|
|
Zavrieť Schovať lištu | ||||||||||||||
GfK, has released findings showing which vehicle features, from a given list, people see as being ‘very important’ in a vehicle.
After a splendid start into 2017, con-sumer confidence in Germany suffers a minor setback in February. Both economic and income expectations, as well as propensity to buy are expected to decline. The consumer climate forecast for March is at 10.0 points following a level of 10.2 in February.
In today’s world, places are getting increasingly accessible, and global citizens have a vast array of choices where to do business and work, and where to spend their leisure time. Digital technologies and modern consumer goods and services are everywhere, regardless of nations’ cultures, religion, and level of development, bridging the gap in hospitality offerings and business environments across the world.
As a result, competition among nations and cities for business investments and tourism revenues is heating up, and this is a trend for years to come. In this context, reputation has turned into a key differentiator for nations and cities.
The global public admires “made-in-USA” products, American strength in science and technology, and the nation’s creative energy, yet the US struggles to win the world’s recognition for its governance, a reputation asset in which Canada and Switzerland are perceived best. Tourism attractiveness is a key differentiator for Italy and France, while Germany needs to do more to promote its natural beauty. Los Angeles, New York, and Berlin are not recognized for their welcoming people, as opposed to Sidney, Toronto, and Amsterdam.
Current events do not define nations’ reputations in the long run, yet their short-term impact can be quite profound. For example, in 2016, a very turbulent year, USA and the UK have suffered large decreases in positive global perception. Our Nation Brand Index’s (NBI) creator Simon Anholt comments: “It is a country’s perceived impact on the world that affects its global reputation, far more than its assets or achievements – and this is what we are seeing here. Those countries that are perceived as being world influencers are suffering following a year of ongoing international conflict and humanitarian issues.”
The souring global mood about leading nations reflects a world beset by conflicts and socio-economic uncertainties. This proves a trend we have seen in the NBI data before: that leading nations are held most accountable for domestic and global problems and they suffer reputation losses in tough years.
But at the same time, leading nation brands are resilient as they have reputation capital to spare. At least in the past year, the leaders held their top positions despite score drops. The world still gives them credit, although with much greater skepticism. Hence, USA managed to retain the top position in the NBI rating in 2016, followed by Germany and the UK which barely edged Canada, ranked fourth.
Leading the Nation Brand Index at number one, the US scored strongly in the categories of Exports (#1 worldwide), Culture (#2), Immigration & Investment (#2), Tourism (#3), and People (#5), but struggled on the Governance metric, where the US ranks 19th – down one place from 2015. Note that the data were collected before the recent US presidential election and its contentious aftermath, the events to watch for impact on the US Governance image in 2017.
In NBI, Investment and Immigration metrics measure the power to attract people to live, work or study in each country and how people perceive a country’s quality of life and business environment.
Combined, these metrics put Canada in the top spot for its Investment and Immigration attractiveness, followed by the US and Germany. Canada performs strongly on all Investment and Immigration metrics, except as a desired destination for studying, on which the US is a clear leader. But the US lags in how it is perceived globally on social equality.
Brand image and reputation go a long way for consumers. To be successful in the business world, companies must create and maintain a positive image and reputation, especially during times of social conflict. The same is true for nations. Those with more favorable branding open their doors to expanded opportunities around tourism, imports and exports, and investment.
hbspt.cta.load(2405078, 'eff4e86e-6faf-4bf2-afc7-1d9ae9a6e041', {});
Which features come top as ‘very important’ for a vehicle to have, according to consumers? What about latest vehicle technology? Download our global study and get the answer!
In our global study, 1 in 3 people across 17 countries say that latest driver technology is `very important´ to them. Download our infographics and explore the top 3 by country.
Biopharma has no lack of touchpoints to optimize engagement with its most important stakeholders. Yet the industry is lagging behind in leveraging those crucial points of the customer journey to meet stakeholders where they are. Below are some suggestions for how biopharma can improve the customer experience and innovate successfully.
It’s time to question the effectiveness of pharmaceutical engagement with its stakeholders. The 15th Annual eyeforpharma Summit (March 14-16 in Barcelona) poses the questions*: “What’s stopping us from being patient-centric? Is it laziness? Or…is it simply too difficult to give up control?”
The same organization recently partnered with The Health Perspectives Group** to review the state of direct-to-consumer (DTC) advertising in North America. They concluded that pharma companies are still overly reliant on TV advertising blitzes and have under invested in authentic patient-centered stories delivered via digital channels. This addiction to old-school push marketing has inflated DTC spending, yet has led to a decline in DTC ad awareness and patient pull-through. How can an industry with such strong scientific roots and talent get it so wrong?
Unclear guidance from regulatory agencies has led to genuine industry-wide caution when activating digital channels. However, this doesn’t explain a drop in digital pharma advertising spending (excluding search) in the US from 2015 to 2016. Digital shyness can’t be the result of resource constraints because TV, radio, magazine and radio ad spending all increased during this same period.
What’s more, new drug applications (NDAs) are back to record highs, so the industry has a great innovation story to tell. And the mobile app surge continues even though most branded and unbranded health apps have few users. Meanwhile, companies are struggling to reorient and redeploy sales forces to take advantage of the new digital realities. We are in a post-iPad world, where the rep and account manager can be curators of targeted and relevant digital content. Yet biopharma still uses outmoded recall and share-of-voice metrics when gauging detail effectiveness.
To paraphrase the futurist William Gibson: The future is already here, it’s just not widely distributed. Plenty of pioneering examples within and outside the biopharma industry heed some basic principles:
There are plenty of success stories such as AbbVie’s patient access programs, Novartis’ real-world psoriasis patient stories (fueled by the largest-ever global survey of PsO patients in over 30 countries) and Otsuka’s fusion of traditional and digital therapies. These are just a few of the pioneers that will gather at eyeforpharma in Barcelona in March to share the best and brightest ideas for engagement with patients and customers.
Join the dialogue as we exchange ideas for advancing the art and science of customer engagement. I will be hosting the Digital Transformation and Customer Engagement tracks on Day 2 of the conference, Wednesday, March 15.
If biopharma makes these five smart moves, they will have the tools to innovate through richer relationships with a breadth of stakeholders, by embracing the new digital reality and by continuing the transformative dialogue on customer engagement.
The conversation continues outside of the conference. We invite you to join us for a meeting onsite anytime during the eyeforpharma program, or be our guest for a special dinner where you can meet other industry peers.
Join us Wednesday, March 15 at OneOcean Club, overlooking the beautiful Barcelona marina
Schedule a meeting and join us for dinner at OneOcean
Not going to Barcelona? Just click here to pre-register for GfK’s post-conference briefing sharing the best and brightest ideas from Barcelona.
*Chairman comments in program for 15th Annual eyeforpharma Barcelona Summit
**The Great DTC Shake-up: Patient perspectives on direct-to-consumer advertising
Poland's 2016 retail purchasing power was approximately €89 bil. Around 43 percent of these funds were spent on food, beverages and tobacco products. Basic supply items – food, clothing, health/hygiene – comprised just under two-thirds of Poland's retail purchasing power. But according to GfK's new study, the amount and distribution of this purchasing power varies substantially from region to region.
The expansion of the digital world through mobile technology has leveled today’s marketing and advertising playing field, providing tools and techniques to reach a worldwide audience. But is going global the best way to make the most of your multi-channel marketing, or do you run the risk of your products and campaigns getting lost in translation across cultures? To truly maximize your effectiveness, you must find an appropriate balance between global scale and local differentiation.
In what was once a highly segmented, geographically limited market, advances in technology and the lower cost of mobile devices have introduced a new set of rules for marketers and advertisers alike. Developing and emerging markets are leaping headlong into the digital world, which now embraces millions of consumers who were left behind in a desktop-centric environment. But while global consumers share many powerful commonalities, marketers who want to leverage the worldwide scale of a global audience run the risk of missing the boat by not integrating local differences and nuances into their campaigns.
Mass media channels like Facebook and Google, for example, can be used to target or research consumers on a global scale, but there are many other popular platforms and apps whose appeal is profoundly local. One of the 10 most popular apps in Indonesia, for example, is Gojek, which allows users to book a ride on the back of someone else’s motorcycle. Completely indigenous to that country, this ride-sharing app was recently valued at $1.3 billion. Local opportunities such as this must be considered when experimenting with advertising effectiveness.
Another key to finding this macro/micro balance is being mindful of global market segments that may have distinctly local flavors. In one region, members of a certain segment may have a preference for particular types of mobile apps or ways of communicating, while in another area they use their mobile phones or smartphones very differently.
It’s important for global marketers and advertisers to affirm the best that each approach has to offer – to be wise about the time spent tailoring to local markets, while also not leaning too heavily on global sameness. Experimentation may take time, but regularly fine tuning your approach between global scale and local customization will lead to effectiveness improvements that can pay huge dividends.
This blog post has been adapted from an article in AMA Marketing News.
Consumers are more connected than ever. New technologies and the benefits they bring have a significant impact on people’s behavior and their relationships with brands. Find out what that means for your business!
GfK will release a completely new version of its geomarketing software RegioGraph at the end of March. RegioGraph 2017 features a new and simplified interface, faster results and numerous new options for analyzing and optimizing locations and sales territories. For the first time, users can work directly with online maps and aerial images. RegioGraph 2017 gives users from all industries an innovative and reliable basis for any location-based decision.
KKR voluntary public tender offer for GfK successful
The Grand Tour – Amazon’s biggest visual production to date – was released on 18 November 2016. Essentially, for all those who aren’t aware of what The Grand Tour is, the show is an updated version of BBC’s Top Gear, hosted by the three presenters who really (whether you like them or not) made the show what it is today: Jeremy Clarkson, Richard Hammond and James May.
Talk about the release and production of this new Amazon Original series has been circulating over the last 18 months, with Jeremy Clarkson even popping up in Amazon’s advertising to help promote products like the Amazon Fire stick, but also to help keep awareness of the new show alive.
Once the show was released, there were mixed reviews from all corners of the media, with some claiming that the show had exceeded expectations, whilst others felt it was offensive and off-key. Away from the newspaper columns and online comment sections though, our UK SVOD data allows us to understand a bit more about how the show actually performed against other titles on Amazon (they keep this data very close to their chest), and what viewers actually thought about the show.
Firstly, even though it was only launched halfway through the month, The Grand Tour (TGT) became the most streamed show on Amazon in November 2016, accounting for 8% of all the streams watched in that month. In the following month, the show was still the most streamed title, and increased its share of streams to 17%, a clear winner and ahead of the second placed title, The Man in the High Castle which attracted 9% of all streams viewed.
However, what is perhaps more interesting is that in December, 45% of all active Amazon users watched at least one episode of the program (we define an ‘active user’ as someone who has watched something in the last week). This is the highest proportion of unique viewers that we’ve ever recorded, not just for Amazon, but also across all platforms captured by our tracker in the UK (which includes Netflix and NowTV). This suggests that two things might be happening: existing subscribers are all intrigued by the show and/or lots of new people have signed up especially to watch the program.
One key reason behind Amazon’s investment, was of course, not just to attract publicity and views, but to encourage sign up amongst a different target audience to those already signed up.
In December 2016, the top reason for sign up to Amazon Prime was ‘to watch original series made by the provider’ (this excludes those signing up for free shipping and because of a free trial). The next most popular reason for sign up was ‘to watch exclusive content not available elsewhere’. To underpin the appeal of TGT, over half of those who said that they signed up to Amazon in order to watch a particular show said it was TGT that they wanted to watch, definite signs that TGT was doing the job it was commissioned for. This I believe can be fairly linked with the launch and increased marketing of The Grand Tour (awareness for TGT was high, with 84% of all Amazon users in December having heard of the show).
When asked why they started watching this new series, the majority of viewers (68%) said that they are/previously had been fans of the BBC’s version of the show. Furthermore, just over half (52%) also stated that they are fans of the presenting trio (Clarkson, Hammond and May), indicating that many of The Grand Tour’s viewers have migrated from the BBC to Amazon (and more technically, from Linear TV to SVOD).
In terms of the program quality, the main question most people are asking is, “is TGT better than the original?’. Amongst those that watched the show, 55% felt that The Grand Tour was ‘much/slightly better’ than the BBC’s Top Gear show with the same presenters, and 45% of viewers also thought that the show exceeded their original expectations. This is backed up with the show’s content rating.
When asked to rate the show using a 10 point scale, TGT scores a content rating of 8.6, higher than most other big Amazon Originals such as The Man in the High Castle (8.3), Transparent (8.2) and Bosch (8.5). The show also scores a lot higher when compared to the average content rating for any show watched on Amazon, which currently stands at 7.9, proving that the high production cost may be paying off (as it happens, the viewers of the show also agree that Amazon’s investment has been worth it, with less than 1/6 of viewers saying that they were disappointed with the show, or that Amazon have wasted their money in making it).
With Amazon finding success from their investment into TGT, it should be expected that they will continue to spend to produce exclusive content not available elsewhere to bolster users of the service.
It is also highly likely that the 2nd season of TGT will be backed by an even bigger marketing budget, given the success the show had in reaching such a wide range of Amazon users, and that all those who watched the show generally thought it was great.
The interesting thing will be how Amazon and The Grand Tour production team decide to follow up with season 2. Will they stick to the tried and tested formula (which seems to be working), or will they try even more adventurous journeys and stunts? At the end of the day, given that most people are watching the show because they like cars and the presenters (Clarkson, Hammond and May), Amazon will undoubtedly follow up with a 2nd season that is equally as successful, so long as they keep those two critical elements at the very core of the show, and continue to build excitement by using the iconic trio in the company’s wider marketing campaign in the run up to release.
Download our free infographic
