In my last post, I responded to ph hanky on his/her comments on P&G’s marketing mix modeling efforts, reported last year. Ph asked a question about P&G’s MMM partner, which I said was an easy one to answer. So I did. Incorrectly – as my friend Mark Weiner, President of Delahaye, kindly pointed out to me in an email yesterday. The correct answer should have been Analytic Partners and the modeling group. I apologize to the parties involved for the error.
Mark went on in his email to ‘set the record straight’ with respect to a couple of points in ph hanky’s post. Mark gave me permission to share the email with you, so here it is. -DB
Thanks for your perspectives on market mix modeling: I agree with your position on the unfortunate absence of any evidence to support the diminishing returns of PR spending. While our marketing mix experience has given us examples of the diminishing returns of advertising and price promotions, there isn’t enough spending in PR to have yet reached that threshold. I am certain that such a phenomenon exists within PR for the same reasons that make PR so uniquely powerful within the marketing and communication mix, and that is the power of the journalist’s third-party objectivity…at some point, the journalist can’t digest another story about mattresses.
That being said, I must say that ph hanky’s slip is showing: the sweeping generalizations which are directed at P&G and Delahaye actually belong to hanky. Here’s what I would have said to ph hanky had I been given an opportunity:
- Delahaye DOES conduct marketing mix modeling. However, in the P&G case, Delahaye provided only the proprietary PR data which enabled their pre-existing model to work. Many PR data sources were tested but only Delahaye’s data succeeded in representing the unique role of PR within the marketing mix . So it would be fair to say that while Delahaye has done marketing mix analyses for companies whose names you’d recognize, P&G’s MMM partners and in-house team took care of it in this case. We’re sufficiently proud of our role in helping P&G specifically and in elevating the role of PR universally.
- I can assure you that a great deal of vigor (sic) was applied to the analysis, and that “vigor” was magnified with a great deal of “rigor.” I suppose that one can argue that if P&G is allocating it’s significant marketing resources based on their marketing mix analysis, it has to be sound research. As for Delahaye’s data, it has successfully passed testing for Six Sigma compliance (3.4 defects per million opportunities) not once but twice…that’s a result of our rigor and vigor.
With the emergence of blogs and consumer-generated media, we run the risk of creating an entire media category based on assertion rather than validation. With so many resources available via the web, it is easy to avoid sweeping generalizations. It’s in the spirit of accuracy — and the fact that I believe that this blog is an important one — that I feel compelled to set the record straight.