Business History Books » Business Consulting » Another Try: Consumer Behaviour on the net?
Another Try: Consumer Behaviour on the net?
Question:
Hi Sherman, I’ve been on holidays (from the Internet at least), and then found I haven’t been getting the MBMM feed properly. :-( Anyway, here is a response to your article quoted in the MBMM Digest… > Could you be more specific on the exact nature of the trend … > Over the past 18 months we have been researching business-to-business…
[SNIP] > …. and whether, in the light of my comments below, We would be affected > by that trend – or whether it would prove productive to be counter-trend. > A trend is like the tide. All boats rise and fall together. Bucking > a trend is a very high risk proposition.
Agreed, but can be very rewarding if done properly… I guess that’s the point of my input – how to do it properly… You make some excellent suggestions below… > Yes, but what I am trying to _deliver_ _is_ _understanding_. Recall, > earlier in my original post I said that although the need for what I > provide is almost universal, the want is almost non-existent. My theory > (and please, everyone, feel free to provide feedback on anything that I > assert) is that the need is not made into a want because the client > doesn’t understand (because nobody has informed them) about the issues > involved. > -From our analysis, your site is not the proper forum to present your > arguments. Rather focus your efforts on getting the browser to > download a PDF document, for example, and present your arguments in > that. Get him in and out as quickly as possible.
Yes, we’d come to a, pretty much, similar conclusion. What I thought would be useful was a short abstract of what the document was about: a specific problem which the client might have a specific point which the document makes (such as methodological issues) a case study a technical paper or presentation and a pointer to the downloadable document. For the inveterate browser, for whom nothing is real unless it is viewed on-line, an on-line copy in a separate page. > I see it like backup – everyone needs it, but not every one does it – and > those that do it don’t often do it properly. Hey, I just got bitten > myself this week – I can’t find a backup of stuff I had 3 years ago and > now need > Are you talking about a RAID system for remote back-up?
No, just the backup process in general. "I must have a backup of this ‘chimeric’ magnetic data". I could loose my on-line copy at any time. > Thus, as you can see, (at least in intent) the browser is either the > ultimate buyer or someone specifically chartered by the person I made > contact with to browse on their behalf. I could, of course, send them the > literature by hardcopy… > Do both! Add a form for a literature request via snail mail in > addition to the downloadable documents. Remember one of the nice > thing about downloadable documents is that the browser can hit your > site, start the download and move on. He will appreciate the > convenience.
Agreed, see above. In addition, what we build are information models which can be traversed (explored) by the user and which might better get the point across than a more static document. This may be a way to create interest in the document which presents a more considered view of what is going on in the model. > – but that can imply a level of interest on their > part that they don’t want yet displayed. > Never assume a weak position.
Can you expand on what you meant, I can see two possible (contradictory) meanings to the above phrase. > Having the web site as a "pull" mechanism means they can "have a look" > without me following up directly. If they subsequently contact me, I’ve > got a much more qualified client! > No! Lead, lure, entice and qualify as quickly as possible.
I’m not so sure (for our style of business at least). Certainly, we want to qualify a prospect with the minimum of effort, but that doesn’t necessarily translate to as quickly as possible. Without using the web, We’ve found that the qualification process may take up to two-three months (elapsed), depending on the signals we get. Our engagements typically are 20-30 effort days, spread over 3-4 elapsed months. Lead times can be the 3-6 months time frame (especially when courting a new client). Effort involved (much to our pleasant surprise) is typically less than 12 effort hours. Maybe this is a function of the qualifying process. Nearly a third of the time is spent on the phone, trying to get an appointment. Nearly a third is spent in face-to-face requirements gathering. The remaining third to half the time is spent writing the formal proposal. I guess we’re looking to the web site to replace most of the time we spend on the phone and some of the face to face time so that I can get to the writing the proposal stage. If we’re asked to propose an engagement, we usually get it. If we can reduce the elapsed and effort time by using the web, then it will be a useful tool. Regardz, Paolo F. Cantoni Tel: +61-2-9498 5945 Director Fax: +61-2-9418 4402 -Semantica- Changed>> Cell: +61-416 11 00 95 << 45 Kendall Street Web: http://www.semantica.com.au Pymble NSW 2073 AUSTRALIA
Response:
>> A trend is like the tide. All boats rise and fall together. Bucking > a trend is a very high risk proposition. >Agreed, but can be very rewarding if done properly… I guess that’s the >point of my input – how to do it properly…
-From my personal perspective, people who place themselves in this much risk are true heros. They face odds that are a thousand to one against them. If it is just the entrepreneur at risk, more power to him, but if he as a family to support and employees dependant on him, bucking the tide may unwise. Professionally, my job is to put them back on track, using research to positon their business in advance of the trend or shift and eliminate the risk entirely. Just as there is no one way to properly go with the tide, there is no one proper way to go against it either. > Never assume a weak position. >Can you expand on what you meant, I can see two possible (contradictory) >meanings to the above phrase.
You are talking about a web domain. This is not print or spot broadcast where the audience has no choice but to endure your message so you must justify your position and avoid offending the viewer, the browser would not be there unless he chose to be. It is the same condition which exists when a customer calls you up on the phone and gets your answering machine. On the outgoing message for an answering machine you first identify yourself and then ask the caller to leave a message. You don’t have to tell him to hang up if he dialed the wrong number. His actions are self-determinate. If he is not interested he is going to disconnect all by himself (ie. hit the back button). Therefore, you must assume that if he is there, he is interested, not in an arguement base upon your previous sales experience, but in what you have to offer. This strong position means, give him what he came for, and in return, have him leave a message. Even more important. Don’t play coy! Tell him that you will get back to him right up front, and ask him how this would be most convenient, E-Mail, Snail Mail, Telephone or Appointment. – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -> No! Lead, lure, entice and qualify as quickly as possible. >I’m not so sure (for our style of business at least). Certainly, we want >to qualify a prospect with the minimum of effort, but that doesn’t >necessarily translate to as quickly as possible. Without using the web, >We’ve found that the qualification process may take up to two-three months >(elapsed), depending on the signals we get. Our engagements typically are >20-30 effort days, spread over 3-4 elapsed months. Lead times can be the >3-6 months time frame (especially when courting a new client). Effort >involved (much to our pleasant surprise) is typically less than 12 effort >hours. Maybe this is a function of the qualifying process. Nearly a third >of the time is spent on the phone, trying to get an appointment. Nearly a >third is spent in face-to-face requirements gathering. The remaining third >to half the time is spent writing the formal proposal. >I guess we’re looking to the web site to replace most of the time we spend >on the phone and some of the face to face time so that I can get to the >writing the proposal stage. If we’re asked to propose an engagement, we >usually get it. If we can reduce the elapsed and effort time by using the >web, then it will be a useful tool.
Take a positive approach and it will be. Sherman Whipple, Sargent & Associates Strategic Services 10 Industrial Park Road, Hingham, MA 02043
Response:
>> If the trend we have been tracking prooves durable, the mission of >trend …
Over the past 18 months we have been researching business-to-business and industrial usage and applications of the Internet for the various stages and processes of marketing of products, components and services. The data gathering methodology is census based, parametric of the the industrial purchasing universe using the Thomas Register and USDC data as the basis of our research parameters. The trend we are seeing is actually a rapid change in composition of those who are using the Internet in locating categories of products and services, learning about products, locating sources of supply and requesting bids or sales contacts, Back in September of 1995, the categories of frequent users and strong intent were dominated by individuals within organizations with decision making responsibilities. In fact nearly a third of those with strong intent were the ultimate decision maker or authorization for purchase. To this segment, the impact of the site was a significant factor and components such as company info, features, client lists, blazing graphics, etc. were important to their experience in browsing the sites of potential suppliers. By April of 1996, however, 4 out of 5 in this group no longer expressed intent to use the Internet, themselves, to locate products. They, however, had been replaced by a very similar group but in total only 1 out of 5 were ultimate decision makers. The replacements had somewhat less responsibity in the decision making process. At the same time the total numbers increased by about 30%. A September 1996 overlay showed a continuation of this shift in composition. Again nearly 4 out of 5 of those who had expressed strong intent and active personal usage of the Internet for purchasing stated that they were no longer actively involved and expressed no interest in personally using this as a resource for their own decision making. Most had returned to their traditional information resources of catalogs, fax’s, and directories. This did not mean that they had rejected the Internet as a resource, but rather that they had decided that it was not a productive use of their time. Therefore, they had delegated the responsibility to someone else in the organization. By April 1997, less than 5% of organizational users could be categorized as actual organizational buyer/specifyers for purchases of industrial products, components, supplies and services. With specific exceptions, the balance of those who use the Internet for purchasing have been delegated to do so and have severe limitations placed upon them. Unlike their bosses, these new browsers do not have unlimited time but must be able to deliver on a deadline. The overall mandate is to acquire product specifications, current pricing and availability, organize this information along with all other information from directories and catalogs, and present it in a single or combined printed report. Exceptions to this are MIS and IT categories. Here the ultimate decision maker not only remains strongly motivated, but there is a clear indication of a reduced dependance on traditional information resources in the decision making process. This does not, however, mean that IT and MIS buyer/specifyers are willing to waste time on-line. They, too, want the informtion on their systems and in their hands as quickly as possible and in a form which can be combined into a report. >…. and whether, in the light of my comments below, We would be affected >by that trend – or whether it would prove productive to be counter-trend.
A trend is like the tide. All boats rise and fall together. Bucking a trend is a very high risk proposition. > your site is not so much to help the individual understand anything > about your technology of methodogly or how it can benefit them. > Rather, think of it as a delivery vehicle. >Yes, but what I am trying to _deliver_ _is_ _understanding_. Recall, >earlier in my original post I said that although the need for what I >provide is almost universal, the want is almost non-existent. My theory >(and please, everyone, feel free to provide feedback on anything that I >assert) is that the need is not made into a want because the client doesn’t >understand (because nobody has informed them) about the issues involved. >From our analysis, your site is not the proper forum to present your
arguments. Rather focus your efforts on getting the browser to download a PDF document, for example, and present your arguments in that. Get him in and out as quickly as possible. >I see it like backup – everyone needs it, but not every one does it – and >those that do it don’t often do it properly. Hey, I just got bitten myself >this week – I can’t find a backup of stuff I had 3 years ago and now need >:-( !!!
Are you talking about a RAID system for remote back-up? – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text ->Now, back to my service, I find it has been pointless making contact and >telling prospective clients (senior managers usually), here’s what I do. >It’s too complicated for them to absorb immediately and in particular to >figure out what the implications for their business are. >I want to use my web site as a sort of off-line tutorial and marketing >process. I can discuss, in general terms, what I provide and how it can >help them and how it has helped other clients and then refer them to the >web site. They can then work through the stuff at their leisure. > Your goal would be to get the information through them and into the > hands of their boss or the ultimate buyer/specifyer. In this > scenario, the individual browsing your site becomes an intermediary. >Thus, as you can see, (at least in intent) the browser is either the >ultimate buyer or someone specifically chartered by the person I made >contact with to browse on their behalf. I could, of course, send them the >literature by hardcopy…
Do both! Add a form for a literature request via snail mail in addition to the downloadable documents. Remember one of the nice thing about downloadable documents is that the browser can hit your site, start the download and move on. He will appreciate the convenience. > – but that can imply a level of interest on their >part that they don’t want yet displayed.
Never assume a weak position. > Having the web site as a "pull" >mechanism means they can "have a look" without me following up directly. >If they subsequently contact me, I’ve got a much more qualified client!
No! Lead, lure, entice and qualify as quickly as possible. I hope this is helpful, Sherman Whipple, Sargent & Associates Strategic Services 10 Industrial Park Road, Hingham, MA 02043
Response:
Hi Sherman, Thanks for your reply… My comments are interspersed below… > I’m not after enticing "Jo (ie non-sexist Josephine or Joseph) Public". I > think I’ll need to use the site to help specifically targetted prospects > better understand the technology and methodology I use and how it can > benefit them. I strongly expect that the site will have white papers, > articles and some fun stuff, probably downloadable. >What do others think? > If the trend we have been tracking prooves durable, the mission of
trend and whether, in the light of my comments below, We would be affected by that trend – or whether it would prove productive to be counter-trend. > your site is not so much to help the individual understand anything > about your technology of methodogly or how it can benefit them. > Rather, think of it as a delivery vehicle.
Yes, but what I am trying to _deliver_ _is_ _understanding_. Recall, earlier in my original post I said that although the need for what I provide is almost universal, the want is almost non-existent. My theory (and please, everyone, feel free to provide feedback on anything that I assert) is that the need is not made into a want because the client doesn’t understand (because nobody has informed them) about the issues involved. I see it like backup – everyone needs it, but not every one does it – and those that do it don’t often do it properly. Hey, I just got bitten myself this week – I can’t find a backup of stuff I had 3 years ago and now need 
!!! When people are apprised of the full implications of working without adequate backup (or more usually have had the full cost brought home to them – with system failure of some kind, or these days having their computer stolen!), they tend to do it… Now, back to my service, I find it has been pointless making contact and telling prospective clients (senior managers usually), here’s what I do. It’s too complicated for them to absorb immediately and in particular to figure out what the implications for their business are. I want to use my web site as a sort of off-line tutorial and marketing process. I can discuss, in general terms, what I provide and how it can help them and how it has helped other clients and then refer them to the web site. They can then work through the stuff at their leisure. > Your goal would be to get the information through them and into the > hands of their boss or the ultimate buyer/specifyer. In this > scenario, the individual browsing your site becomes an intermediary.
Thus, as you can see, (at least in intent) the browser is either the ultimate buyer or someone specifically chartered by the person I made contact with to browse on their behalf. I could, of course, send them the literature by hardcopy – but that can imply a level of interest on their part that they don’t want yet displayed. Having the web site as a "pull" mechanism means they can "have a look" without me following up directly. If they subsequently contact me, I’ve got a much more qualified client! > Just some thoughts.
I’d appreciate more of your thoughts on my points above. – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -> Sherman > Whipple, Sargent & Associates > Strategic Services
Response:
>My web site isn’t really up yet, but as a niche market in the Information >area – developing Conceptual Information Models of an organisation, I don’t >think I’ll be setting up a "cool site".
I’ve seen a demonstration of a technology called Superscape, where you can create a 3d world which surfers on the net can explore. The files are, amazingly, only about 60k in size. http://www.superscape.com http://vwww.com This means you can have an amazingly cool site, taking surfers right into an model. > I think I’ll need to use the site >to help specifically targetted prospects better understand the technology >and methodology I use and how it can benefit them. I strongly expect that >the site will have white papers, articles and some fun stuff, probably >downloadable.
I’ve opted for a working site. One has to decide the purpose of the site and stick to it, as I think people visit for that purpose. Also you don’t know how technically savvy a lot of the audience are. I’ve refered to my site in meetings and had people load it up, to discover that they don’t recognise a link when they see one. If that’s the level, relying on people having plug-ins installed does not seem a good idea! The best is to either have your site work on different levels so people can use the gee whizz stuff if they like or hide the technology. My site for instance works by CGI making link pages on the fly, surfers just press a button and don’t realise this. John John Block Creative, marketing aware work which Freelance Copywriter talks rather than blandly bores, actively promotes your product, International and aims to be the best Welcomes Dollar and Sterling, in your market sector.
Response:
> I’m not after enticing "Jo (ie >non-sexist Josephine or Joseph) Public". I think I’ll need to use the site >to help specifically targetted prospects better understand the technology >and methodology I use and how it can benefit them. I strongly expect that >the site will have white papers, articles and some fun stuff, probably >downloadable. >What do others think?
Paolo, If the trend we have been tracking prooves durable, the mission of your site is not so much to help the individual understand anything about your technology of methodogly or how it can benefit them. Rather, think of it as a delivery vehicle. Your goal would be to get the information through them and into the hands of their boss or the ultimate buyer/specifyer. In this scenario, the individual browsing your site becomes an intermediary. Just some thoughts. Sherman Whipple, Sargent & Associates Strategic Services 10 Industrial Park Road, Hingham, MA 02043
Response:
>In a sense, those entering now, are more representative of delegatetd >information gathering related to a purchase or need, and are not >directly involved in the buy/purchase decision. One could say that >surfing the net for business appears to be moving towards a clerical >activity.
I am sometimes approached by secretaries who have, while producing a shortlist of copywriters for their bosses, printed from my site for presentation to the decision maker. This trend could have implications for site design. Rather than just thinking in terms of browsers and surfers we’ll have to consider extras like downloadable postscript or rich text format files on sites. John Block Creative, marketing aware work which Freelance Copywriter talks rather than blandly bores, actively promotes your product, International and aims to be the best Welcomes Dollar and Sterling, in your market sector.
Response:
… > I am sometimes approached by secretaries who have, while producing a > shortlist of copywriters for their bosses, printed from my site for > presentation to the decision maker. > This trend could have implications for site design. > Rather than just thinking in terms of browsers and surfers we’ll have to > consider extras like downloadable postscript or rich text format files on > sites.
My web site isn’t really up yet, but as a niche market in the Information area – developing Conceptual Information Models of an organisation, I don’t think I’ll be setting up a "cool site". I’m not after enticing "Jo (ie non-sexist Josephine or Joseph) Public". I think I’ll need to use the site to help specifically targetted prospects better understand the technology and methodology I use and how it can benefit them. I strongly expect that the site will have white papers, articles and some fun stuff, probably downloadable. What do others think? Regardz, Paolo F. Cantoni Tel: +61-2-9498 5945 Director Fax: +61-2-9418 4402 -Semantica- Cell: +61-419 619 185 45 Kendall Street Web: http://www.semantica.com.au Pymble NSW 2073 AUSTRALIA
Response:
I’m searching for information about consumer behaviour on the net. We are preparing a study about this subject. Our goal is to find out, how the process of using the net (for business reasons) works. How does a user navigate? What is he looking at first? What elements are attraktive for him? … Does anybody know some sources in or out of the Web? It would be interesting to discuss about that subject. Thanks Philipp Laemmlin delta Consulting Group AG
Response:
>I’m searching for information about consumer behaviour on the net. >We are preparing a study about this subject. Our goal is to find out, how >the process of using the net (for business reasons) works. How does a user >navigate? What is he looking at first? What elements are attraktive for him? >… Does anybody know some sources in or out of the Web?
Philipp, Now that you have reposted with the following phrase, "how the process of using the net (for business reasons) works", I may be able to offer some assistance. We are about mid-way through a joint two year study with Krislyn Corporation on a related topic. The working title is "The Role of the WWW in Industrial Marketing". It is a forecasting and planning model to be used to integrate electronic commerce into the business to business sales, marketing and distribution process. At the present time we are still in the process of defining the parameters and matrix. This is prooving to be much more difficult than originally anticipated because the composition, expectation and levels of participation of industrial buyer/specifiers has not remained constant. While we believe that the paramters will ultimately stabilize and, to a degree, closely match that which already exists for all other forms of purchasing/specification, etc., this has not been the case to date. In fact, over eighteen months of tracking, the attrition rate is running at nearly 80%. Essentially 4 out of 5 of those prequalified as motivated and active WWW buyer/specifyers, drop out after about six months and go back to their traditional information resources. In the same interval, the rate of attrition is offset by a new group. Actually the rate of growth of new buyer specifiers is greater than attrition rate, so there is an appearance of total growth. What we have seen, however, is the composition of this new group has changed. This is not a replacement, but rather a shift. As each new group comes in we are seeing a lowered organizational level of decision making responsibility as related to purchases. In a sense, those entering now, are more representative of delegatetd information gathering related to a purchase or need, and are not directly involved in the buy/purchase decision. One could say that surfing the net for business appears to be moving towards a clerical activity. At the same time, there are specific exceptions to this in certain industries and fields. These may be models for the future, or they may be just what they appear to be, exceptions. Basically what I am saying is that it would be very difficult to provide a difinitive analysis at this time. Industrial users (both buyers and sellers) are still working out the kinks and haven’t figured out for themselves how they will utilize, and even more important, support and maintain their web presence. You may want to give a call to the people a Thomas Register for their input. Sherman Whipple, Sargent & Associates Strategic Services 10 Industrial Park Road, Hingham, MA 02043