Only 7% marketers say email automation is “very successful”
Although marketing automation has been around for some time, its adoption is best described as slow and steady.
Although marketing automation has been around for some time, its adoption is best described as slow and steady.
Although marketing automation has been around for some time, its adoption is best described as slow and steady, according to new research.
While showing improvement since last year, 39% of companies still rate their email marketing automation campaigns as ‘not successful’ and just 7% view them as ‘very successful’.
The latest Email Marketing Industry Census 2015 from Econsultancy/Adestra, suggests that the perception of marketing automation capabilities varies – 43% of companies think Email Service Providers [ESPs] are ‘advanced’, while agencies say less than half that figure, just 19%.
Given agencies are using more functionality of ESPs, they may have a more accurate viewpoint – and this perception could be one reason why adoption is slow.
The survey of over 1,000 in-house and agency respondents suggested that a slight improvement in automation performance may be linked to the increased use of automated triggers.
The majority of automated trigger points have seen increased use compared to last year. However, figures are still low – most triggers are only used by less than a third of companies and only ‘subscription or sign-up to website’ (65%) and ‘automated response to website visit / sign-up’ (59%) are being used by more than half. Agencies on the other hand, are making much more use of triggers, up to double that of in-house marketers.
However, the expectation is that organisations will continue to increase their use of automation to deliver timely, relevant content to their customers.
More than half (54%) identified marketing automation as an area they are not yet doing to their satisfaction. Additionally, when asked which areas they would really like to focus on in 2015, the highest ranked option was automated campaigns (29%).
I think it comes down to planning. It’s relatively easy to plan out an individual campaign or a series of campaigns, but working out the journey you want to take each of your buyer personas on – taking account of all possible entry points (social, web, blog, email etc ) is complex. Tools like HubSpot have the capability – but agencies need to create well thought out long term plans to take advantage of them.
If only 7% think email marketing automation campaigns are very successful, I suggest that reflects then level of adoption rather than the success of the approach.
I agree with Jane. The issue is not the tool – it is rarely the tool – but the way it is being used. Whether you use one of the bigger tools such as Hubspot or look to combine best of breed specialists such as CANDDi and HTK Horizon is up to individual choice but you need to ensure you have a strategic plan that includes what you want to get, who is doing what and have they really had the training they need
I agree with Jane and Dave; the planning is the most important step of automation; the rest is plain sailing and many tools out there have the capabilities. Also the% you give only add up to 46%; what about the rest? maybe they said it was just succefull not VERY succeful?
“Relevance” is the number one issue (within the planning cycle). Automation execution is mediocre at best in most instances. Practitioners treat consumers like idiots, sending the most basic responses at inappropriate times. I am consistently amazed at the lack of insight many marketers have into consumers; they believe that the mere a notification is sent is an achievement. The challenge is that the automation is merely an enabler. Any brand using automation has to consider the QUALITY, RELEVANCE and TIMING of their interactions. The vendors of automation s/w are often at fault as they sell the ‘easy, better, personalised’ benefits without themselves being at the forefront of good practise.