Entrants must answer seven set questions within a maximum of 1,000 words in total. Concise but clear communication is a key element of marketing effectiveness and skill, so the judges may penalise entries that exceed this limit.

In previous years, some entries have misunderstood the content that the judges are looking for in the answers to Q2-4. Taken together, these encompass the development and implementation of the marketing initiative, but it is important that each element is covered in the correct place if maximum marks are to be awarded. As an aid to full understanding of this aspect, we have therefore amplified our comments in these three sections.

And remember too the value of being succinct. These three sections together account for less that a third of the total marks, so brevity (with clarity) will leave more scope within the overall 1000-word limit to describe fully the most important elements of your submission, relating to the delivered value of the project. 

1. What was the issue or challenge facing the business? (50 marks)

Articulate the problem, challenge, project or opportunity. Describe the business environment in which the marketing activity was completed. Only by giving a clear, well-articulated and quantified description of the issues at outset, will the judges be able to determine the overall effectiveness of your marketing activity.

2. What was the insight that underpinned your strategy and tactics? (50 marks)

How and why did you establish your approach to solve the original issue? What drove the decision to focus your resources on this marketing activity? Maybe it was insight from external research, or a collection of comments from your colleagues. Provide a clear explanation of the insight and how it was developing your strategic thinking.

3. What was your proposed strategy to address the issue or challenge? (20 marks)

Provide an explanation of the overall marketing strategy being used. The strategy might encompass a number of marketing campaigns for a brand (maybe not specific to the category being entered) but your description here should explain why your approach was adopted.

4. How did you execute the strategy? (50 marks)

Describe in detail, using images if necessary, the marketing activity completed. Whether an innovative approach, or just doing the basics well, showcase the tactics or elements of the campaign that you feel delivered the greatest impact.

5. What metrics did you put in place to track the effectiveness of your solution? (50 marks)

Give a clear description of the controls used to measure the effectiveness of your marketing activity. Were metrics and objectives set at the start of the campaign, giving a clear definition of effectiveness over a set period? How well do these metrics complement the category being entered?

6. How can you prove that your campaign strategy met its objectives? (100 marks)

Tell us how your marketing activity met, or exceeded, the original objectives. Where possible, provide the data related to all the metrics you had in place to measure effectiveness.

How well does this go towards resolving the issue – or meeting the opportunity – set out in question 1?

Can you match the marketing activity specifically to the results being achieved? Is there clear evidence that the activity was cost-effective, with greater revenue than cost?

7. What value was added to your business as a result of your strategy? (50 marks)

As well the short-term cost-effective benefits of the marketing activity provided in question 6, the judges are looking for evidence of long-term value-add to the business.

The very best entries go beyond the results of the marketing activity, to explain the additional benefits achieved for the organisation as a whole. What long-term impact will this activity have on your business or the industry sector?

Give a complete definition of the value to the business, with quantification where possible.

With new product, service or innovation entries, it is important that the initiative should have been in the market long enough to demonstrate not just the success of the initial launch but also the more settled impact on the market and the company performance.

Public Relations, Corporate Social Responsibility and Sponsorship Categories

We recognise that the benefits from such initiatives are rather softer, and that the traditional way of justifying the campaigns by constructing figures such as “the equivalent cost of conventional advertising” is not especially helpful, not least because of the changing nature of advertising.

For these categories, therefore, we are introducing a different marking scheme for Questions 6 and 7, where we are happy to consider qualitative as well as quantitative information.

6. (PR, CSR and Sponsorship only) How can you prove that your campaign strategy met its objectives? (100 marks)

Tell us how your PR or sponsorship activity met, or exceeded, the original objectives. Where possible, provide the data related to all the metrics you had in place to measure effectiveness.

How well does this go towards resolving the issue – or meeting the opportunity – set out in question 1?

Can you match the activity specifically to the results being achieved?

Is there clear evidence that the activity has had a positive impact on any or all of your stakeholders – customers, potential customers, staff, shareholders or your local community?

7. (PR, CSR and Sponsorship only) What value has been added to your business as a result of your strategy? (100 marks)

As well the short-term benefits of the PR, CSR or sponsorship activity described in question 6, the judges are looking for evidence of long-term value-added to the business.

The very best entries go beyond the results of the marketing activity, to explain the additional benefits achieved for the organisation as a whole. What long-term impact will this PR, CSR or sponsorship have on your business or the industry sector?

How successful has this activity been in aligning with and reinforcing your core corporate ethos and customer messages?

Have you yet formulated plans to build on this in the future? To what extent is this activity likely to engage you with new customers or retain existing ones, and how does it work positively with your mainstream marketing activity? 

Entry specifics

The seven questions must be answered using a maximum of 1000 words. However, we suggest that a PDF version is submitted as your supporting material, allowing you to use graphs, charts and images to clarify data and make the paper more engaging.

The judges appreciate that for some categories, providing detailed analytical data may be quite difficult. However, to prove marketing effectiveness, the very minimum should include an explanation of the targets set for the campaign and the overall results.

In general, judges would like to see entrants provide as much analysis as possible. Clarity and brevity are important throughout, but in terms of assessing marketing effectiveness, some answers are more important than others.

This is reflected in the maximum possible score for each question. Every entry will be carefully reviewed by a panel of judges. Short-listed entries will then be debated, discussed and assessed by all the judges at a full-day judging event.

Eligibility

Our Awards are open to all financial services companies or their agencies, based anywhere in the world. It is not necessary for anyone in your organisation to be a Member of The Financial Services Forum to make an entry.

For overseas submissions, where our judges may have less direct experience of the local market, entries should be accompanied by a brief (no more than 400 words – in addition to the core 1000-word entry) summary of the local market dynamics and the company’s position within that.

The marketing activities that are being entered must be either ongoing or have finished after 31 May 2018. Any new product, service or innovation entry must have been launched after 1 September 2018.

Cost

The cost per entry is £250 plus VAT for Marketing Effectiveness Award Categories.