Super Bowl XLVI drew hun­dreds of mil­lions of viewers in the U.S. and around the world, so it’s no sur­prise that adver­tisers doled out some $3.5 mil­lion per 30-​​second spot to show­case their goods and ser­vices. We asked mar­keting pro­fessor Scott Swain in the Col­lege of Busi­ness Admin­is­tra­tion to explain what makes a Super Bowl adver­tise­ment successful.

What have been some of the most suc­cessful Super Bowl ads/​campaigns to date? What made them successful?

There are dif­ferent ways to define suc­cess. Ads that are pop­ular with con­sumers because they are funny or enter­taining often fail to deliver a unique and mem­o­rable brand mes­sage. It is inter­esting to think about what an “all time” list of Super Bowl ads might look like. Adver­tisers have dif­ferent objec­tives and the cul­tural con­text that the ads are drawing on for their mean­ings change over time. That being said, there have been a number of Super Bowl ads that seem to have res­onated par­tic­u­larly well with audi­ences at the time they aired. A few that come to mind are the “Mean Joe Green” ad for Coca Cola in 1980, Apple’s “1984” ad, the Bird and Jordan “Show­down” ad for McDonald’s in 1993, Monster.com’s “When I Grow Up” ad in 1999, Budweiser’s “Respect” ad in 2002, Reebok’s “Terry Tate” ad in 2003 and per­haps last year’s Volkswagen’s “The Force” ad with little Darth Vader.

It seems that more and more com­pa­nies are hyping up — and leaking — their com­mer­cials before the game. At $3.5 mil­lion dol­lars per spot, what can adver­tisers do to extend the life of their ads to obtain the most value?  

There is no doubt that new tech­nolo­gies and social media have dra­mat­i­cally changed the way adver­tisers think about designing and lever­aging Super Bowl ads. Adver­tisers, for example, are looking for ways to get con­sumers engaged before the Super Bowl in dif­ferent ways. An extreme example is the Doritos com­pe­ti­tion, where con­sumers submit home­made com­mer­cials and the winner gets their ad shown during the Super Bowl. More gen­er­ally, con­sumers have unprece­dented con­trol over their media expo­sure and over brand mean­ings, which are both a threat and an oppor­tu­nity for adver­tisers. If there is some­thing about an ad that puts con­sumers in a “sharing” mood, the brand can end up reaching an audi­ence that dwarfs the audi­ence “pur­chased” by the brand’s adver­tising budget. At the same time, con­sumers may be saying things about the brand that are at odds with the way the brand seeks to posi­tion itself in the marketplace.

How do com­pa­nies mea­sure the return on invest­ment of their Super Bowl ads? Do large, estab­lished brands mea­sure suc­cess dif­fer­ently than smaller, lesser-​​known brands? 

Given the cost of Super Bowl ads, every brand needs to under­stand the likely return on the invest­ment and com­pare it to alter­na­tive uses of the money. I think the per­cep­tion of adver­tising account­ability is greater now than in pre­vious years because of social media and the avail­ability of new ana­lytics. Con­sumers will be flooding Twitter, Face­book and Google before, during and after the Super Bowl, and much will be made of the volume and con­tent of this traffic. Ulti­mately, each brand will define suc­cess rel­a­tive to its adver­tising objec­tives, which might include raising aware­ness, changing beliefs or atti­tudes, stim­u­lating pur­chase inten­tions or encour­aging behav­iors such as trial, repeat pur­chase or brand switching. One dis­ad­van­tage faced by smaller brands is that they may not have enough money left over to con­duct the kind of mar­keting research you like to do in the eval­u­a­tion phase, such as tracking studies, sales analyses and direct response analyses.