« November 2006 | Main | January 2007 »

Chrysler, Time, and the Unpredictable Outcome

Just love this -picked up at Jaffe Juice (a marketing blog).  Time magazine names "You" as the person of the year.

Time_5

On the time site, Chrysler runs an ad:

Chrysler_time_2


I know, someone is going to make the case that the ironic juxtaposition will increase awareness, and therefore it will be a positive campaign.

In reality, it is the poster child for why fire and pray marketing is too dangerous. Yes, it is what we are used to.  It takes time and money to produce a spot or build a site, so you have to take your best guess and go with it.

But if, after seeing this, you are still not sold that marketers need to have more ability to respond quickly, and that they need to get instant feedback on customer respose, and that they need to be able to make changes on the fly, then we shall have to part amicably.

No marketer on the planet can predict the future, and the future is guided by an ironic hand. No quantity or research or predictive modeling would have avoided the Time/Chrysler situation.  The ability to respond quickly, however, could have enabled Chrysler to capitalize on the situation.

What if they immediately redeployed a set of new ads, ads that might even make fun of their own? 

Ten Tips for Holiday Testing

I offered some thoughts on ways to boost holiday spending on your site in a recent newsletter, and was surprised at just how many people read the article. Seems as though as marketers, we're beginning to embrace testing and optimization, even during such an inconvenient time as the hectic holidays.

My point in the article was that as the holiday season draws near, we can't afford to give in to the fear that testing might somehow jeopardize the wonderfully increased numbers of the season.

In fact, giving in to fear and avoiding such a smash-hit tactic as testing can be far more risky during the holidays than continuing to test. After all, the testing of promotions and content during off-peak times results in significant increases in ROI. Imagine, then, now much more you can bring in by testing during the busiest time of year.

Testing technology, too, has changed in recent years, so that web operators no longer need to fear that making changes, testing those changes and optimizing for the best results will put any real restriction on their daily traffic or run the risk of a system-wide failure.

Rather than avoiding testing because of fear, I suggested that marketers take control of our sites and our traffic by running some simple tests.

Here's a shortened version of some of the things you might try testing. Or, go here to read the article in its entirety:

1. Landing page merchandising

 

Nothing is more important on a retail landing page than the way merchandise is displayed. What products you show, how many items are displayed, whether photographs are large or small, the quality and quantity of copy all benefit from aggressive testing and optimization.

Consider how products are grouped: Try listing best-selling items versus most popular items versus most-often-recommended.

2. Percentage off versus dollar savings, and other promotions

Customers often respond differently to promotions, depending upon how it is framed, even when the ultimate price is the same (e.g., 10% off a $100 purchase versus $10 off a $100 purchase).

You can also test free shipping and with the threshold for free shipping, to see if the resulting boost in sales makes up for the loss in shipping fees. And don't forget to testhow long you offer free shipping. The promotion matters a lot in, say, early December, but it ceases to matter later in the month.

3. Encouraging customers to “act now”

You can often improve conversions by generating a sense of urgency among visitors. Test different scarcity messaging like “Limited Time Only” vs. “While Supplies Last” vs. “Offer expires November 31st.”

4. Reflecting paid search content

Create customized landing pages for your 5 top-performing keywords. Then, make sure that the landing page content obviously relates to the search terms. You might repeat the search phrase verbatim, or reorganize your content to narrow the focus of the page.

5. Reinforcing your affiliates

Reminding customers where they came from can also increase conversion, especially if a visitor stands to gain by spending money with you (e.g. Upromise).

Try showing the logo of the affiliate to those who arrive from affiliate sites. Test size and placement of logo, as well as reinforcement copy.

6. Promotions in email marketing campaigns

You don’t have to limit yourself to testing a promotion within the email itself. You can also carry the promotion forward onto the website, customizing it so that only the people who received the offer will see the offer, and so that they will see only the specific offer that they received in the email.

7. Call-to-action

On paid search and email campaigns, test “Learn More” or “Start Now” versus “Buy.” When writing your call-to-action copy, finish the “I would like to...” sentence.

8. Gift suggestions

Test whether gift suggestions affect sales in your particular environment. If so, you might begin testing what you yourself think will be a great gift idea. Is it really something people want to give? Keep back-up ideas on hand in the event that what you think they want to give turns out to be wrong.

9. Increasing trust during checkout

Test placing confidence information (return policy, privacy policy, customer service number, recent awards, etc.) and security trustmarks (TrustE, VeriSign, HackerSafe, etc.) above the fold and in combination with each other to see if you can reduce abandonment rates.

10. Radical simplification

Yes, cross-sells and other content may increase your visitors’ average order value, but in some cases, superfluous content distracts customers from completing their purchase.

Lost revenue from abandoned shopping carts may exceed revenue gained from cross-selling. Test it and find out!

When Listening Hurts - Yahoo TV Gets an Earful

So Yahoo TV launches its new look, and gets an earful.  What is the net?  It is better to get negative feedback fast and out in the open than it is to hide problems.  And it didn't have to go the way it did.

According to the blognoscenti at TechCrunch and others, Yahoo! is getting negative ratings for the redesign and credit for being both open to feedback (through their own blog). Kudos to Yahoo for having the cajones to open a public forum for feedback and taking their lumps.  And nice work from Sal Taylor Kidd, the Director of Product Management, for engaging in the conversation.

What caught my eye in the discussion was a simple post on the Yahoo blog in defense of Sal and the team:

"I have to say I’m amazed and dismayed by the tone of these posts. “This sucks!”, “I hate it!”, “Cheap, worthless stunt.” I’m sorry, but would you people talk to the people at Yahoo like this if you met them in person? Of course not."
                            Comment by Charlie Wood - Dec 1st, 2006 at 1:26 pm

A perfect gem of wisdom that captures exactly what we have been saying here at The Site is Dead.  Your customers will not tell you what you most like to hear if you just ask their opinion.  Unless you are willing to put it out there, you will be living in a focus-group fantasy world that is not a mirror image of our own.

One of the unerring truths of digital products is that you always know exactly what you should have built 10 seconds after you launch (or run out of budget...).  From where I stand, this means that you have two choice: Launch what you have and gird for criticism or Never make changes.

Given that the second option is untenable, does it mean that we all have to go through what Sal and Yahoo TV did? Will public scorn be added to the list of indignities that plague the position of Product Manager? Probably.  But it doesn't have to be this bad.

Charlie Wood is right.  People will not be as honest, and you won't learn what you need.  But how did Yahoo get in a position where they were not doing testing?  Why did the new interface require a damn the torpedoes launch?  Why couldn't they introduce some of the interactivity to evaluate how it affected the user experience gradually?

Whether the new Yahoo TV site is good or bad is not my bailiwick.  From my standpoint, if more people engage with the site, if more can find what they want, then it is a success, and if not, it isn't.

But other companies who are contemplating introducing more interactivity to their sites should take heed - you will likely get grief, and Yahoo is a good model for openness.  But you can avoid some of it by selectively testing your ideas, either through Beta or live testing, to understand how it will affect your visitors.



Testing Engagement Rather than Preferences

I've recently been thinking about what testing really means, at its core. I think it means listening, really listening, to consumers.

Mostly, we tend to test things online: colors of buttons, wording of language, copy in a headline, position of the navigation bar, number of fields in a form, size of images, or placement of merchandise.

When we test elements, we often learn interesting factors - a hard sell in the call to action may perform better, indicating that consumers of a given company may need a good, hard push toward the purchase.  That in itself is important knowledge. But it leaves out significant information about the way the consumer engages with the company.

What if, instead, we begin to test the underlying assumptions about how we engage with our customers, and how our customers engage with us? Should you do more suggesting, or more effective responding to searches? Should you give a lot of results or just a few?  Should you create a shipping club or just offer reasonable shipping rates?

This sounds simple, but it marks a fundamental difference in the way we have been thinking about testing and optimization.

Think of it this way: You want to buy a sweater for someone you don't know very well. You might ask, "What's your favorite color?" She says red, and you know a tiny bit about her. Her answer might help you make a decision - but there are an awful lot of red sweaters available.

Now imagine that, instead, you ask, "What's your favorite thing to do on a cold weekend day in January?"

If she answers that she loves ice fishing in 20-below weather, that gives you a very different feel for how she engages in the world (and thus what type of sweater to buy) than if she answers that she likes to sit in front of a fireplace with a good book.

Both answers are equally revealing. And both, I would argue, give a better idea of what kind of sweater to purchase than simply knowing her favorite color is red.

So keep seeking elements that change results, but seek to be bolder.