skip to main |
skip to sidebar
I'm always frustrated by marketers who say they need new tactics, but reject every recommendation with the expression, "We tried that—it doesn't work."
Marketers like these are "old men," no matter their age or gender.
The Trappist monk Thomas Merton once wrote in his journal, "For the 'old man,' everything is old: he has seen everything or thinks he has. He has lost hope in anything new. What pleases him is the 'old' he clings to, fearing to lose it, but he is certainly not happy with it. And so he keeps himself 'old' and cannot change: he is not open to any newness."
In the words of Bob Dylan, "May you stay forever young."
Remember the old song?
Well, lead generation and lead cultivation go together like a horse and carriage, too. Or at least they should.
Eight of 10 marketers plan to ramp up social media spending this year, in the relentless pursuit of leads.
But unless they marry lead cultivation to lead generation, all the social media in the world won't boost the bottom line.
In her blog, B2B e-marketing guru Ardath Albee explains why. "Without the nurturing, generating leads is merely an exercise in trying to scrape the 10% who may be ready to buy and then dumping the rest into an afterthought category."
To succeed, you have to engage people who opt to follow you. (Social media marketing is a lot like marriage, isn't it?)
And engagement requires consistently useful content. "The perceived value of the content is what you're being judged on every time," Albee writes. "In all cases, just showing up is not going to work."
Don't believe it? Look at the divorce rates:
- 49% of prospects have unsubcribed to an email series
- 43% have unliked a company on Facebook
- 52% have unfollowed a brand on Twitter
The figures suggest that marketers should rethink the role of social media, putting lead cultivation first.
"Perhaps the ramp-up strategy for social media should actually be customer nurturing instead of new lead generation," Albee says.
A new study by GroupM confirms marketers' sense that customers are behaving differently than they did a few years ago: - 86% of customers say search engines are important to their buying decisions.
- 58% begin their "buying journey" with online search.
- 45% continue to use search throughout the journey.
- 40% who use search go to social media as the next step in the journey.
- 30% use social media to create a buying "short-list."
- 28% believe social media builds brand awareness.
And what do customers most value? Reviews and blogs.
"The data suggests the two most important subsets in social are user reviews and category blogs, rather than sites like Facebook, Twitter and YouTube,” says Chris Copeland, CEO.
Here's a quizz for marketers who rely on email for lead generation and cultivation.
Q. Who's your worst enemy?
A. The spam filter.
Eighty percent of email actually is spam. That's why businesses set their filters on maximum.
How can you avoid spam filters?
- Title your email
- Use complete and correct HTML code
- Omit redundant code
- Send your email both in plain text and HTML
- Match the plain-text and HTML versions
- Avoid red-flag phrases like "money back guarantee," "risk free," "no obligation," "no catch," "Dear Friend," "click here" and "order now"
- Avoid repetition of key words
- Avoid misspelled words
- Avoid full capitalization
- Maintain an even image-to-text ratio
- Use font sizes no smaller than 8 points, no larger than 14
- Don't use Flash, Java or rich media
- Don't use light grey or red fonts
- Don't use "invisible fonts"
- Don't use non-ASCII characters
- Don't use embedded images
- Don't use forms
- Don't send attachments
Here's good news for event organizers: Facebook can't compete.
There's science to back it up.
Edward Glaeser, in his book Triumph of the City, cites a University of Michigan study in which researchers organized groups of people and asked them to play a game requiring cooperation. The researchers organized one set of groups that played the game face to face; and another set of groups that played by communicating electronically.
The face-to-face groups thrived; the e-groups collapsed.
Togetherness magnifies people’s strengths, Glaeser concludes.
That's why companies located in the geographic center of their industries are more productive; why workers who live in cities see their wages grow faster than others'; and why inventors are inspired by other inventors who live in the same community. And it's why, far from failing in the Internet Era, cities are blossoming.
"Humans communicate best when they are physically brought togther," Glaeser says.
Wired columnist Jonah Lehrer points to a second study by Harvard Medical School that asked whether physical proximity affects the quality of scientific research.
The researchers analyzed 35,000 peer-reviewed papers, mapping the location of every co-author. The results showed that, when co-authors were located close together, their papers tended to be of the highest quality (as measured by the number of subsequent citations).
"For whatever reason, electronic interactions are not (at least not yet) a substitute for the real world," writes Lehrer.
"Our most important new ideas typically don’t arrive on a screen. Rather, they emerge from idle conversation, from too many people sharing the same space."
