Understanding the consumer has never been easy, especially not in the world’s fastest growing economy where demographic and psychographic changes are happening at a frenetic pace. Marketers are on their toes dealing with frequent new challenges. one such challenge is the outdated consumer classification, an alternative to which was proposed by the Market Research Society of India (MRSI) recently. The new Indian Socio-economic Classification (ISEC), which seeks to replace the existing NCCS, has been enthusiastically embraced by Indian advertisers who want consumer data, as accurate as possible, to optimise their marketing strategies and spends.
On the other hand, there’s Google which began the year making good on its promise of doing away with cookies. The tech giant announced its intent to phase out third-party cookies in January 2020, giving itself a two-year timeframe. Finally, in January 2024 it turned them off for nearly 30 million chrome users, just a fraction though. The announcement came well in advance, but what exactly have marketers been doing to deal with the imminent change? How well prepared are they to navigate the cookieless world, even as their dependence on data only grows?
ISEC: Reinstating Discrimination
With nearly Rs 33,000 crore of TV AdEX at stake, advertisers are rooting for the new socio-economic classification system, ISEC. Will broadcasters and BARC adapt?
Autonomous market research industry body, Market Research Society of India (MRSI) recently announced the adoption and implementation of its latest Indian Socio-economic Classification System, ‘ISEC’. Socio-economic classification refers to a framework which enables brands and agencies to understand their target audience’s behaviour and profiles, set price points, as well as devise their marketing and advertising strategies accordingly.
The current socio-economic classification being followed in India, which is the New Consumer Classification System (NCCS), is based on ownership of consumer durables and vehicles. However, the growth in GDP and income, penetration of consumer durables, and ownership of vehicles has witnessed a siginificant increase since it was introduced in 2011. This has resulted in the NCCS becoming less discriminatory and more volatile, and hence the need to redefine key variables, which led to the development of a more stable and robust construct, ‘ISEC.’
As per MRSI’s official statement, among the various industry stakeholders on track to adopt ISEC are The Indian Society of Advertisers (ISA), research users of various organisations such as ITC, Hindustan Unilever Limited, Marico, Dabur India, research agencies including Kantar and IPSOS, as well as key media agencies. The new classification system has been created by a team of seasoned experts and professionals from across the research and insights industry using National Council of Applied Economic Research (NCAER), the Worldpanel Division- Kantar, Indian Readership Survey (IRS), and referencing data from VTION, ICUBE, among others.
Rolling out the ISEC, Mitali Chowhan, Director General, Market Research Society of India, said, “Socio-economic classification is the base of any targeted consumer understanding. At MRSI we recognise the need for an evolved SEC structure and ISEC is a system that is highly relevant. ISEC was developed by the industry, for the industry and unlike any previous classification system, it considers women’s education as a key definer of social capital, an attribute that is highly pertinent in current day.”
Spanning 1 to 12 tiers, ISEC is an open-source system that is available for all industry stakeholders. Commenting further on the scope for its modifications and fine-tuning, Chowhan adds, “Targeting is customisable for brands and categories. ISEC or indeed any socio-economic classification can be used in combination with other variables - a common demographic, for example, is town class. ISEC helps by creating a construct that works across markets, and over time.”
The new system is representative of India’s social-economic strata, works equally well for urban and rural, is straightforward, quick, and non-intrusive to administer. Sharing his thoughts on the launch, Shashi Sinha, CEO of IPG Mediabrands India, said, “A better and deeper understanding of consumer cohorts is always appreciated. It equips brands with the opportunity to identify and target consumers in a sharper manner and opens up avenues for sharper communication. ISEC is highly discriminatory which is also crucial in current times. The implementation was long due and we are certain that this will help the industry considerably going forward.”
Sinha, who is also the BARC Chairperson, told e4m that while he personally thinks that ISEC displays better discrimination and stability as compared to NCCS, BARC is currently evaluating the proposed system. “Soon, we will start consulting our stakeholders -broadcasters and advertisers. BARC can take the next step only after their feedback is received.”
WHY ISEC?
Revising the current socio-economic classification is critical given the changing landscape of Indian households. Unlike NCCS which factored just the education of the Chief Earner (CWE) and the presence of certain consumer durables - from a list of 11 items - in the household, ISEC takes on an advanced approach by including the occupation of chief earner, education of highest educated male adult as well as education of highest educated female adult. This makes it more stable and allows for more discrimination based on social parameters.
The omission of consumer durables can be reasonably understood as bringing more stability into the system. Explaining how ISEC allows for greater discrimination with its focus on measuring social capital, K Ramakrishnan, Managing Director – South Asia, Worldpanel Division, Kantar states, “ISEC introduces the education of the highest educated female as a variable in the mix. Even anecdotally, education of women has been seen to make a huge difference to the behavioural patterns in families. Therefore by introducing this variable, ISEC seems to take into cognisance the need to have a dimension of social capital in its segmentation.”
Quite noticeably, ISEC also brings back the occupation of the Chief Earner into consideration. While the earliest classification - SEC - took into account both occupation and education, NCCS considered only education in addition to durables. Commenting on the reasoning behind it, Ramakrishnan adds, “The continuing factor has always been education. The issue with durables was that it tends to be one dimensional; households can only move upwards with very rare exceptions. With big initiatives in the market towards addition of LPG households etc., the classification changes rapidly in proportions which may not always be a reflection of distinctive behaviour. Occupation certainly is a variable to consider, along with the factor around education of the woman in the household.”
Both ISEC and NCCS classify consumers into five broad categories-- A, B, C, D & E in the case of NCCS and high, upper-middle, middle, lower-middle, and low class in the case of ISEC. These are further divided into 12 tiers. With India and its consumers climbing the economic ladder rapidly, NCCS was becoming more and more non-discriminatory, particularly at the premium end. The other big concern was its volatility due to the changing ownership patterns of durable items. A new system was warranted to address these pain points.
Simplifying the argument with some arbitrary figures, Praveen Tripathi, CEO - Magic9 Media & Consumer Knowledge, says, “The problem with NCCS is that with the economy and durable ownership moving up, the top-end or NCCS-A which includes households with 9 of the 11 durables has become huge, making it difficult to precisely target the real top-end. In a city like Delhi, if NCCS-A was only 20% of all households, it has shot up to almost 50% today (both figures are created to illustrate a point). For a niche or premium product that is to be targeted at just 1-2% of the population, even if one opts for NCCS-A alone, the amount of wastage is very high. We needed a system that could slice off the top end reasonably well, making the target group consuming premium categories with low penetration directly addressable with very little wastage.”
Highlighting the issue with NCCS’ stability, he adds that the purchase of even one additional durable could change the category of the household. “Many households acquire an extra durable every year, some more frequently, and others may even acquire more than one durable within a year. This leads to frequent changes in consumers’ profiles making it tough for marketers to identify and target them. It also makes measurement difficult. If someone were to build a panel with a certain NCCS composition on a given date, by the end of 12 months, 5-10% of that panel may have changed the NCCS. The entire composition goes for a toss. With the ISEC, it will be easier to maintain a stable panel as it takes into account education instead of durable ownership which is more volatile than education levels of adult members of a household.”
ISEC allowing for sharper targeting will thus enable advertisers to not only save, but also make the most of their valuable marketing dollars. Elucidating the criticality of ISEC for marketers, Mayank Shah, Vice President, Parle Products who is part of the committee working towards creating the new Indian Socio-Economic Classification (ISEC) states, “It is crucial to have this system in place because there are no discriminating markers in the current NCCS rankings. It is based on ownership of durables, but government subsidies and other favourable economic factors have ensured that almost all families have these items today. There are also other areas of concern. For example, both graduates and business owners are bucketed in NCCS-A, which means that someone running a small scrap store is an entrepreneur, and so is the owner of a multinational conglomerate. How can we say there is no distinction between the two?”
ISEC, emphasises Shah, will bring this much-needed discrimination between pools of people sitting in the same category under NCCS. He says, “The earliest SEC system was a pyramidal structure which gradually transformed into a diamond structure with NCCS. Now ISEC is trying to streamline it further. We are including the education level of the highest qualified female member as we have noticed that this discriminator has a significant impact on consumer behaviour.”
ABOUT TIME
Among the two noteworthy and welcome features of the ISEC are its emphasis on social capital and a gender-neutral approach. By categorically including ‘education of the highest educated female adult member’ as a key variable, it eliminates the implicit male-skew of the previous two classifications, the NCCS and SEC, before that.
Launched in 1988, the SEC was an urban classification system based on the education and occupation of the Chief Wage Earner (CWE). It was linked to only one person in the family, usually a male member. The rural population was classified on a separate grid based on education and type of house. The lack of geographical uniformity and marketers’ concerns regarding it not being a good-enough indicator of affluence led to the introduction of NCCS, which was adopted by the Indian Readership Survey (IRS) and BARC subsequently. Like SEC, the NCCS too accounted for just the Chief Earner’s education; the majority being male.
In that sense, ISEC is the first gender-neutral consumer classification in India. Commenting on its significance, Himanshu Saxena, Chief Operating Officer & Managing Director, BBH India, remarks, “Finally, real acceptance of gender diversity and inclusion arrives in marketing. All this while most brands idolised even a woman audience through the knowledge lens of a CWE (usually considered men). With increasing labour force participation amongst women through formal and informal occupations, ISEC should break that notion by including ‘highest educated women in each household’ as a key parameter. It’s a welcome change which shall also be deeply insightful. In today’s India that has truly democratised aspirations and ambitions across the urban and rural landscape enabled by digital platforms, a more contemporary and forward-looking consumer profiling mechanism would be immensely valuable.”
According to some marketers and industry experts, the SEC, based on occupation and education, was a more stable system and a better indicator of consumer behaviour and their propensity to consume, as compared to the NCCS which was bound to become irrelevant in the course of time. The ISEC is even better because it factors in the role of women as influencers as well as decision makers in addition to occupation and education.
“At a very basic level, SEC is, kind of, still relevant for on-the-fly segmenting. It included an education - occupation matrix to place people in cohorts. NCCS took tangible goods owned to form cohorts, but ignored women completely and also did not give much weight to education. Both are important, given the fact that women in the workforce and the number of educated Indians are on the rise. Now, ISEC is bringing back the SEC with more sense and sensibility. It not only includes the occupation and education of the chief wage earner, but also that of women, which is huge. Slowly, ISEC will become the norm,” MVS Murthy - Chief Marketing Officer at Federal Bank points out.
ALL ABOARD THE ISEC TRAIN?
Given its criticality and the limitations of NCCS, the adoption of ISEC may seem inevitable. However, some stakeholders have expressed concerns that will need to be addressed. The Indian Broadcasting and Digital Foundation - one of BARC’s member organisations - has reportedly formed a 5–6-member task force with representation from GEC, news, sports and other genres to understand the system and its implications. Their concern is that because ISEC links women’s education to viewership, it could hurt GEC ratings, while niche and news genres would benefit.
Dhirendra Yashwant, Head of Marketing, Sun Marathi agrees that the adoption of ISEC may impact advertising revenue in the short term, but he believes that in the long term it will prove beneficial for the entire Television ecosystem. “ISEC is a more stable classification system as compared to NCCS. Hence, it is expected to show correct data cuts for all genres. There may be a dip in viewership of a few genres while few others will witness growth.”
Sharing a different perspective on the discussion, he adds, “ISEC is a gender-sensitive system since education of the highest educated female adult is one of the parameters of classification. Women being the main TG of GEC genre, ISEC will add sharpness to the viewership data if adopted by BARC. A better understood viewer profile will have implications for broadcasters, encouraging them to make suitable changes to their programming. It will help them sharpen their targeting during the process of viewer acquisition. Advertising deals and rates may get revised basis new calculation of ROI on the client side.”
Pawan Jailkhani, Founder -CEO, BrandMo Technologies and ex-CRO 9X Media, believes that the change was long overdue. According to him, “The new classification should have come into play by now. Demographic and psychographic consumer profiling has undergone drastic changes in the last 4-5 years that are not captured by the NCCS. There is no reason to oppose ISEC as it will upgrade the overall profiling of a consumer, and thus, the overall profiling of the society. Eventually, a brand pays a platform or a broadcaster on the basis of the socio-economic potential /profile of the audience.”
While most industry stakeholders seem upbeat about the adoption and implementation of the proposed classification, they agree that apprehensions, if any, will have to be allayed to smoothen out the transformation process. They also acknowledge that the ISEC, though more stable, will also need to be recalibrated for relevance over the course of time.
Yashwant closes with this thought, “As organisations increasingly give more importance to skillset over education while recruiting talent, education levels may not accurately represent earning potential and, hence, the ability to consume products and services going forward. ISEC needs to be relooked a few years from now when GEN Z and GEN Alpha become the dominant consumption force.”
‘ISEC is a welcome development, and none too soon’
Chintamani Rao, Strategic Marketing and Media Consultant, shares his insights on the ISEC proposed by the MRSI
Shashi Sinha’s statement that BARC is evaluating the proposed Indian Socio-Economic Classification (ISEC) makes one wonder. In an interview with e4m, Sinha said: “We are evaluating the ISEC proposed by the MRSI. Soon, we will start consulting our stakeholders – broadcasters and advertisers. BARC can take the next step only after their feedback.”
There is nothing wrong with what he said, but the question is about the way in which the industry works. Clearly, BARC is not on board. The advertisers – the ISA – have endorsed it, but unless it is accepted by the IBDF, the biggest stakeholder in BARC, ISEC is a non-starter. (Note, Sinha does not mention the agencies, the third stakeholder in BARC.)
It must first be said that ISEC is a welcome development, and none too soon, not only for what it is, but, equally, for what it replaces. The ISEC considers parameters only of occupation and education, much as the erstwhile SEC (Socio-Economic Classification) did. Where it differs is that while the occupation parameter is the occupation of the chief earner, as earlier, the two education parameters are the education level of the most educated adult male and – most important – the most educated adult female in the household. The second part is a brilliant and insightful thinking, in my view.
ISEC replaces the NCCS (New Consumer Classification System), which has long outlived what I said back then was its predictably limited usefulness. Adopted in 2011, the NCCS is based on two parameters, one of which is the education of the Chief Wage Earner (or, now, Chief Earner). The other is not occupation, but the number of durables owned by the household, from a list of 11.
There were all kinds of analyses to show why and how the NCCS was better than the SEC, which it replaced, but to my mind it was terribly left-brained. Marketers are interested in a household’s propensity to consume. If the purpose of such a system is to classify households according to their propensity to consume, we must look for indicators of their likely behaviour. Ownership of durables is manifest behaviour: as an indicator, it simply says those have bought more products in the past are better prospects for the future.
I argued that if a household that owned one durable today were to buy two more next year, its classification would change. Consequently, as over time all households would own more durables, everyone’s classification would move up. Well, that is exactly what happened. Year on year, the proportion of NCCS A, B, and C households in the universe has been going up, and of D and E households, coming down.
The ISEC is more stable, as was the old SEC. For a household those parameters change slowly over time, and if they do change then either that’s a result of a life change, or it results in a life change. If the Chief Earner upgrades their occupation, or the education status of adults in the household changes, that will definitely lead, in time, to a change in their consumption habits, and accordingly the classification should change.
Few today would remember – or even, perhaps, be aware of – a time when households were classified only by income, which as a parameter had fairly obvious shortcomings. The move from income to socio-economic parameters was a seminal change, and it came about without a hiccup because the stakeholders were in conversation from the start.
Sometime in 1987 an informal group got together with the objective of finding a better predictor of consumption behaviour: Roda Mehta and I from OBM (Ogilvy); Rajni Chaddha from Hindustan Lever (HUL); Prakash Nijhara from Cadbury (Mondelez); and Thomas Puliyel from IMRB (Kantar IMRB).
Preparations were already under way then for fieldwork for a new edition of the National Readership Survey (NRS, precursor to the IRS), which was the only syndicated media research at the time. Clearly, a new method of classification would be meaningless if the NRS did not use it. The first step, then, had to be to co-opt the NRS Council. After quick consultations they agreed with the need for change, and put things on hold.
At the instance of the group, the MRSI undertook research, generously funded by Cadbury, to determine which parameters were the best discriminators of a household’s propensity to consume. They concluded that it was a combination of the education and occupation of the chief wage earner (CWE). That made sense intuitively, too.
The resulting classification method, dubbed SEC (Socio-Economic Classification), was adopted starting with the NRS of 1988.
Now we are on the threshold of another change, one as needed as the one 35 years ago, but the path ahead is uncertain.
The IBDF has formed a task force to understand and evaluate the proposed system, and there is, reportedly, a genre-based division of opinion among broadcasters. News and sports broadcasters are said to welcome it because they believe they stand to gain. GEC broadcasters, on the other hand, are likely to oppose it because they fear that they stand to lose – specifically, from the inclusion of the woman’s education as a parameter. Apparently the operating principle in the industry body continues to be, as always, not, “Does it make sense” but “How does it affect my business?”
It is good to see that the ISA, long silent on matters concerning BARC, has publicly endorsed ISEC. Whether it can pull its weight in BARC is a different matter.
Abhi picture baaki hai.
Market Research in a cookieless world
With cookies leaving the plate, marketers are recalibrating their research strategies on the back of first-party data. But is that enough to sustain?
In the late 1300s, Hans Fugger travelled from Graben village to the city of Augsburg in Germany, presumably to gather intelligence on the booming international textile industry. He maintained hand-written records of these insights and went on to build a successful business empire that stood tall for several generations. While it would be disingenuous to call this the beginning of market research – as there are no concrete proofs to the fable – it surely tells the power of insights and data towards building successful businesses. Over the years, each business has banked on extensive market and consumer research for its success. From surveys to data mining to psychoanalysing, the realms of the research world have evolved along with changing trends and customer behaviour. Currently, as marketers go through another transition and amp up their strategies to leverage the power of first-party data with the cookies crumbling, we explore the best way forward to attain, secure, and analyse consumer data.
From Scribbles to Codes
The late-19th and early-20th century saw a boom in the discourse around the importance and relevance of market research as advertising agencies tried to help their clients leverage the best out of markets. In India, market research made its official debut in 1950, possibly initiated by Burmah-Shell. It led to the establishment of the Indian Market Research Service. Soon-after, several research and insights firms sprawled over, including IMRB and the Market Research Society of India (MRSI).
Brands too were quite proactive in exploring the market conditions and customer preferences, as the competition was steadily rising in the young economy. They were either directly collecting consumer data or partnering with agencies and research firms to collect insights for product design, marketing strategies, and creative planning.
Speaking on the evolution of market research in India, Anand Chakravarthy, Chief Growth Officer of Omnicom Media Group shared, “In the earliest days of market research, people would go out to the field, meet customers, and work on surveys, interviews, and focus group discussions. In fact, this went on till the early 2000s. It was a long, time-consuming, and costly endeavour. People would take down this data in writing, get back to the office, create databases on computers, analyse it, and then use it. This was made simpler with the rise of computer-assisted personal interviews, or as we called them, CAPIs, wherein the data was directly fed into the computer. It all changed with the advent of digital tools and technologies, and most of the research went online. There were household panels, mobile panels, and eventually with internet penetration, we now get data from apps, social media channels, and cookies, etc.”
To put it simply, market research moved from sampled first-party data collection by means of direct communication with consumers to third-party sources. Thanks to technological advancements, and the growing internet penetration.
According to Chakravarthy, while this shift in research tools and methodologies have simplified the process, saved time, and cut costs by 30-40%, it has also led to a significant dip in the granularity of data that was earlier assessed before any campaign was curated. A problem which he feels can now be addressed by digital first-party data analysis, if done in the right manner.
Leveraging First Party Data
While both third and second-party data can give great insights into the market trends, they restrict marketers when it comes to analysing the data. Third-party data, sourced from external entities, often lacks the granularity and specificity necessary for detailed analysis, as it is based on aggregated demographic information. On the other hand, second-party data, while more targeted and specific, still relies on agreements with trusted partners, limiting the breadth of available data. That is where first-party data becomes crucial for marketers.
Getting Up and Close with Customers
First-party data refers to information gathered directly through various interactions between the company and its audience. This could be website analytics, transactional data, and customer feedback. These insights can be collected through data platforms on business websites, surveys, feedback forms, reviews, etc. Much like the beginning of market research, this new form of data-collection and analysis puts brands in direct contact with its customers, but in a more personal manner. First-party data provides the depth of context with individual consumer preferences and behaviours, essential for effective targeting and personalisation strategies.
Taranjeet Singh, Managing Director of Criteo APAC explains, “First-party data, including every web and app search, click, and transaction, offers a comprehensive view of who is browsing and buying which products, when, how often, and across which devices. First-party data collection equips brand advertisers with invaluable insights and analytics that help optimize ad campaigns and improve ROI. Being directly collected by retailers, this data is clean, reliable, and privacy-safe. It provides a wealth of information about consumer shopping behavior, preferences, and purchase patterns, both online and offline. Advertisers can harness this data to target ready-to-buy audiences at the point of purchase and personalise their ads with precision, down to the SKU level.”
Further, marketers are increasingly tapping into psycho-analytical tools to understand and hyper-personalise communication.
Vishal Rupani, Co-founder of Sprect notes, “This focus on psycho-analytical tools, when used ethically and with user consent, is creating hyper-personalized communication that feels relevant and engaging. However, it is crucial to remember that psycho-analytical indicators provide glimpses, not guarantees. Combining them with explicit user feedback and a focus on building trust, remains essential for effective marketing.”
Personalized Data Repositories
Now as we stare at a cookie-less world with stringent data protection norms, brands are getting bullish on building their own data skills to create more personalized experiences for their customers. This will not only save them money which they otherwise spend on accessing data from other sources like research firms and telecom companies, but will also give them better control over how they want to analyze and use this data. They are partnering with various tech firms to explore new-age technologies and platforms like customer data platforms, analytics, data management platforms, and listening tools, etc.
Mayank Shah, VP of Parle Products shares, “While we are still relying on third-party data for our business needs, we do realise that with the death of cookies the onus is now on us and our companies to collect relevant insights. We have to do it from scratch and are in the initial phase of implementing this. We have started with building our own data repository and have partnered with players like IBM for this.”
Although, some of the heritage brands like Parle are yet to begin their journey of first-party data collection and analysis, major D2C brands have written impressive success stories using this data from day one.
Chaitanya Ramalingegowda, Director & Co-founder of Wakefit.co quips, “The insights and analysis derived from our first-party data have been instrumental in sculpting Wakefit.co into the brand it is today. We employ a mix of qualitative and quantitative methods to ensure that insights are robust and based on critical mass, reflecting a trend or a common pain point faced by a consumer cohort. We are one of the few companies that has set up a dedicated customer experience team that collects feedback and offers advice on usage and care even after the product is delivered. This ongoing loop of feedback and improvement has been crucial in ensuring that Wakefit.co remains synonymous with quality sleep and home comfort.”
The relevance and dominance of first-party data for modern marketers, especially when the biggest third-party tool i.e., cookies are dying, is undeniable. However, as per market experts, it is important to have an omnichannel and holistic approach to research wherein you collect and analyze all first-party, second-party, and third-party datasets to get a clear view of the consumer trends.
Chakravarthy explains, “First-party data obviously plays a crucial role in creating more customer-centric and personalized experiences. However, it cannot be seen in-silo for creating maximum impact. Each kind of data is important to meet various marketing needs. What is required is enrichment of first-party data using indicators from other sources. For example, you have a payment service provider like PhonePe who has details of users in forms of numbers and email ids. Now, it cannot share those details with you but can give you general indication of what kind of users are using what kind of services, spending how much money, and at what kind of places. Now, to run a campaign there, you can corroborate your first-party data to create a more nuanced data-set of customers whom you want to target to attain maximum results.”
There are several platforms available that allow marketers to use both first-party and third-party data together for analysis. The best way could be to download the third-party data from sources like social media analytics platforms and process them on data platforms to create customised strategies.
Manoj Dawane, Founder & CEO of VTION Digital Analytics elaborates further, “There are different brands at different stages in their lifecycle. While some don’t have any collection of first-party data because they have limited to no online presence, others might have had access to this data as soon as they started. Now in between these two extremes, we have brands that have access to some sort of data but that might not be very helpful to run campaigns across channels. To give you an example, Spotify might have very granular first-party data about the music preferences of a listener but they have no means to know that this person is also interested in skincare products. So, how can Spotify help advertisers to target the right audience? That’s why it is very crucial to enhance first-party datasets. This can be done through second-party data providers like us at VTION or partner with other brands in data-clean rooms. The way ahead is to collaborate so that maximum data potential can be harnessed without compromising customer privacy.”
A Peek into the Cookie-Less World
The cookie-less world appears to be a challenging space for marketers who have relied extensively on third-party data for their business needs in recent times. As per a recent Adobe report, 82% of Indian brands still rely heavily on third-party cookies. However, the quality of data derived from these cookies often falls short, resulting in personalisation errors that erode consumer trust and strain brand relationships. “This scenario presents a significant opportunity for forward-thinking companies that proactively prepare for a future without third-party cookies. With many competitors likely unprepared, there’s ample room for differentiation through enhanced customer experiences before and after the deprecation of third-party cookies in Chrome”, suggests Adobe.
To make the most of this situation, publishers like Meta, Snapchat and Google are preparing well to support marketers who would still want to rely on third-party data for their business needs. They are investing in technologies like conversion modelling wherein the data does not identify the user in order to quantify conversions. These data clean rooms will allow the parties to securely share and analyse data with full control of how, where, and when that data can be used, without compromising customer identity. This can still help marketers in creating micro-targeting strategies based on demographic data. But it will not be sufficed for brands that want to create hyper-personal communication strategies.
As Chakravarty points out, this data cannot be treated as fool-proof. Therefore, the cookie-less world will require marketers to polish their strategies and innovate their targeting methods, which can be aided by using tools like artificial intelligence.
Gulati notes, “We can expect artificial intelligence (AI) and machine learning to emerge as indispensable tools. These technologies, powered by advanced algorithms, are sure to provide a pathway for enhanced targeting and personalization without the reliance on traditional tracking methods. Notably, AI’s capability of facilitating dynamic content creation will help to optimize ad relevance and engagement for improved return on investment.”
Furthermore, marketers will have to be more inclusive when thinking of their strategies. According to Jacob Joseph, VP – Data Science of CleverTap adapting to India’s socio-economic shift is the key. “The digital adoption across India is high and next only to China. With a growing internet user base, research needs to account for varying levels of digital literacy and ensure accessibility across different platforms. As India’s economic growth will likely be driven by Tier 2 and 3 cities, research needs to cater to their unique needs and aspirations. This may involve local language surveys and on-ground fieldwork. Additionally, market research solutions need to be cost-effective and adaptable to cater to the diverse budgets of businesses in India.”
In conclusion, the future of market research is going to be driven by adaptation and innovation supported by tools like advanced analytics, real-time insights, and an omnichannel approach.
