIN The priority map shows that the TOV dimensions informative and attractive had a substantial positive impact on the probability of going on holiday in Norway. Since a big share of the target group also characterised the campaign in these terms, it indicates that the campaign has chosen the right TOV. However, even though innovative also has a positive impact on the probability of going on holiday in Norway, only few characterised the campaign this way. Thus, in the future, the campaign could benefit from becoming more innovative. 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. 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 Negative impact on probability for holiday in Norway PRIORITIZE Positive impact on probability for holiday in 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. 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? Impressive nature experiences 29% Showcasing Norway as an attractive and popular destination 27% Different possibilities and experiences 24% Do not know Other Active and sporty holiday 4% 4% 5% Something for everybody Recreational and restful holiday A destination not far away Family vacation and child friendly environment 2% 1% 0% 0% 0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30% 35% N=621 The figure shows how the target group perceives the message of the campaign. Almost one in three perceives the message to be about the impressive nature one can experience in Norway, while another 27% finds focus to be on showcasing Norway as an attractive and popular destination. A significant proportion (24%) also finds the message to be that Norway has different possibilities and experiences. 16

17 EMOTIONS 17

18 Emotionel Statements About Holidays In Norway This table shows that the respondents agree with the statements On a holiday in Norway, I can restore my inner harmony and balance and On holiday in Norway, I can feel full of renewed energy. Statements On holiday in Norway, I can restore my inner harmony and balance 49% Fewest respondents agree with the statement On holiday in Norway, I can avoid surprised and feel safe On holiday in Norway, I can feel full of renewed energy 44% On holiday in Norway, I can feel completely liberated 43% On holiday in Norway, I can expand my horizon 31% On holiday in Norway, I can immerse myself in local life 21% On holiday in Norway, I can spend quality time with my family On holiday in Norway, I can feel special and stand out from the crowd 19% 13% On holiday in Norway, I can avoid surprises and feel safe 10% How the table should be read: n=621 The table shows how many percent of the target group agrees with the statement 18

19 The Effects Of Emotional Statements On The Probability Of Going To Norway The Effect Of The Statements On The Attitude Towards Norway As A Holiday Destination The chart shows the statements which affect the respondents probability to go on holidays in Norway. WHICH STATEMENT HAS THE GREATEST EFFECT? Only statements with a statistically significant effect are shown in the chart. The results show that only two statements have this effect. The percentages in the figure indicate how much the probability of going on holiday in Norway increases/decreases when respondents find that the actual statement fits their perception of Norway. On holiday in Norway I can feel completely liberated 7% On holiday in Norway, I can feel completely liberated and On a holiday in Norway, I can restore my inner harmony and balance have a clear positive effect on the respondents attitude towards Norway as a holiday destination. On holiday in Norway I can restore my inner harmony and balance 5% 0% 2% 4% 6% 8% n=621 19

20 CAMPAIGN EFFECTS 20

21 Campaign Effects Section In A Newspaper Advertisement 1 Advertisement 2 TV Commercial Germany Difference to benchmark Germany Difference to benchmark Germany Difference to benchmark Germany 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. In general, all campaign elements have succeeded in making the German target group more likely to go the Norway (the elements score above the general benchmark). It also seems that the campaign has been somewhat persuasive in changing the German target group s attitude towards Norway. All campaign elements perform below the benchmark on the dimension visited Visitnorway.de. 21

22 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. 22

23 The Campaign s Ad Effect Hierarchy The table displays how the campaign elements succeed in persuading the target group to book a holiday in Norway. Effect Persuaded and active holiday Section In A Newspaper Advertisement 1 Advertisement 2 TV Commercial Benchmark 30% 21% 24% 24% 26% In general, all campaign elements seem to succeed in persuading the German target group. However, they differ in their likelihood of moving them to the top of the hierarchy. Persuaded and active contact 6% 1% 3% 4% 6% Persuaded 43% 45% 37% 46% 36% Involved 20% 21% 20% 16% 17% Especially the newspaper section succeeds in converting respondents who recall the element to the top of the hierarchy (30%). Recollection 2% 12% 15% 11% 15% N (% of total) 87 (14%) 141 (23%) 99 (16%) 113 (18%) 23

24 Statements About Norway The PDI Score Newspaper Section Advertisement 1 Advertisement 2 TV Commercial You can experience a unique natural scenery in Northern Norway + 94 % + 93% + 92 % + 91% The midnight sun in Northern Norway is a unique experience + 94 % + 84 % + 87 % + 83 % On a holiday in Norway, you can explore the Norwegian nature Northern Norway is a different and exciting holiday destination There are attractive offers for a holiday in Norway + 98 % + 91 % + 91 % + 93 % + 93 % + 85 % + 85 % + 80 % + 82 % + 79 % + 73 % + 75 % Norway is closer than you think + 70 % + 67 % + 69 % + 70 % 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. The respondents primarily agree with the statements You can experience a unique natural scenery in Northern Norway and On a holiday in Norway, you can explore the Norwegian nature. Especially respondents who remember having seen the Newspaper section agree with the campaign targets. N=

25 COMMUNICATION EFFECTS 25

26 Branding And Campaign Effect Compared To The Other Campaigns ADJUSTED ACCORDING TO SPENDING PER HEAD GERMANY BENCHMARK DIFFERENCE GERMANY 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. The campaign produced a positive branding and campaign effect. However, compared to the other non-scandinavian summer campaigns, the positive campaign effect is below average, while the branding effect is above. When adjusting according to spending per head, the campaign s communication effect performs even worse compared to the benchmark. 26

27 Net campaign effect Net Campaign Effect: What Did The Campaign Do? There are attractive offers for a holiday in Norway 9% Northern Norway is a different and exciting holiday destination 5% Norway is closer than you think 5% The midnight sun in Northern Norway is a unique experience You can experience a unique natural scenery in Northern Norway On a holiday in Norway, you can explore the Norwegian nature n (campaign) = % 3% 2% 0% 2% 4% 6% 8% 10% 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 has a positive impact on all campaign targets. Particularly, there is a large net impact on the target related to the attractiveness of Norway as a holiday destination, while the campaign also had a substantial impact on Norway as a diverse and geographical proximate destination. 27

28 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 28

29 Small/negative net campaign effect Large net campaign effect Campaign Effect: Did The Campaign Do The Right Things? ADEQUATE There are attractive offers for a holiday in Norway RETAIN The priority map indicates that the campaign fulfilled the right goals to a large extent. The targets which were strongest affected by the campaign also have the largest impact on the probability to go to Norway on holiday. Thus, it is important for future campaigns to preserve this focus when preparing campaigns. Norway is closer than you think Northern Norway is a different and exciting holiday destination The campaign also had a large net effect on the perception of geographical proximity, but it does not impact the likelihood of going on holiday in Norway that much. Likewise, future campaigns could benefit from an enhanced focus on the unique natural scenery in Northern Norway. The midnight sun in Northern Norway is a unique experience MONITOR On a holiday in Norway, you can explore the Norwegian nature You can experience a unique natural scenery in Northern Norway PRIORITIZE 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: 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 n (campaign) = High impact on probability for holiday in Norway 29

30 Net Branding Effect: What Did The Campaign Do? NET BRANDING EFFECT It has exciting cities 5% It offers good cycling 4% It has an exciting culture and history 3% Norway is easy to get to 3% It is easy to book all the elements of a holiday to 3% It offers a wide range of sustainable alternatives 3% It offers experiences that you cannot find anywhere 2% It offers good hiking 2% It offers an opportunity to experience natural 2% It has spectacular natural scenery 2% It has new and interesting places 2% It has great cuisine and local specialities 2% It is easy to plan a trip to Norway 1% It offers good angling 0% It offers excellent skiing, snowboarding, etc. -5% -6% -4% -2% 0% 2% 4% 6% 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 has had the largest net branding effects on the dimensions It has exciting cities and It offers good cycling. On the other hand, the campaign has had a negative effect on the winter focused dimension. 30

31 Small/negative net branding effect Large net branding effect Branding Effect: Did The Campaign Do The Right Things? ADEQUATE It has exciting cities It offers experiences that you cannot find anywhere else in the world It offers good hiking It offers good angling It has new and interesting places MONITOR It offers excellent skiing, snowboarding, etc. It offers good cycling Norway is easy to get to It has an exciting culture and history It offers a wide range of sustainable alternatives It offers an opportunity to It has great cuisine experience natural and local phenomena such specialities as the midnight sun or the northern lights It is easy to book all the elements of a holiday to Norway It has spectacular natural scenery It is easy to plan a trip to Norway RETAIN PRIORITIZE The campaign managed to influence some of the right branding targets. While the campaign had a substantial net effect on targets, which have a large impact on going to Norway on holiday e.g. It offers sustainable alternatives, easy to book all elements of a holiday to Norway and exciting culture and history the campaign could, in the future, focus on other important campaign dimensions which are focused primarily on nature and the easiness of planning a trip to Norway. For instance, It has a spectacular natural scenery, Opportunity to experience natural phenomena and It is easy to plan a trip to Norway have a relatively large impact on respondents motivation to go Norway on holiday. The campaign should prioritize these goals in the future. Simultaneously, future campaigns need not focus on the possibilities for hiking and cycling, just as future campaigns would benefit from a reduced focus on exciting cities. 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 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 31

32 Platform Efficiency Advertisement: 89 The campaign achieves an overall platform efficiency score of 111. This is better than the average of the other campaigns. The overall campaign efficiency is the result of a more or less equal contribution from all three measured platforms. Especially the newspaper section performs better than the other platforms, but in combination, they contribute to a platform efficiency score above benchmark. Section In A Newspaper: 115 Overall platform efficiency: 111 TV Commercial: 97 What platform efficiency means 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 32

33 Platform Effectiveness Advertisement The campaign achieves a platform effectiveness score of 78. This is below benchmark. This implies that the campaign has not been successful in achieving a division of labour between the campaign elements. TV commercial Platform effectiveness: 78 Section in a newspaper 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. 33

34 ? METHODOLOGY 34

35 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 April The survey was conducted with a representative sample of Germans over 18 years of age who are in the Innovasjon Norge summer (nature based) target group (see box on the left). A total of 621 interview were completed within the nature target group. 35

36 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: