There are companies I am happy to have market to me – for example, Apple, Lexus, Tumi and Agile Computing. I hear from them occasionally, it only takes a minute to find out what they have to say, and I never feel like I am being duped.
I could suggest a few more names, but that’s it: just a few.
Frequency as The Holy Grail
Many of the companies I deal with (or have dealt with) have a different view on what constitutes effective marketing. Giving them my email address, mailing address, or phone number is tantamount to giving them license to contact me often. For example:
- The business card printer that emails me 5 times a week with offers.
- The large bank that calls 3-4 times a month to pitch its offers.
- The dozen or so technology companies from whose sites I download lengthy white papers who then call – never more than 48 hours later.
- The satellite radio company that called me 26 times to promote a special offer
In response, I’ve learned to send unidentified callers to voicemail, delete unwanted email and, when necessary, unsubscribe and visit websites to modify my permissions.
Frequent contact is often the Holy Grail of developing leads, and converting those leads to sales. Responsiveness and frequency of contact sufficient to keep a prospect informed and predisposed to marketing offers are necessary to make sales. The challenge, however, lies in determining what is sufficient and, from the buyer’s perspective, acceptable.
Permission Marketing is not an Invitation Victimize Buyers
Seth Godin popularized the term permission marketing. It is the opposite of interrupt marketing (spam, telemarketing calls at dinner time, the knock on the front door). With permission marketing, buyers give explicit permission to sellers to receive email, have their contact information forwarded to affiliates, or otherwise proceed to the next step.
There is increasingly good evidence to show that conversion rates (favorable responses that take the customer to the next selling step) for online marketing activities are higher for permission-based buyers, than for those solicited at random.
Problems arise when sellers interpret permission liberally, viewing it as license to market assertively and often, alienating those who gave them permission in the first place.
Case in Point: Facebook “Like” Button
Consider the results of a study conducted this past June by ExactTarget. It sought to understand what inhibits Facebook users from “liking” a company. The biggest inhibitor, in a word: mistrust.
Clicking the “like” button is a form of granting permission to sellers. As the data below shows, consumers are wary.
An Option to Regulation
Consumers complain, so governments look at further ways to protect them from zealous marketing practices. But companies have options.
There are several now who voluntarily disclose the methods they will employ to contact a consumer, and for each indicate the frequency of such contacts. This way, consumers have greater control over not only what and how information about them is used, but also over the nature and frequency with which they receive marketing offers and appeals.
If more companies would do this, there’d be fewer wary consumers. Marketing permission, arranged between informed and consenting adults, is the way to go.
Leave a Reply