Branding to LGBTQ+ Communities Should Be a Metrics Innovation Goldmine

Sometimes the most creative aspect of a campaign is its results. I’ve seen success measured in the number of phone calls to Sweden and the volume of “Lucky Iron Fish” distributed worldwide. Match.com could just tout memberships but instead measures the number of second dates they’ve made possible. It's a more compelling metric. Many mighty campaigns yield extraordinary results but against a standard set of expected metrics: Exposure! Engagement! Sentiment scores! Ratings and circulation! Likes and follows! Sometimes even a direct tie to sales! If you’re a veteran of writing awards entries, you know the deal. We don’t often see a variety of measures for success, which is a bit disheartening in an industry that champions the potential of tying creativity to data-driven accountability. But maybe we can see the opportunity here. Perhaps this small set of normalized, industry-standard metrics means that there’s a limitless range of measurement options we can still develop to prove advertising impact. If you view this as an industry opportunity, you’ll certainly see it as an open space in marketing to LGBTQ+ communities, given that we have one standard metric for brand success. And it’s not even an advertising metric. Restoring LGBTQ+ Brand Trust Is a Journey Built on Actions, Not Parades I’m speaking to the influential, powerful, meaningful HRC Foundation Corporate Equality Index (CEI), “the national benchmarking tool measuring policies, practices and benefits pertinent to lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender and queer (LGBTQ+) employees.” The good news: A lot of brands and agencies market a high score on the index as proof of their commitment to LGBTQ+ communities, from their policy to their branding. The bad news: Some companies wield it as a distraction. Companies like AT&T and Amazon trumpet perfect scores while giving money to politicians who undermine our equality. The HRC is evolving its policy accordingly: They’ll still celebrate companies who score 100 but will no longer grant the designation of Best Place to Work for LGBTQ+ Equality unless a company goes above and beyond in its community commitment. This is great, as it forces brands to step up, but adland never should have been in a position where the primary metric to prove brand commitment wasn’t designed from a place of marketing impact. Additional metrics help guide the way, like a relatively new GLAAD resource measuring LGBTQ+ user safety across social media platforms, but shouldn’t the creative world of advertising be the source of more solutions? HRC CEI is one fantastic gauge for measuring commitment with impact, but the LGBTQ+ community implores the industry to please develop others. In fact, look at the creation of alternative metrics for LGBTQ+ communities as a sandbox for building truly powerful innovations that reflect our industry’s greatest strengths. There are some simple questions that brands and their agencies can ask in developing some of these metrics. What exactly is the problem here? If your work is truly designed for LGBTQ+ community impact, it must solve a problem. Support is what you’ll be measuring, after all. And we’ve got plenty of issues that haven’t been addressed. You know all about the marketing concept of value exchange, but make it real: Where’s the overlap between a community challenge and your stake in that community? How can brands take what they do best and make a meaningful difference? Take this month's violation of LGBTQ+ communities, wherein groundbreaking HIV prevention drugs have been ruled to “substantially burden” religious freedom. Support on this issue can supersede a rainbow variant on your logo. Imagine an insurance brand acting on the metric of “measured commitment to continued coverage on policies.” Envision an education brand delivering on the metric of “number of people connected to coverage resources.” Picture a soft drink brand innovating toward “volume of profits directly allocated toward prescription support.” What are our objectives? I’ve been privy to cases with great results that somehow didn’t have objectives documented when they advanced to activation. These cases boggle the mind. You achieved great success … but to what end? In terms of LGBTQ+ community support that innovates your approach to data, once the right problem or solution is identified, stated objectives will be vital to new approaches. But here’s where innovation starts: Don’t just state brand objectives. Don’t just pursue engagement and exposure for your positive message. For every one metric of positive brand impact, you must state one metric demanding community impact. If liquor sales is a metric, add a metric for the “number of LGBTQ+ bars supported.” After you list sentiment as an objective on an automotive brief, list an objective for the “number of LGBTQ+ people able to buy their first car.” This only works if the good you do for you is also equally, measurably valuable for us. What does change look like? Metrics that don’t speak to change may speak to vitality, visibility and the state of a brand today, but they don’t speak to tomorrow’s success. We know that brands can, and do, affect change. We know the power of iron fish in skillets to cure nutritional deficiencies. We know the power of Swedish phone calls to impact global tourism. The biggest imperative that becomes clear in exploring the possibilities is to stop leaning heavily on external scores to validate your purpose. Define brand purpose in terms of impact versus values or intent. Invent around the creative opportunities inherent in that impact. Don’t stop at likes, subscriptions and purchases. “Lives changed” can be the metric for almost any brand in any category. Gay Times and the Power of LGBTQ+ Visibility

Columnist Network

Branding to LGBTQ+ Communities Should Be a Metrics Innovation Goldmine

'Lives changed' can be measured by any brand in any category

Graham Nolan

About

Subscriptions

Events

Publications

WORK SMARTER - LEARN, GROW AND BE INSPIRED.

Subscribe today!

Graham Nolan