by Bob Walker | Aug 28, 2018 | Customer satisfaction, Marketing and strategy, Survey research
Many companies have established ongoing customer satisfaction programs: your department or company may be one of them. If not, you probably see many customer satisfaction survey examples once you finish a purchase transaction with a company. The airlines and lodging industries are particularly good at sending out requests for feedback shortly after every flight or stay. Yet a recent conversation with a client gave me pause: he rather confidently indicated that customer satisfaction research was the primary tool used for strategic insight into the performance of their business and the minds of consumers. Um, not.
Customer satisfaction research is not strategic research, and it never will be because it was never intended to be. Customer satisfaction research results cannot identify areas for new product development, a new advertising or communications strategy, or possible new market opportunities. Importantly, customer satisfaction research cannot tell anyone if the business is expanding or contracting, or effectively meeting customer needs, since it is restricted to recent customers.
At its best, customer satisfaction research is a process control and exception reporting tool. But even these goals are sometimes elusive, especially when the measures being used are general and nonspecific. Customer satisfaction can be very useful if trying to determine if specific performance criteria are within acceptable limits. However, the research ‘container’ (i.e., areas of investigation, questions, scales, and metrics used) is generally naïve in terms of whether the dimensions themselves are relevant or not.
One can hypothesize that, in a number of cases, some of the measures being asked probably have little to do with characteristics of the transaction that matter, or where the business is going – or where it is been. As an exception reporting tool, customer satisfaction is useful; as a business guidance and strategy development tool, it is of limited use.
But where does that leave us if most marketing managers and researchers don’t recognize the essential distinction between a process control tool and research designed to help grow the business?
The function of strategic research is to help an organization look out the window and navigate the uncertain and constantly changing road ahead. It is both quantitative and qualitative in nature. Strategic research helps the management team understand their customers’ attitudes and behaviors about the products they are using – and also those of their competitors. Additionally, strategic research helps identify the direction in which category users feel the market is going. It’s research that is dynamic, and always listening to customers general feelings and more detailed perceptions of your brand or service, rather than restricting their responses to the measures that are predetermined in a customer satisfaction study.
Don’t be lulled into complacency by positive customer satisfaction research results that indicate your business is doing well among your existing customers. You are only getting part of the story, and strategic research (which can take many forms, and should be conducted routinely) involves actively listening and responding to the ever-changing needs of today’s customers.
by Bob Walker | Jan 30, 2018 | Marketing and strategy
Last year I attended a conference held by a research software company. It was quite an event, featuring celebrities, writers, and well-known thought leaders. The massive conference hotel was somehow able to pack 3,000 attendees into a single room for the general sessions. During breaks, the hallways were teeming with bodies, all swimming in different directions, some swarming to the coffee stations, while others were headed to a quiet corner to make a call, catch up on email, or see an old friend. It seemed that everyone was abuzz with excitement on that 1st day.
The morning session on the 2nd day was more muted for marketing research firms (like mine) who have relied on this software platform for many years. As the CEO bounced around the stage like a child, extolling the virtues of the platform’s latest interface updates, he managed to say that there really was no need to work with an outside research firm or expert — just bring the software in-house. Hand the tasks over to a staffer: there’s really nothing to it. As someone with extensive research and methods expertise, I was disheartened. I immediately asked myself: why am I here?
I had flown a thousand miles on my own account, and fully intended to evangelize the product message upon returning home. After all, I had used this platform for nearly a decade, and suggested many feature improvements and bug alerts that made it a better product. The goodwill that I had extended to this company, in the spirit of partnership, was obviously misguided. I never realized that the company’s ultimate goal was not to support my business, but to take my business away.
More recently, I began to notice that when I added client seats to my license (so that they could provide survey changes directly, or have access to online reporting), they would begin to receive marketing materials, including email invitations for product trials and attend conferences. This is totally unethical, violates privacy laws, and is effectively spamming. I never gave this company permission to contact, or market to, my clients directly. Many of my clients have been cultivated over years, and some are at the highest levels of their companies. But apparently, this software company believes that they own all of the data in their system – even if that includes the names and contact info of people who never opted in. I have heard the same complaint from other users of this software platform.
Yet clearly, this is an effective strategy: the company does not need to scour for prospects. The email addresses are simply there for the taking; it’s just too tempting not to. And recently, after aggressive direct marketing, one of my clients decided to bring their software in-house. After all, how hard could it be? And this software company’s ever-growing consulting arm could certainly use some extra billable hours. Well done!
You might want to check with your research software vendors and ask them: are you marketing directly to my clients by accessing my account? Are you harvesting email addresses from my contact list? If so, fire them immediately.
In the world of software, you have many great alternatives. Most of them are ethical, too.
by Bob Walker | Jan 18, 2018 | Marketing and strategy, Marketing research, Quantitative research
NEW YORK, Jan. 17, 2018 /PRNewswire/ — 1stdibs, the leading global marketplace for collectors and dealers of beautiful things, today revealed the findings of its first Interior Designer Trends Survey, which focused on interior trends that will dominate in 2018, 2017 trends that will fade and common mistakes clients make when redesigning a space. Research firm Surveys & Forecasts, LLC, sampled the opinions of top designers from around the world who are part of the 1stdibs Trade Program. This program provides exclusive benefits, such as discounted trade pricing and complimentary concierge services, to interior designers and architects.
The commissioned survey looked at changes in home design that designers will be watching for this year, as well as top fads from 2017 that are losing steam. Among the most surprising findings was the turn away from minimalist styles and washed-out, mostly white interiors, which had been among the most popular looks.
“1stdibs is fortunate to have 40,000 of the most talented interior designers take part in our trade program,” said Sarah Liebel, GM of the 1stdibs Trade Program. “This group is responsible for putting together some of the most beautiful spaces throughout the world, and we are thrilled that we are able to share their predictions for interior design in 2018.”
Between December 19, 2017, and January 2, 2018, researchers with Surveys & Forecasts, LLC, a full-service strategic research consultancy based in South Norwalk, CT, conducted more than 630 online interviews with interior designers who are part of the 1stdibs Trade Program, which consists of 40,000 registered designers.
by Bob Walker | Dec 22, 2017 | Marketing and strategy
Have you seen the movie “The Fifth Element”? This now 20-year old epic still intrigues me: a futuristic, campy, sci-fi story about an unwitting cabdriver Korben Dallas (Bruce Willis) and the carrot top heroine Leeloo (Milla Jovovich). Leeloo and Korbin embark on a quest to retrieve four precious stones that will save the world from destruction. After they are retrieved, the stones are placed on a giant sundial, designed to repel the death beam. The four elements are revealed: earth, wind, fire, and water. But where is the fifth element? It is, of course, Korben declaring his love for Leeloo. The elements unite and the world is saved!
I watched this movie (again) the other night, and it got me thinking about our world of marketing mix elements. Really, it’s true, my life is very dull.
We are taught in business school about the 4P’s: product, price, promotion, and place. But isn’t there a fifth element — a rather obvious one?
Of course, the 4P’s still exist, albeit in a very different and highly fragmented form from just a few years ago. Given the pace of technological change, the impact of digital, and our ability to target, the net impact of the marketing mix seems to have had an opposite effect. Consumers face a fire hose of stimuli blasted through dozens of media and distribution channels. It’s no wonder that more and more research studies involve issues of SKU reduction. Do you really need to sign up for your 200th e-newsletter?
So, what does that tell us about the broader state of consumer marketing?
In marketing and research, we sometimes hear about an additional “P” that has somehow been overlooked, such as “packaging”, “personal selling”, or “process”. But aren’t these simply extensions of the existing 4P’s?
The true missing element — the fifth element — is people. I’m not sure why there weren’t 5 P’s from the start. After all, do we assume product + price + promotion + place = the instant success recipe?
Modern consumer markets are complex and competitive, with dozens of brands from which consumers can choose. What separates the winners from the losers? It is the marketer’s ability to reach through to the consumer — to people — at an emotional level, over time (let’s not forget – it takes significant investment), through acquired distinctiveness and brand salience. Product differentiation is less and less of a factor.
Reaching people, and appealing to their emotional center, their social connections, and their hopes and dreams is the key lever in marketing. While the trip to the grocery store can be described as a series of product transactions, those transactions occur in the much larger context of a living person that may just be trying to get through his or her day. That is the world in which all brands live and compete.
As marketers and researchers, let’s always remember that.
Happy holidays!
