Deconstructing Integration (and How to Put It All Together for Best Results) - RedEngine Digital & Special Olympics at 2014 Bridge Conference
1 like659 views
The document discusses strategies for integrating marketing efforts within organizations, focusing on collaboration across departments, budgeting, and aligning branding to create a cohesive donor experience. It highlights the importance of breaking down data silos to achieve a comprehensive understanding of customer interactions and the complexities surrounding attribution in multi-channel marketing. Additionally, it provides practical recommendations for staffing, budget management, and the value of advisory groups in fostering organizational buy-in for integrated initiatives.
Deconstructing Integration (and How to Put It All Together for Best Results) - RedEngine Digital & Special Olympics at 2014 Bridge Conference
- 1. ! Deconstructing Integration (and How to Put It All Together for Best Results) Olga Woltman, Director, Online Giving, Special Olympics Liz Murphy, Founder, RedEngine Digital #Bridge14 @redengine @lizred !
- 2. ! INTEGRATION STAFFING STRUCTURE BUDGETING & REVENUE ORGANIZATION BRAND DONOR EXPERIENCE TECHNOLOGY & DATA CHANNELS & TIMING COMPETITION ATTRIBUTION !
- 3. ! INTEGRATION STAFFING STRUCTURE BUDGETING & REVENUE ORGANIZATION BRAND DONOR EXPERIENCE TECHNOLOGY & DATA CHANNELS & TIMING COMPETITION ATTRIBUTION !
- 4. ! Staffing Structure Is there an ideal? • The standard model • Digital & DM together makes sense/ the new norm • What about social and mobile? Who should they belong to? • Do mobile and web analytics belong in IT or direct response? • SEO, the website? Executive Level Communications/ Marketing Direct Response/ Digital IT Events
- 5. ! Staffing Structure At SOI, Direct Response has always resided in a single department reporting into the same person (mail, phone, digital, legacy giving, donor services) Why it works • Shared goals • Day-to-day awareness and collaboration • Lends itself to integration across a lot of other key elements Potential Pitfalls • Conserted efforts to integrate and collaborate with communications & marketing teams, key areas for digital channel • Leader sets the tone – which can be key to success, or not.
- 6. ! INTEGRATION STAFFING STRUCTURE BUDGETING & REVENUE ORGANIZATION BRAND DONOR EXPERIENCE TECHNOLOGY & DATA CHANNELS & TIMING COMPETITION ATTRIBUTION !
- 7. ! Budgeting & Revenue Why it works • Shared goals, removes barriers to collaboration • Not worrying about who owns the money, we are channel agnostic Potential Pitfalls • Individual accountability is still important • Requires a cultural shift at every level BUDGETS ARE AWESOME
- 8. ! INTEGRATION STAFFING STRUCTURE BUDGETING & REVENUE ORGANIZATION BRAND DONOR EXPERIENCE TECHNOLOGY & DATA CHANNELS & TIMING COMPETITION ATTRIBUTION !
- 9. ! Integrated Direct Marketing Program • Long history of collaboration with chapters • Centrally managed direct response • Phased approach • Channel-agnostic revenue sharing model
- 11. ! Why It Works • Shared commitment to mission • Successful program, cost-efficiencies and revenue, the impact of not working together is too great • Voluntary participation and greater capabilities • Managed with the help of advisory group • Credibility built over many years • Treating chapters as client: reporting, responsiveness, accountability • Clear (contractual) expectations and processes
- 12. ! • There can be scary revenue risks • Going after the “sacred cows” • Digital channels can be controversial • Attachment to existing metrics • Cannot anticipate every scenario -- or every personality • Making changes too quickly or mandating participation • Increased program management complexity Pitfalls
- 13. ! INTEGRATION STAFFING STRUCTURE BUDGETING & REVENUE ORGANIZATION BRAND DONOR EXPERIENCE TECHNOLOGY & DATA CHANNELS & TIMING COMPETITION ATTRIBUTION !
- 14. ! • Mess of marks to be inserted here…
- 15. ! Brand: Bringing it all together
- 16. ! Clear Brand Hierarchy Why it works • Clarity of the brand helps amplify the voice and helps organization stand out (including in the mind of the donor) Potential Pitfalls • A long and complex journey to bring all the pieces together and, over time, complete transition • Possible negative impact on revenue • Brand vision that does not resonate with donor audience
- 17. ! INTEGRATION STAFFING STRUCTURE BUDGETING & REVENUE ORGANIZATION BRAND DONOR EXPERIENCE TECHNOLOGY & DATA CHANNELS & TIMING COMPETITION ATTRIBUTION !
- 18. ! Why Integrated? • Because Target, Walmart, Best Buy does it. Why not your org? • It’s a user turnoff if your messaging, offers, brand experience are not aligned • Consumers expect and want it 18 / Special Olympics
- 19. ! Consumers Say “Integrate!” Source: MyBuys and e-retailing surveys via Steve Olenski
- 21. ! Purchase Influences Differ with Generations & Type of Purchase
- 22. ! INTEGRATION STAFFING STRUCTURE BUDGETING & REVENUE ORGANIZATION BRAND DONOR EXPERIENCE TECHNOLOGY & DATA CHANNELS & TIMING COMPETITION ATTRIBUTION !
- 23. ! Must Get Rid of the Data Silos • If the engagement and transaction history of each customer could be tracked across all these interaction paths, then we’d have a 360-degree view of the customer. OFFLINE DATA DIGITAL DATA CALL CENTER DATA SOCIAL DATA
- 24. ! • LTV • Source coding strategy & beyond • Chart your data flow – what, when, where – visually • CRM, CMS, Social Media, Web Analytics – capture and pass back data (unique IDs), then move into donor database • For full picture of channel interaction, “tag” all interactions All About the Backend Copyright Creative Commons
- 25. ! Still Major Obstacles • “New” digital interactions (display ad viewthroughs) • Limitations of legacy donor databases • Technical workarounds to include granular sourcing (ie., digital is not just one channel from investment perspective) • Time and money to redo data synchs • Adjustments for new CRM data changes • Major expense and time undertaking 25 / Special Olympics
- 26. ! Other Obstacles • “It’s an IT project.” Requires multi-departmental group (including fundraisers) to identify data capture, mapping and reporting needs • Lack of pre-planned training and education for teams and partners • Accessibility for cross-departmental team members and partners • Others you’ve encountered? 26 / Special Olympics
- 28. ! Communication Matrix: Channels & Programs
- 29. ! Shared Outlook or Google Calendar Courtesy of Humane Society of US
- 30. ! Campaign Calendars • Alignment of key channels & alignment across departments
- 31. ! Year-End Coordination with Programs • Ongoing communication throughout planning • Shared materials and schedule to help align efforts
- 32. ! Channels & Timing Why it works • To a donor, cause is a single entity • Alignment helps take in consideration needs across departments and teams • In the process, we are able to identify opportunities • Accept that calendar is not perfect or final Potential Pitfalls • Online & offline planning occurs at different points, requires deliberate effort to align • Time & fineness are required to build commitment • Trying to create a perfect tool that meets all needs
- 34. ! Competition • Organizational priorities and programs • How do you balance competing revenue goals per month, per year? (Events, public awareness) • Inter-departmental calendar and coordination • More integration organizationally? • Are you competing in the mail and online with chapters? • Add that to your external competitors 34 / Special Olympics
- 35. ! Bonus Tip • When working with chapters, consider forming an advisory group (including nay-sayers) to help define the new program. Giving stakeholders a sense of ownership is key to getting the buy-in. 35 / Special Olympics
- 37. ! ATTRIBUTION IS HARD!!!! WHAT IMPACT DO ONLINE MARKETING ACTIONS HAVE ON OFFLINE GIVING? What role does remarketing play in conversions? DOES ACQUISITION MAILDRIVE GIVINGONLINE? What is the donor LTV based on origin channel? How many of CPC donors are newly acquired versus renewed?
- 38. ! Must Understand the Consumer Multi- Device Buying Path, Too Doesn’t account for Direct Mail, print, phone, other
- 39. ! Omni-Channel Measurement Is the Biggest Challenge To identify the optimal marketing mix and investment, you have to know how the aggregate effect of the channels, NOT just measure each individually.
- 40. ! How Is A Channel Assisting Other? 40 / Special Olympics Source: Google
- 42. ! Campaign Goals & Measurement • Identify, set up and tag your data sources and paths to conversion– ‣ Goals, attribution, assisted conversions by source, event tagging, etc.
- 43. ! Universal Analytics (new upgrade from GA) allows you to see cross-device behavior and combo of devices per transaction and revenue 43 / Special Olympics
- 44. ! Evaluating Multi-Channel Investment 44 / Special Olympics Source: Google
- 45. ! Google (UA) Attribution Model 45 / Special Olympics
- 46. ! Changes Your View 46 / Special Olympics Source: Eric Tsai
- 47. ! Back to Data Integration • Acquisition match back • CRM match back • How to identify new donors, monthly upgrades, value of view throughs • Channel interaction and investment 47 / Special Olympics
- 48. ! Connecting Offline & Online Audiences • Special Olympics EOY Facebook Custom Audience Test • Facebook CRM ads targeting direct mail donors, lapsed donors and non- donors during EOY matching gift campaign • Test Group A featured donors who received a Matching Gift direct mail package AND were served Facebook ads • Test Group B included lapsed donors and non-donors who received a non- Matching Gift direct mail piece AND were served Facebook ads • Match rate from Facebook was 50% • DM lapsed and non-donors who saw FB ads (test) and who did not see ads (control)
- 49. ! Facebook EOY CRM Retargeting • Facebook CRM ads targeting direct mail donors, lapsed donors and non-donors • Test Group A featured donors who received a Matching Gift direct mail package AND were served Facebook ads • Test Group B included lapsed donors and non-donors who received a non-Matching Gift direct mail piece AND were served Facebook ads • 2 Control groups (donor and non) who did not see Facebook ads
- 50. ! Facebook EOY CRM Retargeting • For donors, FB ads generated 153% ROI with online gifts, plus small avg gift increase in mail • For non-donors, FB ads lifted avg gift in mail by nearly 20% and generated 21% more revenue than DM group who did not see ads. for every $1 spent online, we raised $8.50 in the mail. • Match rate from Facebook was 50%
- 51. ! ADA Integrated Email & DM 51 / Special Olympics Direct Mail Donors Pre- Email Direct Mail Donors Post-Email
- 52. ! ADA Matching Gift Campaign • 2-email series to 20,000 direct mail donors – two segments • 4-email series to house file and DM donors got emails #2-4 (suppressed from email #1) • Pre- and post-emails integrated with direct mail campaign (DM included GA tagged vanity url for online donations) ‣ Pre-email sent March 5 ‣ Direct mail in home March 8-15 ‣ Post email sent March 19
- 53. ! A $20K Surprising Result! • Small return via email and 5% lift in DM giving • BUT $20,105 attributable revenue came in via the vanity URL donation form • DM donors who received emails were 3x more likely to give online and give a gift 32% higher than those who didn’t receive emails • Many first-time online gifts from this group
- 54. ! Email was a huge influencer 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 3/8/2013 3/15/2013 3/22/2013 3/29/2013 4/5/2013 4/12/2013 4/20/2013 4/28/2013 5/6/2013 5/14/2013 Number of Dona7ons via Vanity URL by Date 3/15/2013 Direct Mail in home date (mailed 3/2/2013) 3/19/2013 Post Direct Mail Email 4/17/2013 Email #2 Deploys 5/1/2013 Email #3 Deploys
- 55. ! Thank you! Questions? Olga Woltman, owoltman@specialolympics.org Liz Murphy, liz@redenginedgital.com Don’t forget to visit the Solutions Showcase! Many of the ideas discussed today are on display at the Solutions Showcase! #Bridge14