The Age of Attention Deficit: Why Positioning Matters -- Notes from FutureM 2013, Day One

It is once again time for FutureM, the Massachusetts Innovation & Technology Exchange (MITX) conference that examines and celebrates the convergence of marketing and technology. I covered FutureM last year with musings about the future of marketing (digital) as so boldly stated by the various conference speakers. This year is actually quite different.

We have clearly passed the point where it’s useful to distinguish between “traditional” and “digital” marketing: as one speaker noted, we live in a mobile world; therefore, all marketing must somehow converge the two. And so it seems that this year we (appropriately) have more questions than answers. From where can we gather meaningful consumer data (the new buzzword: “big data”); if we do so, who should have access to it—and, perhaps most important, what should they do with it? Where will the next big ideas come from?

These are important concerns. To even begin to address them we need to back up to the fundamental question that has mystified, entertained, and stymied marketers forever. It is: what uncomplicated, authentic, rational value proposition will inspire the engagement that we seek? 

Because as Jim Speros, EVP of Fidelity Investments, explained to a packed house, this is an age of constant message bombardment. Although this idea is not especially new, the data on how extensive the bombardment actually is caught me off guard. When technology evolved so that mail could be targeted to specific households, we worried about “cutting through the clutter.” And there were only four “platforms” then: print, broadcast (TV/radio), outdoor, and mail! Now, of course, we have multiple devices, and more coming. Today I saw a talking shoe, and of course Google Glass.

But now, as then, the technology is only as good as the messages it carries. We have less time than ever to make our point to consumers before they must decide whether to move on, and we will have less than that in a year. The attention deficit is inadvertent. Consumers can’t help not having more than a few seconds to share with us. 

And so, of course, we start with the basics. You have to know what you’re on the planet to do; all the creativity flows from there. Are you a beverage company, or an organization that refreshes this world, inspires moments of happiness and optimism, creates value and makes a difference—like Coca Cola? Are you an entertainment conglomerate, or a creator of the most creative, innovative and profitable entertainment experiences and related products in the world, delivering a “seamless” experience of magic—like Disney? Are you a sports team—or have you noticed that modern-day sporting events are both game and experience?

Once you know, the possibilities are endless.

The knowing is called “positioning.” There is a classic positioning formula that has helped many get started (and has been tweaked many times for task forces of all shapes and sizes!). It is some version of this:

To [your potential consumers, defined], [your product or service] is [a category that provides context, like “children’s footwear company”] that [promises something that is compelling from a rational and/or emotional point of view; a promise] because [your proof points, the things that make this so].

If you try this, you may well find that at the end you have something that is interesting—to you. But you also may have the gut sense that it is not emotionally resonant, that nobody else will care. And you will be correct.

Try this instead:

We believe in [something that makes you get up in the morning, like “the health and wellbeing of children”]. Our company creates [what you do, like “high-quality footwear and related products”] in order to ensure that [describe the connection between what you create and what you believe, like “young feet are cared for as they grow”] so that [the outcome you want to see, like “children develop healthy allignment and participate in fun activities with proper support”]. 

The answer to the question, “Where will the next big ideas come from?” is … right here.

Ask Ambiguous Questions, Get Unreliable Answers

I recently received an email from the Boston Symphony Orchestra, inviting me to participate in an online survey. I’ve been a subscriber for a number of years, but not a patron of the Spring Pops which was the focus. Clearly, the BSO is interested to know something about the crossover between classical music patrons and Pops patrons; for my part, I am always interested to know what survey sponsors want to know and how they ask. So I clicked through to answer the questions.

The surface opportunity of market research is the gathering of information. The research asks questions of the respondents, and they answer. But other opportunities accrue as well. Asking for input creates goodwill. Everyone appreciates being asked. Asking certain types of questions presents the opportunity to prompt consumers to think about what they need, want and value. And, of course, the process can stimulate demand—introduce ideas, products or services that perhaps the respondent has not yet considered, or may have the opportunity to engage with in the future.

I am not remotely trying to suggest that market research is nefarious! Gathering insights and data is vitally important, and incredibly useful. But this leads me to the struggle I had with the questions on this survey.

Basically, the BSO wanted to know what I think of the Boston Pops. I think that the Boston Pops are a fun tradition. I listen to the Fourth of July Esplanade Concert on the radio. I have been to benefit concerts at the Pops. But I have never gone out of my way to attend a concert, because I prefer other kinds of music and pursue those.

So how do I answer the question? If I say that the Pops is “fun” but “not for me,” then am I saying that I’m not fun? If I say that the Pops is “enjoyable” (which it clearly must be, because it’s popular enough to suggest that it’s not tortuous) but “old fashioned” … well, what should an interpreter of this data think? That is, if I don’t attend Pops concerts then on what basis have I decided that the Pops is “fun” and “enjoyable”? I’ll admit it: I got pretty confused. I felt like I wasn’t doing a good job answering the questions. Was I thinking too much?

I have been in most interesting conversations about this very topic relative to the Net Promoter System (NPS). NPS is an index designed by Bain & Company to help organizations understand customer loyalty and compare themselves against others with “efficient growth engines.” Not to get off topic, you can learn more about NPS here. 

The key NPS question is “How likely is it [that] you would recommend us to a friend?” At the time, the internal version (to measure employee loyalty) was “How likely is it [that] you would recommend this company as a place to work?” In theory, the question was used to measure engagement in the organization, the thought being that happy and productive employees are assets in creating customer loyalty.

Not at all, but not necessarily for the reasons you would think. The feedback was shockingly and disappointingly negative … until one read the comments. They included, “I don’t want to work with my friends.” and “My friends work in other types of businesses.” One can understand this logic, literal-minded as it may be.

So what did the score mean? The creators of NPS may have anticipated and designed around this issue, but the executives of the company in question didn’t know about that. And they didn’t like their score … so they pretty much disregarded it.

As it turns out, a different question has been developed for what is now being called eNPS. It’s “How likely would you be to recommend this company’s products or services to a friend or colleague?”

Isn’t that so much better? What we really want to know, after all, is whether the employee is sufficiently engaged and enthusiastic to be an ambassador—and that’s what this question asks. (Of course, if the friend or colleague isn’t in the market for the products or services, you’re out of luck with the literal-minded!)

When we survey, we need to think hard about the mindset of those we are soliciting. We need to be clear and straightforward, and not clutter people’s minds with possibilities that have no bearing on what we want to know.

No, I will not be attending the Pops … even though I answered that the concerts might be fun (or even enjoyable). But I appreciate the voucher for $25, to be used toward a ticket for a BSO concert in Symphony Hall. That, hands down, has my loyalty.