اقتصاد کشاورزی و توسعه

اقتصاد کشاورزی و توسعه

تحلیل بیزی بازده تبلیغات در صنعت لبنیات ایران با الگوی اشباع و قیف فروش

نوع مقاله : مقاله پژوهشی

نویسنده
دانشیار اقتصاد کشاورزی (تولید و مدیریت)، دانشگاه سید جمال الدین اسدابادی، اسدآباد، همدان
چکیده
پژوهش حاضر با هدف پاسخ به شکاف موجود در ادبیات تبلیغات یعنی، فقدان یک چارچوب کمی و داده‌محور برای سنجش نقش نسبی رسانه‌ها در مراحل مختلف قیف فروش در صنایع مصرفی ایران، به‌ویژه صنعت لبنیات، طراحی شد. تاکنون، مطالعات مشابه بیشتر بر کل اثر تبلیغات تمرکز کرده و کمتر به تفکیک سهم هر رسانه در مراحل آگاهی، علاقه، تمایل و اقدام پرداخته‌اند. در مطالعة حاضر، از مدل‌سازی ترکیب رسانه‌ای مبتنی بر استنباط بیزی استفاده شد، که امکان برآورد دقیق و هم‏زمان اثر رسانه‌ها و رفتار اشباع تبلیغاتی را فراهم می‌آورد. بدین منظور، داده‌های پانل شامل ۱۴۴ مشاهده هفتگی از فروش شش ویژند (برند) لبنی طی تیر تا آذر ۱۴۰۳ گردآوری و تحلیل شد. برای سنجش رفتار اشباع، تابع مایکل- منتن به ‏کار گرفته شد و برای بررسی سیاست‌های مختلف تخصیص بودجه رسانه‌ای، شبیه‌سازی مونت‌کارلو به اجرا درآمد. نتایج پژوهش نشان داد که مرحله آگاهی به‌تنهایی ۳۵ درصد از فروش نهایی را تبیین می‌کند و سهم سه مرحله علاقه، تمایل و اقدام، در مجموع، ۶۵ درصد است. بدین ترتیب، تبلیغات تلویزیونی عمدتاً در آگاهی اثرگذار است، اما سریعاً به سطح اشباع می‌رسد و بازده نزولی پیدا می‌کند؛ در مقابل، تبلیغات دیجیتال اثر ماندگارتر و قوی‌تر بر مراحل میانی و پایانی قیف دارد. تحلیل سناریوها حاکی از آن بود که ترکیب بهینه شامل ۴۵ درصد تلویزیون، چهل درصد دیجیتال و پانزده درصد رادیو بیشترین افزایش فروش (هجده درصد) را ایجاد می‌کند. این نتایج تأکید می‌کند که راهبرد تبلیغاتی موفق، به ‏جای افزایش بودجه مطلق، باید بر تخصیص بهینه مبتنی بر داده و شناخت رفتار اشباع رسانه‌ها استوار باشد.
کلیدواژه‌ها

موضوعات


عنوان مقاله English

Bayesian Analysis of Advertising Effectiveness in Iran’s Dairy Industry Using Saturation and Sales Funnel Models

نویسنده English

habib shahbazi
Associate Professor of Agricultural Economics (Production and Management), Sayyed Jamaleddin Asadabadi University, Asadabad, Hamedan, Iran.
چکیده English

Introduction: In Iran’s dynamic and competitive Fast-Moving Consumer Goods (FMCG) market, particularly in the dairy sector, the effectiveness of advertising has become a pressing concern for both private companies and policymakers. Despite the essential role of dairy consumption in public health and nutrition, per capita dairy consumption in Iran has declined over the past decade, falling below WHO-recommended levels. This trend has been attributed, in part, to ineffective advertising strategies and the misallocation of promotional resources. Therefore, this study addressed this gap by proposing a data-driven, Bayesian-based framework to evaluate the effectiveness of multimedia advertising across various stages of the consumer decision-making process, modeled as a sales funnel (awareness, interest, desire, and action). Unlike conventional linear advertising models, this research accounted for saturation, delayed effects, and the varying impact of different media channels at each funnel stage. The key objective was to quantify the contribution of each media type (television, digital media, and radio) on dairy product sales, while also identifying the most efficient media mix strategy. The study drew upon recent advances in Media Mix Modeling (MMM) and Bayesian inference to analyze the nuanced relationship between advertising and consumer response, offering practical insights for optimizing advertising expenditure.
Materials and Methods: The study employed a Bayesian MMM framework to capture the nonlinear, multi-stage, and time-dependent nature of advertising effectiveness. The analytical model was based on a decomposition of total sales into baseline sales and cumulative effects of advertisements across four funnel stages. A nonlinear Michaelis-Menten function was used to model advertising saturation, while ad carryover effects were represented using exponential decay (Adstock) functions. Weekly sales data were collected from six major Iranian dairy brands including Pegah, Kaleh, Mimas, Damdaran, Sabah, and Ramak, covering a 24-week period from July to December 2024, totaling 144 observations. Advertising expenditures were disaggregated into three channels: television, digital media, and radio. Control variables included raw milk prices, seasonal dummies, national holidays, and competitor advertising intensity. The parameters of the model (e.g. baseline sales, media effectiveness weights, saturation point, and carryover coefficients) were estimated via Bayesian inference using Markov Chain Monte Carlo (MCMC) techniques— specifically, Gibbs sampling and the Metropolis-Hastings algorithm. Posterior distributions were derived for each parameter, and convergence was assessed using the R-hat statistic and trace plots. Model accuracy was validated using predictive checks, WAIC, and leave-one-out cross-validation (LOO-CV).
 
Results and Discussion: The Bayesian analysis yielded critical insights into how different media channels contribute to sales across the consumer decision-making funnel. The baseline weekly sales, absent any advertising, were estimated at 12,300 units (95 percent CI: 10,050-14,500), serving as a benchmark for evaluating media effectiveness. Among the media channels, television had the greatest influence at the awareness stage, with a posterior coefficient of 0.48, indicating a strong but short-lived impact. Digital advertising was more effective in the desire and action stages, with a coefficient of 0.35, offering longer-lasting effects on purchasing behavior. The impact of radio was limited and statistically insignificant. The analysis also captured the saturation effect of advertising, modeled using the Michaelis-Menten function, indicating that returns began to diminish sharply after 8 million IRR per week in ad spending. Moreover, the carryover coefficient of 0.82 reflected the gradual and persistent nature of advertising effects, which decay over time but remain significant across several weeks. Breaking down the sales funnel revealed that awareness accounted for 35 percent of the total impact, while interest (25 percent), desire (20 percent), and action (20 percent) comprised the remaining 65 percent. These findings stress the importance of allocating more resources to media like digital platforms that influence deeper stages of the funnel. Scenario-based simulations using Monte Carlo methods explored various budget allocation strategies. Increasing the share of TV advertising from 50 to 70 percent yielded only an 8 percent sales growth due to rapid saturation. Conversely, raising digital ad share from 30 to 50 percent resulted in a 14 percent increase in sales. The optimal mix— 45 percent TV, 40 percent digital, and 15 percent radio— produced the highest gain at 18 percent, highlighting the need for a balanced, stage-specific media strategy. Control variables also played significant roles. Higher raw milk prices negatively affected sales (−0.27 coefficient), while national holidays led to a 12 percent decline. Seasonal changes showed a +0.08 uplift in spring and summer, and competitor advertising had a −0.19 crowding-out effect. In sum, the Bayesian funnel model effectively captured the complex, nonlinear nature of advertising response and provides a valuable framework for data-driven planning in the dairy industry.
Conclusion and Suggestions: This study provides a robust quantitative framework for evaluating multimedia advertising effectiveness in the Iranian dairy sector. By integrating the sales funnel structure with Bayesian inference and nonlinear modeling techniques, the research captures both immediate and long-term impacts of different advertising channels while accounting for saturation and media interaction effects. The findings underscore that effective advertising is not merely a function of budget volume, but of strategic allocation based on media roles within the consumer journey. Digital media, despite its slower initial uptake, delivers more durable influence, particularly at the purchase stage. Television, while useful for brand awareness, quickly reaches its saturation point. In sum, the proposed framework can guide data-driven advertising strategy formulation, maximize return on investment, and support national policy design in other consumer industries facing similar market dynamics

کلیدواژه‌ها English

Media Mix Modeling (MMM)
Bayesian Modeling
Sales Funnel
Advertising Saturation Effect
1.      Aaker, D. A. (1991). Managing brand equity: capitalizing on the value of a brand name. Free Press.
2.      Azadrokht, E., & Ebadi, F. D. (2017). Brand equity on consumer purchasing behavior of food products. Proceedings of the 10th Conference on New Research in Science and Technology. Available at https://civilica.com/doc/697247. [In Persian]
3.      Bucklin, R. E., & Gupta, S. (1992). Brand choice, purchase incidence, and segmentation: an integrated modeling approach. Journal of Marketing Research, 29(2), 201-215. DOI: 10.1177/002224379202900205.
4.      Charan, A. (2022). Marketing analytics: MMM sales response functions. Available at https://www.ashokcharan.com/Marketing-Analytics/~mx-mmm-sales-response-function.php.
5.      Chen, H., Zhang, M., Han, L., & Lim, A. (2021). Hierarchical marketing mix models with sign constraints. Journal of Applied Statistics, 48(16), 2982-2999. DOI: 10.1080/02664763.2021.1946020.
6.      Court, D., Elzinga, D., Mulder, S., & Vetvik, O. J. (2009). The consumer decision journey. McKinsey Quarterly, No. 916.
7.      Danaher, P. J., & Dagger, T. S. (2013). Comparing the relative effectiveness of advertising channels: a case study of a multimedia blitz campaign. Journal of Marketing Research, 50(4), 517-534. DOI: 10.1509/jmr.12.0241. 
8.      Dekimpe, M. G., & Hanssens, D. M. (1995). The persistence of marketing effects on sales. Marketing Science, 14(1), 1-21. DOI: 10.1287/mksc.14.1.1.
9.      Fader, P. S., & Hardie, B. G. S. (2009). Probability models for customer base analysis. Journal of Interactive Marketing, 23(1), 61-69. DOI: 10.1016/j.intmar.2008.11.003.
10.  Gabry, J., Simpson, D., Vehtari, A., Betancourt, M., & Gelman, A. (2019). Visualization in Bayesian workflow. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society: Series A (Statistics in Society), 182(2), 389-402. DOI: 10.1111/rssa.12378.
11.  Gelman, A., Carlin, J. B., Stern, H. S., Dunson, D. B., Vehtari, A., & Rubin, D. B. (2013). Bayesian data analysis (3rd ed.). Chapman & Hall/CRC. DOI: 10.1201/b16018.
12.  Ghose, A., & Yang, S. (2009). An empirical analysis of search engine advertising: sponsored search in electronic markets. Management Science, 55(10), 1605-1622. DOI: 10.1287/mnsc.1090.1054.
13.  Hanssens, D. M., Parsons, L. J., & Schultz, R. L. (2001). Market response models: econometric and time series analysis (2nd ed.). Springer.
14.  Hosseini, S. S., & Erfanian, Z. (2009). Modeling the effects of advertising on the demand for dairies in Iran (case study: milk industries of Iran). Iranian Journal of Agricultural Economics and Development Research, 39(1), 1-9. [In Persian]
15.  Isariyawongse, K., Kudo, Y., & Tremblay, V. J. (2007). Generic and brand advertising in markets with product differentiation. Journal of Agricultural & Food Industrial Organization, 5(1), 1179. DOI: 10.2202/1542-0485.1179.
16.  Jain, P., Karamchandani, M., & Jain, A. (2019). Effectiveness of digital advertising. Advances in Economics and Business Management (AEBM). DOI: 10.13140/RG.2.2.36629.99048.
17.  Jin, Y., Wang, Y., Sun, Y., Chan, D., & Koehler, J. (2017). Bayesian methods for media mix modeling with carryover and shape effects. Google Inc. Technical Report. Available at https://research.google.com/pubs/archive/46001.pdf.
18.  Keller, K. L. (1993). Conceptualizing, measuring, and managing customer-based brand equity. Journal of Marketing, 57(1), 1-22. DOI: 10.1177/002224299305700101.
19.  Kotler, P., & Keller, K. L. (2016). Marketing management (15th ed.). Pearson Education.
20.  Li, H., & Kannan, P. K. (2014). Attributing conversions in a multichannel online marketing environment: an empirical model and a field experiment. Journal of Marketing Research, 51(1), 40-56. DOI: 10.1509/jmr.13.0050.
21.  Lilien, G. L. (1994). Marketing models: Past, present and future. In G. Laurent, G. L. Lilien, & B. Pras (Eds.), Research traditions in marketing (pp. 1–25). Springer. DOI: 10.1007/978-94-011-1402-8_1
22.  Marín, J. (2025). A new framework for marketing mix modeling: addressing channel influence bias and cross-channel effects. arXiv. Available at https://arxiv.org/abs/2311.05587.
23.  Morovati, A., Khanlari, A., & Shafagh, H. (2015). Investigating the impacts of brand equity on consumers’ evaluation of  brand expansion: a case study of consumers of Pegah dairy products in Tehran city. Consumer Behavior Studies Journal, 2(2), 61-74. Available at https://cbs.uok.ac.ir/article_7659_31098295c42f6a7dc18283949354622a.pdf?lang=en. [In Persian]
24.  Mortazavi, H., & Gorji, M. B. (2014). The relationship between advertising and brand equity in dairy products. Proceedings of the 3rd National Conference on Accounting, Financial Management, and Investment, Gorgan, Iran. [In Persian]
25.  Muehlhoff, E., Bennett, A., & McMahon, D. (2013). Milk and dairy products in human nutrition. Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO), Rome. Available at https://www.fao.org/3/i3396e/i3396e.pdf.
26.  Naik, P. A., & Raman, K. (2003). Understanding the impact of synergies in multimedia advertising. Journal of Marketing Research, 40(4), 375-388. DOI: 10.1509/jmkr.40.4.375.19395.
27.  Pakari, A., Rahjou, S., & Shams Lahroodi, S. (2019). Investigating the effect of logo design on consumer purchasing decisions of food products with the mediating role of brand equity. Scientific Journal of New Research Approaches in Management and Accounting, 3(9), 150-164. Available at https://majournal.ir/index.php/ma/article/view/183. [In Persian]
28.  Prihatiningsih, T., Panudju, R., & Prasetyo, I. J. (2024). Digital advertising trends and effectiveness in the modern era: a systematic literature review. Golden Ratio of Marketing and Applied Psychology of Business, 4(2), 132-143. DOI: 10.52970/grmapb.v4i2.505.
29.  Ravid, R. (2025). Marketing mix modeling in Lemonade [Preprint]. arXiv. Available at https://arxiv.org/abs/2501.01276.
30.  Rimša, R. (2024). Marketing mix modelling using Bayesian statistics. Master’s Thesis, Vilnius University. Vilnius University Repository. Available at https://epublications.vu.lt/object/elaba:192057575.
31.  Rossi, P. E., Allenby, G. M., & Misra, S. (2024). Bayesian statistics and marketing. Wiley. DOI: 10.1002/9781394219148.
32.  SCI (2023). Estimation of essential goods consumption in Iran (2011-2021). Statistical Center of Iran (SCI), Tehran. [In Persian]
33.  Seetharaman, P. B., & Chintagunta, P. K. (2003). The proportional hazard model for purchase timing: a comparison of alternative specifications. Journal of Business & Economic Statistics, 21(3), 368-382. DOI: 10.1198/073500103288619025.
34.  Segel, I. H. (1993). Enzyme kinetics: Behavior and analysis of rapid equilibrium and steady-state enzyme systems. Wiley-Interscience.
35.  Shahbazi, H. (2021). The optimal budget of Milk Generic advertising: an application of different allocation methods. Iranian Journal of Agricultural Economics and Development Research, 52(4), 643-662. DOI: 10.22059/ijaedr.2021.285992.668791 [In Persian]
36.  Shahbazi, H. (2024). Examining the effects of free riding in brand and generic advertising of milk in Iran. Iranian Journal of Agricultural Economics and Development Research, 55(2), 205-227. DOI: 10.22059/ijaedr.2024.359300.669220. [In Persian]
37.  Shahbazi, H. (2025). Assessing dairy producers’ surplus and benefits from brand advertising. Journal of Business Management, 17(2), 389-413. DOI: 10.22059/jibm.2024.368814.471. [In Persian]
38.  Shahbazi, H., & Faryadras, V. (2018). Milk optimal generic advertising expenditure in an imperfect competitive marketing level. Agricultural Economics and Development, 26(2), 217-244. DOI: 10.30490/aead.2018.73561. [In Persian]
39.  Sinha, R., Arbour, D., & Puli, A. M. (2022). Bayesian modeling of marketing attribution [Preprint]. arXiv. DOI: 10.48550/arXiv.2205.15965.
40.  Tellis, G. J. (2004). Effective advertising: understanding when, how, and why advertising works. SAGE Publications. DOI: 10.4135/9781452229379
41.  Vakratsas, D., & Ambler, T. (1999). How advertising works: What do we really know? Journal of Marketing, 63(1), 26-43. DOI: 10.1177/002224299906300103
42.  Vehtari, A., Gelman, A., & Gabry, J. (2017). Practical Bayesian model evaluation using leave-one-out cross-validation and WAIC. Statistics and Computing, 27(5), 1413-1432. DOI: 10.1007/s11222-016-9696-4.
43.  WHO (2017). Healthy diet: Fact Sheet No. 394. World Health Organization (WHO), Geneva. Available at https://www.who.int/news-room/fact-sheets/detail/healthy-diet.
44.  Yang, Y., Zhao, K., Zeng, D., & Jansen, B. J. (2020). How search engine advertising affects sales over time: an empirical investigation. arXiv preprint arXiv:2008.06809. DOI: 10.48550/arXiv.2008.06809.