Posts Tagged ‘harris interactive’

Recently, Harris Interactive conducted a poll about consumer’s information-gathering process for their most recent purchase. The poll’s purpose was to identify what carries more weight: face-to-face WOM or online (including social) WOM, both prior to and downstream from the purchase.

Brandweek summarized, “When respondents were asked to identify the various methods and sources they used, 21 percent cited face-to-face with a person not associated with the company, such as a family member, business colleague or friend. Another 12 percent said they got such information through a phone call with someone of this sort … Just 4 percent mentioned getting such guidance via public online social-networking sites, such as Facebook, LinkedIn or MySpace. Another 4 percent mentioned private social networking sites, such as customer communities.”

From Harris’ press release: “Adults who had a memorable product purchase, use or service experience were asked if they had taken any type of downstream action and almost four in five said they had (79%). More than seven in ten who had taken an action (72%) said they had taken positive action with 57% communicating about their positive experience with others while 41% specifically recommended that someone make a purchase.”

Harris had a few takeaways. A couple of them:

1. “Methods of obtaining information and post-experience communication is much more likely to occur through a mix of traditional and new-age consumer generated (social) media, both offline and online. Further, few are using social networking tools.”

2. “Communication to others about a product or service experience is more likely to occur than recommendation, and there is much variability by product/service category. Also, most post-experience communication takes place offline.”

I have a couple of opinions on this poll.

FIRST, MY LAST PURCHASE …

My last purchase was a pair of running shoes. So what lead to me to this purchase?

1.   I talked to several friends who also run to get their advice.

2.  I checked out runnersworld.com, runningtimes.com, and a handful of other credible online sources for runners.

3. I used various guides on these sites to determine the type of shoe that i should be running in.

4. After identifying about 5 or so shoes that fit the bill and my price range, I read dozens of customer reviews to learn about the fit and wear of the shoe.

5. I went to my local Dick’s Sporting Goods and tried two of them on. Based on how they fit me, I picked one; the Nike Air Span 6.
(Note: I’ve also done this by going to Zappos.com and ordering a couple different models and sizes and then returning the ones I don’t keep)

MY PURCHASE PROCESS: Almost completely online. My face-to-face inquiries factored very little into the process.

Of course, this might be a crappy example considering the fit of shoe is such a personal thing. But, then again, aren’t a lot of our purchases personal? Don’t we take a BBQ grill, or a car stereo, or a refrigerator just as seriously? In fact, I’d likely use the same process to buy any one of those things.

Downstream: I had a great experience with the staff at my local Dick’s, and told my friends about it (via Twitter). That helped Dicks. These shoes are also working out really well for me, so I’ve told a few friends (face-to-face) about some of the features that make me like them, in the event they need something similar one day. That helped Nike.

MY REPONSE TO THE HARRIS POLL

Naturally, I zeroed in on the “social networking” stuff. I was left with a few takeaways of my own:

1. Downstream Chatter.

Harris’ takeaway that the post-purchase communication is happening offline – I’d agree with that to a certain extent. In my world – the agency world, infused heavily with digital – I see a lot of post-purchase chatter happening online; particularly on Twitter and Facebook. Maybe this is a sign that brands (and agencies) need to find a way to stimulate more of that dialoge online with people “not in my world.” It might be an easier sell with Millennials, in fact.

2. What’s online WOM?

Notice that MySpace, Facebook and LinkedIn weren’t in my purchase process. And why would they be? What was I going to do in Facebook? Maybe put in my status “what running shoes should i get” and wait for a flurry of responses? However, running community websites, running publications, and online reviews from Zappos.com and other websites were high on my list. And while I asked friends for their advice (face-to-face), my decision was wholly made online. The reviews I read on various websites, as well as the editorial reviews on Runner’s World, were very WOM. They’re educated, first hand-feedback based on experience and industry knowledge.

3. The role of social networks.

I appreciate that Harris did this poll. It may bring some clarity to the role of social neworks in marketing. So many brands run into social without understanding how it’s used by their audience. They just want to be there because they feel like they should. The truth is that  - at least not right now – consumers aren’t running to Facebook to decide what shoes to buy.

Now, I am not suggesting that the takeaway from this study is that brands should ignore social. The opportunities lie in finding the RIGHT WAY to be a part of the social conversation.

Maybe I didn’t use Facebook to select my shoes. But that doesn’t mean that I wouldn’t want to interact with Nike on Facebook. It’s important to be where your customers are, engage with them, monitor the buzz around your brand, and find ways to connect with your audience to drive action. For example, Nike could use Facebook for offers, giveaways and contests to stimulate action. Or they could promote their Nike+ insert on Facebook, or create a running club there. But then again, they may not need to with nikeplus.com – a GREAT example of how a big brand is using social to drive interest and participation with their brand. Look at that. Did I just create WOM?