The Short on the Long Tail

The Long Tail is all the industry rage these days. Popularized by Chris Anderson in his book of the same name, marketers have raced to embrace and use this to their advantage. Google, Yahoo and others have ‘reprogrammed’ their algorithms to exploit the Long Tail. It seems that anyone and everyone is/are talking about how this changes everything.

Blogs are reporting how the once popular ‘standard’ Google searches are showing a new order of keyword replies. Industry pundits are claiming that this changes advertising and is turning everything on its head. Small companies are out performing large companies. Standard advertising practices are no longer relevant, and large brands will be left in the dust.

Chicken Little is shouting, “The sky is falling!”

I think not.

Here is my logic:

1. With enough sample data, the long tail data too falls within the 1st or 2nd standard deviation- it is a law of statistics
2. With enough market force embracing the long tail, large and small companies alike will start using their keywords/adwords and SEO to exploit that tail—more samples to populate #1
3. Marketing basics will prevail, marketing is based on adapting to drive awareness, consideration and conversion- whatever drive those three will be used
4. We are not in 2000 all over again- this is not magic, nor rocket science

Pundits will counter, when the long tail becomes mainstream as you claim, a new one will emerge. True, and that too, if the right thing, will become a standard as well.

The evolutionary cycle holds true about 170 years later. Darwin really was a smart man.

Ours Go to 11

Anyone out there remember This is Spinal Tap. A cult classic movie. Hair bands, heavy metal lifestyle, 80’s rock. But I guess that is not the point of my blog.

The point is contained in the one scene about the amplifier that goes to 11.

Was that marketing genius, was it not understanding what other people could grasp, or was it trying to make something out of nothing? You are left to guess, if you so chose to analyze the scene… which I would presume most did not (which only proves that I really am an odd bird, but again I digress).

So how does your product or service stand up?

Does yours go to 11? Or do you just make 10 louder? Or maybe you are moving to acoustic instead?

Know What Your Customer Wants

So I was at home this morning, and my son (all 20 months of him) was pointing at babbling at the TV. I am thinking to myself, ‘he wants to watch the TV, and there is too much of that already’.

Then I realized as he played his air guitar, that he really wanted the digital music. That request I could grant.

I tried kids music, bluegrass, top 40 hits… all to no avail, as the word he does have down pat is ‘no’.

What in the end did he want? Reggae.

I knew we had listened to it in the past. I knew he liked it. But did I know that is what he wanted to hear at that time? Did I know that it was this music that would make the difference? It was about the right music, at the right time, in the right room that made the difference.

Do you know what you customer wants? When they want it? Where they want it?

You should.

Strange Bedfellows?

So now that the Microhoo merger is off the table (at least temporarily), we can get back to business as usual. Errr, or not. Does anyone remember that Yahoo and Google are going to run a trial for using Google search on Yahoo?

Is that not a strange bedfellow? Is that an ‘Art of War’ Sun-Tzu moment?

Really it is neither. It is a wise move utilizing a key strategic alliance. Being a big proponent of focusing on your core, I am also a supporter of strategic alliances.

The general assumption I work under is that even if a certain business aspect is not core to your company, it is core to some company out there. Thus taken to the logical extreme, if your company only focuses on 1 core thing, it could still cobble together a very successful enterprise by striking alliances with companies that represent all other components, where that component is ‘core’ to that business. While not realistic, the concept holds.

Companies should really take a good hard look at what their core competency is, and how they can compliment and enhance that, through strategic alliances. Sometimes, like in the Yahoo case, it requires you to ask and answer some really tough questions, challenge some notions that may be considered sacrosanct, and really swallow hard. You do not have to be best of friends to successfully work together. You just have to align people to common goals and share the vision.

Call it whatever you want; in the end these partnerships can help you accomplish some serious business goals- whether scaling costs, opening new doors to new markets, outsourcing non-core business processes…. The list goes on, and with creative thinking and a good team to help find and deliver the opportunities, you too can help change the game of your business for the better.

The Data To Support ‘Green’ Growth

As a precursor to Earth Day I blogged how companies left, right and center were embracing ‘green’ and using it in their marketing campaigns. That post was mainly about ensuring that people are aware of action v words.

This morning I read a new report from Chad White (Direct Marketing Association's Email Experience Council), on some data to help support the rapid growth of utilizing ‘green’ in marketing. While this is only a snippet, and only relates to e-mail campaigns on Earth Day, it is none the less telling as to the trend.

• The number of emails from retailers that mentioned Earth Day more than tripled this year compared to last year
• If you include emails that included eco-friendly messaging but didn't explicitly reference Earth Day, then the number increased more than six-fold over last year
• The percent of retailers promoting Earth Day in their emails quadrupled, increasing to 16% from only 4% in 2007

My prediction, this will again more than double next year, and post the US election this fall, we will see a significant jump as well.

Customer Support Is Everyone’s Business

I was reading a Los Angeles Times article today on how difficult it can be to find customer support numbers on Web pages.

This has always been a sore spot for me; a sense of major frustration. Why do so many companies (including ones I have worked for to remain nameless) try to bury contact numbers.

While I understand that each contact a customer has with a company costs money, is that not part of the relationship you build with your customer? Whether a tube of toothpaste or a private jet, companies try to build brand loyalty.

What better way to screw that up than punt on enabling the customer to contact you, in a manner they feel most comfortable. Forcing a customer to web-only interactions, because they cost the company less, does not provide a reasonable alternative. You need to meet the customer where they want to be met.

Customer service is inherently expected in a purchase (if needed). We are a service based economy, and just because it is hard to tie support costs back to repurchase rates, it does not mean a) we should not try, and b) we should not make it easy for customers to speak with us.

Marketing should look at new ways to measure customer loyalty through support contacts. No, not in the cheesy ‘do you want fries with that’ pitch that many companies employ to try and turn their support calls into revenue generating opportunities. Yes, in the manner that you are building your brand, supporting you customers, and helping customers understand that you stand behind your products/services.

If you invest, it will return in spades- through brand reputation, re-purchase intent, re-purchase rates, and word of mouth marketing.

People, Planet, Profit

Hot off the presses from McKinsey (yep the stratergery consultancy):

• Almost 70 percent of executives around the world say that global social, environmental, and business trends are increasingly important to corporate strategy
• Yet relatively few companies act on the global trends they think will affect them most
• Among those that do act, only 17 percent report significant benefits

Hmmm… Social, environmental and business. Sounds eerily like the ‘triple bottom line’ to me.

Full disclosure, I am a big proponent of the triple bottom line: People, Planet, Profit. I am a capitalist at heart, but do fundamentally believe that the ‘carrying capacity’ of the planet – especially in terms of people and environment, are important factors we need to address--- today.

Don’t get me wrong. I am not a dope smoking, stereotypical hippe that demonizes capitalism and the goal of profit. I am for profit (although my bank account would suggest otherwise), and could not put my hair into dreadlocks if I had to.

No, I am just an average guy who sees that 5,10,15 years from now these will be issues that are mandated through regulation. So I figure, start addressing it now, invest for the future, and you will win…

Call it what you will:

• Cost avoidance- spend $10 today or $10,000 in the future
• Competitive advantage- if you are ‘there’, why not push for more regulations, as will cost your competition more to catch up
• Investment- if you can figure out how to make social and environmental economically feasible today, think of the learning curve effect for tomorrow
• Positive PR- consumers are getting more savvy as to including social and environmental considerations in their selection criteria

Bottom line- the triple bottom line will be more important than just 70% talking about it. Soon, you will have to do something about it.