Archives

The classic learning model is comprised of three elements:  Think -> Feel -> Do.  People learn about a product or service, come to feel a certain way, and then take action.  A very linear, logical approach.

In the 80s, Dick Vaughn spearheaded the FCB Grid which identified alternative learning models, such as  Feel -> Think -> Do (for categories like luxury cars and perfume) and Do -> Feel -> Think for (instant gratification products like candy bars).  Still linear, however.

In the 90s, based on the research I was conducting, I started counseling clients that the decision-making process was actually iterative – often with lots of back and forth between the thinking and feeling components.  It’s often the case that we rationalize our feelings with thoughts and our thoughts with feelings.

But that’s only one dimension.  What’s the situation a consumer finds themselves in?  What are they actually thinking and feeling about?  How they prioritize, based on their situation, can provide marketers will critical consumer insights.

Take restaurants for example.  The diagram below shows quite a number of attributes that might be considered when deciding where to eat.

Here are several situational examples:

1. I don’t have a lot of time to eat and I’m alone.
2. I’m dining out for a special occasion and don’t have a lot of time because we’re going to the theater immediately after dinner.
3. I feel like full-service Thai in a family-friendly setting.
4. I’m driving on a highway and I’m hungry; the next rest-stops are in 5 miles and 50 miles.

Where someone “enters the decision-process” – how they prioritize what’s important to them in that situation – will determine which set of restaurants they will choose from.  In our four examples, I might have some of the same restaurants on my first two lists.  If children are in the party I might have some of the same restaurants (Thai only) on my second and third lists.  Example #4 highlights how taking action can supersede nearly all other variables.

What are the decision criteria in your category?  How can you use this approach to effectively segment and communicate with your customers?

Your thoughts?

As a native Angeleno, the business of my hometown is entertainment.  Naturally, I’ve done work for the studios, as have most local marketing researchers.  While highly creative in some regards, it’s a fairly conservative industry.  That’s one of the reasons why we see so many sequels and remakes.

For sentimental reasons, I wanted to see “Fame” remade.  I loved the original – kids with a dream going for it.  But did I get to the theater to see the remake?  No.  I was at home watching “So You Think You Can Dance,” a real-life show where kids with a dream go for it – and then some:  once the  top 10 dancers have been selected, I get to vote.

And that’s what the studios missed.  Today, I get to interact with the concept of the original film.  I get to help a kid realize his or her dream.

Once consumers get a taste for interaction, whether it’s a fan page on Facebook or voting on “American Idol,” it’s hard to get them to go back to the simpler days when they had no impact on something familiar.

The good news for the studios is that “original” can still trump “interaction.”  “Fame (2009)” was neither original nor interactive.

Are these consumer insights part of the entertainment industry’s “new rules”?  Let me know what you think.

I recently saw a really great article in More magazine.  Judy Jones interviewed John Medina, PhD, director of the Brain Center for Applied Learning at Seattle Pacific University.

To me, the most interesting part of the article was the description of the four-step learning process:

1. Encoding, where information enters the brain through the senses
2. Storage, what we do with the encoded information
3. Retrieval, being able to get information “out” when it’s needed
4. Forgetting, which is often overlooked, he says, but critical to learning:

“Human learning is primarily subtractive.  It’s controlled forgetting, learning how to forget in a smart enough way so that you can focus on what’s left in your cognitive landscape…[The brain has to figure] out what’s relevant and irrelevant, and then subtract the irrelevant…[this is] some of the most important work the human brain can do at any age.”

Medina goes on to say that as we get older, what we actually lose is our “filtering ability.”  What’s happening is that so much information is going into the brain and we can’t “turn down the noise” – so we forget why we went into a room or where we left the keys, for example.  We can retrieve information, but filtering is harder.

The findings suggest that, in our personal lives, exercise is most helpful in keeping our “filter” intact.  (Just one more reason to get that 30 minutes in three times a week!)

From a marketing perspective, I wonder how we can use this information to break-through the competitive clutter.  This is particularly critical in communication strategy, where the use of verbal and non-verbal cues, coupled with relevant associations, might create a more impactful execution.

What do you think?  If your target audience is older, how can you envision using this new finding?

I just finished listening to a webcast entitled “From Brainstorm to Firestorm:  Creating an Environment for Viral Marketing Success” hosted by SmartBrief and moderated by one of my favorites, Guy Kawasaki.

In Guy’s opening take, he stated the obvious:  you get more followers with any social media tool by being more interesting; and you’re more interesting by providing interesting links and information.  The three tools he uses are Objective Marketer (for email campaigns), TwitterFeed, and TwitterHawk.  Another tool, TweetMeme, he felt to be the single most powerful way to get followers.

Andy Sernovitz had a slightly different perspective.  He felt that allowing people to participate and share however was best for them was the key.  Rather than TweetMeme, he would go the ShareThis approach where people could “share the love” for you/your brand in whichever they wanted.

Stacey Kane of California Tortilla (voted best burrito in D.C.) said they leveraged their TacoTalk email newsletter into effective Twitter campaigns to drive store traffic.  One example:  providing a “secret password” on Twitter for a free taco in-unit; conversion rates were much higher than when the same thing was done via newsletter.

Brendan Hart with National Geographic talked about the importance of connecting with the brand.  For instance, on Twitter, they’ve invited people to solve a puzzle of Mount Everest at their website; as someone improves upon the time, NatGeo posts that result on Twitter, keeping it fun and interactive.  On their website, people can post photos they’ve taken and a couple are selected for inclusion in each issue of the print magazine.  Involvement on all fronts.

Stephanie Miller of ReturnPath summarized things this way: Use Twitter when brevity over clarity is desirable, email when content is king, and Facebook when a brand wants to be more engaging.  She gave an example of Oreo, which has 1.3 million fans on Facebook and where nothing has been posted since early March vs. Coca Cola, with 3.4 million fans, who seem to be so engaged that every few minutes one of its fans is posting something.  Do people love Coke more than Oreo?  I’m not sure.  But what’s clear is that Facebook is more important to Coke and its fans know that.  In short, she said whatever social media we use, we must commit the time and resources.

As with any form of marketing, no matter the way in which we connect with our consumers, we must be channel appropriate and engaging.

Your thoughts?

For a week now, many of us have been keeping up on what we now know will be the closing chapter of the Michael Jackson saga.  Like millions, I’ve kept up on the news.  One might argue that this really isn’t “news” (battles in Afghanistan, anyone?), but no one can argue about whether this is a “story.”

As humans, we’re programmed to listen to and tell stories.  Books, movies, and television (especially soap operas) all tell stories in one way or another.  Facebook and Twitter might very well be tied to the desire to tell our own stories.  The more easily we can relate to a story, the more likely we are to follow it or to become involved with it.

In marketing, we know that a sale can’t take place unless there is some connection between a consumer and the brand.  Consumers are connected to “Brand Michael” and so it shouldn’t come as a surprise that his record sales are way up.  Brands typically don’t have a story they tell to consumers, but they can (e.g., the launch of Saturn).  Companies do have stories to tell (their history) and those stories often are the foundation for corporate culture – the way employees know how to act within the story.

In marketing research and account planning, storytelling is a critical skill.  It’s the stories we tell (aka research analysis and consumer insights) about target audiences which inform new product development, operations, and advertising, to name just a few.  Our job as consumer advocates requires we tell their story, objectively and with passion, so they have a voice when decisions are being made.

More in a future post on what makes for great marketing research/account planning storytelling.