Me thinks you are “buying" it. Just not “paying" for it the old way. The currency is data, time, and attention. These are your signals.
Larry W. Smith +1 917 754 3904 Twitter: @lwsmith10011
On Mar 12, 2015, at 5:51 PM, Doc Searls <
" class="">
> wrote:
On Mar 12, 2015, at 4:26 PM, Larry W. Smith <
" class="">
> wrote:
For some companies and brands, the customer journey is being replaced/supplemented with actionable and measurable touch point events. P&G coined FMOT - first moment of truth, aka, buying at point of sale. Google has the ZMOT - zero moment of truth from the search result. http://adwords.blogspot.com/2011/07/zero-moment-of-truth-new-marketing.html
What we don’t have is an overt signaling mechanism as a consumer. There’s no browser “hot button” to down vote a site or ad in real time. Consider the value if, in addition to the 0.04% CTR, the advertiser/publisher had a 6.5% down vote or annoyance metric? Over time and big data you’d be able to normalize effectiveness and ability to interact, then price inventory accordingly.
Here is my truth, at this moment, which will last an indefinite length of time: I'm not buying anything. I don't plan to buy anything while I'm reading, or surfing, or whatever else I'm doing on the Interwebs. That's a signal I would like to send, as a default, when I'm not shopping online, which is nearly all the time.
Now, with a hat tip to Don, here is a message I would also like to send as an important and financially rewarding peace offering: even though I'm not buying anything, I do respect the publisher's need to pay the bills, and the desire by advertisers supporting the publisher for their ads to be seen. This means I would welcome seeing ads that are not personal, not based on surveillance, and express the advertiser's desired brand message. In other words, that I welome old-fashioned brand ads of obvious provenance that serve a clear brand function and support appreciation all around. Alone these same lines regarding marketing vs customer service, you might put it in the context of “offense” vs. “defense.” The offense runs the play to score/capture the customer and the defense tries to keep the customer on the team; very different objectives, strategy and tactics. Don’t miss the humor in the fact most people find that marketing is offensive.
Right. I think that maps well to the buy and the own cycle. And remember that we are owning 100% of the time and buying some much smaller % of the time.
Doc
Larry W. Smith +1 917 754 3904 Twitter: @lwsmith10011
On Mar 12, 2015, at 11:31 AM, Sean Bohan <
" class="">
> wrote:
In marketing and communications (advertising, PR, events, etc.) the "Customer Journey" is a big deal to clients and agency-types. It's intention is to go beyond demo and segmentation and "get closer" to the customer to understand their behaviors (aggregate), needs (aggregate), wants (aggregate), patterns (aggregate) to better understand them, evolve product and most importantly, target them where they are and interrupt them.
There is a ton of research (surveys, interviews, focus groups, experiential journaling, etc.) that goes into developing that Customer Journey but it is still n=1 in the hopes to understand "all". Nowhere in the "journey" itself is there a moment where the user is actually a participant. They are always the object in the crosshairs.
The intention is to get marketing/comms more aligned with the consumer to generate better #s (CTRs, 800# calls, rebate cards, etc.) via narrative and context. It works. Getting .07% click-through-rate vs. an average of .04% CTR is considered a job well done.
Don has a big point here - customer service and marketing *should* be part of the same org. In some companies it is. In others the marketing folks don't want to be within 100 miles of CS. It isn't sexy, it isn't fun, and who wants to deal with complaints all day?
VRM won't end this practice. VRM will be a profound contrast to it.
|