Associate Professor Felipe Thomaz, of University of Oxford’s Saïd Business School, suggests Professor Byron Sharp’s best known book, How Brands Grow, is a misnomer – it’s actually about how big brands keep big marketshare, not how they got there. He also says it’s based on flaws within Andrew Ehrenberg’s earlier work, primarily static markets and a requirement not to differentiate. Thomaz suggests that’s why big FMCG firms adhering to those rules were caught napping by more nimble differentiated start-ups.

Reach “sufficiency”, or optimising media for reach, no longer works, he suggests, because all reach is not equal – and reach alone doesn’t deliver business outcomes. “There is a missing dimension,” per Thomaz. He’s out to prove it with a peer-reviewed paper that analyses 1,000 campaigns and a million customer journeys via Kantar and WPP. The upshot? “None of it holds … I'm seeing that 1 per cent of campaigns are actually getting exceptional money, while the vast majority are choosing to get some really mediocre outcomes.”

That’s partly because audience reach doesn’t account for their ability to be influenced - and different media, different categories and consumer types have varying degrees of impact in different moments. Reach, he says, is proving a misleading media proxy for business impact - the variances of consumer receptivity to switching is different by category. Personal care, for instance, has less consumer preparedness to trial alternatives once they’ve established their preference - they’re harder to “manipulate”, Thomas posits, but some media channel characteristics stand a better chance. TV versus influencers in lower funnel strategies will likely surprise many. Which has knock-on impacts on channel effectiveness and weighting. Thomaz says that’s good news for media owners – if they can stop selling on impressions and start selling on functionality. “For some categories, there might be a premium they can charge.”

The need to reach all potential buyers in the category, he says, “has not changed in the least … Reach is important, and you still need that scale. However, you also need [to optimise to] the business outcome. But he still thinks it’s “really bad to waste your money on people who will never buy you”.

In short: “If you're managing your company's marketing on simplistic and reductive laws, you might want to revisit those, because you're leaving money on the table or leaving yourself open to very simple counter-plays. It's dangerous.”

See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

‘Really mediocre outcomes’: Oxford Uni professor says Byron Sharp and Ehrenberg-Bass’ marketing science rules no longer hold – 1,000 campaigns, 1 million customer journeys as evidence

Mi3 Audio Edition