July 29th, 2008
Those of you familiar with advertising may be familiar with the rule of 3. This rule states that in order for a consumer to actively think about purchasing your product or service you have to hit them with the advertisement 3 different times. For example if a company wants to sell you something they should send you an email, a direct mail letter and give you a phone call. This is just an example, but you get the point. This “rule” has been around quite some time and I think we need to re-examine its effectiveness.
The rule of 3 has been in existence pre-internet but I question its modern day utility. Let’s think about this for a moment. The overall attention span of humans is decreasing, meaning we are all getting a more and more ADD with how we perceive and interact with information. We don’t have the time to sit and watch ads anymore, we want things instantly and we want it our way, and we don’t get it, we hit the “back” or the “delete” button. So knowing this, do you think that marketers should spend their time trying to show you MORE ads? There has been a large backlash against telemarketers, spammers, blog pitchers, etc. for precisely this reason, people do not want to be spammed and people do not want to see more ads.
There are a couple of things that can happen. Either the rule of 3 will turn into the rule of 33, meaning that marketers are really going to have to bombard and spam the hell out of people in order to get their attention (and really irritate them). OR instead, the rule of 3 will switch from a metric of quantity to a metric of quality and relevancy. Instead of concentrating on how many times marketers need to advertise to someone to get their attention, marketers need to focus on the relevancy and the quality of those ads.
We can all see that our attention is diminishing we don’t want to be bombarded with ads and we don’t want to be spammed, so what is the solution? Focus on relevancy, it is far more effective to show someone 1 relevant ad than it is to show non-relevant ads in larger quantity. Of course we could combine the concepts and show more relevant ads, but remember over time marketers will reach a point of diminishing return, meaning that just because you show more relevant ads doesn’t mean you are going to get more purchases. There is a balance between relevancy and respecting your consumers. Show consumers relevant ads, but don’t bombard them. If you are tired of seeing ads, so are your consumers.
What do you think about the rule of 3? Do you find it effective or not?
Thanks for reading.
TAGS: advertising rule of 3, relevant advertising, spam advertising, spam marketing, target marketing
July 24th, 2008
It’s not always easy to reach your target audience and this is true regardless of what market you are in. Sometimes you have to go through several channels before you can reach the decision maker and the process can be time consuming and tedious. Even when you finally reach the decision maker, they can be unenthusiastic with your product or service and may simply turn you away. However, it’s not always necessary to go directly after the decision maker, instead you can go after the sphere of influence. Going after the sphere of influence accomplishes two main things. First of all it provides you with a warm introduction to the decision maker from an internal source. Second, it allows the decision maker to lean on his/her sphere for support or advice. This means that if you can get the sphere of influence on your side, you have a much better shot at getting the decision maker on your side as well.
A sphere of influence is comprised of the people that surround you and give you advice or ideas on various topics. Think of your friends, family, and co-workers as great examples of spheres of influence. If you want to find a good restaurant around town, you may ask your friends what they recommend. If you are looking to transition jobs or move to a new company you may ask your co-workers for advice. If you want advise on areas to relocate to or advice on how to budget finances you may ask a family member. All of these people make up your sphere of influence and these people are crucial because they shape you who are, what you consume, and how you live your life.
Similarly, in a corporate environment, decision makers have their own spheres of influence, usually co-workers. If you find that it is difficult to get directly to the decision maker then begin buiding relationships with the “sphere.” Notice I said building relationships, this doesn’t mean spamming someone or trying to pitch a product to everyone in the “sphere.” This means building relationships with them. For example, why not take out the receptionist to coffee or take the adminstrative assistant out to lunch? Usually there are co-decision makers that readily influence the ultimate decision. Build a relationships with them and then THEY will introduce you to the proper decision makers. Not only that, but if you can get can someone other than the decision maker to get excited about a product or a service, then you have a much better shot at getting the decision maker excited about your product or service as well.
How are you tapping into the “sphere of inluence?”
thanks for reading
Follow me on twitter
Connect with me on linkedin
Connect with me on facebook
TAGS: decision makers, sphere of influence, target audience, target marketing
