February 18, 2007

three thoughts on customer engagement…

zzzzsteak333333.jpg
Three thoughts on “Cus­to­mer Enga­ge­ment”.
1. As some­body in the wine busi­ness, I find it odd that the industry, which has been brin­ging peo­ple together for thou­sands of years, is actually rather bad at “Cus­to­mer Enga­ge­ment”. A lot of wine­ma­kers don’t want a con­ver­sa­tion with you, they just want to tell every­body how great they are. They just want to slap a pic­ture of their cha­teau on the label and tell you how classy their family is. Boring, boring, boring.…
2. It’s not about how much your pro­duct enga­ges with the cus­to­mer. It’s about how much your pro­duct allows your cus­to­mer to engage with other peo­ple. As Kathy Sie­rra says in her bri­lliant post, “Suc­cess no lon­ger has to be a meri­toc­racy (or adver­toc­racy), today it’s just as much a loveoc­racy.”
3. I find “Cus­to­mer Enga­ge­ment” much easier if I start thin­king of the pro­duct [in my case, a bottle of wine] not as a “thing”, but as a “Social Object”.
[Semi-Related Link] John­nie Moore talks about the “300” movie event we went to the other night:

I think if I’d not seen it in these cir­cums­tan­ces, I might have been a bit more snarky about it… and I think that’s inte­res­ting. These bloggy ini­tia­ti­ves rip down some of the barriers bet­ween crea­tor and audience; because the direc­tor was there, I thought more about the work that he’d gone through in making it, saw his pas­sion for the work, enjo­yed his quirky anec­do­tes about the cha­llenge of get­ting it made. I made con­nec­tions. In my eensy-weensy way I felt part of something. I like that. 

By ope­ning up to the blog­gers, War­ner Bros help turn their movie into a social object. I guess the ques­tion is, how well does social objec­ti­fi­ca­tion scale?

[Afterthought from John­nie Moore:]

“Mar­ke­ting 1.0 treats cus­to­mers as objects of com­mu­ni­ca­tion: mar­ke­ting is done to them. In co-creation, ever­yone is a sub­ject (in the gram­ma­ti­cal sense) — an ini­tia­tor of action, a crea­tor. Your brand, and your mar­ke­ting, are the objects ever­yone gets to play with — if you’re lucky. Miss this point, and you may head the same way as the music industry…” 

6 Responses to “three thoughts on customer engagement…”

  1. Nick Smith says:

    Re: 2. Me thinks if you can crack this you’ve crac­ked uni­ver­sal appeal.
    If your pro­duct or ser­vice helps me to let go of the idea of sepa­rate inte­rests then it must also ack­now­ledge that part of me that needs to feel the con­nec­tion that exists bet­ween us, the part that seeks for the con­fir­ma­tion and safety of kno­wing that we are not separate.

  2. Eric Strauss says:

    Coin­ci­den­tal, but my first guess for social objec­ti­fi­ca­tion sca­la­bi­lity would be in groups of 300. In Frea­ko­no­mics, The Long Tail, or Blink (I can’t remem­ber which one) a busi­ness­man com­ments on the appro­priate time to open a new office. He ans­wers, “I put 300 spa­ces in the par­king lot, when they are full, I know it’s time to build a new office.”
    The clo­ser we are to each other, the bet­ter. And the­re­fore lots of little groups are pro­bably bet­ter than a few big ones. When we are all still peo­ple, not num­bers, recom­men­da­tions mean something.
    In the same way that MBNA and others used affi­nity mar­ke­ting to sell cre­dit cards, we (blog­gers) use com­mon inte­rests and trus­ted opi­nions to sell pro­ducts (whether we are paid or not).
    Because when two things are basi­cally the same, like cre­dit cards are, it’s really tough to choose one over the other. That’s why sub­jec­tive opi­nions, like what your friends think, become more impor­tant than the objec­tive tech specs.

  3. Anonymous says:

    Don’t know if the aim neces­sa­rily has to be a “loveoc­racy”, although that would be great.
    A “res­pec­toc­racy” seems pretty worthy goal — and I think that might have been what John­nie was get­ting at. Ins­tead of get­ting snarky, he went in to the scree­ning with an idea of the work and care going into the pro­duct. 2-way res­pect. We can live with that in our shop.

  4. nabila says:

    Hi Hugh,
    just launched an e-commerce business,so client enga­ge­ment is a real con­cern. Your post hel­ped me today, very ins­pi­ring!
    pro­ducts as social objects, I totally agree espe­cially today, and hope­fully more and more…
    Nabila

  5. “It’s not about how much your pro­duct enga­ges with the cus­to­mer. It’s about how much your pro­duct allows your cus­to­mer to engage with other peo­ple”
    If you make, say, peri­to­neal dialy­sis machi­nes, I’d think the lat­ter depends on the for­mer.
    Or am I mis­rea­ding this?

  6. hugh macleod says:

    Cle­ver for clever’s sake, Milan ;-)