Engagement, Permission and Efficiency

Let me start by taking a view on Permission.

In my opinion, there are 2 levels of Permission. The first is probably the most obvious, which is where a consumer actually gives the brand the opportunity to talk to them. This may very well be because they are an existing customer or have an interest in getting information about a product or service. By having this level of Permission, the brand can be hopeful that the piece of marketing that arrives in front of the consumer has a greater chance of being read, and not just ignored

A second way of looking at Permission is to view it as means of engaging with the consumer at a time that resonates with them

There are many examples of where timing plays an important role in getting a message read. Brands such as SKY or Virgin know full well that the chance of getting new subscribers are increased if they hit at a time when a new source of entertainment is wanted, such as moving to a new home, or with a new baby in the family.

Insurance companies are well aware that many policies are bought in line with the purchase date of a new car, and car manufacturers can ramp up communications in line with a potential replacement for a new car..usually before the end of the 3rd year.

Timing provides relevance. If it's relevant I'll be more likely to engage with it. And engagement is a proxy for permission. Permission to talk to me because I'm engaging with you by clicking your emails, walking into your store, visiting your website

So how does Permission translate into efficiency?

Well,

1. Permission gives increased response rate because the offer made is relevant and made in the right time scale.
2. The offer made in many instances can be sent pretty much automatically, which drives efficiency.
3. Permission has been given to sent the offer through an appropriate channel, which saves costs by optimising channel selection.


If they want it...they'll do it

Personalisation for the Connected Consumer

Today’s world is increasingly being inhabited with Connected Consumers. These consumers use multiple channels, touch-points and devices to communicate with brands and with each other at warp speed, 24/7. The number of marketing messages that consumers see is often quoted in the thousands. Whatever the number, it’s a lot!

For brands, providing communications that quickly create engagement with these consumers requires that message to resonate and so personalisation is a key plank of any organisation’s eCRM Strategy.

I often have a quote in my presentations about lazy marketers creating email newsletters. Now of course, having offended a large proportion of the audience, I explain later on by actually talking about lazy marketers creating one size fits all email newsletters. This is based on the principle that if I put enough ‘stuff’ in front of you, something will take your fancy. Today’s consumer doesn’t have the time or patience to trawl through a mass of content to find something they need

Now of course we mustn’t mistake personalisation for salutation. ‘Dear Gianfranco’ doesn’t really cut the mustard in terms of personalisation these days. Even Cicero, the Roman philosopher, a few thousand years ago talked about remembering and using someone’s name to have a successful conversation with them. We need more than that if we are to persuade our audience to takes us along with them on their journey

My old Greek friend Aristotle ( don’t worry, there are no more philosophers in this piece) talks about Pathos, Ethos and Logos in the art of persuasion. In plain English that roughly equates to Emotion, Credibility and Logic.

The emotion (Pathos) of a brand can open up an email inbox for example but only positive and relevant experiences will keep it open. And I believe that Credibility and Logic have the use of data at the heart.

In today’s data rich marketing world, logic in the form of personalisation in eCRM can be based on 3 key information areas

Profile – What I’ve told a brand about myself in terms of age, sex and interests

Behaviour – What a brand can infer are my likes, interests from my interaction with them

Transactional – What do my purchases both on and offline tell you about my current and future needs?

Used correctly, combining these starts to create relevance and context to our messages in particular if we can overlay location as part of all this as well an understanding of what device and or app they are reading the message on. As a result, the messages and the brand gain credibility

But of course this new eCRM only works when the context and relevance that you are engaging with me with has my Permission. But it also stops working if you abuse my Privacy by ignoring the Permission I have given you. That permission is about engaging me on particular topics, at certain times using my preferred media.  Nothing more.

Of course before you can convince an audience, using Aristotle’s Ethos, they have to accept you as being credible. And credibility also has Trust as a cornerstone.

As a consumer I want the recommendations and relevancy that personalisation brings, but don’t want you to abuse that trust.

And if you do, as a connected consumer in today’s world using connected networks, your lack of ethos will be quickly shared.

Love Me or Like Me...Just Follow Me

In a previous post I talked about best practice in terms of un-subscription pages. One of the suggestions was to give subscribers the opportunity to follow your brand via another channel such as Facebook or Twitter.


Of course ideally you don't want subscribers to un-subscribe, but what if you notice that they are not engaging with your emails? Should you try and head off the un-subscribe at the pass?


Recently I've not been opening my Habitat emails - not because I've fallen out of love with them, but just because I'm not buying for the house. They have spotted the lack of engagement and I received a very interesting email from them this morning. The subject line was 'Love Habitat? Like us on Facebook!' and the main image and copy looked like this

'We noticed you're not loving our emails, so why not like us on Facebook instead?'


I think this is a great example of using email engagement data to keep subscribers engaged with the brand..one way or another

An A to Z of eCRM - N

N is for 1984

We need to be as relevant as possible but not in such a way that scares consumers or feels like we are intruding. There is a fine line between being there for our audience and acting like big brother.

Personalisation is a key plank of any organisation’s CRM strategy – but to me CRM stands more for Contextual Relevance Marketing than anything else. 

This new CRM only works when the context and relevance with which you are engaging with me has my Permission. But it also stops working if you abuse my Privacy by ignoring the Permission I have given you. That permission is about engaging me on particular topics, at certain times using my preferred media.

My old Greek friend Aristotle talks about Ethos in the art of persuasion– and that before you can convince an audience, they have to accept you as being credible. And credibility has Trust as a cornerstone

As a consumer I want the recommendations and relevancy that personalisation brings, but don’t want you to abuse that trust. And if you do, as a connected consumer in today’s world using connected networks, your lack of ethos will be quickly shared