Archive for the ‘User Engagement’ Category
The Great Non-Debate: Print and Digital
24 Aug 2009
by Michelle O'Hagan
The non-debate rages on I suppose. That would be the one about which is better / more meaningful / more useful / prettier / more creative / more portable / easier to read with your morning cup of coffee … Print or Digital. <sigh>
Really, are we still having this conversation? Shouldn’t we be worried about creating excellent content and delivering it in the way in which our audience wants to consume it?
Earlier today, I was pointed toward a FOLIO: blog post titled The Reverse Transition From Digital to Print which envisioned a world that was newly enamored with “slowness,” “paper records” and “recyclable paper” in lieu of an overwhelming number of channels, data farms and silicon chips. The author proceeded to describe all of the lovely things about printed material, including the feeling of a “personal connection,” “beautiful packaging” and “tighter circles of friends” (imagining, I suppose that we’d all be tighter if everyone would just get over that Facebook thing, already).
As I read, I was thinking two things:
- There probably was something great about washboards, too (Meaningful conversations on the front porch while scrubbing those knickers? All that water we could save?) but there won’t be a movement away from our front-loading washers and dryers any time soon.
- Why was the author writing an entire blog post about this imagined “reverse transition” without making the most important point: the business case ($$$) for it?
Well, it turns out, he wasn’t. FOLIO: ran only the first half of his post. The rest of the article was accessible via a “click here” link at the bottom of the post. To summarize, the second half of the post points out what would be lost in such a transition and concludes:
However, I can’t help but feel that a reverse transition from web to print would seem a bit like Big Brother was taking over; that citizens are given beautiful print packages at the expense of freedom of information, connection and creativity. It would give more control to fewer people – allowing them to decide what is good enough for the masses. It would not by any means be overt censorship, but rather, the hoarding of power to the limited space available in an expensive world of print products and distribution channels.
Why are we still talking about this? Certainly digital content, and the business models that go along with it, will prosper. But print isn’t going anywhere either, though print opportunities are not as ubiquitous as they once were.
The most important thing is delivering content in a way in which your audience wants to consume it. Might be print, might be digital. But that’s up to them. Your readers, I mean.
Marketing to “Profitable Loyals”
22 Jun 2009
by Michelle O'Hagan
Why a Loyal Customer isn’t Always a Profitable One, an article in today’s Wall Street Journal, posits:
To be considered loyal, it shouldn’t be enough for a customers to feel a bond to a company, or to simply stick with the relationship. It should also require certain actions, or shopping behaviors, on the part of the customer.
In other words, loyalty and profitability are not synonymous: The proper target audience for any marketer should be those customers who actually are profitable, not just customers who visit your site often or who may have warm feelings toward your product or service.
Assuming this is true, questions arise. How do marketers encourage clients or customers to become “Profitable Loyals” and against what benchmarks or metrics are those PLs measured?
I’d argue that once a marketer can accurately label their own PLs and set benchmarks and metrics around them, it is easier for business development to target clients who may, indeed, become PLs.
Thoughts?
