BrandSavant

Gaining Insight From Social Media Data

Why, Arizona

A brief thought from the train today: content marketing is still somewhat in the “low-hanging fruit” days, but as the information economy becomes more efficient, and the returns on content “arbitrage” begin to diminish, content will have to do more than simply answer questions. Content will have to connect with people.

When you are “working a room,” connecting is an exercise in finding common ground. You live in New York City? I used to live in New York. You have a daughter? I have a son. Etcetera. Common ground in this sense, however, addresses the lowest common denominators; the superficial aspects of life. Those help you open a door, of course, but once someone chooses to read your content, that door already stands open, does it not?

People truly connect not when they share the same what, but when they share the same why. There are some companies out there that are fantastic content marketers–and I’d never give them my custom, because their content is incongruous with other aspects of their brand. When that is the case, I find myself irrationally choosing not to do business with them, despite an overwhelming flood of “rationally” helpful content. They’ve connected with me on the surface, but failed to connect with me on a deeper level.

Every time, for instance, someone sends me an infographic that is based upon lousy data, or is improperly cited, or mixes apples and oranges, a little part of me dies. But you might receive the same infographic, and have that image spark the idea that makes you the next Mark Zuckerberg. Value judgements about content are individual and idiosyncratic, and ultimately it is not for me to judge what content is or is not of value to you. But if you wanted to reach me, you’d understand me. And if you understood me, you wouldn’t send me crap infographics. You’d understand, and empathize with, my values, not my search terms.

The strongest brands in the world leave deeper footprints. Content alone rarely does that. Content can serve as a record of proof, but seldom serve as the proof itself. Indeed, if your brand is proving it, every day, in customer service, quality, operational efficiency or innovation (whatever your customers connect with), the content will create itself. Brands scramble to encourage user-generated content, but the best content is the trailing variable of consumer passion, not the product of a contest.

Content marketing begins with who you are, who you hire, and how you act.

{ 2 comments }

Tom asackerWhen I need to pull myself out of a thinking rut, or am otherwise in search of a “mental sorbet,” Tom Asacker is one of the people I turn to who can reliably spin my thinking around. I loved his latest release, The Business of Belief, so much, that I invited Tom to answer a few questions about this short, provocative book so I could share some of his thoughts with you.

We hear plenty these days about influence, but The Business of Belief deals with something more primal, and more useful: persuasion. You cannot hope to persuade a customer unless you can connect with their beliefs–and you cannot connect with their beliefs unless you are crystal clear about your beliefs. And if that sounds a little seditious for a marketing book, it is. Hence, my first question:

Tom W: The book starts out as a branding and marketing book, but becomes something…very different. Who is this book for, and what do you hope they do with it?

Tom A: It’s for people who are interested in the modern art of influence and behavior change. Those who want to understand and move others, so that they can make their good intentions a reality. And I believe that it’s needed now more than ever, because growth has stalled and frustration levels are at an all time high and climbing.

We’re living in fast-paced world overwhelmed by complexity and choice. I hope the book causes people to slow down and think, to use it as a springboard to reexamine their beliefs and decisions. And that their questioning brings them renewed passion for possibility, change and growth.

Tom W: I love the metaphor you employ of “crossing a bridge” for behavior change. Which is harder to create–a desire for the outcome on the other side, or the feeling of “safety and comfort” to cross the bridge?

Tom A: It really depends on the strength of the desire, the number of competing options, and the perceived level of risk and uncertainty. For example, I may have a strong desire for a novel experience. If it’s for a new wine, the challenge will be to bring a particular brand to life in my mind, to stimulate my desire. Safety and comfort are pretty much non-issues. However, if the novel experience I desire is an expensive vacation in a foreign country, then creating a feeling of safety and comfort may be the greater challenge.

When it comes to behavior change within organizations, both are equally difficult. Leaders must communicate frequently and passionately to stimulate desire as well as to create an environment that feels safe and comfortable. More importantly, they must work really hard to reduce the number of competing options on people’s time, attention and motivations.

Tom W: You quote Daniel Kahneman, who is near and dear to my heart, about our bias to pick the simpler choice; the easier answer. Under what circumstances might we pick the more complex choice?

Tom A: When a particular choice really matters to us. “Matter” comes from the Sanskrit “maatra” which means “to measure.” If, for example, you’re an engineer developing a breakthrough product, complexity is irrelevant because it is in your DNA to be “measured” in your approach. The same is true of all enthusiasts. Their choices may appear more complex, especially to novices, but it’s not really. Enthusiasts simply derive value in a more exacting process of choosing.

Tom W: In Part Three you talk about breaking the happy trance of our present beliefs and creating new thinking patterns, which reminds me of “This is Water,” by David Foster Wallace. Isn’t this a little cognitive behavioral therapy, disguised as marketing?

Tom A: The essence of marketing, the terminal goal, is to influence someone’s decision. So it’s all about understanding thinking patterns and behavior change. However, unlike CBT, choices in the marketplace are not influenced by changing someone’s thinking, which then leads to a change in their feelings and behavior. Instead, you must appeal to their feelings first. Our thoughts and behavior follow our perceptions and feelings. That’s the happy trance. Look, we may impulsively choose a particular brand, because we like the design of the packaging. And that’s okay. But that trance also guides more significant decisions, like the actions we take at work or with our health, career and community.

I’m aware that it’s impossible to exist in today’s modern marketplace and become completely enlightened, to wake up and be fully conscious of all of our choices and decisions. What I am imploring people to do is to become more conscious, especially regarding decisions that will have consequences on their future well-being, and the well-being of others.

Tom W: I love the Buckminster Fuller quote: “You never change things by fighting the existing reality. To change something, build a new model that makes the existing model obsolete.” So–what message should HR departments take from this?

Tom A: That they should stop trying to fix people, and instead work on fixing the design of the business. Because the design, the model, is what produces the results. The people, all of whom desire to do a good job, are simply working within its, and their, constraints.

The great statistician and quality consultant Dr. W. Edwards Deming wrote, “If you can’t describe what you are doing as a process, you don’t know what you are doing.” I’m finding far too many executives trying to manage the results of the operation by managing their people, especially their activities and reporting. It will never work. Instead, they need to better understand and manage the process, and let the process drive the results.

Tom W: Your final anecdote describes someone named Jake who grows content, and thus stops growing. Are we doomed (confined?) to a choice between contentment and growth?

Tom A: Yes.

What I love about Tom’s writing is that he doesn’t tell you how to do things. He gets you to examine why you do them. Get the right answer to that, and the how works itself out pretty directly. If you’d like to read more of Tom’s provocative thinking, I encourage you to pick up a copy of The Business of Belief (not an affiliate link) follow Tom on Twitter, and start yourself down that challenging, but ultimately rewarding path.

{ 0 comments }

Dog JumpWho needs data, when you have a vision? “Ship it!,” they tell you. Don’t wait for permission–beg for forgiveness! Go with your instincts, and they’ll never fail you.

We see these sorts of platitudes daily. It’s hard to make a populist argument against “go with your gut” or “lead from the heart” or other romantic notions of leadership.

But survivors get to write history, as I’ve often said in this space, and for every bold, swashbuckling CEO who ignores the naysayers and succeeds, there are scores of CEO’s who ignore the naysayers…and don’t.

Stephanie Clifford’s marvelous article on ousted J.C. Penney CEO Ronald Johnson highlights one such example. Johnson was formerly the Senior Vice President of Retail Operations for Apple, and a man who “liked to tell employees that there were two kinds of people: believers and skeptics, and at Apple, there were only believers.”

There is, of course, a BIG difference between a skeptic and a cynic. I’m no cynic. But a little healthy skepticism is good. Skepticism is often what reveals a key piece of data that either prevents an awful decision, or facilitates a better one. According to Clifford’s article, some of that key data was available, but was ignored in favor of Johnson’s instinct:

[Johnson] ignored a study Penney had just completed on customer preferences, and gave merchants a one-sheet grid explaining what prices they could use.

“Ron’s response at the time was, just like at Apple, customers don’t always know what they want,” said an executive who advocated testing. “We’re not going to test it — we’re going to roll it out.”

Now, my intent here is not necessarily to roll my eyes and issue the self-righteous “I told you so” of the professional market researcher. OK, maybe a little. But this attitude–that customers don’t know what they want–is a dangerous one. Henry Ford was famously dismissive of market research, claiming that “if I had asked people what they wanted, they would have said faster horses.” Maybe so, but that’s because Ford was a car man, and not a market researcher. I can assure you that if a competent practitioner in my field asked Ford’s customers what they wanted, the answer would have been “to get places faster.” Just so.

We all love a good story, and the received wisdom we learn from the outliers–those truly visionary CEO’s who make markets–provides fodder for some good ones. But the corollary tale–the tale of the competent CEO who seeks the data, listens to the advice, and changes their mind to make what turned out to be a better decision? These don’t show up on most people’s Kindles. Those CEO’s are every bit as brave, though the best-seller lists rarely celebrate that kind of courage. But there’s nothing more brave than recognizing that your personal instinct is wrong, and changing course to make a better decision for shareholders and stakeholders.

Here’s the one truth I’ve come to after two decades as a professional qualitative and quantitative researcher: if you can’t get a customer to tell you what they want, you asked the wrong question.

{ 10 comments }

Like Soylent Green, The Internet Is Made Of People

May 7, 2013

Tweet…And I have enjoyed talking to those people on my new podcast, The Friday Five. If you haven’t heard the [...]

Read the full article →

Klout, Revisited

May 2, 2013

TweetI have a confession: I look at my Klout score about once a week. There, I said it. Here’s what [...]

Read the full article →

The Content Marketing Treadmill

April 29, 2013

TweetSeveral months ago, I wrote this on my personal blog, because it didn’t (at the time) seem like it was [...]

Read the full article →

The Marketing Tyranny of the Majority

April 26, 2013

Tweet Thomas Jefferson would have been a very good marketer. When he said, “The majority, oppressing an individual, is guilty [...]

Read the full article →

The Future of the Analyst Business

April 22, 2013

TweetThis is such a great article about the problems facing the “analyst” industry in the age of social media. I’ve [...]

Read the full article →

The Single Best Question You Can Ask Your Customers, Audience Or Partners

April 8, 2013

TweetLast week, at Social Slam in Knoxville, my wife Tamsen and I gave a brand new presentation called Putting Data [...]

Read the full article →

The Large Print Giveth; The Small Print Taketh Away

March 25, 2013

TweetFrom Amazon’s Kindle product page: Ahem. Maximum Battery Life (in hours): THERE I FIXED IT. Tweet

Read the full article →