Brands Struggle to Prove Incrementality Amid Fragmented Measurement
Review your current incrementality measurement approach and ensure you have a randomized control trial framework in place.
Review your current incrementality measurement approach and ensure you have a randomized control trial framework in place.
Summary
Incrementality has become a hotly debated metric, with only 8% of brands running formal programs, according to Melissa Berger of Digitas. Randomized control trials remain the most reliable method but demand discipline and long timelines, often six to eight months, which clashes with C‑suite expectations for quick answers. Brands face fragmented systems and misaligned measurement partners, leading to inflated or inconsistent results. Fetch’s Geoff Matthews stresses that partners must be upfront when a plan may not deliver, while Robin Wheeler highlights the risk of overstating sales growth. The panel noted that attribution often breaks down when multiple teams claim the same outcome, complicating the path to purchase tracking. The discussion underscored the need for rigorous, honest measurement to truly capture incremental impact.
Key changes
- Only 8% of brands have a formal incrementality program.
- Randomized control trials are the most reliable but require long, disciplined execution.
- Brands struggle with fragmented systems and misaligned measurement partners.
- Partners must be upfront when a plan may not deliver.
- Attribution breaks down when multiple teams claim the same outcome.
- C‑suite demands quick answers, but impact often requires six to eight months.