Thank you for the kind mention in your post, Paul. I would only add that for this concept to succeed, marketers have to employ great consistency and patience. Campaigns rooted in spacing represent a long-term strategy. If well crafted, they should work well over time, but they won't necessarily yield immediate results. Most managers and marketers are thinking about short term goals these days, that is, meeting monthly and quarterly projections. That means they're likely going to go for limited time offers and promotions rather than crafting core messages that build brand awareness over time. My question is, why can't/won't they do both? In that way, they can meet short term goals while consistently working to instill the core values that will keep the brand top of mind with the customer.

Provocative, excellent post, Paul. For a company like mine, communications to my customers and my prospective customers, have to consistently show how solutions oriented Design Force is. We know our customers well. We know what their needs are. We know how to address those needs. It's important for us to align our solutions to their problems. That message has to be communicated clearly and consistently and it is our total focus. Let's face it: customers can go to many competitive sources to purchase services. The onus is on us to show them the level of our expertise and the depth of our understanding of their businesses and their needs. Short term or intermittent marketing isn't going to deliver the results we're looking for.

Claire, thank you for commenting. Over my marketing career, I've seen campaigns last for days, weeks and months. Sometimes the timeframes were appropriate, othertimes they were not (as in a campaign that lasted days, should have lasted weeks).

As marketers, I think sometimes we give up too easily. A customer does not buy right away and we assume they don't want our products/services. When in fact, it might not an issue of interest but of timing. More discipline, more patience. See it through.

That's why I believe the use of the spacing effect may make a large difference in our marketing ROI.

Ted, thank you for adding to the discussion. It sounds like your company practices these concepts. What means/tools/techniques are you using to properly space your marketing messages to your target audiences to keep your messages top of mind?

We have a long-term strategy and specific messages to communicate our to clients and prospects. By spacing our out-reach to them via phone, email and mailing them relevant information that continues to put our key messages front and forward, along with recently published articles, we push that top of mind strategy. We've redesigned our web site to better reflect our evolution as a firm and key our communications to the messages on our site, so our marketing efforts are cohesive. We also use PR to position thought leadership articles and to discuss timely topics that are aligned with our core messages. Anything else would result in wasted time, efforts and money, Paul. Thanks for asking.

When I read this post I thought about a community I joined recently - http://coachcreativespace.ning.com - the existence of which can be considered one example of "spacing" in marketing.

Dan Goodwin, a creativity coach, is the motivating force on this social network named after his website. By adding in ideas for others to discuss and commenting on what else is going on he has collected a group of people who think discussing their creativity is important. And if they want one-on-one guidance, I can't imaging them going anywhere else without trying Dan's services first.

Beth, thank you for commenting. Your take on "spacing"--in this instance-- is a trifle different than the programmatic approach I was alluding to, but if within the community there are methods and techniques to keep key messages top of mind and relevant, then I'm all for it!

Paul: outstanding piece here. There's the "obvious" reaction that says, "I get it, frequency matters," but applying hard brain science to the mix makes this idea take root. So where would we go from here? What kind of short-cut can we apply to understanding a forgetting curve, or a curve shape that corresponds to your core consumer segment? We still need to apply permission based techniques to put our message in front of them -- or just rely on mass market communication -- but in both cases, it puts science to the question of, "yes, frequency matters -- but how much?" Lord Leverhulme would love to know!

It took me awhile to digest the Wired article, but I come away from it being convinced that it is not, sadly, the holy grail of learning for most of us. While it may have some use in the aggregate, it is not enough to give us any real insight on how to behave differently as marketers.

According to the article, everyone has a different forgetting curve that can only be calculated individually. On top of that, getting them to remember it means being able to repeat to them the right message (the part you want them to remember) at precisely the right moment. Missing a few sessions has an exponentially degrading effect on information recall.

Because we don't know where a person is going to be, what they'll be consuming at the precise moment their memories require that they see the information we want them to see, we're left to send out our messages over a broad area within our "target" demographic in the hopes that some of it will 1) reach the audience when 2) they are paying attention and willing to internalize it on some level and 3) stick for as long as it needs to until the marketing array meets the customer again under the right conditions at precisely the right time.

And through sheer volume of advertising communications, that has had some success. However, with the information overload that people are really experiencing, they have an uncanny knack for tuning out our messages... at least, the ones they didn't invite.

But perhaps that is the real lesson: Though clever marketers come up with the occasional catchy tune that we can't get out of our heads after one or half a dozen listenings, most of the time these messages represent just one voice out of 3,000 people get in a day.

Only after earning their trust by consistently delivering superior value can we gain the permission to break through their defense perimeter of ambivalence. Perhaps then we'll have earned a seat at their table.

Once we have their permission, maybe then we can space our messages appropriately, according to averages at first, and then by demographic if the studies suggest that would be effective.

Stephen, thank you for the compliment..and joining the conversation. One of the toughest questions we marketers can answer is how much is too much? Frequency matters, especially in light of this research on the forgetting curve, but I believe we'll have more success if we vary the same message along various channels so as to not become a nuisance. A consistent message, approached in a deliberate and persistent manner, across all channels will help improve our marketing return.

Cam, thank you for the insightful response and for reading the Wired article. I also had to think long and hard as to whether the learning techniques as presented by SuperMemo are applicable to marketing.

You have it exactly right, that the spacing effect is most appropriate for permission based, opt in messaging.

The article mentioned that it's a conscious act of wanting to remember the information that makes Supermemo a success. You have to want to retain that data, and if you do, spaced learning can help.

In the same manner, for those customers, who want to receive our marketing messages, the spacing effect could help keep our messaging top of mind.

I really liked your article Paul. I think spacing could be particularly effective in a multi-channel campaign.

I have a question. Given each customer group is likely to have different memory spans, do you have any tips on working out frequency?

Brendan, thank you for commenting. I really do believe there is something to this "spacing effect" and the programming of messages along a forgetting curve. As you mentioned, the difficulty however is to discern the spacing effects of individual customers - a darn near impossible task.

It's my experience (and I've seen a lot of marketing in both Fortune 500 and SMBs) that marketers could benefit from two things. First, employing a programmatic approach to marketing with activities that flow and build towards a logical outcome. Second, utilization of the spacing effect to space messages out over a campaign thru different channels. Hopefully one would know enough about customers to determine their preferred channel/s.

Keep dialoging, keep spacing your messages and be patient. Simple advice, difficult to execute.

Brendan, I realized I didn't specifically answer your query. Since every customer and every company/industry is different, I suggest experimenting/testing for the messaging frequency that works best for your customer base.