Michael Kaminsky asks how to get skeptical teams to adopt incrementality testing. The answer: frame it as finding inefficiencies, not attacking their methods. Every dollar spent has waste in it. Testing brings clarity on where to spend more and less, making each dollar work harder.
Chapters
It sounds like you've worked with organizations that are sort of fairly bought in to like measurement in general and incrementality broadly, but I speak with a lot of people who are not necessarily in that situation. Do you have any tips for like how to have that conversation or particular arguments or illustrations that are particularly impactful or convincing?
I think laying out the path as to how this becomes valuable to them. Am I just coming in and saying this is doing well and this isn't doing well? Naturally, people spending money in these channels believe they are doing well. That's why they do it. They genuinely believe it. You don't want to come in and say, I'm just gonna test your beliefs and see if they're true or not. That's not the goal here. The reality is there are inefficiencies everywhere in any kind of investment anywhere. And the more clarity you can bring to that, the more transparency you can bring to any type of investment, the more valuable it is to you as an investor. And so if you think of it from that perspective of there will certainly be pockets of inefficiency here, no one is fully efficient. If we can find those pockets of inefficiency, then every dollar you spend from then on gets more effective. If you can lay it out in those terms and have people believe that, then I think you are then working toward a common goal. It's not a bad thing if we find an inefficiency. It's a really positive thing. 'Cause we're already doing this well, we're already doing X well. How can we get better than that? Well, we can only do it by changing, and we can only do it by finding the areas where we need to invest more and in, and where we need to invest less.
