First it’s a great review of our methodology developed a couple of years ago, followed by some pointed questions in the comments and my response. I will follow up with additional examples in the coming weeks and look forward to follow on discussions with Michael and Vito.
Correlating Online Recommendations and Product Sales
MotiveQuest describes itself as “a new kind of research company that uses online anthropology to explain consumer motivations.” Although they don’t use the term “netnography,” that’s what their “anthropological research approach” is. Explaining their approach, the company says:
“MotiveQuest uses new software, combined with an anthropological
research approach, to help you better understand online customer
conversations about your brand.”
The company has developed a metric it calls THE ONLINE PROMOTER™ SCORE, which “measures the number of people online that are recommending a brand to others.” MotiveQuest worked with the Mini Cooper auto brand to measure the impact of online promoters to sales. They published a
case study on SlideShare that includes the graph below. They say that the graph “shows the correlation the monthly change in online promoters for the previous month versus the change in sales. For example the point in the upper right is MINI’s monthly change in sales from April to May 2006 and the change in online promoters from March to April 2006. Statistical analysis gives 99.8% confidence that the metrics are positively correlated.”
Analyzing the relationship between the social media conversation and product sales is clearly something marketers in all fields are keenly interested in. It’s a positive development that research companies who use netnographic techniques and offer consulting services based on their findings are trying to find ways to do that.
Some Questions About the MotiveQuest Case Study
This case study from MotiveQuest seems like a good idea, and the results are quite interesting and worth analyzing. Given my interest in this topic, I wanted to find out more about the relation the authors of this case claim to have found between their Online Promoter Score and Mini sales, and so far I have been unsuccessful. I would appreciate it if MotiveQuest could contribute to this discussion by explaining what they did, and answering some questions that came up while I was trying to replicate their procedure.1. I found the official sales from Mini in the U.S. for the period December ‘05 to July ’06, and the data presented in the case study is significantly different from those figures. What data did you use? I also tried using data for only North America sales, only Europe sales, entire world sales, and some other combinations. Unfortunately, the percentage variations do not match with any of the latter. Did you use official sales data or your own estimations?2. In slide number 7, you show that you can do all this statistical analysis with only seven observations, and in later slides the presentation assures high statistical significance. What methodology are you using? I would be very surprised if by having only six observations (percentage changes) , that is, seven values minus one value to calculate the differences, you are able to back up all the results. Also, with such a small sample, is it valid to throw away the observations that you don’t feel comfortable with (i.e., outliers)? Additionally, you are working with some form of time series, are you using the proper econometric procedures to control for trends or seasonal changes? Unfortunately, this is what confuses me the most and makes it hard for me to buy the results shown in the presentation.3. In slide number 8, the case study implies that there is some form of causality between your score and the sales. How do you know that? Isn’t it simply the case that more people buying Minis results in more posts, and that your Online Promoter Score has no predictive value? I am very interested in this, because if you actually have found a predictive measure, you have a gold product if, also, you are capable of showing similar out-of-sample results. Finally, and assuming that the data and regressions presented in the case study are accurate, I proceeded to regress your Online Promoter Score with other economic variables, such as inflation, unemployment, gas prices in the U.S. and total car sales in the U.S. Factoring in those variables allows me to get an even higher correlation between the Online Promoter Score and Mini sales. Therefore, I could conclude that the Online Promoter Score actually has some information in it (taking into consideration my previous assumption), but under no circumstances is it able to produce the results shown in the presentation.
Some initial replies
It's been a couple of years since I did this analysis and since this study we’ve found links in a number of other categories, many parts of which are client confidential but I’m sure there are pieces which can be shared more broadly so that we can show more examples of the relationship. I'll start with one comment. I don't really believe this is revolutionary but a natural relationship we should expect to find, based on beliefs: that the most influential factor on consumers’ decisions is each other and that people posting in social media are at least a sample of the overall world. There are many data points supporting both of those beliefs, so it’d be surprising to not find some sort of relationship between online discussions and sales. It happens that measuring advocacy through the online promoter score does that.Addressing your points in order:
1. We used data provided by Mini for their sales for the US only, we got permission to share the indexed values but not the raw data. This may be very similar (or exactly the same) as the data commonly released through automotive news. If you'd like to send me your data, I can compare it to the old files I have.2. The data earlier in the slide set shows a period during our first engagement with Mini and their agency during which the relationship is clearly evident, the full data set that produced the regression shown above is longer.As far as controlling for "econometric" variables like seasonality, trending, etc... typically we look at share in order isolate seasonal and trend effects and we can compare the changes in share vs. changes in share of or raw advocacy, it really depends on the dynamics of the category. 3. Causality is a dangerous word… The relationship is leading in many cases but often times quite strong when aligned as well. We’ve increasingly worked with our clients on strategies to help them increase the advocacy and drive stronger market share and sales as a result.That’s really interesting to see our data improving your regressions, I’m always surprised that the relationship is as strong as it is given all of the other factors that would have a strong impact on sales. If you would like to chat contact me at: bmiller at motivequest dot com and we can share more.