So, yesterday I was wondering why all of my social accounts but LinkedIn were easily integrated into my Flock browser. Couldn’t find anything that addressed it in LinkedIn’s help section. Did some research and learned that LinkedIn was not giving out its API. So, I used the online support feature. Trying not to be too inflammatory, I asked: “is there a way to integrate Linkedin with my Flock browser?”

At 10:23 AM today, I received this response from Patrick B., whom I’m sure has a policy to be nice. Says Patrick, “At this time LinkedIn does not offer tools or plugins compatible with Flock.”

I replied to his email: “and when might you get around to it?” I’ll let you know if I hear anything.

On another note, got an email yesterday from my health insurance company saying they had not received the May payment. I knew they had been paid May 8, so I called their hotline. Young lady answers, tells me her name and asks how she can assist me. We do all the verifications and I tell her about the email. She says, “I am so sorry Mr. Hoover for that email. We show you paid that on the 8th. Please accept my apologies. ” Now, how hard was that? She acted like a person, took responsibility although she had nothing to do with the mistake.

UPDATE: This just in from Patrick B:

Hi Harry,

I am not sure. I will forward your feedback on to our product team.

Thank you,
Patrick B.
Customer Support Agent

bookmark to:

    - On average, small banner ads on mobile devices produce the same level of brand recall as the typical 30-second TV spot

- In a blinding glimpse of the obvious, MediaPost reports women in wealthy households make 2 of 3 of buying decisions

- Alternate forms of media such as downloading or watching TV programs “on demand” drives media revenue growth

- Conspicuous consumption and race: who spends more on what?

bookmark to:

I was thinking about what to write as my guest post for the THINKing blog. Since I write about social media specifically as it pertains to associations and non-profits, which seem to be (unnecessarily, but for obvious reasons), always trailing a bit behind the corporate world, I didn’t want to either be too specifically association-centered in this post or too “surface” or general for the audience of the THINking blog.

But I suddenly realized that that none of that really matters! Because it’s actually not about writing. The real lesson of social media is that it is teaching us - all of us - to LISTEN.

When I started my blog less than a year ago, I thought that it would be a way to get my thoughts about my industry (and its relationship to social media and innovation) on “paper”, that it would help me learn to write, that if I was lucky I’d get a few friends and colleagues commenting who would help me clarify my thoughts and deepen my understanding of whatever issues I was writing about. Which did happen, of course - but something far more interesting and far more meaningful happened at the same time. It opened a door to this whole new world where in order to participate fully, I had to listen and interact, not just talk! Listen by reading other’s blogs, by joining social networks where other bloggers were discussing similar things, by joining groups within groups, by reading what others shared or tagged, by subscribing to feeds on all sorts of relevant topics, by signing up to Twitter where the conversation is free flowing. Only once I started to really listen, did I see how to get real lasting value out of adding to the conversation.

All this listening can be intimidating, of course - I couldn’t do it all at once, I had to dip my toes in first, then the rest of me, little by little. Organizations need to find their own ways to do the same. We early adopters in the non-profit world like to argue about the how we get organizations to join the revolution. But really, it’s an internal, psychological shift that has to happen. Listening is something that historically and structurally organizations have never really known how to do!

But with the advent of everything 2.0 and the new power of the consumer to have a voice, companies began to be forced to listen, in a reactive fashion, because of customer complaints. New social technologies enabled people to complain about problems directly to the companies, and when they weren’t heard, between themselves about those companies, and then to anyone out there on the web. And for the first time, they began to really be heard. Because not only could they voice dissatisfaction, they could enable themselves to affect the future of a product, service or an entire company through joining forces with other customers who felt the same way. Companies started to take notice, to respond or change when pushed hard enough.

In the association/non-profit industry, (as elsewhere), organizations have structures in place that, as it turns out, are all about NOT listening. The Decision to Join was a massive study of over 16,000 individuals and why they choose to belong (or not) to associations. One of the study’s findings was that there is a huge disconnect between the perceptions of those at the top, about what matters to members about benefits and services, than those of the “rank-and-file” about what they think matters most to them. Which disproves the idea that the governance level people (the board and top level volunteer leadership) can represent the rest of the membership and act for them - maybe they don’t even know what the membership is really thinking. Sound familiar? We’re learning that we can’t truly know what our members / customers / audiences want - unless we ask, and unless we listen to what they tell us even when we don’t ask.

So, with the advent of the newly empowered “user” (apologies to Drew Olanoff), companies and associations have begun to realize that the world is shifting. We still market; we still advertise; we still brand; we still push our promotional messages; we still send communications out to existing audiences, target audiences and the world at large. But all of sudden, those audiences have the power to talk back - or to ACTIVELY IGNORE our messages by creating their own products (eg through open source technology), starting their own groups, finding the information they need elsewhere on the internet…

So organizations are realizing - some faster than others! - that they need to learn to listen, in order to participate, in order to reach those new and old audiences that may no longer feel the need to pay attention to their traditional push communications. They need to set up online alerts to get notified about what people are saying about them. They need to let go of the “myth of control“, and not be afraid of hearing negative things - which, on the whole, are much less frequent than they think. They need to start by listening.

There are different ways to listen. I found this on a site about learning disabilities (my formatting):

“It has been shown that people listen with a preferred listening approach:

Appreciative - listens in a relaxed manner, seeking enjoyment, entertainment, or inspiration.
Empathic - Listens without judging, is supportive of the speaker and learns from the experience of others.
Comprehensive - Listens to organize and make sense of information by understanding relationships among ideas.
Discerning - Listens to get complete information, understand the main message and determine important details.
Evaluative - Listens in order to make a decision based on information provided and may accept or reject message based on personal beliefs.

Most individual listen with more than one listening style. To be a good listener takes practice in becoming proficient in each style.

This refers to individuals, but organizations also need to learn how to listen in some of all of these ways, depending on the context. It’s not enough just to have the “technological translation tools” - technology will always move faster than any of us can really keep up! Many organizations get too worried about what platforms to use and what tools they need. Learning to listen is not about what tools you use to do it, it’s a change that has to happen from within in order to learn how to understand the language of this new world and stake your place in it.

Thanks for listening!

bookmark to:

Dear Valued Customer,

At Boca Java, we continue to strive to improve your experience with us, and with that in mind, we’d like to invite you to participate in this brief survey.

We’d like to thank you in advance for providing your feedback on our member benefits program. To show our appreciation, we will give you a bonus 1,000 Boca Bucks when you complete the survey. Your account will be credited within 4 – 6 weeks after survey completion. Again, thank you for your input and for your business.

Sincerely,

The Boca Java Customer Satisfaction Team

All right, class. Now, can anyone tell me what is wrong with this? Anyone?

Let’s review. Boca Java knows me. I have an account with them, have had for a while. They usually communicate with me by name, not as “Valued Customer”. Second, they sent it from the Customer Satisfaction Team. They should be trying to engender loyalty not satisfaction. We talked about the difference in that previous post. I won’t rehash. I will, however, drop a quote on you that should help convey the message. A former client once told me,

“The danger is we will aim low and hit our target.”

Satisfaction is a low target.

bookmark to:

A new story in B2B citing a Chief Marketing Officer Council study bears me out.

According to the study, only 6.8% of marketers said they have excellent knowledge of the customer when it comes to demographic, behavioral and psychographic data, while 51.9% said they have fair to little knowledge of the customer. “One of the problems is a lack of ownership of the customer relationship across the company,” said Jim Hintze, senior VP-marketing at Fujitsu, which provides hardware, software and services for the tele-communications industry.

As we discussed recently, research indicates that a 5 percent increase in customer loyalty can increase profitability by up to 85 percent. This should be enough to get a marketer off his fat Francis to do something about taking care of current business all the time, not just when the economy tightens. As my marketing mentor Bill Loeffler used to say, “the best new business program is doing great work for current clients.”

Can I get an Amen?

bookmark to:

These are the companies looking for higher customer satisfaction scores, not greater customer loyalty. “Harry,” you’re probably saying, “what’s the difference?” They are world’s apart.

A satisfied customer, according to author Jeffrey Gitomer in his book Customer Satisfaction Is Worthless, is one that felt “OK about dealing with you. Their needs were met. The product was OK. The service was OK…their overall feeling about you is between neutral and positive, and their experiences with you have not been negative.”

A loyal customer, Gitomer continues, “feels great about dealing with you…They will proactively refer someone to you. Their overall feeling about you is wonderful and their experiences with you have been memorable.” Now, that’s what I’m talking about.

Guess what happens when you have loyal customers. Research indicates that a 5 percent increase in customer loyalty can increase profitability by up to 85 percent. Do you want satisfaction or loyalty? Then, call you customers by name and treat them as individuals.

We’ll be talking more about this subject. Thank you, valued reader.

bookmark to:

Christian Bogh had the idea for a wiki, and he is the first to have asked to join as a writer to help update the list. Invitation sent, Christian. Drop me a note if you want to help compile the list.

With this wiki now online, we look forward to having others contribute to the list. I’ve broken the list into sections, one for media people and one for media outlets. If you make additions, please keep them in alphabetical order. Thanks.

bookmark to: