In one line
Activation media sells in the weeks it runs and fades. Brand-building media works slowly through memory and lasts. Binet and Field found about 60:40 brand to activation works best on average across IPA cases, a benchmark rather than a rule: one brand's best split moves with its category, its position and how long you judge it over.
What it does
- Each burst of media leaves a trace that decays over time: adstock, or carry-over. Activation's trace fades within weeks; brand media's lasts quarters.
- Brand media raises mental availability and lowers price sensitivity, so every later quarter sells more at a better price.
- Cutting brand media flatters this year's profit. The cost shows up next year as lower share.
Business and brand
Impact on the businessP&L, cash, share price
- Activation pays back faster and is easier to measure inside the quarter.
- Brand media looks expensive in-quarter and pays over two or more years.
- A plan judged quarter by quarter drifts towards activation and erodes growth.
Impact on the brandMemory, loyalty, pricing power
- Brand media builds memory and pricing power that compound.
- Activation converts existing demand but builds little that lasts.
- The right split depends on the category and the brand's stage; 60:40 is an average.
Try it
Split a fixed budget
Divide the same media budget between brand and activation for a year. Next year everyone goes back to the plan they started with, so any gap is what this year left behind.
Share of the media budget on brand building → 60:40 is Binet & Field's average across IPA cases; Countermove works out each brand's own split.
Notice: For Brightwater, the challenger, the split that earns most over two years is 80:20, €0.24m more than 60:40. Judged on this year alone it would be 50:50: activation's quick sales count in full, brand building's later payback does not. You are on the activation side of it.
Runs Countermove's market engine: the reference soft-drinks market, three brands, rivals holding their plans so only your change moves the result.
Sources
- Binet & Field (2013), The Long and the Short of It, IPA
- Assmus, Farley & Lehmann (1984), Journal of Marketing Research: advertising carry-over
- Sethuraman, Tellis & Briesch (2011), Journal of Marketing Research