![Is Measurement Certification Still Important? ,[object Object],[object Object],[object Object]]()
Empfohlen
Empfohlen
Weitere ähnliche Inhalte
Was ist angesagt?
Was ist angesagt? (20)
Andere mochten auch
Andere mochten auch (17)
Ähnlich wie Ad Monsters IAB Overview - Mark Verone
Ähnlich wie Ad Monsters IAB Overview - Mark Verone (20)
Kürzlich hochgeladen
Kürzlich hochgeladen (20)
Ad Monsters IAB Overview - Mark Verone
- 1. Measurement Certification: Exploring the basics of how your site measures up … AUGUST | 2008 Mark Verone Director, Partner Marketing Operations
- 16. Orbitz through the eyes of Googlebot… BEFORE AFTER
Hinweis der Redaktion
- INTRODUCTION: Who am I? My professional career began 13 years ago in Broadcast Radio Marketing. I fell into the interactive space in 1999 because I was one of the few radio marketing geeks that understood the internet and was able to deconstruct an ad server. I have been in the interactive ad operations space since 1999 when I learned how to use Net Gravity at Clear Channel Radio…almost 10yrs later and I am still using the same ad serving technology with DART Enterprise. Over the last few years, many companies have adopted IAB/MRC guidelines for insuring their impressions and click counting methods are documented and certified. However, only a handful of publishers, ad servers, agencies, networks, etc. are actually listed as "certified" by the IAB. What about the rest of us? How can we get certified or at least begin thinking about the basic elements required for the certification process? Some of the requirements are technical and others are process based. In this session, we will touch upon the basics of measurement certification and the impact on 3rd party discrepancies.
- We are trying to get more compliant...how about you? Do you think Measurement Certification is still Relevant? Show of hands in this room - how many companies are certified with the IAB? Majority NO Outcome: Small number - but you are leading the pack and setting the standards that the rest of us hope to achieve. Minority YES Outcome: Of all those that are certified, have you seen a decrease in overall 3rd party discrepancy or has there been little or no change? - Majority YES Outcome: That's great - almost the entire room has gone through the pain of the audit process -- Has it solved the 3rd party discrepancy problem? – (brief polling discussion) - My interest in this topic stems from our desire to minimize the headaches of 3rd party discrepancies, insure that we are billing our clients for certified traffic and protect publisher revenue. Minority NO Outcome: For the rest of us that are not certified, my interest in this topic stems from our desire to minimize the headaches of 3rd party discrepancies, insure that we are billing our clients for certified traffic and protect publisher revenue.
- Orbitz Worldwide has not gone through the "audit" process yet but we are proactively making changes to our ad serving technology and operational process to become more compliant. We realize this is a source of 3rd party discrepancies...in a perfect world 2 certified companies (agency and publisher) should have virtually no discrepancies…but in some cases they do and it is not always a “technology” problem. The IAB also recognizes that other factors come into play. Sure technology is a big part of the equation, however, what about the HUMAN element on both sides of the fence. As an Operations Geek, I am really interested in how we can resolve the human element through better workflow process. The IAB has also recognized this by introducing guidelines that go beyond the technology aspect.
- We are all moving at the speed of light. Our industry is growing by leaps and bounds, we can’t seem to hire people fast enough or train them properly yet we expect them to be perfect and not make costly mistakes…mistakes that not only impact revenue but also jeopardize the relationship between buyers and sellers.
- If agencies and publishers insure proper communication, define their process and follow the IAB standards – then it might be a perfect world…
- Perfect Lemonade: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=prJZistw-Dc http://www.youtube.com/v/prJZistw-Dc The fact is we are human and we are not perfect… I subscribe to the Japanese Philosophy of Kaizen or Continuous Improvement. (in fact, I am presenting a session on this subject after lunch) By identifying areas of improvement and creating a plan to eliminate waste, we are all working to make things better
- Brief IAB Measurement Certification 101 and History 2001 – IAB initiates project to identify and categorize measurement methods and analysis of counting differences AOL, Avenue A, CNET, Walt Disney Internet Group, DoubleClick, Forbes.net, MSN, NY Time Digital, Terra Lycos and Yahoo! 2004 – IAB and Members joined together to issues global standard for counting online ad impressions. 2005 – IAB Measurement Task Force developed two (2) sets of guideline for global and domestic measurement 2006 – IAB issues Digitial Video Ad Measurement Guidelines 2007 – IAB issues Rich Internet Application Ad Measurement Guidlinelines 2007 – IAB issues Rich Media Ad Measurement Guidelines 2008 – IAB / MRC issues Process Guidelines expansion for all Measurement Certification
- Areas of Certification: High Level Overview Ad Campaign Measurement & Audit Guidelines Measurement Definitions Ad Impressions Caching Guidelines Filtration Guidelines
- Auditing Guidelines Auditor Information: IAB Member Companies certified by the IAB / MRC to conduct a measurement audit. ABC Interactive AMC Group BPA Worldwide Ernst & Young Deloitte & Touche ImServices PricewaterhouseCoopers 1. Counting Methods: Independent verification of activity for a defined period. Counting method procedures generally include a basic process review and risk analysis to understand the measurement methods, analytical review, transaction authentication, validation of filtration procedures and measurement recalculations. Activity audits can be executed at the campaign level, verifying the activity associated with a specific ad creative being delivered for performance measurement purposes. 2. Processes/Controls: Examination of the internal controls surrounding the ad delivery, recording and measurement process. Process auditing includes examination of the adequacy of site or ad-server applied filtration techniques. Although audit reports can be issued as infrequently as once per year, some audit testing should extend to more than one period during the year to assure internal controls are maintained. Audit reports should clearly state the periods covered by the underlying audit testing and the period covered by the resulting certification.
- General Reporting Parameters: 5. General Reporting Parameters In order to provide for more standardization in Internet Measurement reporting, the following general reporting parameters are recommended: Day — 12:00 midnight to 12:00 midnight Time Zone – Full disclosure of the time-zone used to produce the measurement report is required. It is preferable, although not a current compliance requirement, for certified publishers or adservers to have the ability to produce audience reports in a consistent time-zone so buyers can assess activity across measurement organizations. For US-based reports it is recommended that reports be available on the basis of the Eastern time-zone, for non US-based reports this is recommended to be GMT. Week — Monday through Sunday Weekparts — M-F, M-Sun, Sat, Sun, Sat-Sun Month – Three reporting methods: (1) TV Broadcast month definition. In this definition, the Month begins on the Monday of the week containing the first full weekend of the month, (2) 4-week periods – (13 per year) consistent with media planning for other media, or (3) a calendar month. For financial reporting purposes, a month is defined as a calendar month. Additional Recommendation: Dayparts – Internet usage patterns need further analysis to determine effective and logical reporting day parts. We encourage standardization of this measurement parameter.
- 6. Disclosure Guidance An organization’s methodology for accumulating Internet measurements should be fully described to users of the data. Specifically, the nature of Internet measurements, methods of sampling used (if applicable), data collection methods employed, data editing procedures or other types of data adjustment or projection, calculation explanations, reporting standards (if applicable), reliability of results (if applicable) and limitations of the data should be included in the disclosure. The following presents examples of the types of information disclosed. Nature of Internet Measurements • Name of Property, Domain, Site, Included in the Measurement • Name of Measurement Report • Type of Measurements Reported Interactive Audience Measurement and Advertising Campaign Reporting and Audit Guidelines U.S. Version 10 o Time Periods Included o Days Included o Basis for Measurement o Geographic Areas o Significant Sub-Groupings of Data • Formats of Reported Data • Special Promotions Impacting Measurements • Nature of Auditing Applied and Directions to Access to Audit Report • Sampling/Projections Used o Sampling Methods Used for Browsers not Accepting Cookies or Browsers with New Cookies o Explanation of Projection Methods Data Collection Methods Employed • Method of Data Collection o Logging Method o Logging Frequency o Logging Capture Point • Types of Data Collected o Contents of Log Files o Cookie Types • Contacts with Users (if applicable) • Research on Accuracy of Basic Data o Cookie Participation Percentages o Latency Estimates • Rate of Response (if applicable) Editing or Data Adjustment Procedures • Checking Records for Completeness • Consistency Checks • Accuracy Checks • Rules for Handling Inconsistencies • Circumstances for Discarding Data • Handling of Partial Data Records o Ascription Procedures Computation of Reported Results • Description of How Estimates are Calculated o Illustrations are desirable • Weighting Techniques (if applicable) • Verification or Quality Control Checks in Data Processing Operations • Pre-Release Quality Controls • Reprocessing or Error Correction Rules Reporting Standards (if applicable) • Requirements for Inclusion in Reports, Based on Minimum Activity Levels Reliability of Results • Sampling Error (if applicable) Limitations on Data Use • Non-sampling Error • Errors or Unusual Conditions Noted in Reporting Period • Limitations of Measurement, such as Caching, Multiple Users per Browser, Internet latency
- BABY STEPS TO COMPLIANCY: When I joined Orbitz in 2005, measurement certification was a very hot topic in the industry...we immediately started looking into it and discovered that the process was a little more complex at the time and that we had some other internal issues to deal with before dropping $100K plus on 3rd party auditors. Our intent is to seek certification but we quickly realized that we needed to have the “ basic ” housekeeping items before accruing consulting hours for audit projects.
- Internal best practices meeting the IAB/MRC guidelines Blocking Spiders and Robots Expanded Cache Busting Techniques at the header and ad tag level Time Zone Disclosure Stripping Internal Impression Counts Preventing Monitoring Systems like Gomez from logging impression in production testing Preventing load test from accidently generating false traffic Insuring that development and staging environments are dis-connected from log processing of ad impressions Blocking 3rd party campaigns from development and test environments. We subscribed to the IAB spiders and Robots list in 2006 and in early 2007, with the assistance of DoubleClick, we installed IAB robots/spiders list from ABCe List is installed and loaded at the ad client level FireFox Browser Tool To emulate non-human traffic – User Agent Switcher (screenshot of Orbitz through the eyes of Googlebot) Blocked all ad calls from rendering to Gomez Monitoring Systems The problem with blocked the ad calls in Gomez is we lose insight on how to monitor the speed of the ad server. The long term goal is to allow the ads to render by strip the impression counts from hitting the database. As an e-commerce company we are very concerned with the speed of the site and want to minimize any latency contribution from the ad server. What tools do you use to monitor ad server performance and impact on page loads? Started to use Akamai to speed up the ad content on our international sites – exploring broader use of Akamai to the domestic sites. Currently working with DART Enterprise Consulting to develop a custom IP callout to strip internal traffic from Orbitz offices / employees / contractors and Gomes monitoring systems. Strip impression counts from specified IP address ranges. Goal is to minimize false counting that may or may not contribute to 3rd party discrepancies We don't want to get charged for excess Rich Media serving fees or charge our advertiser for internal traffic. DoubleClick developed a solution called SmartCount+ designed to align DFP/DFA numbers to DART Enterprise using a pixel method to count client side versus server side. SmartCount+ pushed out by DoubleClick in 2007 and was never fully functional DoubleClick has tabled SmartCount+ for a pending future release. SAS70 compliance DART Enteprise is not 'out of the box' compliant requiring the publisher to get SAS70 compliant or develop internal controls around the tool
- Internal best practices meeting the IAB/MRC guidelines We subscribed to the IAB spiders and Robots list in 2006 and in early 2007, with the assistance of DoubleClick, we installed IAB robots/spiders list from ABCe List is installed and loaded at the ad client level
- User Agent Switcher (screenshot of Orbitz through the eyes of Googlebot)
- Blocked all ad calls from rendering to Gomez Monitoring Systems The problem with blocked the ad calls in Gomez is we lose insight on how to monitor the speed of the ad server. The long term goal is to allow the ads to render by strip the impression counts from hitting the database. As an e-commerce company we are very concerned with the speed of the site and want to minimize any latency contribution from the ad server. What tools do you use to monitor ad server performance and impact on page loads? Currently working with DART Enterprise Consulting to develop a custom IP callout to strip internal traffic from Orbitz offices / employees / contractors and Gomes monitoring systems. Strip impression counts from specified IP address ranges. Goal is to minimize false counting that may or may not contribute to 3rd party discrepancies We don't want to get charged for excess Rich Media serving fees or charge our advertiser for internal traffic. Started to use Akamai to speed up the ad content on our international sites – exploring broader use of Akamai to the domestic sites.
- DoubleClick developed a solution called SmartCount+ designed to align DFP/DFA numbers to DART Enterprise using a pixel method to count client side versus server side. SmartCount+ pushed out by DoubleClick in 2007 and was never fully functional DoubleClick has tabled SmartCount+ for a pending future release.
- SAS70 compliance DART Enteprise is not 'out of the box' compliant requiring the publisher to get SAS70 compliant or develop internal controls around the tool
- My original question was: Do you want to be IAB compliant? We'd say YES. You should be. And here's why: We can't get to the point of centralized accountability as an industry until we're all there as one The money is in the hands of the agencies/advertisers -> BUT you need to: instill confidence in your numbers have the numbers to back it up
- Are you an IAB member? We recommend joining the IAB IAB is the governing body for setting standard and guideline We believe that our membership adds a level of credibility and demonstrates our commitment to adhering to standards.
- If you are a member, are you taking advantage of the IAB services? IAB brokers the ABCe robots/spiders list Jeremy Fain (Ad Operations facilitation)
- Internal Filtering (internal IP's) - Base level things to do w/ trafficking (w/r/t discrepancies) - implementation issues - not all issues are technical, in fact a lot more than you'd expect are due to human error - IAB document [appendix to measurement guidelines] - in all test cases, not tech, human - standardize procedures, SLA, SOX, process & procedure - agency/advertiser construction of a tag (naming conventions, etc.) - self- 1 Insertion Orders: a. Does written, complete and up-to-date procedural documentation exist for the following ad-campaign initiation functions: i Approval of the original contract (signed insertion order) to initiate entry and creation of an electronic insertion order, ii The insertion order entry process itself, iii Follow-up on seemingly illogical or unusual campaign parameters • Manual review, and • System edits iv Quality control review of the completed insertion order and campaign parameters, including timing, and v Training processes and procedures for any personnel associated with the above functions? b. Are content delivery systems standardized such that tagging mechanisms are easily identified and checked for accuracy? c. Are general terms and conditions (default terms) reviewed periodically and approved by management? d. Are insertion orders approved for entry by management personnel? e. Are management personnel who approve/execute insertion orders knowledgeable of advertiser requirements and the contract specifications? f. Are the responsibilities of each party clearly articulated in the terms and conditions? g. Are original contract terms (the signed insertion order) compared with the created electronic version? h. Are insertion orders entered and reviewed/approved by different personnel? i. Do defined procedures exist for adjusting in-process or processed insertion orders, as follows: i Defined approval and review of changes by management personnel other than entry personnel, ii Error follow-up and logging procedures, iii Communicating adjustments to the insertion order to agency management and client personnel, depending on the significance of the change? 6 Ad Trafficking: a. Does written, complete and up-to-date procedural documentation exist for the following ad-trafficking functions: i Use of hard-coded ads or sponsorships where advertising is not placed through the normal ad system. ii Assignment of third-party server, partner or affiliate responsibilities, iii Assignment of appropriate tagging or other identification functionality within ads or page-content, iv Testing the validity of ad tagging v Ensuring proper insertion order execution through timely monitoring of activity, and vi Completion and post-execution review of the campaign? b. Do appropriate management personnel review to ensure the presence of expected ad creative prior to activation of the campaign? Does this review include whether alternative (non-flash) ad creative is available in case complex creative such as Flash-based ads cannot be served? c. Do management personnel test (through systems checks and direct observation) that ads are trafficked to expected publishers or affiliates, in accordance with the parameters of the approved insertion order? i Before trafficking? ii After initiation of the campaign? d. Are errors noted in trafficking corrected in a timely manner and communicated to original insertion-order creation personnel? e. Does appropriate management review completed campaigns to ensure execution as documented in campaign contracts and insertion orders? 3 Technology Infrastructure: (Completion of this section of the self-assessment questionnaire is only necessary if the publisher, 3PAS or advertising agency maintains campaign-entry software, adjusts entry parameters or maintains the technology infrastructure for campaign entry. In some cases only a portion of this section will be applicable, if for example, third-party tools are used but infrastructure is maintained by the agency or publisher) a. Does written, complete and up-to-date documentation exist for the following technology areas/procedures: i Purchasing and evaluating new software applications, ii The campaign entry, insertion order and trafficking application software itself, iii Computer operations and data back-up procedures, iv Granting and denying access to application and systems software, v Maintenance procedures for application and systems software, • Development • Testing • Approval vi Restart and error correction procedures, and vii Output distribution and reporting procedures? b. If the agency or publisher relies on third-party documentation and manuals, are these manuals up-to-date and applicable to the software versions currently in use? c. Are operations, application/systems development and programming, and data access and control functions administered by different personnel? d. Is access to campaign initiation, insertion order, trafficking and systems software diligently controlled through passwords? i Are passwords changed periodically? ii Are employees with access periodically reviewed to ensure continued authorization of all users? e. When application software is changed is documentation of the change retained? If so, for how long? f. When application software is changed, are changes tested to ensure accurate execution prior to adoption of the change? g. Are data and software related to Internet ad campaigns backed up and stored offsite on a regular basis? 4 Reporting: a. Has the organization reviewed the disclosure guidance contained in the IAB Ad Impression Measurement Guidelines? For in-house developed applications, are the appropriate disclosure made as required in the Guidelines? For customized ASP solutions, is full disclosure made of all customized aspects of the application? b. Are all types of data editing or data manipulation fully described to users of the data? For significant types of data adjustments, are these adjustment rates disclosed? c. Does current documentation exist for all report creation processes? 5 Other Matters: a. Does the advertising agency or publisher use automated methods to extract campaign parameter or execution data directly from a third-party or other system? If so, are data extractions reviewed for completeness and accuracy by personnel other than those executing the extraction? b. Does the advertising agency or publisher use geo-targeting, frequency capping or other special targeting/execution parameters in its insertion orders? If so, are these parameters reviewed for completeness and accuracy by personnel other than those entering the parameters? c. Are geo-targeting or other vendors used in targeting processes reviewed and approved by agency or publisher management? d. Are the names of geo-targeting or other vendors used in targeting processes communicated to advertiser clients? e. If a third-party is used for targeting or capping applications, is there a post entry review to ensure accurate entry of campaign parameters? f. If a third-party is used for targeting or capping applications, is a timely review performed to ensure accurate execution of campaign parameters? 8 Interactive Advertising Bureau IAB Ad Campaign Measurement Process Guidelines 9 Interactive Advertising Bureau g. Are the IAB Ad Impression Measurement Guidelines followed for autorefresh pages that are set by the agency or publisher?