How can companies measure the impact and open rates of memo blasts?
This fact-check may be outdated. Consider refreshing it to get the most current information.
Executive summary
Measuring the impact and open rates of company memo blasts starts with standard email metrics—open rate, click-through rate (CTR), and click-to-open rate (CTOR)—but requires layering in deliverability checks, list hygiene, A/B testing and alternate outcome measures because raw opens are increasingly unreliable due to mailbox behavior and provider pre-fetching [1] [2] [3].
1. Define the metrics: open rate, CTR and CTOR, and what they tell you
Open rate is the percentage of delivered emails that register as opened and is useful for gauging subject-line effectiveness and immediate attention, while CTR measures clicks from the send to a click and signals downstream engagement; CTOR isolates content effectiveness by dividing clicks by opens to show how compelling the message was to those who actually viewed it [1] [2] [4].
2. Don’t trust raw opens alone—know their technical limits
Modern mail clients and privacy features can overstate or obscure opens: Apple’s Mail Privacy Protection (MPP) pre-fetches images and tracking pixels so it marks messages as opened even when users haven’t engaged, and some corporate clients pre-download content, all of which can inflate open-rate figures and erode their reliability as absolute measures [3] [5].
3. Use weighted averages and cohort tracking for fair comparisons
When campaign sizes vary, a weighted-average approach gives a truer picture of account-level performance and trend lines over time; tracking cohorts (by send date, audience segment, or campaign type) lets teams compare similar blasts—newsletters vs. urgent memos vs. promos—so benchmarks aren’t distorted by volume differences [6] [7].
4. Segment, tag and benchmark against industry and historical data
Segmentation improves relevance and open rates; benchmark current blasts against industry averages (Mailchimp, MailerLite, HubSpot, Campaign Monitor publish cross-industry benchmarks) and the company’s own historical data to set realistic targets and detect anomalies in behavior or deliverability [8] [9] [4] [1].
5. Combine quantitative tracking with qualitative impact measures
Open and click metrics should be paired with outcome KPIs—task completion rates, intranet visits, form submissions, conversions, or NPS/satisfaction surveys—to measure whether a blast produced the intended organizational result rather than just eyeballs; marketing case studies show that linking opens to conversions and business outcomes is essential to proving ROI [10] [11].
6. Improve signal quality with testing, list hygiene and deliverability practices
A/B subject-line tests, send-time experiments and content variants reveal what moves opens and clicks, while routine list cleaning—removing dormant addresses and segmenting unengaged recipients—improves deliverability and the accuracy of engagement metrics; platforms typically include tools to automate these actions [6] [11] [12].
7. Report smartly: present multiple KPIs and explain caveats
Executive reports should show opens, CTR, CTOR, deliverability (bounce rates), and downstream conversions, and explicitly note technical caveats like MPP and client pre-fetching so stakeholders don’t overinterpret open spikes; transparency about measurement limits keeps decision-makers from chasing misleading signals [3] [5] [13].
8. When open tracking is compromised, shift to alternative signals
If privacy features make opens unreliable, emphasize other measurable actions—clicks to intranet pages, completion of embedded surveys, sign-ups, and behavioral markers on linked landing pages—since clicks and on-site activity are less subject to client-side pre-fetching and more directly tied to outcomes [1] [10] [2].
Conclusion
A rigorous measurement approach treats open rate as one signal among many: calculate weighted averages, segment and benchmark, correct for known technical distortions like MPP, run A/B tests and tie email engagement to concrete organizational outcomes; this blended methodology turns memo blasts from guesswork into actionable intelligence [6] [3] [10].