Archive for May, 2011

Live Plus Seven

// May 13th, 2011 // No Comments » // Uncategorized

Most of us have had favourite TV shows cancelled out from under us at one time or another, and have had less than kind words for the programmers and networks that have done the deed. If they only realised just how many people like me loved that show, runs the rant, they would never have pulled the plug.

Today’s programming maestros have a new tool at their disposal to assist them with their decision-making processes (and hopefully spare them from our wrath): “live plus seven”. And sometimes the impact of that tool is significant, as the New York Times recently reported (http://nyti.ms/fZFn6p).

The continuing spread of Digital Video Recorders (such as the TiVo and the MySky) means that more and more consumers are timeshifting their viewing, recording shows and watching them at a time that suits them. In mature markets such as the United States, where DVR penetration is now estimated at 40%, some shows are almost as likely to be watched on a delayed basis as they are to be watched live.

Take, for example, Fringe. This cult sci-fi drama (screening in the U.S. on the Fox network) typically reaches an average of 1.7% of Fox’s 18-49 target audience (2.24 million people) when shown live — a number that would usually guarantee cancellation for the series. However over the course of the seven days following the broadcast, enough extra viewers watch the show via DVR that the cumulative audience climbs to around 3.3 million viewers — enough to see the series renewed (as it has been, for a fourth season starting later this year).

“Live plus seven” — live viewing plus DVR-enabled screening over the next seven days — is not the currency for advertisers, either here or in the U.S. (“commercial plus three days” is an accepted measurement in the United States, while we prefer same day viewing in New Zealand). But it’s gathering momentum amongst programmers as a means of identifying the true following of series at risk.

Lest you think your beloved series is now safe, however, a final observation from the New York Times may just puncture that bubble:

A senior executive from one television production studio, who asked not to be named because of the need to be able to sell shows to the network program heads, said, “They will read the numbers and then they will secretly try to find the justification to renew the shows they love and cancel the ones they don’t.”

Mobile Data

// May 13th, 2011 // No Comments » // Uncategorized

Instant gratification is alive and well and living in your mobile phone.

New Google research has confirmed what smartphone users already knew: those who have such devices use them to guide much of their everyday life. According to Google’s “The Mobile Movement: Understanding Smartphone Users” study (conducted among 5,013 U.S. adult smartphone Internet users in late 2010):

  • 81 percent of smartphone users browse the Internet
  • 77 percent search
  • 68 percent use an app; and
  • 48 percent watch videos on their smartphone

But here comes the crunch:

  • 79 percent of smartphone consumers use their phones to help with shopping via activities such as comparing prices, finding more product info and locating a retailer.
  • 74 percent of consumers who use their mobile device during the shopping process make a purchase online, in-store or on their phones.

The study also found that 70 percent of consumers use their smartphones while in the store.

In other words, just because you have them in your store doesn’t mean that they’re going to buy from you — at least, not without some informed haggling.

The behaviour isn’t a surprise; the numbers are.

Google’s recommendations as a result of this study?

“Develop a comprehensive cross-channel strategy as mobile shoppers use their phones in-store, online and via mobile Web sites and apps to research and make purchase decisions. And implement an integrated marketing strategy with mobile advertising that takes advantage of the knowledge that people are using their smartphones while consuming other media and are influenced by it.”

You can learn more about the Google study via this video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CjUcq_E4I-s

Nielsen Launches ‘Rolls Royce of Measurement’ Systems

// May 13th, 2011 // No Comments » // Uncategorized

June sees the launch of the first part of Nielsen Company’s new Consumer and Media Insights (CMI) research programme, which greatly enhances the information available about Kiwi consumers, their attitudes and their media consumption habits.

At the heart of the new service is a revised and revitalised print readership study. That research is linked with, and informed by, half a dozen integrated modules that tell us much more than we ever knew before about consumer behaviour, including:

  • Household Expenditure
  • Product Usage & Purchasing
  • Consumer Insights
  • Media Engagement
  • Digital Ratings
  • TV Ratings

 

In a nutshell, the new CMI data will enable us to drill ever more deeply into the behaviours, habits and opinions of Kiwi newspaper and magazine readers, including:

  • their attitudes towards a wide range of issues (through more than 200 new Attitude statements)
  • how they spend their money (275+ areas of Household Expenditure)
  • how they currently use a wide range of products in key categories
  • their future purchase intentions
  • how they engage with, and can be reached by, other media

 

This is a comprehensive overhaul of the existing print readership programme, so it will be revamped in stages. First step: release of the Statistic NZ Household Expenditure insights next month.

Brand as Cult

// May 2nd, 2011 // No Comments » // Uncategorized

“Bombarded with a cascade of products that have few real differences, people need some other criteria to determine what they should buy. Moreover, consumers are so media literate, blasted as they have been with too much advertising, that they have learned how to edit what they don’t want to hear to find the little that they do.”

That rather bleak description summarises author and adman Douglas Atkin’s view of today’s marketing environment. You’ll be pleased to hear that Atkin’s Eeyore-like perspective was challenged by a Eureka moment on a rainy night in New York City as he “watched eight enthusiastic sneaker-wearers at a focus group express the kind of intense conviction I had only imagined possible at a revivalist meeting or cult gathering. Their language verged on evangelical; their passion was on the brink of zealotry. What I saw was ironic considering that I had just left a meeting of anxious marketers who had been fretting that brand loyalty was dead.”

That chance encounter led Atkin to consider whether there were lessons for marketers to learn by studying cults and other organisations (such as the U.S. Marine Corps) which inspired commitment above and beyond the call of duty – and that in turn led to a journey of exploration which he describes in his book “The Culting of Brands”.

The very word cult implies that its followers are psychologically flawed individuals, gullible and desperate. Atkin argues otherwise, pointing out that successful cults will only grow if their members are socially appealing enough to proselytise – people in significant numbers are not going to join an organisation populated by social failures. In other words, cult members are just like you, me or any other demographic cluster desired by marketers. A few brands already have cult-like status amongst their followers: Harley-Davidson, the Grateful Dead, Apple. How can this be duplicated?

Atkin suggests that four basic steps lie at the heart of any cult:

  1. An individual might have a feeling of difference, even alienation from the world around them
  2. This leads to openness to or searching for a more compatible environment
  3. They are likely to feel a sense of security or safety in a place where one’s difference from the outside world is seen as a virtue, not a handicap
  4. This presents the circumstances for self-actualisation within a group of like-minded others who celebrate the individual for being himself

If these are valid hypotheses, then perhaps they are nowhere better encapsulated than in the one-time Apple catchphrase “Think Different”.

So what does it take to attract a passionate following? Atkin suggests that we should not try to be all things to everyone (difficult as that might be for a marketer to embrace). Instead of trying not to alienate anyone, you must target the alienated and simultaneously separate your organisation from the mainstream. Harley-Davidson embraces this fact in its brand guidelines document: “Harley Truth #1: Harley is not for everyone.” Arguably local operator Hell Pizza achieves similar separation through its polarising advertising persona.

It helps to have an enemy that can be readily demonised, thus positioning your brand as a plucky crusader triumphing against overwhelming odds. Apple has been fortunate (?) to have several evil empires within easy reach: initially IBM, ruthlessly repositioned as dictatorial Big Brother in the classic 1984 commercial that introduced Macintosh to the world; then Microsoft, relentlessly lampooned in a series of Mac vs PC comparison commercials; and more recently the record industry, resisting the digerati with its last analogue breath until Apple freed music through the iPod. The iPhone? Torn from the grasp of the cellular providers we love to hate.

Not all enemies are tangible. The iPad owes at least some of its success to the freedom of mobility it brings its owners – free from the constraints of tethered communication. Nike encourages its followers to “just do it”, demonising the notion of “not doing it” for millions of fitness-conscious consumers. And Harley brings out the rebel in its core catchment, mostly middle-aged males trapped by the weekday constraints of comfortable suburbia (Atkin neatly describes it as “the claustrophobia of the everyday”).

Another vital attribute of cult brands: the people (whether staff, influencers or users). Even before it had much to offer in the way of technology, Apple employed what it called product evangelists, whose job it was to build an enthusiastic following. Trade Me, through its community notice boards, has always cultivated a sense of “members helping members” – a small-town virtue, even in a neighbourhood of 2.75 million users. The urge to belong is a deeply-felt human need, and that’s not just demonstrated by the fact that so many of us have signed up to Facebook: a legendary Yale University study of 194 patients who had been hospitalised by a heart attack found that 55 percent of those reporting no support (i.e. from friends, relatives, religious organisations or voluntary groups) died within the year compared with 27 percent of those with some social network in place.

Regular contact is another important attribute. Call it the “No Marine left behind” doctrine – the notion that your loyalty will be reciprocated by the organisation, even to the point of ensuring that you don’t slip away easily. Not just “your call is important to us” – rather, “without you we’re nothing, together we’re one”.

Our cult poster child, Apple, even gives an example of what happens when core values are allowed to wither. During Steve Jobs’ long exile from the company, Apple “lost its original commitment and vision and became distracted by quarterly results and foolhardy product development”.

Steve Jobs’ speech to software developers and dealers on his return really said it all:

“Marketing is about values. We have to be very clear on what we want our customers to know about us. They want to know who is Apple and what do we stand for. What we’re about is not making boxes for people to get their jobs done, although we do that very well. What Apple is about, its core value is that we believe that people with passion can change the world for the better. That’s what we believe.”

If you want your brand to be cult-ivated, that speech is as good a place as any to start.

Changes We’d Like To See

// May 2nd, 2011 // No Comments » // Uncategorized

  1.  Cryptology added to the curriculum for trainee pharmacists, to assist them   with deciphering doctors’ handwriting
  2. A “what were you thinking?” automated alert on “Reply All” emails, triggered by the presence of offensive or merely foolish language
  3. An official ban on press releases that position any minor change in real estate statistics as either “recovery” or “calamity”
  4. A sensor on the mailbox (for homes with long driveways) which tells us “you’ve got mail”
  5. A ruling by the Advertising Standards Authority on whether the estimated-duration-until-destination signage posted on motorway onramps is misleading or just acceptable puffery
  6. A Personal Video Recorder with individual user delete codes, so that only the person who actually recorded a worthy programme can delete it to make way for someone else’s mindless entertainment choice
  7. Movie reviews that take account of our own stored preferences (plus critic and consumer reviews) to predict whether we’d actually like the latest movie release
  8. Spam that was at least coherent, maybe even gave us a laugh (and an apology for wasting our bandwidth)

So Much Data, So Little Time

// May 2nd, 2011 // No Comments » // Uncategorized

In the March issue of the Journal of Advertising Research, seven distinguished researchers (who collectively form the Engagement and Talent Committee of the Research Transformation Initiative at the Advertising Research Foundation) turned their analytical abilities towards forecasting “The Shape of Marketing Research in 2021″.

The most meaningful conclusion they reached:

THE RIVER
To describe the future structure of the marketing-research industry, we introduce the metaphor of the river. The fundamental premise is that research in 2021 will represent a continuous, organic flow of knowledge—a “river” of information. Today, maybe 80 percent of marketing issues are addressed by conducting a market-research project. By 2021, we think that leading edge companies—probably led by consumer packaged goods and technologically driven enterprises—will look for answers to 80 percent of their marketing issues by “fishing the river” of information.

That conclusion brings its own consequences (and a whole new set of problems/opportunities):

  • The researcher of the future will be an accomplished navigator of the unpredictable waters in this complex river system.
  • The focus of the marketing-focused organisation will be on mastering the strategies and tools for “fishing” the relevant data from the flow of information and channelling the river toward information that is valuable for the firm.
  • This trend will require firms to develop new tools to collect and distil the flow of information. The use of a diverse set of tools also will require collaboration between different functions in the organisation. And that likely will include customer insights, information technology, research and development, and an increased reliance on vendors with highly specialised expertise.

 So from where might the data flow? Some possibilities suggested by the researchers:

  • Mobile Data: One of the biggest opportunities for marketers is the opportunity to collect real-time geographic information about consumers and to geotarget consumers
  • User-generated Content and Text Mining: Web 2.0 provides gathering places for Internet users in social-network sites, blogs, forums, and chat-rooms. These assembly points leave footprints in the form of colossal amounts of textual data. The difficulty in obtaining insights from online user-generated content is that consumers’ postings often are extremely unstructured, large in magnitude, and not easy to syndicate.
  • Social Networks: The integration of social networking sites with other sources of information such as online retailers and media sources will amplify the opportunities to derive actionable marketing insights from online word-of-mouth content.
  • In-Store Path Data: Tools such as PathTracker by Sorensen combine RFID and video systems to allow marketers to obtain a full picture of what is happening in the store and enable tracing consumers and product flow. The difficulty with converting these extremely valuable data into insights lies in the magnitude of data and the complexity of analysis.
  • The Internet of Things: More and more products now are being embedded with sensors (e.g., RFID and wireless devices) to create a marketplace of interrelated network of products. Such a network can allow marketers to track consumers geographically and over time.

For more details see http://bit.ly/fCjEfA

It’s clear that the researchers of the near future risk drowning in data. What’s not quite so clear is how that flood will be effectively managed — either by researchers or their marketing clients.

Digital Body Language

// May 2nd, 2011 // No Comments » // Uncategorized

The term “Digital Body Language” was coined in 2007 to describe our new Internet-enabled ability to develop a better understanding of consumers by monitoring the way they behave online. It’s a concept that’s slowly developing a following amongst marketers, particularly in the U.S. (and even spawned a recent book of the same name by Eloqua CTO and co-founder Steve Woods).

So what does it mean and how can it help us?

In the prehistoric era we now know as Pre-Internet, potential customers left tracks that the eagle-eyed sales prospector could follow. If Jack and Jill were planning a trip back to the home country to re-enact their tragic childhood trip up (and swiftly down) the Glastonbury Hills, they’d have to phone or visit a travel agent — perhaps first for brochures and timetable information (and to quiz an agent who knew the area). Subsequent visits were required to book the travel and finally to pick up the tickets and the paperwork. Such regular points of contact made it easy to target and upsell the Jack & Jills as they considered their various options. Result: a better-quality travel experience for J&J, happy customers and a more profitable Lifetime Customer Value equation for the supplier.

Skip ahead to today. Jack and Jill are in contact with old Glastonbury schoolmates via Facebook, so they’ve already got the skinny on where to stay in the area (although their friends’ first recommendation rated poorly on TripAdvisor, proving that the wisdom of the crowd is not infallible).

J&J checked out photos of the hills on Flickr so they’re able to identify the gradient and plan their best route to the top (Jack’s left knee is a bit dodgy these days). They’ve Googled the various stops on their itinerary; and they’ve been watching the last minute deal sites and local online travel agency sites for some time, searching for the best airfare deals. In other words, J&J’s trip is largely self-directed or relying on the guidance of their social networks – but they don’t know what they don’t know (and a little expert advice might have made a big difference).

It’s not easy for a local agent to identify 21st Century Jack and Jill as potential customers — but their Digital Body Language (aka online behaviour) does provide both clues and contact points:

What keywords did J&J use on Google? How did they put the word out on Facebook? Did they search for Glastonbury accommodation on TripAdvisor?

Any of these and many other points of intersection online provide opportunities for a new type of selling and marketing, triggered by context and behaviour — but one which requires new, more effective, faster processes for analysing and measuring Digital Body Language. It’s a new skill set required by tomorrow’s marketers.

Research Online, Buy Offline

// May 2nd, 2011 // No Comments » // Uncategorized

It seems counter-intuitive in many cases, but a number of studies confirm it: products promoted online are likely to generate as much as six times more sales through offline channels as they do online (even if the product is readily available to purchase through the Internet).

Why would consumers go to all the trouble of researching and resourcing online – and then not just click on the Buy button?

A recently-released Cross-Channel White Paper by Oracle examined why consumers use more than one channel to research and buy products — and they definitely provide useful pointers for multichannel marketers. Here’s what some of the 1054 U.S. consumers surveyed had to say:

  • 43 percent said they called a customer service representative because they couldn’t locate all the product or service information needed to buy online.
  • 39 percent said they went to the store because they prefer to touch and feel the product.
  • 36 percent said they visited the store to compare several brands of the same product.
  • 22 percent said they opted for the store because they needed to receive the product immediately.
  • 19 percent said they chose to call a customer service representative because the online buying process was too complicated or they encountered an error.
  • 19 percent wanted to ask about the return/refund policy.
  • 15 percent said they wanted to ask a customer service representative about shipping options.

Whilst it would seem that some of these issues could be resolved through improved website design and functionality or even through web-assisted communication with a live helpdesk operator, at least a couple (immediate supply and the urge to touch and feel the product) require real rather than virtual interaction. And we’d suggest that (even though they didn’t specifically say so) consumers sometimes need the validation and reassurance that only speaking to a real person can deliver.

We’re not quite ready for a totally-automated, personality free supply chain – and probably never will be.