Think! Sponsorship has released poll results ahead of their conference next week, providing insight into how effectively the sponsorship industry is currently evaluated.
The poll was completed by sponsorship industry experts, the majority of whom were either agency (42.7%) or rights holders (33.8%) with sponsors comprising 6.4% of the sample.
How sponsorship campaigns are measured
Respondents cited brand awareness as the most common aspect of a sponsorship that’s measured, with 82.7% citing this as a key metric.
This was followed by TV exposure (63.2%), return on investment (57.4%) and print media exposure (54%).
The majority of respondents (71.7%) believe that research should be undertaken on an on-going basis instead of periodical.
Interestingly, 83.8% of respondents stated that the social impact of sponsorship will need to be researched more as more campaigns tie in with corporate social responsibility activity.
Sponsorship research budgets cut
Worryingly for the industry, 65% of respondents said that their research budget had been cut since the global financial crisis.
This is in spite of the fact that sponsorship rights fees have continued to rise over the past few years.
On the question of whether there should be a standardised evaluation matrix for sponsorship, respondents were split fairly evenly with 50.8% agreeing and 45.1% disagreeing.
Many cited that the difficulty with standardised measurements is that sponsorship campaigns are rarely identical – so creating an evaluation technique to apply across the board is very difficult.
Over-reliance on media evaluation
There was a clear majority (70.9%) who believed that the industry had become over-dependent on measuring media coverage and brand awareness.
Which is especially interesting given that this is what the survey group stated was its most used metric.
A possible explanation is that in order to produce robust return on investment (ROI) figures a detailed media evaluation is often required.
Anecdotally, there are those in the industry who report that senior management in major companies feel reassured by seeing media equivalent values.
Social media research not effective
Only 20% thought that social media activations were being researched effectively.
Respondents also felt that the industry was much more concerned with the quality (80%) of social media than the quantity (14%).
Facebook (90%) was seen as the most important social media channel, followed by Twitter (84%) and YouTube (50%).
Among sponsors (and agencies representing sponsors) the majority said that the social media activity of the rights holder influenced their sponsorship buying decisions and that they compared such initiatives across multiple rights holders.
Rights holders 'should' present research findings
The relationship between sponsors and rights holders appears to be closer than in the past with sponsors saying that on the whole they share evaluation results – with rights holders almost universally reciprocating.
Indeed, a majority (60.4%) felt that evaluation should be a collaborative effort between the parties.
Most sponsors declared that it was either very important (14.5%) or important (13.7%) for rights holders to present research information prior to negotiations.
The conference: last remaining places
The findings of the survey dovetail with the programme of events on offer at Think!Sponsorship's Measuring up conference, taking place next week (9 May) at Stratford Circus, London.
Over 200 delegates have already signed up to attend the event with just 20 tickets remaining.
Speakers include Barclaycard, Dublin Airport Authority, Western Union, BSKYB, Mark Hunter MBE, M&CSaatchiMerlin and Edelman.
To book one of the last remaining places email catherine@thinksponsorship.com.
To find out more about the day visit www.thinksponsorship.com.
