Brand Engagement Index 2012

DECEMBER 2012

Report

Overview

– Management & research objectives

– Methodology

– Executive summary

– Meaning of brands

– Measuring eNgagement

– The four I’s

– TOP 10

– Media exposure

– Category results

Management &

Research Objectives

5

To support this mission, NBBDO is looking to operationalize the eNgagement concept in a

quantitative survey that can be used…

– … to rank a set of 116 brands based on their eNgagement performance

– … to offer to its clients as a customized research tool in future projects

The outcome of this project will be threefold:

– Master survey that measures Brand eNgagement

– Model that shows the relationship between the four I’s, Brand eNgagement and business KPI’s

– Ranking of 116 brands based on their eNgagement performance

Develop a research tool to measure Brand eNgagement and the related I’s.

Rank 116 brands based on their Brand eNgagement score amongst Belgian

consumers.

Management & Research Objectives

Methodology

7

Research method

– Online survey

– Recruitment via InSites’ Talktochange consumer panel

– Field: 11/10/2012 – 23/10/2012

– Survey length: 18 minutes

– Sample:

• N(Respondents) = 2.331

• N(Brand evaluations) = 11.100

Screening & quota

Screening:

– Age between 18-45

– Not active in danger occupations

Quota:

– Language: Dutch (60%) – French(40%)

• Gender: Male (50%) – Female (50%)

– Age: 18-24 years (24%) – 25-34 years (36%) – 35-45 years (40%)

Methodology

Meaning of brands

9

N =2331

Q: To what extent do you agree with the following statements?.

2010 2011

Sign. difference (95%)

Associations

2012

54%

26%

18%

19%

13%

11%

15%

9%

8%

11%

9%

7%

7%

29%

48%

50%

46%

48%

42%

37%

39%

39%

35%

33%

28%

29%

14%

23%

27%

29%

31%

38%

34%

35%

42%

34%

45%

36%

47%

2%

2%

3%

5%

6%

7%

10%

13%

8%

15%

11%

19%

14%

1%

2%

3%

2%

4%

4%

3%

6%

3%

9%

3%

I expect brands to have a high value for money

Brands need the input of their consumers

Brands should be close to their consumers

Brands should involve their consumers in thedevelopment of new products and services

Brands are attractive

Brands should involve their consumers in theircommunication efforts (campaigns...)

Brands can make us dream

Branded products are more reliable

Brands bring products closer to their consumers

I find branded products more attractive than privatelabels

Brands have to actively communicate with me

Brands are a means to feel more confident

Brands make people interact with each other

Totally agree Rather agree Neutral Rather disagree Totally disagree

84% 86% 94%

74% 74% 79%

69% 70% 74%

65% 65% 71%

61% 61% 63%

53% 51% 51%

52% 51% 48%

49% 48% 55%

47% 48% 42%

46% 48% 50%

41% 42% 39%

35% 37% 33%

35% 34% 27%

Brand Engagement

11

Intimacy

Involvement

Interaction

Influence

Brand

eNgagement

Index

Likeability

Loyalty

Purchase

intention

Consideration

Uniqueness

r² = 0,42

r = 0,65

r = 0,70

r = 0,65

r = 0,65

r = 0,61

r² = 0,48

r² = 0,42

r² = 0,42

r² = 0,37

The BEI (Brand

eNgagement Index) is a

score on 100, consisting of

the scores on the four

dimensions of engagement

There are very strong correlations between brand engagement and all KPI’s.

Brand engagement can predict 37% to 48% of the KPI’s.

Likeability and loyalty can be best predicted by engagement, uniqueness is

somewhat less predictable by engagement towards the brand

The model Influence on KPI’s

12

Q: You said you would recommend this brand to others. Please indicate why you would recommend this brand to others?

Q: Can you think of other things that would trigger you to recommend this brand to others?

N =4458 / F= Only if they would recommend the brand

Recommendation Reasons

46%

44%

40%

35%

24%

17%

9%

9%

8%

5%

My personal experience with this brand triggers me torecommend this brand to others

My price/quality perception of this brand

The products and services of this brand

I just love the brand

The promotions from the brand

This brand puts a lot of efforts in its consumers

The buzz (campaigns, events, etc.) about this brandtriggers me to do so

The mission of this brand

The activities from the company behind the brand

None of these

13

Q: You said you would not recommend this brand to others. Please indicate why you would not recommend this brand to others?

Q: Can you think of other things that prevents you from recommending this brand to others?

N =2548 / F= Only if they would not recommend the brand

No recommendation Reasons

28%

17%

16%

13%

8%

7%

6%

5%

4%

35%

I just don’t love the brand

My price/quality perception of this brand

My personal experience with this brand triggers meto not recommend this brand to others

The products and services of this brand

This brand does not put a lot of efforts in itsconsumers

The (lack of) promotions from the brand

The lack of activities from the company behind thebrand

The mission of this brand

The buzz (campaigns, events, etc.) about thisbrand does not trigger me to do so

None of these

14

The 4 I’s

Sectors with lower & higher engagement

DECEMBER 2012

▸ low engagement categories (52 – 53,9)

- Energy – Dairy – Margarines - Beer

▸ Medium engagement categories (54 – 56,5)

- Water - Automotive – Magazines – Juices – Banks – CSD

– Coffee – Chocolate snacks

▸ High engagement categories (57 – 61,4)

- Salty snacks – cellphones – telecom – retail

Low engagement DECEMBER 2012

18

Energy

The 4 I’s Energy

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

Intimacy

Involvment

Interaction

Influence

Electrabel

Luminus

Eneco

Essent

Lampiris

Nuon

Belpower

19

Dairy products

The 4 I’s Dairy products

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

Intimacy

Involvment

Interaction

Influence

Campina

Joyvalle

Inex

Inza

Danone

Nestlé

Lactel

Kraft

20

Butter

The 4 I’s Butter

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

Intimacy

Involvment

Interaction

Influence

Solo

Planta

Bertolli

Becel

Alpro

21

Beers

The 4 I’s Beers

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

Intimacy

Involvment

Interaction

Influence

Stella Artois

Jupiler

Maes

Duvel

Palm

Vedett

Hoegaarden

Leffe

Medium engagement DECEMBER 2012

23

Water

The 4 I’s Water

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

Intimacy

Involvment

Interaction

Influence

Spa

Perrier

Vittel

BRU

Contrex

Chaudfontaine

Evian

24

Cars

The 4 I’s Cars

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

Intimacy

Involvment

Interaction

Influence

Volvo

Mercedes

BMW

Audi

Volkswagen

MINI

Toyota

25

Magazines

The 4 I’s Magazines

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

Intimacy

Involvment

Interaction

Influence

Dag Allemaal

Humo

Libelle

Story

Flair

P-magazine

Feeling

Goed Gevoel

Knack

TV Familie

Vitaya

26

Fruit juices

The 4 I’s Fruit juices

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

Intimacy

Involvment

Interaction

Influence

Minute Maid

Appelsientje

Looza

Materne

Sunland

Capri Sun

Tropicana

27

Banks

The 4 I’s Banks

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

Intimacy

Involvment

Interaction

InfluenceKBC

Belfius

ING

BNP ParibasFortisArgenta

AXA

28

Cola

The 4 I’s Cola

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

Intimacy

Involvment

Interaction

Influence

Coca-Cola

Coca-ColalightPepsi

Pepsi Max

River

Lidl Cola

29

Coffee

The 4 I’s Coffee

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

Intimacy

Involvment

Interaction

Influence

DouweEgbertsIlly

Nespresso

Dolce Gusto

Jacqmotte

Nescafé

30

Chocolate

The 4 I’s Chocolate

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

Intimacy

Involvment

Interaction

Influence

Mars

Snickers

M&Ms

Leo

KitKat

Twix

Maltesers

Côte dOr

KinderBueno

Milka

High engagement DECEMBER 2012

32

Retail

The 4 I’s Retail

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

Intimacy

Involvment

Interaction

Influence

Delhaize

Carrefour

Colruyt

Lidl

Aldi

Makro

33

Telco

The 4 I’s Telco

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

Intimacy

Involvment

Interaction

Influence

Belgacom

Proximus

Mobistar

Base

Telenet

Mobile Vikings

VOO

34

Cellphones

The 4 I’s Cellphones

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

Intimacy

Involvment

Interaction

Influence

Nokia

Sony

Samsung

Apple

HTC

BlackBerry

LG

35

Salty snacks

The 4 I’s Salty snacks

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

Intimacy

Involvment

Interaction

Influence

Lays

Smiths

Croky

TUC

Pringles

36

The 4 I’s Salty snacks

52%

30%

40%

23%

18%

17%

24%

25%

26%

61%

23%

18%

50%

34%

44%

25%

18%

14%

25%

20%

26%

66%

22%

18%

43%

31%

36%

18%

11%

8%

19%

17%

18%

23%

20%

15%

This brand is present in places that I frequently visit

This brand is very much present in my daily life

This brand succeeds in reaching me as it is present at the right placeand at the right moment

I feel involved with this brand

I feel involved in the actions this brand undertakes

This brand involves me in its communication efforts

This brand stimulates conversations about itself

This brand stimulates interaction with its users by organizing thingsthat fit to their consumers lifestyles

By evoking buzz (campaigns, events, etc) this brand induces adialogue between consumers

I would recommend the brand to others

I have recently spoken about this brand to someone

The brand has triggered me to join conversations about it

Sign. difference compared to last year 95%)

2010 2011 2012

nvolvement

nteraction

nfluence

ntimacy

4 I’s score for Lays (2010-2011-2012)

0

20

40

60

80Intimacy

Involvement

Interaction

Influence

2010

2011

2012

Top 10 DECEMBER 2012

39 Brand eNgagement Index © In

Site

s C

on

su

ltin

g

Top 10 2011 Overall

40 Brand eNgagement Index © In

Site

s C

on

su

ltin

g

Top 10 2011 Overall - Users

Sign. difference (95%) . = Not tested in 2010 Counts below 30

41 No significance difference . = Not tested this year

Top 10 2012 Overall

In TOP10 2011 Not in TOP 10

(colruyt, delhaize

en zero are new

brands)

42

Top 10 2012 Overall users

Sign. difference (95%) . = Not tested this year

In TOP10 2011 Not in TOP 10

(eneco & colruyt

are new brands)

Media exposure DECEMBER 2012

44

Q: On which of the following occoasions did you encounter the brands that are listed below?

DIMENSION 1 (65% EXPLAINED VARIANCE)

DIM

EN

SIO

N 1

(11%

EX

PL

AIN

ED

VA

RIA

NC

E)

Media exposure Above the line exposure

I have seen this brand in a store

TV advertisements

I have seen this brand at a friend’s place

In printed media: newspapers, magazines

In public places: flyers, street animation, sampling, tasting,

etc

In the street: abri, billboard, etc.

Radio spots

I have encountered the brand in a conversation with a friend/family member

On the website of the brand

Athletes that are sponsored by the brand

At sponsored events/festivals

On Facebook

On another website

On Twitter

On other social media

On Pinterest

Other

Significant on dimension 1

Significant on dimension 2

Significant on both dimensions

45

Q: On which of the following occoasions did you encounter the brands that are listed below?

Media exposure

Auto-

motive Banks Beer

Cell-

phones

Choco-

late

snacks

Coffee Coke Distri-

butie Energy Juices

Maga-

zines

Marga-

rines

Salty

snacks Telco Waters

Dairy

products

TV advertisements 66% 44% 41% 42% 63% 55% 49% 20% 42% 39% 38% 52% 52% 64% 59% 42%

In the street: abri, billboard, etc. 49% 38% 25% 25% 24% 26% 30% 26% 20% 18% 21% 13% 23% 44% 25% 14%

In printed media: newspapers,

magazines 47% 43% 27% 32% 19% 28% 25% 39% 36% 20% 37% 23% 22% 44% 24% 20%

I have seen this brand at a friend’s

place 39% 14% 45% 44% 35% 33% 47% 28% 11% 31% 40% 30% 48% 34% 31% 28%

I have seen this brand in a store 33% 10% 69% 55% 68% 61% 70% 51% 8% 70% 57% 72% 71% 35% 68% 69%

In a conversation with a

friend/family member 31% 25% 22% 29% 13% 18% 23% 28% 20% 10% 19% 13% 13% 33% 15% 8%

On the website of the brand 25% 23% 10% 25% 9% 13% 12% 24% 18% 8% 14% 9% 14% 31% 10% 7%

Radio spots 22% 31% 16% 7% 10% 11% 12% 17% 31% 8% 25% 7% 9% 39% 8% 8%

At sponsored events/festivals 20% 23% 27% 13% 7% 8% 26% 5% 10% 7% 11% 3% 11% 29% 13% 5%

In public places: flyers, street

animation, sampling, tasting, etc. 20% 17% 23% 14% 17% 19% 29% 20% 14% 16% 11% 13% 23% 29% 13% 15%

Athletes that are sponsored

by the brand 9% 15% 5% 6% 3% 4% 11% 5% 7% 2% 3% 2% 4% 14% 7% 5%

On Facebook 9% 6% 7% 12% 7% 7% 10% 6% 5% 4% 7% 4% 8% 14% 5% 3%

On another website 2% 3% 2% 3% 2% 2% 2% 2% 4% 1% 3% 2% 3% 4% 2% 2%

On Pinterest 2% 2% 2% 3% 2% 1% 2% 2% 2% 1% 2% 1% 2% 2% 1% 1%

On Twitter 2% 2% 2% 4% 2% 2% 3% 1% 2% 2% 3% 2% 3% 5% 2% 2%

On other social media 2% 2% 2% 2% 2% 2% 2% 1% 2% 1% 2% 2% 3% 2% 1% 2%

Other 2% 4% 2% 1% 1% 3% 3% 2% 3% 1% 2% 2% 3% 3% 1% 3%

None of the above 10% 14% 8% 13% 7% 10% 10% 12% 16% 10% 11% 10% 7% 7% 9% 11%

Categorie results DECEMBER 2012

47

Category results

48

1

2

3

TOP 3 among total

1

2

3

TOP 3 among users

Category results Coke

TOTAL USERS NON-USERS

2010 2011 2012 2010 2011 2012 2010 2011 2012

Average 52,7 53,8 56,5 54,5 55,3 57,7 35,6 38,7 44,2

Coca Cola 66,2 68,1 70,1 66,2 68,8 70,2 60,0 26,7 63,3

Cola Light 59,6 63,6 61,4 60,8 64,6 62,5 42,7 46,3 48,7

Pepsi 50,2 53,8 54,7 51,0 54,5 55,1 40,4 46,8 49,8

Pepsi Max 53,8 53,6 54,3 55,4 54,7 55,2 38,8 41,7 44,8

Lidl cola 45,9 44,9 48,2 50,2 47,7 49,6 29,9 30,9 41,7

River cola 38,6 39,0 44,1 39,3 38,9 45,3 33,1 39,5 34,9

Coca-cola Zero . . 62,7 . . 64,0 . . 50,1

Sign. difference (95%)

Executive summary DECEMBER 2012

Executive

Summary

• The overall feeling towards brands is consumers need to receive high value for

money. In addition brands need to listen to their consumers. They should be

close to their consumers and listen to their needs and even involve them in the

development of new products and services.

• These two characteristics are key for brand recommendation. A good

price/quality perception and the personal experience are the main drivers of

brand recommendation. There is no willingness to recommend when either

these two characteristics are not present or there is no ‘love’ between the

consumer and the brand (or its services/products).

• This points out the importance to engage with consumers as a brand. The

brand eNgagement index is a model to measure brand engagement. This model

focuses on 4 dimensions: Involvement, Influence, Intimacy and Interaction.

These dimensions explain the majority of the variance in the brand

engagement index. The brand engagement index influences the brand KPIs

such as likeability, loyalty, consideration, purchase intention and uniqueness.

Executive Summary Conclusions

• The brand eNgagement index (BEI) integrates the scores on each of the four

dimensions and can reach a maximum score of 100.

• On a brand level Coca Cola, Colruyt, Apple, Samsung, Douwe Egberts, Cote

D’or, Proximus, Telenet, Delhaize & Coke Zero are the best scoring brands out

of the 116 evaluated brands. Four new brands came in the Top10, whereof two

retailers : Colruyt and Delhaize. Coke Zero took the place of Coke Light. Unlike

Telenet, last year n°2, just remained in the top 10. Among users only, Coca Cola

and Apple perform well but smaller brands such as Mobile Vikings, Argenta and

Eneco that are in the top.

• On category level, the 3 best scoring categories are retail, telecom and

cellphones.

• Media exposure remains a driver of brand engagement. There is a direct

positive effect on brands which have more exposure on their BEI score.

Executive Summary Conclusions

THANK YOU