The Future of Tracking Studies
EVOLUTION IS A discontinuous
process, no less for research methodologies
than for the natural world.
Tracking studies have been with us for
over 50 years now. Every couple of decades
has seen a new approach that caused a leap
forward in the acceptance and utility of
the discipline. These leaps have typically
been driven by a combination of changing
needs, understanding or data-collection
methodology, as summarised in Table 1.
One leap forward occurred in 1976
when Maurice Millward and Gordon
Brown conducted their first continuous
tracking study. In this case it was not the
data collection that was innovative: it was
the way the data were analysed that made
the real difference. Prior to 1976 tracking
data had been collected continuously but
then typically aggregated over time on a
period-by-period basis. By presenting the
data as continuous trends, plotted against
the timing and scale of media events,
Millward and Brown took tracking from a
static report card to a dynamic view of the
changing marketplace. The utility of this
approach has become widely accepted
and it is now an industry standard.
Tracking at the crossroads
Today, tracking is facing new challenges.
The sheer complexity of today’s competitive
environment challenges its ability to
cover the plethora of brand extensions,
media choices, retail channels and target
groups. As the general public becomes
increasingly time-poor and resentful of
intrusion, traditional data-collection
methodologies are becoming less productive,
driving up costs. Finally, senior
management demands for fast and
coherent feedback pressure market
researchers to abandon their traditional
gatekeeper role and value speed over
quality. In the face of these challenges,
some people are asking whether tracking
will continue to evolve or whether it will
go the way of the dodo.
It is a choice, not a fateThe competitive environment facing
brand marketers today is complex and
fast-paced. They must have a robust, holistic
view of what is happening over time in
order to make the right decisions in a timely
manner. The role of a tracking study is
to provide insight based on what people
think, and to do so in a consistent manner
over time in order to highlight changes
and the drivers of change. Brands are assets
that derive their value from what people
think of them, so how can we make
sensible brand and marketing investment
decisions without attitudinal tracking?
Unfortunately, what is in question
today is not the purpose of the discipline,
but the quality of execution. As an industry
we face a basic dilemma. The need to
provide very targeted and granular feedback
is increasing. The cost of providing
that feedback is also increasing, while
budgets are decreasing. Most tracking
studies are being stretched, trimmed and
squeezed in an attempt to get a quart out
of a pint pot. It is not realistic, and it undermines
the ability of tracking to add real
insight where it counts. If tracking is to
continue to be a useful and reliable decision-
making tool, we must all take a long
hard look at what we really must know in
order to make our brands successful,
then design our studies appropriately.
In the remainder of this article I
will propose a five-step programme for
making sure that tracking studies
continue to evolve.
Download the full article (pdf)
Originally published in Admap