REICH COMMUNICATIONS

Who do we trust?

 

Many companies work hard to create and maintain visibility.  That's what keeps those of us ion advertising and public relations busy.

But how much effort do those companies put into building and maintaining a good reputation?  Some, like American Express and McDonald's, put heavy emphasis on PR, community relations and customer service as a way to secure a good reputation with customers and potential customers.

A survey just released by Mediabistro makes interesting reading.  The poll, by Harris, got feedback from about 19,000 people at random.

The most trusted brand, the poll says, is Amazon. I know they work hard to keep their payment site safe and secure, and they are good about accepting returns on things if there's a problem.

Second is Apple, thanks to their innovation and customer service.

Disney is third.  How can you not trust Mickey, right? 

Google ranked fourth.  We must trust them, because Google is where we all go when we want to find something out.  Google it, right?

Johnson & Johnson is fifth on the list.  We all have J&J products in our home, and they've done a good job with PR damage control when they''ve run into quality control problems. 

Coca-Cola is #6.  Maybe it's because the company's been around for close to 100 years and they spend and spend to keep their name in front of us, often using ads that tug at the heartstrings.  So we trust them, even though Mayor Bloomberg is after them and other soft drink makers for causing childhood obesity.

Seventh is Whole Foods.  We love their stores because they have great stuff niucely presented.  Sometimes a little pricey, but tastes good.  We trust them to have good-tasting, interesting foods.

Sony, Procter & Gamble and Costco round out the top ten in that order.  Sony's products are quality, and they have a good reputation for customer service.  Like J&J, P&G has products in every American home, it seems.  From familiarity comes trust.  Last is Costco.  I don't know much about them.  I've tried my best to avoid their stores, but my wife says their prices are great.  I guess low prices creates trust... I guess.

I'm a bit surprised not to see American Express on this list.  To me, they are among the best at customer service. 

Perhaps less surprising is the absence of banks, insurance companies, pharma companies and electric companies on this list. Also, other than Disney, no media companies either.

 

 

Content Marketing Challenges

 

A new survey from my friends at MarketingProfs, where I'm a contributing writer, shows most B2C marketers now use content marketing, even as they continue to be challenged by determining the effectiveness of their efforts. 

Eighty-six percent said they are now using various forms of content marketing to reach consumers.

Social media and websites are the most commonly-used platforms, with 84% of respondents saying they utilize them.  E-newsletters follow close behind, with 78% and online videos and blogs round out the top five at 70% and 69% respectively.

Content marketing is here to stay, but the biggest challenge, after "lack of sufficient budget," is producing enough content and creating content that engages the target audience. Just having content out there doesn't do much good if it doesn't get read or doesn't move people to take some form of action.

That's where good PR people (note, I said "good") should be utilized by marketers.  It's always been a role of PR practitioners to take marketing messages and craft them into engaging content.  That's what we do when we draft a news release or a feature article or a speech.  When we pitch a story or segment idea, or when we script a video or write a blog post or newsletter, we've got to make it interesting enough to get read or viewed and compelling enough to help create a desired response -- buying a product or service, understanding or agreeing with a position on a issue.

PR people are trained or learn from experience to walk the fine line between the blatant, hardcore sales messages of advertising and informative unbiased journalism.  It's that combination, leaning a bit toward the unbiased journalism part of the equation, that enables PR results to have a credibility that advertising usually just doesn't achieve.

So it makes sense that the PR function should be involved in the content marketing task.  It should, of course, be a collaborative effort, coordinating with marketing, advertising and sales.  But PR should be given a very strong, if not decisive, voice in the process to ensure the content in content marketing doesn't get diluted to the point of ineffectiveness by the other marketing and management disciplines.

It will take an enlightened and trusting top management to put such a structure into place and enforce it, but it should pay off in terms of producing and disseminating solid content that attracts attention and engages in an effective way.

 

.

Is Customer Service the New Marketing?

 

I've asked this question before and I've suggested in previous posts here that excellent customer service may be the way for some companies to stand out from their competition.  

Does marketing still have the greatest impact on brand perception? Or in this digital age, is creating a high level of customer service a better investment? How can public relations fit into this picture?

Next week -- November 28th -- Software Advice will host a live Google+ debate with industry thought-leaders discussing just this. Panelists will dive into whether or not investing in customer service makes more sense in a world of social media, customer reviews and diminishing return on traditional marketing spend.

The panel includes:

• Micah Solomon - speaker, author, thought-leader
• Shep Hyken - customer experience expert, speaker, author, thought-leader
• Denis Pombriant - Beagle Research CEO, author, thought-leader
• Jon Miller - Marketo cofounder, thought-leader

The program will begin at 2 p.m. Eastern time on November 28 in a Google+ Hangout. Questions and comments will be taken from the audience.  You can attend the event by adding CRM Market Analyst Ashley Furness in your Google+ circle and she'll send you an invite to participate. 

I hope to have a follow-up post on the discussion a day or so after it takes place.

How NOT to make a sale

I don't mind if a company contacts me to solicit my business.  I try to look at emails and snail mail that comes in, and I'll even give someone a quick moment on the phone.  

If the pitch comes in via phone, I'll listen for a few seconds and, if even remotely interested, I'll then ask the caller to send me information by regular mail.  I tell them, truthfully, that I don't make a purchase decision from a phone call, but that I will read material and then decide.  It's interesting, but by asking people to snail-mail me information, I put an end to about 75% of the pitches.  They want to email me stuff, but I don't need more email clogging my Inbox.  And I resent having to use my toner and take my time to print someone else's sales material.  But many call centers are not equipped to handle mail follow-up, and they lose any possibility of getting business from me.

Lately, I've been seeing a new -- and really offensive -- type of pitch.  The one I just got moments ago from Google trying to sell me ad space on Google+ is an example.  My phone rang and I hear someone saying he's calling about some opportunities in my business sector.  I asked him, "What sector do you think I'm in?" since people sometimes think Reich Communications is a cellular reseller.  The guy kept talking, and I again asked him a question.  He kept talking, with the normal hesitations and "uh"s that made me think I was speaking to someone live.  Finally, as I was about to hang up, he said for more information and to place an order, press 1.

Damn!!  I hate being tricked! 

I dialed 1 and really told off some poor Google sales rep.  I also told him since my number is on a "do not call" list, the next time I get a call from them I'll report them to the FTC and they'll get a fine.  And I mean it.

But the thing that astounds me about this is, how do people think they will actually sell anything if they are so impersonal about the sales process?  We hear all this talk among marketers about connections and relationships with customers and potential customers.  Obviously, the marketing folks at Google, despite all the site's success, don't get it.

One thing I do know... Google will not get any business from me.

 

.

 

“Absolutely, Positively Unacceptable”

 

That's what FedEx SVP of U.S. Express Operations Matthew Thornton III said in a response to the video that's gone wildly viral showing a FedEx delivery person tossing a package that looks like a computer or video screen over a fence into a customer's yard.

In a post yesterday on the official FedEx site, under the heading "Absolutely, Positively Unacceptable,”  Thornton said: “Along with many of you, we've seen the video showing one of our couriers carelessly and improperly delivering a package the other day.  As the leader of our pickup and delivery operations across America, I want you to know that I was upset, embarrassed, and very sorry for our customer’s poor experience. This goes directly against everything we have always taught our people and expect of them. It was just very disappointing.”

He adds, "While this delivery fell way short of those high standards, we are already using it as a learning opportunity. We’ve shared this video internally to remind everyone that every single package is important to you, our customers, and that actions like this are totally unacceptable. We are also going to build this into our training programs as a constant reminder of the importance of earning -- and keeping -- your trust with every single delivery.  We hope that you, like the customer involved in this incident, will see it as an unfortunate exception that proves the rule that our company cares for its customers.

The video has had more than 4-1/2 million views so far on YouTube and it's been the subject of countless stories on local and even network newscasts.

But FedEx seems to have a really bad situation under control, even as the video still gets more hits.  FedEx representatives identified the guilty delivery person and then met with the customer to apologize and replace whatever may have been damaged in the package.  Evidently, they did not call a news conference, but instead relied on fast corrective action and got the apology out quickly via social media.  What more could they have said in a news conference, after all, and what other questions and embarrassing situations might then have been brought up by reporters?

Most people realize their packages might get rough treatment not only by Fed Ex, but by UPS and, especially, by the U.S. Postal Service.  In one TV news report I saw, the damaging FedEx video was followed by a similar video showing a UPS delivery person tossing packages out of his truck and onto the ground.

The fact that FedEx made no excuses and agreed that this was simply unacceptable will go a long way in easing the problem and minimizing any long-term negative impact on the company. The company generally has a good reputation for professionalism, so I think most people will cut them a break with this unfortunate breach.  A quick look at the comments posted onthe FedEx blog show overwhelming understanding and support, and some comments even note experiences they've had where FedEx employees have gone above and beyond to serve their customers.

In my own experience over the years with FedEx, I've found their drivers to be courteous and professional.  And I still believe that when it "absolutely, positively has to be there overnight," FedEx is the way to go.

 

 

You can't always believe the headlines

 

"Social Falls Short on Customer Loyalty; Traditional Methods Encouraged"

That headline in a MediaPost story this week caught my eye.  It flies in the face of all the hype we've been hearing about the wonders of social media.

The study, which surveyed 5,000 people in the U.S. and western Europe, found that only 18 percent of the respondents felt that their interaction with a large company or its brands via social media would encourage them to buy from that company again.  The number slipped down to 15 percent for social media interaction with smaller businesses like local retailers. 

The report says social media appears to be one of the least effective means of encouraging customer loyalty and other techniques that are more likely to resonate with consumers should get priority attention and budgeting from marketers and retailers.  The other techniques mentioned include a home delivery option, control of channels and frequency of communications received from a company, and a choice of ways to contact the company with questions or problems.

With all the talk about how impactful social media can be when connecting consumers with a company or brand, the survey begs a few questions.  

First, could the survey simply be wrong?  Might the questions asked have been leading, tilting toward desired responses?  The other question is who commissioned the survey and what might they have to gain from a particular set of findings?

Aha!  That might be the problem with this survey.  It was done for Pitney Bowes, whose mailing equipment products like postage meters are threatened by a reduction in pieces going via the U.S, mail as more promotional pieces and even billing is done electronically via email and other digital platforms.

"Sophisticated social media and Web interaction can be time-consuming and expensive and outcomes are difficult to measure," says the report. 

So would our friends at Pitney Bowes have us stay locked into our old methods of interaction, and ignore or avoid new technology?  

I think many marketers and their agencies are getting it right as they experiment with social media and other forms of digital communication, while looking for ways to measure and determine the ROI on the new opportunities that the Web afford us.

We also need to show a healthy skepticism when we see surveys, asking who conducted or who paid for the research, and what might they have to lose or gain by its findings?

Are PR Pros not being social about Social Media?

A survey recently reported in PR News shows that only 59 percent of corporate PR or Communications directors regularly review what is being said about their company or brand in various social media channels.  That figure is down from 2010, when the survey showed 73 percent monitored social media.

So that means that 41 percent of PR and Corporate Communications directors aren't fully doing their job. 

More consumers are tweeting and posting on Facebook and blogs, covering virtually every subject you can imagine -- including praise, complaints, suggestions about your products, your customer service and your employees.  For a PR pro not to have someone in his organization monitoring social media would be like not keeping an eye on what's being said about your company in the nation's newspapers and on TV and radio.  I'd call it a dereliction of duty.

Social media is a two-way street, providing organizations an opportunity unparalleled in the history of PR and advertising to hear and to be heard directly by the people you sell to or want to sell to.  But you can't be passive and jump in only when you have a sales message or when a crisis erupts.  Social media is an ongoing stream of information and conversation, and you won't be heard kindly if you're there only when you need the social media audience.

It's easy enough to monitor thanks to free tools like Google Alerts and others.   And it should not be difficult for companies to have a genuine presence on some social media platforms, offering information, advice, news and responding to what others are saying or asking about you.  You don't have to be tweeting 25 times a day or posting on Facebook or a blog constantly.  But try to set some sort of schedule for sharing information regularly so your social media presence is fairly fresh.

Social media is here to stay, even as various platforms evolve  and new ones come into favor.  It is simply too big for PR pros to ignore.

Negative Reviews can Hurt

As social media becomes ever more popular with all age groups, it gives a new and powerful voice to consumers.  So it becomes more important than ever for brands, and those managing brands, to keep a close watch on what's being said.

Before five or six years ago, it was hard for a dissatisfied customer to tell others beyond his personal circle of friends about his beef.  Most publications were loathe to print letters to the editor from a consumer complaining about a product or service -- especially if it was one advertised in that book.  Some local TV stations had - and still have - consumer reporters who help cut through red tape to solve customer complaints.  But how many people with complaints can actually be selected for a feature that runs a few times a week?

But look at how people can now voice their product or service complaints.  Online publications and marketplaces, including giants like Amazon.com and a host of travel sites, now include comments and reviews from real customers.  Say you're looking to book a room at a resort you've never been to.  Unless you're working through the dying breed of travel agents, you most likely are going to an online site to get info and even book the room.  But if you spot, right below all the pertinent information, some negative comments by people who recently stayed there, you very well might take a "pass" on that place and keep searching elsewhere.

Negative reviews and comments by everyday people have become a powerful un-convincer.  Companies that have spent thousands -- or often millions -- to convince you to consider their product and buy it, can have the deal blown literally at the finish line by one or two negative comments.

A recent study, the 2011 Online Influence Trend Tracker, shows that a whopping 80 percent of buyers have changed their mind about a purchase after seeing a negative review online.  That's up from 67 percent only a year ago.

The flip side is that positive online comments have convinced 87 percent of shoppers to move ahead with a planned purchase.

So what does this mean for marketers and for those who handle their public relations and customer relations?

More than ever, brands cannot stick their head in the sand and ignore what's being said about them.  It's crucial that brands constantly monitor not only major media, but social media and, if you sell online, e-commerce sites as well.  Watch for consumers complaining of problems and try to respond, hopefully with a fix or a meaningful explanation and apology.  Others will see that there's a dialogue between customer and company and it can be reassuring to know the company is trying to do the right thing and taking consumer comments to heart.

A caution:  Avoid trying to deal with complainers who come off as overly hostile or nasty.  One client we worked with, a GPS navigation app developer, had someone who we suspect was a disgruntled former employee who wrote nasty curse-laden comments everywhere he could find a spot to post a comment.  He never responded to our attempts to chat, and we saw that other readers were not taking his comments seriously because of their nastiness, wording and frequency.  Our attempts to reach out to legitimate complainers, though, were almost always met with appreciation, and these efforts turned some complainers into new advocates for the brand.   

The key lesson here is to listen and respond appropriately.

 

 

 

 

Climbing Out -- Bathroom Blogfest 2011

 

I’m pleased to be participating in the sixth Bathroom Blogfest. 

The annual event, which now includes 
more than 30 bloggers who come from 
a variety of disciplines ranging from 
design to home furnishing to marketing 
and PR (that’s me), has looked at 
bathrooms from a number of perspectives.

This year’s theme is Climbing Out, 
which I take to mean looking beyond 
the traditional role of public bathrooms 
and how they can and do impact an 
organization’s image and its customer 
relations efforts.

Most decent restaurants seem to pay attention to their bathrooms.  
I’ve been to some places where the bathroom is more spectacular 
or homey than the décor of the eatery itself.  And I’ve also been 
turned off by restaurant bathrooms that are dark, dingy or just plain 
dirty and unkempt.  That’s not exactly someplace that will keep you 
in the mood for a great meal.

Retail stores seem to have a wide range of bathroom quality, but 
most seem to be clean and institutional.  The same can be said for 
bathrooms at major movie theater chains.  Nothing great, but clean 
and generic.   

Supermarkets seem to be another story.  Maybe the markets figure 
no one even needs to go while grocery shopping, but hey, nature 
calls anytime, anywhere.  Supermarkets rarely have a public 
bathroom, but instead send customers to the employee bathrooms.  
In many cases, those bathrooms are in the bowels of the store.  It’s 
not at all appetizing to see the backrooms of a supermarket, which 
are surprisingly unclean, in appearance at least.  

It would seem that any store, restaurant or other place that has 
customers or clients coming to visit would put some effort into 
having bathrooms that are, at the very least, clean.  And going the 
extra mile to have bathrooms that sparkle and dazzle reflect caring 
and concern for customers.
 

Climbing out of bare-bones bathrooms 
makes good sense for any business that 
has customers visiting.  It’s good customer 
relations, which translates to good business.

...

Here's info on all 33 Bathroom Bloggers this week.  
Be sure to check out their posts during the coming week by 
clicking here. 

 

 

Weekend Thoughts

Where did the instructions go?

 

I finally joined the 21st Century last week when I bought an Android 2 smartphone.  I bought it mainly to pick up my emails when I'm on the run.  But the phone does so many other things as well -- it's a GPS navigation system in the palm of my hand, thanks to an app from my client CoPilot Live.  It's also a camera with almost as many features as my expensive Canon digital.  With another app, it can be a small e-book reader.  It can give me news updates and weather reports for just about anywhere in the world, and since it connects to the web, I can instantly Google the answer to the trivial questions that constantly come up in the course of everyday conversation, like who co-starred in that movie we saw two weeks ago, or when did the Giants move from New York to San Francisco? 

Oh, and it also lets me make and receive phone calls. Wow!

In many ways, it's fairly intuitive to use.  But still, there's so much packed into that little thing that it is helpful to refer to the instruction manual.  

But wait -- no manual came with the phone.  We looked in the box and all we found was a one-page sheet called Quick Start Tips.  The salesman said there's a full manual available online, and he gave us the URL to find it.  And sure enough, there it is -- all 80 pages, chock full of information so I can unlock all the wonderful features on my new phone.  But it sure would be nice to have a printed copy of that manual so I could refer to it at times when I'm not at my computer.

I stopped at the Verizon Wireless store today to get a hard copy of the manual.  He apologized and explained there isn't one.  It's only online.

So let me get this right... I just paid $149 for a piece of equipment, and Motorola won't supply me with printed instructions for it.  I have to spend who-knows how long printing it on my computer, probably going through a third of a toner cartridge in the process? 

I suppose Verizon/Motorola are priding themselves on being "green" by saving on paper and ink.  But really, it's about saving money -- their money, not mine.  Why can't they keep the manual online, but make a printed version available to users on request.  I'd even be willing to pay $1 to cover handling and postage, if they had the nerve to ask me for it.

My wife had the same problem when she bought her Nook e-book reader a month ago.  We spent $195, yet we got no instructions.  She had to go three times to the folks at the Barnes & Noble store, and the people there were extremely helpful.  But that was three trips to the shopping center about five miles away.  So whatever trees and ink were saved by not printing were balanced out, I'm sure, by gasoline used and polluting CO2 emitted.

Can someone show me the sense to this?  I just don't see it.

By the way, can anyone show me how to get that annoying Android apps icon off the home screen of my new phone?  It wasn't in the Quick Start Tips, and I don't feel like going back to the Verizon store again today.