Reech, solution d’influence marketing, vient de publier une étude intéressante sur le marketing d’influence. On y retrouve beaucoup d’informations sur la relation entre les influenceurs et les marques. Quels types d’influenceurs sont privilégiés lors des campagnes ? Quelle rémunération ? Quel budget ?… Autant d’informations pour y voir plus clair en matière d’influence marketing…
A l’occasion du salon Paris Retail Week, Reech est allé à la rencontre des marques pour effectuer un sondage afin de mieux comprendre leurs besoins et leurs usages en matière d’influence marketing.
Vous pouvez retrouver l’infographie ci-dessous et l’étude complète sur cette page, mais voici ce qu’il faut retenir…
Même si certains annonceurs ne sont pas encore au fait de cette catégorisation en fonction du nombre d’abonnés, les influenceurs les plus sollicités sont ceux appartenant à la mid tail (10.000 à 1M d’abonnés) et la long tail (1.000 à 10.000 abonnés).
Seuls 4% des influenceurs font partie de la top tail (+1M d’abonnés). Ce qui est aussi logique, puisque qui dit top tail dit également budget conséquent pour intégrer ces influenceurs aux campagnes.
Même si la rémunération des influenceurs est de plus en plus systématique, 25% des influenceurs ne sont pas rémunérés pour leur contribution. Pour les publications rémunérées, certaines se font en argent (18,5%), d’autres en cadeaux (27,4%) mais la majorité se fait avec un mix des deux (28,2%).
D’ailleurs cette tendance de rémunération devrait s’accélérer, puisque 52% des annonceurs interrogés ont augmenté leur budget par rapport à 2017 et 74% comptent augmenter encore d’ici 2019.
A noter également que pour leurs campagnes d’influence marketing, plus de la moitié des annonceurs ne se font pas accompagner par des agences. Mais au fil des années, l’influence marketing tend à se professionnaliser aussi bien au niveau de l’expertise que des outils d’analyse de l’influence et des retombées des campagnes. En parallèle, les pratiques évoluent, il est important de se maintenir à jour. Se faire accompagner reste une garantie d’efficacité et de performance. A ce sujet, Reech et sa plateforme peuvent être une excellente alternative.
Dernier sujet important : le choix des influenceurs.
De prime abord, on pourrait se dire que le nombre d’abonnés serait LE critère à retenir, mais pas du tout, ce critère arrive en dernier.
Le 1er critère de sélection est la relation de l’influenceur avec sa communauté d’abonnés. On privilégie donc la qualité à la quantité ce qui peut aussi permettre d’éviter les fake influenceurs.
Pour terminer, voici l’infographie complète, pensez également à aller jeter un œil à l’étude qui vous apportera des détails supplémentaires.
Source : Blog de Reech
Article écrit en collaboration avec Reech.
Successful personalization at scale requires four elements working in tandem. Here’s how marketing leaders build the operating model to make that happen.
Personalization is ready for its closeup moment. Technology and customer expectations are converging to propel personalization—the process of using data to customize the timing, content, and design of every experience in real time—from a promise to a reality.
Personalization at scale can drive between 5 and 15 percent revenue growth for companies in the retail, travel, entertainment, telecom, and financial-services sectors. One global retailer, for instance, saw sales from its brand-owned stores triple in just a year thanks to a successful personalization initiative.
For this reason, more than 90 percent of retailers say personalization is a top priority. But only 15 percent of these companies believe they are actually doing a good job at it.1 Consumers who have been stalked by irrelevant ads or bombarded with outdated offers would agree.
While many companies have scored a few modest successes with their personalization experiments and initiatives, few know how to do it on a large and consistent scale across all channels. Most companies focus exclusively on data, analytics, and agile, while investing very little in the necessary organizational and operational rewiring of how people work. Personalization is still treated like a nice add-on to a company’s existing marketing function.
We believe, however, that driving substantial and sustainable growth through personalization requires embedding it into the marketing operating model. To do this, companies must move beyond the initial excitement of “one-to-one marketing” and into the low-thrill but crucially important realm of organizational change.
What is the personalization operating model?
An operating model driven by personalization requires four elements to work together effectively:
- Data foundation: Building a rich, 360-degree view of customers in real time
- Decisioning: Mining data to identify and act on signals along the consumer journey
- Design: Crafting the right offers, messages, and experiences at speed
- Distribution: Delivering and measuring these experiences across platforms and feeding new insights into the data foundation
The real source of value in this operating model is how each element interacts with the others. Insights from the data allow the business to know how to design offers in response to customer signals. The more this operating model works, the more it improves by continually feeding more data into the model and refining its activities.
While each of these individual elements has been well chronicled, none is particularly effective in isolation. Only by developing and deploying an integrated personalization operating model that enables a faster and more effective way of working can businesses hope to capture their full growth potential.
How to develop your personalization operating model
Building a personalization operating model requires business leaders to invest in six foundational elements: processes, tools and tech, governance, KPIs, talent, and leadership (exhibit). Implementing and embedding these elements is complex, requiring dedicated commitment, focus, and problem solving. We want to isolate a few of the most common pitfalls that cause companies to falter and suggest solutions for how to address them.
1. Process: Commit fully
What can go wrong: Not long ago, the CEO and CMO of a travel company decided to make a big push into personalization. Despite selecting a strong group of seven people and working in an agile way, they had little to show after six weeks. The problem was that the selected employees weren’t working in the same place and, after attending the daily stand-ups, were going back to their normal jobs.
Solution: Since an agile working team is the core component of a personalization program, it’s essential to get it right. At the most basic level, this means assigning a small group of carefully selected people—including a campaign manager and staff from creative, digital media, analytics, operations, and IT—to be full-time members of each agile team. Personalization is going to fail if it’s a side job. Unified around a shared goal, the team also needs authority and stature to succeed. Process improvements should include:
- Giving decision-making rights to the team and empowering them with critical resources, such as a promotional budget
- Staffing the team of 8 to 15—no more than can be fed by two pizzas—with “doers” not managers
- Colocating team members so they can work side by side all day
- Appointing a team leader who helps everyone work toward a shared vision and goals
- Developing new service-level agreements (SLAs) with internal and external departments, partners and vendors to make sure they can match the timelines of the agile team
The travel company colocated its personalization team members and removed many of their other responsibilities. In addition, it gave the team immediate access to creative-design resources from the marketing department (through new SLAs), speeding up the creation and testing of new marketing campaigns. As a result, the number of pilots launched in a given month more than tripled.
2. Governance: Be clear about boundaries and decision rights
What can go wrong: A global telecom provider recently put a personalization team in an agile “war room” only to find out that business-as-usual (BAU) channel functions, such as e-commerce, were launching conflicting tests. Without clear boundaries, decision rights, and responsibilities, creating personalization teams can result in unexpected clashes with other parts of the business.
Solution: A control-tower function is needed to manage the inevitable collisions between multiple agile teams and BAU groups. This new function is run by a manager and a small staff of people who have responsibility for tracking, anticipating and solving problems, and maintaining a centralized testing pipeline with common prioritization logic. They are also responsible for navigating and facilitating the very real organizational and political conflicts that arise from having multiple cross-functional teams within a legacy organization.
In practice, that means developing agreements with legacy groups on testing and release protocols, meeting regularly with affected functions to maintain good relations, and being transparent through regular communications to breed trust.
3. Tools and tech: Give people new shoes so they can run faster
What can go wrong: A consumer-goods company started its personalization transformation the right way. Management had aligned on the strategy, defined the consumer priorities it wanted to execute on, and committed the right set of doers and leaders to drive the change. The first pilots launched rapidly, but not long after, the scaling up of successful pilots stalled. The IT department had promised a new set of tools that would enable a perfect 360-degree view of the consumer, the creation of campaigns across channels with few easy clicks, and a fully automated decisioning engine to reduce manual list-pull work and targeting frictions. When this didn’t happen on time, the agile team was forced to measure campaign performance manually, which often didn’t generate results until 7 to 12 days after a campaign was completed.
Solution: Numerous off-the-shelf tools exist to help the process of personalization run with the numerical precision of a finance department. “We now see marketers use experience templates created by their agile development teams and user experience designers to shorten the loop between idea, launch, and measurement from months to days, and even sometimes hours,” says Liad Agmon, CEO of Dynamic Yield, a leading-edge decisioning-engine platform that delivers cross-channel personalization.
Automating list pulls, enabling versioning with dynamic templates, and creating easily searchable creative-asset libraries can reduce daily frictions while real-time measurement capabilities accelerate testing and learning. At the core of the personalization tech is a centralized decisioning engine, or “brain,” that is capable of interacting with each outlying system to consistently make real-time decisions based on consumer signals. This technology can coordinate content offers across audiences and channels in real time and help teams adjust them based on feedback.
In addition, companies are investing in customer-data platforms to unlock the data trapped in multiple silos. These investments have the additional benefit of freeing up teams from low-value activities so they can focus more on developing great customer experiences.
4. Key performance indicators (KPIs): Focus on both small and big outcomes
What can go wrong: The personalization team at a national retailer quickly developed a set of personalized triggers targeting customers during key moments when it seemed there was a strong intent to make a purchase. The campaign was successful and drove incremental sales. But subsequent campaigns drove limited value because the team either couldn’t agree on its focus or tried overly broad targets that led to multiple conflicting initiatives.
Solution: Personalization teams need a single, shared goal focused on solving a specific consumer challenge, such as the acquisition of an under-represented consumer segment like millennials, a boost in cross-selling, or improved engagement with new customers in their first 30 days. Without these kinds of strategic, consumer-centric KPIs, teams will fail because, without a shared purpose, they will focus on too many customer segments and moments in the journey.
Tech Brands will redefine Meaningful, breaking industry silos and contributing to the overall human experience, beyond their traditional product/service categories.
Havas global CEO Yannick Bolloré has spent the last five years relentlessly reorganising the network to remove its individual specialities and facilitate the Village model. It’s a strategy he conceptualised in response to client’s calling for a less confusing agency framework.
Operating in a total of 60 markets around the globe have been reorganised into the Havas Village structure with creative, media and PR all in one building, offering a full-service model to clients. The overhaul was a result of Bolloré taking on the Havas Group global CEO role after spending several years within the Bolloré group – a majority shareholder of Havas’ parent company, Vivendi.
At just 22,000 people globally, Havas is significantly smaller than its competitors in ‘the big six’, including WPP, Publicis, Omnicom, IPG and Dentsu. Not to mention the growing force of consultancy giants such as Accenture, Deloitte and PwC.
Bolloré told AdNews on a recent holiday to Australia that he doesn’t view being the biggest as the most important, rather in advertising, it’s “survival of the fittest”.
When Bolloré took over as CEO five years ago, he realised Havas needed a competitive edge, which led to introduction of the Havas Village strategy.
“When I started my role it was a very strange period of time because it was at the same time as the merger between Omnicom and Publicis and the rise of Google and Facebook,” he said.
“My first decision as a new CEO was to try and create something different and more modern to the new expectations from CMOs. At this time, I remember clients were working with many different agencies. They had one agency for each speciality – creativity, media, PR, social, search, mobile – everything. This period of time was crazy and no one was collaborating.”
Shortly after Havas coined its Village strategy, WPP introduced a similar model and blessed the industry with the buzzword ‘horizontality’. Publicis introduced its Power of One strategy a year later. The idea of creating bespoke units for clients from across the group has also been used by Omnicom for blue-chip clients like McDonald’s and locally Dentsu has rolled out bespoke teams for Disney and Woolworths.
Bolloré recognises the holding groups as strong competitors, but said Havas has enjoyed the advantage of being three years ahead in the restructure of its organisation to facilitate the integrated model.
“Trust me, it’s not simple,” he said, referencing the process the network underwent to bring its specialities together, which took five years to pull off in Australia.
“What you see today, is our competitors trying to catch up with the same strategies that we started to develop years ago.”
The last piece of the Village puzzle is the Australian office, which in 2019 will move its sub-agencies – Host/Havas, One Green Been, Red Agency and Havas Media – into one office in Harrington Street, Sydney. With the Australian office equal to 25% of its Asia Pacific operations and the sixth largest market for the Havas group, it’s an important market for the group, Bolloré explained.
The relocation makes Havas one of the biggest agencies in Sydney at 450 people, which Havas AUNZ chairman Anthony Freedman said will open the door for greater opportunities and help grow the group’s position in market.
Protected from WPP’s woes
There are two factors which have protected Havas from the woes of other holding groups, such as WPP, which has been beaten up in the headlines over the last 12 months following leadership exits and lacklustre financial results. Firstly, Havas isn’t publically listed and forms part of the family-owned company, Vivendi.
Bolloré explained the business is able execute on a long-term strategy because it’s not impacted by various changes of leadership, which his father Vincent Bolloré, who chairs the Bolloré Group, becoming a shareholder of Havas in 2004.
“We’re not publically traded so we don’t have to worry about the next quarter. We just have to focus on creating the most value for our clients and our talents in the long-term. This makes a big difference,” he said.
“In our industry, but also in other industries, there’s a short-term focus in the economic world. If you want a sustainable company for people and for your clients, you have to focus on the long-term and sometimes that stock marketing doesn’t have the same vision.”
Unique to the Havas group is its entertainment ties with Vivendi also owning Universal Music, Canal, Daily Motion and other properties. Bolloré led the acquisition of a 60% stake in Havas in 2017 for $3.4 billion.
Bolloré said Havas is his main focus but being part of the Vivendi group enables the company to understand more about the changes happening in the entertainment world. An example he offers of the two businesses collaborating successfully is the Air New Zealand ‘Summer Wonderland’ campaign featuring Ronan Keating.
2018 ‘transition year’
Despite a revenue dip in 2017/2018, Bolloré backs Havas Village as a “successful and fruitful strategy” and believes it’s been game-changing for the group.
“The years that have followed, between 2014 and 2016, we were the higher performing company in the world with the higher company gross,” he said.
In 2015 the network had revenue growth of 17.3%. Fast-forward to 2017, Havas slumped and for the financial year posted just 1.9% revenue growth missing its 3% forecast.
Across the board, 2018 has been a difficult year for advertising holding groups, particularly WPP which suffered a dramatic drop in its Q3 results. Omnicom and Publicis have fared better, but global pitches and digital transformation has meant challenges for the global industry.
Bolloré admitted 2017 has been more challenging than the network expected, but he has high hopes for the business to return to growth next year.
He described 2018 as a “transition year” with major clients such as Ford, Mondelez and Amex challenging their current agency partners with global reviews.
Lower margins on the media side of the business, clients cutting marketing spend and pressure on the creative side to align regionally meaning lower costs, has impacted the growth of the Havas Group, Bolloré said.
“We have been in defence for pitch mode during these last 12 months. I hope 2019 will be more like the year we knew in the two years before, where we start to come into the competition,” Bolloré says.
“Clients in the past wanted to produce a different campaign for every market. Now clients want to have a set of agencies that produce all work for all regions so we have to adapt our cost structure a little bit, with some agencies benefitting less from global segments.”
Read more at http://www.adnews.com.au/news/havas-global-ceo-it-s-survival-of-the-fittest-not-the-biggest#I7giUVEtT51mGOBG.99