Is Talk of "Relationships" Confusing to Customers?

Good to see someone writing sense on this one. The relationship hype has gone on too long. Most 'relationships' are essentially one-sided: companies assume they exist and pepper 'their' customers with unwanted messages - failing to recongnise the disconnect between the idea of 'owning the customer' (dreadful concept!) and having an adult relationship (which is what most customers might want, most of the time).

Like everything else in marketing and branding these days, any relationship has to be on the customer's terms.

The problem highlighted is at its greatest with B2C markets, where it is usually difficult to be in personal direct contact with the customer. Good B2B marketng typically involves more or less regular face-to-face or other contacts, and is, therefore, simpler - but still cannot be presumed upon.

Graham

I learned along ago not to use the "R" word with customers because they simply laugh at it when it's used in the context of a business. "That's not a relationship" they say; and some follow up with the devestating "to me they're just a bill." Customers know with whom they have genuine relationships, and for the most part they are people.

But, let's not confuse their aversion to call them relationships with an absence of such relationships. As we well know, customers do develop strong, lasting emotional connections with companies and brands. Whether we call them relationships or not, they do exist. As you suggest, the challenge for companies is to determine with which customers it is possible to create such connections. For those who are unlikely to get that close, the best we can hope for maybe is to deliver an effective and attractive value proposition that will have them continuing to buy (retention) and hope that over time we can convert some of them to a closer emotional connection.

Jim Barnes

Jim

Wise words indeed.

But they also raise a question about what exactly customers have a 'connection' with. Is it the company, or its products. Or is it to the dream that they represent. Harley Davidson is a great example. Harley Davidson motorcycles themselves are not that good. They are low tech, they are heavy and they still break down too often. But the dream of rugged men overcoming the odds, of riding open roads with the wind in your hair, of freedom from the boredom of everyday life is enormously appealing. But the dream is not reality. It is created in the minds of generations of Harley riders and maintained through dozens of peer-organised HOG events. Harley Davidson the company also attends these events, but their presence is only a sideshow. The Harley brand really has been created by generations of riders for future generations of riders. It is the stuff of legend.

Other companies are not so lucky. They mostly sell dull products that are much like all their competitors products. Retention through habitual buying is all that many of them can hope for. And they support that through a broad range of tactical marketing activities. Should they invest money in developing customer loyalty? It depends. Particularly on what the payback from the investment is likely to be. And here is a problem in unsubstantiated talk about developing emotional connections. Where's the payback? If you can't show that there will be a payback from developing emotional connections. If you can't identify the retained customers who should be targeted for these activities. And if you don't know what activities you need to do and what they will cost over time, then you should be very careful before you squander scarce resources on what is just a marketer's dream.

Fulfilling customers' dreams can be very lucrative. But fulfilling marketers' dreams very rarely turn a profit.

Graham Hill
Independent CRM Consultant
Interim CRM Manager