We think, therefore, we are. What do you think?

Author Archive

Aug 6th, 2010 by Rolf Wulfsberg

The economic benefit of simplicity

In a recent speech at New York University’s Stern School of Business, Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner indicated that a top priority of the overhaul of the financial system “will be simplifying the forms consumers have to get credit cards, auto loans and mortgages.”1 Geithner said that the government “will move as quickly as possible to bring clarity to the new rules of finance.”

Should companies in the financial services industry see these requirements as yet another regulatory hurdle that will cost them money and aggravation or does simplification of communications actually represent a potential for economic benefit? Geithner indicated that the changes would enable consumers to “make better choices, borrow more responsibly and compare costs and services,” but rigorous research at Siegel+Gale reveals the potential for significant business benefits for the lenders as well.

Siegel+Gale’s Simplicity Laboratory rigorously analyzes communications on such pillars of simplicity as comprehension, relevance, clarity, and freshness. Analytical tools such as heat mapping are used to identify specific elements of communication that induce confusion.

But the Simplicity Laboratory goes further. It also measures the extent to which reduction of complexity and confusion leads to economic benefit. A recent test of student loan application forms, for example, revealed that a 12 percent improvement on perceived simplicity of the loan application led to an uptake of a corresponding 12 percent in consumers’ willingness to actually fill out and submit the form for approval.

The economic benefits of simplicity can manifest themselves in many ways. Testing of simplified forms for the Internal Revenue Service has demonstrated that such simplification leads to both increased payment of full amounts owed and reduced numbers of calls into IRS taxpayer service lines. Tests of documents sent to customers by financial institutions revealed that simpler communications were more likely to be read and saved for future reference. In addition, simplified communications significantly improve the relationship between the institution and the customer. Those who receive the less complex documents are more likely to believe the bank values and acts in the best interests of its customers. They are more likely to find the institution to be easy to do business with, and they are more likely to remain with the bank over time.

This discussion is not meant to diminish the frustration that companies must feel with the increasing burden of Federal regulation. It merely hopes to point out that remedying much of the complexity that has led to this regulation may in fact lead to positive outcomes rather than increased cost.

1 Fredrix, Emily and Crutsinger, Martin. “Geithner pledges quick action on new financial law.” Yahoo! News, August 2, 2010

Rolf Wulfsberg is the global director of quantitative research for the Siegel+Gale New York office.

Comments (1)

Permalink

Aug 6th, 2008 by Rolf Wulfsberg

Touch Point Management: Prioritizing the Investment Opportunities

Any company today that practices brand management understands the importance of its touch points with its customers and prospects. As Dr. Paul Temporal puts it:

"Brand management is, at its simplest, managing the consumer experience by managing all the interactions (touch points) that any current or potential customer has with your brand. It is about those "moments of truth" that we all know too well can make us happy or frustrated." (1)

Try searching "touch points" on Google. You should get over 1.4 million results. Refine the search to "managing touch points." You still get over 400,000 results. The fact is, touch point management is a critical issue to companies.

If you read these articles on managing touch points, you likely will be given the advice that one should initially identify those interactions that make the most difference—that is, you should prioritize the touch points. For example, in advising on how to manage digital touch points, Patrick Fleck offers a 10-point action plan with the following as points 4 and 5:

4. "Assess risk. Classify each touch-point by level of business risk. Identify and quantify, if possible, the revenue volume associated with each touch-point. In other words, measure what is at stake at each digital touch-point. Don’t forget intangibles—like brand.

5. Prioritize. Beginning with the highest risk touch-points, perform customer research as necessary to clearly identify customer goals and needs." (2)

This is very sound advice, but it is easier said than done. How do you determine the business risk associated with a specific touch point?

(more…)

Add Comment.

Permalink

Aug 4th, 2008 by Rolf Wulfsberg

Fact-Based Branding in Today’s Marketplace

Arguably, the most important aspects of a brand positioning are that it be relevant and credible. While ad agencies talk about “finding the white space” and “breaking through the clutter,” if that unique message doesn’t matter to buyers, or if they do not believe it is true, the brand strategy will fail.

To understand what is relevant to a brand’s target audience(s), we must understand how decision makers make brand choices. The figure below depicts the brand decision process. (Note: This gating process applies to almost any type of decision.) While the specific value structures that are used by decision makers in various buying environments may differ significantly (e.g., the scientist purchasing a mass spectrometer versus a teenager purchasing a DVD), all decision makers utilize a remarkably consistent process.

The decision-making process

Gate 1: Awareness
Gate 1 is basic awareness of the brand. It addresses the question, “Has the buyer heard of you?” If the decision maker has never heard of your brand, it plays no role in the selection. This doesn’t mean your brand won’t be purchased. Your brand may be white-labeled or an invisible “ingredient” element that is not customer facing. Business-to-business brands often play this role and debate whether there would be a return on investment (ROI) in becoming a “household” name (e.g., BASF’s mass advertising campaign several years ago to make consumers aware that “we don’t make many of the things you use; we make many of the things you use better”). Or you may produce a classic commodity product (e.g., nails at the local hardware store) that one purchases just because it is what the local hardware store carries. I am a do-it-yourselfer at home, yet I could not tell you who manufactures the nails in my workshop if my life depended on it. Or, one may simply purchase your unknown brand because of the product’s appearance and/or its packaging at the point of purchase.

Lack of awareness simply means that the buyer is neither seeking your brand nor giving you an advantage because he/she has heard of you. Research consistently shows that consumers are more likely to purchase a product from a company they have heard of compared to the same product from a company they have not heard of, even if they know almost nothing about the first company other than its name.

(more…)

Add Comment.

Permalink