I read a great article from The Marketing Student that covered how Generation Y is changing marketing and I’d like to expand a bit on David’s ideas.
First, a quick rundown of David’s concepts (Full Article Here). David graphed the communication habits of Boomers, Gen X-ers, and Generation Y.
David’s post continues on to discuss how these channels are used, and I’d like to take a look at how this affects direct marketers.
Direct marketing to the Boomer generation was the easiest; after all, postal mail and phone calls were regular forms of communication. Although I laugh at the thought, I can imagine people used to rush to the mailbox to see if they had any letters. Lacing this communication with the casual mailer or telemarketing call was successful because people trusted that medium for its relevancy.
For Gen-X it was similar, but AOL added a bit more to the mix. Direct mailers were overwhelming, and the slowness of snail-mail reduced its relevancy. A letter from a mailer was never as up-to-date as an e-mail or instant message; a direct mailer, was never as relevant as a newsletter or marketing e-mail. Interestingly enough, in David’s graphs he mentions instant message for Generation Y, but not for Gen-X; if you remember AOL had both e-mail and instant message. While IM would eventually win out as more relevant than e-mail, it wasn’t an easy medium to target as it didn’t have an “idle” feature that would allow messages to be delivered while the user was offline. This is probably one of the reasons IM has survived, somewhat unregulated, and has not had the same fall-out as e-mail.
Users are more likely to trust and respond to a medium that is used to keep in touch with what society, and more specifically, friends are doing.
Generation Y is overloaded with channels. From social networks to e-mail and instant message, most of them are noise. Thanks to GMail’s powerful SPAM filter, e-mail has been somewhat saved, but Gen Y does not check personal e-mail as frequently as their elders. Gen Y is also wary of signing up for newsletters or registering for a website with their actual e-mail (read: Gen-Y knows how direct marketers handle e-mail). Because e-mail is less relevant to Gen Y’s friends and family, it is a less effective marketing channel. Wall posts and PM’s are a bit more relative, but it’s nearly impossible to gain access to a Facebook user’s inbox or wall, and legitimate marketers would never try.
If you take one more look at David’s graphs, txt is the new channel that remains unscathed. Compared to IM, txt messaging has the advantages of being on-person and able to receive idle or off-line messages. And, as I’ve mentioned before, it’s less likely to follow e-mail’s fate because of the carrier approval process and universal keywords.
But, I saved David’s best graph for last:
It is extremely difficult to jump straight to a face-to-face meeting or phone call without somehow warming up the contact. Consumers are wary of sudden phone calls or face-to-face pitches, this is why these mediums are more urgent yet less frequent. David’s urgency graph is actually the funnel from initial contact to a face-to-face meeting, or the final purchase. As you move to the right of his graph, the lead gets hot, and the user is more likely to make the final jump.
Brands are complaining that the 18-25 year olds are locked in social networks that are difficult to penetrate. They are correct, and while Facebook, et al. can be an effective target audience, the current PPC and PPV models Facebook provides are not the right methods to reach that audience. When it comes to communication, and relevancy, 18-25 year olds are locked in text messaging.
- Ainsworth