Econsultancy State of Marketing Attribution in Asia Pacific

Market Data / Supplier Selection /
Event Presentations / User Experience
Benchmarking / Best Practice /
Template Files / Trends & Innovation
State of Marketing
Attribution in Asia
Pacific
In association with Datalicious

State of
Marketing
Attribution in
Asia Pacific
in association with Datalicious
Econsultancy London
4th Floor, Wells Point
79 Wells Street
London W1T 3QN
United Kingdom
Telephone:
+44 207 269 1450
http://econsultancy.com
help@econsultancy.com
Econsultancy New York
350 7th Avenue, Suite 307
New York, NY 10001
United States
Telephone:
+1 212 971 0630
Econsultancy Singapore
20 Collyer Quay
#23-01
Singapore
049319
Telephone:
+65 6653 1911
All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be
reproduced or transmitted in any form or by any means,
electronic or mechanical, including photocopy, recording
or any information storage and retrieval system, without
prior permission in writing from the publisher.
Copyright © Econsultancy.com Ltd 2015
Published September 2015

State of Marketing Attribution in Asia Pacific in association with Datalicious Page 3
All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopy, recording or any information storage
and retrieval system, without prior permission in writing from the publisher. Copyright © Econsultancy.com Ltd 2015
Contents
1. Executive Summary .........................................................4
1.1. Methodology................................................................................ 5
1.2. About Econsultancy .................................................................... 6
2. Foreword by Datalicious.................................................. 7
2.1. About Datalicious........................................................................ 8
3. Marketing Attribution Beyond the Last Click .................9
4. Goals and Benefits of Attribution.................................. 12
5. Types of Attribution....................................................... 15
6. Types of Technology and Vendors................................. 19
7. Actionable Attribution...................................................25
8. Multichannel Attribution...............................................29
9. Barriers to Success......................................................... 31
10. Appendix: Respondent Profiles.....................................34

1. Executive Summary
This State of Marketing Attribution report, produced by Econsultancy in partnership with
Datalicious, is based on a survey of more than 400 client-side and agency marketers based in the
Asia Pacific region. The key findings of the report are outlined below:
Lack of knowledge holds back marketers
Though marketers in the APAC region recognise the opportunity behind attribution, this is not
translating into action for many. Though multi-device behaviour has increased the focus on
attribution in the opinion of 71% of companies, this research has found that two-thirds of
company respondents (66%) do not carry out any form of marketing attribution beyond basic
‘last-click’ analysis.
Lack of knowledge appears to be the biggest issue preventing both companies and the clients of
agencies from implementing an attribution model but, promisingly, there does seem to be little
resistance to implementing attribution modelling with only 16% of company respondents saying
they were not convinced by the business case.
Custom modelling is the most effective attribution model, though most are
still using first and last click
Attribution capabilities have significantly improved since the days of last click. As marketers try to
track the entire customer journey and assess the influence of multiple devices and channels, basic
attribution models have become less relevant as they fail to take into account the complexity of
journeys or the amount of data available. Despite this, first touch or click remains the most
commonly-used model beyond last-click, used by 47% of companies who carry out some kind of
marketing attribution modelling beyond last-click.
However, this research is encouraging in that custom modelling is shown to be the most popular
method after first and last-click, used by 39% and 49% of companies and agency clients
respectively. This form of modelling is viewed as significantly more effective than other models:
41% said it was very effective compared to 15% that said the same of first touch or click.
Turning attribution insights into action is the final hurdle
Though the argument for attribution is won, and the value of it recognised by marketers, this
report shows that 44% of companies agree to some extent that the insights they gain from
attribution are not ‘actioned’. Actioning insights is the third biggest barrier to effective attribution
according to survey respondents, with other challenges relating to disparate tech/data and data
complexity most likely compounding the problem.
Further findings
The importance of customer experience has helped the case for attribution; the research also
found that over two-thirds of client-side marketers see insights into consumer and customer
behaviour as a major benefit of marketing attribution.
For those implementing attribution, the most likely primary impact was an increase in spend
on certain digital channels, noted particularly by agencies talking about their clients.
Despite positivity around the complexity of models used, the research also found that nearly
half of organisations surveyed still carry out attribution manually or using spreadsheets.
Just over half of companies carrying attribution do so on a multichannel basis; the offline
channels most likely to be included are direct mail and printed media.

1.1. Methodology
This is Econsultancy’s first State of Marketing Attribution in Asia Pacific report, carried
out in association with Datalicious.
There were over 400 respondents to our research request, which took the form of an online
survey during May and June 2015. Respondents included both client-side professionals
(including marketers and ecommerce professionals) and supply-side respondents (including
agencies and consultants).
Information about the survey, including the link, was emailed to Econsultancy’s and Datalicious’
respective user bases and promoted on Twitter and other social channels. The incentive for taking
part was access to a complimentary copy of this report just before its publication on the
Econsultancy website.
The findings are shown for client-side (i.e. ‘company respondents’) and supply-side (or ‘agency
respondents’) separately. For a more detailed profiling of respondents, see Section 10.
If you have any questions about the research, please email Econsultancy’s Research Director,
Linus Gregoriadis (Linus@econsultancy.com).
Figure 1: Which of the following most accurately describes your job role?
Respondents: 422

1.2. About Econsultancy
Econsultancy’s mission is to help its customers achieve excellence in digital business, marketing
and ecommerce through research, training and events.
Founded in 1999, Econsultancy has offices in New York, London and Singapore.
Econsultancy is used by over 600,000 professionals every month. Subscribers get access to
research, market data, best practice guides, case studies and elearning – all focused on helping
individuals and enterprises get better at digital.
The subscription is supported by digital transformation services including digital capability
programmes, training courses, skills assessments and audits. We train and develop thousands of
professionals each year as well as running events and networking that bring the Econsultancy
community together around the world.
Subscribe to Econsultancy today to accelerate your journey to digital excellence.
Call us to find out more:
New York: +1 212 971 0630
London: +44 207 269 1450
Singapore: +65 6653 1911

2. Foreword by Datalicious
Most marketers recognise the benefits of doing media attribution beyond the last-click, right?
Surprisingly, no, or at least, they do but are incapable of action. That’s one of the key insights to
come from this report, which finds that over 60% of marketers in APAC do not carry out any form
of attribution, despite a clear majority recognising its importance.
While it’s promising to see that the growth in cross-device, cross-channel campaigns has
increased an awareness for media attribution, it would seem there’s still some way to go in filling
knowledge gaps around the subject. The benefits of media attribution are clear: it allows
marketers to optimise media channel mix, justify media spend and end media wastage.
Wastage in media spend has a multiplying effect on marketing performance—not only is it a
measurement of inefficiency but also a grave representation of missed opportunities. And that’s
not just reflecting on missed impression opportunities, but extends to conversion optimisation.
Without a true understanding of media performance across channels, it is impossible to allocate
media spend to better performing channels.
This report also shows that custom media attribution is the most effective attribution model,
especially when compared to first or last click attribution. If you’re still using first or last click
models then your marketing team really needs to take a good look at the reasons why.
And finally, there’s still a high amount of marketers that aren’t actioning insights, and there are
plenty of practical reasons why this may be—it requires creative and media agency cooperation
which can’t always be guaranteed and it usually requires buy-in from the entire CMO department.
It’s not an easy process to navigate but as a general industry comment, we are seeing more
awareness among media agencies of the value of actioning attribution insights, so the future looks
very promising.
From the team at Datalicious, we hope that the information in this report gives you greater
insights into how marketers across APAC are responding to challenges of multichannel and cross-
device campaign optimisation and how you can apply these learnings to your own media
attribution journey.
Special thanks must go to Linus Gregoriadis and his team of analysts at Econsultancy for putting
this significant research together.
Christian Bartens
CEO & Founder
Datalicious

2.1. About Datalicious
Founded in 2007, Datalicious is a global full-service media attribution and marketing analytics
provider. Since its beginnings as an Australian analytics consultancy, Datalicious has expanded
internationally through its growing product development and consulting services divisions.
The Datalicious OptimaHub is an innovative media attribution platform that uses the latest
technologies to track consumer purchase paths across channels and devices for maximum
accuracy, whilst providing enterprise grade flexibility and customisation. Datalicious’ professional
services are included in all OptimaHub attribution packages to ensure clients are adequately
supported at each stage of their project and to help maximise the value they get from their
technology investment.
Datalicious technology drives the attribution capabilities for some of APAC’s largest and most
innovative brands so please contact us for a selection of case studies on how other market leaders
are using media attribution to supercharge their marketing efforts.
For more information visit www.datalicious.com or email:
sydney@datalicious.com
melbourne@datalicious.com
auckland@datalicious.com
singapore@datalicious.com
mumbai@datalicious.com
manila@datalicious.com
Datalicious is part of the Veda Group.

3. Marketing Attribution Beyond the Last
Click
As the number of consumer touchpoints and digital screens have proliferated, it has become more
difficult for marketers to ascertain at what point consumers are influenced to purchase.
Marketing attribution used to be a simpler affair, with many pointing to the last click as the point
at which interest turned into a buying decision.
With mobile devices giving customers multiple screens to buy, share or consume on, that point
has become less clear. It’s no longer about identifying the last click, but about tracking, as
accurately as possible, an entire customer journey to discover what channels are actually having a
direct impact on the purchase decision. With this data to hand, attribution becomes much more
than just the last click, marketers can apportion credit to individual touchpoints and optimise
accordingly, which in turn can lead to more efficient allocation of budgets and significant
improvements in the customer journey.
Econsultancy defines marketing attribution as “the practice of allocating value to the different
touchpoints / channels that have influenced a sale or another desired outcome.” In this survey,
respondents were asked to discount the use of default last click attribution models whereby 100%
credit is given to the touchpoint or channel giving the last click before conversion.
Insightful attribution can lead to tangible improvements, as investment in poorly performing
channels can be reduced and better performing channels can be optimised. Despite the
opportunity around attribution, many marketers in the Asia Pacific region are still missing out.
Figure 2 illustrates that two-thirds (66%) of company respondents do not carry out attribution
modelling, but over half (56%) are ‘thinking about it’.
Figure 2: Do you or your clients carry out any type of media attribution modelling
to measure the effectiveness of your/their marketing?
Company respondents: 185
Agency respondents: 188

For those planning to carry out attribution modelling, some of the latest marketing trends might
have contributed to their decision to invest in this area. Although there’s still some debate around
what ‘big data’ actually entails or refers to, this term can be used to describe the vast amount of
data generated by customer actions. With such a large volume of information to sift through and
understand, it is wise for marketers to invest in processes that ensure the data becomes insightful;
marketing attribution is one such process.
Figure 3 shows that for nearly three in five (58%) organisations, the rise of big data has ‘increased
focus on attribution’. Agencies are 33% more likely to point to big data as driving their clients’
interest in this area, with over three-quarters (77%) of respondents saying that’s the case.
Figure 3: ‘The rise of big data has increased focus on attribution’
As noted before, the number of screens a customer moves between has also increased the need for
attribution. Figure 4 on the next page shows a broad agreement between company and agency
respondents, with 71% and 84% respectively agreeing that ‘multi-device behaviour has increased
focus on attribution’.
As seen in Figure 5, also overleaf, the issues which restrict marketers’ ability to carry out
attribution or implement it properly are mainly around a lack of knowledge, lack of time and
technology limitations. Lack of knowledge was identified as the primary concern by both
company and agency respondents.
On a positive note, there does seem to be little resistance to implementing attribution modelling,
with only 16% of company respondents saying they were not convinced about the business case,
and 15% citing internal politics. This suggests that there is plenty of appetite for implementing
attribution but more work needs to be done to equip teams with the skills necessary to make the
most of the tools available.

Figure 4: ‘Multi-device behaviour has increased focus on attribution’
Figure 5: What are the reasons you or your clients don’t carry out marketing
attribution or have delayed its implementation?

4. Goals and Benefits of Attribution
Company and agency respondents point to similar goals for marketing attribution, with slight
differences between the two groups, as seen in the charts below. Over two-thirds of responding
organisations cite optimising media mix (70%) and building understanding of customer journey
/ sales cycle (67%) as high-priority goals. This is a positive sign that marketers understand the
opportunity afforded by attribution to provide a better customer experience.
It is also encouraging to see that marketers aim to do more than just justify their digital spend;
they’re using marketing attribution to optimise the media mix and improve performance.
Company respondents
Figure 6: What are your main goals for marketing attribution?
Respondents: 53

Agency respondents
Figure 7: What are your clients’ main goals for marketing attribution?
Respondents: 69
Figure 8 shows that the perceived benefits of marketing attribution match up with marketers’
goals. Nearly four in five (79%) organisations cite budget allocation as a primary benefit, closely
followed by a better understanding of the interaction between channels.
It’s worth noting that over two-thirds (71%) of company respondents cite insights into consumer
and customer behaviour as a benefit of marketing attribution, demonstrating that marketers are
increasingly aware of how critical customer experience is. It is also encouraging to see that
marketers are seeking to have a better understanding of how digital and physical interactions
complement each other and fit into attribution models.
Figure 9 shows that just over half (52%) of company respondents agree that ‘the ROI from
attribution investment is clear’. While a large proportion claim to effectively measure the impact
of attribution, this does leave 48% of respondents either in disagreement or having no opinion on
the statement – this is a particularly important issue for attribution vendors to overcome and
demonstrate the efficacy of attribution modelling.

Figure 8: What do you/your clients regard as the benefits of marketing
attribution?
Company respondents
Figure 9: ‘The ROI from attribution investment is clear’
Respondents: 44

5. Types of Attribution
As the diversity of channels, devices and touchpoints has increased over the last few years, the
challenge of attribution has become more complex. Along with this diversity has come the era of
big data, allowing a level of customer journey analytics not previously seen. The application of big
data into attribution models has developed the range of methods used by companies.
Despite this, Figure 10 shows that first touch or click, which many would class as a basic form of
attribution, remains the most commonly-used model beyond last-click according to both
companies and agency respondents (47% and 50% respectively). Encouragingly, second to this is
custom modelling, used by 39% of companies, and a higher 49% of agency clients.
Custom attribution modelling uses one or more standard models as the starting point, and then
layers in other factors unique to a business to produce a custom model. Though complex to set up
and monitor, the method produces the most relevant model for every business, ultimately
increasing accuracy.
The 26% higher use of custom modelling by the clients of agencies indicates the expertise of the
latter when it comes to attribution technologies and methodologies. Concerns are regularly
expressed about media agencies owning attribution, in that there is a danger of them ‘marking
their own homework’. However, agencies certainly have the experience and internal skills to make
the most of their clients’ big data, using more complex models than perhaps companies are able to
in-house.
Even allocation (linear) attribution, where each touchpoint along a journey to purchase is given
equal value, is the least-commonly used method, with just over a fifth (21%) of companies
selecting it.
Figure 10: Beyond last click, what methods do you/your clients use for marketing
attribution?
Note: This question was conditional on carrying out media attribution modelling beyond the last click.

The increased accuracy of custom modelling is reflected in Figure 11, which clearly shows the
augmented effectiveness of the method, with 41% of companies rating their custom attribution
model as ‘very effective’, and a further 41% rating it as ‘somewhat effective’. In comparison, even
allocation (linear) was rated as ‘very effective’ by none of those surveyed, and as ‘somewhat
ineffective’ by more than a quarter (27%).
Agencies rate even allocation as slightly more effective than the client-side, with 71% rating the
method as ‘somewhat’ or ‘very’ effective. However, custom modelling is again viewed as the most
effective method, with almost half (49%) of agencies saying their clients rate it as ‘very effective’.
Company respondents
Figure 11: How would you rate the effectiveness of your attribution method?
Respondents: 26
Survey respondents were asked in an open question if any attribution type or approach has
proved particularly effective, producing a mix of opinions (box overleaf). Some are sticking with
simple, click-based approaches, either because they are just starting out using attribution models,
or because they don’t have the internal resources to progress to a more complex model. Others
were evidently further ahead with their attribution modelling, using custom modelling to
optimise marketing budgets across both publishers and channels.

Agency respondents
Figure 12: How would your clients rate the effectiveness of their attribution
methods?
Respondents: 35
Is there any type of attribution or approach that has proved to be particularly
effective?
“Ultimately there is little data to support the benefit of one model over any other...”
“At the moment everything is based on clicks and online only. We need better insights of impressions, offline and
cross-channel conversion metrics.”
“Using media mix modelling to set budgets, then optimising within digital channels rather than trying to de-dupe
across channels. This makes for a simpler view of each channel that is more actionable. Display learnings can be
used to allocate budget across publishers. Digital channel learnings can be used to allocate budget across
channels. But the budget itself is set by whole-of-marketing, top-down attribution.”
“Custom weightings dependent on the channel.”
“For clients, the very simple approach (‘don’t try to bite off too much’) to attribution is the most effective at the
moment.”
“Focusing on personal contact rather than points-based systems limited to website touchpoints.”
“First interaction approach is taken for platforms like Facebook, where the Indian consumers are not
comfortable enough to buy, but to be made aware of the brand message.”
“We have a bespoke algorithmic approach that has been proven to deliver better results.”
Survey respondents

The complexity of attribution modelling is reflected in Figure 13, which shows that 64% of
respondents agree that a perfect attribution model is impossible to achieve. The attribution trends
briefing based on this year’s Digital Cream event1 discussed the reputation that attribution has
gained as being ‘divorced from reality’, stating:
“Sometimes there is scepticism about the amount of arbitrary rules in place, which
means that errors can be introduced into the modelling. It’s often seen as just one
version of the truth within companies; the definitive view of the world. However, it’s a
mistake for companies to try to build the perfect model as ‘perfect is the enemy of good’.”
The vast majority of experts believe that attribution is not a perfect science and it can’t solve every
question a marketer has about their campaign mix. However, they do help marketers to evaluate
the influence of different channels on each other, and the comparative impact of each on
conversion rates.
Company respondents
Figure 13: ‘A perfect attribution model is impossible’
Respondents: 46
1 https://econsultancy.com/reports/marketing-attribution-trends-briefing-digital-cream-london-2015/

6. Types of Technology and Vendors
Although attribution modelling often tops marketers’ wishlists and many vendors have added
sophisticated functionality to their technology platforms, nearly half (48%) of organisations
surveyed still carry out attribution manually or using spreadsheets.
Further analysis revealed that larger organisations (earning more than $50 million each year) are
significantly more likely to carry out marketing attribution using vendor or custom-built
technology compared to their smaller counterparts (75% versus 25% in the case of custom-built
technology).
Unsurprisingly, agency respondents are more than twice as likely to report that their clients use a
media agency for their marketing attribution programmes.
Figure 14: How do you or your clients carry out marketing attribution?
In terms of types of technology, Figure 15 shows there’s an even split between those who use ad
serving technology to carry out marketing attribution and those who enlist the services of an
agency or consultancy. Less than a fifth (17%) use a pureplay attribution company.
Figure 16 shows the types of technology that the clients of agencies typically use. As agencies have
multiple clients, they could select multiple answers. Supply-side respondents also report that ad
serving technology is the most popular route among their clients, with nearly two-thirds saying
that’s the case. Nearly three in five (56%) point to paid search technology, whereas none of the
companies surveyed indicated they use this technology to carry out marketing attribution.

Company respondents
Figure 15: What type of technology vendor do you use to carry out attribution?
Respondents: 18
Agency respondents
Figure 16: What type of technology vendor do your clients typically use to carry
out attribution?
Respondents: 25
Note: Respondents could select multiple options.

As seen in the chart below, organisations use a variety of vendors for marketing attribution. This
not only shows that the market is still highly fragmented, but is also probably a reflection of
market maturity. Google and Adobe command a sizeable portion of the market, with around half
(50% and 44% respectively) of responding organisations saying they use them. Datalicious (31%)
takes the third spot, while all other named platforms command much lower shares of the market.
Table 1 and Table 2 on the next page shows this information cross-tabulated against the methods
used attribution, for both client-side and agency respondents.
Figure 17: Which vendor or vendors do you or your clients use for attribution?
Note: ClearSaleing is now known as eBay Enterprise Attribution.

Table 1: Which vendor(s) do you use for attribution? (cross-tabulated by method of attribution)
Adobe
ClearSaleing
Datalicious
Ensighten
Google
IBM
Kenshoo
Marin
Software
Qubit
VisualIQ
Other
First touch
36% 0% 14% 7% 36% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 7%
Even allocation (linear)
20% 0% 10% 0% 40% 0% 10% 10% 0% 0% 10%
Position-based / ‘Time
decay’ 17% 0% 0% 0% 50% 0% 0% 17% 0% 0% 16%
Custom modelling
17% 17% 25% 0% 25% 0% 0% 8% 0% 0% 8%
View-through
31% 0% 8% 0% 31% 0% 0% 8% 0% 0% 22%
Table 2: Which vendor(s) do your clients typically use for attribution? (cross-tabulated by method of
attribution)
Adobe
ClearSaleing
Datalicious
Ensighten
Google
IBM
Kenshoo
Marin
Software
Qubit
VisualIQ
Other
First touch
28% 0% 3% 6% 25% 6% 9% 3% 0% 3% 17%
Even allocation (linear)
24% 0% 3% 7% 24% 0% 10% 7% 3% 3% 19%
Position-based / ‘Time
decay’ 24% 0% 4% 8% 24% 4% 12% 8% 4% 0% 12%
Custom modelling
25% 0% 4% 4% 13% 0% 8% 8% 4% 4% 30%
View-through
24% 0% 5% 10% 19% 5% 10% 5% 0% 5% 17%
Note: ClearSaleing is now known as eBay Enterprise Attribution.

More often than not, siloed organisational structures and impermeable data walls don’t really
support the kind of flexibility that is required to make the most of optimisation efforts in general,
and attribution in particular. Flexibility is a key ingredient when it comes to undertaking a
successful marketing attribution programme, not only in terms of organisational structures and
degree of collaboration between teams, but also in terms how models are applied and customised.
Encouragingly, nearly two in five (58%) marketers describe their attribution systems as ‘very’ or
‘somewhat’ flexible, while only 12% describe themselves as ‘not flexible at all’ (Figure 18). This
means that a large proportion are half-way there. However, as we’ll see in Section 9, disparate
technology platforms still represent a deterrent in 41% of companies surveyed.
There’s no doubt that when it comes to marketing attribution, flexibility and effectiveness are
intertwined. Adopting a nimble approach means being able to action the insights uncovered by
the attribution programme and make adjustments on a regular basis, which in turn leads to small
successes. However, only half of those surveyed indicate that their technology ‘facilitates effective
attribution models’ (Figure 19).
Figure 18: Typically, how flexible are your/your clients’ attribution systems?

Company respondents
Figure 19: ‘Our marketing technology facilitates effective attribution models’
Respondents: 45

7. Actionable Attribution
Numerous Econsultancy roundtables held around the world on this topic have found that
delegates are generally in agreement about why they want to develop an attribution model: to
justify investment, measure the impact of channels and optimise these channels accordingly. This
optimisation, based on the insights gained from attribution modelling, is a stumbling block for
some marketers. Figure 20 shows that 44% of companies agree to some extent that the insights
they gain from attribution are not actioned.
A recent Datalicious whitepaper2 found that ‘actioning’ multi-touch attribution insights improves
overall return on advertising spend. The research stated: “While it is impossible to say exactly
how much the study participants will be able to increase their performance by actioning the
insights gained from this exercise, it is certain that the impact will be significant.”
Respondents were asked if they had actioned any insights as a result of marketing attribution, and
many of the answers focused on aiding the identification of value in specific channels and how
channels interact with each other. Optimisation of budgets was mentioned numerous times as a
significant change, particularly decreasing spend on ineffective channels.
The latter is encouraging, indicating increased levels of trust in attribution modelling. Previous
Econsultancy research has revealed anecdotal evidence of unwillingness among some marketing
departments to embrace attribution, due to the risk of it reducing the budgets of certain channels.
This fact can make it difficult to get buy-in from all parties, and without full support, insights can
be hard to action.
Company respondents
Figure 20: ‘We don’t action the insights we get from attribution’
Respondents: 44
2 http://www.datalicious.com/media-attribution-optimising-digital-marketing-spend-in-financial-
services/

What is the most significant change you’ve made as a result of marketing
attribution?
“Identifying ineffective spends. But still searching for effective spends.”
“Being smarter about marketing spend.”
“Optimising digital media mix.”
“Decreased spend on certain channels. Dropped ATL media spends.”
“The media agency who implemented the system will argue that media spend has been adjusted based on the
marketing attribution results. However, the result is display is our most successful channel so we should put
more budget into display. Coincidentally, advertising agencies make more money out of us if we put more money
into display.”
“Our clients are able to spend on channels that are most effective and approach differently to channels that are
not as effective.”
“Better visibility into the value of display and paid social advertising.”
“Changing definition of leads generation due to user behaviour tracking.”
“Determining a fairer and more accurate picture of channel effectiveness and value within the media mix.”
“Gaining a much better insight into how channels work in synergy – moving clients away from being reliant on
one or two channels only.”
“Inputs: simply moving away from rule-based attribution to algorithmic / bespoke attribution. Outcomes:
driving better conversion volume and efficiency.”
“Reducing their wastage on digital channels that mostly don’t work and focus on channels that do work.”
“Better optimisation of the digital budgets, leading to more investment as better ROI is achieved.”
Survey respondents
Figure 21 shows the impact of attribution on spending on digital marketing channels, revealing
that the most likely impact is an increase on some, but not all, digital marketing channels. More
than a tenth of companies said they had increased spending across all digital channels, however,
only 3% of agencies agreed.
Tellingly, almost a third of companies (30%) said that attribution had resulted in no change in
digital marketing spending, compared to 15% of agencies who said the same about their clients.
This is most likely an indication of the challenges that companies can face when actioning
attribution insights internally, leading to a lack of change. In contrast, agencies can bring expert
advice and clearer direction when it comes to altering budgets, with companies potentially more
likely to make changes at the recommendation of, and with the support of their agency, compared
to companies going it alone.

Figure 21: What has been the primary impact of attribution on your / your
clients’ spending?
Of those who have made budget increases as a result of their attribution model, 64% have made
this increase in display advertising and 55% in paid search (Figure 22). There is a large disparity
between the response of companies and agencies when it comes to paid search; 38% of agencies
said their clients have increased paid search budgets. Another area where there is a larger
discrepancy in response is video, where a much larger proportion of agency respondents (29%)
said their clients have increased their budgets than companies themselves indicate (14%).
We also included a survey question about which channels had seen a subsequent reduction in
budget, but the sample size was unfortunately too small to include the chart.

Figure 22: Which digital channels have seen an increase in budget as a result of
attribution?

8. Multichannel Attribution
Figure 23 below shows which digital channels companies in the Asia Pacific region are using as
part of their marketing attribution. From the client-side perspective, in descending order, display
advertising (76%), email (74%), SEO (70%) and paid search (69%) are the four channels most
likely to be included in attribution modelling. Organic social media marketing (57%) and social
media advertising (57%) are also factored in by more than half of responding companies.
Figure 23: What digital channels are included as part of your or your clients’
marketing attribution?
It is a cause for concern if marketers are only including a limited number of channels in their
attribution modelling, because it is important to get as complete a picture as possible.
Recognising that offline touchpoints also need to be included to give a truly holistic perspective of
how credit should be apportioned, marketers are increasingly asking questions about the
contribution made by more traditional advertising channels such as print advertising, TV and
direct mail. More than half of marketers (55%) say they are carrying out multichannel attribution,
while 70% of supply-side respondents say their clients are doing this (Figure 24).
Looking at the specific offline channels being included within attribution models (Figure 25), no
single channel is being incorporated by more than half of companies doing multichannel
attribution. Direct mail (41%), printed media (35%) and point of sale (33%) are the offline
touchpoints most commonly being factored in. The problems around multiple data sources and
technology platforms are discussed in the next section, and it is clear that these issues are
exacerbated when digital and non-digital touchpoints are involved.

Figure 24: Do you or your clients carry out any type of multichannel attribution
(i.e. joining up online and offline)?
Figure 25: Which offline touchpoints are included in your / your clients’
attribution models?

9. Barriers to Success
Along with opportunities, marketers are faced with a raft of challenges when trying to implement
effective marketing attribution programmes. As seen in the chart below, the five main barriers are
around technology, data and skills.
Figure 26: What are the greatest barriers to using attribution more effectively?
Companies considering implementation or striving to accelerate the process of adoption should
consider how well they perform in each of these areas and what they can do to address related
challenges:
Technology – While having the right technology in place is rarely the sole success factor, it
certainly is an important contributor. Some organisations can deploy third-party technology
quite swiftly, but many grapple with internal integration issues and how well existing
platforms communicate with each other.
Time and time again in digital marketing, disparate technology platforms feature among the
most commonly cited issues and attribution is no exception, with 41% of companies surveyed
mentioning it.
Data – There’s no denying that marketers are often overwhelmed by the volume of customer
data and the survey results reiterated this, with nearly two in five (37%) client-side
respondents pointing to complexity of data as having a detrimental effect on the success of
their attribution programmes. Somewhat ironically, this is why good attribution models are so

important, as they provide marketers with the confidence to delve into this complex data
landscape and generate insights that can be acted upon.
Perhaps more worryingly, 37% indicate that auctioning the insights they get is an
impediment. These are the marketers who, aided by marketing attribution, have managed to
sift through the data and find meaningful information to make decisions and prioritise
improvement initiatives. However, turning these insights into action has proven to be a
bottleneck. This is often either because they don’t have the necessary processes and
technologies in place to act on their attribution results or because there’s a lack of
communication between those who uncover the insights and those who have the power (or
willingness in many cases) to act upon them.
Skills – As we’ve hinted above, technology alone can’t solve the attribution conundrum.
Organisations need to invest in increasing their internal capabilities around analysis and
optimisation, two activities which typically fall under the remit of analysts. Although we’ve
witnessed an increasing supply of skilled people recently, over a quarter of client-side
respondents say that a lack of analysts prevents them from using attribution more effectively.
Defining the online customer journey is another are which requires a fair amount of attention
and due diligence. The aim of such an initiative is not to isolate events or steps that customers
take towards a purchase, but to be able to set goals for attribution that accurately reflect this
journey. Studies have shown that no single channel, be it online or offline, carries the load, so
focusing on one portion of the customer journey is not only counter-productive, but can
backfire at some point.
Admittedly, defining the customer journey is no easy task and is often held back by channel
politics, which are among the most difficult to trace underlying issues. This particularly
becomes a problem when some teams over-emphasise the role the channel they oversee plays
in the overall marketing mix. This might lead to undercutting the value and impact of other
channels.
Please elaborate on the problems you or your clients have experienced with
marketing attribution.
“Getting it set up... how to define who gets what part or what achieved success.”
“Lack of visibility on what drives the algorithm. Lack of publicly available information about the attribution
model.”
“The model lags, so doesn’t reflect current performance. The model doesn’t align to last-click attribution, so
weekly/monthly digital reporting doesn’t align to the larger model.”
“We are tied to a tech code base that is in almost permanent lockdown and a CMS that is clunky, inflexible and
painful to work with.”
“Lack of talent. Additionally, partners such as Facebook do not pass back device ID data or impression-level
data, making view-through conversion analysis very difficult.”
“Collating data in time for it to be actionable. Spend data is disparate, and a manual process. Publisher data
doesn’t necessarily align with the strategies that we allocate budget to, and classification is manual.”
“Interpreting the data into actionable insights. Not sure as to how to properly roll out a strategy of how to deploy
attribution findings into operation.”
“It is difficult to prove that an increase in performance was due to moving toward a more bespoke methodology.
We’re looking at ways of doing this via test and control at a market level, but it’s difficult to eliminate ‘noise’.”
Survey respondents

Please elaborate on the problems you or your clients have experienced with
marketing attribution. (cont.)
“Our clients don’t trust the data.”
“Understanding multiple touchpoint attribution.”
“Each platform we use has its own reports and dashboards which make it hard to compare and join everything
into one big picture. Google Analytics is using last-touch as a default. Now many clients don’t know how to use
even a simple Google Analytics dashboard so it’s hard to explain and drive them towards multichannel
attribution without going into technical details.”
“We suspect these are the same problems as most companies have relative to tech: customer journeys spanning
multiple platforms, quality of data and resources to carry out the analysis.”
“It is an extremely limited way to run your business and only accounts for a small part of qualifying hot prospects
– very overrated.”
Survey respondents
Receiving impartial advice and support from third parties and ensuring that the insights are not
biased in any way is another key requirement when undergoing a marketing attribution
programme. Yet, as the chart below shows, only half of companies surveyed claim they are
confident that their agency is impartial when carrying out marketing attribution on their behalf.
Additionally, as seen in Figure 26, 12% say they don’t trust the data.
Company respondents
Figure 27: How confident are you that your agency is impartial when carrying out
marketing attribution?
Respondents: 10

10. Appendix: Respondent Profiles
Figure 28: In which country or region are you based?
Respondents: 422
Figure 29: Which best describes your job role?

Company respondents
Figure 30: In which business sector is your organisation?
Respondents: 196
Figure 31: Are you/your clients more focused on B2B or B2C marketing?

Agency respondents
Figure 32: Which type of company do you work for?
Respondents: 210
Figure 33: What is your annual company revenue?

Econsultancy State of Marketing Attribution in Asia Pacific

Recomendados

Recomendados

Mais conteúdo relacionado

Mais procurados

Mais procurados (19)

Semelhante a Econsultancy State of Marketing Attribution in Asia Pacific

Semelhante a Econsultancy State of Marketing Attribution in Asia Pacific (20)

Mais de Christian Bartens

Mais de Christian Bartens (20)

Último

Último (20)

Econsultancy State of Marketing Attribution in Asia Pacific