Why simplicity is key to marketing success

As our world and technology have become increasingly complex, people gravitate toward simple, easily recognizable messages and calls-for-action.

Let's agree: The time of complex visual messaging in marketing and advertising is over. Collages are dead.

A simple image that conveys a single core idea are favoured by marketers and brand managers because they work. In essence, today anything that is not necessary to get to “yes” merely gets in the way. 

It is the difference between the completely uncluttered Google search website with its legendary a single function, and Yahoo search where myriad content has come to obscure its (former) main function. 

The challenge is that arriving at simplicity is hard work. It requires a focused purpose and a great deal of clarity. It requires knowing who exactly your message needs to speak to and convince to pay attention and a deep understanding of what breakthrough communications are about, what they must over come. 

Our brains are designed to edit out information, to ignore clutter, to disregard anything that doesn't look immediately pertinent. 

Great marketing gets past those hardwired gatekeepers. And great marketing has to be singular, direct and address an important target market motivation. 

Hallmarks of effective communications

1. Purpose
2. Specific target audience
3. Relevance to audience
4. Clarity
5. Consistency
6. Suitable medium
7. Repetition
8. Multi-channel
9. Conversation
10. Evaluate and Learn

Components of effective messaging

• Message (what you want to say)
• Redundancy (used to emphasize the message – can be image and text working together)
• Decoration (Embellishing to increase attractiveness and get attention)

Noise is all the things that interfere with the intended message.  In the arts, as in other sectors, an important issue remains learning to reduce the noise in our marketing and to focus on the single most important audience motivation to connect an experience with that audience. Because, ineffective marketing - the kind that has no clear message which means there is no redundancy or useful embellishment, and therefore there is no noise reduction and results simply in information overload which humans are designed to simply dismiss -leads to "No." 

Embracing the challenge of simplicity means honing a more rigorous process to arrive at effective communications that have the power to connect with your intended audience.

Exploring year-over-year membership / subscription

At a recent board workshop for a professional association we discussed membership and different ways to look at membership in order to help us understand how to grow it. Remembering some work I had done a few years back with a performing arts client I proposed that it is worth looking at the cumulative number of members over several years. Typically, we look at the total number of members - or subscribers - as an annual figure and then we pay some attention to churn (new members acquired minus non-renewing members). Growth occurs when this churn figure is positive, so that more people join than drop out in a given year. Churn rates also make clear why the first task in a mature, established organization is usually retention, keeping members/subscribers year after year. High rates of retention mean that growth can be achieved more readily (as long as you have not captured your entire market that is);  they also mean that your marketing efforts should become more cost-effective as retention should cost less than acquisition. .

When we look at a wider time span, for instance 5 years or 10 years, we gain a different understanding of the degree to which an organization has reached and engaged its market. Is the annual figure and the cumulative 5-year figure very close or is it much larger?

If it is very close then you are basically stable, without worrisome loss or solid growth year-over-year. If you wish to grow in this scenario then you need to focus on acquisition strategies to accelerate growth.

If the 5-year cumulative figure is much larger, then you might need to think not only about acquisition but re-acquisition. Re-acquisition means re-engaging with people who have made up their mind already about the value you provide by rejecting it for some reason. Re-acquisition is quite a different task, requiring different strategies, tactics, messages and channels. Because these people are not a blank slate relative to your organization, and because they have developed firm beliefs about your organization and have perceptions founded in their personal experience, I tend to think that re-acquisition is fundamentally more difficult than gaining a brand new member, subscriber, customer.

Strategically this dynamic, however, is well worth considering in light of your total market potential.

Re-acquisition may indeed be a critical effort to ensure an organization's sustainability in the long-run. IGiven the nature of re-acquisition, strategies and tactics designed to re-engage likely run their course over 3 to 4 years. The focus would have to shift back to true acquisition at that time because those you wish to re-engaged either have or really are not going to have their minds changed unless something else happens in their world.

In both cases, retention driven by creating value and a mutually beneficial and meaningful relationship with members remains paramount.

Halifax presentation and workshop

Social web strategy for the performing arts

"Many arts institutions even allow their audience members to write their own critiques on the organizational website. This is a scary trend." Michael Kaiser, President at Kennedy Centre for the Performing Arts, blogging on HuffPost, a while back.

It's not clear to me whether he thinks the ability of people to engage with each other is positive or negative for the performing arts, but he definitely says it's scary. (He might have meant that with regard to the demise of news-media critics and the rise of patrons providing their opinions online.)

In any case, in 2011, year 16 of the commercial internet, this amazes me.

It is neither scary nor new that arts patrons share their thoughts, reactions and recommendations about performing arts events.

Yes, the speed of this sharing is near instant - and potentially widely distributed - in the age of mobile technologies. Smart companies would want to harness this user generated content (UCG) on their own platforms as much as possible and indeed, they'd participate.

Imagine a social web strategy for a performing arts organization predicated on authentic relationships between their organization, artists and audiences: They might thank audience members for feedback, positive reviews, questions and being interested. The artistic director might comment back when they see a reaction that they want to shift to a different place. They could have a conversation and share information and perspectives. They might answer those "what were they thinking!" questions that people post on Facebook, Twitter or on blogs. Marketing staff could retweet and amplify the positive reviews you get. The company could give the behind the scenes insight, tell the back stories and facilitate creators, actors, musicians, dancers to speak for themselves (many do). They would not abuse these relationship for quick ticket sales, but they might occasionally highlight upcoming shows in their venue and in others. They might rally everyone around the love of the arts and spread it.

Can you imagine the power of these interactions for your company - your brand - in the long run?

For years, user generated content has been coveted by consumer companies and entire strategies have been thought up to get it - using contesting, short codes, value added info, exclusive perks. I used it as part of a place branding project for a city in Eastern Ontario back in 2007 with great results. Dove's Campaign for Real Beauty put an interesting spin on the genre. Today user generated content (the social media) has become ubiquitous through social networks (that's the platforms) and the real challenge is not the generation of it, but the harnessing of the conversation real people are having about you, your services, your products. (Real people is key, because there are all kinds of spam engines, and fake UCG where companies or their agents act as imposters - this is not social and it is not what I am talking about.)

The true irony might lie in what great art has the power to do:

It is supposed to be a conversation; an exchange between orchestra and audience through music; an exchange of ideas in theatre; a kinetic exploration through the body in dance; an entertaining experience (in the best sense of the word). It aspires to be: emotive, beautiful, thought-provoking, stimulating or even transforming. It examines the human condition. It can connect people both to each other and to a higher plane of being in whatever way they choose. It can foster greater understanding across cultures or socio-economic groups. And it does it by carrying on the conversations outside of the performance space.

I think, those arts organizations who have figured out to become part of the conversation are to be congratulated and celebrated. That's why I celebrate the vision and smarts at the National Arts Centre in Ottawa, or Shell Theatre in Fort Saskatchewan, Alberta. (Please add others who do it well in the comments below.)

They may just have realized that the conversation goes on without them anyways. And they can build authentic relationships by inviting audiences not only inside their theatres but inside their web presence, too.

Finally, new audience engagement modes reflect a generational as much as a technological shift. Back in 2006 even Time magazine had figured out the signs of the times by declaring You, yes, YOU, its Person of the Year.

By the way, Twitter and Facebook were in their infancy in 2006. Notably, Time's Person of the Year for 2010, was Mark Zuckerberg. The speed of business has increased tremendously and it demands nimbleness and adaptablility more than ever.

Artistic Risk and Branding

Creating a strategic framework to achieve value innovation  means we need to ask basic questions as if they were brand new. For example, what does "taking artistic risks" mean from an audience perspective?

The answer is that "it depends": Each audience member determines "risk" using a slew of criteria to figure out under what circumstances it might be worthwhile to not actually enjoy a performance that one paid for and made time to attend.

Personally, I attend several performing arts on subscription - the ultimate commitment much of the performing arts still relies on. I have different expectations from different art forms. In terms of classical music voluntary risk taking is limited to listenable music (I have little tolerance in the orchestral setting for dissonance). In contemporary dance, I look for the new and unexpected, as long as the dancers are top notch and indeed are dancing. In theatre, I like intellectual, thought-provoking work and I like a great deal of variety, too, including some great brassy entertainment that tells a great story. I also really like mash-ups that blur the boundaries of art forms by taking the best from each and creating something even greater. (Fela!, which I saw at Toronto's Canon Theatre, is an extraordinary example of that.) 

I have just established, in my singular experience at least, that it is possible within the same person to evaluate risks quite differently depending on the context.

The very idea of "artistic risk" is highly subjective. For instance, not all risky programming is innovative, and what's perceived as a risk in one city may not be so risky in another. Risk is contextual not absolute.

Performing arts audiences are diverse in tastes, expectations, culture and background. Those who can afford tickets easily will evaluate risks differently from those who have to give up something else in their life in order to save up for tickets.

Effective branding is critical to success 

I propose that developing and living a strong, singular brand is the best way for creators and presenters of artistic experiences to help their audiences decide to give all manner of experiences a try and to invest their time and money.

The brand becomes the touch point, the guarantee of a thoughtful and respectful arts experience, whether or not it's "entertaining", "provoking", "escape" or "stimulating". 

Robert LePage when receiving the Governor General's Performing Arts Award recognizing his body of work was quoted about not wanting to be merely "international" but "universal." (Watch the short NFB film here.)That is a quintessential brand statement, captured in a single word. It is awesome! It is a strong brand statement within which he can explore all manner of ideas in myriad ways; it's not limiting but rather gives a meaningful contour to his work and aspiration.

He talked about his visual language of theatre evolving beyond the spoken word and to borrow from other forms of storytelling that are familiar for contemporary audiences - most important being film. From a brand point of view, that means he's breaking free of the "traditional" bounds of one art form in order to bring his vision to life and to stay relevant. It's an act of reinvention, which is requisite to maintaining brand relevance in the long-term.

Societies, communities, people, technology have been changing rapidly - socially, politically, environmentally, economically, (multi-)culturally. Every industry, every sector in society must change in relation to these external challenges. Those that will succeed are those that will bring audiences, customers, consumers along on the journey. 

I propose that to define and embrace a comprehensive brand (not a logo, but a way of being), one relevant to audiences and stakeholders in your community, is the most efficient and effective way to connect the arts, artists and audiences to create success. 

As a researcher, strategist and marketer I have the tools to help clients build powerful brands. I also have learned that many people have a limited understanding of the breadth of what branding is and does. As I continue to contemplate value innovation in the performing arts I will share from my experiences in brand research and development.

Imagine: creating a brand new genre of live music making today!

Yes, as if it was brand new. Where would you start? 

I would start with looking at my potential audiences and what they thrive on today. I would look at my community, its demographic make-up, its values, attitudes and beliefs and I would segment. I might identify those huge numbers of people who listen to music electronically, primarily using ear buds, irrespective of genre. I would examine deeply where they find their music, what they are listening to, how they listen to this music, when they listen to it, whether they share it with others and how, why they listen to their music, what music gives them, and what music gives them that nothing else in their lives does.

Then I would find out how they spend their days, how much time they spend being social and what they gain in their social interactions. I might see that there are grave pressures and stressors in people’s lives, and a wide range of worries and concerns that express themselves in various ways, including making people sick, feeling isolated and alone. I might think about how their current consumption of music via ear buds enhances these issues or alleviates them.

Then I might realize that the highest potential revenue is available in the 30 to 59 year age group - according to Statistics Canada data. I would use an existing geographic segmentation tool to understand demographics, values, attitudes and beliefs by postal codes, allowing me to see many dimensions of potential audiences.

I might determine that there are two different generations in this 30-year age span - Boomers and Gen Xers - who hold different generational values. I might decide that Gen Xers would be the sweet spot as they are less individualistic in orientation and I could foster and keep them as customers longer because they are younger. I would do this knowing that they tend to be more independent-minded even as they value communal spaces and social connections.

I would see that my target Gen Xers create, participate and engage in every dimension of life (socially, environmentally, politically, economically, artistically). I would see that they are sophisticated consumers who research, explore and sample online and by recommendation (both peer and paid recommenders). They are curious about new experiences and are excited to try out things they haven't done before. I would see that they tend to look to be entertained in a friendly atmosphere rather than simply accepting others authority and doing as they are told without knowing why.

Then I would find out where this generation spends time and what their days, evenings and nights look like. Are they indoors in front of large screens or having family and social time, are they on the run using mobile devices as a primary interface while working hard, are they hanging out in coffee houses, bars and restaurants to get face-time, as they also chat and engage in social media to share with their wider community, are they in Yoga studios and fitness studios, spas and aesthetics shops where pampering is the order of the day and image is honed? Or do they work and worry about having enough money and resources to make ends meet? Different segments, micro-segments, would dominate in various activities and I might decide that I want to provide my solution - live orchestral classical music (ha!) - to all of them or some of them.

Then I might ask myself: how can I connect my brand new idea, never been seen before type of music making requiring perfect harmony among 40 to 100+ (!) musicians to these Gen Xers? How is my idea, that thrives on delicate sound (both in the highs and lows - qualities that are harder to appreciate and hear in compressed digital files), complex structure and intricate music making with a bewildering array of instruments, going to make these sophisticated, busy Gen Xers' lives better, richer, more complete? What is the value Gen Xers would gain from such a formidable live experience? How is that value greater in comparison to other activities in their lives? How do I connect this live experience through online/mobile channels and make it irresistible? How will I secure true participation in the live music making?

Then I would decide what the business model is going to be, after all, getting that many musicians to play together will take considerable resources especially in the mid- to long-term. In essence, I would think about whether there can be economies of scale in my business model and what they are. For instance, I might realize that the live performance doesn't scale well and I might search for ways to extend the live aspects to further monetize them. I might borrow from the playbook of other live events, whether its sports or pop and rock music.

I would look to other music experiences for inspiration, from the house concert to the stadium rock concerts. I would also look to the video game industry because it is highly participatory, the high-end spa experience because it does so well at pampering and getting me beyond my daily concerns, and the travel industry, both packaged and independent travel. And I'd think about styles of performance a lot.

This would eventually get me into the weeds of decision making: Would I put the musicians in a closed music making space, a concert hall, or would I put them outside or in community contexts? Would I have musicians be perfect technicians playing all the notes just so, or would I think about all that's needed for an awesome performance experience fro the audience? Would I ban the enthusiasm of my audience to the ends of long pieces, or would I encourage spontaneous outbursts of joy, delight, feedback? Would I dress musicians in black tails or would I allow their personalities to shine through with more than their hair styles? I would deeply consider the trade offs in each decision, talk to musicians and audiences and figure out how they would shape my brand.

Building such a bold idea from scratch would be awesomely exciting.

(I hope I would figure out how to build-in "creative destruction" mechanisms, so that the audience experience stays fresh and vibrant, rather than becoming narrowly defined by my initial magic formula. Everything tells me that there will be significant disruptive factors of all kinds, most of them outside my control, so that I might as well build in change and evolutionary leaps into my DNA.)

Value Innovation: From participation to attendance in the live performing arts

Important to achieving value innovation is responding to and building on what captivates audiences and, sometimes more important, potential audiences.

Today I listened to a really interesting CBC radio call in show on "Why live theatre is dead to you." It is well worth a listen to the wide range of views expressed by callers. Several pointed out that they simply don't know what is available. And that they have had disappointing experiences. (Diagnostically: these are marketing and programming/production issues.) By the way, for most live theatre wasn't actually dead, just not in reach for these and other reasons.

This week is rich with well considered coverage: like this article in the UK's Guardian on What do audiences want I read yesterday.

Not surprisingly, there are examples of arts organizations learning about being relevant in new ways.

At the National Arts Centre Orchestra, a new initiative called Casual Fridays, innovates on the classical concert experience expressly to reach and engage a new and younger audience. This includes a much more casual and friendly concert hall experience. NAC English Theatre (Youtube video) is using inventive marketing campaigns to generate buzz and bring the NAC to the streets of Ottawa to invite patrons to a night at the theatre.

Yet, by and large, the voices of those who continue to hold fast to conventions and traditions and a belief in the arts in and of themselves appear strong. And far removed from the younger generations interests, values and attitudes.

This is the "young audience" (Gen Xers are about 35 to 49 years old today) orchestras, for instance, need to attract in large numbers in order to replace not only aging highly committed patrons, but the revenue they represent. That means quite likely for many orchestras - and theatres and dance, too - not a 1 to 1 replacement strategy but a 3 or even 4 to 1 replacement imperative.

Research on participation and attendance
The Ontario Arts Council affirms in its Ontario Arts Engagement Study (lead by WolfBrown and released in October 2011), that not merely engagement but participation in the arts experience is where it is at from the audiences' perspective.

Key findings from the study include: "Involvement in participatory activities is linked to attendance at audience-based activities – Overall, people who engage in participatory arts activities are more likely to attend audience or visitor-based activities – sometimes at a rate of two or three times higher than those who do not engage in participatory activities."

And it leads the study's authors to ask: "How can arts organizations build bridges between participatory forms of engagement and professional arts performances and exhibits?"

From an institutional perspective the goal has often been to "get bums in seats", ie attendance. Personally, I detest this phrasing, because it reduces the audience in the most unhelpful ways. 

Imagine yourself shift the institutional end-game to the audience perspective. In what ways, if any, would it change your understanding of how to connect meaningfully to audiences and potential audiences? How would this change what you do in your quest to foster specific attending behaviours in audiences, like subscription renewal perhaps or some other repeat purchase?


And, honestly, how effective is your organization at marketing its shows? In the simplest terms, marketing is the process by which services and products are brought to market. Marketing is about the relationships you build and about trust and mutual respect; in my view it is not about "bums in seats." (That is a short-term sales approach.)

Why LTE (4G) Networks are a major opportunity or threat in the performing arts

Or in plain language: what are 4G speeds on LTE networks which started to come online in Canada in 2012 going to enable for theatre goers and dance attendees as well as presenters and producing companies?

During the first year of conducting Value of Presenting workshops there was little appetite to consider anything but the utility of social media in selling tickets. A breakthrough happened at the CAPACOA conference in January 2013 and now it feels like more and more presenters are beginning to see that web-based mobile technologies are going to create leaps in value for audiences and perhaps artists, producers and presenters. We presented at the Creative City Summit in Ottawa in May 2013 what we found out from Canadians and presenters about their use and attitudes to digital technologies and how Canadians' views of what "live" means to them might be evolving.

At APAP|NYC we presented on this topic (PDF) this month as well and just last week the 2014 CAPAOCA conference featured a successful workshop with presenters on the opportunities, the values of both streamed and live experiences, facilitated by Frederic Julien from CAPACOA.

Watch this Youtube video by Alcatel-Lucent which was created in 2009 (!) to demonstrate their technology vision and emerging capabilities. The final minute shows a vision of a performing arts experience, begging for a presenting business model!

What will the successful strategic move look like?

"How can I sell tickets using Twitter?"

Have you ever heard someone ask: "How can I sell tickets using Twitter?" or "I have a lot of Facebook fans but very few seem to buy tickets to my events. I don't think Facebook works for me."

I have puzzled over such statements; I couldn't understand why anyone would measure these social media platforms by their capacity to achieve direct sales  --- whether of tickets or widgets or gadgets.

In my mind, social media were, well, social.

Social means relationships. Social means conversation - mostly consumer to consumer, but also consumer to brand. Social means mutual respect. Social might mean recommendation. Social can mean someone buys something based - at least in part - on a social network interaction. But it all starts with authentic relationships, it's like being friends in the so-called real world.

Off I went looking for organizations using social media in exemplary ways, especially in the performing arts presenting field. This experiment is part of the Value of Presenting Study we have been working on.

The experiment: Interview by Twitter 
The topic: The use of social media and online technology in your performing arts organization.
The interviewees: Two arts presenters (read the transcripts here: Shell Theatre and the National Arts Centre) who use social media in exemplary ways and an agent who does, too.

Key findings:
1. Social media are about building relationships
2. There are other ways to sell tickets
3. Audiences engaged: mostly the 30 to 55 year-old crowd rather than "young people", even though one interviewees said they find Facebook and txt works with a Students Rush tickets program;
4. Hone your authentic voice
5. Experiment to see what works for your organization

It's fun to experiment with trying to help more people see what the strategic potential of social media in the performing arts presenting sector could be, by doing. In this case, it's not in direct sales measured by revenue, but in building relationships measured by quality of relationships, engagement and championship of the brand. It is not an old-style transactional relationship, but one that is mutually enriching, extends beyond attendance, and requires new, timely interactions. And they are a lot more public.

The importance of voice is a fascinating topic in the concise world of social networks. (As these interviews show, short texts can be extremely good at making clear points and sharing salient information.) Voice is a key brand attribute that requires honing and calibration.

I think the adoption of social media shifts an organization's brand into a new realm. As such, an evaluation  of  what an organization stands for and how it is and behaves in its world (in short an evaluation of market relevance), may well be an essential step toward embracing such contemporary marketing methods.

See my earlier post on Social web strategy for the performing arts.

A bold, new arts brand: Ottawa Storytellers

We recently did some research and strategy work with Ottawa Storytellers (OST). Their goal was to further build on their existing audience with a focus on cultivating a younger, more culturally diverse audience.

With storytelling the challenge is two-fold: 1) many people do not think of storytelling as a professional, adult performing art; and 2) event promotion has not built broad-based trust and credibility in organizations producing or presenting storytelling events.

The challenge we faced was that OST needed to build much greater recognition for itself as a credible and trustworthy source of quality performing arts/ storytelling events and for storytelling as a bona fide professional art form with every communication touch point. At the same time, it needed to “sell” storytelling series or individual performances, without being encumbered by organization-level messaging.

Often in event-based marketing - and when marketing budgets are relatively small - there is little leverage or recognition accruing back to the arts presenter, except among the most committed audiences. That in turn creates long-term liabilities like needing to continually invest in one-off marketing of events, rather than being able to benefit over time from a mother brand approach where recognition, trust and credibility reside with the presenter, not only a specific artist/event. Such an approach creates all kinds of benefits such as more easily presenting new artists through reducing box office risk and more effective marketing. It was also important to understand that when growing an audience is the central goal then the strategy cannot rely on largely list-based marketing efforts alone.

Central Strategy: Mother Brand

Web banners for Storytelling series events.
Design by Annette Hegel, Ottawa.

That is why a central part of our strategy called for a new branding approach that would be cohesive, bold, contemporary, intelligent, easily structured and flexible in application, welcoming and inviting to audiences, and give weight to OST (this is where the relationship with the audience gets built) while also giving strong presence to show-specific information (which is where OST fulfills its artistic mission).

In short, OST needed to take its place at the heart of its marketing. It would be the mother brand from which all series and events would flow.

In our analysis, we had found the OST logo and tagline were already strong and we recommended keeping both. We found that many of their marketing and communications tactics including much of their online efforts were well conceived and executed. The visual branding, on the other hand, was less effective, too complex and hard to adapt. Similarly, there was, at times, no clear hierarchy of messages evident in marketing materials and the oft-observed "too much text, which ends up saying very little to anyone" was also sometimes an issue.

Creative Brief: Define Audience Using Psychographics

By defining the audience, we were able to create a target that felt real. We used a psychographic composite (values, beliefs, generation-based experiences), rather than just relying on demographic elements (age, income, etc) which are less meaningful, and certainly much less so in terms of creative direction.

OST has just launched its new web site which features its new branding approach. I think they did an excellent job translating the strategic direction into an effective brand architecture. 

What do you think?

Thank you to OST for agreeing to share the back story on its new strategy initiatives. 

Encourage or stifling Audience participation

I stumbled upon this worthwhile blog post musing by a mid-western orchestra musician - via Orchestra Canada's Facebook presence. The discussion in the symphonic world continues unresolved.

For some time I have wondered about the desire for audience participation, audience loyalty, audience engagement that does not go beyond what an orchestra/ music director/ musician might want from that audience. That is that it appears as though the concepts of participation, engagement, loyalty are great as long as they are delivered on the orchestra's terms rather than on a give a take between audience and orchestra.

I suspect that the habits, the deference, the stifling of the audience's participation that classical music performance has earned a reputation for are difficult to sell to a savvy, media-enriched and fully empowered, performing arts attending audience of Gen Xers (the oldest Gen Xers are about 45 now). This is an independent generation; they create and engage but not in one-way sort of set up. They are sophisticated consumers as consumers; whether they know much about the classics is not what it's about.

A line from a piece I wrote 5 years ago while assembling generational profiles to inform marketing decisions jumped out at me again: "Gen Xers tend to look to be entertained in a friendly atmosphere rather than simply accepting others authority and doing as they are told without understanding why."

They know they can spend their 24 hours every day in ways they find highly rewarding and appealing without being told when to clap, when to be quiet, when to be in awe, when to engage. What will it take for classical music to break through its well-earned reputation that somehow places the service to the music above the service to the audience?

Who answers phone surveys anyhow?

The answer should come on May 13! At the next MRIA Ottawa speaker's event:

"We’ve seen the evidence of declining response rates – the focus of discussion at our April 15 panel discussion - and we’re troubled or at least challenged. We’ve seen evidence that suggests lower response rates may not necessarily have a clear negative impact on the quality of the data gathered. Yet, we worry that it may just be a matter of time before response rates and other challenges conspire to change that.

We know that certain segments of society are less accessible: they may be less willing to do surveys, they may be less accessible because of schedules or how they use communications tools. There may be other unrecognized factors at play, or it may be some combination of issues."

Customer Service - getting it right

My love for my Subaru and my Subaru dealership is well known and often mocked by my friends and colleagues...

But great customer service is one of the pillars of consumer loyalty, and there is no question as to which car dealership I'll go out of my way to use.

So, what makes the customer experience so good?

1. Friendly, helpful, human staff. When you call the dealership, your call is answered by a live, friendly, bilingual receptionist. She or he transfers you to a live, friendly and knowledgeable member of staff in the appropriate department. No voicemail unless you call after hours.

2. There are no stupid questions. Go ahead, ask them where the block heater is or how to open the frozen gas cap door. They listen to every question and make sure they answer each one and that you understand the answers.

3. Feedback and Follow up. After every service call, I get a short automated survey call to ensure I had a good experience and that I was satisfied with my service call. Subaru compiles this information and uses it to train staff. When I wasn't happy, they called back immediately and went above and beyond to made the situation right.

4. Living the brand. Subaru is known for safe, practical cars and kicking butt in rally events. Take the shuttle and you get a personable, calm driver who quietly and efficiently navigates traffic and alternative routes to get you to and from the dealership on time.

SEO - keyword thinking

No doubt, the most important part of your web site is what it says to the human visitor. However, when you write your site with SEO in mind you should evolve a keyword mindset: Humans categorize and we use keyword concepts to make sense of the world and the web.

Keywords are also the driving force in search engines. That's why in addition to weaving these important words and phrases throughout your web site, you need to ensure that the coding aspects of the site are considered.

Here's the source code view of my web site (if you click on the image you can see it larger)  at www.strategicmoves.ca. Note the underlined elements:
- Description and Keyword meta tags
- Title tag
- Image alt tags
These tags exist in code only and should support your actual content. They are useful in ensuring search engines interpret your site correctly.

Consider this question: how do you make keyword thinking an integral part of web development?

For instance, do you task your creative writing team and technical web team with creating these tags as each new page is written? Who writes your description, keyword, image tags- your writer or the developer? Who determines the title tag - and are they in tune with your brand strategy?

I always recommend that the writing and web teams work closely together from the outset and involve the client to ensure the best results for the users. I say for the user because SEO is about users and positioning yourself effectively in the content of search engines.

Telemarketing - a field guide

As I got the fourth phone call in a week from a telecommunications company wanting me to switch or upgrade, I sighed with frustration. As someone who has managed telemarketing campaigns, and who has benefited from excellent service calls, I know that telemarketing can be positive and profitable - in terms of sales and in terms of enhancing the relationship between company and customers.

So why are telemarketing calls so annoying?

1 - the caller doesn't know who I am or the relationship I have with the organization. Seriously - how does Rogers, who owns Fido, not know that I have cell phone service with Fido? How is it that my fairly simple name get mispronounced almost every time?

Companies track purchase behaviour and a multitude of other details about their clients. Phonetic pronunciation of names and tracking the comments of the customer are absolute requirements for any company undertaking telemarketing. Please acknowledge that I do business with you and that it's valued.

2 - the caller isn't offering something relevant to me. Why switch phone service when the costs and services are identical? Want me to change to your service? Offer something significantly better than what I currently have. Why did you think I'd want tickets to the circus? Is my name from a list of people who have supported a particular charity or are you cold calling from the phone book?

3 - the caller doesn't know the details of what they are offering. So I am interested in getting a subscription to the dance series. Is that ballet in tutus or contemporary dress? The caller had no idea.

Callers need to know as many details of the business as possible and know how to quickly find answers to customer questions. Small details really do make or break the deal.

4 - the caller doesn't ask me anything about my experience with the company. I don't want to listen about you - I want to talk about me and how I experience your company. Callers representing the company are contacting current and potential clients - it's an amazing opportunity to advocate for the company and collect quick feedback on brand awareness and customer satisfaction.

Telemarketing is as much a Public Relations activity as a Sales activity. Use it wisely to carefully promote your message and collect important information from your customer base.

Economics of fear and sustainable buying practices

Here's a hypothesis for consideration:

With news media reporting - in particular headlines - bleakly declaring the end to life as we know it for many months now, it is inevitable that people feel that the global financial crisis is having a major impact on their lives. This feeling is spawned by what we are told day in and day out at least as much as it stems from real losses in employment or investment portfolios.

Sustainable buying practices might well be on the rise. Those are practices not based on personal debt financing and overleveraging to "get things now". They are built on concepts of need, affordability, prioritization and saving for specific purchases. As this shift occurs it demands equally sustainable pricing practices, elastic enough to be responsive to the market and to ensure the survival of the business beyond this crisis. It means the "traditional" growth model has to be rethought in terms of "sustainable exchanges".

Any business model but especially those based on debt financing will have to be rethought in the context of needs, wants and sustainable personal - and business - finance.

I imagine it also means customer value propositions will increasingly include price related incentives, meant as short-term fixes to stimulate consumption. But in business only a few can survive on low price positions, the rest need greater differentiation to sustain their business. I imagine the competitive landscape will increasingly be thought to include alternatives across sectors of the economy, not just direct competitors within a specific sector.

If the above is so, what does that mean for how I think about performing arts marketing and sustainably developing audiences?

Thoughts on Making Buying Decisions

Some purchases we make require very little critical thinking - and some that would benefit from weighing options more carefully are made using overrides. ("I want it", "my neighbour has it already"). Some purchases receive a great amount of attention - often those that cost a lot of money, but not always.

One way to think about performing arts marketing is that we endeavour to recruit buyers who are willing to use convenient overrides so that they subscribe year after year, regardless of the specifics of the programming or other aspects of the overall customer experience.

This is important because arguably purchasing several live performing arts events in a single transaction (subscription) has significant implications for the buyer: time commitments, long terms planning and their financial capacity to pay in advance.

What are the circumstances required for someone to make a complex purchase in a mostly automatic fashion? And is it realistic with emerging audiences or is that a model of a time that is coming to an end?

Who knew a "word cloud" could be so fun

Check it out, using the words from this blog so far I got this: just click below.

Wordle: Strategic Moves

An Insight Sets the Stage

Here are a couple of quick updates on work I've been doing: The Audience Development Strategy's implementation by the NAC Orchestra continues to deliver excellent business results: In 2007 (year 1 of the strategy), we delivered the best campaign results in 19 years and exceeded several key targets. The 2008 campaign delivered the best results in 20 years.

The true test of a strategy cannot be merely success in its first year, when everyone is engaged, learning and changing. Keeping the momentum up to deliver to the increasingly ambitious targets in year 2 and looking toward the ever higher goals in each of the next 3 years is where the strategy and its implementation are tested. Especially important - as much of the media promotes a foreboding sense of apprehension about the unfolding global and Canadian recession - this strategy is built on the kind of deep audience insights that will help the Orchestra meet the challenges ahead.

On a similar note, I have been working with the NAC team on building a marketing strategy for the Governor General's Performing Arts Awards gala. Again, the rigorous, multi-faceted analysis phase which leveraged what we have learned about local audiences and expanded on that knowledge through additional research, is yielding the building blocks for an effective, multi-year, audience-centred strategy.

This latest project has been leading me to deepen the work on an insight about the tension between familiarity and discovery in buying decisions. It says that in order to buy performing arts experiences, the audience looks for things they are familiar with, but these are not necessarily the elements that will make the event memorable -which looks to be important to the repeat purchase decision. To be memorable, it has to deliver enough surprise and discovery. That means, if the marketing (or possibly the art) neglects the need for familiar touchpoints for a local audience, it can become exceedingly difficult to succeed in terms of marketing and sales.

The recent literature on neuroscience research has been interesting and may turn out to be enlightening - possibly helping to resolve this tension. In future posts I intent to explore these concepts further as I believe they are at the core of the marketing challenges faced in a world where the means of production and distribution are not only readily available but also cheap and global for all to use. Competition has to be thought of far more broadly now.

Teaching clients about online presence

In the last few days I've lead two Q and A workshop sessions with completely different clients to help them understand how they can start to use the web for much more than, well, than having a web site.
Helping clients draw the connections between their own site and how to drive the right kinds of traffic to their site means that they can become a lot more effective in their marketing, relationship building or sales efforts.
It's been interesting to speak about these issues to non-specialists - being understood seems to involve a lot of non-web metaphors that are grounded in people's real lives. (Something about marketing speak that mystifies and obscures rather than enlightens sometimes.)
Anyhow, having done these two sessions I now have a ready-to-go, customizable workshop on how to think about integrating online channels and using anything from SEO to search marketing to facebook or myspace and other social networking fora, to lead generation and nurture to e-news to RSS and whatever else we will be able to do on line next. Since surely itsgreatest hallmark remains its "evolution."