Author: Ray Fisman

  • Did eBay Just Prove That Paid Search Ads Don’t Work?

    Before you read the rest of this post, go to Google and try searching for “Amazon.” You’ll probably notice that the top two listings are both for Amazon’s website, with the first appearing on a light beige background. If you click on the first — a paid search ad — Amazon will pay Google for attracting your business. If you click on the second, Amazon gets your business but Google gets nothing. Try “Macys,” “Walgreens,” and “Sports Authority” — you’ll see the same thing.

    If you search for eBay, though, you’ll find only a single listing — an unpaid one. Odds are, after marketers at Amazon, Walgreens and elsewhere catch wind of a preliminary study released on Friday, their search listings will start to look a lot more like eBay’s. The study — by eBay Research Labs economists Thomas Blake, Chris Noskos, and Steve Tadelis — analyzed eBay sales after shutting down purchases of search ads on Google and elsewhere, while maintaining a control set of regions where search ads continued unchanged. Their findings suggest that many paid ads generate virtually no increase in sales, and even for ones that do, the sales benefits are far eclipsed by the cost of the ads themselves.

    Companies spend enormous sums on marketing their products. Yet it’s notoriously difficult to measure the impact of ad expenditures. Companies advertise heavily at times when they hope to sell a lot — like Christmas Eve and Boxing Day — and in areas where they expect to see their sales grow. So a naïve examination of the relationship between ad expenditures and revenues will of course find they move in sync, even if customers don’t pay the ads any mind.

    Advertising has also traditionally produced a lot of waste — I see ads for Brioni suits when I open up the morning paper, even though the last time I wore a suit was on my wedding day. The study’s authors quote 19th century retailer John Wannamaker: “I know half the money I spend on advertising is wasted, but I can never find out which half.”

    The internet promised to change all that. Google, Yahoo, Bing, and others gave sellers the opportunity to target their pitches to customers who were plausibly interested in their products. That’s why paid ads for Amazon come up in response to a search for books, but not life insurance. Further aligning the interests of companies and consumers, advertisers only get charged for paid search listings that actually get clicked on, ensuring that they pay for attracting genuinely interested customers.

    But what do companies actually get for the billions they now spend on search marketing? The eBay team began by examining whether there’s any benefit to buying search ads that contain the word “ebay.” In these cases, it’s possible that in the absence of paid listings, customers would simply click on the unpaid — or “natural” — listing, which would appear at the top of the search anyway. So in March 2012, eBay conducted a controlled trial to see what would happen if they shut off this “branded keyword advertising” by halting their purchases of search ads containing the word “ebay” on Microsoft and Yahoo search engines, while continuing to purchase search ads on Google as a control. There was no change in eBay sales via Yahoo and Bing, relative to those that came through Google — consumers simply substituted clicks on the unpaid search listing for the now-absent paid ones.

    Encouraged by these findings, eBay management agreed to run a controlled experiment where they shut off all Google search ads in a third of the country, while continuing to buy ads everywhere else. In contrast to branded keywords — where it’s inevitable that the company will end up as one of the top unpaid listings — there’s a good chance that if you try searching for “used les paul guitar,” a guitar reseller will appear ahead of eBay’s search listing. So in order to drive a customer to eBay for his guitar purchase rather than, say, Guitar Center, it might be worth the cost of placing a carefully targeted ad.

    But in aggregate, that’s not what the eBay team found — overall, there was no appreciable decline in sales of eBay listings in the part of the country where Google ad purchases were shut off. People who thought to buy guitars via eBay were finding their way to the site anyway, either by clicking on natural listings, or by going directly to eBay’s site without using a search engine at all. Search ads did generate a modest increase in the likelihood that internet surfers with little recent history of eBay transactions would end up making purchases on eBay. So paid search ads serve an informational function, letting a sliver of potential eBay customers know that they’re in the guitar business. But by the time you get to customers who have had three prior eBay transactions in the last year, the effect of paid search on sales drops almost to zero. Overall, paid search turns out to be a very expensive way of attracting new business: The study’s authors estimate that, at least in the short-run, paid ads generate only about 25 cents in extra revenues for each dollar of ad expenditures. (For branded keyword searches, the additional revenues are close to zero.)

    People buying search ads aren’t idiots — they’ve looked at the correlation between keyword purchases and subsequent sales and no doubt found it to be strong. But this study suggests that marketing departments should be more careful in confusing causation and correlation in assessing the returns to their ad expenditures, to avoid the equivalent of concluding that marketing works because you advertise and sell a lot in December.

    The study’s authors note that paid search may be more profitable for other companies than it’s been for eBay. For example, as Stop and Shop tries to get a foothold in the crowded New York online grocery marketplace, they might sensibly buy some ads to compete with Fresh Direct. Paid search may also be worth it for smaller companies that lack the name recognition and high Google page rank that make paid searches less valuable for the eBays and Amazons of the world — some of Google’s own research indicates that this is likely the case. Caveats aside, eBay’s experiences suggest that all companies should look carefully at how much bang they’re getting for their search marketing dollars.

    The larger lesson from eBay’s experiment is about the importance of questioning conventional marketing wisdom. As much as the internet has given companies opportunities to target their ads, it’s also given them a ready testing ground to experiment with different business practices to see what really works.

  • Forget About That Cash Bonus

    In the corner of my home office sits a cabinet full of tchotchkes and gifts that neither I nor my wife can quite bear to part with. It includes a silver Tiffany picture frame I received from Columbia Business School for 10 years of teaching and a company-embossed Swiss army knife that my wife got one Christmas, back in her days as a consultant.

    While many might see this sort of gift giving as a sign of the boss’s kindness and generosity, economists mostly see inefficiency: why can’t Columbia just pay me a cash bonus rather than offering presents that collect dust? One answer comes from a classic study by Nobel Laureate George Akerlof, a pioneer in the field of behavioral economics, which focuses on the idea of gift exchange in the workplace. Acts of kindness by employers, the reasoning goes, elicit more effort from their employees in return, hence the utility knives and picture frames. But Akerlof mostly had in mind monetary rewards — you pay me above-market wages, and I’ll repay the favor by working harder — which can’t quite account for the booming corporate gift business.

    A study published last year by German and Swiss researchers took a more literal position on the gift exchange hypothesis, suggesting that economists’ focus on cash might often be misplaced. The researchers found that gifts were far more motivating to short-term employees than unexpected cash bonuses, effectively paying for themselves by improving productivity. The findings provide some guidance on the types of gifts that are likely to engender the greatest motivation and loyalty.

    The study was inspired, in part, by the need to catalog books at a German university’s economics library. Student catalogers were recruited to spend half a day helping out, with an advertised hourly wage of 12 Euros. While somewhat removed from the corporate context that most managers inhabit, the study has the merit of focusing on a task for which it’s easy to measure productivity: how fast and accurately employees catalog their books. It was also a situation in which employees wouldn’t expect their productivity to elicit further gifts or payments later on, since they were told explicitly that the job wouldn’t continue past the morning’s work.

    A Gift vs Cash

    Before the students started to catalog the books, the experimenters told some of them that they would receive an unexpected seven-Euro bonus — a 20% pay hike relative to the promised wage of 36 Euros for the three-hour job. Another group was given a gift-wrapped water bottle that was worth around seven Euros. (In some versions of the experiment, a price tag was left on and catalogers were informed of the present’s value, to ensure that the employees didn’t overestimate it.) Crucially, a separate set of students didn’t receive any bonus at all, to serve as a baseline to measure the effects of gifts and extra cash.

    The cash bonus didn’t have any effect on the speed or accuracy with which the students did their jobs. However, those receiving the free bottle reciprocated by upping their data entry rate by 25%, a productivity increase that more than offset the cost of the bottle itself.

    It’s not that the workers particularly loved their bottles — in fact, in a separate experiment in which catalogers were offered the choice between a bottle versus seven Euros, 80% took the cash (and still worked a lot harder). Rather, it was the thought that counted, and simply handing out a few more Euros hardly takes much thought. Even offering the option of a gift showed that the employer cared.

    The Shape of Money Matters

    An intriguing final version of the experiment underscored the importance, in the eyes of the employees, of the thought and effort bosses put into their gifts. In this treatment, the cash was delivered as a five-Euro note folded into an origami shirt and a two-Euro coin with a smiley face painted on it. The origami money-gift generated the highest increase in productivity of all. (While the researchers never handed out gift cards or other easy-to-obtain cash equivalents that are common and efficient employee rewards, one can imagine that a Starbucks gift card doesn’t exactly scream “I Care.”)

    The study has its limitations. It’s hard to imagine that the average Wall Street trader would work harder for a pink Cadillac than a six-figure bonus. The motivational effects of cash surely become more important when the stakes get higher, and gifts probably work best when tailored to the particular set of employees involved. That’s how you really show you care.

    And that, more than gifts versus cash, is really the study’s takeaway. Many employees toiling away in stores, factories, and cubicles are desperate for a sense of meaning in their work lives. Even the smallest gesture of kindness that shows they’re part of an organization that actually cares can give them purpose — and that leads to motivation.