Mobile can better loyalty and customer service

This article originally appeared on Mobile Commerce Daily by Alex Romanov, CEO of iSIGN Media on 05/10/12.

It has been said that where Google goes these days, people follow. So when Ian Carrington, Google’s director of mobile marketing, told an audience during the Changing Media Summit in London last year, “If you don’t have a mobile strategy, you don’t have a future strategy,” marketers paid attention.

Fast-forward the clock to 2012 and a Marketing Magazine interview and it is clear his opinion has not wavered: “Advertisers … have to grow up and realize the mobile Web is just as important to their business [as apps] and should very much be a consideration for what their mobile strategy should be.”

Mr. Carrington’s recent comments come at a time where mobile, specifically smartphones and tablets, are enjoying high adoption rates and even higher popularity.

Year year
Media research firm Nielsen may have called 2011 “The Year of the Mobile,” but in only a few short months, it is amazing how antiquated that label seems.

Considering that the company’s latest research shows that smarphones made up nearly half of all United States mobile phones in February 2012 suggests that going forward, christening years with tech titles might be a bit premature.

Like no other marketing tool before it mobile is the ideal medium to improve customer service and, through heightened customer feedback and shopper metrics, instill greater loyalty.

Today’s North American Internet-using population stands at 273,067,546 and smartphones already comprise around 30 percent of worldwide mobile phone subscribers and is rising daily.

More than half of the U.S. mobile market is already dominated by customers relying on 3G access, while globally one in five mobile subscribers are running on 3G speeds and faster.

With data indicating that today’s Web-accessible mobile phone users spend nearly three hours per day on their wireless devices, there is a continuing incentive for companies to ramp up their mobile customer services.

In other words: relying solely on traditional short message services (SMS – or what has long been considered the backbone of mobile strategy) will shortchange both you and your customer.

Instead, expanding into new wireless channels such as QR codes, advanced augmented reality apps or multichannel techniques, for instance, is another way to make the rest of 2012 and beyond more mobile still while improving customer service and driving loyalty.

And speaking of multichannel techniques, there is also the burgeoning arena of digital signage and its mobile phone importance.

Unlike static standalone signs, digital signs are increasingly linked to mobile devices via Bluetooth or Wi-Fi connectivity and can deliver a wealth of customer-specific promotions, coupons and redemptions, and all of it based in real-time and location-aware.

When it comes to driving loyalty, nothing is more valuable than delivering to customers relevant and timely messages and information that they can act on immediately.

For the marketer, instant feedback helps paint a metrics picture that can be used to create an even more tailored experience during the next engagement.

Room for improvement
To be sure, for all the excitement and “mobile has reached a tipping point” chatter in the first quarter of 2012, it is important to remember that 2011 was already very mobile. And so was 2012.

After essentially putting the power of mobile on the map, companies continue expanding their mobile efforts and have taken them far beyond a basic SMS blitz incorporating location-aware campaigns and engaging rich media experiences.

Despite that momentum, many companies have yet to jump on board the mobile bandwagon or have yet to use it to its full potential.

In a 2011 survey from King Fish Media for instance we learned that 62 percent of survey respondents planned to launch a mobile marketing campaign within the next year, while only a third of companies already had a mobile communications strategy in place.

And since 2012 still has a long way to go, it is likely that many marketers still have not gotten the mobile message. And like any New Year’s resolution, they are easy to make and even easier to break – either by not following through on their mobile campaign plans or by launching those plans incorrectly.

But many of the ones that succeed will do so in part because they established loyalty using great customer service.

Think of loyalty and mobile customer service like an equation. Improved customer service, plus improved customer feedback equals greater loyalty.

Focusing on the positive, what follows is a look at ways in which businesses can build brand loyalty through the fusion of mobile and customer service.

Streamlining customer experience with mobile
Think that your customer service practices and your mobile customer service programs are fully integrated with one another? You might be mistaken.

Last year, a TeaLeaf study called mobile “the worst channel for customer experience,” stated that 83 percent of customers surveyed in Britain reported that they have encountered a problem when using mobile checkout.

While no comparable study was completed in the U.S., the results are telling.

Mobile has far to go in providing high quality customer service, particularly with many company mobile initiatives struggling to take shape in such a fast-paced environment.

Marketers responding to rising consumer smartphone adoption, however, have an opportunity to deliver tailored programs and technology that ultimately drive loyalty.

What makes up the ideal customer experience?

The best mobile experiences are the ones that use best practice and keep important demographics in mind. These are the areas most important to fine-tuning an agreeable customer experience via mobile, the type that builds loyalty through ease of use and intelligent design.

Letting the customer guide the experience. Before making changes, ask yourself how each change affects customer interaction with your company. How will the changes you make to your customer service affect the customer experience?

Maximize the multichannel map. Customer service levels should be consistent across all channels, with the ability for customers to easily interact with representatives as needed. The customer should be able to transition between channels without difficulty.

In an SMS or mobile app message, for instance, include a link to your company Web site and phone number for customers to speak with live help.

Nothing speaks like the voice of authenticity, so the saying goes, and sometimes even the most mobile-savvy customers welcome the opportunity to sort out a problem with a real person.

Even if a consumer is left dissatisfied by a specific experience, quality customer service, both traditional and mobile, increase the odds of loyalty purchases at a later date.

Offering valuable mobile additions. Listening to customer response is a vital part in the creation or revamping of the mobile medium.

Since reviews and feedback shape the customer and repeat customer experience, this data can be used to formulate mobile strategy. This is particularly important in healthcare and service providers’ cases, as they often provide lower-rated customer service experiences.

Making service a priority. Quality customer service benefits companies greatly, and as its importance is realized more widely, this should become a top priority.

In today’s ultra-competitive marketplace it is hard enough finding customers, let alone keeping them. All it takes is one ill-timed message before a potential buyer tunes your message out and goes elsewhere.

But once you have gained that loyalty, the strategies above can be used to boost your competitive advantage.

Loyal customers buy more and shop more often, making them more profitable than new ones.

If we can simply use appropriate customer service strategies to attract and retain the customers we want – the ones who are most valuable to us – then we will soon see retention numbers rise accordingly.

THE BOTTOM LINE: be aware of your customers’ needs. By understanding what they want, you can arm new mobile services with plans for top support and consistency.

As we continue through the rest of 2012 there is no doubt that many companies – even the majority – are at least in some formative stage of building and expanding their mobile outreach.

Others have gone well beyond their beta versions.

Mary Meeker, a partner at the venture capital firm Kleiner Perkins Caufield & Byers, told us back in October 2011 that the number of Fortune 1000 companies that are launching mobile ad campaigns grew from 203 in July 2011 to 250 this past September, a 23 percent increase – and the trend is upward.

Regardless of what stage they are in, however, there is always some aspect of mobile marketing and customer service that can be improved upon to attract and retain customers.

Loyalty boosted by mobile is an ideal way to forge ahead, because with mobile use growing and changing, we can expect grand returns – and soon.

If Nielsen termed 2011 “The Year of the Mobile,” and a Google Guru continued to hammer home the importance of mobile this year, it is clear that any business without a mobile strategy, and certainly one that integrates with building customer loyalty, is going to be left behind.

Alex Romanov is founder/CEO of iSign, a Toronto-based interactive marketing company specializing in mobile and digital out of home and digital signage. Reach him at alex@isignmedia.com.

This article originally appeared on Mobile Commerce Daily by Alex Romanov, CEO of iSIGN Media on 05/10/12.

An Internet Hot Spot’s Cold Response: When Calling Something an ‘Experiment’ is no Safeguard from Critics

In one of the early scenes from the dystopian 70s cult classic Soylent Green the camera shows a largely homeless and grotesquely overpopulated New York City street whose riotous masses are cleared with dump trucks – called scoops – treated more like rubbish than people. And in later scenes the audience learns not only is prostitution legal, but the women that come with the little remaining luxury property that’s left are called “furniture.” Nice.

If only treating people like objects was confined to Charlton Heston-starring science fiction.

Instead, the recent marketing misstep by BBH Labs, the innovation arm of the international marketing agency BBH, has brought us all a notch lower on the “soylent slide.” Earlier this week, at the annual tech-fest better known as the SXSW technology conference, BBH Labs hired 13 volunteer homeless people to stand in as human mobile hot spots. Carrying Wi-Fi devices and wearing t-shirts that read: “I’m [name] a 4G Hotspot,” the volunteers were enlisted to help prevent the overload of the existing mobile network, a common occurrence at tech-crowded events. It was also intended as a conversation starter – homeless workers would have an opportunity to speak with mobile users about their plight and discuss America’s homeless problem. And who knows, maybe a chance encounter would aid their employment and housing prospects?

In fact, Saneel Radia, the director of innovation at BBH Labs, who was quoted in a New York Times story about the Austin, Texas event, seemed utterly surprised by the public backlash.

“We saw it as a means to raise awareness by giving homeless people a way to engage with mainstream society and talk to people,” he said. “The hot spot is a way for them to tell their story.”

Somehow I think that positive outcome is unlikely, especially when you start with turning homeless people into an awkward marketing ploy while treating them like glorified telephone poles –albeit telephone poles with enough of a human voice to request that their 4G “customers” consider a donation to help them survive. While it’s true that these unlucky 13 did volunteer for their services and were paid for their efforts (more on that later), the program speaks to the worst kind of human exploitation. It’s one thing to know your actions are exploitative and nevertheless carry them out based on some flawed “greater good” logic, but it’s another level entirely when you’re oblivious to that cruelty.

The marketing carelessness also highlights another disturbing trend related to technology, a term that Chris Klauda, a vice president at D.K. Shifflet & Associates, a travel and hospitality market research company calls, “isolated togetherness” – people in close physical spaces, but remaining disconnected from the “real world” and are instead solely focused on the goings on in their virtual worlds via their smartphones, tablets, laptops, etc.

As the technology through which we all communicate continues to advance, becoming more immersive, digitally interactive, and mobile, it’s critical we – not as public relations professionals but as moral, caring, and empathetic members of the human race – remember that treating people with respect isn’t just about asking for someone’s assistance or paying them for their efforts in some endeavor. Nor does calling a marketing misfire a “charitable experiment,” excuse BBH Labs from their decision. That kind of qualified and dare I say bullsh*t language serves no one. In fact, it’s the kind of language PR professionals rely on so often that gives our industry a bad reputation and further fans the flames of the media mess at the heart of this blog post.

For their efforts the 13 volunteers, selected from the Front Steps homeless shelter, earned themselves free t-shirts, $20 a day (which based on an 8-hour work day amounts to $2.50 an hour or about the same legal minimum wage in 1976, and $4.75 below today’s legal minimum), and the opportunity to collect some extra donations.

But if you ask me, and the many others who were similarly disturbed by this story, I think they all got a lot less than they bargained for. Consider this “charitable experiment” a dismal failure, and hopefully one that will not be re-dressed and re-hashed for the next South by Southwest technology conference.

They may not have been called furniture as in Soylent Green, but these 13 volunteers definitely served as a 2012 appliance.

Shame on us all.

Groupon’s Dodgy Deal: Can a PR Blitz and Site Overhaul Save the Company From Itself?

When it comes to Groupon, the daily deals digital Mecca, my, my, how the dot com angels have fallen.

Even as a public relations professional who’s seen and navigated her fair share of client missteps, I’m a bit gobsmacked by how a company that less than two years ago snagged the front cover of Forbes magazine with the eye-catching title “Meet The Fastest Growing Company Ever,” has managed to have its PR rug so skillfully pulled out from under them. What’s especially noteworthy is that Groupon’s recent rotten deal has been entirely self-made.

For readers who aren’t up on the latest Groupon happenings, the company has for the past several months, endured a barrage of PR setbacks, helping re-write the company’s until-now spotless public narrative. Here’s the errrr…..deal: In 2011 the Chicago-based company was roundly sacked following a Super Bowl XLV (45) ad that appeared to mock the decades’ long Tibet-China conflict. A few months later, and just ahead of Groupon’s November initial public offering (IPO), the company that had since its founding been branded based on its hyperactive growth, had to slice its reported revenue in half due to questionable accounting practices. Tsk tsk tsk.

Even the company’s opening stock price, fittingly perhaps, came in at a bargain $20 compared to an earlier valuation that said the couponing site was worth $30 billion. Re-tweaked fuzzy math brought that value down to $12 billion.

And while the company’s NASDAQ stock as of this writing is hovering near its opening price, only down .2 percent, and they’ve managed to start the new year with no additional public relations faux pas – that is if you exclude their announcement last week of a 2011 fourth quarter loss of $9.8 million – a sense of Wild West mentality combined with deck-of-cards-like fragility (some would say Ponzi scheme) continues to deal the company a PR blow.

To be sure, Andrew Mason, Groupon’s 31-year-old CEO, isn’t going down without a fight. In the effort to build back its image as a leader in the online deal-a-day world where coupons attract customers to once-hidden brick and mortar establishments and where everyone wins, the company announced this week major revisions to its website. Among the changes includes adding “thumbs up” and “thumbs down” capabilities so that Groupon users can help the site be more selective when doling out its latest offerings. And in another striking move, Groupon announced the hiring of public relations veteran Paul Taaffe to better manage the company’s image. His arrival comes after only a two-month stewardship by Brad Williams, formerly of EBay Inc.

Whether or not Taaffe, 50, paired with Mason,31, is the right combination of relative youth and relative years remains to be seen. But the fact that his arrival comes after his predecessor barely had time to break in his desk chair’s seat cushion, more than even erroneous math or disgruntled business owners crying foul over the supposed Groupon “deal,” is the best indication yet, that Groupon might be sick. Very sick.

As PR professionals we are tasked with helping keep our client’s message on track, being consistent and accurate with the media, and when calamity strikes, honest and up front about our mistakes. But that hard work should always be predicated on a company that gets its facts and its story straight –before it goes public. To do anything less is like having one hand tied behind your back during a boxing match. Or if you’re a lawyer, having your client reveal a critical detail that could alter a defense only moments before opening arguments. That type of handicap serves no one.

There’s no denying Groupon’s had a tough year. And while it may be easy to say “what’s 365 days in the course of a life?” Groupon, much like its leader, is still very young, having just celebrated its third birthday. But if you’re three years old and already a third of your life has been troubled with a mixed marketing message, what does that suggest going forward?

Taaffe’s got a rocky road ahead of him, for sure.

Good press or bad press aside, Groupon and its thousands of employees and millions of dedicated users aren’t going anywhere anytime soon. But taming the daily deal beast just doesn’t seem like a job anyone should embrace and revamping a website is just not enough. Public Relations leaders can only craft a message so far. Too much spin and a message – and a company – can spin out of control.

Let’s see what happens next.   

Shame on Lowes for Pandering to Special Interests: When a Home Improvement Giant Could Use a Fixer-Up All its Own

“Never stop improving.”

Well, at least for Lowes, the above slogan parked in bold blue all caps on the top left corner of the home improvement giant’s webpage, it’s an appropriate start.

The question is how will the company’s recent public relations snafu ultimately pan out as their corporate brass has plenty to improve on now. (And we’re not talking basic roof repair) Earlier this week, the shopping behemoth that only days ago was about as far removed from politics as one of its featured bathroom redesigns, has landed itself in quite the brouhaha.

In yielding to mounting pressure from a variety of sources, including our very own Florida Family Association, (more on that later) the company pulled an ad it was running on commercial breaks for The Learning Channel’s All-American Muslim, a new reality TV show that purportedly shows real Muslims going about their daily lives – you know exactly like the rest of us. I don’t know about you, but the very fact that we need a program such as this to allay our tired and torturous fears of the proverbial “other” – in today’s day and age is frightening. But I digress.

As we enter the peak shopping days and weeks of the increasingly secular holiday season, you can bet this communications bombshell was not what Lowes was expecting. Already Google is working its magic. Google “Lowes” and the fallout from the pullout is the fourth hit. And with the decision making front pages news on CNN.com on Tuesday and Connecticut congressman Chris Murphy addressing the matter on the House floor, calling Lowes’s decision a rubber stamp on “basic foundational bigotry against a major American religious group,” you can bet their troubles are only beginning.

From a public relations perspective, this is the kind of textbook nightmare we dread: an apolitical company becoming unintentionally embroiled in a very politicizing and polarizing mess. So all this begs the question, where did Lowes go wrong?

Lowes went wrong by not following the advice I wrote about in my recent Blagojevich blunder post. Louder voices aren’t more credible voices. And while the company continues to say that its ad pulling had nothing to do specifically with the Florida Family Association, a nonprofit whose web “About Us” description says the group aims to, “educate people on what they can do to defend, protect and promote traditional, biblical values,” it seems VERY likely that it was at least a contributing factor to a collection of below-the-radar narrow-minded people and groups.

Shame on Lowes for pandering toward groups that mask McCarthy-style witch-hunting in the guise of religious enlightenment –whether they’re a 501C3 or not.

There’s comes a point in any communications campaign where all the writers, all the support staff, all the leaflet designers, and press release pitchers, must step aside and let the company speak for itself – without the buffer PR teams necessarily provide. While Lowes has been diligently responding via Tweet and in the press, perhaps a more transparent apology would be in order –without our help. Until now Lowes CEO Robert Niblock, 48, has been mum on the controversy.

As Lowes closes out 2011 and opens 2012 searching for repair and replacement parts in its “corporate improvement” aisle, we can all rest comfortably knowing that the modern social media landscape and blogosphere won’t let red meat like this out from under its digital jaw grip easily. And if there’s a communications upside to any of this, All-American Muslim, which has enjoyed modest success with 908,000 to 1.7 million viewers since its November 13 launch, stands to gain at least something of a ratings bump following the buzz.

Then again, the show’s producers probably wished Lowes would never have gotten involved in the first place and “never stopped improving” their advertising campaigns somewhere else.

The Gift That Keeps on Giving: To Yourself

Leave it to marketing professionals to come up with this one. Buying yourself that little “I’ve earned it” pick-me-up has a new name: self-gifting.

Just in time for the peak of holiday season giving and receiving, evidence suggests that 60 percent of all shoppers will add themselves to their holiday lists, spending an average of $130, a 16 percent increase from last year. In the short term, many are quick to call this yet another strong indication that the still-weak US and global economy is taking its vitamins and getting stronger all the time. Deep discounts and the relaxing of recession-era belt tightening seems to have left customers in the buying mood.

But is it me, or does anyone else see a bit of a problem with this “I, Me, Mine” relapse? I remember reading somewhere that Americans’ gluttonous consumerism and anemic savings rate was supposedly at the root of our current economic troubles?

Ellen Davis, Vice President of the National Retail Federation, who was quoted in an Advertising Age post that addressed the phenomenon, rightly points out the pragmatic downside to such an aggressive self-indulgent holiday marketing campaign. If the holiday season becomes overly connected with adding oneself to their annual guest list, as people patiently wait for the end-of-year price slashing, how will retailers attract business during the other 10 months of the calendar, she asks?

Davis’ concerns, however, aren’t even number one on my list, shopping or otherwise.

The bigger question is this: what happens when the over-terming of trends and excessive labeling, waters down the meaning behind such actions? There’s absolutely nothing wrong with an occasional spur-of-the-moment purchase. Such actions send your brain’s pleasure center into the stratosphere, washed over with the neurotransmitter dopamine. And like that coveted end-of-day piece of chocolate, provides your body with warm and fuzzy feel good feelings. But when impulse buys are turned into a self-promoting season of “You’ve Earned It” and “Gift Yourself” tag lines, as is being done by J. Crew, hasn’t the meaning behind the purchases been lost?

Instead, what once felt good has morphed into another transparent attempt to get consumers to open their wallets?

As a public relations professional, and one who is keenly aware of properly calibrating messages for clients, marketers this holiday season would be wise to consider the pitfalls of overly promoting the self-gifting fad. Otherwise self-gifts could rapidly become self-returns.

Singing The Blues For Pink

The following article by Vanessa Horwell, Chief Visibility Officer of Thinkink, originally appeared on Marketing Daily on 10/25/11.

For a color whose name doesn’t even get top billing on the visible spectrum of light, pink has certainly developed potent staying power. From the Pink Panther to pink Cadillacs, and everything in between, this dainty mixture of red and white has also come to symbolize a less benign issue: the hundreds-of-millions-of-dollars-a-year-fight against breast cancer – the third deadliest cancer in America today and No. 2 killer of women.

Are you surprised I didn’t say it was the No. 1 killer of women and the second deadliest cancer in the United States? You can thank the power of marketing for shifting those perceptions.

Not only has breast cancer taken more than 240,000 lives since 2005, according to Cancer.org, it has also commandeered an entire month through powerful — some would even say extreme, marketing influence. For the past 25 years, October’s ghosts and goblins have had to share the stage with the specter of breast cancer and its increasingly corporate-like kissing cousins – Breast Cancer Awareness Month and the inexorably linked Susan G. Komen for the Cure Foundation.

While no one can deny the impressive global awareness and funding these organizations have brought to the breast cancer cause – Susan G. Komen alone raised about $420 million in 2010 – am I the only one who thinks that all the merchandising: the pink ribbons, the pink-clad NFL teams, the Bank of America pink checking accounts, the pink armbands, pink lunchboxes, pink Kitchen Aid food processors  and whatever else has been Pink’d for October is diluting both the issue at hand and, in reality, siphoning more money toward profits than for research for an actual cure, and skewing public attention away from other serious cancers — or other causes, period?

When was the last time you paid attention to cervical cancer, or colorectal cancer? Why don’t any NLF teams wear ribbons to support Male Breast Cancer – something that kills, on average, 450 men per year?

Pinkwashing: Where Does All the Money Go?

In 2002, Breast Cancer Action launched a side project called “Think Before You Pink,” whose goal was to raise awareness over the types of companies that chose to go pink, and “encourages consumers to ask critical questions about pink-ribbon promotions.” Doing battle with so-called “pinkwashing,” their motto is “raise a stink.” Here, too, donations go to cancer research.  The organization asks consumers to do some research before a pink product is purchased, for example:

• How much money from your purchase actually goes toward breast cancer? Does it say so plainly on the box or packaging?
• Does the company you’re purchasing from have a cap on the amount it sends in donations regardless of the number of pink-related sales?
• Are funds being raised through direct purchase, or is a clever marketing scheme disguising the fact that you need to purchase additional merchandise from the company in order to make a donation?
• How, specifically, is your money being spent?

I was reminded of the need to research when I received an email from Etsy (a site for artisanal wares), promoting all things pink but without any visible endorsements. Showcased vendors were promoting their wares with descriptions such as, “This apron knot dress is a great way to show support for all those around us touched by Breast Cancer and a fashionable and fun way to show your support for the fight for a cure.”

I don’t know about you but I don’t that think fun and breast cancer belong in the same sentence, and it’s precisely this sort of overreach that at first confuses consumers (who exactly am I giving to?), then moves onto cause fatigue (not another pink promotion!!), and finally cause alienation (what a sell-out; I want nothing to do with that brand).

Have Sponsorship Dollars, Will Go Pink

Susan G’s overreach, too, seems to have gotten the organization into several snafus, the most notable when it partnered with Kentucky Fried Chicken to sell pink buckets of chicken to franchise operators, where 50 cents of every purchase went to the “For the Cure” campaign. Seriously, KFC?

Needless to say, the public and media backlash was acute, and the partnership short-lived. Is a pinkwashed KFC really going to unclog all those red blood vessels? Fried chicken is a well-known contributor to obesity, critics said, and obesity is also linked to cancer. How can a campaign be genuine if, on one hand, money goes to a worthy cause and, on the other hand, unnecessarily shines the spotlight on a fast food chain driving its sales and profits?

The truth is, it can’t.

Then there was the perfume brouhaha where independent testing of the chemicals in Susan G.’s Promise Me perfume revealed that some of them might be linked to cancer. For its part, the foundation released a statement saying that the levels of questionable ingredients fell “well within the guidelines of the International Fragrance Association,” but that out of an abundance of caution, the perfume’s formula was being tweaked.

Of course, the plot thickens when you consider the driver behind this story was cancer charity rival Breast Cancer Action. Is it possible their constant nitpicking is also part of their own marketing campaign called “my charity is better than/more deserving than yours?”

For consumers, it becomes very tiresome and, if that example raises questions of agenda bias on Breast Cancer Action’s part, this one won’t. Earlier this year, Stephen Colbert took Susan G. Komen to the court of public opinion when he teased the group’s million-dollar-plus effort to squash nonprofits that allegedly appropriated the “For the Cure” slogan. Who can blame these smaller nonprofits wanting to cash in on what’s become a multimillion-dollar marketing machine.

To Komen’s credit, the organization makes no bones about its size, its influence or the way it does business.

“It’s a democratization of a disease,” said Komen CEO Nancy G. Brinker, in a recent New York Timesarticle about the pinking of professional football. “It’s drilling down into the deepest pockets of America. …America is built on consumerism. To say we shouldn’t use it to solve the social ills that confront us doesn’t make sense to me.”

Raising awareness is all well and good, and Americans have huge hearts and pocketbooks when it comes to giving, but why must that awareness come with a pair of New Balance sneakers or a Kitchen Aid blender?

The truth is that it shouldn’t.  Since when did we start needing to get something in order to give?

Let’s Reconsider Our Disease Consumerism

Pink’s 2011 October reign is almost complete. Soon we’ll be on to November, which is officially recognized as Lung Cancer Awareness Month. You remember lung cancer, don’t you, the No. 1 American cancer killer that took nearly a million lives in fours years? It’s got a color and a ribbon, too, though it shares its pearl-colored badge of honor with multiple sclerosis. Only its marketing budget can’t compete with pink.

As we close out the final months of 2011, why don’t we leave the color spectrum and our “disease consumerism” aside? Perhaps my singing the blues over pink may convince others to think about the effect that one cause’s marketing efforts have had on so many others.

From breast to colorectal to pancreatic and prostate to ovarian, esophageal and all the insidious rest — cancer kills indiscriminately. Choose whichever form of runaway cell growth you want and re-focus on the color of money instead: donate all that you can directly to treatment and screening sources of these other unadvertised cancers – having done your research first, of course.

Trust me. That blender – pink or otherwise – can wait. Because all cancers and life-threatening diseases are equal-opportunity killers, even if the marketing budgets of the nonprofits that support them aren’t.

The following article by Vanessa Horwell, Chief Visibility Officer of Thinkink, originally appeared on Marketing Daily on 10/25/11.

Message Not Sent: Public Eager to Adopt Mobile Buying; Businesses Not So Much

For a three-word sentence, “Message not sent,” does a pretty good job at frustrating text messagers from completing and sending their digital thoughts. And when it comes to m-commerce, ‘M’ for mobile, businesses it seems, haven’t gotten the message either.

A new survey compiled by Empirix reveals a mixed message: 91 percent of American shoppers believed mobile buying for anything from airline tickets, to department store purchases, to all items in between by text message, email or smart phone app, will generally benefit their shopping experience, while nearly two-thirds of respondents expected an improvement in customer service via their mobile outlet.

But like a garbled message trapped in the Internet ether, fewer than half of businesses surveyed in several countries including the United States, the United Kingdom, France and Germany, said they’d be investing money toward establishing m-commerce networks. The US, which often plays second fiddle (or third, or fourth) to tech-savvy Europe, was a relative “winner,” with 41 percent of businesses saying they would. Better still; more than half of US businesses said they at least had a mobile strategy in place. By contrast only 14 percent of UK businesses were game for upgrading from ‘E’ to m-commerce.

Dealing with the digital disconnect

That’s where PR companies come into play. Playing the watchdog role for our clients means it’s our job to inform them when it’s time to enhance their business and marketing models, offering concrete mobile marketing suggestions and strategy. In short, just having a web page is so last decade. As seen on airlines, mobile onboard buying campaigns have really taken off. (Pardon the pun)

If airlines can be persuaded to the see the benefits of turning a jumbo jet’s cabin into a touch and click sky mall, then why not other businesses?

To be sure, an m-commerce-embracing public and a plugged in communications industry are only the first steps toward success. But they’re not bad starts. In Empirix’s press release on the study, Tim Moynihan, VP of Marketing cautioned companies against quantity of mobile initiative versus quality of effort.

“As more businesses deliver m-commerce applications to an increasing number of consumers, the risk of poor service increases dramatically,” he said. “Investing in an end-to-end service assurance program at the start of this journey will separate the winners from the losers.”

An “end to end service assurance program,” huh.

Sounds like the perfect job for us.

Note to the Small Business Owner: Groupon WON’T Save Your Company

Current economic environment notwithstanding, most consumers are attracted by ways to save money – not in their bank account, but on stuff – because they are going to spend. Businesses, naturally, oblige by offering “deals,” the growth of which has exploded thanks to Groupon, LivingSocial, Daily Deal and the dozens of other wannabes. Of course, the growing number of daily deals appeal to our human nature – getting the best offer before the next person does.  One doesn’t have to be a coupon hoarder or penny pincher to fall in that category, and Groupon has been most “helpful” in transforming so many of us into online deal hunters.

In less than a year, the “Groupon experience” has become incredibly popular with retailers and restaurants trying solicit new customers and get the cash register ca-chinging again. But if they expect a lot of these new customers to jump all over non-Groupon prices after paying heavily discounted rates at the start of the relationship, they are delusional and tragically mistaken.

Last month, I posted a comment on a Loyalty group I’m a member of on LinkedIn:

“While relatively innovative, Groupon is not a company that helps brands build loyalty. Because Groupon offers consumers discounted goods/services from an ever-changing variety of companies, it inherently encourages consumers to purchase a scattershot of different items, driven by heavy discounts offered during a short timetable – not through developing brand loyalty. The process works against loyalty because it drives consumers to try many new brands – rather than sticking with one brand consistently – all on a single factor. Price. Groupon essentially says to consumers, why stick with the usual go-to salon/restaurant/bookstore when you can try this coupon for another, different company that’s much cheaper than what you’re probably paying? Companies may increase business by using Groupon to bring in new consumers who might not normally try their brand, but in terms of encouraging long-term brand loyalty the service simply isn’t equipped to offer real results. I’ve always argued that when marketers go down the discount highway, it’s almost impossible to turn back around. Think about it… it’s highly unlikely that a consumer making a purchase decision based on a percentage discount from an unknown retailer/brand will return to that retailer/brand for “non-Groupon” prices. Why would they? Instead, they’ll simply look for the next bargain delivered by Groupon from yet another retailer/brand… and so on.”

That discussion is gaining a lot of traction as the “Great Groupon Debate” is argued among retail marketers and business reporters alike:

-          Bryon Morrison, president of The Marketing Arm’s wireless practice discusses the cons of Groupon in his article featured in Mobile Commerce Daily Countering the Groupon effect and linking tactics to strategy

-          And Fred Minnick, writing for Stores, asks if daily deal sites good or bad for retail in his article “The Great Groupon Debate”

In a recent Slate feature, Noreen Malone lived off Groupon for a week. There was a lot of effort involved (20-minute walks each way for a coffee shop? No thanks.) and a little pressure (don’t forget your coupon!), and Malone noted that it’s also an easy way to be blinded by the deals: “We might not know, sitting in our cubicles, that we want these things—but take 50 percent off the sticker price, and suddenly we do,” she said.

 

And that’s the trouble with Groupon. In a social deals-type environment, we look at sticker price, not at brand value. Groupon is less about the brand, more about the price. Why go back and pay full rates if you’re always presented with something new—and that deal you grabbed wasn’t even nearby?

Yes, we are even willing to go out of our way for a good deal, but will we return to the same place when we don’t have a chance at a discount? Fat chance. In a recent survey by Cooper Murphy Copywriters, 82 percent of companies that had Groupon promotions in the past said that they were unhappy with the level of repeat business they received after running their promotion.

To continue Groupon momentum, a company might consider another deal, and another one… and they’re continuing that cycle of margin giveaways in the process, not to mention alienating loyal customers who have been paying standard prices for months or even years. With an influx of new customers waving deals, will the regulars have the same level of service, the same experience?

It’s better to concentrate on customer connections in the long run. Keeping costs low for all buyers—not just the Groupon set—will ensure repeat customers. Specialized pricing and competitive edge can hook new clients, but how can we keep customers coming back? is a better question than how low can prices go this month?

There is no quick fix to finding new customers – any marketer worth their grain in salt will tell you. The experiences that consumers are having with Groupon like not being able to redeem coupons for 4+ months (personal story that I’ll share with you next week) or finding out that the deals are only available at very limited times will and work against Groupon, the business and their brand.

My advice? Treat Groupon and its ilk with caution and think about long term ways to connect with customers to build profits – not give away margins and alienate existing customers through deep discounts.

Enhancing Attendee Engagement with the Mobile Channel

By Vanessa Horwell, Founder & Chief Visibility Officer, ThinkInk & TravelInk’d

(This article originally appeared in Hotel Executive.com, where Vanessa is a contributor)

For traditional marketing and advertising promotions, the mobile channel is opening up a slew of new opportunities: everything from retail coupons to loyalty reward programs are being enhanced through mobile interactions. The immense convenience and “always connected” benefits of smartphones and other mobile devices (not to mention the intimate nature of these devices) make them a very appealing vehicle for consumer advertising, but what about the trade segments—specifically, what can the mobile channel do for trade shows and conventions? With mobile’s vast capabilities and ever-growing adoption, the channel can increase the effectiveness of conventions by becoming an integral tool for all phases of the event: pre-convention, during, and post-convention.

There’s no denying the reach of the mobile channel: by the end of 2011, it’s estimated that over 90 percent of Americans will own mobile phones, with over 50 percent of these being smartphones. Of course, in most business professions, the concentration of these numbers is far higher, making mobile one of the most effective tools to communicate with on-the-go professionals. Considering the professional playing field these days, who isn’t on-the-go?

Logically, these factors extend into the convention and trade show environment. Whether convention planners are looking to create an event-specific app or utilize optimized mobile websites to communicate with attendees, there are a number of mobile techniques that can be applied to ensure a successful event—and provide more opportunities to create value for convention goers. Following are a number of approaches for organizers to engage more attendees and optimize the convention experience through the mobile channel.

The Mobile Channel: Pre-Convention

Let’s face it: the majority of convention-goers aren’t all that excited about attending an upcoming convention or trade show. While there’s nothing that can change this fact, planners can use the mobile channel to make preparations for these (rather unwilling) attendees much easier, thereby eliminating some of usual problems associated with RSVP “checkpoints” (hotel reservations, individual event reservations, etc.) prior to the convention.

• Notification – Before any major checkpoint is reached, convention planners can offer pre-registration (which, if applicable, could include downloading the convention’s app) that provides each attendee with a mobile notification that gives instant linkage to the specific RSVP site. Think of it as a direct landing page for each event, sent via text, mobile email, or app. For example, convention attendees can sign up at pre-registration to receive notification via a downloadable convention application. The result is that, prior to the RSVP deadline for each event, the attendee will receive a message:

  Dear Mr. Smith, please find a link below that will either confirm or cancel your attendance of the workshop: “Using the Mobile Channel Effectively at Conventions.” Click on the link that represents your preference. We look forward to seeing you on July 23rd!

• Communication – Through mobile applications or devices that offer web communication (48 percent of business travellers’ phones have web access), convention planners can provide a congregation/meeting forum for attendees. By providing “meet and greet” events through mobile devices, planners can eliminate and/or shorten the need and length of these events at the live convention. In addition, such forums can generate more excitement for the events, as long as each forum provides a moderator that gives detailed information about each event.

The Mobile Channel During the Convention

Convention planners grapple with the unexpected during convention execution, and it’s not unusual that a professional wonders why didn’t someone just tell me? when in attendance. With some smart moves, the mobile channel can be calibrated to enhance participation by offering immediate information, engagement, and connection with others on the floor, or even with social networks. Issues that used to slip through the cracks can be addressed with smoother, simpler communication while on-site to ease immediate handling.

• Information – No longer do convention planners need to design, print, and distribute information packets and brochures. Through mobile applications and optimized browsing, convention planners can offer maps and detailed event information such as exhibit locations, sponsor products, agenda items, and event location/times. In addition to its practicality, it helps provide an eco-friendly feel to events, and may even be used as an additional marketing tool.
• Engagement – Mobile offers instant interaction and instant results. Speakers and event managers can keep the audience engaged in events by asking questions, taking polls, and displaying results in real-time. Not only will the audience maintain a closer connection with presenting professionals, but the event organization in general can be streamlined for the benefit of all parties. Relevant questions received after speakers’ presentations can be collected and answered to continue the interactive mindset.
• Connection – The mobile channel gives instant connection to event sponsors, planners, and fellow attendees. Implementation can also involve linking convention communications to Facebook, Twitter, LinkedIn, and other popular social networking connections. With regular updates from attendees, event buzz can grow exponentially in real-time, and without increasing cost.

The Mobile Channel Post-Convention

Another essential convention component doesn’t even happen on location. When the presentations are over, the business cards are collected, and the bags are packed, it’s all about the take-away benefits of a professional thinktank. On the attendees’ side, the mobile channel facilitates cross-communication and the forging of partnerships, but it also enhances future conventions in the following ways.

• Feedback – Because it can be used to gather immediate feedback, mobile takes advantage of “fresh” data (information and opinions that are gathered while impressions are fresh on attendees’ minds) that will give planners an edge for the next “big event.” In the case of closely-scheduled or even back-to-back events, this information is considered vital. With so many organizations joining forces at a convention, communication between these separate entities can become streamlined.
• Maintaining Connections – Like all forms of electronic communications, mobile provides an open link between all convention participants long after the event comes to a close. However, unlike other forms, mobile gives instant connectivity regardless of the participant’s location—convention sponsors, advertisers, planners, and attendees can communicate on-the-go. As all too often, these communications might be shuffled to a “to-do” list, never to been seen again because there was no immediate access to a computer. Mobile ensures that such ideas and thoughts are communicated whenever, wherever.

Challenges for Mobile Channel App Adoption

Convention planners can’t move into the mobile channel without caveats. Participants can experience a streamlined event for networking and building their businesses, but only if provided with intuitive options for their needs, which can vary depending on industry. Building on app adoption in the first half of 2011, current mobile channel incorporation can avoid the disappointments and pitfalls of earlier trial runs.

• Poor App Availability – Some early apps intended for conventions and trade shows this year were only available for iPhone users. Nielson Company’s March 2011 mobile survey indicated that 31.1 percent of respondents wanted to purchase an Android as their next phone, while 30 percent wanted an iPhone—a close split that wouldn’t be favored by an iPhone-only app offering. Apps also need to be planned for hybrids or mobile web to blanket the widest group of attendees as possible.
• Incomplete Offerings – There’s no point in offering an app for participants if it doesn’t have a draw. Instead of repackaged content or a series of maps, original content paired with event FAQs and directions is more likely to increase engagement. Some might argue that an inferior or “worthless” app could even damage the reputation of a convention or trade show, and the cost of development certainly wouldn’t be worth the investment.
• Skewed Intention – Every quality app has its place in a convention if it is marketed properly and, if highly specialized, offered in conjunction with complementary apps. If offering an app to aid social networking, for example, it might be advantageous to additionally offer help-based, information-focused apps.
• Poor Design – Poor usability can hurt convention app use. Anything from hard-to-find information due to layout to untested designs can hurt the reputation of those offering “bonus features” to participants. Since many convention-goers ask a series of location-based questions upon arrival, for example, it would be advantageous to have that information positioned accordingly.

It’s not just the traditional consumer target that benefits from the “always connected” feature of the mobile channel; trade segments can also be successfully targeted in the convention atmosphere. Since the mobile channel is based on two-way communication, apps that allow feedback and commentary can improve more than just an industry event, but issues and product development discussions in the following year. Throughout all phases, convention planners and participants can take advantage of the convenience and effectiveness of the mobile channel.

Who knows? By making it easier to attend and participate (and even have fun) via the mobile channel, maybe everyone could even have a good enough time to enjoy it. Wouldn’t that be the ultimate type of engagement with convention attendees?

Chief Visibility Offer, ThinkInk & TravelInk’d Vanessa Horwell is the founder and Chief Visibility Officer of ThinkInk & TravelInk’d, a public relations and visibility firm that shuns press releases in favor of storytelling. She has spent the past 18 years working with companies in the US, UK and Europe, developing successful campaigns and strategies for their brands. Ms. Horwell is a senior level strategist who works with companies in North America, EMEA and Asia-Pac in developing winning media campaigns, building relationships with influencers, and improving visibility through a unique style of public relations. Ms. Horwell can be contacted at 305-749-5342 or vanessa@thinkinkpr.com Extended Bio…

HotelExecutive.com retains the copyright to the articles published in the Hotel Business Review. Articles cannot be republished without prior written consent by HotelExecutive.com

You Can’t Have It Both Ways, It Seems

Wednesday, September 29, 2010

By Vanessa Horwell

I’m going beyond the press release and into advertising territory in this column, after a recent article in The New York Times‘ “On Advertising” column grabbed my attention. It discussed the trials and tribulations of a new female “enhancement” product that is having a hard time getting airplay. Pun very much intended.Most readers of that article would surmise that its purpose was to highlight the disparity between what is acceptable in advertising — or not — when it comes to “our” sexuality, as well as the double standards that exist within the advertising world today. To me, the article also raises another red flag: the very aggressive and divisive political atmosphere that has engulfed our country when it comes to women’s choices and the freedom and control that we have over our bodies. And let’s not forget the media cohorts, either. However, as this is not the appropriate place to discuss political issues, I won’t. So let’s go back to advertising. Advertise like it’s 1959 When it comes to today’s media market (or did I mean to say meat market), one could argue that society has progressed a great deal since the early days of television and print advertising, à la “Mad Men.” More and more, we have been exposed to TV shows, commercials and ads that feature interracial families, homosexual couples (albeit male, predominately), and an altogether a more laid-back attitude when it comes to discussing and displaying things of a sexual nature. This, however, is not the case when it comes to female sexuality — which seems to be as taboo as ever if we take the boycott of this female product as an indicator. Zestra Essential Arousal Oils, a product designed to enhance the female sexual experience, is struggling to find networks or publications that will run its ads. I have to say that Zestra’s commercial is really rather lame, especially compared with ads for same category products like KY gel and Trojan condoms. It’s a number of middle-aged women talking about their diminishing sex drive due to getting older and having children. Hello out there — there is nothing remotely “inappropriate” about either, and I can very confidently make this statement as a mother of two almost grown-up children, and as a woman approaching the company’s target customer’s age. The company has had its ad pulled from prime time on most major networks — the very same networks and stations that run male enhancement ads for Viagra and Cialis ad nauseum. Even Facebook pulled the ads after just a couple of weeks. In the end, Zestra has had to settle for the graveyard shift — after midnight — when its target audience is fast asleep, dealing perhaps with hot flashes and worries about their university-bound children and the associated financial obligations. And I can tell you, that is definitely not sexy, on air or in real life. So why this double standard? Why is it okay to publicize men’s sexual needs, but not women’s? Looks like we can’t have it both ways What this situation makes apparent is that while we have become more accepting of certain social issues — we have no problem watching “The Situation” get his rocks off with several females at a time — there is still an enormous double standard in acknowledging the comfort level of women’s sexuality, in any medium. While we seem to be perfectly fine with ads showing women as sex objects (Heidi Montag, Kim Kardashian, et al.), it suddenly becomes unacceptable once real women start discussing their real sexual needs and desires. Since when did American media become uncomfortable with recognizing the sexual needs of women equally? Are we less progressive than the Europeans, or even the British — supposedly prudish — who quite openly discuss sexual topics like S&M and sex toys in their daily papers? Watch the ad and tell me what you think. Is it so racy for prime time compared with its male counterparts? Are the networks right to ban an ad like this? And what message are they sending to American women?

About Vanessa Horwell

Vanessa Horwell is Chief Visibility Officer at ThinkInk. She works with companies in the U.S., UK and Europe to improve their visibility through strategic public relations and new media channels. Reach her at vanessa@thinkinkpr.com.