CAMPAIGN TEST SUMMER CAMPAIGN NORWAY SUMMER 2013 INNOVASJON NORGE JUNE 2013

Transcription

1 CAMPAIGN TEST SUMMER CAMPAIGN NORWAY SUMMER 2013 INNOVASJON NORGE JUNE

2 Background And Purpose In May 2013, Innovasjon Norge launched a campaign in Norway 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 and June 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 1074 respondents were invited for the study with 872 of these falling within the target group. 606 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 Scandinavian Innovasjon Norge summer campaigns in 2013 a solid base with 1,759 completed interviews. The non-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 47%. The aided recollection is between 13% and 48%. During the campaign period, Norway s Share of Voice (SOV) in Norway increased quite drastically. When the campaign was launched, Norway s SOV increased almost 50%, which is a which is a very substantial growth. The campaign is rated somewhat differently depending on which campaign element is in focus: The Advertisement and the TV commercial are rated very positively, higher even than the benchmark, while the two internet platforms are rated worse than the benchmark. The campaign s Tone Of Voice (TOV) is credible and beautiful. Hardly any respondents use negative words to characterise it. Moreover, the target group primarily perceives the message of the campaign to be the impressive nature one can experience in Norway, while another part finds the message to be the many different possibilities and experiences one can have in Norway. The internet section in particular seems to stimulate information search among the target group, while the internet Banner and the advertisement also produces visits to the website. However, the platforms in general do not perform better than the benchmark. Considering the effect hierarchy, the campaign is on par with other campaigns in translating attention into actual likelihood of going to Norway on holiday. Looking more closely at the communication effects, the campaign produces a positive result which is above benchmark. When adjusting according to the large budget, the communication effects are below the benchmark. The campaign has a particular strong impact on the campaign targets, but in the future it should focus more on the many experiences Norway has to offer since this target is vital in connection with thinking about going on holiday in Norway. Considering the branding effects, the general conclusion is that the campaign did some, but not all, things right. While the campaign managed to influence important targets such as It has new and interesting places, other important targets about Norway s nature and natural scenery were largely unaffected. These targets should be prioritized in the future. 3

4 Elements Tested Advertisement TV Commercial Internet Section Internet Banner 4

5 RECALL AND RATING OF CAMPAIGN 5

6 Recollection Of The Campaign Channels UNAIDED AND AIDED RECOLLECTION CHANNELS, UNAIDED RECALL In an advertisement in a newspaper, magazine etc. 58% Unaided recall, general 47% On television 47% On an Internet banner 37% Aided recall, TV Commercial 48% In a brochure In a special supplement in a newspaper, magazine etc. On Facebook 33% 20% 16% In an online newsletter 9% Aided recall, Advertisement 22% On the radio 8% At a travel agency or tour operator 7% On an outdoor advertisement, e.g. a large billboard 5% Aided recall, Internet Banner 15% In a film on the Internet 5% Do not know 4% Elsewhere 3% Aided recall, Internet Section 13% In the cinema 2% At a fair 1% 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 0% 50% 100% N=606 n=284 The unaided recall is 47%. This means that 47% of the target group remembers having seen an advertisement for Norway as a holiday destination in the past month. The channels show that the unaided recall primarily originates from advertisements in newspapers, magazines and similar (58%), television (47%), an internet banner (37%) and a brochure (33%). The aided recall for the TV commercial is 48%, which is the highest of all campaign elements. Thus, when shown the TV commercial, 48% of the nature target group remembers having seen it before. The aided recall for the Advertisement is 22%, while the Internet Banner has a recall of 15%. The Internet Section has the lowest aided recall (13%). 6

7 Norway s Share of Voice NORWAY S SHARE OF VOICE IN NORWAY (NATURE BASED TARGET GROUP) 60% 52% 50% 45% 48% 40% 38% 39% 27% 34% 30% 28% 20% 10% 0% Norway Denmark Italy Iceland Sweden Finland Germany n=2.170 (lowest n=101) 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 launched in May 2013, and it caused a significant increase in Norway s SOV. From mid-may and onwards, Norway s SOV increases to approximately 52%. At the end of the tracking period included in this report, Norway reached the highest SOV of all other potential holiday destinations. 7

8 Rating Of The Different Platforms In The Campaign HOW WOULD YOU RATE THE CAMPAIGN? 100% 8% 5% 13% 90% 27% 80% 35% 70% 42% 60% 55% 13% 46% DO YOU THINK THE CAMPAIGN IS BETTER OR POORER THAN OTHER CAMPAIGNS YOU REMEMBER? 100% 3% 3% 2% 4% 12% 90% 17% 23% 21% 25% 80% 70% 43% 60% 50% 40% 46% 43% 50% 40% 56% 59% 57% 49% 30% 20% 10% 0% 38% 30% 26% 18% 8% 4% 5% 2% 4% 3% 2% 1% 4% 2% 1% 4% 5% 6% 6% 30% 20% 10% 0% Advertisement TV Commercial Internet Section Internet Banner Benchmark n= 606 n= % 11% 6% 9% 6% 2% 5% 2% 4% 2% 2% 14% 7% 6% 9% 9% Advertisement TV Commercial Internet Section Internet Banner Benchmark Very positively/much better Positively/Better Neither positively/better nor negatively/poorer Negatively/Poorer Very negatively/much poorer Don't know The campaign elements are assessed quite differently. The advertisement and the TV commercial is rated very positively and is also assessed more positively than the benchmark, while the two internet platforms are rated worse than the benchmark. In general, the campaign elements are not rated better than other campaigns (compared to benchmark). However, this conclusion does not involve the TV commercial, which is rated much more positively 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=606 10

11 Tone of Voice Across Platforms Compared To The Other Campaigns TONE OF VOICE FOR THE NORWEGIAN 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 1% 0% 1% 0% 13% 12% 11% 8% 11% 9% 9% 7% 8% 10% 6% 5% 5% 8% 4% 4% 15% 15% 18% 17% 17% 17% 20% 21% 22% 22% 22% 0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30% 35% 40% 45% 23% 25% 25% 29% 29% 31% 39% Norway Summer Campaign Benchmark n=606 The campaign is primarily perceived as credible and beautiful. Both of these TOV dimensions score a bit higher than the benchmark. However, the TOV dimension informative scores considerably lower than the benchmark not surprising as Norwegians possibly are more critical than foreigners about what constitutes information about Norway as a holiday destination. 11

12 Tone of Voice Of Each Platform Top Seven TONE OF VOICE OF EACH PLATFORM Credible 23% 30% 29% 41% Informative 13% 23% 35% 45% Creative 12% 19% 22% 47% Beautiful 20% 22% 26% 25% Entertaining 7% 12% 13% 51% Serious 14% 15% 25% 27% Usable 12% 18% 20% 22% 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% internet banner Internet section TV Commercial Advertisement n=606 This figure shows the top seven dimensions across the four platforms. As the figure illustrates, the Advertisement stands out as being very credible and informative. On the other hand, the TV commercial is perceived as more creative and entertaining 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? 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. Entertaining 9% We suggest that these results should be interpreted with caution. Thus, counter-intuitive results can occur. Confusing 9% Entertaining has a positive effect, which means that if the target group described the campaign as entertaining, they are more likely to go on holiday in Norway. Surprisingly, the same positive effect is found in connection with the TOV dimension confusing. Uninteresting -9% It is less surprising that an uninteresting assessment of the campaign has a negative effect. -15% -10% -5% 0% 5% 10% n=606 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 Entertaining RETAIN The priority map shows that the TOV dimension entertaining has 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. 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. Uninteresting 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 Negative impact on probability for holiday in Norway Confusing 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? Impressive nature experiences 23% Different possibilities and experiences 18% Showcasing Norway as an attractive and popular destination 17% Something for everybody 12% Other Active and sporty holiday 4% 5% A destination not far away 4% Family vacation and child friendly environment Recreational and restful holiday 0% 1% Do not know 15% 0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% n=606 The figure shows how the target group perceives the message of the campaign. More than one in five perceives the message to be the impressive nature one can experience in Norway, while another 18% finds the message to be about the many different possibilities and experiences one can have in Norway. Finally, the last substantial share of the target group (17%), states that the campaign aims at showcasing how great a holiday destination Norway is, without specifying how it does this. 16

17 EMOTIONS 17

18 Emotionel Statements About Holidays In Norway This table shows that the respondents agree with the statements and On a holiday in Norway spend quality time with my family to the highest degree. Thus, it seems that family values are associated with a vacation in Norway among Norwegians. Statements On holiday in Norway, I can spend quality time with my family 60% On the other hand, few Norwegians agree with the statement On a holiday in Norway, I can feel completely liberated. On holiday in Norway, I can avoid surprises and feel safe 41% On holiday in Norway, I can restore my inner harmony and balance 35% In sum, to a larger extent, Norwegians associate a holiday in Norway with a safe family environment, while more freethinking and progressive holiday needs are not associated with holidays in Norway. On holiday in Norway, I can feel full of renewed energy 35% On holiday in Norway, I can immerse myself in local life 30% On holiday in Norway, I can expand my horizon 29% On holiday in Norway, I can feel completely liberated 5% On holiday in Norway, I can feel special and stand out from the crowd How the table should be read: 4% n=606 The table shows how many percent of the target group that agree 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? On holiday in Norway I can feel completely liberated 20% Only statements with a statistically significant effect are shown in the chart. The results show that several 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 spend quality time with my family On holiday in Norway I can feel full of renewed energy 16% 19% On holiday in Norway I can expand my horizon 14% On holiday in Norway, I can feel completely liberated and On holiday in Norway, I can spend quality time with my family have a large positive effect on the respondents attitude towards Norway as a holiday destination. On holiday in Norway I can restore my inner harmony and balance 12% On holiday in Norway I can avoid surprises and feel safe 9% On holiday in Norway I can immerse myself in local life 6% 0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% n=606 19

20 CAMPAIGN EFFECTS 20

21 Campaign Effects Advertisement TV Commercial Internet Section Internet Banner Norway Difference to benchmark Norway Difference to benchmark Norway Difference to benchmark Norway 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.no 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. The campaign elements perform quite differently: The Internet section performs best, and also performs better than the benchmark on all five elements. Compared to the other elements, the Internet section has created more information search and more visits to Visitnorway s website. On the other hand, the TV commercial performs consistently below the benchmark. 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 Advertisement TV Commercial Internet Section Internet Banner Benchmark 10% 6% 10% 8% 7% In general, the campaign elements perform on par with the benchmark. However, the Internet Banner struggles to involve and activate the target group as a large proportion of the respondents only remembers it. Persuaded and active contact 2% 1% 4% 1% 1% Persuaded 24% 18% 25% 18% 21% The advertisement performs well in the higher levels of the hierarchy. Thus, after exposure to the Advertisement a fair number of respondents were persuaded and activated. Involved 52% 59% 38% 28% 49% Recollection 13% 17% 24% 45% 21% N (% of total) 134 (22%) 288 (48%) 81 (13%) 89 (15%) 23

24 Statements About Norway The PDI Score Advertisement TV Commercial Internet Section Internet Banner Norway is an exciting destination for me 73% 70% 86% 74% Norway has many experiences to offer 93% 91% 93% 91% Norway has many activities to offer 89% 87% 96% 92% I still discover new aspects of Norway as a tourist destination 75% 68% 88% 72% Norway has a travel offer which is relevant to me 69% 63% 78% 63% 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 campaign statements Norway has many experiences to offer and Norway has many activities to offer. In particular, respondents who remember having seen the internet section agree with the different statements. n=

25 COMMUNICATION EFFECTS 25

26 Branding And Campaign Effect Compared To The Other Campaigns ADJUSTED ACCORDING TO SPENDING PER HEAD NORWAY BENCHMARK DIFFERENCE NORWAY 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 overall basis, the campaign achieved a positive branding and campaign effect, which results in a very positive communication effect. Compared to the other Scandinavian summer campaigns, the positive campaign effect is above average, while the branding effect is below. However, when adjusting according to spending per head, the communication effect performs below average. Thus, the Norwegian campaign has not been as effective as the other Scandinavian campaigns. 26

27 Net campaign effect Net Campaign Effect: What Did The Campaign Do? Norway has a travel offer which is relevant to me 8% Norway is an exciting destination for me 8% I still discover new aspects of Norway as a tourist destination Norway has many activities to offer 5% 7% 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. Norway has many experiences to offer 5% 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. n (campaign) = % 2% 4% 6% 8% 10% The campaign has a positive impact on all campaign targets. In particularly, there is a large net impact on the target related to the relevance of the travel offer and the excitement of Norway as a holiday destination. Interestingly, there is also a substantial effect on the target group s perception of Norway possessing new aspects as tourist 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 An increase in the net effect with elements placed in this field is expected to provide a significant increase in the total probability 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. MONITOR PRIORITIZE 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 I still discover new aspects of Norway as a tourist destination Norway is an exciting destination for me RETAIN Norway has a travel offer which is relevant to me The priority map indicates that the campaign affected the right campaign targets. The two targets Norway has a travel offer which is relevant to me and Norway is an exciting destination for me which carry the most important influence on going to Norway on holiday were also greatest influenced by the campaign. In order to further enhance the campaign effect, the campaign should prioritize to influence the target group s perception of Norway has many experiences to offer in the future. 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 MONITOR Norway has many activities to offer Norway has many experiences to offer PRIORITIZE 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 offers a wide range of sustainable alternatives 7% It has exciting cities 7% It has great cuisine and local specialities 4% Easy to book all the elements of a holiday 3% It has an exciting culture and history 3% It has new and interesting places 3% It has spectacular natural scenery 2% It offers good cycling 1% It offers good angling 1% Opportunity to experience natural phenomena 1% Experiences that you cannot find elsewhere 0% It is easy to plan a trip to Norway 0% It offers good hiking 0% It offers excellent skiing, snowboarding, etc. -1% Norway is easy to get to-4% -5% 0% 5% 10% (campaign) = 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. On an overall basis, the campaign produces a positive effect in most branding targets. The campaign had the largest net branding effects in relation to the dimensions It offers a wide range of sustainable alternatives and It has exciting cities. The campaign failed to influence the perception of Norway as a place easy to get to; however, since the campaign took place in Norway this might be for very obvious reasons. 30

31 Small/negative net branding effect Large net branding effect Branding Effect: Did The Campaign Do The Right Things? ADEQUAT E It offers a wide range of sustainable alternatives It is easy to book all the elements of a holiday to Norway It has exciting cities It has great cuisine and local specialities It has an exciting culture and history It has new and interesting places RETAIN It has spectacular natural scenery The campaign only managed to influence a few of the right branding targets. The campaign had a strong impact on a important motivation for spending your holiday in Norway It has new and interesting places. However, in the future, the campaign should prioritize other brand targets such as the natural scenery and the Northern Lights, while hiking is a vital motivator for having a holiday in Norway as well. 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 It offers good cycling It offers excellent skiing, snowboarding, etc. MONITOR It offers good angling It is easy to plan a trip to Norway Norway is easy to get to It offers experiences that you cannot find anywhere else in the world It offers good hiking It offers an opportunity to experience natural phenomena such as the midnight sun or the northern lights PRIORITIZE 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: 136 The campaign achieves an overall platform efficiency score of 96. This is below the average of the other Scandinavian campaigns. The overall campaign efficiency is primarily low, because the Internet Banner s lack of ability to move people beyond recollection. Especially the Advertisement performs better than the other platforms, but in combination, they contribute to a platform efficiency score just below the benchmark. Internet Banner: 42 Overall platform efficiency: 96 TV Commercial: 112 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. Internet Section: 110 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 131. This is above the benchmark score. This implies that the campaign has been successful in achieving a division of labour between the campaign elements. What platform effectiveness means Internet banner Platform effectiveness: 131 Internet section 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. TV commercial 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 between May and June The survey was conducted with a representative sample of Norwegians over 18 years of age who are in the Innovasjon Norge summer (nature based) target group (see box on the left). A total of 606 interviews 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: