Jan 15, 2014 | Branding, Communication, Customers, Marketing
Low interest and confronting categories present problems for marketers.
It is relatively easy to generate interest in a new beer, a car, fashion item, but what about insurance, toilet cleaner, and petrol?
Typically we frame communications in the context of a problem to be solved, a tried and true method, but it means always coming at the product from a negative perspective, “you have a problem, here is the solution”. The marketing focus is on the happy smiling person who has solved their cleaning problem, the financially saved flood survivor, and the cleaner injectors in your car from “Factor X” in their petrol. The approach works well, but it often seems that the ad we end up with is a compromise, the best of a modest lot.
The marketing challenge is that the fake happy consumer depicted in the advertising always comes at the product from the point of view of the problem, and whilst it is nice to solve the problem, the context is still one of a problem, and the smile is still fake.
The better way is to concentrate on the person, rather than the problem, make the owner of the problem feel better, even happy. Change the context from the problem to the person who owns the problem, and be human in the way the problem is discussed. This great post by Barry Feldman, one of the great contemporary copywriters, demonstrates how with a collection of poop campaigns, a confronting topic we all face. Make sure you watch the video.
It takes some magic to make a boring or confronting product sufficiently fun, engaging, informative and interesting to enable a piece of communication to work, but it can be done with imagination and some marketing courage. The age of social media offers a new array of tools, but there is no substitute for being brave, and stepping beyond the boundaries of the norm.
Dec 30, 2013 | Customers, Governance, Leadership, Strategy
Just before Christmas, in an unusually hot and humid period, I was attacked by “mossies” while sleeping. The blighters feasted on my left shoulder, leaving a very itchy area.
So what you ask, and fair enough to wonder at the relevance.
It occurred to me that it was a nice metaphor for the “strategic itch” that seems to occur in many enterprises around this time of year. Someone, usually the CEO, gets a mossie in his ear about strategy, which results in everyone putting in an effort to redo the stuff that was probably done last year, a few updated numbers, some new graphs, and a reaffirmation of some vision and mission statements. All this of course culminating in an off-site 2 day meeting that involves a bad head-ache on the second morning.
The itch is scratched for another year, there are some “decisions” that are incorporated into the budget process, but little of real value has been achieved.
Just as scratching the mossie bites on my shoulder offered short term relief, but had little impact on the time it took for the itch to go away, and indeed ran the risk of causing some longer term problems if infection set in, so does the yearly strategic meeting do little, but potentially causes problems.So, here are a few “do’s and don’ts” that may remove the causes of the itch.
Do:
• Identify and consider the drivers of performance and change in your industry
• Consider how your current capabilities are lined up against these drivers, identify gaps, and agree how to address them.
• Review and consider your responses to the value propositions of your competitors, and consider what you would do to you, if you were them.
• Re-acquaint yourself with your customers, ensure you know why they buy from you and not others, and consider the manner in which you build relationships with them.
• Spend time identifying the “cause and effect” chains in your business, and how you can make them more visible, efficient, manageable, and accountable.
• Do a bit of “what if” scenario planning, the more out of the box the better
• Have some different people, from both inside and outside the enterprise in the process and at the meeting to avoid just continuing status quo thinking.
• Remember that innovation capability is about the only sustainable competitive advantage left to us, so consider how best to build the capability to innovate, without worrying too much about that new product in the pipeline.
• Agree a small set of KPI’s that reflect the most important things you considered, and ensure the processes are in place, or at least agreed to measure and communicate performance against them.
• Make sure everyone in the enterprise understands the priorities, and the underlying logic of the priorities, in other words, achieve alignment throughout the business.
Do not:
• Concentrate on the numbers, these days they are too easily generated and tend to remove the motivation to think.
• Allow status to be a determining factor in the importance given to every individuals contribution to the conversation
• Shy away from difficult, or confronting people or conversations.
• Think that all the answers to tough questions can be arrived at in the meeting.
• Think the job is done when the conversation ends. You get 1/10 for talking, the other 9 for doing.
• Think that this is a one-off, annual event. Strategy planning and review processes should be at the heart of enterprise governance, and are an ongoing challenge, particularly for boards.
Have a good strategy meeting.
Dec 19, 2013 | Change, Customers, Sales
Had an interesting debate at a conference a short time ago, something that I think makes a big difference, but is not usually considered, at least in my experience. The debate was the merits of pitching Vs what I call “long form selling”
Selling is a process, it takes time, effort, and involves multiple touch-points as a relationship evolves that can lead to a sale. Obviously the process varies depending on many factors, you would not expect to spend much time considering the competing merits of different paper-clips, but power stations are a bit different.
By contrast, a pitch is a yes/no equation. You get one shot, a short time, little opportunity to build rapport and points of empathy with your audience. Make or break.
In some industries pitches are the norm, nobody thinks much beyond the immediacy, they are the all there is. In others, long form selling is the norm.
Often the forms are mixed up.
Being an account executive selling to an Australian supermarket retailer is usually called “selling” but the reality is that it is just a series of pitches, with little opportunity to build a relationship much beyond knowing the other parties name and a few commercial characteristics.
Clearly, the greater the imbalance of power in the conversation, the more likely each interaction will look like a pitch. The task of the seller in that case is to take control of the conversation, and ensure it is a process, with opportunities to revisit and review, not just a once off opportunity to sell.
I know which I prefer, but I also know which focuses the mind.
Dec 5, 2013 | Change, Customers, Marketing, Sales
Some marketing activity is aimed at creating demand, alerting people to a value proposition. Other so called marketing activity is aimed at delivering an offer, an important but very different activity to demand creation.
Consider the difference between most ads on TV, and the yellow pages. The former generally sets out to tell you why you should buy something, whereas the yellow pages is a list of places where you can go to get delivery.
Which leads me to all the all the banner ads on the web, those persistent, annoying and endlessly crappy pop-ups that appear. I have just upgraded from windows XP to Windows 7 as I replaced my laptop, not wanting the leap to windows 8, just a step too far, and have not yet figured out how to avoid the apparent thousands of pop ups plaguing my screen. None are likely to get my attention beyond wanting to strangle the silly bastard who is paying somebody to disrupt me in the belief that I will react positively to the disruption.
The old laws of supply and demand still work. The supply of space into which to place a banner ad on the web is infinite, so any price is too much, and it does not work, like an ad in the yellow pages does not work to create demand, just where to get it once you have decided to buy something.
Nov 4, 2013 | Customers, Marketing, Sales, Small business
cartoon courtesy Mark Anderson
Automation of the marketing and sales “funnel” has many productivity advantages, so long as the implementation of the software works, which is always harder than the smiling assurances of the automation salespeople would indicate.
However, there is one benefit that is largely ignored that can have a significant impact, irrespective of the software implementation: the classification of leads into categories that reflect the leads individual behavior and the expected sales strategy to be implemented.
The usual process to date, encouraged by the “Sales Funnel” has assumed that all prospects travel progressively down the funnel in a consistent homogeneous manner. Clearly, nothing could be further from the truth, every situation is different.
Following is a list of the categories I have used in the past to classify prospects. They can be managed simply in a spreadsheet, or elsewhere on a continuum that ends with extreme software intervention, but irrespective of the tool, the nail still looks the same.
- Newly identified prospects, with little information.
- Leads that have been “qualified” by marketing, but sales has rejected, or failed to move ahead.
- Leads that sales has qualified as “hot” and therefore become a priority, at least in the eyes of some sales people.
- Leads that are really just contacts not ready to progress towards a sale, but with whom you need to just maintain contact.
- Contacts that need some marketing input to turn into qualified leads
- Contacts that are really just “tyre-kickers”
- Leads you have lost contact with, but who may be “restarted”
- Finally, and perhaps most importantly, those who have for some reason or another dropped out of the funnel at some point, and who can be recycled back into the system.
Each of these is different, although there are grey areas between them, and each requires a tailored approach based on the history of the prospect, their role, purchase decision making power, and many other factors.
Before automation, there was little consideration of the real behavior of prospects, now, irrespective of automation, you need to be considering the sales funnel from the perspective of the “Funnellee”
Oct 25, 2013 | Branding, Customers, Marketing, Social Media
Sick of the avalanche of unsolicited email coming in to your inbox? Most of us are, and my kids have reacted by virtually turning email off, and using social media to communicate with those in their circles. The volumes however, continue to go up, as email simply works as a marketing medium when done well.
Clearly, there is a “Trinity” that is evolving in marketing as the 21st century progresses.
Social media
Email
Content.
All are different, all have a place, all require different skills to be successful.
Social media is a “pull” tool, voluntary, people are free to dip in and out at their discretion. The task of the marketer is to make it interesting, engaging, and provide the reasons for people to keep on coming back.
Email is a “push” tool. Find a mailing list, and send stuff out. However, with an open rate for unsolicited emails in the low single figures, the challenge is to not just get the mail opened, but to get the recipient to do something with it.
Content is the stuff that has to be interesting, and targeted to the concerns, problems, and competitive environment of the recipient, and is glue that holds email and social media together. Neither are likely to be any good without the glue of effective content.
So, to be effective, spend lots of effort getting the right glue, then making sure you use it properly.
