Note to CMO: Smart Consumers vs. Vertical Marketing

Dear CMO:

We tend to think of our end user base here at the MegaCorp World HQ Campus as neatly falling into one of several cleanly segmented segments. Our peas never touch our carrots and that's how we like things. The problem here is that we haven't given 'ocra' its own user sub-segment designation. So, we just call it 'other' and hope that no one asks too many tough questions about it.

There's a fallacy in this thinking that runs afoul of this recent discovery that consumers, very often, will do what they want without any regard for our segmentation strategies. Marketers often fall into this trap because we've been too literal in our interpretations of best practices, namely:

1. Sell on benefits, not features.
2. Stress emotional, not rational, benefits.
3. Different user groups have unique wants and needs.


Sell on Benefits, Not Features. Unless, of course, the features are benefits.

We marketers are poets at heart and love to craft evocative tapestries of words and images that illuminate how self-realized our end users will be after they embrace our new, longer lasting gum. In the tech world, we'll revel in how many songs you can download on your "5 Gigs in your pocket for less than you EVER thought possible" storage device. Only the problem is that you've got a few gigs in your iPod already and have no reason whatsoever to put that hocket puck in your pocket in the first place.

You're putting words in your (theoretically potential) customers' mouths. If you've got a new, impossibly small 5 Gig storage device that you can drag and drop stuff into and won't crash if you drop it, say so. You've just sold it on benefits. Let your users decide how this fits their needs. You probably don't know how they'll use it yet. And maybe they don't either.


"Sometimes a cigar is just a cigar."

Sell the emotional benefits, not the rational benefits. Unless the need is rational. Then, by all means, sell the rational benefits.

It's interesting to know that your new cordless headset makes your neck feel better, increases the flow of chi to your kundalini third eye and helps you achieve a state of ergonomic wa. That's lovely stuff. And I couldn't care less because the real thing is, I need to talk on the phone a lot and I'm tired of holding a handset to the side of my head. Period. I'd go off on another Snakes On A Plane rant here, but I think I've done that elsewhere way too many times. Let's consider this point covered.


How to Make Half a Whole

The sum of the parts will equal the whole, assuming you count all the parts. Sure, it's entirely possible that different users have different needs. It's also equally possible that most all users have the same need. What often changes is how they get their hands on your stuff -- who influences them, where they get more information about it, where they buy it, and what their alternatives are. This is more of a media and channel strategy question than a messaging one.

The trap we fall into here is that we truly believe our market is comprised of a few, finite user groups, each with unique wants and needs. The usual truth, however, is that "other" takes up 50% of our pie chart and is fragmented into thousands of different users who may be using your product or service in similar ways to create completely unique solutions to their unique problems. This isn't bad news, by the way.

It's too easy to be "too clever by half". Customers don't care how smart we are, either. They have their own bills to pay and consequently will use our stuff as they see fit. They can educate themselves, evangelize to each other, and share stories within their industry sub-sub-sub-segments with or without the use of blogs, RSS feeds, podcasts or even the internet. If your stuff works for them, they'll use it.

Unless you find a way to patronize them, ignore them, or make yourself scarce, of course.


Regards.

Copyright (c) 2006 Stephen Denny