# 43% of marketers underutilize in-store retail media despite recognizing full-funnel value

*IAB and Grocery TV survey reveals a deployment gap for a channel marketers already believe works across awareness, consideration, and conversion.*

By **Jenny Huang Goodman MPA MSc MHSA, Principal** — The Stash Edge, Hako Shikin LLC.
Published 2026-10-16.

Canonical: https://www.pops4.com/stash/articles/marketers-survey-pattern-via-iab-and-grocery-tv-2026-10-16t15-7
Subject: Marketers (survey pattern via IAB and Grocery TV)
Tags: in-store media, retail media networks, shelf play, offline attribution, grocery marketing, trade promotion

---

According to research from the Interactive Advertising Bureau and Grocery TV, marketers understand that in-store retail media drives results across the entire funnel—yet **43 percent** of respondents admit they underutilize the channel. The gap between acknowledged value and actual deployment suggests that in-store digital screens, endcap placements, and audio spots remain underfunded relative to their perceived performance.

The survey, reported by The Shelby Report, documents that marketers recognize in-store retail media as effective for awareness, consideration, and conversion, not just last-mile activation. Brands treating the channel as a coupon-only tactic are leaving reach and frequency on the table. The **43 percent** underutilization figure points to budget allocation inertia: dollars flow to familiar digital platforms while a proven offline medium waits.

In-store retail media works because it intercepts shoppers at the moment of highest intent. A shopper standing in the cereal aisle is already in category; a screen message or floor decal shifts brand choice without fighting for attention against email, feed scroll, or streaming ad breaks. The medium captures undivided focus in a decision window measured in seconds. No cookies, no viewability disputes, no skip button. The conversion path is immediate: shelf to cart.

The underutilization stems from three friction points. First, in-store networks operate on fragmented inventory—each grocer, pharmacy, or club runs its own platform, making media buys more complex than a single programmatic dashboard. Second, attribution remains harder than digital: tracking lift requires loyalty-card data partnerships or syndicated panel reads, not pixel fires. Third, creative production differs from social or display; effective in-store assets are static or looping video, not interactive or swipeable, and must comply with retailer content guidelines.

A small physical-product brand can enter in-store retail media without national grocery contracts. Start with a regional chain that sells your product. Contact the retailer's media sales arm—most grocers now run ad networks managed by Cooler Screens, Grocery TV, or Vibenomics—and request a test campaign in **ten to twenty stores** for **thirty days**. Budget **one thousand to three thousand dollars** for a local pilot. Creative can be a single static image: product shot, benefit claim, aisle location. No video crew required.

Measure by comparing sales velocity in test stores against matched control stores during the same period. Pull POS data from the retailer or your distributor. A **10 to 15 percent** velocity lift in test doors justifies expansion. Layer in a retailer-funded trade promotion—temporary price reduction or bonus-size offer—and the in-store media amplifies the deal's visibility, compounding lift. The play scales store by store, market by market, without requiring a national footprint.

The broader pattern is that offline media with measurable in-store impact remains cheaper per engaged shopper than online channels with attribution theater. Marketers who wait for perfect dashboards miss the window. The winning move is to test small, measure clean, and deploy where the shopper already stands.

## The takeaway

In-store retail media delivers full-funnel results but stays underutilized due to fragmented buying and attribution friction—small brands can pilot locally for under three thousand dollars.

---

## Publisher

**Hako Shikin LLC** — Virginia Beach, Virginia. Founded 1997. ASI 217876 · DUNS 18-204-6339.
Principal and author: **Jenny Huang Goodman MPA MSc MHSA**.

- Author: https://www.huanggoodman.com/about
- LLM context: https://www.pops4.com/stash/llms.txt
- MCP endpoint, for AI agents: https://mcp.pops4.com/mcp
- Client dashboard: https://dashboard.pops4.com/
- Catalogue: 70,000+ products, 200+ brands