Chapter 17

Achieve Share of Market Goals

Setting an advertising budget to achieve a targeted share of advertising voice is one of the most critical decisions a brand has to make. The right share of voice protects and grows market share, while the wrong share of voice can cause the hold brands have on their market share to slip (Institute of Practitioners in Advertising (IPA) and Nielsen Analytic Partners 2009). As social media conversations supplement—and may even supplant—advertising, a new question emerges: Does a similar relationship exist between conversational share of voice and share of market? Can marketers and advertisers achieve a targeted market share by achieving a targeted share of conversational voice? The ability to answer that question can guide the ways in which companies budget, plan, and evaluate their media and marketing programs.

If this chapter were an episode of MythBusters, the answer to the “myth” of market share and social media conversation would be “probable.” The evidence we have so far is suggestive, but not yet conclusive. However, it's certainly intriguing enough to discuss, and inspiring enough to warrant a deeper look.

Studies from full-service listening companies TNS Cymfony (2009), Keller Fay Group (Moore 2010), and Nielsen (Swedowsky 2009), all performed separately, show that the basic relationship between conversational share of voice and share of market appears to hold across ready-to-eat cereals, automobile brands, and warehouse clubs, respectively. The warehouse club findings shown in Figure 17.1 (Moore 2010) demonstrate the correlation.

Figure 17.1 Share of conversation parallels share of market among warehouse clubs (Swedowsky 2009).

Source: Moore, 2009. Used with permission.

A closer look at Costco's data reveals that its conversational share of voice is greater than its market share; that difference is what IPA/Nielsen calls an “excess share of voice.” IPA/Nielsen's report concludes that excess share delivers growth: for every 10 percent of excess share, share of market generally increases by one-half of 1 percent. (The payoff is bigger for leading brands, whose gains could nearly triple to 1.4 percent.) If that relationship carries over, Costco's results suggest market share improvement arising from its 16 percent excess share of voice. Further empirical research is needed to determine if excess share of conversation voice works the same way as it does in advertising share of voice. If it does, then marketers and advertisers will have an additional tool at their disposal for budgeting and strategy.

Share of conversational voice differs from advertising voice in that advertising share of voice increases when advertisers purchase media impressions that raise or lower their relative share. Marketers and advertisers can influence their conversational share of voice—and potentially their market shares—through strategy and tactics that stimulate or depress conversation.

Four factors shown to affect conversation are customer passion, emotional engagement, marketing communications, and the media context in which ads appear. Let's look at each of these in detail.

• Customer passion and advocacy. To further examine the Costco example, Nielsen Online notes that the brand's disproportionate share of voice resulted from the extraordinary grassroots passion exhibited by the Costco community. Costco members think highly of the products, and especially its private-label brand—which, listening analysis showed, meets their expectations for “cheaper” and “less expensive” goods but with quality comparable to national brands. When digging into conversations across all the stores, only Costco's Kirkland brand was mentioned by name (Swedowsky 2009).

  Conversation levels rise as the number of brand advocates rises; to that end, Costco's higher levels relate to the strength of its fan base. Costco's official Facebook fan page had 153,000 fans in October 2010, while rival BJ's page had only 21,000—a ratio of 7:1 (Facebook 2010). Outdistancing competitors on advocate numbers contributes to market share advantage, because of the advocates’ activity levels and generally positive comments (Nail and Chapman 2008). Conversely, declines in advocates and their weight of influence can presage market share declines (Onalytica 2008).

• Emotional engagement. Dr. Carl Marci and his colleagues at neuromarketing research firm Innerscope study the relationships between emotional engagement and advertising effectiveness through biometric study. (See Chapter 19 for Marci's essay on the role and value of emotions in advertising.) Their research on emotional engagement with Super Bowl commercials shows that engagement levels “correlated significantly with the number of times the advertisements were downloaded and viewed online, as well as with the number of times the advertisements were commented on online in the general population at large” (Siefert et al. 2009). In other words, the more emotionally involved viewers are, the more downloads and buzz emerge, which contribute to online conversation volume and share of voice.
• Marketing communications, advertising, programming, publicity, and news give people plenty to talk about online and offline. Advertising weight changes and media scheduling raise the discussion level in social media. A TNS Cymfony analysis of flat-panel HDTV brands Sony and Samsung showed that outspending a rival and timing it to a key selling period—like the holiday season—can stimulate online conversations, change historical share of voice patterns, and give brands momentum (Nail and Chapman 2008).
• Media context influences word-of-mouth conversation about advertising. ESPN studied the relationship between ad exposure in NFL and college football programs (13 brands) on different sports platforms and word of mouth afterward. Using Keller Fay's TalkTrack (a nationally representative, weekly word-of-mouth survey), ESPN found that while word of mouth peaked on the days the ads aired, viewers continued to talk about them afterward, and at levels higher than nonviewers. Taking two brands and projecting their conversations nationally, Keller Fay estimated that each enjoyed conversation increases in the 80 to 90 million range. Additionally, the firm discovered an interaction effect: Viewers watching the game on both television and ESPN.com had higher word-of-mouth rates than users of either platform alone.

Emerging Plays for Achieving Market Share

That the historical correlation between share of voice and share of market holds, and that a number of factors have been shown to stimulate conversation, led us to develop three emerging plays:

• Influence conversation levels through a combination of online and offline strategies and tactics. Think of the four factors just discussed as levers for enhancing conversation levels and share of voice for companies, products, or services. Each brand will need to determine the best mix of conversation drivers for its marketing purposes and market share goals.
• Leverage social media listening to track progress toward share of conversational voice goals, and use them to adjust programs in near-real time. Use observations gleaned from listening in three ways:
  • Develop insights for conversation-generating programs.
  • Measure overall levels and patterns in conversation drivers that are important to your conversations, such as trends in advocates, postings, and reading activity and sentiment.
  • Keep tabs regularly on your share of voice and the relative shares of voice among competitors.

    Make timely budgetary, strategic, or tactical adjustments, as necessary, to keep your share of conversation voice where it needs to be. For example, if a competitor is gaining share, consider increasing activities to raise your voice in order to protect your market share and make other competitors vulnerable. A decrease in a major competitor's share of voice signals an opportunity to raise your own share and better your chances for growth. Also keep in mind that factors other than communication strategies influence market share. For that reason, always evaluate communications strategy effectiveness by including all other variables that affect market share, such as competitive changes, product innovations, promotions, or trade deals.

• Add social media data into predictive models for market share. TNS research head Larry Friedman told us in an interview that social media data should be strongly considered as input to market mix models. Referring to Bowman et al.'s modeling work (2010), he noted that “social media brings about market share changes that rival the changes one would see through changes in ad spend” (Friedman 2010). Social-media-enhanced models not only improve prediction, they can also enhance planning and lead to deeper insight by answering questions like: “What is causing positive/negative conversation that is affecting share? And what should we do to maximize/minimize its impacts?” This pioneering research needs to be expanded, and the impacts of positive and negative information need to be more generally understood. However, the promise of better business results through better planning and prediction is becoming a reality.

Summary

A solid body of research validates the correlation between advertising share of voice and share of market. Early evidence suggests that the correlation holds between conversational share of voice in social media and market share. If that is the case, marketers and advertisers have an additional metric for setting their budgets and targeting conversational share of voice levels to achieve. Unlike share of advertising voice which is accomplished only through media buying, raising conversation levels results from at least four factors that can be influenced through marketing and advertising strategy, tactics, and programs. Share of conversational voice may also be used to evaluate marketing and advertising effectiveness and provide near real-time guidance for taking actions that maximize or correct them.