SiriusLabs - Campaign Planning: Taking a Data-Driven Approach
Obama 2012: Lessons from a data-driven campaign
description
Transcript of Obama 2012: Lessons from a data-driven campaign
Obama 2012: Lessons from a data-driven campaign
You probably thought we had it easy…
But victory was never assured Big-spending groups called Super-PACs
were largely supporting Romney
The progressive base was less enthusiastic than in 2008
Obama was usually ahead in the polls, but the advantage was narrow and volatile
It wasn’t 2008 (which O won by 7.3%)
So how did we win?
Massive numbers of field offices 786 Obama field offices vs. 284 Romney
offices In Ohio:
Field offices are where hundreds of paid staffers organized tens of thousands of volunteers to mobilize millions of votersSource: TheMonkeyCage.Org
Obama Romney
So how did we win?
Sophisticated technology and targeting Giant data & micro-targeting operation Fully integrated databases Smarter new methods of targeting TV ads New technology for social sharing, polling
place lookup, phone banking, volunteer mobilization, vote tracking, election day rapid response
Thousands of staffers in Chicago HQ and the battleground states
All of that costs money
In 2008, Obama campaign raised $750 million Not enough to beat Romney 2012 & Super-
PACs
But fundraising was more difficult in 2012 President less available for fundraising events In early campaign, we saw average online
donation was half of what it had been in 2008 People were giving less, and less often
We had to be smarter, and more tenacious
Obama 2012 Digital Department
Digital department was very focused on data, using evidence to drive decisions
We had a culture of testing Constantly looking for ways to improve Humility was required Creativity was encouraged Lots of staff to create content, run
experiments, analyze results, develop new technology
What impact can testing have?
version Subject line donors moneyv1s1 Hey 263 $17,646v1s2 Two things: 268 $18,830v1s3 Your turn 276 $22,380v2s1 Hey 300 $17,644v2s2 My opponent 246 $13,795v2s3 You decide 222 $27,185v3s1 Hey 370 $29,976v3s2 Last night 307 $16,945v3s3 Stand with me today 381 $25,881v4s1 Hey 444 $25,643v4s2 This is my last campaign 369 $24,759v4s3 [NAME] 514 $34,308v5s1 Hey 353 $22,190
v5s2There won't be many more of these deadlines 273 $22,405
v5s3 What you saw this week 263 $21,014v6s1 Hey 363 $25,689v6s2 Let's win. 237 $17,154v6s3 Midnight deadline 352 $23,244
ACTU
AL ($
3.7m
)
IF S
ENDIN
G AVG
IF S
ENDIN
G WORST
$0
$2
$4
Full send (in millions)
$2.2 million additional revenue from sending best draft vs. worst, or $1.5 million additional from sending best vs. average
Test sends
Testing = constant improvement Little improvements add up
Improving 1% here and 2% there isn’t a lot at first, but over time it adds up
Testing = data-driven decisions We don’t have all the answers
Conventional wisdom is often wrong Gut instinct is often wrong
On the Obama campaign we had this thing called the Email Derby… Even the experts can’t reliably predict the
most effective messages Listen to your audience!
Experiments: Email Volume
More email = more donations People say they get too much email But our experiment showed that sending a
higher volume of fundraising emails led to more donations, without dire consequences
Implementing a “more email” policy probably led to $20-30 million in additional revenue for the campaign
Experiments: Ugly vs. pretty At first we tried making emails prettier, with
slick-looking buttons and nice formatting That failed, so we asked: what about ugly
instead?
Ugly yellow highlighting got us better results But at some point it lost its novelty and stopped
working – always important to re-test!
Experiments: Personalization Adding “drop-in sentences” that reference
people’s past behavior can increase conversion rates
Example: asking recent donors for more money
The added sentence doubled the donation rate Confirmed in several similar experiments
…it's going to take a lot more of us to match them.
You stepped up recently to help out -- thank you. We all need to dig a little deeper if we're going to win, so I'm asking you to pitch in again. Will you donate $25 or more today?
…it's going to take a lot more of us to match them.
Will you donate $25 or more today?
Technologies: Saved Payment Info
Campaign introduced “Quick Donate” system, allowing donors the option of saving their credit card info for easier donating later
Allowed one-click donations within email
Obama 2012: Digital Department
Raised over half a billion dollars online
Recruited tens of thousands of volunteers
Publicized thousands of events and rallies
Did I mention raising half a billion dollars? Conservatively, testing resulted in about
$100-200 million in additional revenue
Digital Department Basics
Grew from a small team in spring 2011 to a department of 200+ in 2012 Outbound (email, social, mobile, blog) Ads Front-End Development Design Video Project management Digital Analytics
Digital Analytics
Goal was to help all the other teams do better Design & implement experiments Analyze & report results Provide data sets
Three overlapping skill groups within team: Database management (SQL, Python) Data analysis (Stata, R, SPSS) Web analytics (Google Analytics,
Optimizely)
Testing requires content
Content creators Need more of these than you think
Obama team had 18 email writers, 4 social media writers, many designers and ad producers
More people = more ideas
Front-end developers Create new pages, improve user
experience, etc
Conclusions
Data-driven campaigning helped Obama win
Big groups of smart people can accomplish a lot!
But you don’t have to have a staff of hundreds to have a good testing program Train existing staffers, hire more when you can Foster a culture of testing: every piece of
communication is an opportunity to test something Even a small list can be split in two – do what you
can