You are currently browsing the matt klawitter digital communications marketing archives for September, 2007.

Invest Your Dollars in Research

September 21st, 2007

This week, I met with members of a marketing team from another major employer in the area. They wanted to talk about our methods, how we approach our assignments, and more importantly how we created the new nd.edu.

Each and every marketing communication project has its own unique challenges, yet some are always similar. This is especially true when dealing with marketing on the Web. If you take away the strategies, goals, and tactics of the assignment, the remainder is something I see during every project on which I work. I realized this during my meeting.

The question was asked where to best invest (or spend) marketing budget dollars. That is, is it best to invest out-of-pocket dollars into creative (design, images, photog.) or perhaps in the technical (development, coding, servers) or maybe even elsewhere? This is especially tricky if you seek to balance in-house talent (usually over capacity) with best of industry vendors that can help give you a booster-shot. I feel the answer is simple. And, this answer is the common bond that all major Web marketing projects share.

Invest your dollars in research first, then deliverables.

It sounds like common sense, but I am amazed how rarely this occurs. Any major Web marketing project that skips right to tactics and deliverables is not a marketing project. That is simply work to improve appearances. It’s a fake-out. A healthy, impactful, and measurable Web marketing project begins with an investment in knowledge.

What kind of knowledge is needed?

At least 20-25% of your budget should first be spent towards learning as much as possible about your end-users. This does not mean just looking at webstats, hits, and other clichéd metrics. You need to know demographics, behaviors, traits, and real personas of the people you are seeking to reach or impact. Each and every decision you make about tactics, creative, and technology should be based on in-depth knowledge of your real users.

If you base decisions on your gut or anecdotal evidence, then you are doomed. If you work with someone that feels research, focus groups, and surveys are a waste of money, then simply ask that person to produce for you detailed quantitative and qualitative demographics about your users. No chance.

Here’s the difference:

  • A web project without research: “Let’s design a new website.”
  • A web project with research: “We will reach emerging, young customers with on-line services in order to seed a relationship early. We will balance basic web marketing with traditional print for the senior customers.”

If you don’t have the knowledge, you are just making a pretty site. If you do have the knowledge, you make an impact.

Posted in Strategy | Permalink

Other Recent Posts:

Passionate Users Inspire Greatness

September 4th, 2007

One week has passed since we launched the new ND.edu website. It seems to me that the effect we’ve had on the community is polarizing. That is, based on the feedback alone, people either really, really love the new site or they really, really hate it. I’m sure plenty of people are in the middle, but that population is not likely to respond to feedback requests.

So, as the lead on the project, what are my thoughts? How have I reacted to the feedback from this passionate, intelligent, articulate, and motivated community?

I have enjoyed every minute.

We moved the needle.

I am proud of the ND.edu community for many reasons. First, even those that give the most critical, judgmental, and cutting responses do so because they care. Those who praise the site have equal (if not more) passion for how the University represents itself online than do the critics. Everyone has a personal impression of Notre Dame – emotion is high – people care deeply for this place. How can I get rattled if feedback is based on a passion for this place?

Second, the community understands that this huge leap forward was necessary. The biggest change has been the focus (at least on the homepage) to video and immersive experiences. There appears to be a generational gap between those who like this feature and those that do not. But, this is not always the norm. Fundamentally, we designed the homepage to feature the video experience for those who wish to interact with it. And for those daily visitors that do not want this interface, they can easily go around it. Even those people that believe they do not want video on the homepage are giving it a chance. Statistics prove that page durations and video streams are sky-high. It is quite an adjustment from the previous site, and most users are getting used to this new style of communication. It is a three-dimensional site now.

To prove this point, last Friday we utilized the video carousel’s full power. We created a space on the carousel for the new “Fighting Disease in Haiti” video piece that also played during half-time of the football game versus Georgia Tech. The response has been very positive – the video itself is compelling, emotional, and intensely Notre Dame.

I wonder: with such a powerful message to share to the community (and the world), how would we have done this before the new ND.edu?

Love it or hate it, we’ve created a new style of communication for ND.edu. I am pleased that we’ve made an impact and started a discussion about how our University deals with innovation, technology, and the future of communication. I would have been seriously disappointed if our launch had no impact on the community. I now believe that polarized, passionate users inspire greatness.

Posted in Analysis | Permalink

Other Recent Posts:

 

Powered by Wordpress - Entries (RSS)