Archives for posts with tag: Loyalty

20db064378647ce74d27c700759993082fd44a5f_m

The marketing world is filled with words like fans, followers, likes, fans, loyalty, engagement, commitment, participation, community, and so on and on and on and on, giving every marketer the false hope and idea what marketing should be about.

It would be beneficial for all stakeholders (clients, agencies and customers) to start with the assumption that nobody cares about what we do. This might make us feel depressed, less important and kind of useless. Still, at least we’re starting from the right point and it helps us focus on our work in the right way.

Don’t be sad: Nobody cares what anybody does.

Nobody cares about the 500+ TV channels, the thousands of magazines and radio stations, the millions of podcasts and gazillions of websites. There’s so much stuff out there, we don’t even have a tiny chance to consume 0,0001% of it. All this media is like the Atlantic, engulfing people with content wave after wave, competing with anything else that’s interesting, useful, or entertaining. With so many temptations surrounding us, seeping out of millions of screens, we should never assume anybody will notice anything we do. Oh, and don’t even assume anybody does care. Don’t kid yourself.

It gets worse: People don’t care about brands.

As a brand, you don’t want people to think about your brand too much. A strong brand will help people make quick, easy and gut-driven purchase decisions. If you’re an Apple fanboy, you don’t think about Dell or HP. It’s going to be Apple, no matter what. Strong brands solve problems. When your favorite beer is Guiness, you don’t have a beer problem. When Acura is your car brand, you don’t have a car problem. No thinking required, no decisions. No worries about price, quality or reviews.

The myth of brand loyalists

Another marketing myth is that the ultimate goal is to create brand loyalists and permanent relationships. People might ‘like’ your brand but they ‘like’ their dog 10,000 times more. For sure, people don’t love brands. They love their favorite pillow 10 million times more than your brand. Using the language of deep human emotions for brands trivializes those feelings. Brands are desperately looking for those lovers, those special ones. If you base your brand on loyalists, you will have a small party in a studio apartment in Manhattan. Brands are built by millions of light customers who buy the brand once in a while.

It’s easy to market to people who actively seek you out and use your product/services frequently. It’s hard to market to people who don’t know you, who don’t care about you, see you frequently. And, don’t get me started with the new buzzword “audience”. An audience goes to a Coldplay concert or watches the latest Spiderman movie. Advertising doesn’t have an audience, waiting for the show to start.

It gets worse.

The vast majority of advertising produced is horrendous. Go to some sad cable channel and try to stick around for the commercial breaks. Try not to change the channel within seconds. Good luck. It’s mental and creative pollution. Another proof point for people not to care about advertising.

That’s a good starting point.

At the bottom of enmity between strangers lies indifference – Soren Kierkegaard.

It’s easy to be loved, even easier to be hated. But it’s really hard to overcome indifference. You can get 1% of potential customers engaged and create participatory communities for them. It doesn’t help you when it comes to the bottom line. The real goal should be to engage the remaining 99% and that means fighting indifference.

The majority of efforts on social platforms is now limited to activating the 1% and going to church afterwards, praying the 1% will spread and amplify the word. It’s good, but not good enough. It’ll earn you brownie points but doesn’t improve business results. Unless you’re happy talking to a minority, we need to focus mainly on the 99%.

You will be judged how you engage the indifferent masses, the ones that don’t care. It starts with answering the most important questions: Why should they care more about you than all the other gazillion options they have? What’s the point? What’s in it for them?

7f2edc617f848ff91738347c600e82fc0aca607e_m

When I first moved to Los Angeles, I listened to radio a lot. One of the shows I liked was hosted by Marc Germain. He called himself Mr. KFI or later Mr. KABC.

It was a nice show without screeners or any topics. People just called in and talked about anything they had on their mind.

Over time, I forgot to tune in. I liked his show but that wasn’t enough to make the effort to listen to him. He never made it big, he’s now struggling with a weekly show.

The first time I heard Howard Stern, I was riveted. I’ve never heard anything like this before. The topics, the questions, the outrageousness.

I’ve been a loyal Stern fan ever since. I’ve sat in a parking lot for an hour to be able to listen to the Stuttering John and Crazy Cabbie fight. I scheduled meetings around his show.

I purchased 3 different Sirius radios that all sucked, just to purchase another one. I didn’t want to miss the show. Each month, I fork over $10 to listen to him.

Howard Stern’s magic is not about being funny, a great interviewer or an outrageous character.

You either love or hate Howard Stern.

There’s not much in between.

Once in a while, his minions go out and ask people “Who is worse? Howard Stern or Charlie Sheen?” The majority of people said Howard Stern was worse. He lost against Mel Gibson.

That’s astonishing.

Actually, not.

He was himself. That’s why he was so different.

Being different evokes deep emotions in people. And that’s why he’s one of the highest paid entertainers in the world.

Some people hate it. Many people love it. He didn’t care about being liked.

He wanted to be different.

It’s easy to be liked. It’s hard to be different.

Most people want to be liked. They ask for advice how to be liked more. Ultimately, they become a commodity. Nothing to see here.

It didn’t work that well for Marc Germain, it doesn’t work in our industry and it won’t work for you.

You need to be different.

What makes you stand out from the crowd?

Once you know that, live it. That’s what people desire. That’s what people pay for. That’s what will change your life.

Brands: Stop trying to be liked. Be different.

The Facebook world lures brands into thinking that a “Like” has any value.

It doesn’t.

To be liked is being timid, being small, being easily replaceable. You want to be loved and hated at the same time. You need to stand for something. Something that evokes deep emotions. You need to have that friction.

Or you’ll disappear.

2344028443_fa0424589a_o

We’re not consumers anymore. The majority of us are producing ideas, sharing photos, thoughts, comments. Because we have become producers, we have much more power than we ever had. The industrial-age power structure of companies(Coke) buying white spaces/time on properties of producers (Time Warner) is rapidly disintegrating and being replaced by a new economic ecosystem of collaboration and co-creation. The challenge for most companies: How do we value this new ecosystem appropriately?

It’s easy to put a price tag on a transaction – You make something of value, I buy it and give you something (most likely money) in return. That’s the idea behind exchanges and the industrial age. It’s measurable. It’s efficient. But, there’s something else taking place: The relationship economy, aka The Karma economy). If I help a friend finding a new job, I don’t expect anything in return. When I love my kid and try to create the best life possible, I don’t expect anything in return. When I smile at a stranger on the street, I don’t hope for an exchange of emotions. I just want to be generous for the sake of being generous.

At its core, the Web is generous.  That’s why it’s so disturbing (or better: infuriating) that a company like Facebook, relying on the generosity of its users, develops monetization solution based on exchanges. A relationship economy brand tries to get rich based on monetary exchanges: In exchange for the user data, produced through the generosity of its users, brands pay Facebook to target users with more relevant messages. A total disconnect if I’ve ever seen one.

All this talk about Facebook being the Internet is just silly and there are warning signs that Facebook might be facing a groundswell of deletions very soon. The Internet landscape is littered with ruins and pitiful remains of companies that believed to be the Internet and Facebook will suffer the same fate. As they should.

Given the generous nature of the Web, people were willing to share data points with the world and didn’t expect anything in return. Sure, a badge from Foursquare is nice. That only works as long as all stakeholders are generous and understand this as a relationship, not an exchange. Users are beginning to understand that most brands just use their data to deliver commercial messages and pay a lot of money to get access to that data. Leaving the user with a shiny badge on his iPhone and data mining companies with impressive balance sheets.

better mistakes

Some look at Congress to legislate behavioral targeting and ease privacy concerns. Others hope the industry will self-regulate itself. I wouldn’t bet a dime on these initiatives. But I bet the house on the creativity and originality of people engaging on the Web. Privacy was always about control: We don’t mind sharing our personal lives and thoughts, but we want to control how, where and with whom. A privacy failure is always a control failure.

So far, our privacy options are limited to the options platforms give us (and how easy they can be located). The exploitation of by corporations leveraging asymmetric power to relinquish control of our data will lead to the obvious question: How can I control my own data, monetize it myself? Why should companies control my relationship with them? Shouldn’t I control the relationship?

People want to share their data and information on their terms. Yes, we want to engage with brands and give away our data to create innovative things. On our terms. When I’m in the market for a car, I would love to hear from brands that can customize offers based on my preferences. And when I made the purchase, I don’t want to hear from the again. Until I’m in the market again. I don’t mind hearing from a local restaurant about their lunch specials between 11.30 and 12.30 when I showed intention that I’m ready to head out to lunch. But don’t bug me before/after or in case I packed leftovers from yesterday.

Project VRM (VRM = Vendor Relationship Management) is still in its early stages and we haven’t see any real-life implementations at scale of this thought model. But, that’s where the future lies: Let me control my relationship with brands. Develop meaningful control systems that are easy to use and give way to a new ecosystem of collaboration and co-creation. The future is about a personal datastore, an aggregation of all relationships with people, platforms and brands. Completely controlled by the individual. Limiting the noise emitted by irrelevant advertising, spam and other commercial messages. Shaping the information flow and stream to receive communications when we want it, about things we desire. Ultimately, leading to a restoration of balance in the relationship between people and brands.

6ff0f09528d8fbf2f7fef40e9d160221ca23e3e7_m

All this talk about branded experiences makes me wonder why upstarts like redbox are so successful. Sure, there’s a time and a place for branded experiences, retail experiences and experiential platforms. But there’s also a time when I just want to buy a product/service and leave. That’s why I’m so annoyed when I have to listen to upsells and I just wanted to activate my credit card. Or when an associate tries to sell the Best Buy warranty while I just want to go home and use the product.

Superior customer service doesn’t always mean eye contact, smiles and a human connection. Superior customer service sometimes just means help me get my task done quickly. And let me go my merry way without some brand blah blah, handshake and efforts to sell me more.

tumblr_kvkugopLxp1qzocyko1_500

In a world driven by human and intellectual capital, traditional Org Charts, Employee Handbooks and most traditional tools that used to help enterprises to run their business have become increasingly unreliable and ineffective. High performance and value creation doesn’t originate from to traditional enterprise tools or new technologies, it originates from focusing on the human side of business.

Jack Welch had it right when he said: “The essence of competitiveness is liberated when we make people believe that what they think and do is important – and then get out of their way while they do it.”

Enterprises face the biggest challenges to humanize their business since their organizations are driven by spreadsheets and shareholder value. As we’ve learned throughout the Great Recession, many companies leveraged their future away by focusing on short-term gains, destroying long-term value over time.

While shareholder value will remain a dominant metric, businesses have to focus their attention more and more on their relationships with customers, employees, partners, and all other stakeholder groups. By investing in these relationships, businesses will be able to create long-term value and, ultimately, shareholder value.

We believe that those organization aspiring to succeed in the current socio-economic environment have to understand holistically who their key stakeholders are and what they want. They have clearly defined strategies to ensure that constant value is delivered to these stakeholders. They have implemented processes to support this strategy and understand the necessary capabilities to execute processes. And they have thought through and communicated what the organization needs from its stakeholders – Loyalty, profitability, investment, etc.

Too often, metrics are derived from strategy. It seems so obvious. But it’s a trap. You can go from A to B directly, pass by C or go from A to D to C and end at B. Strategy is not a destination, it’s a choice of one path you’re going to take. Metrics help you track whether you’re moving in the right direction. Most corporate initiatives are focused on incremental improvements – expand your business to a new market, grow your product line, find new consumers. All these initiatives are developed with the belief that they will enable the business to deliver better value to all its stakeholders. That’s why focusing on the stakeholder perspective is imperative to deliver replicable value, choose the right strategy and exact metrics. When formulating strategies, businesses need to consider the wants and needs of all their stakeholders. This is not limited to primary stakeholders, the view needs to be expanded to the general public, special interest groups, legal and regulatory community. If this broad view of stakeholders is not adopted, businesses run the risk failing to satisfy the needs of their stakeholders, opening themselves up for revenge on multiple Social Media channels.

So, what is the best path for businesses to increase stakeholder value?

1) Stakeholder Satisfaction: Who are the most influential stakeholders and what do they desire?

2) Performance Strategies: What strategies should the organization adopt to ensure the desires of stakeholders are satisfied?

3) Measurement: Metrics are required to track if the chosen strategies are actually implemented. Metrics help to communicate strategies throughout the organization. Metrics combined with incentives help to speed up implementation. And, ultimately, metrics help you determine if the chosen strategy was the right one and if not, why. When the measures are consistent with the organization’s strategies, they encourage behaviors that are consistent with the mission and vision of the business.

4) Align processes with strategies: What processes do we need to put in place to allow the strategies to be executed?

5) Capabilities: What capabilities do we require to operate these processes? Today, tomorrow and in the future?

6) Stakeholder Contribution and Collaboration: What contribution does the business require from its stakeholders to succeed? How can we maintain and enhance these capabilities?

This complex exercise will help your business to face the challenging socio-economic environment and adapt efficiently. Or as Jack Welch said:

“An organization’s ability to learn, and translate that learning into action rapidly, is the ultimate competitive advantage.”