It's not new; the likes of RDP have been around for a long time with their card decks and brochure request campaigns.
They have been joined by directory campaigns such as QuickPages, Are You Covered and Asrecommended plus the national newspapers' own collaborative booklets. This form of media is a top performer with today's consumers who want speed of use when being targeted.
Advertisers that shun this media on account of image, believing they have the most stand-out in their own solo campaigns, do so at their peril.
Results from collaborative campaigns usually deliver higher ROI than their solo counterparts.
Furthermore, the doormat is now more cluttered than ever. Amid countless direct mail items, up to 12 items in the free newspaper plus up to three Royal Mail door-to-door items and other hand-delivered items, the stand-out for an individual campaign is poorer than it's ever been.
Some advertisers will say that they don't want their brand to suffer by taking part in a collaborative campaign and then place ads in classified sections of newspapers alongside 30 other brands!
Aggregation of brand offers is popular online; websites such as Confused.com, Uswitch and Moneysupermarket.com give the consumer the maximum information to shop around - so why should the doormat be any different? Why are their sites working so effectively?
Well, just as the online versions allow you to shop around providers in one easy place, offline campaigns allow the consumer to do the same with a useful guide format that saves the hassle of sifting through many leaflets.
Another great recent example of this is Direct Line's publication containing all of its product offerings.
Collaborative marketing is spreading across channels to include Royal Mail door-to-door, direct mail and inserts. It can group brands from one product sector such as insurance or can be a collection of complementary brands carefully targeted at different audiences such as the over fifties or the sub-prime segments. Formats include A5 directories, card decks, coupon booklets or brochure/mail pack combinations.
The benefits are numerous -- low risk, low cost route to market, high response rates and being involved in a campaign that consumers genuinely find useful.
Add to that, collaborative campaigns are better for the environment as they cut down on the volume of print being mailed. It is hard to argue against this marketing technique.
Why pay 拢60k for your own campaign when you can reach the same audience for as little as 拢8k in a collaborative distribution?
Sure, conversion may be lower than your own campaign but if you can generate quality leads for as low as 拢4 each then it's not difficult to deliver budget-beating cost per acquisition.
The best campaigns are those that do not carry too many brands. Fifteen is an optimum number; the consumer has enough choice to make the selection credible but there are not so many that no advertiser achieves the desired ROI.
Collaborative media owners who are experts in targeting via the chosen media channel and know who the optimum responders are, based on hard data (making sure of course that the data is right) will deliver the best results. 北京赛车pk10s that just rely on generic profiles only using Acorn or Mosaic are usually weaker.
Lastly, look for those campaigns that add something beneficial for consumers such as extensive editorial/tips and use optimum formats -- just don't use suppliers who skimp on paper quality, weight and finish.
If cost effective marketing is becoming more difficult, perhaps the collaborative route could just be your answer.
If you have an opinion on this or any other issue raised on Brand Republic, join the debate in the .