電子郵件營銷報告

1、Table of ContentsIntroduction 4 Executive Summary 6 Email Marketing Objectives 8 Email Marketing Challenges 14 Email Marketing Tactics & Technology 24 Email Marketing Subscribers 35 Email Marketing Performance 39 Analyst Bottom Line and Recommendations 42 Acknowledgements 46 Appendix: Survey Backgro

2、und 47THE STATE OF EMAIL MARKETING2019IntroductionTHE STATE OF EMAIL MARKETING2019THE STATE OF EMAIL MARKETING 20195EXECUTIVE SUMMARYEmail remains one of the most important marketing channels. Recent Demand Metric studies confirm that it is one of the most-used channels, and that it ranks high on th

3、e list of best ways to reach certain groups, such as sales and marketing and technical audiences. Significant vari- ance, however, exists in the results marketers get from using email.Demand Metric and Return Path by Validity continue to partner to under- stand which email tactics marketers are usin

4、g, how well they are working, and what challenges prevent greater success with email.The most recent edition of this research continues to pursue answers to the key question:IntroductionWhat separates high-performing email marketers from the rest of the pack?EXECUTIVE SUMMARYExecutive SummaryTHE STA

5、TE OF EMAIL MARKETING 20196THE STATE OF EMAIL MARKETING2019THE STATE OF EMAIL MARKETING 20197EXECUTIVE SUMMARYThe top email marketing objectives are communicating with customers (74 percent), building brand awareness (64 percent), and communicating with prospects (63 percent).Over one-third of study

6、 participants (37 percent) report that email marketing effectiveness is increasing, down from 44 percent in 2018.Firms that report increasing email marketing effectiveness are more likely to also report annual revenue growth.The biggest email marketing challenge is competition for attention in the i

7、nbox (45 percent).Email deliverability ranked third on the list of challenges and saw a 12 percent increase compared to the 2018 study.Email personalization was the top email marketing tactic in use (72 percent), a slight increase from the 2018 study.One-third of study participants have no formal su

8、bject-line optimization process.This report shares the results of the 2019 research study, providing insights and data useful for benchmarking, planning, and improving email marketing effectiveness.Some of the key findings from this study include:For more detail on the survey and the participants th

9、at contributed to the research, please refer to the Appendix.Executive SummaryEmail Marketing ObjectivesTHE STATE OF EMAIL MARKETING2019THE STATE OF EMAIL MARKETING 20199EXECUTIVE SUMMARYCommunicating with customers, prospects, and building brand awareness are the top email marketing objectives.FIGU

10、RE 1Email Marketing ObjectivesGenerate revenueCommunicate with customersCapture data on subscribersBuild brand awarenessCommunicate with prospectsOther objective201820196%4%74%76%70%73%64%63%56%52%28%29%The objectives in place for email marketing show subtle changes from 2018 to 2019, as Figure 1 su

11、mmarizes.The top three objectives are unchanged from last year, but in a different rank order:Communicate with customers Build brand awareness Communicate with prospectsThese top objectives parallel the overall marketing mission. The 2019 results dont show a significant shift in objectives, but perh

12、aps reflect a more pragmatic orientation through the increase in the revenue generation objective.Email Marketing ObjectivesTHE STATE OF EMAIL MARKETING 201910EMAIL MARKETING OBJECTIVESThe order of priorities for email marketing changes based on an organizations focus.FIGURE 2Email Marketing Objecti

13、ves by Organization TypeB2BB2CNon-ProfitMixed B2B/B2C81%62%57%14%19%78%65%54%80%35%38%Generate revenueCommunicate with customersCapture data on subscribersBuild brand awarenessCommunicate with prospectsOther objectiveSegmenting the email objective data from Figure 1 allows some differ- ences to emer

14、ge based on organization type, which Figure 2 shows.B2C organizations list revenue generation as the top objective, while B2B firms place communicating with customers at the top of the list.Non-profits had the highest percentage of the “Other objective” response option, and write-in comments indicat

15、e that these objectives include donations, member engagement, retention, and advocacy.6%4%74%65%73%41%25%4%71%63%66%55%30%THE STATE OF EMAIL MARKETING 201911Fewer participants in the 2019 study report in increase in email effectiveness.FIGURE 3Email Marketing EffectivenessSignificant increaseSlight

16、increaseHolding steadySlight declineSignificant decline28%36%37%15%14%9%8%5%5%43%20182019EMAIL MARKETING OBJECTIVESExperienced marketers understand that ensuring email effectiveness requires constant vigilance and maintenance. Many, dynamic factors influence email marketing success.The implication i

17、s that rarely is its effectiveness holding steady: for most marketers it is either improving or declining. Study participants share in Figure 3 how they rate the effectiveness of email as a marketing channel.The effectiveness of email as a marketing channel did not show improve- ment year-to-year in

18、 this study. This lack of increased effectiveness, however, did not apply equally to all study participants.THE STATE OF EMAIL MARKETING 201912Those who are having success with email have more objectives for its use.FIGURE 4Email Marketing Objectives and EffectivenessIncreasing Email EffectivenessDe

19、clining Email EffectivenessGenerate revenueCommunicate with customersCapture data on subscribersBuild brand awarenessCommunicate with prospectsNo specific objective79%70%69%72%66%50%46%48%37%19%1%8%EMAIL MARKETING OBJECTIVESThis email marketing effectiveness data lets us segment objectives by effect

20、iveness. This segmentation was presented in the 2018 report, and Figure 4 presents it using the 2019 data.In all cases, a much higher percentage of organizations that report increasing email effectiveness cite having the email objectives listed in Figure 1.In fact, the difference between the effecti

21、veness segments for these email objectives averages 18 percent, with the greatest delta resulting from the “Generate revenue” email objective.In the 2018 study, the average difference between these segments was only 10 percent. This study did not look for the reasons why firms that report increasing

22、 email effectiveness have loftier objectives for email than those that report declining effectiveness.But we can speculate; where email effectiveness is on the rise, its likely the result of an investment in time, tools, or acquiring skills to use email effectively.THE STATE OF EMAIL MARKETING 20191

23、3Revenue growth in the past year is related to increased email marketing effectiveness.FIGURE 5Email Marketing Effectiveness and Revenue GrowthSignificant increaseSlight increaseHolding steadySlight declineSignificant decline31%27%21%Revenue increaseRevenue declineRevenue flat11%10%3% 14%32%34%17%3%

24、4%4%45%44%When analyzing this email effectiveness data, an interesting relation- ship came to light between revenue growth and email effectiveness.Study participants were asked to characterize their organizations revenue growth during the most recently completed fiscal year, using the following cate

25、gories:Figure 5 displays this relationship between revenue growth and email marketing effectiveness.There are certain cautions to note when looking at correlations in data. Statisticians and marketing research analysts are always quick to point out that “correlation is not causation” and that adage

26、applies here. It is an oversimplification to imply that investing to increase email marketing effectiveness guarantees revenue growth.Managing an effective email marketing program isnt a guaranteed cure for all revenue ills, but this data shows it clearly can serve as a component in driving growth.

27、This relationship between email marketing effective- ness and revenue growth should cause marketers to sit up and take notice. Their efforts to curate an effective email marketing program can play a key role in driving revenue growth.EMAIL MARKETING OBJECTIVES(15%) Significant increase(53%) Slight i

28、ncrease(19%) Flat or no growth(8%) Slight decline(5%) Significant declineEXECUTIVE SUMMARYEmail Marketing ChallengesTHE STATE OF EMAIL MARKETING 201914THE STATE OF EMAIL MARKETING2019THE STATE OF EMAIL MARKETING 201915EXECUTIVE SUMMARYThe study inventoried the challenges of marketing through the ema

29、il channel, as Figure 6 summarizes.Email Marketing ChallengesThe top challenge for 2019 remains the same, although at a lower severity than in 2018. Deliverability, however, has surged as a problem, up 12 percent year-over-year.A new challenge appears as a response option in the 2019 survey: “Lack o

30、f tools to optimize or personalize email,” and it ranks fourth in the 2019 list of challenges.The “Other challenge” response option elicited some insightful write-in comments, which we summarize here:Lack of engagement, list growth, data quality, email copywriting, technology stack limitations, inte

31、rnal silos.Competing for attention in the inbox remains the top email marketing challenge.FIGURE 6Email Marketing ChallengesCompetitionStaffing/EmailLack of toolsPoor emailPoorlyLimitation ofLow visibilityLack ofNotOtherfor attentionResourcedeliverabilityto optimizeperformancedefinedemail serviceint

32、o emailexecutiveexperiencingchallengein the inboxconstraintsor personalizemetricsproviderperformancebuy inany challengesemail6%8%6%3%45%40%37%31%26%26%24%24%23%23%22%13%14%21%41%25%54%20182019THE STATE OF EMAIL MARKETING 201916EMAIL MARKETING CHALLENGESWhile some debate may exist about the quality o

33、f open rate as a metric, the reality is that no other actions can occur that matter to email marketers unless emails are opened.Figure 7 compares open rates from the 2018 study with 2019 study data.The greatest change in the 2019 study comes in the middle of the range shown in Figure 7. In 2018, 39

34、percent of participants reported open rates between 11 and 20 percent.In 2019 that figure is 46 percent, and the increase comes from both ends of the range: fewer participants reported open rates of 5 percent or less, and fewer also reported open rates of more than 21 percent.The average email open

35、rate for the 2019 study skews higher than in 2018.FIGURE 7Average Email Open Rates for Bulk Sends11 to 15%More than 25%6 to 10%21 to 25%16 to 20%5% or less2018201912%15%16%23%18%16%12%12%19%27%22%8%THE STATE OF EMAIL MARKETING 201917EMAIL MARKETING CHALLENGESOpen rates correlate to email marketing e

36、ffectiveness, and Figure 8 shows how strong the relationship is between reported effectiveness and open rates.The relationship between open rates and email marketing effectiveness is intuitive, and Figure 8 shows exactly what logic suggests we should see. Seeing the actual comparison numbers, howeve

37、r, is impactful.Over half of participants whose email marketing effectiveness is increasing enjoy open rates of 16 percent or more. Barely one-third of those whose email marketing effectiveness is decreasing report the same open rates.Investing to increase email marketing effectiveness will pay divi

38、dends in higher open rates.Study participants that report greater email marketing effectiveness also report higher open rates.FIGURE 8Average Open Rates & Email Effectiveness11 to 15%More than 25%6 to 10%21 to 25%16 to 20%5% or less5%10%10%10%14%17%14%33%35%12%15%25%Increasing Email EffectivenessDec

39、lining Email EffectivenessTHE STATE OF EMAIL MARKETING 201918EMAIL MARKETING CHALLENGESOpen rates showed a correlation to the type of firm that was using email for marketing. Figure 9 shows this relationship.B2B and B2C firms have a greater struggle with open rates than do the Non-profit organizatio

40、ns in the study. Using an average open rate of 15 percent or less, the differences are evident:11 to 15%More than 25%6 to 10%21 to 25%16 to 20%5% or lessAverage open rates vary significantly based on type of firm.FIGURE 9Average Open Rates by Type of FirmB2BNon-profitB2C12%5%2%10%9%9%10%19%17%20%16%

41、14%14%37%24%25%29%28%(64%) B2B(64%) B2C(33%) Non-profitIt was outside the scope of this study to explore why non-profit organi- zations enjoy higher open rates. What is clear is that B2B organizationssee the lowest percentage of their bulk email sends opened.THE STATE OF EMAIL MARKETING 201919EMAIL

42、MARKETING CHALLENGESThe objective of an email send may influence the open rate for those sends. The data about open rates and email marketing objectives results in the graph shown in Figure 10.Figure 10 should encourage marketers to employ less subtlety in crafting their marketing email messages.Thi

43、s studys data shows that when generating revenue is one of the objectives for email marketing, the average open rates are better.When the objective is communicating with prospects, average open rates are the worst. While just speculation, the absence of a relationship between sender and receiver may

44、 underpin the reason for the latter.When one of the email marketing objectives is generating revenue, open rates are better.FIGURE 10Average Open Rates and ObjectivesCommunicate Capture data on CommunicateBuild brand with prospectssubscriberswith customersawarenessGenerate revenue44%46%46%47%52%56%5

45、4%54%53%48%Open rates 16% or more Open rates 15% or lessTHE STATE OF EMAIL MARKETING 201920EMAIL MARKETING CHALLENGESAs was the case in 2018, staffing and resource constraints pose a chal- lenge to email marketing success. Figure 11 shows a summary of the resources study participants use to support

46、their email marketing efforts.Firms in the 2019 study showed a marked increase in using outside resources and expertise, either through outsourcing or through blending resources with in-house email marketing efforts.The resource mix for email marketing showed some major differences based on the B2B

47、or B2C orientation of the firm:Theres a greater tendency to use outside resources to support email marketing efforts in 2019.FIGURE 11Email Marketing Resources in UseIn house onlyOutsourced onlyBothOther resource72%35%59%26%5%2%1%201820190%B2B firms: 75% in-house only; 24% both in-house & outsourced

48、B2C firms: 48% in-house only; 50% both in-house & outsourcedB2C firms are more willing to invest in outside resources to help with their email marketing efforts.Looking at the use of resources from Figure 9, using the average open rates in Figure 7 revealed no significant difference in which resourc

49、es were in use. In other words, lower open rates were not associated with heavier reliance on one type of resource over another.The resource use mix was virtually identical for open rates of 15 percent and below, and for 16 percent and above. Clearly, concerning open rates, other disciplines and bes

50、t practices come into play.THE STATE OF EMAIL MARKETING 201921EMAIL MARKETING CHALLENGESThird on the list of challenges in this years study was email deliverability. Over one-third of the study participants have this challenge, compared to just one-fourth in 2018.A way that some organizations attemp

51、t to address this challenge is by changing their email service provider (ESP) or adding a new, dedi- cated IP address. Figure 12 shows the frequency that study participants resorted to this remedy.In the 2018 study, the survey simply asked participants a “yes” or “no” question about making a change

52、to their ESP or IP. The 2019 survey made this question more granular to identify the specific type of change.A comparison is still possible: in 2018, 57 percent changed neither, 24 percent made one or both changes, and 19 percent didnt know.The increase in the email deliverability challenge in this

53、years study corresponds to an increase in making ESP, IP, or both changes in an effort to deal with this challenge.FIGURE 12Changes to ESP or IPChanged IPChanged ESPChanged neither30%13%I dont knowChanged ESP & IP8%60%38%Almost one-third of the firms in the study made a change.THE STATE OF EMAIL MAR

54、KETING 201922The reasons study participants gave for making an ESP or IP change are shown in Figure 13.EMAIL MARKETING CHALLENGESNo, single reason for changing dominates the list.FIGURE 13Reasons for Changing ESP or IPTechnicalTo get aCostPoor emailSubstandardLack of custommerDiminishingOther reason

55、limitationsfresh startdeliverabilityuser experiencesupportemail results32%31%29%30%25%26%24%24%23%21%19%16%15%10%40%50%20182019THE STATE OF EMAIL MARKETING 201923EMAIL MARKETING CHALLENGESPerhaps the most important question to answer regarding changing the ESP, IP, or both is, does this strategy wor

56、k? Figure 14 shows the relation- ship between these changes and average open rates, which correlated in this study.Figure 14 suggests that changing ESPs or dedicated IP addresses is a bad idea: the firms in this study that did experienced noticeably lower average email open rates.However, when consi

57、dering these results, readers should understand that:Poor results are a leading cause of making a change in the first place.FIGURE 14ESP/IP Changes and Open RatesOrganizations that made no changes had higher, average open rates.Open rates 16% or moreOpen rates 15% or less51%49%37%63%No changeChanged

58、 ESP, IP, or bothThe lesson in this data is that marketers should ideally follow email marketing practices that eliminate the necessity to change ESPs or dedicated IP addresses.When it is necessary, however, some patience is required to allow the changes time to heal the online reputation damage tha

59、t precipitated the change.12The benefits of making a change are not immediately realized.EXECUTIVE SUMMARYEmail Marketing Tactics & TechnologyTHE STATE OF EMAIL MARKETING 201924THE STATE OF EMAIL MARKETING2019THE STATE OF EMAIL MARKETING 201925In the pursuit of increased email marketing effectivenes

60、s, marketers use a number of tactics. This study continues to measure the use of known email marketing tactics, and results from this year and the 2018 survey are shown in Figure 15.Email Marketing Tactics & TechnologyAlmost half of the studys participants report open rates of 15 percent or less.FIG