Les Girls

An avid reader of the New York Times and other trade and consumer publications, I pick up bits and pieces of marketing data and information that only bring forth the big picture when synthesized--one of the primary purposes of this blog.

Recently, a lot of information is hitting the media about girls and their mothers. To no surprise, women are attracted to the internet in droves, particularly to the high content and social networking sites. In the '80's, as editor of Catalog Age magazine (now called Mulit-Channel Merchant), I was repeatedly given new media demonstrations, sponsored by anyone seeking press, but most notably IBM at the time (It was pushing Prodigy--remember that--along with Sears). To IBM back then--and to so many others I can recall--I said that the web and e-commerce developers need to address the behaviors and attitudes of women before this channel would come into its own, providing avenues for reading, browsing, shopping, networking (gossiping)--the traditional domains of women.

Women's shopping behavior is not always "go-and-get" (or click), the hunt. It's foraging--browse and buy, compare and enjoy, especially with your friends. Now that the internet has adopted many of these more female behavioral modes into their sites--and as the social networks have evolved--women are becoming a dominant emarket source.

For example: (95% of mothers go online at least once a day--Source: MarketTools (San Francisco). According to a recent article in the NYT ("Sorry, Boys, This is Our Domain"):
". . . a study published in December by the Pew Internet & American Life Project found that among Web users ages 12 to 17, signficantly more girls than boys blog (35 percent of girls compared with 20 percent of boys) and create or work their own Web pages (32 percent of girls compared with 22 percent of boys).

Girls also eclipse boys when it comes to building or working on Web sites for other people and creating profiles on social networking sites (70 percent of girsl 15 to 17 have one, versus 57 percent of boys 15 to 17). Video posting was the sole area in which boys outdid girls: boys are almost twice as likely as girls to post video files.

Object-oriented behavior vs. love of narrative? You be the judge.

On a tangentially related topic: Tween girls behavior is pretty contradictory. Of course, they're 'tweens. Contrast the website www.stardoll.com/en/ with KGOY (kids getting older younger)phenomenon. At the Swedish site Stardoll, the average age of the girl visitor is 13.8, and she spends 2-2.5 hours a day at the site putting together virtual paper dolls, many of which are celebs, or decking herself out a "MeDoll." The site has 7.9 million unique visitors/month and is published in 15 languages.

Full-blown KGOY, with its accompanying indulgent "helicopter" parents and grandparents, is on view in the newest fad--make-up and "make-over" parties for little girls, some as young as 3 years old. Having a "primping party"--spa b-day parties for grade schoolers--is the new cool among a certain set of girls, with stores like Sweet & Sassy and Dashing Diva catering to these Britney or, rather, Hannah Montana wannabes (who would want to be Britney, really?).

What does this all mean? That we're raising a contingent of pedicured, active bloggers and web developers who lead their lives vicariously through the sleazy exploits of semi-talented, needy attention-grabbers? (Information taken from two recent NYT articles--"Dress Up for Dollars"--2.17.08) and "Skin Deep: Never Too Young for That First Pedicure--2.28.08). Don't think so. Sounds more like a lot of creativity yearning for an outlet, self-expression confined now to what's available. Art, music, home ec--much of this is cut out of current school systems. 4H, Girls Scouts, Camp Fire Girls, assemblies, bulletin boards--I guess not so popular any more.

To come: Flash Facts--interesting tidbits I happen to come across, appearing whenever they appear.

Passings: Max Raab, 1926-2008

Another visionary businessman--too few of whom remain today--died February 17, 2008, aged 82. A Renaissance man of the Greatest Generation, Raab founded Villager and JGHook, invented the shirtdress as well as the store-within-a-store concept to promote his Villager line. He went on to produce Walkabout, A Clockwork Orange, the Mummers documentary Strut!, and the lyrical film directed by Robert Downey, Sr., Rittenhouse Square. He also served in Occupied Japan with the U.S. Army.

For this little girl growing up in the beanfields of Oregon, Villager was IT. It defined everything that I aspired to--an East Coast casual sense of well-being and entitlement. How far was my world from that! Together with a stitched-down Pendleton reversible plaid skirt, a name collar white blouse from Charles F. Berg (a Portland specialty retailer catering to the well-heeled), and a blue blazer, Villager, Lanz, Weejuns, and more dressed and defined us female baby boomers, just before we overturned it all--favoring anything that was first of all outrageous, but more importantly individualistic.

In the '80's, Arthur Cinader with J. Crew would re-invent "preppy" and Ralph Lauren would skyrocket the look to Kennedy-esque level fantasy. Interestingly, all of these men were Jews giving tribute to the world of American wealth and power, eventually overtaking and overcoming it. As with Irving Berlin's White Christmas, looking from the outside in often brings forth the best. It's a distillation process born from exclusion and, sometimes, suffering that extracts and recognizes excellence while burning off the dross.

Body doubles and the truth

Ad Age reported today that Pfizer--"under Congressional pressure"--will pull its Lipitor ads that featured Dr. Robert Jarvik. The ads indicate clearly that he is a user of the product, but they are also somewhat misleading. I for one was always under the impression that he is a practicing cardiologist, not just the inventor of an artificial heart (http://www.adage.com/).

But then I also thought the ads gave the impression that he is a rower, a sport that we in Philadelphia take very seriously. Alas, not true either. The agency used a body double. But why did it take Pfizer so long to pull these ads? The New York Times first reported on this advertising snafu on February 7, 2008 (http://www.nytimes.com/).

Actually, I thought the ads featuring Dr. Jarvik undermined what they were supposed to do in the first place--achieve credibility for the product and establish authority. His reptilian features and arrogant manner did little to inspire confidence in me. And the use of a medical doctor to hawk product bordered on an area that lies somewhere between the Distasteful and the Unethical.

Now, whatever Pfizer hoped to achieve is further compromised.

Take away: Marketers beware of using endorsements--celebrity or otherwise. They often backfire or fall out of fashion or go into rehab. But if you do use them, for heaven's sake, don't compound the problem by letting a good storyboard idea overtake the truth.

Multi-Channel Marketing: A Single View of the Company

Five years old, but still relevant

Reprint from The Catalog Council Newsletter, 2002
Multi-Channel Marketing: Giving Customers A Single View Of The Company:
By Carolyn Gould and Kirk Kirkpatrick

The trade press abounds with statistics citing the value of multi-channel customers-those cherished souls whose loyalty to your company extends from store, to catalog, to Web. Or maybe just catalog to Web. Studies have shown these customers can be up to twice as valuable as single channel customers.

A Jupiter Research study done in March, however, maintains that multi-channel buyers are not what they are cracked up to be, indicating that only 10 percent of the 52 percent of U.S. consumers surveyed who have internet connections "have conducted online transactions across multiple channels through the same marketer."
The problem may lie, we believe, in what constitutes multi-channel behavior. If a catalog drives a buyer to your Web site, where a purchase is made, is that customer a multi-channel customer? An April 2002 study by shop.org indicates that 68 percent of all online customers who receive a catalog first shopped the catalog, then bought online.
Customers do not differentiate your brand by channel. You're the same company in print, on television, on the Web, on the phone, or in the store. Given the perceived value of these customers, why, then, is it that so many companies seem to be doing their level best to frustrate one of their most valuable assets-the multi-channel browsers and buyers-by not giving them a single view of the company?

Here are ten obstacles-presented David Letterman-style-that we believe may be preventing you from maximizing your multi-channel opportunities:
10. Overlooking obvious, low-tech solutions. You really don't need a CRM application to recognize and reward multi-channel customers. Just segment them by channel, analyze their behavior against single channel customers and start recognizing their value by treating them differently.

9. "Building" your brand at the expense of serving your customers efficiently in whatever channel they choose to shop or communicate with you. On the Web, sophisticated graphics can help build your brand but may stand in the way of communicating and selling effectively. You need to recognize that each channel has its own limitations and advantages. Trying to make the Web, for example, look exactly like your catalog may result in spending more money on design rather than making sales on product.

8. Not using your catalog/retail merchandising expertise and knowledge on the Web. Copy, merchandising and check out (or shopping cart) are three areas where many catalogers have consistently neglected to use their direct marketing expertise to close sales. Over the past six months, some improvements have been made, but just take a look at many Web sites to see that this is true. Many still present product lists in product categories, with little regard to merchandising the offers. Would you do that in your catalog? One exception among a few is Newport News, which was cited in July as one of the Top 25 Online Retailers by comScore Networks. Its success, as indicated by George Ittner, the company's chief executive, is due mostly to presenting fashion by themes and lifestyle trends, not strictly by product categories, which it also includes on the site.

7. Not empowering your CSRs or Sales Associates to make decisions affecting the customer, such as honoring the lowest price regardless of channel, and not giving them access to your Web site. Here is one place where customers can get angry fast. If a customer has seen a blouse on sale in the store, but doesn't have time to shop for it (probably because there are no sales associates available during her lunch hour), then why drive her crazy when she sees the product at full price at home on the Web? What do you do, when she calls up to find out why? Does your CSR automatically give her the lower price? She deserves it. After all, she cared enough about you to check out that blouse in three channels, even though she has yet to make a purchase.

6. Putting customers in "buckets" and not following up across channels to help build loyalty. All catalog customers are multi-channel customers. They, however, may not be your multi-channel customers. Obviously, everyone shops in a store, but maybe not in your store. Maybe they shop in your competitor's store or from their catalog and buy from you via the Web? Or perhaps, they buy only clothing from your Web site, but buy shoes from your store? Perhaps they might add a new channel if given the right offer?

Understanding customer behavior drives sales. There are an increasing number of new data products available that allow you to analyze customer behavior across channels, across product lines, across different types of businesses, and against direct competitors.
After all, there's only so much discretionary income available for all offers. What are you doing to maximize the possibility that your customers will continue to spend with you? What are you doing to ensure that prospects will find your offer compelling enough to change their established buying patterns?

5. Inadequately tracking customers across channels-and then cutting catalog circulation or Web spending based on "inadequate" information. Most tracking problems seem to stem from channel marketers believing that they "own" customers who shop from their channel - a Web customer, a catalog customer or a retail customer. We saw this turf war before when catalogers first went into retail in the eighties. Now we're seeing it again. Most turf wars stem from inadequate research-silo-ing the customer as it were-and from the Web and retails channels not wanting to bear some of the high cost of the catalog or the Web site. This practice, we believe, has to stop.

4. Not taking full advantage of the synergistic customer-focused opportunities that multi-channel marketing affords-such as catalog quick order on the Web site. Catalogers have made improvements here over the past several months, but more opportunities await than catalog quick order and putting your URL on your catalog or on in-store signage. Why not thank your customer via e-mail for their order placed by catalog? Shipping confirmations are yet another opportunity to communicate. Don't make them look like an order form. Why not upsell by embedding a product locator for a complementary product in the thank you message? Why not use the shipping confirmation for a quick survey or a coupon?

3. Letting your "techies" or systems drive the customer - and business - experience. Your customer - unless you're selling high tech products to engineers - probably does not approach shopping like your "techies" do. So, why do you let them design the customer interface? Your catalog savvy can match any usability study anytime. Having said that, however, conducting usability studies can expand your knowledge about how your customers and prospects maneuver through your Web site. It's an invaluable experience.

2. Not aligning your policies across all channels to present a cohesive view of your company; for example, not allowing your customers to purchase and/or return across all channels. We know from years of experience selling in both the retail and catalog environments that certain types of merchandise sell better in one channel than another. Retail presents an assortment; catalogs and the Internet are item-driven. You might promote these products differently in each channel - showcasing item-driven products on the Web and in the catalog - but you should, at least, give customers access to your entire inventory somewhere. Put your Web site and your catalog in the store. Backlist your store's inventory on the Web. Or, at least, tell them where they can make an in-store retail purchase conveniently. And if you have a lot of stores, like Sears or Circuit City, why not offer delivery from the retail store for orders placed by phone or Web?

1. Organizing in silos, which can result in losing the focus on your customer. The number-one challenge facing multi-channel retailers, we believe, is organizational. Organizing in silos hampers communication, creates turf wars over customers and dollars, and puts products over customers. Customer-centric marketing or CRM applications are not possible when the customer is being divided up. If you have separate retail, catalog, and Internet divisions, at least form a customer-focused task force that works to ensure that products, policy, pricing and brand remain consistent across all channels. Your aim should be not just to achieve a single view of the customer, but also to present to that customer a single view of the company.
This article is adapted from a presentation given at the Annual Catalog and Multi-Channel Marketing Conference Spring 2002.