Who’s your audience – free info tool from YouGov

Recently, a great new data tool for marketers was released from YouGov – the YouGov Profiler. Type in any search term – anything from sport, media brands, celebrities or food to find a comprehensive profile of the market it attracts.

Much hilarity ensues for search terms from Eastenders to Victoria Beckham. But looking a little closer, entrepreneurs and new business startups can find a great wealth of answers to their early questions of how to target customers with their hot new product or service.

YouGov states on their website: ‘It joins 120,000 integrated data points from over 200,000 of YouGov’s most active UK panellists to show how every single member interacts and engages with traditional (TV, radio, press, print) and new media (online, social, mobile) channels. This connected data is unique to the research industry and it means YouGov clients can mine its huge seam of information in real-time and understand more about their audiences than ever before.’

Of course, I wouldn’t suggest replacing targeted market research and customer insight with this tool. However I’ve seen personas created with a lot less ! 😦 But for those pre startup entrepreneurs who want information on their intended audiences, it’s not a bad place to start to learn about their habits.

YouGov Profiler data tool

Take a look for yourself. https://yougov.co.uk/profiler#/

App glut

How many times must I dismiss the download Yahoo Mail app interstitial when I log in via the web? I must have closed it a hundred times already that I would have thought Yahoo’s smart tracking to pick the behaviour up by now. But no, they haven’t.

I’m not old-fashioned; I just don’t see the need. I have the Gmail app and many other apps. So many in fact that I just can’t download another app to the device. So, I’m stuck with the annoying interstitial it seems.

So many apps, that I wonder we must be in an app glut. A sentiment shared by Kevin Tofel who raises a question of what must be next.

I’m further reminded of a recent experience of a friend of mine using a banking app. He was wanting to reset his password but had to not only switch between the app and the web version but between devices ! – first step on tablet / desktop, second step on phone. After several failed attempts where clearly devices and app / servers were not talking to one another, my friend resorted to phoning to speak to a human. Unfortunately there was no one on tech support to help as the time difference between the US and the UK was not in my friend’s favour. So much for mobile banking on the go…

I believe we must be fast approaching (or are already there) a crucial time for app strategy – a similar time when web design scaled back to introduce more flat and leaner code to avoid the bandwidth block of swfs and gifs. So what’s next after apps?

Perhaps the emphasis on apps will diminish along with the reliance on devices. Everyone talks about ubiqitious computing – so irrespective of device, shouldn’t we be able to we accomplish our goals on any connected technology already existing or not yet conceived? Whether it be a vending machine, ATM, kiosk or any other accessible terminals in airports, streets, in the air even. It shouldn’t have to be yet another piece of technology that we the user has to carry, wear or buy.

Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs 2.5 License.

Arts organisations caught in the olde world?

Everyone has examples of pointless links embedded in confirmation emails and yesterday I had a new one.

I needed a copy of the confirmation for a BFI film screening, expecting the email to contain the link to take me to my account.

It contained a link alright:

email

… unfortunately it was useless. The home page offered me no ability to log in to my account:

bfiHome

I searched all the drop down menus where I was encouraged to sign up to this and that. But absolutely NO signpost to an existing customer’s account area.

I found this arrogant. This high-profile organisation’s marketing strategy is lost in the old days where getting the sale is the most important thing. Everything else is secondary.

It was back in 2004, that Jakob Nielsen wrote,

The biggest challenge in e-commerce is to get the first order. Don’t blow it thereafter. Treating customers well after they place their initial order will vastly increase the probability that they’ll place more orders in the future.

After another minute of random clicking around the site, the lovely animating banner captured my attention. There in beautiful colour was the slide for the season for which I’d bought my ticket – Studio Ghibli. Clicking the banner took me to the subsite:

whatson

…. and there was the login link. In the time it had taken me to work that out, I’d been made feel like a second thought.

In light of this, I check how another arts organisation, Whatsonstage.com, does it. In the confirmation email I’d received for a previous purchase is an embedded link. Yet however, the same thing happens! The link in the email takes me to their home page, where again, I am unable to log in:

wosHome

The onus is on me, the customer, to find where to find my account. First I click ‘More’ which doesn’t produce the desired result, then I click ‘Theatre club’. And there it is…as obscure as it is:

clubwos

It’s a matter of principle. Neither of these organisations leave me with a warm and fuzzy feeling that I would want to spent my money with them again. Do they think that because they have the great and exclusive discounts and offers they do, that is enough to make customers return?

On the plus side, I know that if I do, I now know where my account pages are hidden.

And the final word from Mr Nielsen,

It’s an old lesson: It’s much easier to close additional sales with existing customers than to acquire new customers. People who’ve proven willing to give you money will often give you more. This is true for all sales channels, but it’s particularly crucial for e-commerce because the first order proves your credibility if you effectively handle follow-up and delivery.

 

Mind the retail gap

Quite a relevant post from econsultancy this week on why retailers need more work on their multichannel offerings. Only recently on the bank holiday a friend of mine, we’ll call her Anna, had quite reluctant assistance in returning a non-functioning hair straightener – we’ll call it XYZ – to John Lewis. The whole episode emphasised a couple of design flaws but more on that later.

XYZ straightener had simply just stopped working after only a handful of uses. Even after allowing it to cool down it would still fail to turn on. Anna referenced a number of online forums to discover it is a prevalent problem. Calling John Lewis (my friend bought it online from the store), she was advised it could return it in store, rather than online.

Arriving at John Lewis Oxford Street, the XYZ counter was abandoned. When someone appeared, they were a XYZ representative, not John Lewis. Perfect, just the person Anna wanted. But no, the company salesperson was in store only for the day and couldn’t advise Anna what to do. ‘You can’t return it in store,’ Anna was told. ‘You need to return it to the manufacturer. You’d best find the store manager,’ Anna was told.

Rewind – Anna would have to what? You’re working in retail. You should know the basic principles. Anna didn’t move and quite rightly asked the salesperson to find the store manager for her.

When the store manager arrived, Anna repeated that she’s been told it could be returned in store. The store manager acquiesced and agreed JL would take care of it. Clearly the call centre and in store staff were ill advised and not aligned on return policy.

At this point, XYZ salesperson finally asked to see the non-functioning straightener – something she’d failed to do before. Plugging the straightener into power, the salesperson concurred that it was indeed not working. And advised that if the straightener heats up over the stipulated 185° it will shut itself off – forever. A key piece of information not very well communicated. Even on XYZ’s product care page, it is not mentioned. Now, I’m no product designer, but doesn’t XYZ have an obligation if they are manufacturing this type of appliance to design it so that it doesn’t overheat?

After learning this, I forget how many times Anna said that she’d just like her money back:
‘We could send it off to the manufacturers.’
No, I’d just like my money back.
‘The new model is coming out. We could let you know when it’s in store.’
No, I’d just like my money back.

Despite Anna and I having just visited the rather lovely roof gardens atop John Lewis, this experience left quite a tarnish on their name for us. Anna got her money back in the end, vowing to never buy XYZ again.

Fast, hassle free online donations

Recently friends of mine have been active participants in fundraising events for charities. Naturally quite inspired by their endeavours I’ve wanted to sponsor or donate to their chosen causes. But two sites most recently have shown vast differences in their online models, it begs the question that their website design are huge barriers to onboarding potential donors ! This is quite topical for me at the moment as I work to simplify online registration for a global beauty retailer that severely hampers visitors becoming members.

Firstly Oxfam Australia. A friend is competing in the Trailwalker hike. 100 kms. Wow, I want to support her team. I follow the link to their page where I see a clear Donate call to action. Clicking this button takes me to a form asking for my donation amount, name, email, physical address (why?) and finally credit card details with a final Confirm button at the end. Phew, all done. Yet clicking the Confirm button does nothing. The fields which I had filled are all in focus so I suspect that this is a validation exercise. So I recheck the details I entered and click Confirm again. Again, nothing.

oxfam2

I try this a number of times, wondering if my credit card also has been charged the same number of times. What I had been failing to see was a slimline drop down at the top of the screen which was asking me to login. What? Why allow users to enter all of these details if it’s necessary to be a member? Not to mention that I’ve never been to this site before – I just want to make a donation and go. I don’t have the time to register !

My friend who’s competing is a good friend so I persevere. I register and I get my subsequent registration confirmation email. Go through the motions and I’m back on the site to login before another attempted donation.

Now the site doesn’t recognise me. I retype the password I’d chosen and typed twice on the confirmation only a minute ago but to no avail. I’m getting well passed annoyed now. Every second I am re-evaluating how much of a good friend the willing 100km hike participant (just kidding, Ron !). My guilt gets me in the end and I click the Forgot password link. A temporary saviour arrives, I type it in and bingo, I’m finally recognised !

But before I try to donate again I want to check the Donation History to make sure my credit card hasn’t already been received or processed. This screen asks me to select the dates I want to check. Rather strange as a new registrant. Also the pre-populated date range seems a bit random – some date in November 2012 to June 2013. Today is 28 April 2014 right? I change the date to today and phew, no transactions display. Then I read the text above the date selector – “If you’ve made a recent donation, please note that donations may take up to five working days to appear.” Oh dear – a simple listing of donations made with a given status of ‘pending’ wouldn’t do here? So do I wait 5 days or go ahead with the donation?

The other site I’ve used recently is Virgin Money Giving. What a breeze! I don’t need to register. I don’t need to login. I select the charity, the amount and chose how I want to pay. Simples. Done in less than 3 minutes.

Multiply 3 minutes by the number of steps taken on Oxfam, amplified by factors of annoyance and frustration and that’s how many potential donors you’re missing out on Oxfam.

Stop and question how much you really need to know about donors. If you were selling raffle tickets at the local shopping centre you wouldn’t find out much at all. It’s called fund raising for a reason, not data collection.

Fundraising is hard enough – I know; my mother fundraised for charity for the best part of 20 years before the convenience of online tools. Use them wisely and be smart.

Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs 2.5 License.

How close are we to our own currency?

There’s been a lot of talk recently about new currencies around the world developed and owned by brands to reward loyalty from customers. Loyalty cards and rewards points are a dime a dozen these days on the high street and of course help to hone many a buying decision.

A recent TED talk by Paul Kemp-Robertson discussed the rise of Amazon’s new currency and Nike Sweat – pledge your sweat for points – as a consumer’s trust is more in businesses than in traditional institutions such as banks and governments.

Ultimately, these currencies are owned and run by the big brands themselves. Even though the consumer might believe that it gives them more power in the market place, does it?

Behind all of these schemes are the machinations that make it all possible. Analytics chew through mountains of statistics and data to pinpoint what we as consumers do with our money, what we buy, create special offers on our most purchased items and make recommendations of our related products – along with creating profiles on us.

This was highlighted further recently with an article in Fast Company, detailing the level of analysis gathering occurring in high street stores. Add what’s been uncovered through Snowden-gate and we have ample concern about our privacy – the how, what, where, when and most importantly, why.

What’s needed in this relationship, is for the key players to change position. Consumers should be their own gatekeepers on who can access their information and to what degree. Not the brands. Subscribing to these reward schemes promotes the risk of multiple data sets stored in faraway databases with price tags on them. Perhaps what is needed is a currency that each and every one of us own. Not controlled by a faceless organisation in an indeterminable location doing god only knows what with. If there is a place for governments in this consumer-controlled world, it is to set the infrastructure to firmly place consumers in the driving seat.

A system that gives power to the consumer to enter into permission-based transactions. Knowing that their behaviour will be tracked and analysed, a consumer chooses who to give their consent to – those stores or brands which they trust to do business with regularly. The consumer chooses the amount of information given and could involve progressive disclosure over a period of time – as the trust with the vendor grows based on an ongoing and amiable relationship. This getting of information is gained through good customer relations and old fashioned service, rather than just because they have the means to do it. In return, the consumer gets rewards, free product, gifts, etc.

Our data is what these brands want. With this information, they can analyse our behaviours and our habits to improve their marketing efforts and their product offering. But so far this has been a lopsided transaction. We willingly tick terms and conditions check boxes on websites that waives the organisation concerned of any wrongdoing if a leak of privacy occurs. Still sounds way out of the control of those whose data is mined – us, you and me.

Anya Kamenetz speaks of apps enabling payment for making monetising our data online. One site in particular – Reputation.com – will soon be offering a feature that allows customers to offer up their data in return for free product, but with what controls?

Either way, the times may be achanging for establishments that mine, store and manipulate our data for their own purposes. Our privacy should be our own global currency.

Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs 2.5 License.