|
Yes. Let’s call human beings people. But let’s also get a little more specific...
The debate has flared up again. The professional world is discussing what we should and shouldn't call our “peeps.”
Don Norman holds this perspective:
“Words matter. Psychologists depersonalize the people they study by calling them “subjects.” We depersonalize the people we study by calling them “users.” Both terms are derogatory. They take us away from our primary mission: to help people. Power to the people, I say, to repurpose an old phrase. People. Human Beings. That’s what our discipline is really about.”
Joseph Jaffe has this to say:
“User is the name given by technology geeks (oil) to the art (once upon a time) of marketing (water) and for some reason, those with "i" (interactive) before "e" (experience), are forgetting about the all important "c" (consumer)”
And Paul Mcenany of Hee Haw Marketing Has this to say:
"Ok, I've got it. I give you the new buzzword of 2006...Custconsumuser"
The irony of this all is that Paul’s moment of levity actually has a grain of truth to it. When we talk about people in the context of marketing, advertising and even designing for them—sometimes it helps to acknowledge that people can be customers, consumers, and users depending on the context and the individual's state of mind.
Let’s put this in perspective. The context of calling someone either a “consumer” or “user” is usually in the setting of marketing professionals using the terms to convey specific information. I’m not talking about how marketers need to speak to people. That is an entirely different story.
What I am talking about here is how we speak to eachother as professionals. Not unlike several physicians getting together and referencing the people they treat as “patients.” Does using that term between professionals demean the actual people they treat? My personal perspective is that these “labels” can provide a certain level of clarity and context. This actually helps us prioritize what is really important in the context of meeting both rational and emotional needs. Sometimes people are more than just people:
An individual balancing their checkbook online is USING technology to complete a task—so they can do other things that are important (like put the kids to bed). Someone listening to a Podcast is part of an AUDIENCE consisting of like-minded individuals who share a common interest.
A person who decides to create their own online ad after seeing what others have done becomes an active PARTICIPANT. Someone who engages in the social media network is part of a larger COMMUNITY. People who spend their money online or in the real world are CUSTOMERS. And when we partake in an economy where goods and services are bought, sold and exchanged then we become CONSUMERS—in addition to PEOPLE.
Sometimes labels help. They help us remember what’s important in the context of meeting a specific NEED. Designing an interface that is useful and usable makes for a happy user. Happy users make happy people (or consumers). And happy people tell good stories about your brand to others.
Let’s not forget it IS about PEOPLE. In the same breath, let’s not get too carried away with limiting what we can and can’t call ourselves. After all, we're people too.
|
Comments
I prefer to say 'How is our COMMUNITY using/interacting with our product?'. It's all about the mindset. To me the term 'consumer' sounds very lifeless, a poor attempt at 'humanizing' a number on a balance sheet.
You're right, sometimes 'user' might more appropriate, or 'participant', but as a catch-all, I prefer 'community' over 'user', or 'consumer'.
Of course, instead of saying 'how is the community using/interacting with our product?', it's much more relevant to ask 'How are David and Mack using our product?'.
Course you can only do that if you JOIN our COMMUNITY ;)
Posted by: Mack Collier | 06.21.06
Mac,
In the spirit of Custoconsumuser—I'm going to refer to you as Macommunity from now on.
;)
Seriously, you are a tireless and passionate advocate for participation and "the community". A wonderful thing.
But if I didn't know you personally and wanted to sell you and a million of your closest friends a product—I might reference you as a "consumer". Please don't hate me.
Posted by: David Armano | 06.21.06
This reads like a transcript of a conversation between my wife and I. Too funny... We're both writers, so words are very important to both of us. We have regular "discussions" (read arguments) over semantics. It's almost comical in many ways.
The impact of words really depends on the audience. David feels differently, in the context of conversation among professionals than he might in a room full of regular folks. Mack lives and breathes "community", so the impact of words and labels is the same for him regardless of the audience. Neither is more or less right or wrong. Semantics are subjective.
I can very easily get my Piscean undies in a bunch feeling that labels like "consumer" are too dehumanizing, but it doesn't really do me any good when in the context of a discussion among other marketing wonks. Now, if I'm getting the word crammed down my throat when I am participating as a consumer and therefore being dehumanized, all bets are off.
Posted by: Tim Jackson | 06.21.06
I think the important thing that Mack gets across with his "community" label is this.
Customers are networked.
The mass market meant companies dealt with a "mass of individuals"
Now companies are dealing with a "network of customers and potential customers"
That's the community.
The term community comes from the term "common", and what we have in common is we are all becoming increasingly connected and increasingly networked.
Posted by: Karl Long | 06.21.06
"David" said: "But if I didn't know you personally and wanted to sell you and a million of your closest friends a product—I might reference you as a "consumer". Please don't hate me."
I won't. In fact in the article I wrote for Marketing Profs last week, I used the term 'consumer' throughout. I bite my lip while I typed it, but I also realized that it was the term that would best reach the article's intended audience.
Then Mr. Long had this brilliant observation: "I think the important thing that Mack gets across with his "community" label is this.
Customers are networked.
The mass market meant companies dealt with a "mass of individuals"
Now companies are dealing with a "network of customers and potential customers"
That's the community.
The term community comes from the term "common", and what we have in common is we are all becoming increasingly connected and increasingly networked."
Exactly. Again, 'consumer' seems to me to be a poor attempt of putting a label on a 'mindless' blob that companies call 'buyers'.
To me 'community' means friends, neighbors, people. I'd rather market WITH friends and fellow community members, not TO numbers.
Posted by: Mack Collier | 06.21.06
"Now, if I'm getting the word crammed down my throat when I am participating as a consumer and therefore being dehumanized, all bets are off."
I agree Tim. Noticed how many times I included the word "context" in this piece? Context is everything. Good communicators vary their communication style per their audience. As I said, the way we choose to talk to people vs. eachother is a whole 'nother ball of wax.
Karl,
"companies are dealing with a network of customers and potential customers"
That's a really interesting perspective. A lot of truth in that statement.
Posted by: David Armano | 06.21.06
In case you missed Mack's column on MarketingProfs (which has a lot of how-tos about building community), read it here:
How to Make the Community Your Marketing Partner
http://www.marketingprofs.com/6/collier1.asp
You know (as an aside), if Mack were a dog, he’d be a Border Collie – he’s *that* focused on the mission of rallying community.
: )
Posted by: Ann Handley | 06.21.06
Why not just call people people? I blogged about it here:
http://www.myneatsite.com/blog/2006-06-22/how-do-you-call-the-people-you-sell-to/
Posted by: Yuri | 06.22.06
Yuri that's a great point, but as "David" said, "Good communicators vary their communication style per their audience.". You have to consider how your audience will hear your message, and what terms do you need to use in order to reach them. I might use 'consumer', when I want to say 'community', because I realize that the receiver for my message will understand, and expect to hear the term 'consumer'. Hearing 'community' might throw them off, which could lead to them not completely understanding the greater point I am trying to make.
Posted by: Mack Collier | 06.22.06
Mac, "David" could not have said it better himself. :)
BTW, not sure if any of you have noticed this little inside joke of ours referring to me as "David" with the quotations and all...
But suffice it to say that it comes from my newfound "blog friends" or BFF as we like to say (Blog Friends Forever) ;) And it's just proof of the power of community that the social network fosters. None of us have met in person and yet we act like we've known eachother for years.
Pretty amazing stuff—and pretty darn cool.
Posted by: "David" | 06.22.06
"BTW, not sure if any of you have noticed this little inside joke of ours referring to me as "David" with the quotations and all..."
"Mac" did. I'll tell Mack about it later. And DA, can't forget him ;)
"Pretty amazing stuff—and pretty darn cool."
Yep yep!
Posted by: Mack Collier | 06.22.06
I think the even interesting debate comes up the different in what to call your BSB vs BSC "peeps" You haven't even discussed all the varities there.
Posted by: ShannonD | 06.23.06