Most conversations about attention focus on which platforms and environments deliver the most consumer viewing time. But, warns Ellie Reeves, Effectiveness Manager of outdoor specialists Talon, marketers could be "throwing money after seconds" unless they also think about the most effective use of that time.
Out of home has always had a unique relationship with attention. We are an attention guaranteed media channel – a billboard isn’t built where it can’t be seen. And in many of the places OOH meets people, brands don’t have long to make an impact. Whether it's a driver passing a roadside site or a commuter catching a glimpse of a bus wrap, the opportunity can be brief. The good news is that these small windows of time can still have a big impact.
Recent findings from On Device’s 2026 Benchmark Report which analysed brand lift studies across media channels, show OOH playing an increasingly important role in driving action, outperforming digital display, digital video, digital audio and TV on measures linked to consumer intent.
And while that may be driven by proximity and point of sale advertising, it also reflects the growing range of ways brands can connect with people through the channel. With the rise of programmatic OOH, the channel can play wherever you need it to in the customer journey, the challenge is ensuring that the role of the campaign is clearly linked to the outcome it's trying to achieve.
Analysing what drives real outcomes for brands
At Talon, we've carried out extensive research to understand what's driving this growth in consumer traction. Analysing 382 brand uplift reports across 182 advertisers, with spend levels varying from £47k to £4.4m, we’ve been able to understand what factors are most important to shift real outcomes for brands.
Purchase Intent and Frequency of Exposure
Purchase Intent and Emotional Engagement
Source: Talon, N = 382 campaigns. These charts reflect average uplifts in purchase intent collected through a passive methodology for OOH, using respondent location data while the campaign was live to define control and exposed groups. This is then correlated with average frequency of exposure and levels of emotional engagement when reshown the OOH creative.
Interestingly, simply increasing exposure does not have a strong relationship with purchase intent, emotional engagement with creative, however, does. That's not to say frequency doesn't matter. Reaching people consistently remains important, but too often we assume visibility alone will do the work.
If attention is the metric we're talking about, then meaningful connection matters far more than the number of times an ad is seen.
Make your second count
When media planning becomes focused on maximising frequency, it's easy to lose sight of the fundamentals, who you're talking to, where you're reaching them, when you're reaching them and what you're actually saying.
If you’ve only got a second to connect with consumers, to drive your KPI, we need to think critically about how the creative is working to do this as quickly as it can. Creative needs to be designed around the objective, the format, the environment and the mindset of the audience – you wouldn’t simply cut and paste a TV advert onto TikTok. The same principle applies for OOH environments. It’s simple stuff, but it’s still hard to pull off in the quagmire of planning and creative strategy.
When we combined our brand uplift findings with creative testing data, a clear pattern emerged - different creative elements drive different outcomes.
Spontaneous Awareness and Scores for Noticing Logos
Source: Talon, N = 81 campaigns. These findings correlate creative testing data with average brand metric uplifts captured via brand lift studies of the associated campaigns.
If you’re trying to drive spontaneous awareness, your brand logo is the biggest thing that matters. In OOH, centralise it, enlarge it, make sure it’s unmissable within a mere second’s time frame. However, if you're looking to influence perceptions or encourage purchase consideration, you need to stand out from competitors.
Using succinct sub-messaging that argues your case helps drive positive perceptions, but the more effectively that message is understood and absorbed, the more likely it is to influence purchase intent. But whilst messaging is a driver of effectiveness, brand attribution is consistently the biggest driver of brand metrics, and is still an enduring challenge for advertisers (see charts).
Quality Perceptions and Message Awareness
Purchase Intent and Dwell Time on CTA/Message
Source for both charts: Talon, N = 81 campaigns. These findings correlate creative testing data with average brand metric uplifts captured via brand lift studies of the associated campaigns.
Effective time spent with consumers isn’t just about giving people the time to read something, it’s about giving them a reason to. The length of copy can’t overwhelm and the message has to be meaningful. Stronger shifts in purchase intent can be driven by connecting to cultural moments (+25%), referencing monetary incentives (+20%), and using a clear call to action (+115%). The power is in what you’re saying to people, not how many times you’re saying it.
There are no small parts, only small actors
As “all impressions aren’t created equal”, we can say the same for seconds. While emerging datasets and AI tools can help us buy more of these, we can’t lose sight of how we’re making these seconds matter. The attention conversation needs to shift to earning attention, not buying it, with a focus on what creative achieves rather than platforms promise.
We can’t be using a platform’s dwell time as a tick box for campaign effectiveness – it’s a lens for us to be self critical and ask the question, “does my creative really work?”
Explore what is shaping the future of advertising at the IPA Effectiveness Conference 2026
The opinions expressed here are those of the authors and were submitted in accordance with the IPA terms and conditions regarding the uploading and contribution of content to the IPA newsletters, IPA website, or other IPA media, and should not be interpreted as representing the opinion of the IPA.
Last updated 11 August 2026