Scientific American just emailed me a survey. An avid reader, I was eager to respond. (I admit that I was also eager for an excuse to take a momentary break from the project I was working on at the time.) 

A survey question asking readers to opine as to whether a gift offer would motivate them to subscribe troubled me. That’s no way to determine direct marketing strategy. So, I emailed them. Yeah, like they care what I think.

I sent the email to the link they provide for “feedback or concerns.” It bounced back as “undeliverable.” 

Not that my effort in writing it was wasted. My unasked-for advice might be useful to others doing market research, so I have pasted it below. If you know anyone at Scientific American whom you think might be interested, please send him or her a link to this post.

—Steve Cuno 

My would-be advice to Scientific American

May I make an observation about your survey questions regarding gift offers? 

Any direct response pro — which I happen to be — will tell you never to ask such a thing in a survey. People don't know and cannot accurately predict what will motivate them to purchase. The valid way to find out if a gift offer works is to test it in the real world and count the replies.

That said, I can already tell you the answer, because our industry has been testing gift offers nonstop for over 100 years. The answer is an unqualified YES. Gift offers always increase sales. 

Perhaps I should qualify that. The right gift offers always increase sales. Which is the right one? Again, don't ask your subscribers. Test various gifts and see which one emerges as the winner. Then, take that winner and "roll it out" to the rest of your market. Based on my experience, I'm betting that offering an item like a calculator, Starbucks gift card or duffle bag will outperform offering literature. But I've been wrong. Which is why I always test. 

In short, I recommend a more scientific approach. Which would seem to make sense, given who you are.

I love the publication. Please keep up the great work.
 
 
Beware statistics. Or at least beware how people wield them.

A friend was at work on a public service campaign aimed at meth abuse. Research had shown that young moms represented more addicts than any other demographic, and my friend's objective was to change that. I facetiously suggested that one way of attaining that objective would be to get other groups to increase their usage until it outstripped that of young moms.

As wisecracks often do, this one illustrates a problem. Statistics comparing where you are relative to where someone else is can be meaningless. A better question is, where are you relative to where you wish to be?

Utahans raise a fuss when they learn that their state spends less than any other per student on education. Yet by itself, this statistic isn't necessarily damning. If all other states suddenly dropped their spending to less than Utah's, would Utah's level of spending suddenly be OK? Never mind what other states spend. The real question is whether Utah spends enough, spends it wisely and spends it effectively. While I suspect the answer to all of the above is no, comparing Utah's spending to that of other states doesn't establish as much.

—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
 
 
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
 
 
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