Post by account_disabled on Dec 23, 2023 9:54:16 GMT
Those who work professionally in the field of marketing and advertising are immersed in an eternally mutable universe in which two days are rarely the same. Marketing is fed every day with a plethora of new things and new possibilities. This discipline is also treated daily with succulent nutrients in the form of new knowledge. However, and despite the fact that marketing necessarily pays homage to news, fluttering around it there are a series of myths that, even though they are lies and have been refuted thousands of times, refuse to die. And they continue to be invoked in a kind of prayer that goes around and around like a ferris wheel (as if by being repeated over and over again they would become more truthful). In an article for Horizont Peter Kiefe takes the lid off some of these myths: 1. “Customer loyalty is the greatest incentive for growth” This old myth takes root in the book The Loyalty Effect published by Fred Reicheld back in 1996. According to this work, companies can increase their profits by up to 100% if they manage to retain up to 5% more of their customers.
The thesis sounds extraordinarily tempting, but the truth is that the calculations on which it is based are based above all and above all on mere assumptions. The Loyalty Effect actually revolves Phone Number List around a thought experiment and that experiment has already been refuted with hard data by the prestigious Ehrenberg-Bass Institute for Marketing Science. When it comes to making a growth spurt, it actually makes more sense for brands to focus on all their customer categories, since the real growth potential is hidden in the so-called "light users." The group of "light users" is so vast that it is much more effective to try to convince a small part of the consumers assigned to this category than to retain the majority of a few "heavy users". 2. "People don't buy what you do but why you do it" Simon Sinek's so-called "Golden Circle" is both a curse and a blessing. It is true that shared convictions and having a certain sense of purpose are absolutely essential factors in building the foundations of a solid relationship between an employer brand and its employees.
Even so, this thesis is only partially true when it comes to the relationships between brands and consumers. The why can help provide a certain sense of differentiation to the brand. But only if the belief underlying this why is really relevant from the point of view of the products and services offered by the brand in question. In this sense, the reason for brands should translate into added value when it comes to satisfying consumer needs. “Organizing the world's information and making it universally accessible” is, for example, the why of Google and in this case people have no problem buying that why because it is closely linked to their own needs. On the contrary, Starbucks ' why is to "inspire and nourish the human spirit" and is so far removed from its palette of products and services that we could safely say that the famous brand is successful not because of this abstruse why but rather despite him. 3. «We need something new, we cannot allow the message to wear out» Severely battered by the anxiety that their campaigns potentially have little impact, many brands tire extraordinarily quickly of the campaigns they implement.
The thesis sounds extraordinarily tempting, but the truth is that the calculations on which it is based are based above all and above all on mere assumptions. The Loyalty Effect actually revolves Phone Number List around a thought experiment and that experiment has already been refuted with hard data by the prestigious Ehrenberg-Bass Institute for Marketing Science. When it comes to making a growth spurt, it actually makes more sense for brands to focus on all their customer categories, since the real growth potential is hidden in the so-called "light users." The group of "light users" is so vast that it is much more effective to try to convince a small part of the consumers assigned to this category than to retain the majority of a few "heavy users". 2. "People don't buy what you do but why you do it" Simon Sinek's so-called "Golden Circle" is both a curse and a blessing. It is true that shared convictions and having a certain sense of purpose are absolutely essential factors in building the foundations of a solid relationship between an employer brand and its employees.
Even so, this thesis is only partially true when it comes to the relationships between brands and consumers. The why can help provide a certain sense of differentiation to the brand. But only if the belief underlying this why is really relevant from the point of view of the products and services offered by the brand in question. In this sense, the reason for brands should translate into added value when it comes to satisfying consumer needs. “Organizing the world's information and making it universally accessible” is, for example, the why of Google and in this case people have no problem buying that why because it is closely linked to their own needs. On the contrary, Starbucks ' why is to "inspire and nourish the human spirit" and is so far removed from its palette of products and services that we could safely say that the famous brand is successful not because of this abstruse why but rather despite him. 3. «We need something new, we cannot allow the message to wear out» Severely battered by the anxiety that their campaigns potentially have little impact, many brands tire extraordinarily quickly of the campaigns they implement.