The Quisenblog

Used to be that those of us in “sales & marketing” had the mindset that once the sale was made, our jobs as marketing professionals was pretty much done.

We succeeded. We got the prospects attention. Intrigued him into considering us. Demonstrated our value to him. Then closed the sale. Let’s order some martinis!

Not so fast, Buckaroo. As anybody who has an expensive piece of workout equipment gathering dust in the basement will tell you, it’s one thing to buy something. It’s something else to extract full value from it. And unless our buyer gets his money’s worth out of it in the form of value, he’s never coming back for another purchase. (And he might tell any friends who are considering it to forget it.)

So what to do? Acknowledge that as marketers, our job isn’t finished when the check clears the bank or the customer loads our product into her car. We need to mindfully help her get the true value out of our offerings. Customer support. Product updates. Advertising. One-to-one communications. All of which support her purchase and help her feel part of the “family.”

Getting value out of our offerings is smart business in a lot of ways. For one, it makes it easy for our customer to justify the purchase. Our product did for him what he expected it to do (and hopefully more). It communicates that we care about our customers and are looking out for them. It elevates our offerings over others in the category. It makes our customers more likely to come back to us in the future. It might even make them (dare we say) more loyal about our products and our company. It will give them a good story to tell others when the subject of your products comes up in conversation.

And compared to the cost of attracting new customers, it costs peanuts.

A customer who uses your product or service a lot is worth way more than one who has paid for it but lapsed or is a casual user. Marketers that realize that—and act on that—are quite a ways down the road to creating a customer for life.

Posted by Mickey

If you enjoyed this post, make sure you subscribe to my RSS feed!

Mickey On Customers customer support, extracting value, rowing machine

Funny how a scene from a movie set in the 1930s can help provide a lesson for audience engagement in the 21st century.

This 2½ minute scene from Jean Shepard’s classic holiday film “A Christmas Story” provides a great example of how a “worst practice” can kill a community of followers.

Nine-year-old Ralphie is a devoted follower of the “Little Orphan Annie Radio Hour,” and listens to the program religiously. In an effort to build a community of dedicated followers, the program’s sponsor allowed kids to become “members” of a special club: “Annie’s Secret Circle.” Club members received an official-looking letter and a special decoder ring which allowed them to decipher coded messages that were broadcast at the end of each program.

Only Official Club Members with the official decoder ring could decipher these messages. Once you opted-in, you were part of a community of kids who also followed Little Orphan Annie and her adventures. You could identify fellow members by the ring they proudly wore. Suddenly, you had a connection to kids you didn’t even know through membership and shared allegiance to a radio show. Only this community had the ability to decipher Annie’s secret messages.

While this was a great way to build and engage a community, the sponsor ended up blowing it. As demonstrated in this scene, as Ralphie was decoding his first much anticipated secret message (hoping no doubt to discover the location of a hidden treasure or find a clue to next week’s adventure), he was let down to find the coded “messages” were no more than “lousy commercials” from the show’s sponsor, Ovaltine. In frustration, he threw his decoder ring away.

This scene dramatizes an important point in engaging your audience. Once you have a community, be sure the content you send them is relevant, useful and wanted. If your content becomes about “you” and not about “them,” you’ll see followers drop off and fall away, just as Ralphie did.

From a content standpoint, it always helps to be thinking in terms of the next engagement. Filter your content by asking, “Is what I’m about to send enough to get my followers to come back the next time?”

Posted by Mickey

If you enjoyed this post, make sure you subscribe to my RSS feed!

Mickey New Media, On Customers, Social Media, Uncategorized audience engagement, building community, Christmas Story, Little Orphan Annie, Ralphie

A lot is being said and written about Toyota’s recall of thousands of its units due to faulty accelerator pedals. The media is talking. Customers are talking. Late-night talk show hosts are talking. But Toyota itself? It’s not talking.

To be fair, Toyota spokespeople are talking. It’s just that they’re not saying anything. Peruse this ad that ran in this Sunday’s paper, and you’ll see what I mean.

While I have no doubt that Toyota’s intentions are good and that the company’s priority is the safety and satisfaction of its customers, one would never know that from the way the company is behaving. Its take-it-slow, let’s-get-to-the-bottom-of-this-and-have-all-the-pieces-in-place-before-we-go-public approach isn’t doing much in the way of maintaining trust. Customers have urgent questions now. Is my car affected? Is it safe to drive? When will it be fixed? What assurances can the automaker give me it is safe?

With all the questions that abound, not just from Toyota owners but from dealers, the media and the general public, this close-lipped approach is proving to be a violation of the trust Toyota has spent decades earning among the car-buying public.

The reality is this: if you’re not out there telling your story, somebody else will be. And you never know who that’s going to be. In these days of Social Media, where anyone with an Internet connection has a microphone, there’s going to be no shortage of commentary. But without a corporate voice, there’s no filter for this information, and the public is left with the uncomfortable feeling that, “There’s something Toyota’s not saying.”

Why is it when there is some major auto recall that the manufacturer gets sweaty palms about the whole notion of transparency? It is the ONLY thing that will contribute to maintaining/rebuilding the trust that is necessary to regain its former position. One need only go back to the Tylenol tampering episode of 1982 to see how it can be successful.

Adopting a “you-know-what-we-know” stance, if taken with the interests of the customer in mind, would go a long way to soothing buyer/owner/dealer anxieties and also nip a lot of the media finger-pointing and speculation in the bud. Accept the fact that you’re going to be fodder for late-night comedians for a while. Don’t stress the fact that some of the answers you’re giving are uncomfortable or uncertain. Trying to do business behind a curtain during a time of crisis management is opening the door to long-term erosion of loyalty.

Toyota’s #1 asset during this time is its base of loyal customers. But how can your most passionate owners stand up for you if they don’t know what’s going on?

From a practical standpoint, there’s a lot Toyota could commit to in order to minimize the damage to its reputation. Offering a 10% discount on new models when owners trade up from a recalled model. Offering an industry-best 10-year warranty, retroactive to 2009 models. Offering free upgraded loaners immediately to those affected.

But above all, be transparent. Take the attitude of, “If I were a customer, how would I expect the company to take care of me?”

It’s the feeling that “there’s something they’re not telling me” from all stakeholders here that is sewing the seeds for discontent.

Posted by Mickey

If you enjoyed this post, make sure you subscribe to my RSS feed!

Mickey On Customers crisis management, customer satisfaction, incentives, loyal customers, Social Media, Toyota recall, transparency, trust

“Our product sucked!”

Not exactly a textbook way of launching an upgraded product image, but definitely attention getting. That’s exactly what Domino’s Pizza is doing. The brand started running spots with clips (I suppose actual verbatims) from customer focus groups where the people panned their pizza: “The crust tastes like cardboard.” “The sauce is like ketchup.” And on and on.

Here’s a 4-minute corporate video that launched the same time as the new campaign.

The brutal honesty of the campaign is refreshing. While many client-types would deem such a strategy “risky,” to me it makes sense on so many levels. For one, Domino’s own research showed that 67% of ITS CUSTOMERS thought its product was in dire need of an upgrade. People didn’t order Domino’s for the quality of the pie. They ordered for the convenience, price and reliability. When you set out to launch a new campaign, you have to start with where your customers are.

Secondly, by taking such a non-conformist tone, Domino’s has been able to attract a ton of attention outside the advertising space. Over 700 daily newspapers covered the campaign. Late night talk show hosts have jumped on board. The campaign has been a trending topic on the Social Media circuit. Any idea what the “value” of this media coverage and conversation is worth?

Most importantly, this campaign provides a “sea change” moment for the brand. Rather than soft pedal a new formulation, the brand is jumping in with both feet, drawing a line in the sand. From this day forward, the brand seems to be saying, we will stand for something different.

Now, of course, the pressure is on Domino’s to pay it off. The proof is in the pizza, to borrow a metaphor. If the “big changes” the brand is promising turn out to be temporary or not so big, and customers’ perceptions of it remain the same, then all this publicity will have been wasted. Worse, they will alienate any new customers that may have come over as the result of this campaign. The brand will have damaged itself but good.

Then again, small risks limit you to small rewards. Bold steps can lead to “curve-jumping” results.

Only time will tell if this campaign from Domino’s is a success. But for the sake of all brands who are content to sell a below-average product, I sincerely hope it will be.

Posted by Mickey

If you enjoyed this post, make sure you subscribe to my RSS feed!

Mickey On Customers brand association, Customers, Domino's Pizza, focus groups, new campaign, product, successful campaign, Value

This is an actual Facebook entry posted by a friend of mine a few weeks ago. He was referencing the AT&T TV spots featuring Luke Wilson.

AT&T launched the campaign in response to Verizon’s “We’ve Got a Map For That” campaign, which uses red and blue maps to highlight AT&T’s 3G “dead spots” across the country. AT&T felt the need to counter punch, and thus came up with this tactical campaign.

The problem is, as the aforementioned Facebook entry alludes to, in its attempt to spin the facts, AT&T has dabbled in some untruths. Not that they lied, exactly—the lawyers must have racked up the billable hours splitting legal hairs. Seems the company’s idea of “coverage” isn’t what Verizon was talking about.

Here’s where it gets sticky for AT&T. If you lead your market to believe something, you better pay it off. Dancing around the facts may make you feel better, but it will just turn your audience off. And turn them against you.

As proof, a quick Google blog search on “AT&T 3G” finds verbatims from bloggers and AT&T customers alike saying “AT&T Lies Again”, “AT&T Moves the Goal Post”, and “Dude, where’s my 3G coverage?”

What’s more? While a marketer can contribute to the conversation, he very likely won’t get the last word. Case in point, here’s what Luke Wilson says…

And here’s what a non-paid Verizon customer says…

This can’t be the kind of word of mouth AT&T was hoping for. But that’s what happens when your audience catches you trying to mislead.

So what could AT&T have done to counter Verizon without bordering on the misleading? My advice would be to speak only about their strengths. Focus on markets where their 3G coverage is strong, and remind customers why they chose AT&T in the first place. Maybe even play off the ridiculousness of the more-places-is-better foundation of Verizon’s maps:

“True, Verizon has 3G coverage in Pierre, South Dakota.
But how often do you find yourself in Pierre, South Dakota?”

For many marketers, there are times you need to get out there and counter punch when a competitor starts eating your lunch. At such times, it is imperative that you do so transparently from your Brand Vision. And to do everything in your power to ensure the bond of trust between you and your customers is never compromised.

Trust is the currency of success.

Posted by Mickey

If you enjoyed this post, make sure you subscribe to my RSS feed!

Mickey Media, On Customers 3G, AT&T, brand vision, campaign, cell phone coverage, Facebook, factual information, Luke Wilson, success, trust, Verizon, We’ve Got a Map For That

Let’s say you are a start-up company with a new product in a competitive category and a very limited marketing budget. Where would you start? Which of the following would you guess would give you the most “bang for the buck”? Which is the most likely to make you famous?

A) Develop a visually appealing logo.
B) Develop some distinctive packaging.
C) Develop a friendly web site.
D) Develop a smart, descriptive tag line.

So what would it be? The logo? The tag line?

If it were my money, I would invest it in “B.” I’d first put emphasis on developing distinctive packaging. Why? Two reasons. First, product packaging is the key touchpoint the customer will have (at least initially) with the brand. With the packaging, you have the opportunity to define the brand for the customer. It is the chance to compete on a level playing field, head-to-head with your competitors.

And secondly, at its best, package design can elicit an emotional reaction from the consumer. It can make him feel happy. Or smart. Or frugal. Or luxurious. A package can infer the values of the brand and engage all the physical senses. The consumer can see it, touch it, smell it, all of which goes into forming a lasting impression of the brand. Instantly, it helps him form a decision about it: yes, this is a useful product I should consider, or no, this is not a product I would be comfortable with or it looks like what I’m already using.

In fact, stop for a moment and think of a product you love. Chances are the mental picture in your mind is of the packaging.

Sorry to say, but I’ve yet to hear of anyone getting teary-eyed over a logo or getting inspired by a tag line.

What is it that makes a package stand out in the sea of 45,000+ items shoppers are confronted with in some retail environments? Four words: respect for the eye. A pleasing color palate. Eye-attracting negative space. Clean, uncluttered type and graphics treatment. And finally, some sort of visual “hook” that makes it stand out amongst its competitors.

I don’t mean this to diminish the need for a crisp logo and a thoughtful tag line. It’s just that as far as impact goes, organizations owe it to themselves to spend a proportionate amount of time and resources on the part of their business that wins sales.

Posted by Mickey

If you enjoyed this post, make sure you subscribe to my RSS feed!

Mickey Media, On Customers aesthetic, brand association, brand emotion, business sales, competition, distinctive packaging, logo, marketing budget, start-up company, tag line

The poet Maya Angelou perhaps said it best: “People will forget what you said. People will forget what you did. But people will never forget how you made them feel.”

Effective marketing has always been about storytelling, but for the longest time the stories we told appealed to the intellect and were of the “factual” variety: this detergent has 25% more cleansing power; three out of four dentists prefer this brand of toothpaste; this brand of peanut butter is free of hydrogenated oils, etc. As marketers, we were trying to plant “thoughts” about a brand or product into a prospect’s mind.

Today, the role of marketing storytelling has evolved to include feelings about brands. It is going beyond logic to enabling emotional connections that have less and less to do with the actual function of the product itself.

The strongest brands have always evoked strong emotions from its users. Kleenex. Campbell’s Soup. Jeep. Nike. Feelings build loyalty and the feeling of community.

Since the emergence of Social Media, we now have endless opportunities to learn about our customers and enrich their brand experiences.

So as part of your marketing or creative brief, why not ask simply, “How do we want our customers to feel when considering or using our product”? The answer to that simple question should open up a lot of possibilities for you. Instead of relying totally on “reason” to win a customer, you’ll think more in terms of the entire brand experience.

Some marketing gurus refer to this as “360-degree marketing,” but really, it’s an acknowledgment that in today’s world of marketing, feelings trump thoughts every time.

Posted by Mickey

If you enjoyed this post, make sure you subscribe to my RSS feed!

Mickey On Customers, Social Media 360-degree marketing, brand communities, brand connections, brand experiences, brand feeling, brand loyalty, creative brief, Maya Angelou

For those of you who are convinced that all it takes to change a consumer’s mind is some irrefutable statistical data, it would be wise to revisit the fate of Dr. Ignaz Semmelweis.

Dr. Semmelweis (1818 -1865) was a Hungarian physician who in 1847 discovered that the incidence of potentially fatal puerperal fever (also know as childbed fever) could be drastically cut simply by doctors washing their hands during the delivery process. Dr. Semmelweis drew his conclusion by compiling and analyzing data from hundred of deliveries, both physician-assisted and midwife-assisted. His conclusions were indeed eye-popping: infant mortality in clinics where hand washing was the norm fell from 10% to just over 1%.

With such compelling data, one would think that the medical establishment would rush to adopt the simple practice of hand washing as protocol in the delivery room. But despite Dr. Semmelweis’s best efforts, the practice was not widely accepted until well after his death, when Louis Pasteur confirmed the germ theory.

Wow. If evidence that a simple practice such as washing your hands can cut infant mortality by 90% isn’t compelling enough to change behavior, what makes you think some factoid about the difference between you and your competitors will?

For most consumers, facts don’t change minds. Facts simply justify what they already think. Trying to change someone’s mind with facts is fine, but you’d be advised to wrap it in some bigger story.

Take teenage smoking campaigns, for example. For decades, millions of dollars in public service dollars went in to costly campaigns to convince teens to quit smoking, or better, to not take it up at all. These campaigns all used undeniable statistics, and made for a very compelling story. And the results? Virtually no change in teen smoking behavior for more than 20 years.

The past decade, however, saw the launch of the “No Stank You” campaign, which rather than convincing with statistics, focused on the “uncool” aspects of smoking, and basically made fun of kids who smoked.

This campaign has been monumentally successful, lowering teen smoking rates by more than 30%. With nary a statistic in sight.

So if you want to change behavior, have more on your side than facts, statistics and other empirical data. Create a movement. Play to peer pressure. Make your product heroic. But whatever you do, transcend logic.

Posted by Mickey

If you enjoyed this post, make sure you subscribe to my RSS feed!

Mickey On Customers "No Stank You" campaign, Dr. Ignaz Semmelweis, factual difference, Louis Pasteur, puerperal fever, teen smoking rates, teenage smoking campaigns

I recently came across this P.O.V. by Brian Halligan about how the quality of your content is much more important now than it has ever been. I couldn’t agree more. Plus, any post that includes a vintage Irish Spring spot has to be worth the read. –Mickey

Are creative marketing types a dying breed?

By Brian Halligan (from Creativity Unbound)

I have been thinking about my mom and dad sitting on their couch in 1979 watching “Dynasty” and being interrupted five minutes into it by an Irish Spring soap ad. Something remarkable happened after that ad played: My dad actually spoke with my mom about soap, and they decided to switch from Dove to Irish Spring! I think of my parents today sitting on their couch watching “The Office” and being interrupted 5 minutes in by an Irish Spring ad. Something very different happens this time: Dad grabs the clicker and either fast-forwards or turns to ESPN.

In those pre-historic times before the age of cable, DVR’s, and clickers (remotes to us Yanks), I might argue that the key factors in order of marketing importance were time slot, segmentation match with the product to the audience, and then creativity/quality of the advertisement itself. In other words, it was important for the advertisement to be creative/good, but mom and dad were going to hear the message by hook or by crook.

I have heard many people argue that creative marketing types are becoming obsolete. I don’t buy it. In fact, I think the creative marketing type is 10 times more important today than it was 30 years ago when you had mom and dad captive on the couch.

To get mom and dad’s attention today, you need to create remarkable content. I use that word “remarkable” because the content has to be so good that it compels other users, content creators and web site owners to remark about it in the form of links back to it. These links inform Google of how remarkable the content is which drives you up the rankings. If the content is really remarkable, it will spread virally through sites like Twitter. Rather than creating a 30-second “spot” for a captive mom and dad, the great creative types today are creating remarkable content that is essentially voted on by the web community through links which will ultimately get it in front of mom and dad if it is deemed worthy. This is really hard and the content needs to be fantastic to spread through a skeptical, non-captive audience.

If you enjoyed this post, make sure you subscribe to my RSS feed!

Mickey On Customers, Ramblings Brian Halligan, captive audience, Dynasty, Google, Irish Spring soap ad, marketing factors, mom and dad, remarkable content, The Office, Twitter, web community

Example number 1,678 of a company that promotes it is something it is not, and then when caught, tries to soft-shoe around it.

The company in question in SIGG—a Swiss company whose sales of what they call an “eco-hydration system” has resulted in sales increases averaging 130% a year just in the United States.

Those “eco-hydration systems,” of course, are otherwise recognizable as those fancy stainless steel refillable water bottles. SIGG grew its market by positioning itself as an eco-friendly alternative to the tens of millions of plastic water bottles that end up in landfills every year.

Once popular with climbers and hikers, SIGG bottles have since evolved into a lifestyle necessity for the eco-guilty, who don’t want to add to the Earth’s landfills or poison themselves with plastics. The company even sold one-liter “limited edition” bottles designed by the likes of Michael Kors and Donna Karan and hired a PR agency to get bottles into the hands of “eco-celebrities,” like Julia Roberts and Cameron Diaz. They even sent bottles to eco-minded bloggers and bought ads in magazines like Yoga Journal, Backpacker, Vegetarian Times and Dwell.

And now, the discovery that the epoxy linings of these glitzy $25 “eco-hydration systems” contains a hormone-disrupting chemical called bisphenol-A (BPA), the same substance SIGG bashed plastic bottles for containing. What’s more, the company found out about this more than a year ago, and it never bothered to let its customers know. It continued selling the BPA-laden bottles until transitioning to its new, improved lining earlier this year.

Consumer groups have been alleging since at least 2007 that SIGG bottles are lined with a BPA-containing epoxy. SIGG, in turn, maintained that their bottles did not leach BPA, and that they could not disclose the formula for the liner because it was made by someone else. It is important to note here that they did not claim not to know what was in the formula, only that they could not or would not reveal it.

In fact as late as a few months ago, you could find the BPA-lined bottles on store shelves—months after the company knew it had a problem on its hands.

And how did SIGG handle it when its customers expressed concerns? As the conversation on SIGG’s Facebook above shows, the company was responsive with information on how to replace bottles, but then couldn’t resist getting preachy about how this BPA thing was much ado about nothing, noting:

“And besides, it is everywhere…BPA is also used to make dental sealants, flame retardants, and is an additive in many other widely consumer products. CDs / DVDs even the cellphone you use to call us.”

That is supposed to reassure customers?

Let’s recap. Company builds sales on a reputation of being eco-friendly and healthy. Company then discovers its product is not so healthy. Company decides to keep that information to itself…at least until old offending product moves through the supply chain. When caught, company denies that the substance it had previously maintained was poison when other products contained it was somehow okay when theirs did.

The thing is, even if SIGG was convinced this BPA thing did not pose a health threat, its intentional position as “eco- and health-friendly,” means it owed it to its customers to disclose the discovery. By failing to disclose it, and letting consumers discover it on their own, the company has lost all credibility with its core customers.

Yes, the company should have been pro-active with customers when it discovered the truth about its liners. Yes, it should have offered to exchange any bottles in circulation with ones with the new liner. And yes, they should have done this humbly, without getting snarky with customers who inquired.

At some point, a decision was made by SIGG management that this wasn’t a big deal. Fellas, the customer decides what is and isn’t a big deal. Your obligation is to be transparent with the consumer and let them know what you know. Whatever decision they make is their own.

Let’s hope example number 1,678 is the last.

Posted by Mickey

If you enjoyed this post, make sure you subscribe to my RSS feed!

Mickey On Customers bisphenol-A, BPA, eco-celebrities, eco-friendly, eco-hydration system, Facebook, water bottles