Setup
The focus of the test was how brands should balance personal and planetary value props when marketing sustainable products. To that end, the two assets were designed to test performance across the following A/B split:
- AMessaging strategies focused on quality and cost savings
- BMessaging strategies focused on environmental benefits.
A
B
Test Results
Attention Share and Engagement Share reflect the percentage of test-wide scoring accounted for by individual variants or demographics. Read more below in the Methodology section.
Aggregate Insights
Personal benefits produced more attention at the top of the funnel, but environmental benefits produced more consumer engagement.
An optimal marketing strategy would marry both value props to maximize performance throughout the funnel.
Further testing could explore differentials between different strategies for framing personal benefits — e.g. a focus on fuel savings vs. a focus on health benefits vs. focus on noise reduction, etc.
Gender-based attention and engagement shares reflect the relative attention or engagement per gender for each variant. Read more below in the Methodology section.
Gender Insights
The male audience paid more attention and engaged more readily overall.
Both male and female audiences paid more attention to personal benefits but engaged more with environmental messaging.
Further testing could target the male audience with dual-prop variants (combining personal and environmental benefits) to determine how best to break through the attention wall while unlocking engagement potential.
Age-based attention and engagement shares reflect the relative attention or engagement per age bracket for each variant. Read more below in the Methodology section.
Age Insights
Older audiences paid more attention overall, with attention breaking in favor of personal benefits.
Engagement was spotty overall and heavily concentrated in the 25-34 and 65+ demos, with both segments breaking strongly in favor of environmental benefits.
The 35-44 audience was the most difficult to reach with environmental messaging but engaged with it most readily.
Further testing could target the 35-44 audience with dual-prop variants (combining personal and environmental benefits) to determine how best to break through the attention wall while unlocking engagement potential.
Methodology
This test was conducted with two message variants and a prequalified TCD audience of 4,540 likely adopters. Among those participants, 3.3% paid measurable attention to the test assets and .5% registered measurable engagement.
Attention Score measures the likelihood that a message will capture eyeballs in the wild. It’s calculated using the rate at which test participants respond to a CTA to learn more about the subject.
Engagement Score measures the likelihood that a message will elicit a meaningful response from the audience. It’s calculated using a proprietary algorithm that weights measurable metrics — shares, saves, likes, etc. — in a way that has proven to be meaningfully correlated (r > .5) to real-world conversion behavior.
Attention Share and Engagement Share reflect the percentage of test-wide scoring accounted for by individual variants or demographics. For example, an engagement share of 25% means the variant or demographic in question accounted for 25% of the cumulative engagement score produced by all segments in the test.
