Product Development
Podcast Interview: Forrester’s Josh Bernoff on How to Profit from the Social Media Groundswell
Social technologies have changed much more than our marketing strategies; they’ve changed us.
Social technologies have changed how we gather and share information. They’ve changed who we meet, where we meet, and, sometimes, how we meet. They’ve changed how we buy, what we buy, and where we buy. They’ve changed what, how, and how much we know about the people around us. And while social technologies may not have changed what it essentially means to be human, they’ve certainly amplified, at once, our voices, our influence, and our need to be heard.
Right now, a brand — possibly yours — is experiencing a public relations mini-disaster thanks to a comment left on a message board; a university student is recommending a movie to 372 people at once via Facebook; Barack Obama’s social media-driven campaign is beating the odds (and the Clintons).
Welcome to the groundswell.
Josh Bernoff, Vice President & Principal Analyst at Forrester Research joined us recently to discuss the soon-to-be-bestseller he’s co-authored with Forrester’s Charlene Li, Groundswell: Winning in a World Transformed by Social Technologies. The book is a brief history of social media — fully seasoned with research and anecdotes from the most notable triumphs and failures of the so-called “Web 2.0″ era — that explains how to thrive now that customers and clients own your brand.
Click here for the Groundswell podcast
Of course you’ll buy the book, but here’s a 15-minute interview you can download (by right-clicking) while you wait for your copy to be delivered.
POST (not haste)
As Josh explains the paradigm of Groundswell thinking, don’t forget POST:
• People - What are your customers ready for? What do they want? What’s motivating them?
• Objectives - What are your goals?
• Strategy - How do you want relationships with your customers to change?
• Technology - Swap “tactics” for “technology” and the same is true. The people, objectives, and strategy must come before your choice of technology/tactics.
Want to find your customers’ social technographics profile?
. .
Read more about the phenomenology of social tech at the Groundswell blog, or any of these other great blogs.
Related Posts:
Written by:Robert Gorell
The 7 Deadly Claims (Part 6) — “Cutting Edge”
It seems corporate siblings experience the same divergence of personality and temperament as real siblings.
Even though Black & Decker owns DeWalt, their Web copy couldn’t be more different. In fact, the contrast between the two brands illustrates both mediocre and powerful ways to handle the sixth deadly claim: “cutting edge” (aka, “next generation,” “revolutionary,” etc.)
Both companies have followed current trends by releasing a line of tools powered by lithium-ion batteries. Lithium batteries provide much greater energy density than other rechargeable battery formulations, which means you can fit more power into a smaller battery. This can allow tool manufacturers to create lighter cordless tools, provide more run time, or increase the voltage rating of a tool (or some combination of those benefits, depending on design goals).
Moreover, lithium batteries won’t self-discharge: If you charge your battery and leave it in the garage, it will still be charged by the time your spouse’s nagging finally forces you to complete that home improvement project you’ve been planning to get to “this weekend” for the past six months. 
This innovation means a company could legitimately claim that lithium-ion batteries represent the “next generation” of cordless tools. But handle with care. The claim may be true, but that doesn’t guarantee it will be persuasive to — or even believed by — the reader. The copywriter still needs to substantiate this claim.
Break Through the Hype
Let’s take a look at Black & Decker and see how they do. If I go to the Black & Decker homepage and click on the rotating Flash banner touting the VPX System™, I’m taken to a page that contains the following copy:
- Breakthrough Lithium-Ion technology - holds charge longer, so it’s ready when you need it
- Includes: VPX Screwdriver, Cutsaw and 3 LED Flashlight
- All 3 tools powered by 1 VPX 7V Lithium-Ion Battery [included]
- VPX Batteries interchangeable with all other VPX products
- VPX Chargers include Daisy Chain Cord to power multiple chargers on one outlet
So, they’ve claimed their battery technology to be a “breakthrough,” and they do a decent job of explaining the main benefit to the casual home user. Not bad, but they might want to make room for a bit more copy and to bullet point at least one other benefit of their new Lithium-Ion batteries. I’d also want to hyperlink the phrase “Breakthrough Lithium-Ion technology” so readers could click-through to find more information. As it is, I had to use the left-hand navigation to find this information by clicking on “The Power.”
This page does a nice job of illustrating the size and weight savings offered by the new battery, and the copy reiterates the “holds a charge longer” claim — though I’d strongly recommend they substantiate it by comparing the VPX charge-holding capacity to older battery technologies, so readers can know exactly how much longer they can let the batteries sit idle.
Overall, Black & Decker does a fair job of handling their claims of “breakthrough technology,” and at least the copy points out the benefits of the new battery formulation. Still, it would be much better if they dramatized the benefits.
Also, by marketing the technology against yesterday’s competition, Black & Decker fails to persuade. Chances are they’re not really competing against older battery formulations, as most consumers are likely comparing them to other Lithium-powered tools. Yet their copy ignores this entirely. They should at least address the issue of how their lithium-powered tools stack up against the competition, don’t you think?
B & D may or may not be the “best” lithium-powered tools, but the VPX System probably does represent good value for the money for the casual home user. It would help if they made that case outright. (Check out this Amazon page and accompanying reviews for one of the VPX drills. Better than the brand’s own site, isn’t it?)
Saw, Don’t Tell
Now let’s take a look at the copy for the new lithium-powered DeWalt Nano™ products.
First, note how DeWalt compares the new technology against their old Ni-Cad powered tools and other Lithium-powered tools. Also notice how DeWalt actively dramatizes the benefit of its new technology by showing how it translates to increased cycle life and faster task completion.
Finally, notice how DeWalt never mentions “cutting edge” or “breakthrough” or “next generation.” They simply talk about how they partnered with a pioneer in new battery technology and how their new (and exclusive!) battery chemistry was developed at MIT. Then they let the geeks among us drill down to the technical details on battery technology. Though they never really explain how the batteries make use of nano technology, rather than drawing attention to a would-be unsubstantiated claim, DeWalt shows us how their tools are cutting edge.
Want to see what this looks like on TV? DeWalt’s approach is basically the online equivalent of Dyson’s “airblade technology” commercial:
- “Superior Customer Service“
- “Easy to Use“
- “Most Experienced“
- “We’re #1“
- “100% Risk-Free“
- “Cutting Edge“
- “Best Value“
[Editor’s note: Is your website losing its edge? Sharpen up your virtual sales pitch at our Persuasive Online Copywriting seminar on March 28th in San Francisco. Jeff and Holly will be your instructors for this first-ever West Coast edition of our popular one-day copywriting crash course. Class size is limited so that attendees can get real advice and actually learn something. You’ll even get $100 off if you register by 2/29.]
Related Posts:
Written by:Jeff Sexton
My Cup Runneth Over from High Slurp-Factor™
Have you tried Arizona Iced Tea? They aren’t bad at all, and I’ve really taken a shine to the No-Carb Blueberry Green Tea they produce. For the longest time I could not put my finger on why the product always make me smile, until last night.
After so many months, it dawned on me: the containers for the green teas are overfilled. When you open the bottle, there’s more product in the container than it should be expected to hold — even to the point that if you opened it up while exerting pressure on the bottle (careful, Readers-who-Test!), you’d spill blue-ish tea on yourself. Sometimes I have to reach down and take a “slurp” off the top so it doesn’t spill — which no doubt causes the rest of the family to consider that “Q’s own personal bottle” of the stuff. An interesting way to establish territorality.
Back to point: I feel happy when I open this product because I feel I’ve gotten more than expected, and certainly more than any competitive product. Obviously that extra slurp’s-worth costs them some finite amount of money, but I’m wondering if the delight I feel at getting more is common enough across their customers that it’s driving more sales than the cost of the slurp. And if I feel good about a product, I buy it regularly, and therefore my slurps and the slurps of my fellow… Slurpers represent significant lifetime value to the company.
Does your company’s product or service delight customers more than they expect?
Related Posts:
Written by:John Quarto-vonTivadar
When Developers Write Copy — Part 2
This one pretty much speaks for itself, but it’s a good example of inside-the-bottle copy, written by application developers.
Here’s the thing, Microsoft: If you’re going to explain something to me about the thing I obviously don’t understand, I’d prefer if you did it in my language — not in Microsoftese. If I understood how to get the most out of your email program, or if I even knew what a “compiled script” was and/or why I may need to add one, we wouldn’t be having this conversation. In fact, I found this message because I was trying to undo a sorting rule I’d accidentally created in my email. In the future, please do us both a favor and assume that I know nothing. Most of the time, you’d be right.
Too bad “OK” is my only option. Would it have killed them to actually link me to where I need to go? (I’d gladly tell the smart people at Microsoft how to fix this problem, but my understanding of what it is that I’m supposed to understand from this message is located in a folder, which is located within another folder, which is tied in a knot, and buried in dust, deep within the left hemisphere of my brain.)
[If you haven’t read Part 1 of this series, check it out. There’s a great discussion happening in the comments.]
Related Posts:
Written by:Robert Gorell
Why Americans Haven’t Driven a Ford Lately
I hate to say it, but ignoring it won’t make it any less true: Americans don’t believe Ford (or Mercury) makes cars that equal its competitors.
Comparably equipped Fords don’t sell for as much new, and they lose their value much faster as they age. That’s not opinion, it’s fact.
According to Edmunds.com, a 2002 Mercury Sable can generally be had for $5,924 to $6,917. Meanwhile, a Toyota Camry from the same year sells anywhere from $9,641 to $12,538. As of today, the 2008 invoice price differential between a premium, non-AWD (all wheel drive) V-6 Mercury Milan and a top trim level V-6 Toyota Camry is about $3,500
While there are undoubtedly different ways to spin this data, I’ve come to these conclusions:
- Americans still doubts Ford’s build quality (when it comes to passenger cars).
- Americans would rather buy a car that will retain its value.
With that in mind, imagine what sort of messaging might persuade you to purchase a Milan over a Camry, or a Honda Accord.
Now, watch this commercial:
(If you’re reading this in an RSS reader, click here.)
Any wonder why these “Mercury Girl” commercials are receiving a lackluster response from buyers? Jill Wagner is certainly an attractive spokeswoman, but what has she told us about the car? Has she really conveyed anything that’ll convince you to “put Mercury on your list”?
In my article on style vs. substance, I argue that, while non-substantive fashion items — e.g., clothing, shoes — can be sold on style alone (which might explain this reaction to the Mercury commercials), substantive products require substantive messaging.
If your product is substantially more stylish than the competition — the Milan may be a good looking car, but it’s hardly a style icon like the Mini — it might be a selling point, but generally speaking, great copy can only overcome lousy messaging when your competition’s messaging is at least as bad as yours.
That’s obviously not the case for Mercury.
What might I recommend for Ford/Mercury? Well, it’ll take more than ad copy; they’ll need an actual business strategy backed by solid messaging. But here’s what I’d have in mind:
- Offer a bumper-to-bumper warranty for 7 years and a powertrain warranty for 10 years. Close the loopholes. Make the warranty transferable. Include basic servicing and consumables like brake pads. That way, we’ll know the car has been well cared for, and when the original owner goes to sell it in 4-5 years, she’ll be able to offer the buyer 2-3 years worth of full warranty and another 5-6 years of powertrain warranty. That’s one bold, resale value-boosting move. (Besides, you’ve now got to compete with Chrysler’s lifetime powertrain warranty.)
- Offer to buy back the car in “X years” if the owner isn’t satisfied. It’s probably not as risky as it seems if you’re already doing step #1, and if you’re really making “Quality Job #1″ as you promised in the 80’s. Again, this will dramatically elevate the used car price. (Besides, you’ll get a premium used car to lease or sell if it doesn’t work out.)
If Ford wants to claim they’re as good as the imports, they’ll need to put some teeth into that claim. These offers will do that. Closeups of Jill Wagner, combined with upbeat music, won’t.
P.S. Yes, I know that both these offers have been used before. In fact, Hyundai already owns the 10-year warranty in the minds of most car buyers, but look at what it’s done for them! I’m simply proposing that Ford/Mercury beat Hyundai at it’s own game AND leverage Mitsubishi’s failed attempt at a buy-back program.
P.P.S. Will these programs have a cost to them? Sure. Take some of it out of the ad budget. Make this move and you’ll get enough word-of-mouth and PR to make up for it. For the rest? Suck it up and look 5 years — not 5 months — down the road. Increased sales now, increased resale value, and increased asking price can all do wonders for blunting the pain of funding these programs. And, hey… at least you’re not General Motors.
Related Posts:
Written by:Jeff Sexton
iTunes Sells 3 Billionth Song, Stops Innovating, Gets Sued
Today, Apple (APPL) announced that its iTunes Store has sold 3 billion songs, the last 2 billion of which were sold in half the time it took to sell the first billion. That’s great news for Apple, but they’re still missing out.
Consider the numbers:
- 6 years since the iPod’s release (November, 2001)
- 4 years of iTunes Store (April 2003)
- 3 billion downloads
- 5 million songs available (as of today)
- 100k iPods sold (as of April)
- 12 songs per album
- Just over 2 albums per ‘Pod (since April ‘03)
Of course, you can upload any music you’ve bought, “borrowed,” or stolen onto an iPod, and surely there are iTunes customers who use another device. In just 4 years, iTunes has become the #1 music retailer on the Web and #3 overall, next to Wal-Mart and Best Buy. But while iTunes may be the default online music store today, they’ve done precious little to innovate.
Meanwhile, rival EMusic, the Web’s #2 music retailer — which, unlike iTunes, is not ignoring the long tail — just launched a mobile store; a coup for independent music distribution. It’s not just indies; big-name artists are fighting back. Today, multi-platinum rapper Eminem announced he’s suing Apple because of iTunes’ shady deals and slim margins. And let’s not forget that EMI and other major labels have teamed up with Amazon to compete with Apple, or that the biggest record company in the world dropped iTunes last month.
They may have “5 million” songs available today, but soon you won’t even be able to buy any U2 songs to fill your red U2 iPod.
Related Posts:
Written by:Robert Gorell
