Over the years, we (and probably you as well) have repeatedly heard from radio show teams and station managers about their frustration with on-air content evaluation methods. Some members of our team have experienced it in their own skin, that's actually what triggered Voizzup in the first place.
You are very fortunate if these don't resonate with you:
❌ Audience ratings are not enough.
❌ Focus groups are not the solution either.
❌ We need better tools for evaluating our on-air contents, which ultimately determine our market share.
Do the following scenarios sound familiar to you?
⚠️ Insufficient periodicity
There's too much uncertainty between books or waves of the official audience ratings in your market. Their periodicity is insufficient. Making on-air changes in between books is scary. That fear makes you risk-aversive. That aversion toward risk constrains your and your team's freedom and creativity.
⚠️ Lack of depth
When you finally receive the ratings, data lacks depth. Results are way too shallow and oversimplified. How does that five minutes long segment you air every Friday at 9.45am in your morning-show perform? Hard to say, right? How about that special coverage you did on Thursday, in the drive-time show, three weeks ago? Impossible to know, with the information you are provided.
⚠️ Deviation in execution
Even if your organisation can afford focus groups, they don't remove the pain. Focus groups are a very useful tool for identifying listeners' perceptions and expectations. Additionally to the already mentioned lack of granularity and sufficient periodicity, this methodology introduces its own issues. They help you define a roadmap. Without continuity in insights, diversion will very likely happen in the execution, from very early stages. Over time, that deviation can only widen.
⚠️ Leap of faith
We should be able to comfortably assert "listeners will like this new content". Somehow, it feels too often like a leap of faith. Don't you wonder whether this is unacceptable within the advertisement based business model of an industry that moves billions of euros/dollars? What would advertisers think if they could see how you make decisions impacting your own content?
⚠️ Gut feeling (only)
Gut feeling. Intuition. Instinct. Too frequently, that's all your on-air or programming team has for making decisions. Maturity of radio professionals, wisdom within the on-air crew are often the only safety net in our organisations. And that's the half full glass. This is how the half empty glass can look: An unfledged, misaligned or misguided team could compromise your product.
Blind spot after launch of new show
To intermittent and shallow insights, add now the long time it takes for newly launched shows to settle in listeners' habits and awareness. For this last reason, it's assumed by radio makers worldwide, walking in darkness is unavoidable during months after the launch of a new morning or drive-time show.
Such delay in listeners' perception of changes on air, in our experience, doesn't actually exist. This lag is just a side effect of the nature of traditional on-air content evaluation methods, based on demographic samples. A side effect that condemns your show teams to blindness, and therefore necessary hesitation, for months. Meanwhile, your listeners are reacting. You just don't know how.
How are these impacting the performance of your team?
Are you and your team at the station experiencing these frustrations, having boldness and creativity constrained as a result?
More importantly, are they impacting your TSL (time spent listening), therefore your market share, therefore your position in the ranking of stations in your market, therefore your advertising revenue?
It doesn't need to be this way. You can break this vicious circle.
Voizzup has a solution that is: