At A Glance
Brands can scale local marketing without losing brand consistency when they separate fixed brand elements from variable local decisions and automate only where the stakes are low. In this Ask the Expert conversation, Experian and Butler/Till discuss how brands can spot real local signals, decide what to automate, and keep people in the loop on decisions that carry brand risk.Key takeaways
- Manual oversight of local marketing tends to break down at around 100 store locations, according to Butler/Till, since decision latency makes it hard to keep pace with simultaneous market-level calls.
- Butler/Till recommends separating fixed brand elements, like voice and positioning, from variable ones, like media mix, audience targeting, and local partnerships, when scaling marketing across many store locations.
- When comparing a local campaign’s performance against a market baseline, a gap of 20% or more usually signals something real, while a gap of just a few percentage points is more often noise.
- Brands running local campaigns across thousands of store locations can automate budget allocation within clear guardrails, but should keep people in the loop on creative selection and other brand-risk decisions.
In our Ask the Expert series, we interview leaders from our partner organizations who are helping lead their brands to new heights in advertising. Today’s interview is with Ryan Lammela at Butler/Till.
When a national brand says it wants to market locally, what does that usually mean to them, and what does effective local marketing require? Where’s the biggest gap between the two?
Most national brands think “local” marketing means communicating the same message with different prices. They want consistency at scale, without surrendering national control. Effective local marketing requires something more demanding: adapting strategy, not just price, to each market’s competitive intensity, seasonal patterns, media preferences, and regulatory environment, while keeping brand integrity intact.
The biggest gap between national and local marketing is structural. Brands underestimate how different markets actually behave. A media mix that works in Seattle might fail in a small rural town in the Mid-Atlantic. Local audiences respond to different messaging angles. The friction comes from centralized decision-making trying to enforce one strategy across fundamentally different market dynamics.
What we’ve found is that successful brands need a framework that distinguishes fixed elements from variable ones. Brand voice and core positioning? Fixed. Media mix, audience targeting, local partnerships? Variable. Without that clarity, you get either chaotic fragmentation or missed local opportunity.
At what point does scale fundamentally change how you have to operate? What starts to break when you move from 50 or 100 locations to tens of thousands of campaigns?
In our experience, the breaking point tends to show up around 100 physical locations. Below that, marketers can still oversee most decisions. Beyond it, you hit the wall: you can’t have people make thousands of media decisions monthly and stay competitive on timing or cost.
Coordination breaks first. When you’re managing multiple channels across multiple markets, decision latency becomes critical; manual approval chains that worked at 50 locations can’t keep pace with thousands of simultaneous market-level decisions. Execution consistency degrades because there’s no visibility into what’s actually running everywhere.
Then measurement becomes a nightmare. You’re collecting data from dozens of sources: platform dashboards, local partners, point-of-sale systems. The noise drowns out signal. Without a consistent way to tie those sources back to the same person or household, you’re comparing apples to oranges across markets.
What’s a pattern that can come to light when you can compare results across thousands of campaigns, something you wouldn’t have trusted from a single market?
When you run 5,000 campaigns across 4,000 locations, patterns emerge that a single market would never reveal. A media mix that looked like a failure in one market? It works in similar demographic clusters. A creative asset that seemed like an outlier? It’s the winner among underserved audiences nationally.
You also spot seasonality patterns you’d miss regionally. When you compare July performance across 2,000 markets, you learn that summer media preferences shift in ways single-market data would dismiss as noise.
Local markets behave differently. How do you decide which local signals are worth acting on versus which are noise, and what data are you leaning on to tell the difference?
Telling a real local signal from noise starts with a baseline: establish expected performance benchmarks across similar market clusters, then look for deviations that are large relative to a market’s normal swing. A gap of 20% or more usually warrants investigation; something in the low single digits is more often noise.
Layer in market context: competitive intensity, demographics, media consumption patterns, seasonality. When a campaign spikes in one market, ask why. Is the market fundamentally different, or are we optimizing for the wrong thing?
Local signals worth acting on are consistent across similar market types, tied to something measurable (seasonal shift, competitive move, audience behavior change), and actionable without breaking brand consistency.
The data that matters most is comparative data, not absolute performance. When Phoenix outperforms Denver on a tactic, and both are similar sunbelt markets, that’s worth investigating.
With that volume of decisions, where do you let the system decide and where do you still want a person in the loop?
Automate based on decision complexity and consequence, not based on volume.
Budget allocation across channels within a market? The system could handle it. The variables are clear, the data is clean, and wrong decisions are recoverable. We set guardrails—don’t shift more than 15% week-to-week, don’t kill a performing channel below threshold—and let optimization work.
Creative selection or messaging? That stays with people. Those decisions carry cultural and brand risk that algorithms can’t weigh. Same with market-level strategic pivots or major partnerships.
Audience targeting is trickier. There’s a lot of data, patterns aren’t always obvious, and bad targeting ripples through the program. We build algorithmic recommendations, but a strategist validates them against market context. The algorithm says shift audience targeting toward women 35 to 44. The person asks why and either confirms the insight or catches something the algorithm missed.
We also keep humans in the loop for anything that breaks the established playbook. When a market starts behaving unexpectedly, we escalate.
The rule: automate routine, standardized decisions with clear success metrics. Keep people in the loop on decisions that shape strategy or carry brand risk.
What have you learned running local programs at this scale that a brand with 50 or 100 locations could apply on Monday?
Brands running campaigns for 50 or 100 locations should start by building their decision framework before they build their system. Know which decisions are local and which are national before you automate them. We’ve seen brands implement tools that actually slow them down because they skipped this step.
Establish market benchmarks now instead of waiting until you’re at scale. Group your locations by similarity and start comparing performance across similar markets. You’ll spot inefficiency fast and understand what good performance looks like in different market types.
Treat automation as a channel tool, not a thinking replacement. Ask yourself what decisions are slowing you down. What insights are you missing because you don’t have bandwidth? Start there, not with the fanciest tech.
Invest in measurement rigor. When you’re coordinating across multiple locations, measurement becomes competitive advantage. Know which metrics matter locally and which are noise. Build data infrastructure to compare performance across markets without creating reporting chaos.
And here’s what matters most: successful local marketing at scale gives local teams better information and faster decision velocity while maintaining brand guardrails. That balance—autonomy with consistency—is where real leverage lives.
Thanks for the interview. Do you have any recommendations for our readers if they want to learn more?
If your brand is managing multiple locations and feeling friction, the question isn’t “should we automate?” It’s “which decisions are slowing us down, and why?” Start there. Talk to teams running campaigns in the field. They’ll tell you where the friction actually is. Then build systems to solve that friction, not to solve a problem you think you have.
Contact us
Click here to view Experian’s U.S. Consumer Data Privacy Notice.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
About our expert
Ryan Lammela
VP of Channel Activation, Butler/Till
Ryan Lammela is VP of Channel Activation at Butler/Till, an independent media agency. He leads media execution strategy for brands managing distributed marketing across hundreds or thousands of locations, translating integrated strategy into measurable market impact at scale.
FAQs
Butler/Till defines effective local marketing as adapting strategy, not just pricing, to local market conditions like competitive intensity, seasonality, and media preferences, while keeping core brand voice and positioning fixed. Most brands think local marketing means the same message at different prices, which misses the structural differences between markets.
Manual oversight tends to break down around 100 locations, according to Butler/Till. Below that threshold, people can still review most decisions directly; beyond it, decision latency and inconsistent visibility start to undermine execution.
A performance gap of 20% or more against a market baseline usually signals something real, while a gap of just a few percentage points is more often noise. Butler/Till recommends grouping similar markets, setting expected performance benchmarks, and investigating deviations tied to a measurable cause like seasonality or a competitor’s move.
Budget allocation within clear guardrails is well-suited to automation, since the variables are clean and mistakes are recoverable. Creative selection, messaging, and market-level strategic decisions should stay with people, since they carry brand and cultural risk that algorithms aren’t built to weigh.
Experian’s identity resolution and measurement capabilities help brands tie data from disparate local sources, like platform dashboards, local partners and point-of-sale systems, back to the same person or household. That consistent view is what allows comparative analysis across markets to actually hold up, rather than comparing apples to oranges.
Latest posts
Tapad Device Graph™ and Sojern’s mobile offering unify travel intent signals; achieve amplification rate of more than 600 percent NEW YORK, June 15, 2017 — Tapad, a part of Experian, the leader in cross-device marketing technology, is partnering with Sojern, travel’s direct demand engine, to provide marketers with an even stronger understanding of travelers as they research and shop across multiple devices. Combined with its 350 million global traveler profiles and billions of predictive purchase intent signals, Sojern utilizes the Tapad Device Graph™ to resolve the complex travel consumer journey, target travelers more precisely, and derive more actionable insights for its travel clientele. According to Sojern’s research, travelers visit hundreds of websites preceding their trip purchase, with some consumers reaching upwards of 450 touchpoints prior to booking. Sojern’s partnership with Tapad will help unify these touchpoints across devices, enabling travel brands to more effectively nurture and engage potential buyers during the purchase process, regardless of which device they use. “Sojern’s been focused on travel for over a decade, helping brands activate predictive purchase signals and leverage our traveler profiles into effective performance marketing campaigns,” said Mat Harris, Sojern’s VP of Product, Enterprise Solutions. “The cross-device insights we gain from the Tapad Device Graph provide a valuable tool for our customers to reach travelers across devices in real-time and at scale, on the right device.” Prior to selecting Tapad as its cross-device partner, Sojern surveyed several probabilistic and deterministic cross-device vendors and performed an extensive global test. The test was an examination of scale, match rate and several other factors, which enabled Sojern to learn as much as possible about each vendor. After examining the final test results, Sojern selected Tapad based on its excellent test performance, tried-and-true experience in the market and complimentary business model. To date, Sojern has already seen an amplification rate of more than 600 percent as a result of the integration, meaning that the Tapad Device Graph is connecting an average of six or more device and browser IDs for every one existing Sojern ID. “Not only is Sojern a compatible partner for our singular Device Graph capabilities, but they are also an incredible data partner to help expand our work in the travel industry,” said Pierre Martensson, SVP and GM of Tapad’s global data division. “Working with the team at Sojern allows us to solve a true challenge within the travel industry today: creating a unified view of customers so travel brands can better understand and access their key audiences at every point along their path to purchase.” Contact us today
Leading data insights and cross-device-powered services bridge mobile insights with connectivity to drive real-time consumer intelligence NEW YORK, May 17, 2017 /PRNewswire/ — Tapad, now a part of Experian, the leader in cross-device marketing technology, has partnered with Resonate, a leading provider of real-time consumer intelligence and activation SaaS solutions. Through this partnership, Resonate will leverage the Tapad Device Graph™ to capture a deeper understanding of its mobile app audiences and provide brands with a more direct connection to their intended consumers. The integration of Resonate and Tapad’s technologies equips mobile app brands with insights into their consumers’ values, beliefs, motivations and purchase drivers. As a result, mobile app brands will better understand how to tailor messaging, drive advertising engagement, increase lift in performance across mobile consumers and ultimately boost revenue and returns. Utilizing the advanced data that the Tapad Device Graph™ provides, Resonate will create an Identity Service that connects mobile IDs to Resonate IDs for reporting insights both in-platform and out. To date, Tapad and Resonate have already driven incremental device connections for nearly 60 percent of customer profiles with an amplification rate of more than 120 percent, resulting in more than 400 million net new IDs within Resonate’s user base. “After testing multiple partners over the course of 12 months, it was clear that Tapad was the partner for us, given their ability to provide cross-device connectivity for more than one billion unique IDs against our consumer base,” said Joel Pulliam, SVP and chief product officer at Resonate. “In addition, Resonate customers have an inherent trust in Tapad’s mix of probabilistic and deterministic mobile connectivity data to provide a unified understanding of their mobile audiences.” “Partnering with Resonate will not only provide its brands with a more in-depth and actionable understanding of its consumers, but it will also allow our clients to connect with mobile consumers on a deeper level,” said Pierre Martensson, SVP and GM of Tapad’s global data division. “Resonate is not just answering the question of ‘how’ consumers are making purchases, but also tackling the more difficult question of ‘why’ they make certain buying decisions to best inform mobile brands about their audiences.” Contact us today
Partnership leverages industry-leading Tapad Device Graph™ for more effective video marketing across all connected devices NEW YORK, April 11, 2017 /PRNewswire/ — Tapad, a part of Experian, the leading provider of privacy-safe, cross-device marketing technology solutions, has announced its partnership with Innovid, the world’s leading video marketing platform. This integration enables Innovid to bring cross-device personalization and a more unified viewer experience to its video marketing clients including Bank of America, L’Oréal, Microsoft and Procter & Gamble. Innovid’s proprietary technology is the only platform optimized for video, enabling marketers to thrive in an ever-changing digital television landscape. Since its launch last year, Innovid’s Marketing Cloud Suite has helped marketers increase message relevance and the opportunity to drive conversions, retention and acquisition through video personalization. By leveraging the Tapad Device GraphTM, Innovid’s marketers can now benefit from the ability to drive consistent, personalized user experiences across all devices, creating more impactful connections with consumers and increasing ROI. “Personalization is a must for every data-driven marketer and really needs to happen across all devices to ensure a unified customer journey,” says Ronnie Lavi, SVP of product at Innovid. “At Innovid, we recognize one size does not fit all when it comes to video. As an open platform, we are always looking to add best-of-breed capabilities through integrations and partnerships, and we’ve chosen Tapad because of its superior cross-device expertise.” “Innovid has long paved the way for effective personalization in the video marketing space,” says Pierre Martensson, GM of Tapad’s data division. “As video continues to gain popularity across digital formats, we’re excited to see how our technology empowers Innovid to bring that renowned personalization to more customers across all of their devices.” Contact us today