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: , , ,

Weapons of Mass Distraction

January 17, 2013 by Leave a Comment
ID-10075506

Image courtesy of thaikrit at FreeDigitalPhotos.net

“Tools, Watson.”

“Tools, sir?” When The Effective Detective started a conversation with a declarative statement like that, it was always best to merely repeat the statement as a question and prepare for a lecture.

“Yes Watson, tools,” The Detective repeated, with a look that indicated he knew the purpose of my reply.

“I have been reflecting on the use of the vast collection of sales and marketing tools available to even the smallest marketer. Unfortunately, too many of our marketing brethren buy into the software mantra of ‘more features are better'”, The Detective said, with an almost wistful tone.

“What is the fault in that mantra, sir?” asking the question that I know would get the most, shall we say, enthusiastic response.

“The fault is obvious Watson!” The Detective responded vigorously, “Instead of choosing a piece of software based on what they are trying to accomplish, they go for the software with the most features that they can afford. The result would be comical if it wasn’t so sad.”

“And that result would be?” I asked, jumping into the breach.

“Why nothing of course, Watson! They end up doing nothing because they get utterly confused when assaulted by the process of using said features. At that time of course, we hear that this software or that doesn’t work, or that the process they are trying to automate is useless to their business, etcetera, etcetera. This is the cycle, almost without fail,” The Detective finished.

“Is there an alternative sir?” I asked, genuinely interested by now.

“Of course there is Watson, it isn’t as sexy and certainly not as easy as buying the most feature packed latest  and greatest version of software. It involves figuring out what exactly you are trying to do, rather than allowing yourself to be distracted by the shiny new thing. It involves thinking through things, to write the process flow down on a piece of paper so you can see exactly what is needed,rather than what a software manufacturer wants to sell you.

“In a nutshell Watson, if you can’t do it or at least flow it out by hand, then you certainly cannot automate it,” The Detective completed his thought.

“An interesting viewpoint from someone who has been involved in software for most of his life, sir,” I responded, egging him on for some reason. Luckily, The Detective’s reaction was more restrained that I expected.

“Not really Watson. I have spent a chunk of my life designing and writing software. I have seen projects succeed and I have seen many fail. I have watched innumerable users  do what I have just described. It is simply the obvious deduction of years of observations.”

“Ah. Well played sir,” I congratulated him.

“Quite so Watson.”

Filed Under: data, Marketing, software, systems Tagged With: , , ,

The Mystery of The Incomplete Explanation Part 1

November 12, 2012 by Leave a Comment

Sometimes in relating information The Detective and I forget that giving a couple of bullet points is often insufficient to fully explain an important concept (or concepts!). Case in point. If you are an observant reader you might have caught the link to an article in Time Magazine that we sent out over the weekend just past. If not, fear not! We realized belatedly that perhaps we could have or should have expounded a little bit more on some of the key points; at least given an example that fits in more with our readers. After all, the article was talking about databases with hundreds of thousands of names, perhaps millions. How could that possibly relate? Let The Detective give it a try:

“Watson, do you think perhaps we were a bit, shall we say, vague in how some of the data mining techniques mentioned in that article could actually apply to the smaller list owner?” asked The Detective as we sat enjoying our brandies.

“Funny thing, I was just considering that,” I replied.

“Very well then,” launched The Detective, “perhaps we should give a slightly longer explanation a go. Let me start with the first point: too many databases.”

“Even a relatively small business could have too many databases. In fact, too many could easily be two, depending on the data that is stored in each of them. Take as a simple example a business that deals with consumers rather than other businesses. It would be quite easy for them to have two databases: one for email through one of the many systems out there, and a direct mail listing, perhaps a mailing list database or document they can merge.

By merging the two data sources, or more simply, picking and choosing items that can be used to properly segment the list, such a business could easily send highly targeted emails as well as direct mail to a potential customer base.”

“What types of items could they, as you put it, ‘pick and choose’ pray tell,” I asked, intrigued.

“Elementary, dear Watson. The simplest in this case would be zip code. If the business is local, then  they probably know the neighborhoods and thus the zip codes of the more affluent residents. Given that information included into the Email list, one could send an offer for high-end merchandise, knowing they would not irritate those who have less interest or capability to pay for such a purchase,” answered The Detective.

“Brilliant, sir!” I exclaimed in spite of myself.

“Another simple example would be if they have tracked the purchase history of their customers, perhaps in an accounting system. By adding an indicator of a high volume purchaser to their email program, they could also target special offers for such loyal customers!” finished The Detective.

“I think that gives a much better idea of what was meant by too many databases, sir. Now perhaps the others?…” I encouraged.

“All in good time, Watson. All in good time.”

 

Filed Under: data, providing service, Uncategorized Tagged With: , , , ,