Thomas wrote today with a great question about lumpy ("dimensional," for you purists) direct mail: 

I am new to the marketing and promo business and I read with much interest the article on Lumpy Mail: An Engine for Lead Generation. I enjoy creating ideas and programs such as this and have already learned from you in this article. I do have one question that I hope you can shed some light on. When you send an item, to the extent that it lends itself to it do you use a printed item or a blank item and just let the item and letter do the talking. For instance, the hockey puck or volleyball. Did you have that printed with your clients information (i.e. name, message, etc)? Thanks for the time and any other hints that you might kick back to me are much appreciated. 

 My reply:  

Glad you liked the article, and thanks for writing. I avoid printing on the enclosed item. That way, the item creates more curiosity, leading recipients to read the sales letter. The moment you print anything on the item, even your company name, it begins to look like a promotional item whose job is to put your name in front of someone, thus reducing the curiosity factor. 

Another mistake to avoid is what I call a "payoff headline." Placing an item in a box with a great headline on the outside is good. Putting a headline inside that gives away your message is bad. Suppose, for instance, that you enclose a tennis ball. A good headline on the outside of the box might be, "WHACK! (Details inside.)" But if on the inside of the box lid you print, "We could make a great match," you've just alleviated any need to read the letter. (Not to mention the fact that wimpy puns like that make for awful strategy.) 

For examples of well-crafted (if I say so myself) lumpy mail letters, click here. Clicking on any of the images will bring up the letter so you can read it. 

 Followup from Thomas: 

One last question if you don't mind. Where do I find postal regulation or guideline related to mailing "lumpy mail" or is all of it contained in a box or envelope as a standard piece of mail. The reason that I ask is that years ago I received a tennis shoe in the mail. It had a mailing tag attached with a postage label on it though it was not "packaged" in any way. Anything you can add to this is much appreciated. 

 My reply: 

My experience has been that you can address, stamp and mail just about anything, as long as it's non-hazardous and not likely to fall apart en route. You also need to watch for state regs. For instance, sending produce to California or Hawaii is tricky, and sending alcohol to Utah is flat-out illegal. It's always wise to check in advance with a business mail specialist at your main Post Office. They won't guarantee their answer, but it's usually reliable. You may have noticed that we mailed the volleyball without a box. We just shrink-wrapped an addressed envelope to the ball. We did the same thing some years earlier when we mailed frisbees for Wells Fargo. Each time, however, I called my USPS rep be sure it would be OK. (I pity the letter carriers who had oodles of volleyballs rolling around in the back of the truck, much less had to carry them from office to office.) 

 —Steve Cuno
 
 
When I was the advertising manager of a decent-sized hospital chain, we used direct mail to invite people to tour our newly opened urgent care facility. Knowing that an incentive offer is the Number 2 strategic peg in successful direct mail (extra points for readers who can name Numbers 1 and 3), we promised each visitor a certificate for a free Baskin Robbins ice cream cone.

Within a few days, I received a note from an outraged consumer. He felt it was deplorable that “…a health care organization would encourage people to ingest ice cream.”

(Let me state here and now that I had no idea people were actually ingesting the stuff. We thought they would merely eat it.)

The outraged consumer’s helpful letter concluded with a suggestion that we offer bran muffins instead.

I’m not making this up.

The urgent care center was mobbed with visitors, and the nearest Baskin Robbins ran out of its most popular flavor. Clearly the promotion did its job. Bran muffins might have been healthier, but no one would have come to our party.

Steve Cuno
 
 
According to a new Adweek survey, 50% of respondents say that advertising "rarely" motivates them to switch brands, 11% say that advertising "never" influences their brand choices, and people 18-34 say they are most likely to be "swayed by ads." 

I suspect there may be some truth in Adweek's conclusions. But, if so, their methodology doesn't establish it.  

The worst way to learn what influences people is to ask them. People don't know what they do, why they do it, or what makes them do it. But they sure think they know! So, when you ask, they'll give you an answer, and most likely they will mean what they say. Trouble is, they are often mistaken. 

For a valid, reliable way to learn what influences people, put them in a real situation. Do not let them know that a test is afoot or that anyone is watching. Then note what they do. 

Our firm recently conducted such a test for the parent company of two national brands that you have heard of. They wanted to know which of the two brands was stronger. We divided their market into three segments. All three received identical offers; the only difference was whether the offers came from National Brand A, National Brand B, or Unknown Brand C. Then, we counted orders. All segments bought at the same rate. We repeated the test and obtained the same results. Post analysis showed that the brand made no difference; only the offer did.  

I might add that no one in the parent company was pleased. Some had championed one brand, some the other. The finding that neither brand had power offended both camps. Getting to the truth doesn't always make an agency popular. 

I should also add that this test in no way proved that brands are powerless in general. This was but one case. But it certainly suggests that you should challenge whether your brand has as much power as you'd like to believe.

Back to the research. Since I suspect Adweek was on to something, you might ask, why quibble over the methodology? The reason is that I can't be sure of a conclusion, even one that sounds reasonable, that is attained by faulty methodology. When I was in grade school, I heard that mixing yellow and blue paint makes green paint. I verified it by stealing my older brother's water color set (don't tell him—he still doesn't know) and mixing up some green for myself. I could have flipped a coin. Heads, yellow and blue make green; tails, they don't. I might have gotten the correct answer. But there would have been a 50% chance of getting the wrong one. 

I deal with the science behind fallacious versus reliable research in chapters 8 and 9 of my book Prove It Before You Promote It, so I'll stop here in deference to those who have read the book, and to try and influence those who haven't to buy copies for themselves and all of their friends. Right now, if you please.

Steve Cuno
 
 
One of the best times to get a customer to buy from you ... is right after that customer has bought from you. 

We just created a program for a client to take advantage of that. On the heels of any purchase, his Top and Second Tier customers receive an offer by mail. Conventional wisdom might tell you that we're mailing too soon, but experience shows otherwise. The mailing brings back 42% of Top Tier customers within a month, and 28% of Second Tier customers.

Anytime a customer makes a significant purchase, send an email or, better yet, a snail mail that (1) thanks the customer and (2) suggests an additional purchase. If you're a fundraiser, bring up a need and suggest an additional donation.

Steve Cuno
 
 
In my previous blog I alluded to the aversion people have to "missing out." The aversion is real. Repeated tests have shown that people are more motivated at the thought of not missing out than they are at the thought of gaining.

Copywriters should keep that in mind as they find ways to word benefits.

I realize this flies in the face of what we hear from positive mental attitude enthusiasts. So be it.

Steve Cuno
 
 
I'm pleased to report that good copy still matters.

For one client, we had done about all we could think of with the database and the offers, and with good results. The copy was already strong, but we wanted to see if we could make it work harder. So, we made the headlines more intriguing. We gave the body copy more personal appeal, capitalizing on people's aversion to missing out.

Sales went up.

Technological wizardy matters. But technology's ultimate goal is to drive people to a selling proposition. Copy necessarily drives that proposition. Always give it your best.

Steve Cuno
 
 
A new report is out. It's from an ad agency specializing in taglines. (Which is kind of like a meteorologist specializing in rain dances.) They just finished searching some 150 corporate taglines, created in 2009, for most-oft used words.

Why? The agency's president said, "A whole bushel of taglines reveals a brand lexicon that speaks volumes about what’s important in the minds of consumers."

Whoa, wait.

Following that logic, we could also conclude that "the dog ate my homework" is the excuse that convinces the most teachers, and that most of us believe the guy who says, "I subscribe for the articles." The question isn't how often a tactic is used. The question is whether it works.

Analyzing words in taglines (aka slogans) reveals what companies want to say. Not necessarily what consumers want to hear. 

Here's a more telling study you might want to try. Make a list of companies that measure individual ad results in terms of cost-per-sale. Call it Group A. Next, make a list of companies that rely on inferential measures, such as how many people recall an ad, or how many awards an ad wins. Call that one Group B. Now count the number of companies in each Group that uses taglines. 

I did this myself a few years ago. In my study, ads for every company in Group B sported at least one tagline. A few used two and one used three. Group A? Not one tagline. Which group do you suppose knows more about the alleged power of taglines?

The study is admittedly inferential, but it's a good start. Not all inferences are created equal. An inference from a consensus of expertise carries more weight than one from non-expert speculation. If any readers have tested slogan-versus-no-slogan in the real world, please click Comment and share.

Meanwhile, if you're looking for a great slogan, how about this one: Don't Waste Your Time. Use your energy to improve the parts of your ad that really count.

Steve Cuno
 
 
Dear CEO:

Next time you interview a marketing candidate, I suggest adding these questions:
  • What marketing books have you read lately? 
  • What marketing periodicals do you take?
  • Which publications are your favorites? Why?
  • Which publications would you recommend to be shredded and buried under a spot where nothing for human consumption is to be planted for at least seven years? Why?
It’s true that book learning isn’t everything. But it’s not nothing, either. A voracious consumer of marketing writing indicates someone who wants to grow and excel at the craft.

As an agency guy, I am surprised at the number of marketing decision makers I am doomed to work with who don’t know a damned thing about marketing. How did they get where they are? Maybe they write well (“PR and marketing are the same thing, right?”). Maybe they graduated with a B.S. in psych and a parent on the Board of Directors. Maybe they “just seemed to have a lot of good sense.” Such “reasons” are not unusual.

Thus I often find myself presenting a fully thought-out, proven strategy, only to have the marketing director fixate on the color of, say, a border. Wouldn’t a midnight blue be nicer?

We all start out in our careers underqualified. Heaven knows I did. At 25, I faked my way into the job of Marketing Communications Manager for a tri-state bank! But the difference is, I knew I was faking it. I was desperately afraid of being exposed.

So, rather than assume I knew it all because I had a PR degree and my card said “Marketing Director,” I devoured every marketing book I could find. I took Advertising Age, Adweek, DM News and others. I called on seasoned pros and picked their brains. I ran tests. I went to seminars. I developed a thirst for knowing how to do effective marketing. I wanted to be worth what I was getting paid. (Happily, in the process, I found out that real competence is more fulfilling than feigned competence.)

I still have that thirst. I still read every sound marketing book I can find. I still go to seminars. I still pick brains. I do these things even though I am the author of a marketing book myself, I write internationally published marketing articles, and I conduct my own marketing seminars.

So, back to your marketing candidate. Is this person someone who wants to continue growing—or who feels that, having attained a certain marketing je ne sais quoi, simply knows it all?
Warm regards,
Steve Cuno
 
 
The other day a friend asked if I, like her husband, need to be right all the time. I took no umbrage. I am perfectly capable, on occasion, of being a typical male. But in this case I was able to honestly answer, "No."

Direct marketing is all about finding out what works. Much of the time this puts us in the position of finding out that some idea we thought up, cherished and defended fell flat when given its real-world test. And that's OK. The thrill of learning trumps any disappointment.

Besides, every time I find out I'm wrong about something, it's an opportunity to get it right. Which is an opportunity for personal growth. That's something I hope never to be done with.

I thought of Michael Shermer, who said, "I am a skeptic not because I don't want to believe, but because I want to know." Amen. 

Incidentally, her husband took no umbrage, either. He readily admitted to needing to be right all the time. I had to compliment him at being so humble about his dogmatism.

Steve Cuno
 
 
One of my favorite clients is introducing a new product. He has strong opinions about the form it should take. So have I. But we both recognize that what his customers will buy is a question of fact, not opinion. So, together, we have devised a test to uncover the fact—before he goes too far in either direction. There will be no focus group or survey, because neither of these can reliably predict consumer behavior. Rather, this will be a valid, scientific test. Ah, for more clients like this one! Watch this blog. I hope to be be able to share the methodology and outcome soon.

Steve Cuno