Balancing big data with a big voice

Back in the day, loyalty communications were pretty simple.

You got a Welcome Pack when you joined and then periodic points statements after that.  The statements may have contained some offers, and if you were really lucky, these may have been personalised in some way.  Some people really pushed the boat out and sent individual mailings with specific offers, normally in response to a lack of behaviour, trying to get you back in-store.

Then email arrived and it became much cheaper to be relevant - or so we thought.  In practice it just became much cheaper.  Emails were sent, even if there wasn't anything particularly relevant to say and if you didn't like it... well you could always opt-out.  So what happened to that dream of 1-2-1 marketing?


Quite simply, it's actually pretty hard to be relevant all the time.

Sure you can use analytical techniques to target customers who you think have a propensity to do something.  Or you can respond to customers with trigger marketing based on their behaviours (i.e. not purchased in a little while) and send an email to encourage them back.  However, for regular communications it's much harder to create customised content for each member based on their exhibited behaviours - for many programmes it's just too hard (or costly) to be relevant.


But there is a simpler way - just ask the customer what they'd like through the use of a preference centre.

With an increasing number of channels and ways of interacting with customers, a simple opt-in/out marketing permission doesn't really cut it any more.  Customers are being trained by social networks like Facebook that allow them to manage who can access their data and for what purpose.

For example, with a simple Facebook wall post I can choose whether to hide that post or not, increase or decrease further posts from that friend, unsubscribe from further communications from that friend or unfriend them completely.  With apps, I get further choices - deciding whether that app/partner can for example access my personal information, access my friends or post on my wall.

LinkedIn go one better and intelligently look to help you control preference.  If you subscribe to a group on LinkedIn and opt in to receive updates via email, LinkedIn will proactively dial-down the frequency of communications if you haven't visited the group for a while.


Preference centres essentially help to manage this by giving customers control over what communications they want to receive, about what topics, over what channels and at what frequency.  Email marketing specialist Adestra reports that preference centres can have a real impact on unsubscribe rates, suggesting that giving customers choice keeps them engaged.  Digital marketing specialists Smart Insights provide some advice on the use of preference centres suggesting that you don't offer what you can't deliver.  If you provide choice in terms of topic or frequency, make sure you have the content and capability to manage this.

If you google preference centres however, they seem to be a feature of email marketing but, little else.  This is I think needs to change.


Preference centres need to become a key feature of loyalty programmes to control preferences for all aspects of the programme and to help manage some of the innovations that are just around the corner.

• For gamification features, members are going to want control about what achievements are posted to which social channels and when.  This  "social currency" is where the key value is within gamification, but that value will only work if the member feels in control.  
• Vendor Relationship Management (VRM) functions will allow members to manage their loyalty data and which partners and/or applications can access this on their behalf.  Like Facebook, members will expect to be able to control both who has access to the data and what data is shared.  They'll also want to able to terminate these relationships at will.
• The "Internet of Things" will bring a host of interactions that can be recognised and rewarded, but members will want to be able to control what can be seen (and recorded) and what can't.  Just because my toothbrush can tweet it's usage, doesn't mean I want it to.

With an increased focus on "Big Data" and the headlong trend to get more and more data from more and more sources it can sometimes be easy to forget that there is a customer at the heart of that data and they'd actually like to be heard.

Sure, we can use the data to work out when someone might be pregnant based on their purchase patterns, and this can be really useful to both the retailer and the customer.

We could also just provide the customer with an easy way to tell us and to give them a big voice...

Pizza Express app - a glimpse into the future of VRM?

Pizza Express have launched a new iPhone app which redefines the space for retailers and at the same time provides a possible glimpse into both the future of payments and CRM (but more on that later).

The application includes a number of clever features such as allowing customers to view their past receipts (great if you need to expense something), create "favourite" restaurant locations and pre-book a table. The really interesting part however is a deal with PayPal that also allows a customer to pay their bill directly via their mobile by entering a unique 12 digit code printed on their receipt - letting the customer then simply get up and walk out as it's seamlessly integrated into the restaurants POS.

This in itself is an interesting loyalty play as Pizza Express get to know who the customer is, what they purchased and how often they come and there is not a loyalty point in sight. It's a compelling application that smooths the purchase process, making the next purchase more likely.

Whilst this is a really innovative app for Pizza Express it's actually part of a wider trend to disintermediate the payment eco-system and the functionality is quite similar to that offered by payment start-up Square.

Jack Dorsey, Square's founder is quoted as saying that they want to replace cash registers, wallets and loyalty cards. Rather than simply trying to replace a specific part of the existing process - exchanging the plastic card for the mobile phone - Square are actively trying to join the whole process up with Mr Dorsey saying:-

"We think it should be one system"

One really interesting innovation within Square is their application Card Case. This allows a customer to create a list of their favourite places and to setup a tab with them, simply paying by giving their name - no swipe of the card necessary. Like the Pizza Express app it also provides access to your receipts; in essence centralising your payment and purchase history and making it accessible.

This is a really interesting feature that both Pizza Express and Square have in common - the provision of customer data back to the customer - and it is becoming increasingly common as customers begin to expect their data to be collected, but increasingly consider it "their" data. When I shop at Tesco I know they are tracking my purchases, however when I go online and see new products added to my favourites list it begins to actually feel like my data.

This trend of providing information back to customers and giving them access to and ownership of it is also gathering pace.

Within websites and applications for example you are increasingly given the option to login via social networks such as Facebook or Twitter. While you still login, connecting via a social network provides a subtle change. You are actually granting permission to that application to connect to you rather than the other way round. At any time, I can review my relationships with different applications and simply close them down by removing the authorisation. I can also look at the permissions I've granted to those applications and change what information they can see.

There has been a transfer of power within identity management. It's now my identity and I can choose who has access to it, how much access they have and when I want to end it.

Imagine this trend being extended to all your interactions.

Within a supermarket loyalty programme for example you could link your purchase history to an app from a CPG manufacture like Unilever. You'd be doing this in the full knowledge that Unilever could then access your purchases and provide you with relevant offers (or reward points). You'd be choosing how to use your information for your benefit.

This is a really amazing thought and something that has been termed VRM or Vendor Relationship Management by Doc Searls, a veteran technology journalist and key founder of ProjectVRM which he describes, saying:-

Since the dawn of the Industrial Age, large companies have been working to "capture" and "lock" customers inside what we today call "silos" and "walled gardens."... ProjectVRM is a new Berkman Center research and development effort that is working to provide customers with tools that provide both independence from vendor lock-in and better ways of engaging with vendors -- on terms and by means that work better for both sides.

I love the idea of this - letting customers engage with brands on their terms with their data - and can see many applications across different industries.

How far this can go will be interesting to see (and to define), but the principle of making customer's data accessible to customers is a key trend. Facebook, Twitter et al. have already proved that making their systems open and giving customers control has only made their service more compelling.

Brands and loyalty programmes collecting customer data and interactions may have to take a leap of faith and empower the customer for the greater benefit of both the customer and the brand.

As Doc Searls said in his earlier thinking within the Cluetrain Manifesto:-

We are not seats or eyeballs or end users or consumers. We are human beings—and our reach exceeds your grasp. Deal with it."

Social CRM - evolution or revolution?

CRM is going Social. But isn't Social CRM just CRM done across social networks?

[pause] [wait for the flames]

The answer if you listen to the promoters of S-CRM is (quite vehemently) no, Social CRM is not a channel. It is not about using social networks to execute standard CRM practices.

In fact, in an interesting blog post by Wim Rampen, he makes some really excellent points about why Social CRM is simply not a channel extension of CRM - another way to speak customers - and instead has many unique properties that make it a more interactive, two way dialogue.

Whilst I get all of that - and largely agree, I guess my problem isn't with the Social aspect of S-CRM, it's with the CRM aspect.

If marketing started out as a way of focusing on the benefit the product provided, rather than on the product itself (so called Marketing Myopia) then CRM was a step forward again, focusing instead on the customer that was receiving the benefit and not just on the benefit itself. All customers weren't equal and so knowing which product to sell, what benefits to highlight, at what quantity and at what price became the mantra.

The buzz words were all about personalisation or 1 to 1 marketing - delivering the right message, to the right person, at the right time.

If only we could anticipate what you wanted to buy and nip in there quickly enough on a channel you were likely to read then we'd make a sale. You'd be happy as you got something you wanted and we'd be happy as we had sold it to you.

I think times are moving on though and if the focus on the product rather than the benefit was essentially Marketing Myopia - a blinkered view of the business a company was in - then focusing on the customer is potentially another blinkered view - almost a Social Myopia - in that it assumes that customers fit into a single neat box. There may be many different boxes, but each customer fits into each box.

This however is just not true and Will makes a very good point in his blog when he says:-

If there is one thing we (should) learn from emergent on-line communities it is that people join these communities to perform a certain job. This can be a social job, functional job or emotional jobs, mostly formed around a shared interest. It is these jobs & interests that bond the people in a community.

What this suggests (and it seems obvious really) is that it is not just about a customer segment, but almost customer personalities - or customer communities as Will defines them.

The problem with this thinking though is that if you begin to segment customers not just by social-demographic measures or exhibited behaviours but instead by community, a customer no longer fits into a neat box. I may be part of many communities - whether they're based around a passion like football, an interest like gardening or a function like my job. Even more complicated, these communities or personalities may vary by time.

My needs when doing the weekly shopping with a large shopping trolley are very different to when I'm walking the aisles on a Saturday evening with a basket - browsing DVDs, wine and ready cooked meals. I'm the same customer, reading the same newspaper, watching the same TV programmes - but I have different needs, desires and approach.

This is obviously difficult to have a view of in the physical world - but in the online world it is much easier to have a view of a persons different personalities or communities, and to interact with these at the appropriate time.

Will makes another interesting observation in a related blog when he says:-

Social Customer Relationship Management is not about managing the relationships with your Customers, it is (increasingly) about managing the knowledge-flows through the relationships of your Customers. And yes, you as a company maybe part of this eco-system of your Customers’ relationships. But please, don’t put yourself at the center of it.

I agree with this and it is why I think Social CRM is not really the right phrase - it isn't really Customer Relationship Marketing - in the traditional sense of trying to build a direct, single relationship with the customer and may be better phrased Customer Context Marketing - building numerous relationships centred around the relevant communities or personalities for a customer and being part of the conversation, not trying to own the conversation.

Whatever it's called however, it's clear that you can't simply apply existing CRM techniques in a social context. This would be similar to brands which simply "mobilised" their websites to create a mobile site - only to find it wasn't relevant to customers in the mobile context.

In the social space, context is king - it's not just the right message at the right time, but more the right message in the right context. Interestingly, a Forrester report designated 2010 as the era of Social Context based on the evolution of the Social Web with the author of the report quoted as saying:-

"The community will take charge and that's going to happen whether or not marketers or brands participate."

I think it's fair to say this also applies to the evolution of CRM - and communities and social context need to be at the heart of it. As the quote suggests, the community will take charge and if the interaction is not relevant and in context, it will be ignored.

Christmas is a time for giving

As the saying goes it is better to give than it is to receive. At this time of year when we're buying gifts for others, thoughts also tend to turn to charitable giving and the trend in recent years has been to give charitable gifts, with more and more charities packaging up their services as items which can be bought and given.

This year though has seen a marked change. Charitable donations have been heavily hit as people start to reign in their budgets by dispensing with any non-essential expenditure. Charitable donations are reportedly down 20%, but for many charities this is much higher; both Shelter and Oxfam are said to be laying off staff and the NSPCC has said it's making 150 of its 2,500 employees redundant. This is not unexpected but it obviously comes at a bad time with more and more people requiring the services of these charities. So desperate is the situation for many charities that the UK government is even considering some form of emergency loan to help charities ride out the crisis.

Charities are essentially like any other business in that they are looking to maximise income and minimise costs, and like any other business they are probably going to have to change how they go to market in the next year or so to become more nimble and proactive. Even in the largest corporate, marketing budgets are being reviewed and people want to make sure they get the best return on investment. There has been an increased focus recently on targeted marketing, sending communications to the right people at the right time to maximise responses and minimise costs. This is not a recent innovation, many programmes have been doing it for years and it's the main theme behind 1-2-1 marketing; however it has always been easier to do mass communications – they take less planning and less thought and provide "known" results.

With tighter budgets and tougher targets though, companies are looking for their loyalty programmes to work harder, using the detailed information they contain to target the customer segments with the most potential. I've no doubt many of the larger charities also have very sophisticated CRM solutions but they too are going to have to become smarter with how they utilise them. The balance from acquisition with blanket mailings may have to shift towards more retention mailings; these retention mailings may also have to change to ensure that they are sent to maximise responses. This may mean having to gather additional information to understand when donors want to be spoken to and what kind of information they want to receive – essentially tailoring the charitable experience and making it more personal and relevant.

In one example of where a small local charity changed its approach to a more targeted campaign to existing donors they saw an ROI of over 900%. After asking donors when they wanted to be communicated to and how often the charity ended up with a loyal customer database with over 50% indicating they wanted to be communicated to just once at Christmas. This saved a significant amount of money on sending mailings that were not wanted and when they did then send mailings, these were personalised to specific donor segments and communication preferences and saw a response rate of over 35%.

All of us, whether charities, businesses or individuals are going to have to think about how to get more value for our money in the near future – increasing income may not always be possible but reducing costs certainly is.

In the short term however what charities really need is our money…

Have a great Christmas and if you feel the need and don't have a preference, try Shelter or Salvation Army to make someone else's Christmas.