Why Do We Do This To Ourselves?

April 14, 2015 by Leave a Comment

Laptop with overloaded DVD Drive. Isolated on whiteA wave of relief washed over me as I saw The Effective Detective was not carrying some kind of ridiculous prop, and did not have a look on his face indicating that he was about to drop a bombshell. Perhaps, I thought, today may be more of our usual type discussions.

“Ah Watson, so good to see you, we have an interesting quandary to consider today,” The Detective smiled his half-smile, which actually sort of worried me.

I replied, well aware I was going down a path that had been determined for me. “A quandary sir? What might that be pray tell?”

“Watson, is that suspicion I hear in your voice?” The Detective asked. When I didn’t answer immediately, he continued, “relax your mind, Watson, there are no big announcements today, merely a point of interest I have picked up on while developing some software to solve a few of the problems we encounter in marketing,” The Effective almost, but not quite, admonished me.

“I’m relieved to hear that sir, so what is the topic today?” I exhaled with a noticeable sigh.

“Information overload, or rather self-imposed information overload, my dear Watson. I find it amusing that while we all bemoan how much information is being thrown at us on a daily basis, we then turn around and accumulate vast information stores most of which are of dubious value towards meeting our goals, and we clamor to figure out how to gain even more. We complain bitterly that we are drowning in data – when it is being sent to us by others, then we go and place the burden on ourselves. Most curious as well as amusing,” The Detective took his characteristic pause, waiting for a rejoinder from me. Since we were playing our usual game, I decided to jump in whole heartedly.

“Sir, I can’t imagine what you are talking about. I see a general narrowing of information requests. I see very few people who ask for more than a name and an email address on their sign up forms. It would seem that a large percentage of other marketers have picked up on this,” I continued, interrupting The Detective who smiled that half-smile and I realized I had been set up. Again.

“True Watson, but there is one place where it seems retrieving a glut of information is still considered a best practice – a term I despise by the way, but that is a discussion for another day. Look no further than Customer Relation Management or CRM – an overblown term for Contact Management as it relates to the vast majority, where it seems a good review is dependent on how much data you can cram into their databases, and the number of useless features added on for good measure.

“The average small business person generally will have a manageable number of direct relationships, and thus needs to collect and record less information. The fact of the matter is Watson that the primary pieces of information you require when you are chasing after a prospect are their name, their company, phone and email, some notes, and most importantly: what is your next step with them and when it is to be taken? I know this for a fact, since I used to sell – quite successfully I might add, using a box of index cards organized by date with names and phone numbers and handwritten notes,” The Detective finished, slightly out of breath.

“So trying to collect and store all those tiny bits of trivia and probabilities of closing, and classifications of prospects which requires a relatively complex and cumbersome system might actually be detracting from the average person’s sales productivity!” I exclaimed, getting the point.

“Exactly Watson! A lot of us forget to make a phone call or what we said the last time we spoke to someone. That hardly requires a product that fills the screen with slots for useless information, making it that much harder to use – and thus less likely to be used. If one insists on using one of those monstrosities, they should do themselves a favor and focus on those few pieces of critical information and ignore the rest of the screen,” The Detective added.

“Something to truly think about, sir,” was the only rejoinder I could come up with.

“Quite so Watson. Quite so.”

 

 

 

Filed Under: data, organization, sales, software Tagged With: , , ,

Process Makes Perfect

June 24, 2013 by Leave a Comment

flowchart“Sir, I wonder if you might expand a bit on the topic you discussed this past Friday,” I requested, kicking off another Monday talk.

“You mean picking software, Watson?” The Effective Detective asked.

“Actually, I was more intrigued by the passing comment about process, sir,” I replied.

The Detective gave me one of his sidelong glances indicating slight annoyance, but he answered. “Passing comment, Watson? That was actually the most important point of the whole bloody discussion!”

“Exactly, sir,” I recovered, ” which is why I am asking about it today.”

The Detective looked at me briefly, then, evidently deciding he would rather lecture me than chastise me, he started in.

“Defining a process before selecting software can be the only thing that ensures you don’t make a bloody mess out of the whole thing, Watson. However, the word process can sometimes elicit visions of massive flow diagrams and tables showing decision points and critical path, and other mumbo jumbo that project managers are sometimes so in love with.

“In fact defining a process can be no more than writing a list of a tasks on a piece of paper. The real trick is that it is on the piece of paper, or extremely well thought out in your head. A process is merely a set of steps that you follow to accomplish something.”

“But what if you are unfamiliar with the object of the process. Say, like email marketing?” I objected.

“Well Watson, the obvious thing would be to contract out or hire someone who does understand how to develop and implement a process, but failing that you can still develop a process using concepts that you do know,” The Detective answered, then immediately continued, giving me no chance to interrupt again.

“Let us take your email marketing example. Imagine if you meet someone at a networking event. Next imagine you are holding, oh,  say an interesting photograph. The person you are talking to shows an interest in photography and comments on the photograph you are holding. You offer it to him, if he will give you his address. He agrees, hands you his card, you thank him and shake his hand, hand him the picture and you both go off to meet someone else. When you get home, you pull out this person’s card, along with other cards you collected that night, send them all thank you notes, and let them know you will be sending out regular updates on photography and  other opportunities to get interesting photographs from you.

“You have just designed a process for staying in touch with prospects, providing them information, and the occasional offer. Just replace physical addresses with email addresses and hard copy letters with emails, and suddenly you have an email marketing campaign designed. You simply need to find the features in a software system that matches each part of your process. If the software doesn’t do all of them, then you either need to redefine your process, or find a different software product,” The Detective concluded and looked at me expectantly.

“That simple sir?” I asked raising one eyebrow.

“That simple, Watson. Of course there may be more steps involved, even some decision points that need to be inserted, but in the end, it all comes down to steps on paper. Once you have that, the rest is easy, or you can hand it off to someone else for implementation. Let us move on Watson,” The Detective finished, signalling it was time to take on a new subject.

“As you wish, sir. As you wish.”

Filed Under: content, data, list building, software Tagged With: ,

Doing the Right Thing, Wrong

June 10, 2013 by Leave a Comment

oops“Watson, I have a wonderful example of doing the right thing wrong,” The Detective began with an uncharacteristically indirect and confusing statement for our weekly discussion.

“Sir?” I asked, not sure how else to respond.

“Come, come Watson, we all know that we should, as part of any well-managed and useable list, have included our customers or clients, however you choose to refer to them. We also know that one of the reasons we segment a list is to ensure that appropriate information is sent out,” The Detective paused, waiting for me to confirm that I understood. I obliged.

“Yes, sir, of course.”

“So I have a wonderful example of a business doing the right thing: labeling me as a customer and engaging me, but doing it wrong by sending me an offer that I cannot use. Worse, it was actually quite an interesting offer,” The Detective said almost wistfully.

“Can you provide me with details sir?” I asked, now that my curiosity had been piqued.

“What? Oh, of course Watson. I have purchased several cars from a local dealership in the last two years. I am very satisfied with the purchases. Now, what do you think would be an appropriate communication from the dealership Watson?”

“Ah, perhaps an offer for some maintenance sir?”

“Precisely! An offer that I would appreciate, that I can choose not to avail myself of, but definitely something I could use if I was so inclined. That, however is not the offer I received. Received three times in fact. No, what I received was an offer for a discount on activation of a feature that is not available on either of the cars I have purchased from this dealership. Worse, it wasn’t until I had clicked through several pages before I realized there was no way I could use this offer. Not only was I frustrated that I couldn’t use the offer, I was irritated that I had wasted my time clicking through multiple pages before I learned this was something I could not take advantage of.

“So, what do you think the lesson learned here is, Watson?”

“Don’t make promises you can’t keep?” I asked, feeling a bit mischievous, and seeing if I could provoke a reaction.

“Bah! Watson, you are playing! The lesson is to ensure that your segmentation includes critical information. There is a delicate balance between over-segmentation and not segmenting enough. It all depends on what you are trying to accomplish and who you are dealing with.  The dealership knew what models and years I had purchased from them. They also knew that the option they were promoting was not available on either of those cars. Any one of those pieces of information included in their list could have allowed appropriate segmentation,” The Detective responded, with an irritated tone – exactly the reaction I had hoped to elicit.

“Simply put Watson, the missing key here was not utilizing information readily available to target a message only to those who would be interested; in this case those who could take advantage of it,” The Detective finished succinctly.

“Simple, but not always easy, sir.”

“That is why it works Watson, that is why it works.”

Filed Under: content, data, list building, Marketing, segmentation Tagged With: , , , , ,

Squirrels

June 3, 2013 by Leave a Comment

too_much_data“Watson, do you remember our discussion regarding too much segmentation?” The Effective Detective started today’s discussion.

“Of course, sir. It is hard to forget any of our discussions,” I replied.

The Detective cast a sidelong glance my way, briefly trying to decide if I was being sarcastic, then deciding  he didn’t care, and continued.

“I have realized there is a similar issue that requires some examination,” The Detective began.

“Which would be?” I asked, encouraging him to continue.

“We all know we are all deluged with data on a daily basis, Watson. What we often don’t realize is that even when we narrow down the data points, we may not be, how shall I say this? narrowing it down correctly.”

“You mean we are looking at the wrong data, sir?” I asked, concerned.

“Not actually wrong as in incorrect, Watson, I would describe it more as data points that are distractions versus ones that take us closer to our destination,” The Detective assured me.

“I am afraid you have lost me, sir. Distractions? If the data is correct how could it be a distraction?” Now feeling a tad confused by the direction the conversation was taking.

“Elementary my dear Watson, even the simplest data analysis – is this good, is this bad? requires time. If you are looking at data that, while quite correct and accurate does not advance you toward your goal, it is a distraction. For example, obsessing over the number of hits your website gets, and ignoring if any of those hits sign up for your list  or buy products that you had for sale. Wondering how you can increase your Social Media Klout without checking to see if all of that Klout is resulting in sales,” The Detective took his characteristic pause, and I, seeing a chance, jumped in.

“Weapons of Mass Distraction, sir?”

The Detective rolled his eyes, but couldn’t hide the smile from turning up the corners of his mouth. “A bit of a cliché, but still accurate, Watson. There is actually nothing wrong with looking for hits, likes, or whatever, the issue becomes when you become distracted by them and lose sight of what the real goal is. You must look at any data in concert with your goals, for example,’ my hit rate is up but my sign ups are flat’, then you can consider issues with the copy, or perhaps you are simply getting hits from sources that are not in your market. The data only informs you when looked at together. By itself, some of this data truly is just a distraction,” The Detective finished and gave me that look that told me it was time to move on.

“Something we should all consider, sir.”

“Quite so, Watson, Quite so.”

Filed Under: building the road, data, list building, Marketing, sales, Social Media Tagged With: , , , , ,

To Double Opt or Not, That is the Question

May 20, 2013 by Leave a Comment

checkout“I find this discussion about single opt-in versus double opt-in a challenge, sir,” I began my weekly discussion with The Effective Detective.

“A challenge, Watson? Pray, in what way?” The Detective responded with genuine curiosity.

“I see the point in using double opt-in as a way to ensure that people are truly interested in joining your list, but with the vagaries of email these days, isn’t it possible that you will lose some people’s interest? Haven’ t they already shown their interest by filling out the form or asking you to be put on their list?” I explained.

“Ah, that is a problem, Watson. The rise of spam has meant people are all the more cautious. Which is exactly why double opt-in is so valuable, especially when you are giving away valuable content. Let us not kid ourselves, we give away content to educate and entice. We want people to understand that we have something to offer them. Something that can help them, whether it is in their business or life,” The Detective paused, allowing me to, once again, jump in.

“Then why not utilize single opt-in, in fact, why not just take their general interest as a sign that we can begin to communicate with them?” I interjected.

The Detective gave me one of his sidelong glances, indicating he was about to school me in something. I sat back and waited to be schooled.

“Watson, this is what makes our weekly discussions so much fun. You invariably take a ‘devil’s advocate’ side. It is refreshing,” The Detective smiled.

“I try, sir,” getting one last word in edgewise.

“However, with possibly a few exceptions, double opt-in is the superior device. Tell me Watson, do you really want a list full of people who really aren’t paying attention after they have that initial give-away? Or would you rather have a list where at least the majority of members are reading at least some portion of your emails?” The Detective started. I sensed this was a rhetorical question and held my tongue to allow him to continue.

“The answer should be that you aim for quality. Single opt-in is more convenient for the user. However, single opt-ins are more likely to  opt-out of your list. They are more likely to forget that they gave you permission. They are less likely to open anything further from you. The reality is that if some of these huge lists that were built with minimal permission were required to re-opt-in the drop-out rate would be substantial.

“You should want to feed your pocket-book, not your ego. It really is as simple as that,” The Detective settled back into his chair.

“You said there were a few exceptions, sir,” I gingerly brought up.

“That discussion is for another time, Watson.”

“Of course, sir.”

Filed Under: building the road, content, data, list building, Marketing Tagged With: , ,

Too Much Of a Good Thing

May 13, 2013 by 1 Comment

pie_chart“Do you know how to destroy the usefulness of a technique, Watson?” This time it was The Effective Detective who began our weekly discussion.

“By misusing it, sir?” I replied.

“Close, Watson. You are still, on occasion, quite vague. There are many ways to ‘misuse’ a technique. I am looking for one way in particular,” The Detective’s response came back with a barely disguised tone of irritation.

“Over use perhaps?” I ventured.

“Perfect Watson! Even if it was a guess,” The Detective shot me a sideways glance. “It is possible to fall into the trap of thinking that if a little of something gives me great results, than a lot of it will give me fantastic results,” The Detective paused briefly.

“Was there a particular technique you were thinking of sir?” I encouraged.

“Yes, Watson, thank you for asking. There is one technique that is often used to a point where the data it provides becomes meaningless. That one technique is segmentation,” The Detective paused uncharacteristically here; usually expounding a bit more on the subject before giving me an opening.  However, even with the limited amount of exposition from him, I had formed a question or perhaps a challenge.

“But sir, isn’t it important, in fact, critical, to have as much information as possible?” I asked.

“An excellent point Watson. That said, there are two dangers in overuse of segmentation.

“The first should be rather obvious. It is possible to segment your audience to such a point that the segments shrink down to a size that renders them unusable. Unless you have a high ticket item that you are marketing to a group that you intend to try to reach at a premium price, who you have a high confidence level of engaging with,  segmenting down to less than fifteen or twenty individuals is most likely not going to produce results equal to or greater than the labor and cost  involved in producing those results.

“The second, and perhaps less obvious, but still deadly, danger is segmenting into sections that will have no effect on your message. If the appropriate age for use if your product or service is anyone older than sixteen years old, dividing your audience into a standard set of age segments like 18-24, 25-34, 35-54, 55-64, 65+ will largely be a waste of time in terms of getting that information, and a colossal waste of time and energy in crafting multiple messages for the different groups,” The Detective took his more characteristic pause here, and my mind raced to come up with an observation or question.

“So one only needs to segment down to the level where the message will resonate most strongly!” I exclaimed in a sudden moment of clarity.

“Precisely, Watson! Well done.  A more specific age example would be  if your product or service is aimed at adults aged 35-64, then you shouldn’t care if they are 35-54 or, 55-64, that breakdown isn’t needed. A tad simplistic I admit, and age is certainly not the only demographic you could over-think,  but you see the point.”

“Indeed I do, sir. So the trick then is finding that balance between too little segmentation, and too much.” I responded.

“Quite, so. That however, is a discussion for another day.”

Filed Under: data, list building, Marketing, segmentation Tagged With: , , , , ,

Do what you love or love what you do?

February 14, 2013 by Leave a Comment
ID-10073588

Image courtesy of Somchai Som / FreeDigitalPhotos.net 

“Tell me sir, are you truly doing what you love to do?” I started my conversation with The Effective Detective today.

The Detective paused before answering, then replied, “Watson, I must say you have developed a knack for starting out with extremely probing questions these days.”

“Thank you sir. Are you avoiding the question?” I said, pressing what I thought might be an advantage.

“Not at all, Watson, are you so paranoid these days that you cannot even accept a compliment?” The Detective asked in reply.

It was my turn to feel caught off-guard. “No sir, I just… well…”

“Ah, I seem to have rendered you speechless, Watson. While you struggle to regain your verbal skills, let me answer your question,” The Detective interjected,  with a smile that implied he had at least obtained a draw in our perpetual battle of wits, if not an outright win.

“The direct answer is no, but that answer needs a qualifier, so shall we say no, not quite,” The Detective continued.

“What I would truly love to do is continually lecture on a common problem: the inability of some business people to understand the data in front of them, not just sales and marketing data, but the personnel data they have as well. How the processes they use to manage their businesses, and  market and support their customers are not based in the reality of the data. None of which is really their fault, they are simply doing what has been done in the past, following the conventional wisdom as it were.

“However there are some difficulties in that, the first and foremost being that few want some smart aleck, even if he is a rather convincing detective, telling them something they don’t want to hear. Often, people don’t want to hear what they need to hear, they want to hear what to do next. So I needed to ah, revisit my ambitions and readjust my own attitudes to provide what people want, not what I think they needed,” The Detective paused, waiting for me to respond.

“In what ways did you readjust sir?” I asked, giving The Detective an opening to explain what frankly I found a tad confusing.

“Elementary, my dear Watson, I isolated the basic thing that gives me joy – solving a problem using a combination of analytical and creative techniques, and focused in on what I could see was a problem that lots of smaller businesses face and can recognize: the issue of taking massive amounts of data that pour into their businesses and their lives each day, sorting out the noise from the signal, and taking the appropriate action to bring in the lifeblood of all businesses – leads.”

“Poetic, sir,” I responded sincerely.

“Quite, Watson. I love what I do, I love the challenge, I love the mental exercise. It may not exactly be doing what I love, but it is certainly a variation on that, and it is something that the people I work with can understand and apply in their businesses,” again The Detective paused.

“It is doing art, as one of your favorite writers says, but how is that different from doing what you love?” I asked, still confused as to the difference.

“Ah, Watson, you’ve hit the heart of it, you see. Unless doing what you love actually answers the needs and wants of others, it will only answer your wants. But loving what you do, even if it is some hybrid of your true love, can answer the needs of those around you and not only feed your ego, but your pocketbook as well. After all, you aren’t of much use if you are homeless and starving,” The Detective concluded. His point made, we moved on to our next item of business.

Filed Under: building the road, data, passions, providing service, Talents and Strengths, Vulnerabilities and Weaknesses Tagged With: , ,

Lions or Tigers or Both? Oh My!

February 8, 2013 by Leave a Comment
ID-10056293

Image courtesy of David Castillo Dominici / FreeDigitalPhotos.net 

“May we start off with a discussion of tactics today sir?” I began, hoping to get some specific questions answered.

The Effective Detective raised one eyebrow – a sure sign I had caught him just a little off guard, before responding.

“If you desire Watson, and what specific tactic would you care to discuss?”

“Should a business advertise on Facebook™ or Google™?” I shot out the question quickly before The Detective changed his mind.

“A nice direct question Watson, and the answer is also quite direct,” started The Detective with that half-smile that made my stomach drop; it would seem I had walked into a trap. “The answer of course is one, the other, both, or neither,” The Detective finished with a smile.

“That is hardly a direct answer sir!” I loudly objected, knowing that I had already lost and the conversation would move along the direction The Detective wanted.

“It is as direct an answer as your question allows, Watson. You provide absolutely no context as to the nature of the product or service this hypothetical business that is placing the advertisement provides. No context as to their market. Indeed, I would assume from the very question, this company has given no thought at all to their market, and certainly not to their marketing,” The Detective said in response.

“Yet, it is a common question that deserves an answer,” I tried again gamely.

“Rubbish I say!” exclaimed The Detective, “Besides the rather sarcastic reply I gave there are only two other appropriate responses to that question.”

“Sir?”

“The first: ‘Well that depends, what is your product or service, and how do you know that anyone on either of these platforms will be interested?’  The second: ‘If you are looking to do a test to determine whether there is a possible market for your product or service on at least one of these platforms, than do both, but be sure to limit your investment to fit your research budget.’

“There really are no other effective answers,” The Detective quietly finished.

“That is it?” I asked, for some reason expecting more.

“Wait, yes, there is one other reply. ‘If you haven’t done the research, or aren’t doing research, then advertise on neither.'”

“Another sarcastic one,” I noted.

“I’m sorry Watson, but those are the only responses I could possibly give. After all, I am not The Social Media Detective, I am The Effective Detective. Blindly plunging into the latest marketing trend like Social Media is a terrible mistake. You need to give it some thought, acquire and analyze the data before you spend a lot of time, and possibly money.”

“Always back to the data eh sir?” I responded.

“Quite so, Watson, quite so.”

Filed Under: content, data, Marketing, Social Media Tagged With: , , ,

Ground Control to Major Tom

February 5, 2013 by Leave a Comment
ID-10058943

Image courtesy of sscreations / FreeDigitalPhotos.net 

The Effective Detective looked particularly intense today as he shot his first question at me.

“Watson, are you aware of the term ‘Signal to Noise Ratio’?”

“I am sir, in what context?” I answered.

“Context? Oh. Quite right Watson. The marketing context,” The Detective smiled, acknowledging one of the rare times I had confounded him, if only for a moment.

“Yes, sir. The marketing context would refer to the vast amount of content available to just about everyone via print, advertising, radio, television, and of course, the Internet, compared to the relatively small amount of content that is applicable to one’s particular situation.”

“Excellent Watson, you have been paying attention and absorbing the lessons from our adventures well,” The Detective congratulated me. “But now the million dollar question, how do you increase the Signal to Noise ratio?” The Detective asked with a slight smile. A smile more related to the hunter zeroing in on his prey than the previous smile he had given me.

I hesitated, with a vague sense of disquiet that a misbehaving school boy experiences shortly before he is rapped across the knuckles. “Umm, I would have to say have more quality content, aimed at a particular audience sir.”

The Detective threw back his head and laughed, “You truly have been paying attention Watson! Bravo! But there is still a  missing piece.”

“Sir?” my figurative knuckles now smarting slightly.

“The audience Watson. Even if you have but a relatively small audience, how can you ensure the appropriate content is reaching your specific target or targets?”

“I am not sure I am following you, sir,” I responded feeling a tad confused.

“It is quite simple Watson,” The Detective started, with a trace of irritation in his voice. “The issue is getting your signal through to the right people, the people who are listening for that signal through all of the background noise of their daily lives. Good, strong, valuable, perhaps provocative, content,” The Detective paused, winding up for the delivery.

“Pray continue, sir.”

“But there are always multiple channels of content being sent out, the noise as it were. If the difference is extreme, say your sports channel vs a political channel, then the need for segmentation seems less. Your content will tend not to overlap. But what if the channels are less distinct, say fitness trainers, some who specialize in weight loss vs others specializing in aerobic endurance?

“Segmenting your audience and generating such specific content becomes more difficult,  but extremely rewarding. Because your content is aimed specifically at their concern, instead of the general universe of people who are fitness conscious, or in the wrong niche, and most likely bombarded with messages from any number of fitness based sources, the Signal to Noise Ratio increases dramatically, and there is a far greater chance that the content will be read, and the benefit attributed to you,” The Detective paused again, eyeing me, as if he knew the question I was about to ask.

“Yes Watson, I have made this point before ( A King Needs a Queen ), but the concept of niching things down even further is important. It is easy to believe that we have something to say to everyone in a generalized market, and perhaps we do. But the real world says unless you have a really powerful transmitter, you’re better off fine tuning the frequency.”

“Reach fewer with more impact,” I replied.

“Quite so, Watson”

 

Filed Under: content, data, list building, Marketing, segmentation Tagged With: , , , , , ,

A Change in Perspective is in Order

January 25, 2013 by Leave a Comment
ID-10016416

Image courtesy of graur razvan ionut / FreeDigitalPhotos.net 

“I read a most interesting article about Big Data recently sir, passed on via Twitter by another business consultant,” I declared, beginning the latest conversation between The Effective Detective, and yours truly, Watson, his “virtual” (literally) assistant.

“I take it by the tone, you wish for me to read and comment upon said article,” replied The Detective. “Very well, please provide the link.”

“As you wish, sir: http://www.marketingprofs.com/charts/2013/9904/marketers-upping-the-ante-on-big-data-in-2013”

I waited patiently while The Detective perused the article, curious to see his reaction. It did not take long, and he did not disappoint.

“Thank you Watson. I have rarely seen such a collection of well-meaning, well thought out, well researched, but largely useless words and charts in my career,” The Detective stated, giving me that slight smile that indicated he was both amused, and open to further discussion.

While I am used to The Detective’s somewhat caustic reactions to things that he does not see eye-to-eye on I was still taken a little aback by his reaction to what I thought had quite a bit of relevance to both our business and those of our clients. “I am not quite sure I understand your reaction sir,” I finally managed to splutter.

“Tut-tut Watson, you obviously referred me to this piece thinking it good news for us as marketers, since we deal in data, and also good news for our clients and readers as it gave some new avenues to pursue, and because the marketing tribe seems to be following the trend, it validates action in that direction. That the data is correct and well presented is not the issue,” The Detective both showed he understood my thinking, but letting me know that he saw a flaw. One that he was doubtless about to educate me on.

“And just what would the issue be, sir?” I asked, to move the conversation along.

The Detective paused, took a deep breath, then started in on his explanation.

“Watson, the issue is simple. Marketing-techno-babble like: ‘Companies are also starting to realize the need for real-time customer data flows to drive more personalized marketing campaigns’ is not only useless to the average small or medium business, it is dangerous. Reports such as these are done on, and for the most part aimed at, larger companies. How do you think a smaller organization feels when confronted with the text and graphs shown in this article?”

“I would tend to guess, inadequate to a degree. They most likely do not have the resources to pursue such projects, so they would tend to ignore the concepts discussed,” I answered.

“I could not have said it better myself Watson! When the use of data is presented in this manner, smaller concerns tend to turn away. They believe since they couldn’t possibly execute the kind of programs that are implied here, data analysis is only for larger businesses. Of course we know that nothing could be further from the truth!

“Every business of virtually any size, has data flowing in. Big Data is a misused term. Unfortunately, writing about simple databases and segmenting customer data across a few categories is not something most of these information sources wish to write about.  They wish to talk about Big Data in reference to the volume of data, when actually it can just as easily refer to the impact even a relatively small amount of data can have on a business,” The Detective summed up.

“Big things can still come in small packages, sir?” I said, not being able to resist the temptation.

“And you accuse me of being corny on occasion Watson? Nevertheless, I concur. It just depends on your perspective. Back to business now,” The Detective responded with a sideways look.

Filed Under: building the road, data, Marketing Tagged With: , , ,
Next Page »