Tag Archives: Marketing and Advertising

Killer Kat

Have you heard about what’s going on with Nestle and Greenpeace? Interesting article this morning about it and I don’t exactly know where I come out on this. Maybe you can help!
The folks at Greenpeace have targeted Nestle over the company‘s use of palm oil in the Kit Kat bar because of

Nestlé’s purchases of palm-oil from an Indonesian company that Greenpeace International says has cleared rain forest to establish palm plantations.

Nestlé says it had already decided to stop dealing with the firm, which supplied just 1.25% of the palm oil Nestlé used last year. It says it bought only a tiny fraction of the firm’s output, so any impact was negligible, and that it is working toward buying only environmentally sustainable palm oil.

OK, so how much is too much, right?  Apparently, the Greenpeace folks think any is too much.  But that’s not what intrigues me here.  This is:

The difficulty with social media, says Ms. Backes, is “to show that we are listening, which we obviously are, while not getting involved in a shouting match.”

She’s a Nestle spokesperson and she’s reacting to the fact that Nestle’s Facebook and Twitter outposts are being inundated with protesters.  The company is trying to respond responsibly via social media but is getting shouted down. Of course, your instinct is to take down the bad comments or prevent additional posts but that changes the nature of the conversation, making it a monologue.  On the other hand, if the protesters are totally wrong and are overwhelming Nestle’s ability to correct each incorrect post, what should they do?

I don’t have an answer.  It’s easy when it’s a handful of disgruntled consumers but what if it’s thousand of organized protesters who aren’t letting the facts get in the way of their story?

What would you do in Nestle’s shoes?

Reblog this post [with Zemanta]

1 Comment

Filed under digital media, Reality checks

Your Algorithm

I was reading the article in Wired on the Google algorithm. Interesting stuff even if you’re just a web searcher, and for those of us who talk about SEO from time to time, it’s fascinating.

One statement stood out:

The holy grail of search is to understand what the user wants,” Singhal says. “Then you are not matching words; you are actually trying to match meaning

My immediate thought was that he was right about most businesses, not just that of search.   The Wired piece details the hundreds of ways Google’s formula manipulates a search to try to get precisely to the point of the user’s question.  Their algorithm is a highly refined way of doing just that.  My theory is that we all need one.

Many firms go about their business making few or no attempts to gain this kind of in-depth understanding of user wants and needs.  You can rest assured that you can count those that have an algorithm to do so based on customer input on your fingers and toes.  Yes, I’m aware of marketing dashboards and monitoring of social buzz.  Those are both great but think about Google’s formula applied to all that social content, feedback cards, surveys, and other customer interaction.  I wonder what nuances would surface?

How about you – got an algorithm?  How do you figure out what your customers, partners, and prospects want based on the information you gather?

Reblog this post [with Zemanta]

Leave a comment

Filed under digital media, Thinking Aloud

Want to save $243?

A new study talks about the impact of crappy customer service.  Unlike any of the rants on that topic in this space, it quantifies the effect based on research.  Not that I have to worry about letting facts get in the way of my story, but I thought I’d share it with you.

Here are the headlines:

Consumers feel the most significant root causes of poor service are:

  • Repeating themselves
  • Being trapped in automated self-service
  • Forced to wait too long for service
  • Representatives don’t know my history and value
  • Cannot switch between communication channels easily

33% cite voice self-service  as the most challenging channel compared to only 1% who find it most satisfying. And 38% of consumers said it is critical to improve voice self-service to make it more intelligently integrated with human assisted service. Where they were trapped in an automated system, consumers spent, on average, more than 9.5 minutes trying to reach a human.

It goes on to say that the average value (in one year) of each customer relationship lost to a competitor or abandoned is $243.

You can read the summary here but you already knew all this since you’re a loyal reader.  Right?

Reblog this post [with Zemanta]

Leave a comment

Filed under Helpful Hints