Marketing

Despite considerable research on customer retention and word-of-mouth referrals, it has always been difficult quantifying their contributions to the bottom line. Using a metric known as "net promoter score," the author believes firms can now measure the dollar value of customers based on satisfaction levels. The author administered a survey designed to assess customer relationships to thousands of customers in six industries. He determined that customers tend to cluster into one of three categories: promoters, passives and detractors. Promoters represent more than 80% of the positive referrals a company receives, while detractors represent more than 80% of the negative word-of-mouth. NPS is determined by subtracting the percentage of detractors from the percentage of promoters. Using this data, a firm can quantify the value of a customer by tracking five categories: retention rate, profit margins, spending, cost efficiencies and word-of-mouth. The firm can then use NPS to make strategic decisions by targeting its efforts to leverage the most value for its customer service dollar. For instance, American Express targets its promoters with premium credit cards in an effort to increase profitability, and GE sends cross-functional teams to its detractors in order to prevent the spread of negative word-of-mouth.

The growing popularity of mobile hand-held devices is opening up intriguing new possibilities for what the authors refer to as "brand in the hand" marketing. Because individuals can be, and often are, connected anytime and anyplace, mobile marketing can be used to collect data through the wireless Internet to determine not only the exact location of a consumer at a given time, but also why that individual might be there. With that information, more meaningful or relevant advertising messages or promotions can be delivered to the consumer on a mobile device. Before companies rush into this new marketing arena, though, they need to understand some fundamental issues. How does mobile marketing differ from traditional approaches? When should a company pursue a "brand in the hand" initiative? Does mobile marketing have to be integrated within an overall marketing strategy and, if so, how? Moreover, how should companies address privacy issues? These are of particular concern, in part because of the personal nature of mobile devices.

Asking customers about their wants increases the probability that they will be dissatisfied.

Too much familiarity with customers can backfire, but engaging in multisided conversations can manage the risks.

Recent research has greatly improved management's ability to anticipate customer wants.

In many companies, there has been a marked fall-off in the influence, stature and significance of the corporate marketing department. Today, marketing is often less of a corporate function and more a diaspora of skills and capabilities spread across the organization. By itself, the disintegration of the marketing center is not a cause for concern, argue the authors, but the decline of core marketing competence certainly is. For this article, the authors undertook a series of in-depth interviews with leading marketing executives and chief executive officers to clarify the root causes of the decline. Their research identifies eight distinct factors that contribute to marketing's waning influence -- among them a worrying "short-termism," significant shifts in channel power and marketing's inability to document its contribution to business results. The consequences are not immediate, but they are far-reaching: Absent a core of marketing competence, say the authors, the corporate brand will suffer, product innovation will weaken, and prices will be less robust. However, the fact that marketing does continue to influence corporate strategy in some companies suggests there are opportunities and viable approaches for building marketing competence as a source of competitive advantage. The article suggests four key issues facing marketing management, placing the focus not on restoration of the corporate marketing function but on the rebuilding of marketing competence across the organization.

RESEARCH BRIEF: A dynamic array of different customer types makes for a stronger business model.

People categorize themselves on the basis of demographics, social roles and shared consumption patterns, and these various identities are both numerous and fluid, changing over an individual's lifetime and across situations. That fact is not fully recognized by traditional demographic and psychographic techniques, and the labels that consumers use to define who they are do not necessarily correspond to the variables that marketers typically rely on. A new approach -- identity marketing -- better captures the complex process of how people's sense of who they are influences their purchase decisions. To be sure, the complexity of identity-based judgments presents both opportunities and obstacles for marketers, but companies often fail to appreciate this. In fact, many marketing blunders can be traced back to a fundamental misunderstanding of customer identity. Common mistakes include the following: (1) selling new products solely on their features, (2) failing to solidify first-mover advantage, (3) fighting the competition head-on, (4) sticking with what's worked before, (5) underestimating low-involvement products, and (6) attacking negative word-of-mouth. Identity marketing helps companies avoid such mistakes by providing a deeper understanding of how customers become strongly attracted to the brands and products that are linked to their multiple -- and sometimes seemingly contradictory -- identities.

To optimize a portfolio of brands, companies can use a five-step approach. First, managers decide on the brands to review. Second, they analyze all of the brands on the resulting short list with respect to each one's contribution to the company. Third, they assess the brands according to current market performance (traction) and future prospects (momentum). Fourth, the brands are classified along those three dimensions (contribution, traction and momentum), allowing managers to identify both challenges and opportunities. The process enables companies to sort their brands into different categories: power (a brand that needs to be defended ferociously and deployed judiciously), sleeper (a brand that with a little fast tracking can build into a power brand), slider (a valuable brand that has lost momentum, is slipping backwards and needs immediate intervention to prevent meltdown), soldier (a solid brand that contributes quietly without the need for much management attention), black hole (a brand that sucks up resources and may or may not ever pay out), rocket (a brand that is on its way to power-brand status), wallflower (a small, underappreciated brand with very loyal customers, often underpriced and undermarketed) and discard (a brand that should have been mothballed years ago). Lastly, the objectives for each individual brand are tied together into an overall plan, which will include any changes to the roster, brand architecture and resource allocation.

The good word from devoted customers may not always be the most effective promotional tool.