Word-of-Mouth’s Ethical Effect: How Fair and Decent Marketing Can Increase your Initiative’s ROI
There’s been a lot of recent talk about ethics in word-of-mouth marketing. As stealth marketers and shills get more negative press, the calls for transparency and honesty are coming from an unlikely source: marketers themselves.
Few advocates give concrete reasons to practice ethical marketing beyond the fact that “it’s the right thing to do.” While treating your customers and prospective customers with respect certainly is the right thing to do, I’d like to add another compelling argument in favor of ethical marketing: it works.
You’ll get the higher quality, more sustainable results from word-of-mouth marketing initiatives when you follow ethical marketing guidelines. Using less-than-savory practices may yield a temporary “pop” in performance or awareness, but soon enough the sun shines through and you’ve burned those folks that are the lifeblood of your brand — people who recommend your products, services or content to others. This isn’t a question of good karma — it’s a consequence of the way the word-of-mouth channel works.
Ethical marketing
So what exactly is “ethical marketing” in word-of-mouth? What are the rules? How do they apply to customer evangelism, employee bloggers, tell-a-friend forms, and the 40 or more other types of marketing practices that fall under the umbrella of word-of-mouth marketing?
At its core, ethical marketing comes down to two things: be honest about the product or service and be honest about your stake in it.
The first half is simple enough: just apply the same FTC rules that you follow in your other marketing efforts. Don’t lie about your product. And avoid the temptation to use tactics that are technically legal, but misleading. Word-of-mouth lives or dies on whether consumers feel good or bad about you and your product, not whether they have legal recourse if they feel maligned.
More of the scandals in word-of-mouth marketing are related to honesty about your stake as a marketer in the product or service. Marketers who would never consider misrepresenting a product’s features or price in a print ad suddenly think it’s a good idea to pose as “independent” bloggers — and are invariably exposed and embarrassed.
Being honest about involvement with a brand or product actually increases your effectiveness as an advocate. Dr. Walter Carl, a leading researcher in word-of-mouth marketing, found that disclosure increased pass-along rates by as much as 70%* — a data point supported by our experience here at PopularMedia, Inc. Failing to disclose your involvement, however, can lead to massive consumer backlash — directly impacting your bottom line.
Why ethics matter more in word-of-mouth
In traditional marketing, you make your appeals directly to individual consumers through advertising, direct mail, or other channels. In this context, conversations between consumers have a comparatively small effect. As a result, if an individual consumer has a negative experience, it primarily impacts only that individual’s potential lifetime value — small stakes in a large market. Unfortunately, this can lead to a “take the money and run” attitude under which consumers are treated as disposable.
Word-of-mouth marketing is different. Marketing messages are spread through established peer-to-peer networks. Violate consumer trust at any point, and you could lose your chance to reach and convert an entire branch of any given network: not just one person, but dozens, hundreds, thousands, hundreds of thousands — even millions of people. This effect is immediate and enduring, meaning the decisions you make today will measurably impact your performance now and for a long time into the future.
How word-of-mouth spreads
The most important thing to remember is that word-of-mouth doesn’t spread randomly from person to person. If it did, you could bypass unhappy consumers and still reach their friends through other mutual acquaintances. After all, there is extensive overlap in social networks ¬— it seems like there should be as many different ways to get a message from person A to person B as the two people have friends in common.
By that metric, viral performance appears to be proportional to the number of “agents” you have, as long as each talks to as many people as possible with the hope that those people will pass the message along — and buy your product — at a given rate.
However, striking patterns emerge when you start to measure pass-along, conversion, and other key metrics — what we refer to internally and with our customers as viral performance indicators (VPIs) — for the “receivers” as well as the “senders” of your messages.
A graph of word-of-mouth conversations will resemble a complex web. Each person is represented as a point or “node”, connected to a number of other points by conversations or shared messages about your brand or product. But when you highlight only the successful conversations — the small percent that actually drive action and pass-along — your graph suddenly looks less like a web and more like a branching tree, with bursts of action connected by a small number of key individuals.
Reader Comments.
- Pingback from Consumer Court « Adventures in Marketing
Hello Jim,
I found your article to be well thought, persuasive and informative. Thank you. I have one question: You write that your company’s data supports Dr. Carl’s assertion that disclosure extends pass-along rates by up to 70 percent. Could you share information about how you, too, have arrived independently at similar conclusions?
Kindly,
Joe Chernov
Director of Communications
BzzAgent
Leave a Comment
Pages: 1 2 next page »
Tags: campaigns, ROI, viral and word-of-mouthArticle Sponsor
More Features
-
Loading ...
Latest News
- Hulu’s Bringing Its “A” Game But… March 19th 2010 ADOTAS – Hulu’s sales team is actively subverting the ad [...] more »
- Yelp! A class-action suit? March 19th 2010 ADOTAS – One of three civil suits against Yelp filed [...] more »
- Viacom Accuses Google; Testing Digital Millennium Copyright Act March 19th 2010 Viacom has accused Google of turning a blind eye to [...] more »
- Google to Leave China April 10th? March 19th 2010 ADOTAS – According to the China Business News, Google Inc [...] more »
- [x+1] Creates The Smartest Tagging System Around March 18th 2010 ADOTAS – Today, if you happen to be at the [...] more »
- IAB’s Video Standards Tackled By ADTECH March 18th 2010 ADOTAS – ADTECH, a part of AOL Advertising and an [...] more »
- Google Search and Mobile and….TV? Oh My! March 18th 2010 ADOTAS – Google wants to dominate your screens…. Not just [...] more »
Features
- For Better or For Worse? March 18th 2010
- Yahoo! Wants to Get More Personal March 17th 2010
- Creative Considerations for the iPad March 16th 2010
- Amazon Leaves Colorado Affiliates Out in the Cold March 12th 2010
- Secret Salsa Recipe: The Best Digital Marketing Mix March 11th 2010
Spotlight
AdBidCentral’s CEO, Vivek Veeraraghavan Talks Openly*What was the inspiration to start AdBidCentral? The conditions that inspired AdBidCentral came from a variety of factors in my personal [...] more...
Reader Favorites
Classifieds
- Sr Director, Marketing Services
- Senior Web Analyst
- Account Director
- Director of Analytics
- Manager, Business and Trade Media Relations
Recent Comments
- Jedd Gould: I think you miss the point. Publications have to charge because the content most are
- Gavin Dunaway: They're similar, but Ning is more a competitor to Facebook and MySpace while StumbleUpon considers
- Steve Feldman: Does StumbleUpon compete with and does essentially what Ning networks does?
- Bulent: I wonder how many of the clients would accept a media plan, that would -as
