Consumer Marketers, Looking to Test New Data Categories? Try These

We are all trying to create and sustain customers, using data to discover new patterns, new audiences, and new prospects — and that requires a lot of testing, and innovative data sets to explore (responsibly). Let’s make it experiential, as well as experimental.

We in the data marketing business love to test — at least, we should. And what we should test for is new data categories.

Expanding the marketing universe — and stretching the marketing budget — depends on higher efficiency in our lists, offers, and creative. We should be eager to test new proofs of concepts and new categories of data sources as they enter the market … if only to know whether or not they produce incrementally or otherwise.

I’m still surprised when I hear some of my data-vendor friends say that a good number of their clients pass on testing — and just go all-in on new lists and data sources. It seems like testing is still too much work for some, or they feel the only way to test is with an entire data source. Guess these client-side folks have money to burn, or are operating very much on-the-fly.

In some ways, digital marketers have it all over offline marketers in their ability to test, cycle, test again, and so on — often, many times over by the time a direct mail or direct-response print or broadcast test cycle has run its course. Yet, in this speed, have we sacrificed some quality in our prospecting strategies?

Online audience algorithms can produce some highly categorized niche segments, based on site visits and app usage — much of it de-identified, from a personal perspective. But how do these segments really stack up against a transaction database, or response lists, or even compiled lists, based on personally identifiable information? Thankfully, we can test for this, or even overlay data! (I am not advocating re-identification here, nor should you. Oh California, please don’t force us to identify non-PII. It’s soooo anti-privacy.)

Recently, the Direct Marketing Club of New York (DMCNY) held a very interesting breakfast program titled “Beyond Demographics: The Data You Need to Max Out Marketing Performance.”

Some Fresh Categories for New Reach and Affinity Discovery

Consider some of these data sources for testing:

  • Values Data — Test cohorts based on “shared values,” rather than simply choosing audiences based on demographics or psychographics. David Allison, principal, David Allison Inc., and author of “We Are All the Same Age Now,” pointed to his firm’s internal research that shows that popularly defined age groups rarely (or barely) match on what they agree upon, or value, as a generation. For example, Baby Boomers agree with each other about 13% of the time; Gen X, about 11% of the time; and Millennials, 15% of the time. Thus, targeting based on demographics alone can be extremely wasteful if the marketer is assuming some sort of shared attribute among them, other than age.However, when targeting based on shared “values” — Adventurers, Savers, and Techsters, and the like — all of a sudden affinities jump sky-high. In these cases, 89%, 76%, and 81%, respectively. These “valuegraphics” are based on “big data” segments — rather than small data (response lists, for example). Still, when compared to demographics targeting alone, shared-value targeting offers an eight-time lift!  Well, that’s worth testing.
  • Attitudinal Data — Another perspective on “beyond demographics” came from Mark Himmelsbach, co-founder, Episode Four, a creator of “brand hits,” such as this one for Charles Schwab. We often have stereotypical views of many demographic and other audience categories — and too many algorithms, he said. But analyze the data for unusual patterns, and suddenly you can find “who knew?” commonalities among certain audience segments that would wow any of us.Who knew that ultra-high net worth individuals are electronic dance music enthusiasts? Who knew that African-American married women are high on the e-sports genre? Or that young Hispanic/Latino adventurers are really into escape rooms? These discoveries give brands new advertising, product placement, and sponsorship opportunities, for example, which might otherwise go untapped. I’m still trying to get my head around these reported affinities, based no doubt by my own preconceptions.
  • Location Data — According to the World Economic Forum, 90% of the world will soon have or already has a supercomputer in their pocket — a smartphone. We’re actually closing in on four connected devices per person, reports Jeff White, founder and CEO, Gravy Analytics. With smartphones alone, as constant companions, we have a huge opportunity to leverage responsibly use of location data. Location can provide huge “affinity” targeting opportunities.A casual wine user might search and buy online his or her wine. But a wine aficionado visits a winery (Location X), or attends a wine tasting (Location Y), and now you have a true affinity opportunity. Granted, location data has a level of sensitivity that carries, more often than not, an opt-in requirement — but the marketing lift can be a significant reward for the advertiser who strategically applies such insights from it. Makes me want to tag every latitude and longitude for some hobby or interest!
  • Experiential Data — Live Nation may own concert venues, Ticketmaster, online game communities and music/culture festivals — but across these many first-party experiences, the company can provide deep analytics that help monetize its various audiences through enriched second-party relationships, said Anubhav Mehrotra, VP, Live Nation. Hilton, American Express, and Uber are just some of the brands Live Nation has teamed up with to enrich brand users with engaging experiences, such as backstage tours and “meet the artists.”

We are all trying to create and sustain customers, using data to discover new patterns, new audiences, and new prospects — and that requires a lot of testing, and innovative data sets to explore (responsibly). Let’s make it experiential, as well as experimental: I sure hope to meet some ultra-high-net-worth individuals at the next Electronic Dance Festival I attend. Or not.

Marketing and Beyond: The Evils of Inertia vs. a Bias to Act

Inertia is a terrible thing. In marketing and beyond, inertia breeds complacency. It defeats initiative. And often leaves us stuck in life and work situations that very much prevent progress.

“The chill of inertia, the failure to make an ongoing effort to progress, is the greatest barrier to success and happiness in life.” Yogananda

Inertia is a terrible thing.

In marketing and beyond, inertia breeds complacency. It defeats initiative. And often leaves us stuck in life and work situations that very much prevent progress.

In our free democracy, where we have full opportunity to act with will as citizens, as voters, as employees (and employers), as consumers, as individuals too often we find ourselves victims of inertia; often ,in the form of our own indifference, or bias to do nothing.

This summer I’ve seen three instances of inertia local, national and global, each with their own potential for terrible outcomes. All are preventable.

Inertia Hurts My Savings

For three of the past four years, my cooperative has sought to introduce a transfer fee where the seller of an apartment pays a fee to the cooperative as a sort of “kiss” goodbye. The funds generated from the sale are dedicated to a reserve where such proceeds can finance many predictable capital projects over time. Building such a reserve lessens the need for high maintenance increases and/or a series of one-off assessments to fund necessary capital projects. In a buoyant New York real estate market, the fee often can be recouped in the sale price. Having such a reserve in good standing also keeps our building attractive to buyers. These are all wonderful benefits of having a transfer fee in place and why it’s part of a fee structure in many New York co-ops.

Yet getting the necessary two-thirds of our shareholders to pass such a common-sense measure had been trying. Despite pleas and prods from the board, we could never muster enough votes at our annual meeting. It wasn’t that shareholders en masse opposed the proposal a far majority of those who voted did favor it it’s just that we couldn’t get enough favorable ballots to meet the mandatory two-thirds threshold of our governing rules. So this year, we took a “vote over time” approach, where we used the summer months to garner the two-thirds majority. It took one tremendous effort interacting as we could with each shareholder by phone, email and visits and we achieved our goal.

Still, nearly a third of shareholders did nothing, said nothing, and paid no attention … inertia. Even when confronted with a worse outcome, they failed to take notice and act. Thankfully, in this situation, enough neighbors picked up the slack. A potential financial emergency has been averted.

Inertia Hurts Democracy

It’s the day after Labor Day and now we start our march to vital mid-term elections. Left or right or in the middle, the decisions of our elected officials matter during the next two (Representatives), four (Governors) and six (Senators) years. Guess which age cohort of voter could hardly be bothered?

A new survey from NBC/GenForward reveals insights on inertia and ambivalence on a growing and key voter bloc Millennials and there’s a potential high price to pay through inertia.

Yes, that’s 43 percent who are uncertain or will probably not or definitely not vote. I understand why many younger individuals may have less faith in our political institutions than prior generations, but we get exactly what we deserve when we don’t show up to vote. Staying home cedes control to someone else. Is this purposefully not voting to stoke some imagined revolution or is this ambivalence? The effect, in any measure, is inertia and the status quo is hard to change when we keep sending the same people back to high office. Voting is the means to change, if you show up to vote.

We healthfully debate guns, police brutality, immigration, healthcare access and affordability, gender equality, climate change, conflicts of interest and Russian meddling. This voter bloc diverse as it is is the very generation who is empowered to make a difference! Folks, we just need to vote for the change and culture we believe in! There’s a lot more behind these survey results, I fear, that I have room to expand upon in this blog. Suffice it to say inertia, again, hurts all our interests.

Inertia Hurts Advertising

And now to a marketing issue wholly predictable and preventable. Europe has instituted a data freeze called the General Data Protection Regulation. I doubt it’s helpful to the average European and I know it is harmful to American interests. It actually institutes inertia as public policy.

Whole categories of beneficial information use in marketing the use of web-viewing and app-usage data for more relevant messaging, for example have been prohibited subject to opt-in permissions. Let’s revisit my co-op example: how many people opt-in to “anything” when it’s wholly desirable and beneficial for them to do so? Very few. Add a little doubt and fear political scandal, hypothetical evils not based in reality and the opt-ins are even harder to come by.

With a stroke of well-intended but ill-informed law, European Parliament slammed publishers, advertisers and consumers alike all in the name of privacy and they are proud of this accomplishment! Time will tell the true toll. But already, Europeans have less information, less choice, less competition, less revenue and more generic advertising all in the name of chasing ad tech profits as a privacy surrogate. These negative effects may not be immediately apparent to the consumer how do you count a beneficial offer not received? The familiar retort behind this law is “privacy is a fundamental human right.” Well, we can see how well that’s going again, all very predictable and preventable.

Let me be clear: I believe in privacy rights, too most certainly. [Disclosure, I work with a digital advertising privacy program for U.S. consumers, the YourAdChoices program.] But let’s make sure that mere annoyances a pop-up ad, for example don’t get conflated with government surveillance of citizens, or personal information misuse by the private sector where consumer harm is likely where privacy concerns as a society are truly legitimate. There are annoyances, which can be managed by ethics and best practices, and there are scenarios where privacy indeed is at risk. One needs to grade privacy protections accordingly. I’ve long argued U.S.’s current and extensive privacy regimen a thoughtful sectoral approach dutifully enforced, complemented by ethics, self-regulation and business contracts is far superior to Europe’s one-size-fits-all prescriptive approach. In short, Europe has mandated that inertia freeze (or even undo) responsible data use. Thus, in this zeal for consent, the tremendous flow of benefits accrued through responsible data deployment largely ceases.

In short, I’m hopeful, stateside, that we shun this European import. Transparency, choice, security and sensitive data we have effective, existing means in the United States to deliver toward these laudable aims. We have other ways to assert such privacy protections, yet we still allow beneficial information flows and innovation to continue.

So, will this be a summer and fall where we let inertia win? Or will we have a bias to act, to keep all-too-predictable sorry outcomes from happening?