For this blog, I decided to comment on "Church of the Customer" by Ben McConnell.
I particularly liked the post entitled 'Crisis 101: now measured in minutes'. Using Amazon's censorship disaster as an example, Ben McConnell blogs about the importance of responding to crises using instant online communication, such as Twitter. It is necessary, however, to recognize the difference between addressing and solving these situations via Twitter. Twitter should only be used to say, "We are aware of this situation". Simply stating this fact might not entirely quell consumers' outrage, but it will show them that you want to solve the problem and ultimately prevent significant damage to your company's coveted brand image. Even if people do not follow Amazon on Twitter or own a Twitter account, the news will inevitably spread to other social networking sites. This "digital-driven word of mouth" can either enhance ill will or subdue it. Unfortunately, for Amazon, it failed to admit its mistake and the former situation occurred. There is even ‘Amazon Fail’ merchandise available. You would think that a company with a Net Promoter Score 36 points above the median could have handled this crisis with the grace of a market leader.
After reading Ben McConnell’s blog, I realize how powerful Twitter and other social networking sites are. Companies grappling with disasters must communicate using these websites if they want to remain in favorable public opinion. I do disagree with Ben McConnell on one point though. While Domino’s disaster was more disgusting than Amazon’s I thought Domino’s addressed the situation better. They took action quickly and did not claim to be perfect. The YouTube videos of the employees putting boogers on the oven bake sandwiches had a message reassuring viewers that the two employees had been fired. It was critical that Dominos post the message on the same video that consumers were watching. While many people will probably avoid ordering from Dominos for a while, Dominos was able to communicate that the problem was resolved. Amazon, on the other hand, continues to blame hackers and other glitches for their censorship.
The reason this post caught my attention was because I learned about the Amazon and Domino’s disasters through Twitter. At least five of the 26 people I follow provided a link describing the separate incidents on his/her feed. Until I read this post, I never considered the power of “digital-driven word of mouth”. But Twitter really is changing everything! I find out about more things through my Twitter account than any other website. In the rare occasion that I do read controversial news stories on a blog first (like the hipster grifter in New York), it’s tweeted about within minutes. One of the blogs I frequently follow commented on a fad called “Twitflix” today. Apparently, some moviegoers are twittering during movies and ruining the experience for other people. At first, I was surprised. Why would anyone spend $9.00 to twitter at a movie theatre? Then, the more I thought about it, the more I realized that these Twitterers just want to be the first layman to review these movies. Most people read reviews before they pick a movie, what’s the difference between a Twitter Review and Rotten Tomatoes? Furthermore, if you want to see a certain movie, a few 140 character Tweets are probably not going to deter you. So I’m okay with this. Tweet away movie goers!
Saturday, April 18, 2009
Monday, April 13, 2009
Paper Outline
I. Introduction
a. Thesis: Walmart has replaced GM as the template for American businesses because they understand their customers' insights. (I'm still working on this, I want to talk about the era of customer insights and how necessary it is to listen to your customers in order to be successful)
i. mention the factors that contribute to the shift of power from companies like gm to companies like walmart--this will probably be a comparison between GM and Walmart. how did GM lose its title as the template of American business? failure to listen to their customer's wants and needs and adapt this into their business model--contrast this with Walmarts ever evolving customer ventric business model
II. body
a. brief history of Walmart: follow Walmart from Sam Walton's days to now. Customers have always been number one. Emphasize the various ways they make this evident in their company culture and physical retail stores
i. different marketing eras that Walmart and GM live in. GM was sales driven and Walmart is customer driven
b. Walmart's values: a comparison between walmarts values to GMs. again, mention the importance of keeping the consumer #1
c. How does Walmart listen to their consumers: low cost, high efficiency, new sustainable products, adaptation
i.low cost: Walmart squeezes every penny from suppliers and passes the savings on to the consumers
ii.high efficiency: your purchases are electronically sent to their hub within 15 minutes of the purchase, they know what you want and they keep thier stores stocked to ensure that you get what you want, they started off with their own distribution system--another way to almost guarentee customers' needs will be met quickly (focus on the fad products)
iii.new sustainable products: walmart is realizing the importance of offering sustainable products and the power it holds. this is crucial for two reasons: 1. their customers new needs are being satisfied and 2. their image is improving because they are helping the environment--compare this to GM: failed to innovate, lost favorable opinion in the public eye and lost customers
iv. Walmart is still growing during the recession because it has adapted. it has seized the opportunity to scoop up the customers that are downgrading their purchases. Walmart must impress them or else these new customers will not continue to shop at Walmart after the recession.
d. how does Walmart communicate to their customers
i.commercials: new campaign's focus is completely on the customer saving money and walmart's green movement/the power it yeilds
ii.in store promotions: not as effective as their commercials, but the inside is not pretentious, highlights your savings, constant rollbacks and comparisions to other stores so that the customer feels good about their purchasing decisions
iii.comparison to GM--when it was the template of american businesses, its ads were not as targeted to their customers insights and needs--it basically told the customers what they should have so it could make more money**will elaborate in my paper, still need more research to formulate this thought
e. walmart is listening to its customers needs at the expense of their employees--
backlash against walmart is targeted towards the treatment of their employees (healthcare, lawsuits for gender discrimination)
however, while they may be subtly changing these practices (its more behind the scenes, so harder to see), they don't necessarily have to because its customers are not demanding a change. most people upset at walmart would never shop there, walmart does not have to listen to them. this won't completely change until its core customers demand a change.
--GM was the complete opposite, in its era they focused more on the employees than the customers
III. Conclusion
a. Walmart is very good at forecasting customer demands/listening to customer insights. This characteristic is the reason why they have replaced GM.
b. Walmart cannot, however, expect that sheer growth will keep them in this position. must adapt and continue to predict customers' needs if they want to remain the template of American business.
c. Lessons from GM: GM became consumed with its powerful position and that was its downfall, Walmart must learn from this mistake.
a. Thesis: Walmart has replaced GM as the template for American businesses because they understand their customers' insights. (I'm still working on this, I want to talk about the era of customer insights and how necessary it is to listen to your customers in order to be successful)
i. mention the factors that contribute to the shift of power from companies like gm to companies like walmart--this will probably be a comparison between GM and Walmart. how did GM lose its title as the template of American business? failure to listen to their customer's wants and needs and adapt this into their business model--contrast this with Walmarts ever evolving customer ventric business model
II. body
a. brief history of Walmart: follow Walmart from Sam Walton's days to now. Customers have always been number one. Emphasize the various ways they make this evident in their company culture and physical retail stores
i. different marketing eras that Walmart and GM live in. GM was sales driven and Walmart is customer driven
b. Walmart's values: a comparison between walmarts values to GMs. again, mention the importance of keeping the consumer #1
c. How does Walmart listen to their consumers: low cost, high efficiency, new sustainable products, adaptation
i.low cost: Walmart squeezes every penny from suppliers and passes the savings on to the consumers
ii.high efficiency: your purchases are electronically sent to their hub within 15 minutes of the purchase, they know what you want and they keep thier stores stocked to ensure that you get what you want, they started off with their own distribution system--another way to almost guarentee customers' needs will be met quickly (focus on the fad products)
iii.new sustainable products: walmart is realizing the importance of offering sustainable products and the power it holds. this is crucial for two reasons: 1. their customers new needs are being satisfied and 2. their image is improving because they are helping the environment--compare this to GM: failed to innovate, lost favorable opinion in the public eye and lost customers
iv. Walmart is still growing during the recession because it has adapted. it has seized the opportunity to scoop up the customers that are downgrading their purchases. Walmart must impress them or else these new customers will not continue to shop at Walmart after the recession.
d. how does Walmart communicate to their customers
i.commercials: new campaign's focus is completely on the customer saving money and walmart's green movement/the power it yeilds
ii.in store promotions: not as effective as their commercials, but the inside is not pretentious, highlights your savings, constant rollbacks and comparisions to other stores so that the customer feels good about their purchasing decisions
iii.comparison to GM--when it was the template of american businesses, its ads were not as targeted to their customers insights and needs--it basically told the customers what they should have so it could make more money**will elaborate in my paper, still need more research to formulate this thought
e. walmart is listening to its customers needs at the expense of their employees--
backlash against walmart is targeted towards the treatment of their employees (healthcare, lawsuits for gender discrimination)
however, while they may be subtly changing these practices (its more behind the scenes, so harder to see), they don't necessarily have to because its customers are not demanding a change. most people upset at walmart would never shop there, walmart does not have to listen to them. this won't completely change until its core customers demand a change.
--GM was the complete opposite, in its era they focused more on the employees than the customers
III. Conclusion
a. Walmart is very good at forecasting customer demands/listening to customer insights. This characteristic is the reason why they have replaced GM.
b. Walmart cannot, however, expect that sheer growth will keep them in this position. must adapt and continue to predict customers' needs if they want to remain the template of American business.
c. Lessons from GM: GM became consumed with its powerful position and that was its downfall, Walmart must learn from this mistake.
Wednesday, April 1, 2009
Blog Seven
According to “How Do They Know Their Customers So Well”, there are seven reasons to understand your customers better, all of which focus on generating more revenue. As a business in the private sector, your motive is to increase profits. But, when companies are this obvious about why they are getting to know me, I become hesitant. Let me illustrate with an anecdote...Yesterday I went shopping for the first time this semester, and it was quite the customer experience. With summer weather and open-toed lattice flats on my mind, I ditched my 1:00 class for the mall. Needless to say, I was nowhere near presentable in my smelly gym clothes. But could you blame me? I had a time limit and shoes on my mind. The sales associates, on the other hand, were not impressed. In all of the high-end clothes stores I visited, I never even received the time of day...and this is a recession! You'd think these people would be hammering to make a sale. Even when I bought something, they could care less about me. Apparently people who are not dressed are not customers.
On the opposite end of the spectrum were the shoe stores. They would not leave us alone. I would inquire about one pair of shoes, and they would bring me nine extra pairs. Usually these shoes were quite tasteless, but as a former retail associate, I understand the need to cross-sell. Although it was annoying to try on eight ugly shoes just to humor the sales associate, I understood what they were trying to do. It was a blatant attempt to increase the amount of money I spent. What really bothered me, however, was the interaction during the actual transaction. Name, I understand. Area code, questionable, but not too invasive. My email address, on the other hand, is not something I like to freely give out. And to them, telling them your email address is no longer an option. They don’t ask if you would be willing to give an email address so that you can receive updates, they list it right after area code in an attempt to trick you! Name? Area code? Email address? When I refused to give them one, they looked at me like I was crazy for refusing their offer. To marketers, email addresses can lead to a goldmine of information, especially if customers can personalize their subscription. It can increase cross-selling success, enhance customer loyalty and create more effective marketing messages. On the customer’s end, it can ease a purchasing decision by offering discounts on certain items or suggesting complimentary items. These are two things that I personally struggle with when shopping. Associates operating the cash register don’t usually stress the benefits of these email lists though. Giving your email address is like as expected as paying for your new shoes. You wouldn’t steal, so why should you refuse to give us your email address? I find this attitude bothersome. Anytime information is being gathered, customers need to give their consent. Sales associates can increase the amount of customers willing to give personal information if they can articulate the benefits of doing so. I know that there are ‘unsubscribe links’ at the bottom of every email, but being asked my email address at the store is annoying. I’m tired of denying them something they expect and I’m sick of receiving useless spam mail. I like the approach Nordstrom’s and Harley use to gain additional insights from their current customers. Personal shopping is, obviously, personal. If I owned a Harley, I would love to go on a ride with the CEO’s, I’d chat them up the whole trip. These methods are more creative and less lazy. Nordstrom’s and Harley Davidson respect their customers and it pays off. I know that less prestigious companies don’t have the funds to follow their examples, but doing a half-ass job obtaining personal information only hurts them. I want to avoid the stores that ask for my email address, not give them more insight.
On the opposite end of the spectrum were the shoe stores. They would not leave us alone. I would inquire about one pair of shoes, and they would bring me nine extra pairs. Usually these shoes were quite tasteless, but as a former retail associate, I understand the need to cross-sell. Although it was annoying to try on eight ugly shoes just to humor the sales associate, I understood what they were trying to do. It was a blatant attempt to increase the amount of money I spent. What really bothered me, however, was the interaction during the actual transaction. Name, I understand. Area code, questionable, but not too invasive. My email address, on the other hand, is not something I like to freely give out. And to them, telling them your email address is no longer an option. They don’t ask if you would be willing to give an email address so that you can receive updates, they list it right after area code in an attempt to trick you! Name? Area code? Email address? When I refused to give them one, they looked at me like I was crazy for refusing their offer. To marketers, email addresses can lead to a goldmine of information, especially if customers can personalize their subscription. It can increase cross-selling success, enhance customer loyalty and create more effective marketing messages. On the customer’s end, it can ease a purchasing decision by offering discounts on certain items or suggesting complimentary items. These are two things that I personally struggle with when shopping. Associates operating the cash register don’t usually stress the benefits of these email lists though. Giving your email address is like as expected as paying for your new shoes. You wouldn’t steal, so why should you refuse to give us your email address? I find this attitude bothersome. Anytime information is being gathered, customers need to give their consent. Sales associates can increase the amount of customers willing to give personal information if they can articulate the benefits of doing so. I know that there are ‘unsubscribe links’ at the bottom of every email, but being asked my email address at the store is annoying. I’m tired of denying them something they expect and I’m sick of receiving useless spam mail. I like the approach Nordstrom’s and Harley use to gain additional insights from their current customers. Personal shopping is, obviously, personal. If I owned a Harley, I would love to go on a ride with the CEO’s, I’d chat them up the whole trip. These methods are more creative and less lazy. Nordstrom’s and Harley Davidson respect their customers and it pays off. I know that less prestigious companies don’t have the funds to follow their examples, but doing a half-ass job obtaining personal information only hurts them. I want to avoid the stores that ask for my email address, not give them more insight.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
