Finally! A terrific Business Week highlighted a potentially devastating problem in one of its recent articles, dubbed Feeling Trashed on the Web? recently, and I just had to comment on it.
The article’s points, and its examples, can be summed up by this sentence at the end of the first paragraph: “Smart companies realize their customers, whose voices now have widely distributed forums for complaints or praise, have the potential to become either brand partners–or brand message hijackers.”
In other words: given the plethora of bloggers and social media sites, companies can craft their brand messages and promotions and send them out on their own, and hope for the best. Of course, that means one of two things: acceptance of the brand and its messaging, or a rejection of it based on scathing reviews that take on a life of their own; changing the direction and message of the brand. In short: brand hijack.
Or: companies can engage their customers in ongoing dialogue to ensure their messages get through–a scary proposition since that necessarily entails giving up a certain amount of control over the brand. While this concept may seem scary at first to a company, consider the downside. As the article succinctly states: “. . .cultivate conversations with them (consumers) or risk getting slammed.”
Lest this all sounds like blackmail, let me bring out the main points the article makes about meaningful engagement with the consumer:
* Be honest and authentic. That’s something many Daily Fix contributors regularly expound on. Sincerity and honesty rule. Authentic brands, like cream, rise to the top.
* Find and court existing communities. Matching brands and their assets, to the right user communities, the ones that share common interests and values with the brands in question, may be hard work. . .but getting this right can yield huge rewards for those brands. Taking this step can solidify a brand’s position with a core constituency, and it can woo new consumers, converting them to the brand and making them advocates.
* Listen to consumers and build partnerships. Open-minded companies can get a lot of good information from the consumer, if they listen and take well-intended comments and observations to heart. Fixing potential product problems early on, addressing customer service issues–these are ongoing company mandates. Sometimes we think we know where a problem lies, but the consumer can pin-point it, and even offer solid suggestions for the fix. How valuable is that?
Engaging consumers can lead to many positives, as we all know. Intact brand images and messaging. Increased sales. Better service. Yes, yes and yes. But how about this one? Consumers as grassroots brand ambassadors, as Mack Collier always likes to say.
How many more legs can you add–gratis–to your marketing department’s efforts, simply by engaging consumers?
“Or: companies can engage their customers in ongoing dialogue to ensure their messages get through–a scary proposition since that necessarily entails giving up a certain amount of control over the brand.”
I wish Mike Wagner could comment here, but I actually see this as an example of a company taking control of its brand. The best thing a company can do online is to find and embrace their evangelists. This is amazingly simple to do, but as you said, so many companies are scared to death of giving a ‘voice’ to their customers. They are too short-sighted to realize that these customers are already talking about them every day, so why not PARTICIPATE in that discussion?
To me, that’s a sign of a company that wants to take ownership of its brand, and embracing their evangelists is a huge part of that. Great post as always, Ted!
Mack,
Thanks for adding more dimension to this topic.
“The best thing a company can do online is to find and embrace their evangelists. . .They are too short-sighted to realize that these customers are already talking about them every day, so why not PARTICIPATE in that discussion?”
Exactly, Mack, and well put.
Marketers have to come to terms with the fact that they do not have complete control over their brands–and with the Internet and social media, they have less control than ever. It makes sense for them to interact with consumers to help shape their brands collaboratively. If they choose not to, then they have to be prepared for the fact this will be done for them.
If companies would actually engage customers, LISTEN, and where appropriate ACT upon customer suggestions, there would be a lot less “slamming” occuring. In many instances, the companies that are subject to the most vitriol, are the ones that aren’t listening and don’t care to.
Paul,
It’s pretty basic, isn’t it? We all want to feel as though we are heard when we have something to say. If companies would take the time to listen, and show some respect and appreciation to the customers who take the time to engage them–and then ACT on those comments, as you point out, they’d be better off.
Great ideas have been handed to companies–gratis–over and over again. Ideas that have allowed products or services to be made better and much more competitive. What is that worth in the scheme of things? Let’s see: the potential for stronger sales, better products and satisfied customers. Sounds good to me.
BTW, Paul, congratulations on your presentation at the upcoming Marketing Profs conference! Knock ‘em dead, guy.
Ted,
You just have to wonder. . .for all the talk about crafting positive brand experiences for the customer, it seems many companies are still missing a golden opportunity to forge meaningful connections here.
Dialogue is a lot better than advertising since it’s a two-way street, isn’t it? Getting up close and personal is a whole lot easier due to the interactive nature of the Internet now. If it could only be utilized to its potential by marketers. . .
“If companies would actually engage customers, LISTEN, and where appropriate ACT upon customer suggestions, there would be a lot less “slamming” occuring. In many instances, the companies that are subject to the most vitriol, are the ones that aren’t listening and don’t care to.”
GREAT point Paul! And you’re exactly right, the actions themselves aren’t what’s driving the backlash as much as the company ignoring its customers is.
Claire & Mack,
Good points. Who among us doesn’t like to be acknowledged and heard? Who among us as consumers doesn’t appreciate it when we raise a problem or issue and it actually gets addressed? Ignoring customers, talking at them, and not acknowledging/fixing their problems, is a recipe for major disconnects and discontent. And that leads to being slammed in a big way. Thanks for weighing in.