The Social Customer Manifesto

The Social Customer Manifesto Podcast 27JAN2006

click here to subscribe

Summary: Leif Chastaine and Christopher Carfi discuss the American Marketing Association's "Ahead of the Curve" session in Chicago, the marketing challenge for RSS, Salesforce.com taunts and tempts Siebel employees, launch of the "Healing Space" health and environment blog, and this week's RIM/BlackBerry Supreme Court decision. (33:32)

Show notes for January 27, 2006

The audio file is available here (MP3, 32MB), or subscribe to our RSS feed to automatically have future shows downloaded to your MP3 player.

00:00 : Intro

01:10 : Recap of the AMA's Ahead of the Curve session: High Tech Trends in Marketing

02:40 : What is RSS?

Metaphors:
Google search for RSS metaphors (n.b. and yes, actually these are "similes" and not "metaphors," we know, we know...)

"RSS is like an API for content"
"RSS is like selling dogfood over the internet"
"RSS is like Tivo for the web"
"Explaining RSS is like explaining sex. You just don't get it until you do it." (also here)
Dave Winer

11:45 : Salesforce.com to Siebel employees: "No Future"

19:30 : Healing Space health, wellness and environment blog launched

25:15 : Supremes won't intervene in RIM BlackBerry / NTP dispute

33:50 : Wrapup

Links:

Bill Flitter, Stowe Boyd, Randy Moss, Michael Sevilla, TheCradle, Salesforce.com, Siebel, Paul Greenberg, Todd Pesek, EarthHealers, Naturaleza Foundation, eco-tourism, Craig Williams, Howard Bashman, Research in Motion, BlackBerry, Ross Mayfield, Davos, BlackBerries a matter of national security

Business Blogging At IBM

Julie Alterio at The Journal News has a decent article up on the scope of blogging initiatives within Big Blue and other organizations. Irving Wladawsky-Berger, IBM's VP of technical strategy and innovation is quoted as saying:

"We absolutely recognize that blogging, just like the Internet, World Wide Web, Linux and open source, is a major initiative in the marketplace that we should be part of. This best way to be part of it is not to observe it passively but to do it actively."

Sound advice.

And, although the article is primarily about the view on business blogging from within IBM and other large companies, Dave Sifry gets into the act as well. And NAILS his line. Way to go, Dave...

"In the world of the Internet, you don't own your brand. Your customers and your users own your brand. You're lucky if you get to shepherd it."

Explosive Growth

Was on a call regarding the upcoming AMA Hot Topic session in Chicago (gratuitous plug: you can still register here), and a startling point was made (paraphrased).

"The number of new bloggers is growing so rapidly that we're seeing a net decrease in the typical individual's understanding of blogging, since the number of newcomers is expanding so wildly."

(I think it might have been Stowe who said this, but there were a bunch of folks on the call.)

Two questions:

• Are other folks seeing this as well?
• If this is correct, the implications are tectonic...we need tools, education, and support that are an order-of-magnitude better and EASIER than the ones we have now if the trend is to continue.

What's everyone else seeing?

Business Podcasting Article In The Baltimore Sun

The key line: "In what amounts to a nationwide social experiment, corporate America is testing whether this cheap and quirky medium proves useful in the battle to reach the public, communicate meaningfully with employees and keep costs down."

link: Corporations go off a-podcasting

(Disclosure: I'm quoted in the article. Also, a huge guffaw out to Social Customer reader Dave Ritter who has the best line in the article, which was pulled from the comments here.)

Thousands Of Customer Needs, Just Waiting To Be Addressed

The "thoughtless acts" Flickr group. Be sure to check the comments on the pics.

"Thoughtless Act: Door jamb as a built-in letter holder. You couldn't design a product that works as well as this."

More here. (Annoying Flash-only site; click on the "what do you see?" link in the upper right.)

(photo credit: fueledbycoffee)

Best Buy Apologizes For Strongarming Some Xbox Customers

Apparently, some customers looking for the best buy on the new Xbox 360 instead were met with less-than-stellar sales tactics at some Best Buy stores, with sales personnel "requiring" customers to purchase unwanted accessories as part of a bundle in order to get the base Xbox unit. Gamedaily reports:

"Console bundles for new hardware launches certainly aren't unusual—many retailers (especially online) have been selling the Xbox 360 in bundle form only—but this practice is one that doesn't sit well with many consumers and was not supposed to have been adopted by popular retail chain Best Buy.

Despite this, certain Best Buy stores in the U.S. apparently ignored the standalone $299 (core) and $399 (premium) SKUs and either forced consumers to buy Xbox 360 bundles or strongly suggested that they do so."

For example, back on November 23rd, the Northwest Indiana Times reported:

"Glancing down the line Tuesday morning at the Valparaiso store, there was a sea of heads covered with knit caps or hoodies. The crowd consisted mostly of guys in their late teens to early 20s, sprinkled lightly with motivated soccer moms and young women.

It wasn't just the weather that was unpredictable. At 8:15 a.m., after many nighttime hours spent shivering in line, a Best Buy employee announced that the unit would not be sold alone for the $399 advertised in the sales flier. Instead, those in line were told they would have seconds to decide whether to buy a higher-priced bundle, adding a game and other accessories."

In the wake of this, did some looking around and just tripped across the following memo, penned by Brian Dunn, Best Buy's President of Retail for North America (via Mike Antonucci at the Merc):

"TO: Open Letter to Customers

FROM: Brian Dunn, President – Retail, North America

RE: Launch of Xbox 360

CC: Best Buy Store, District and Territory Employees; All Officers and Directors

DATE: December 6, 2005

I’m writing to apologize.

While all of us at Best Buy were thrilled to be part of the recent launch of Microsoft’s Xbox 360 video game system – one of the most anticipated events in the history of electronic gaming – the launch did not go as we had hoped. We sold out of Xbox 360s nationwide in less than two hours, and most of our stores did an outstanding job of serving our gaming customers. I’d like to thank the majority of our employees, who provided a terrific experience for customers at the launch date. However, our promotional activities in certain cases failed to follow company guidelines. As a result, some of our valued gaming customers had an experience in our stores that was inconsistent with what you’ve come to expect from us, as a leader in the consumer electronics industry.

Specifically, customers in some Best Buy stores were told that they were required to buy additional Xbox accessories or services if they wanted one of the sought-after Xbox 360 consoles, even though we advertised the Xbox 360 console alone. I want to be very clear that Best Buy does not condone pressuring customers to purchase items they may not want or that may not fit their lifestyle. In fact, these behaviors are in direct conflict with our desire to serve customers’ needs better than anyone else, and our values of honesty and integrity.

We are currently investigating all leads about promotional practices that may have violated the company’s guidelines, and we will take disciplinary actions as appropriate. We also have reminded all of our stores about our policies with respect to launches of hot products. Meanwhile, on behalf of Best Buy, I’d like to offer a sincere apology to any customers who felt pressured to buy items they did not want.

Customers who are unhappy with Xbox 360-related purchases made in November 2005 may return unwanted items for a full refund at any Best Buy store. In addition, if your Xbox 360 purchasing experience did not meet your expectations for any reason, please email us at [email protected] . (Employees with information pertinent to our investigation are encouraged to call our Ethics Hot Line instead.)

Last, I would like to invite you back to our stores, particularly later this month, when Best Buy will receive more shipments of Xbox 360s. While supplies continue to be very limited, we are truly excited about this new gaming platform, and we’d like to deliver the best of that experience to you. We promise an in-store experience that is focused on your needs and the needs of everyone on your holiday gift list.

Brian Dunn"

(UPDATE: The letter has since been posted here, with a miniscule link to a PDF buried next to the garish page navigation photograph .)

So, from both the communications and customer interaction points-of-view, a well-handled episode for Best Buy. Although a few individuals tried to take advantage of customers, Best Buy corporate is doing the right thing in not only investigating (and, presumably, disciplining) the responsible parties, but also taking an aggressive tack to make whole the customers who were affected by the issue. Of course, it would have been better if this never had happened in the first place, but still an "B+" response based on relative timeliness and assumption of responsibility for the issue. (Would have been an "A" if they had done this in an even more timely manner and made the letter to customers more visible on their web site.)

Are Customers Really The Best Marketing?

In a far-reaching post, Brad Feld asks the question: "Are customers your best marketing?"

Yes. Well, yes (mostly). To beat an already overused word into twitching submission, the marketing done by customers has to "authentic," doesn't it? (Don't get me started on the whole Bzzagent thing again.) In other words, what a company provides has to do one of two things:

• Provide real value (in the form of information or insight)
• Provide something that is creative and/or entertaining

These are the obstacles that need to be overcome in order to get folks talking around the real and virtual water coolers, IMHO.

Back to Brad. Feld:

"[Companies need to] stop talking about “marketing” and instead focus on getting their existing customers to tell the world about their product through blogs, references, online interviews, and at cocktail parties (these are both products that the target customer will ultimately start talking to a friend about over a drink)."

Good stuff. Read the whole thing.

Update: Graham Hill brings up two great points in the comments below.

The Social Customer Manifesto Joins The Corante Marketing Hub

A big post-Thanksgiving "thank you" and immense kudos to the folks at Corante who today launched the Corante Marketing Hub, which includes the Social Customer Manifesto and nearly two dozen other blogs concentrating on "the best writing and thinking on marketing across the blogosphere and beyond."

I'm proud, honored and humbled to be associated with this group. Here are some of the best-of-the-best from the network:

• Renee Hopkins Callahan, our fearless editor, takes on innovation in the grocery store.

• Elizabeth Albrycht on blogs as foundational tools for network building.

• Tom Asacker opines brilliantly on why it's much better to be "loved or hated" versus trying to please everybody (and invokes the inimitable Bertrand Russell in the process).

• Toby Bloomberg with sage words: "No longer does an organization control the marketing message."

• Bruce Fryer tells Sony that "treating your customers like sheep is not a good policy" with respect to Sony's rootkit fiasco.

• Susan Getgood relates her best and worst customer service experiences in recent memory.

• Neville Hobson shares his thoughts on the importance of trust in online purchasing.

• Shel Holtz reminds us that it's not just customers who blog about their experiences with an organization, but ex-employees do as well.

• Lois Kelly comments that a big part of "markets are conversations" revolves around friendliness.

• Andrew Lark on transparency.

• Mike Manuel on CNet's special report on the social web.

• Grant McCracken nails it when he says "it's no longer 'if you build it, they will come but 'if they build it, they will come.'"
  

• Michele Miller shows how you can lose a sale in two words.

• John Moore of Brand Autopsy reminds us of the big picture with respect to blogs and RSS.

• Johnnie Moore ponders on what would happen if financial services were interesting.

• Jennifer Rice on the difference between theory and practice, via an analogy between customers and the ocean: "Talking to customers is a very basic starting point, and I'm always astonished when I find that businesses have never tried it. They're sitting in their offices staring at a picture of the ocean on their screensavers, thinking they understand it. At least get your ass over to the water and dip in your toe."

• Evelyn Rodriguez runs with a similar notion on the adventure of understanding your customers.

• Mary Schmidt on collaboration vs. competition.

• John Winsor on the importance of being proactive.

and last, but not least...

• David Wolfe says we recharge differently as we go through different life stages.

This group rocks. Subscribed!

Seth's Head vs. The Long Tail

Over the weekend, Seth went on a rant about "the inanity of the American consumer." In particular, he was incensed about the availability of a machine that can toast a muffin, heat a slice of ham, and cook an egg all at the same time. Godin:

"What kind of person, exactly, needs this...not only don't people need it, it's unclear that they even want it.

It seems as though we've marketed ourselves into a corner, where the only way to grow is to find increasingly narrow niches of decreasing utility."

Seth, you fell victim to one of the classic blunders, the most famous of which is "Never get involved in a land war in Asia", but only slightly less well known is this: "don't assume the customer is just like me, the marketer."

While this doesn't precisely fall into the "long tail" case for the reasons mentioned here (primarily the amateur creation aspects), is this not still a case where there's an opportunity to match up a customer with a product that has utility for that customer? It doesn't matter if you or I think there's "utility" for something like this. If this meets a need for someone, and that someone can find it via online search, and it can be created and delivered efficiently, why not?

Bonus rant: As noted above, the reference post talks about consumers. I won't be able to say it better than Jerry Michalski, via Doc Searls, so I won't try. Doc:

"First, we're readers, viewers, listeners and (most of all) customers, not just 'consumers.' As Jerry Michalski put it long ago, a consumer is nothing more than a gullet whose only purpose in life is to gulp products and crap cash. Economically speaking, "consumer," as the word is commonly used in the advertising business, is a linguistic fossil from the old industrial world where the only way big companies could reach potential customers was through media conduits that sluiced in one direction only, from the privileged few to the captive many. Except as the literal reciprocal of "producer," "consumer" no longer holds much useful meaning, except where the supply side of advertising talks amongst itself. Worse, using it is risky and misleading. It disses a whole side of the marketplace that grows in power every time one customer links to another one."

On Time, Attention, And Marketing

Tens of thousands of words have been spilled by Steve Gillmor and others on the subject of "attention" over the past few months. It's an important subject, a fundamental one.

I think part of the issue behind why this idea has not gotten broader exposure is that getting to the core of answering the question "what is attention?" requires navigating deep thickets of prose and over-intellectualizing.

Example, from Attentiontrust.org: A Declaration of Gestural Independence:

"Definition of attention: Attention is the substance of focus. It registers your interests by indicating choice for certain things and choice against other things...the establishment of value in the attention economy is a dual register of what one pays attention to and what one chooses to ignore."

:cocks head:

My question: Why does this fundamental concept need to be spun up with layers of confusion and thick prose? Why not just call it what it is? How about this:

"Attention is another way of saying 'time.'"

Attention is time, as in "where I choose to spend my time." This is why this concept (whether we call it "attention" or "time" or what have you) is fundamental. It's also why it applies, fundamentally, to marketing.

Interruption marketing doesn't work anymore. (Although that's not to stop big companies from throwing more money at it.) In a world where the customer has increasing ability to choose where to spend her limited hours in the day, an organization interested in becoming noticed by new prospective customers needs to give those customers a reason to spend their time with them. (The customer will spend money with them later. But only after they've spent the more precious thing, time.)

If this is true, how do you earn the time of your prospective customer? It may mean that "marketing" now needs to do things that:

• Provide real value (in the form of information or insight)
  
• Provide content that is creative and/or entertaining
  
• Provide a venue and the opportunity for prospective customers to connect with others who have similar views or needs

This is still a nascent thought, and I'd love to bat this around. What do you think?

tags: attention, attention.xml, attentiontrust